EARLY AND MIDDLE IROQUOIAN REGIONAL INTERACTION

WILLIAMSON AND ROBERTSON PEER POLITIES BEYOND THE PERIPHERY ... 27

PEER POLITIES BEYOND THE PERIPHERY:EARLY AND MIDDLE IROQUOIAN REGIONAL

INTERACTION

Ronald F.Williamson and David A. Robertson

Much attention has recently been paid to thenature and extent of interaction between Iro-quoian groups of the Great Lakes region andpopulations situated in the Mississippi Rivervalley. Many of the suppositions generated bythis research have been influenced by modelsof "core and periphery'. This paper seeks toaddress the difficulties encountered in applyingthese models to the late prehistoric GreatLakes region. Of major concern is the compar-ative scarcity of clearly identified trade mate-rial on sites in southern Ontario. In the absenceof clearly identified, consistent interregionalcontact, the basic applicability of the constructmust be questioned. An alternative model isproposed emphasizing the likelihood thatprolonged and consistent exchange and com-munication between peer polities, groups at asimilar level of complexity, within the GreatLakes region is of greater significance thansporadic contacts with more highly structured,but distant, societies to the south. It is suggestedthat the changes that Iroquoian society experi-enced in southern Ontario are more likely to beunderstood in terms of regular interactionbetween groups beyond the 'peripheral" re-gion, rather than as influences emanating from aMississippian "core". It is also suggested that inorder to understand the relationships betweenthese politically autonomous groups, we mustabandon the current theoretical paradigm,together with its preconceived notionsconcerning the socio-political affiliation ofthose polities.

INTRODUCTION

A number of studies have recently focusedupon the question of interaction betweenIroquoian groups in the Great Lakes region andgroups further to the south, particularly thosein the Mississippi and Ohio drainages

(Dincauze and Hasenstab 1989; Hasenstab1990; Jamieson 1991, 1992). The constructsgenerated by this research have all beeninfluenced, to greater or lesser degrees, bymodels of centre and periphery. Such modelshave their immediate origins in ImmanuelWallerstein's (1974) world-systems theory andthe work of numerous other researchers (e.g.,Frank 1967; Gottman 1980) who are concernedwith accounting for the nature and effects ofthe relationships existing between developed,capitalist nations, and the underdevelopedsocieties of the Third World.

This paper seeks to address the difficultiesencountered in applying the core-peripheryinteraction (CPI) or similar kinds of long dis-tance interaction models to the late prehistoricGreat Lakes region. Of major concern is thescarcity, in the archaeological record of theearly Late Woodland period (circa A.D. 900-1300), of clearly identified trade goods originat-ing from the proposed Mississippian core, onsites in southern Ontario. This has requiredproponents of these models to focus generallyupon certain more "prosaic" types of artifacts;yet, as archaeologists we are continuallyreminded of our inadequate comprehension ofthe function and role of material culture in pastsocieties. The interpretation of certain attrib-utes as expressions of group identity or soli-darity, in the absence of a clear understandingof their evolution and structural context, cannothelp but leave one uneasy. Equally discomfort-ing is the manner in which the exchange ofmaterial goods, technologies or ideologiesbetween social groups has been conceptualized,whether implicitly or explicitly, in these recentworks.

BROADENING PERSPECTIVES

It is perhaps sell-evident that few, if any,

28 ONTARIO ARCHAEOLOGY No. 58, 1994

societies in our modern world develop incomplete isolation from their neighbours. Therelative ease of communication, through avariety of media, between even the most distantparts of the planet has resulted in anunparalleled level of interaction betweendifferent cultures, which must adjust on analmost continuous basis in order to reconciletheir own ideologies and modes of behaviourwith a flood of new influences. Archaeologistsare not immune to these developments, incor-

porating into the basic philosophical corporathat guide their research a diverse and eclecticrange of theoretical and interpretive approach-es, gleaned from an equally wide variety ofdisciplines. As a result of these developments,few archaeological propositions are nowaccepted as universal truths. Differing culturalbackgrounds and political orientations amongresearchers, in addition to generational differ-ences, have led to a plethora of schools ofthought within the field. This is most apparentin the debate between processualists and post-processualists, and in the efforts to reconciletheir different worldviews (e.g., Wylie 1989).

With the vastly increased complexity of thediscipline, it should occasion no surprise thatits subject matter has also become morecomplicated. Archaeologists are graduallybecoming less willing to view past societies asisolated phenomena, which passed throughpredictable and set, evolutionary stages ofcomplexity while remaining largely untouchedby outside influences. It is now generally rec-ognized that apparently impermeable culturalboundaries were, in fact, easily traversed byany number of means at a variety of levels,which alone or in combination may have hadprofound impacts upon the participating soci-eties. Thus it may be said that societies, whichwere formerly understood primarily throughtheir internal relationships and interactions,cannot be understood without equal referenceto their external relationships (Wolf 1982).

This general broadening of perspectiveswithin archaeology ultimately provided thebasis for several recent attempts to incorporatethe Iroquoians of southern Ontario into broadercommunication and exchange systems, therebyintegrating various groups in the greaterNortheast with those of the Southeast andMidwest. Dincauze and Hasenstab (1989)largely seek to do so in order to explain theappearance and development, among theIroquoians, of a package of culture traits that

distinguish them from the majority of theirAlgonquian neighbours. In their model, theseinteraction networks ultimately converge onCahokia, its secondary centres, or its possiblerivals such as the Kincaid, Angel, or Mariettasites (Dincauze and Hasenstab 1989:79). Thus,the Iroquoians' reliance on maize horticulture,their occupation of semi-sedentary villages,their increasing concern with defence, theirsocial organization and ideological structure,and even many of the most basic aspects oftheir material culture are seen to be the director indirect result of contact with these groups.While Dincauze and Hasenstab (1989) employ aCPI model, Jamieson invokes an interregionalinteraction model of the "Mississippification" ofOntario populations, based on "a diversifiednetwork of geographically disparate, albeitoverlapping socially and/or ethnically relatedMississippian-spurred development" (Jamieson1992:71). All of these studies representlaudable attempts to move beyond traditionaland insular explanations of Iroquoian culturalevolution. Nevertheless, they fail to adequatelyreconcile their broadened geographical outlookwith the complex nature of societal interaction,its underlying motives, and its resultantmaterial expressions.

In the absence of convincing evidence forconsistent interregional contact, it is morelikely that prolonged and consistent exchangeand communication between evolving and moreclosely interrelated polities, at a similar level ofcultural complexity within the Great Lakesregion, had a greater effect on thehomogenization of Iroquoian material culture inthe post A.D. 1300 period than sporadiccontacts with more highly structured, butdistant, societies to the south. While there may,in fact, have been limited access to, or knowl-edge of, the material goods produced in Caho-kia or its related manifestations (the "core" ofthe recent models), it is unlikely that thesegoods or their constituent symbols were incor-porated into the material cultures or cognitivesystems of local Iroquoian populations withoutundergoing a process of reinterpretation(Schortman and Urban 1992:237). As willbecome evident, however, the alternativeapproach presented below, which is based uponthe recognition that Early to Middle Iroquoiansociety consisted of numerous regionally basedand independent (albeit interrelated) peerpolities, shares with several of the CPI-basedmodels the desire to more

completely reconstruct the modes of communi-cation and interaction that characterized theMiddle through Late Woodland period. It alsoaddresses a growing dissatisfaction with thebasic paradigm that has defined archaeologicalresearch in southern Ontario for the past threedecades.

MODELS OF LONG DISTANCEINTERACTION AND

IROQUOIAN EVOLUTION

CPI models have been successfully utilizedin a wide variety of archaeological studies as ameans of providing an underlying frameworkfor understanding the observed growth ofasymmetric, long distance interactions betweenhighly developed societies or cores, and lesscomplex neighbouring groups or peripheries(e.g., Champion 1989, ed.; Frankenstein andRowlands 1978; Rowlands et al. 1987). A CPIapproach is seen as a means of explaining thechanges in the political and socio-economicsystems of the participants in long distanceinteractions- changes which are mostprofoundly experienced, and most highlyvisible, among the peripheral groups as theybecome increasingly structured to meet thedemands of the core. In the process of thisrestructuring, peripheries become more andmore dependent upon the core in order to meettheir own needs for social, if not biological,reproduction. Under such circumstances thenature of interaction among the peripheralgroups themselves is likely to be largely dic-tated by their individual efforts to maintain theirrelations with the core. Of course, peripheralgroups may choose not to participate within anexpanding core system, yet such resistancemay itself require equally significant change(Dincauze and Hasenstab 1989:77; Rowlands1987:5).

One of the most fundamental shortcomingsof the CPI-based "Mississippification" hypothe-ses is the failure of their proponents to provideconclusive evidence of mid-continental societiesthat were capable of acting as cores. Theattributes typically associated with cores, suchas advanced levels of political organization;marked social stratification; centralized andhighly structured modes of economic produc-tion, including craft specialization and institu-tionalized wealth redistribution; dense popula-tions approaching or exceeding the carrying

capacity of their resource base; and the abilityto expand and maintain their dominance overlong distances, through the use of ideology,sheer force, or by other means, are all prob-lematic in the case of Cahokia and the othermajor groups of the Mississippi and Ohiodrainages. This situation has recently led JonMuller to argue that "there seems to be noreason to suggest that most Mississippiansocieties were more than low-level chiefdom-level societies at best" (Muller 1987:11; cf.Smith 1978:479-503).

In order for a CPI-based model of Iroquoiandevelopment to be credible, it must be demon-strated that the so-called "cores" of the conti-nental interior were capable of exerting theirinfluence over long distances, and of integrat-ing far-flung polities within intensive and rela-tively stable networks of interaction. The inabil-ity to do so further undermines the entireconstruct by failing to provide convincingmotives for large-scale Iroquoian participationin intense relations with the Mississippian orother southern groups. The Iroquoians are saidto have been anxious to take part in suchinteraction (Hasenstab 1990:20-23); indeed, itoften appears that they were driven to do so,although there is little suggestion as to why thisshould have been the case. Hasenstab (1990:62) has even suggested that northern Iroquoi-ans were supplying the Cahokian core withanimal resources on such a scale that theyseriously threatened their own hunting territo-ries. This contention is based, in large part, onan analogy with the documented nineteenth-century New York Iroquois practice of supplyingnatural resources to European centres on thesouth shore of Lake Erie (Hasenstab 1990:19-21). Notwithstanding the inappropriateness ofan analogy with an historic cash-based reserveeconomy, it is unlikely, in the absence ofcoercion, that prehistoric groups would, forexample, have knowingly threatened thebiological viability of the deer populations ofsouthern Ontario in order to ship skins enmasse to the south. There is also no evidencethat the apparently autonomous, region-allybased Early Iroquoian communities in theNortheast could have undertaken any suchconcerted action without a more centralizedpan-regional political structure.

The simple invocation of a CPI model, bymerely identifying the existence of an allegedcore which may potentially have had an impacton a distant polity, in no way provides an


explanation for observed culture change amongthe latter group. In the absence of detailedanalysis of the specific contextual setting ofsuch a relationship, and without developing anunderstanding of the mechanisms by whichsuch interaction may have operated (both interms of articulating the different socio-economic structures of the participatinggroups, and in terms of initiating socialtransformations), a CPI model is little differentfrom any other hyper-diffusionist app-roach(Champion 1989:10). Such an approachundermines the importance of endogenouschange, operating as it does under the as-sumption that contact between different socialgroups led inevitably to acculturation of theless "evolved" society. Whether such accultura-tion took place through trade, conquest, orsimply because of some innate "superiority" ofthe dominant culture becomes largely irrelevantand, accordingly, is seldom explored in greatdetail.

It seems ironic that these recent studies ofIroquoian cultural development, in their at-tempt to critically examine the implicit insular-ity of the in situ model (MacNeish 1952; Wright1966), return to the type of southern diffusionhypothesis, if not migration perspective (Snow

1994), that the in situ model itself sought toredress. That these arguments have come fullcircle is a consequence, in part, of the failure ofmany archaeologists to recognize the inade-quacy of the available data for reconstructingthe logistical systems, structural contexts andconsequences of pan-regional interaction.

At the most basic level, the suggestions thatIroquoian society developed either as a mar-ginal periphery to a Mississippian core (Din-cauze and Hasenstab 1989), or as a result ofboth core-periphery interaction and morelateral relations between peripheral and/ormarginal communities (Jamieson 1992), arelargely speculative since there is little conclu-sive evidence for large-scale or highly developedrelations between Ontario populations andpeople in the southeast or midwest. The bestevidence for this kind of interaction would bethe substantial presence and clearly dem-onstrated symbolic significance, on peripheralsites, of exotica which are undoubtedly offoreign origin. While materials of this sort werein circulation in Ontario during the Late Ar-chaic to Middle Woodland period (Ellis et al.1990:118-119; Spence et al. 1990:138, 155-156),they remain elusive for the period in question.

While it may be argued that the exchange ofmaterial goods per se is not the prime concernin CPI analyses focusing on questions of domi-nance and dependence (Champion 1989:11-12;Rowlands 1987:5-9), the fact remains that in themajority of cases where CPI has been appliedsuccessfully, the existence of extensive tradeconnections and their obvious importance indefining both the external and internal relationsof the peripheral polities have, to some degree,been recognized for decades.

In southern Manitoba, Mississippian influ-ence has been clearly demonstrated on thebasis of Oneota-like artifacts, including largeshell gorgets with weeping eyes, miniatureceramic vessels with incised thunderbirds andbroken arrows, lizard or salamander effigies, aswell as vessels with curvilinear traileddecoration (Nicholson 1994:5-7; Syms 1979:283). In Ontario, however, the extremely smallassemblage of identifiable exotica, for thecrucial Early and Middle Iroquoian periods,provides a shaky foundation on which to baseany similar explanatory approach. In order tocircumvent this problem, proponents of pan-regional explanatory models have turned theirattention to more basic elements of Iroquoianmaterial culture, such as small triangular pointtypes, certain ceramic attributes such asincised horizontals, and several aspects of theoverall settlement and subsistence patterns(Dincauze and Hasenstab 1989:76; Jamieson1991, 1992).

The underlying assumption of such anapproach is that these traits must represent athreshold level of ideological and/or socio-political connectedness between the core andits peripheral or marginal communities. Therecent proposal that certain Mississippianceramic vessels (Ramey Incised) and theirconstituent design sequences might haveconstituted active symbols of order, hierarchy,and religious beliefs in a form of socio-ideolog-ical communication between Cahokia's elite andits commoners (Pauketat and Emerson 1991),suggests that such artifacts should beidentifiable in the archaeological record ofcommunities that participated in the system.There is simply no evidence that Early Iroquoi-ans in Ontario had been exposed to andunderstood, let alone embraced, the world viewor religious iconography of the society that theywere supposedly serving. Moreover, it mightprove difficult to differentiate symbolsspecifically representing Cahokian ideology



from pan-Indian symbols also employed by

Iroquoians (von Gernet 1992a:136).Nevertheless, if material culture is an "indi-

rect" reflection of society, in the sense thatideas, beliefs, and meanings interpose them-selves between people and their things (Hod-der1986:3) (and notwithstanding the logicalcircularity of using the same decorative criteriaas a basis for both chronology and for socialinferences dependent on that chronology), whywould Iroquoians adopt symbols that werederived from completely different cultural-historical and therefore structural contexts?Jamieson claims, for example, that "the conceptof incised horizontals ultimately is of transi-tional Mississippian and Mississippian origin"(Jamieson 1992:74, emphasis added). Yet,neither the appearance of horizontal elementsnor incising was sudden in Ontario or in otherparts of the Northeast. They have been found,both separately and together, on vessels datingto Middle Woodland times (Finlayson 1977:137,348; Fitting 1972:256-257, 261; Jackson 1979:22;Ritchie and Funk 1973:133; Wright 1967).Incising as a decorative technique has alsobeen noted on Early Woodland wares (e.g.,Bush 1975:13-22; Ozker 1982:197; Ritchie andFunk 1973:153), while corded horizontals havebeen found on early Middle Woodland vesselsfrom a number of sites, suggesting thepossibility of a developmental sequence out ofEarly Woodland Vinette 1 pottery (Jackson1979:22). The concept of the incised horizontal,therefore, was not introduced, but had beendeeply embedded in the mental templates oflocal potters for at least a millennium prior tothe emergence of a Mississippian "centre".Moreover, in that such motifs occur on ceramicvessels throughout the world, one must becareful to distinguish between diffusion andconstraints in human cognition and motor skillsthat lead to independent invention.

Jamieson further argues that other kinds ofcultural traits, such as certain bone artifacts ortriangular projectile points (Levanna), are"exogenously derived homologues, ultimately ofMississippian origin" that were adopted by lateEarly Iroquoian communities in Ontario(Jamieson 1992:72). While certain artifactattributes were clearly shared by regionallybased, autonomous communities over largegeographical areas, their origins are not at allclear. For example, Justice (1987:217) hassuggested that Levanna points, which arepresent in Ontario by A.D. 600 (Stothers 1977),

are derived from Jack's Reef Corner Notchedpoints, which date to the late Middle Woodlandperiod (A.D. 500-800). Sites of the late MiddleWoodland Kipp Island phase in New York haveyielded both Jack's Reef and Levanna points(Ritchie 1969:228-253). Similarly, Jack's ReefPentagonal points, a form closely related toJack's Reef Corner Notched, have been foundin association with Levanna points in lateMiddle Woodland contexts at the Pointe-du-Buisson site, on the St. Lawrence River inQuebec (Clermont and Chapdelaine 1982:86).While knappers from more southerly, contem-poraneous communities may also have madeand used projectile points similar to these(Ritchie 1971:26), their use in the Northeastpredates the emergence of apparently complexMississippian societies.

Many of the bone tools mentioned by Jamie-son also appear to have antecedents in theelaborate bone industries of the Middle Wood-land period (e.g., Finlayson 1977:431-453;Kenyon 1986:90-101; Ritchie 1969:231-233). Thesame is true of polished stone pendants, aparticular type of which — cannel coal — ispurported to have functioned as a marker of"salient social identity" originating in upperOhio (Jamieson 1992:74). Yet, after five years ofarchaeological research involving the excava-tion of twenty-five Early Iroquoian sites on theCaradoc sand plain of southwestern Ontario(Williamson 1985, 1986, 1990), only one small,green pebble pendant was recovered fromamong tens of thousands of artifacts. Sincethese communities represent the westernmostEarly Iroquoian populations in Ontario and,therefore, those nearest to Ohio, it is unlikelythat the occasional dark-coloured pebblependant recovered elsewhere in southernOntario signifies anything other than an indi-vidual preference for personal ornamentation.Moreover, there are certainly precedents forpebble and black slate pendants in Late Ar-chaic and Early Woodland times (e.g., Granger1978:139; Ritchie 1969:116; Ritchie and Funk1973:154).

That there are clearly antecedent and widelyused forms for these artifacts across theNortheast well before Mississippian timesattests to the antiquity of regional interactionamong autonomous, similarly structuredcommunities. Indeed, there is ample evidencefor the emergence and decline of an intensive,long distance exchange system across thenortheast, including Ontario, in the Hopewell

phase of the Middle Woodland period (Braun1986; Brose and Greber 1979). It would appear,however, from the relatively rare presence ofmarine shell and native copper on Early Iro-quoian sites in southern Ontario, that theassociated exchange networks (some of whichwere far-reaching and may have originated inMiddle Woodland times) were neverthelessattenuated. Hence, an examination of theprolonged, consistent exchange and communi-cation between groups at a similar level ofcultural complexity within the Great Lakesregion might provide our best clues for under-standing Iroquoian cultural evolution. A poten-tially fruitful means of carrying out such anexamination is through adoption of the conceptof "peer polity interaction" as a means of ex-ploring the widespread growth of more complexsocio-political structures among OntarioIroquoians in the post A.D. 1300 period.

PEER POLITY INTERACTIONAND THE EMERGENCE OF

TRIBAL SYSTEMS

Although the concept of peer polity interac-tion (PPI) has its origins in the study of spatialand power relations between chiefdoms andearly states, it is sufficiently flexible to be ap-plied to small scale situations exhibiting alesser degree of complexity (Cherry and Renfrew1986:150; Renfrew 1986:1). PPI has beendefined as the "full range of interchanges takingplace (including imitation and emulation,competition, warfare, and the exchange ofmaterial goods and information) betweenautonomous (i.e. sell-governing and in thatsense politically independent) socio-politicalunits which are situated beside or close to eachother within a single geographical region"(Renfrew 1986:1). The examination of suchinterchanges between autonomous politicalunits, or peer polities, may shed some light onthe shared structures (political institutions,specialized ritual communication systems, andconventionalized patterns of non-verballanguage [Renfrew 1986:11) that suggest thatthese peer polities together constituted a morebroad and recognizable social group.

Fundamental to the PPI approach is theidentification of autonomous peer polities. Aswill be discussed more fully below, it is likelythat, prior to the Late Iroquoian period, the self-governing multi-lineage village represents the

maximal political unit. Many such units formeda pattern of discrete regional clusters acrosssouthern Ontario, defined by factors of distanceor physiography. The growth of strongercommunication and exchange relationshipsbetween these autonomous peer polities insouthern Ontario is of greater significance tothe development of the cultural uniformitiesthat have led to the recognition of an increas-ingly homogeneous Ontario Iroquoian societythan are less regularized, external links withother regions (Figure 1). It is at the level ofinteraction between these individual polities,made up of regional clusters of villages, thatthe processes which ultimately led to theemergence of larger tribal groupings operated,and it is likely that it is the examination of theseintermediate-scale ties that will prove to be themost informative (Renfrew 1986:7).

In order to investigate the relationship(s)between these peer polities, however, we mustfirst abandon the current theoretical paradigmand any of its preconceived notions concerningthe socio-political affiliation of those polities.Most previous research has been framed in amodel of Iroquoian cultural development(MacNeish 1952; Wright 1966), which in somerespects has outlived its usefulness. J.V.Wright's outline of the Ontario Iroquois Tradi-tion proposed three stages of development. Thefirst consisted of a western branch called GlenMeyer and an eastern branch called Pickering;both were thought to have evolved in relativeisolation from one another. The second stage,the Middle Ontario Iroquois, was thought torepresent the fusion of these two branches,resulting from the military conquest of the GlenMeyer by the Pickering. The final stage, theLate Ontario Iroquois, was thought to reflect adivergence from the middle stage culminatingin the historical tribal groupings known as theHuron, Petun, Neutral, and Erie (Wright1966:94-101).

Two other Iroquoian co-traditions weresimilarly defined: the Mohawk-Onondaga-Oneida Tradition and the Seneca-Cayuga-Susquehannock Tradition. Wright acknowl-edged that the three postulated traditions were,in effect, rather simplistic taxonomic tools, butargued that simplicity was necessary tounderstand the archaeological record (Wright1966:3). Archaeologists now recognize,however, that complex cultural developmentscannot adequately be investigated usingsuperficial models. Indeed, the imposition of



Figure 1. Peer Polity Interaction. Prolonged and consistent interaction between politically autonomous villageswithin a specific region are of primary significance, whereas interactions beyond the region are less well-developed (after Renfrew 1986: Figure 1.5).one-dimensional taxonomic divisions such as"branches" on prehistoric societies masksregional variation and discourages "the investi-gation of dynamic, multi-dimensional lines ofsocio-political integration" (MacDonald 1993). Tohis credit, Wright (1966:101) recognized that, inthe fullness of time and with accumulation ofdata, many of his interpretations would be"subject to marked alterations". He has, never-theless, been tenacious in his defence of certainaspects of the model, such as the con-questhypothesis (Wright 1992), despite overwhelmingopinion to the contrary (see William-son1990:311-312 fora summary).

The limitations of the original constructs areclearly reflected in the increasing difficulty withwhich archaeological data are accommodated byWright's model. Middle and Late Woodland sitesin southcentral Ontario have culturalassemblages that share attributes with com-plexes in southwestern and southeasternOntario, and the classification of certain EarlyIroquoian communities as either Pickering orGlen Meyer is proving as difficult as classifyingsome Late Iroquoian sites as either prehistoric

Huron or prehistoric Neutral. A break fromWright's model of Iroquoian prehistory is slowlybeing made. More recently, the use of histaxonomy has served as a convenient tool tosimplify communication rather than as a guidefor defining discrete cultures (Smith 1990:287-288).

If no rigid taxonomy is imposed a priori, theproblems inherent in the model disappear. It issuggested, therefore, that Wright's culturalcategories based on earlier, incomplete data beabandoned, since their use currently results inconfusion. Jamieson (1991:6), for example,argues that the spatial differences within andbetween Early Iroquoian cultures may beinterpreted as reflecting the degree to which

locally developing groups interacted with otherexternal polities, adopting and integratingdiffused traits and ideologies. In the very sameparagraph, however, she suggests that theresultant information and communicationnetwork permitted Pickering Branch domination

over the Glen Meyer Branch. Abandoning thistaxonomy will force researchers to examine thearchaeological record in order to

demonstrate the actual level of socio-politicalintegration and co-operation among regionallybased, pre-tribal social systems.

For the Early Iroquoian period, it would seemthat sites were distributed in a pattern of geo-graphically discrete, regional clusters. Somegroups likely associated with their neighboursmore frequently than did others, and each wasprobably adapted to a slightly different envi-ronment. Sequences of ceramic developmentwere also quite variable from one region toanother, as was the use of specific decorativemotifs or techniques (Williamson 1985:289-290).This may be attributable to the fact that spou-ses were obtained from other communitieswithin a regional cluster (Timmins 1992:486).The evolution of this period should clearly beviewed as multilinear, with each region experi-encing unique cultural adaptations and arrivingat different stages of economic, social, andpolitical development at slightly different times(Williamson 1990). Yet, while there apparentlywere a large number of regional ceramic micro-traditions, there was also a considerabledevelopmental uniformity in material cultureand settlement-subsistence patterns at themacro-regional level. It is absolutely essential toreconcile these two levels of interaction in orderto propose long distance Early Iroquoianpopulation incursions and disruptions (Jamie-son 1991, 1992) and to gauge the actual effectof Mississippian traits on the many politicallyautonomous communities residing in southernOntario from the tenth through late thirteenthcenturies A.D.

There does not appear to have been a socialnetwork integrated by cross-cutting pan-resi-dential institutions until the fifteenth century orlater (Timmins 1992:483-489). That is, there donot appear to have been fully formed tribalsocial systems involved in long distance andlarge scale politics, warfare and exchange untilthe Late Iroquoian period (Figure 2). Instead, inthe course of the consolidation of the smallerand more numerous bands of the MiddleWoodland period, food production and thedevelopment of corporate lineages and unilinealdescent led to the evolution of relatively smalland autonomous multi-lineage communities(Niemczycki 1984; Service 1971). It was notuntil these communities were integrated at amuch higher level that tribal systems wereformed. It should also be noted that, in manysocieties, the village represented the mostcomplex socio-political unit attained in a

region, despite the presence of a low-level socialnetwork involving a number of neighbouringcommunities (Renfrew 1986:2).

Evolution from the small multi-lineage com-munities of the Early Iroquoian period to thelarger but still autonomous communities of theMiddle Iroquoian period appears to havefollowed a region-wide intensification of foodproduction and to have involved decreasedmobility in the subsistence schedule, commu-nity aggregations (if not population expansion),and increased levels of co-operation andcommunication among neighbouring polities(Dodd et al. 1990; Pearce 1984). In southernOntario, such changes may have begun aboutthe end of the thirteenth century A.D. It is likelythat these changes were a consequence of an800-year-long transition to horticultural villagelife, rather than a sudden response to externalthreats brought about by the decline of the siteof Cahokia (Dincauze and Hasenstab 1989:77-78).

The intensification of food production and itslogical consequences appear to have occurredgradually. Prior to the thirteenth century A.D.,Early Iroquoian settlement-subsistence systemsapparently involved villages or base settlementsas well as seasonally occupied hamlets whichserved varying functions (Williamson 1990:312-320). Village sites have yielded evidence ofunplanned long-term occupations withnumerous overlapping houses that vary in sizeand internal arrangement. Hamlets, on theother hand, appear to have been occupied inthe fall to exploit and process deer and otheranimals attracted to mast-producing forest,and in the spring to exploit spawning fish. Theinternal ordering of house features at some ofthese sites suggests that their occupations mayhave extended past autumn into early winter,and it is possible that a few were occupied year-round. These data attest to a mixed economyinvolving horticultural villages. It was aroundthese base settlements that most crops weregrown, and from them that hunting andgathering parties, which included men, women,and children, travelled five to ten kilometres togather and process food and other resources(Williamson 1990:312-320).

Bruce Trigger (1976:134) has suggested thatthe estimated population (200 to 400) of most ofthese early sedentary villages falls comfortablywithin the size range of Middle Woodlandspring and summer fishing groups, and that



the small villages of the Early Iroquoian periodmay have been continuations of these earlymacrobands. Their small size also suggests thatseparate polities had not yet begun to jointogether to form larger communities and thatleadership would have remained informal,perhaps being limited to an individual who alsoacted as a spokesperson in dealings withneighbouring groups (Trigger 1981:24). Earlysedentary villages, therefore, may have beencharacterized by a flexible and evolving socio-political structure, whereby people were free topursue seasonal subsistence activities in eitherextended or nuclear family units. Some mem-bers of these groups may have elected toremain at fall hunting sites into the winter,depending on the severity of the weather andthe availability of resources.

Such overall flexibility would explain thevariations in house morphology, interior houseactivity, and seasonally intermittent occupa-tions at the various exploitative camps docu-mented for Early Iroquoian populations. Untilan increasing dependence on cultigens forced arealignment of work tasks that separated menfrom women for prolonged periods, residenceand descent patterns may have remainedlargely unchanged from Middle Wood-landtimes (Williamson 1990:318-319; see alsoTrigger 1976:136). Hence, the adoption of cornappears to have been gradual and characterizedby conservatism. When horticulture was firstpractised, the risk of crop failure may have beengreat, and simple caution may explain thereluctance of Early Iroquoians to engage in full-scale farming (Bronson 1977:34). As long as thesize of population aggregates remainedrelatively small, the natural productivity ofsome Early Iroquoian micro-environmentsseems to have encouraged a tendency to reducerisk factors by continuing to rely partially onnaturally occurring resources. In this manner,Early Iroquoians sought greater securitythrough a mixed economy.

T i m m i n s (1992:485) has argued that the long-term occupancy of Early Iroquoian villagessuggests that village locations were highlyvalued, and that they and the hunting territo-ries with which they were associated wouldhave been tenaciously protected. He has alsonoted that some regional clusters of EarlyIroquoian sites may have involved, not a singlesite sequence, but two or more contemporarycommunities that may have shared a huntingterritory or some other common resource base.

In this way, a number of self-governing, auton-omous polities may have participated in a largesocial network in much the same way as ismodelled in Figure 1, each with more mean-ingful social links with neighbouring communi-ties than with distant groups. Such networksmay have involved spousal exchanges, waralliances and trading relationships, and mayeven have served to "predispose people for theeventual decision to amalgamate into largervillages", once the region-wide intensification offood production had occurred (Timmins1992:486).

In at least one area of southern Ontario,there is evidence of an increasing commitmentto food production by the twelfth and thirteenthcenturies. This is reflected in a growing em-phasis on the placement of villages adjacent tothe most suitable soils for agriculture within theregion (Williamson 1985:326). As the contribu-tion of cultigens to the Early Iroquoian dietincreased, it is likely that the production ofsurplus storable foods for year-round con-sumption became more reliable, therebyallowing more people to live together through-out the winter season (see Trigger 1981:24),and resulting, at least in some areas, in theamalgamation of one or more autonomous localpolities (Pearce 1984; Timmins 1992:487; Tuck1971). The resulting villages, situated onheavier, more drought-resistant soils thanthose used previously (Pearce 1984:287), yieldevidence of considerable changes in settlementpatterns and material culture that perhapscorrelate with the significant social andpolitical developments thought to have accom-panied community fusion: village councils,formalized community planning, and multiplesocial groupings (Pearce 1984:293-304; Trigger1990:124). Moreover, the fourteenth centurymay have seen substantial population growthto levels observed in historical times (Warrick1990). This apparently was a consequencerather than a cause of intensified food produc-tion (Trigger 1990:124).

It is also possible that these developmentswere exacerbated by external factors such asconflict with non-Iroquoians from neighbouringregions (Pearce 1984:330-334). While the initialresponse to such a challenge may have beensomewhat limited, it would have becomeincreasingly systemic if the risks had persisted;indeed, this appears to have been the case,even into the historic period. It is the change insocial relations, or the organized response to

36 ON T ARI O ARCHAEOLOG Y No. 58, 1994

such events or risks, that is observable in thearchaeological record (Braun and Plog1982:506-509).

In order to reconstruct the degree of related-ness between peer polities during both Earlyand Middle Iroquoian times and eventually toidentify the point at which tribal social systemsformed, we must reach an understanding ofexchange systems and the relationships be-tween style and social connectedness. Intraditional Iroquoian cultural-historical schem-es, the main underlying assumptions regardingstyle have been that ceramic attributes reflectethnic identity, and that, more importantly,socio-political dominance is normally evidencedby increasing frequencies of traits belonging tothe predominant group. This is a notion forwhich there is substantial contradictory cross-cultural evidence. It has been noted elsewhere(Hodder 1978a:4-9) that vessel shapes anddesign motifs often remain the same among aconquered population, despite significantacculturation. Furthermore, invaders mightintrude upon settled populations and theirarrival may not be identifiable in ceramicpatterns for a number of centuries. The tradi-tional approach assumes that potters too easilyaccept the legitimation of control and are quickto embrace a new and dominant ideology(Hodder 1986:26).

If, however, one accepts regional heteroge-neity in both the socio-political sphere and inthe artifact assemblages of the Early Iroquoianperiod of southern Ontario, as well as anincreased homogeneity in ceramics and com-munity amalgamation during the Middle Iro-quoian period (Dodd et al. 1990; Pearce 1984;Williamson 1990), it becomes apparent that fourceramic trends need elaboration andexplanation. The first concerns the extent,nature, and reasons for the widespread sharingof certain ceramic technique and decorativemotif attributes (e.g., the shift away from thecoil manufacturing technique and the increaseduse of cord-wrapped stick treatments) duringthe Late Middle Woodland and Early Iroquoianperiods, given the autonomy of regionally basedcommunities as reflected in their ceramicmicro-traditions. The second involves theapparently rapid and dramatic changes inceramics during the Early to Middle Iroquoiantransition (circa A.D. 1300), in particular, theincrease in the manufacture of collared vesselsand the use of horizontal motifs. The third isthe overall decreasing

complexity in design beginning in the MiddleIroquoian period. The latter may, in part,explain the fourth trend: increasingly moresubtle manifestations of regional variationduring this same period. This is not to deny theantiquity of regional diversity in the archaeo-logical record, but to recognize certain broaddevelopments in ceramic style during theperiod in question.

Central to all of these questions are theinterrelationships between the use or appear-ance of individual attributes or combinations,their cultural-symbolic context, and socio-political changes in the society. Achieving anunderstanding of these interrelationships isrendered more difficult by the fact that a soci-ety's material culture is not a static entity.Individual objects pass through "life-cycles"; astheir contexts of use change, so do their mean-ings or cultural significance. Such changesduring the course of an object's use representchanges in the underlying human relationships(Appadurai 1986:17-22; Barrett 1987:8-9).

While some researchers who support long-range regional interaction models are pointingto the diffusion of specific elements or traits, itis argued here that horizontal motifs, for exam-ple, were already well implanted in the sym-bolic repertoire of Ontario Iroquoians and thatincreased local exchange led to increasinglysimple and homogenous decorative sequences.These constituted changes from previouslymore complex and regionally variablesequences that accompanied changes in dietand in household and community sizes. Theintensification of food production and the onsetof increased exchange were mutually reinforc-ing events. David Braun (1986:123) has simi-larly argued that the stylistic standardization ofcertain ceramic vessels, recovered from sitesinvolved in the Hopewellian interaction sphere,resulted from the development of symbolicredundancy in exchange activity among bothneighbouring and geographically separatedcommunities. He further suggests that suchuniformity was deliberately sought as a meansof reinforcing membership in an expandingnetwork of social relations.

In this way, the most frequently expressedcultural markers may have symbolized the"salient affiliations" of a group, making it easierto identify membership since these cues werehighly visible and redundant (Schortman1989:53-57). Consequently, these symbolsshould find lasting expression in the archaeo-

WILLIAMSON AND ROBERTSON ______ PEER POLITIES BEYOND THE PERIPHERY ... 37

logical record. In that exchange networks weregrounded in negotiation and social obligation,they may have dissolved if they were not regu-larly reaffirmed, despite the fact that the ex-change of goods may have occurred along thesame social lines as the exchange of marriagepartners (Braun and Plog 1982:511), at least inEarly Iroquoian times. The higher frequency ofcollared vessels and the use of incised hori-zontals may be interpreted as an expression ofevolving closer social ties between regional peerpolities. These closer ties and the resultantceramic standardization are significant changesfrom an earlier, less structured sharing ofceramic traits, based on less regularintercommunity interaction during the EarlyIroquoian period — a level of interaction thatresulted in less but still observable develop-mental uniformity across the Northeast.

Thus, while there may have been greatervariation between neighbouring communitiesduring the Early Iroquoian period, the introduc-tion of even minimal restrictions on the accep-tance of ceramic innovation, as perhaps wasthe case in the Middle Iroquoian period, mayhave resulted in broad areas losing theirregional distinctiveness. In such cases, culturaldifferences may have diminished with time, andeventually boundaries may have lost theirdefinition, resulting in gradual spatial variationin cultural content and ceramic expression(Barth 1969:36; Hodder 1978b:253). It shouldnevertheless be recalled that, while there wascertainly a greater expression of coherenceamong Middle Iroquoian groups, there mayhave been other ceramic attributes in the samecommunities that reflected the expression ofgroup separateness and identity (see alsoNicklin 1971:27-29). Here, perhaps, lies a clueto understanding the increasingly subtle mani-festations of regional variation during theMiddle Iroquoian period in Ontario.

Yet, increasing ceramic uniformity may nothave been simply a behavioural reflection of anew social identity. Symbolic communicationresults from a common understanding of a setof rules regulating the organization and mean-ing of symbols. In this way, material culturecan be understood as a "symbolizing behaviour"that has "functional utility .... and a logic of itsown, which is not directly observable as patternor style" (Hodder 1982:7). For any explanationof observed patterns to be convincing, it mustalso make reference to this hidden orunderlying structure.

Meaning is derived from the associations anduse of an object, and there is a need toinvestigate the relationship between the struc-tural context of the object and the symbolsused to decorate the object. It is through ashared understanding of symbols that itemscome to represent society, although we areuncertain how social relations are translatedinto material symbols. While it has been arguedthat symbols are organized to maximize theflow of information (Hodder 1982:10), we havenot yet even determined how they are regularlyused in our own cultural contexts, let alonethose of the distant past. This should lead us tomore cautiously explore the meaning ofattributes with respect to economic or socio-political transition, particularly when some ofthe decorative attributes that are found oncooking and storage vessels, for example, maysymbolize functional categories and nottemporal, spatial, and/or ethnic variation.Incised horizontals, for instance, occur on lessthan ten percent of Early Iroquoian ceramicvessels (Williamson 1985:286-288) and onapproximately forty to fifty percent of MiddleIroquoian vessels (Dodd et al. 1990:335-337). Ifpots decorated with horizontal motifs were usedfor the preparation, storage, and consumptionof maize soup, it might be argued that thesefrequencies reflect not a new social identity but,rather, the growing role of corn in the diet, asthis crop may have contributed forty to fiftypercent of the daily caloric intake by MiddleIroquoian times (Schwarz et al. 1985).Alternatively, Ramsden (1990:176-177) hasargued that the changes in ceramic vessel formand decoration from Middle Woodland to LateIroquoian times symbolized changingperceptions of space and boundaries that wereintimately linked with major shifts in settlementand subsistence patterns and burial systems.

Whatever the meaning behind the changes indesign sequences on ceramic vessels from Earlyto Middle Iroquoian times, the changes wererapid and widespread, encompassing most ofsouthern Ontario and northern New York State.It seems most likely that this resulted from anexpanding network of trading partnerships.Spence's (1982) conclusion that MiddleWoodland societies were ranked implies thattrading relationships were limited in numberand scope at that time. With the evolution ofmulti-lineage communities and the eventualtransition to more formalized tribal


social systems, however, the number of lineagebased trading relationships within the commu-nity and the overall social network probablyincreased dramatically, resulting in significantimpacts on the potters of the communities,especially if these relationships occasionallyconstituted avenues of exchange for marriagepartners. At the very least, the amalgamation ofneighbouring villages in the early fourteenthcentury should have, by logical consequence,resulted in a heightened level of familiarityamong fewer communities, provided villageexogamy was still practised and communitieslooked to adjacent villages for marriage part-ners. This may have led to an "unprecedentedlevel of inter-regional interaction and integra-tion" during the Middle Iroquoian period(Timmins 1992:487). In fact, Timmins has notedthat the widespread adoption of incised hori-zontal motifs occurred so rapidly that it seemsto have been a generational phenomena assuggested by the different frequencies injuvenile (25%) versus adult (6%) assemblages inthe late thirteenth century occupation of theCalvert site (Timmins 1992: 488).

Ultimately, in order to construct a newcultural-historical paradigm, detailed symbolicarchaeological analyses will be necessary todetermine which ceramic attributes signallednew, more complex, socio-political identitiesand which represented temporal variation orfunctional categories. Similar analyses will berequired of other artifact classes, and it will benecessary to link these developments within achronological framework of intensified foodproduction and concomitant changes to settle-ment patterns at the house, community, andregional levels. As Timmins (1992:483) hasclearly stated, our ability to understand theevolution of Iroquoian tribal social systems restslargely with our success in recognizing thevarious stages of the evolution of extendedfamilies, lineages, clan segments, and villages inthe archaeological record. It will also benecessary for researchers to proceed withfocused examinations of local sequences and toresist attempts to fit their ceramic data intoelusive categories such as Glen Meyer orPickering (e.g., Bursey 1994).

Dincauze and Hasenstab's (1989:70) objec-tion to ecological-social models is that they failto account for the uniqueness and develop-ment of Iroquoian culture. They also point tothe rapid diffusion of cultigens and questionthe "failure" of Algonquian and Iroquoian

groups to converge culturally. It has becomeincreasingly apparent, however, that in someregions the distinctions between Iroquoian andAlgonquian are not as sharply defined as wasonce believed. Where environmental conditionspermitted, some Algonquian groups certainlydid practice maize horticulture (Fox 1990:471;Murphy and Ferris 1990:263). Other groupswho inhabited areas (such as the CanadianShield) which were unsuitable for horticulturedisplay among their material culture certaintraits which have been traditionally regarded as"Iroquoian" (Fox 1990:463). Recent researchhas forced us to continue to re-evaluate ourassumptions concerning a direct link betweenethnicity and material culture (von Gernet1992b:122-123, 1993:77) and to consider thepolitical and social circumstances thatsurrounded the original definition, during thecontact period, of a marked dichotomy between"Iroquoian" and "Algonquian" groups (Moreauet al. 1991:58).

Once the traditional paradigms are aban-doned, however, and we are able to reconstructthe long-term regional evolution of peer politiesacross the Northeast, it may become evident thatthese polities responded, at least initially, toexternal influences in different ways and atdifferent times, depending on the structure ofthe social network in which they were involved.Indeed, it was into these polities, with culturaltraditions extending back at least a millennium,that cultigens were first introduced, perhapswithin the same Ohio-based exchange systemsthat centuries before had provided exotic goodsof a different form. While the gradualprogression toward the intensification of foodproduction had been set in motion by theintroduction of cultigens in the late MiddleWoodland period, the following millennium ofcultural change, including the development ofmatrilocality and matrilineality, clans, and tribalsystems, was more likely the product ofendogenous change among region-ally basedpolities, rather than exogenous influencesresulting from interaction with a more complexsociety to the south.

Acknowledgments. This paper is based upona presentation given at the 25th AnnualMeeting of the Canadian ArchaeologicalAssociation held in London, Ontario in May of1992 and includes a summary of Williamson'sdissertation research undertaken at McGillUniversity. We are indebted to Martin Cooper



for his comments concerning the culture historyof the Great Lakes and Midwestern regions, toRob MacDonald for his discussions regardingintellectual trends and paradigm shifts inIroquoian archaeology, to Claude Chapdelaine,Susan Jamieson, Alex von Gernet, and theanonymous reviewers for contributingnumerous helpful comments. We are alsograteful to Patricia Reed and Carol Short fortheir editorial assistance in preparing thismanuscript.

REFERENCES CITED

Appadurai, A.1986 Introduction: Commodities and the

Politics of Value. In The Social Life ofThings, edited by A. Appadurai, pp.3-63. Cambridge University Press,New York.

Barrett, J. C.1987 Fields of Discourse: Reconstituting

a Social Archaeology. Critique of

Anthropology 7(3):5-16.Barth, F.

1969 Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: TheSocial Organization of Culture. LittleBrown, Boston.

Braun, D. P.1986 Midwestern Hopewellian Ex-change

and Supralocal Interaction. In Peer

Polity Interaction and Socio-Political

Change, edited by A. C. Renfrewand J. F. Cherry, pp. 117-126.Cambridge University Press,Cambridge.

Braun, D. P., and S. Plog1982 Evolution of "Tribal" Social Net-

works: Theory and Prehistoric North

American Evidence. AmericanAntiquity 47(3):504-525.

Bronson, B.1977 The Earliest Farming: Demography

as Cause and Consequence. In

Origins of Agriculture, edited by C.Reed, pp. 23-48. Mouton, Le Hague.

Brose, D., and N. Greber (editors)

1979 Hopewell Archaeology: The Chilli-cothe Conference. Kent State Uni-versity Press, Kent, Ohio.

Bursey, J. A.1994 The Pottery from the Tara and

Ireland Sites: Three Terminal GlenMeyer Components in the Burling-

ton/ Crawford Lake Area. Kewa94(3):2-15.

Bush, D. E.1975 A Ceramic Analysis of the Late

Adena Buckmeyer Site, Perry Co.,

Ohio. The Michigan Archaeologist21(1):9-24.

Champion, T. C.

1989 Introduction. In Centre and Periph-ery: Comparative Studies in Ar-

chaeology, edited by T. C. Cham-pion, pp. 1-21. Unwin Hyman, Lon-don.

Champion, T. C. (editor)

1989 Centre and Periphery: Comparative

Studies in Archaeology. UnwinHyman, London.

Cherry, J. F., and A. C. Renfrew1986 ' Epilogue and Prospect. In Peer

Polity Interaction and Socio-Politi-cal Change, edited by A. C. Renfrewand J. F. Cherry, pp. 149-158.Cambridge University Press, Cam-bridge.

Clermont, N., and C. Chapdelaine

1982 Pointe-du-Buisson 4: Quarante Sièclesd'Archives Oubliées. SocieteRecherches Amerindiennes auQuebec, Montreal.

Dincauze, D. F., and R. J. Hasenstab1989 Explaining the Iroquois: Tribal-

ization on a Prehistoric Periphery.

In Centre and Periphery: Compar-

ative Studies in Archaeology, editedby T. C. Champion, pp. 67-87.Unwin Hyman, London.

Dodd, C. F., D. R. Poulton, P. A. Lennox, D. G.

Smith, and G. A. Warrick1990 The Middle Ontario Iroquoian Stage.

In The Archaeology of Southern

Ontario to A.D. 1650, edited by C.J. Ellis and N. Ferris, pp. 321-360.Occasional Publication of theLondon Chapter, OntarioArchaeological Society 5. London,Ontario.

Ellis, C. J., I. T. Kenyon, and M. W.Spence1990 The Archaic. In The Archaeology of

Southern Ontario to A. D. 1650,edited by C. J. Ellis and N. Ferris,pp. 65-124. Occasional Publicationof the London Chapter, OntarioArchaeological Society 5. London,Ontario.

Finlayson, W. D.

1977 The Saugeen Culture: A MiddleWoodland Manifestation in South-

western Ontario. National Museumof Man, Mercury Series, Paper 61.Archaeological Survey of Canada,Ottawa.

Fitting, J. E.1972 Occupational History. In The

Schultz Site at Green Point, editedby J. E. Fitting. Memoirs of the Mu-seum of Anthropology 4. Universityof Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Fox, W. A.1990 The Odawa. In The Archaeology of

Southern Ontario to A.D. 1650,edited by C. J. Ellis and N. Ferris,pp. 457-474. Occasional Publicationof the London Chapter, OntarioArchaeological Society 5. London,Ontario.

Frank, A. G.

1967 Capitalism and Underdevelopment

in Latin America: Historical Studies

of Chile and Brazil. Monthly ReviewPress, New York.

Frankenstein, S., and M. J. Rowlands1978 The Internal Structure and Region-

al Context of Early Iron Age Society

in Southwest Germany. Bulletin of

the Institute of Archaeology 15:73-112.

Gottman, J.

1980 Centre and Periphery: SpatialVariation in Politics. Sage, London.

Granger, J.

1978 Meadowood Phase Settlement

Pattern in the Niagara FrontierRegion of Western New York State.Anthropological Papers 65. Museumof Anthropology, University ofMichigan, Ann Arbor.

Hasenstab, R. J.

1990 Agriculture, Warfare and Tribal-ization in the Iroquois Homeland ofNew York: A GIS Analysis of LateWoodland Settlement. UnpublishedPh.D. dissertation, Department ofAnthropology, University ofMassachusetts, Amherst.

Hodder, I.1978a Simple Correlations Between Ma-

terial Culture and Society: A Re-

view. In The Spatial Organization ofCulture, edited by I. Hodder, pp. 3-24. Page Brothers, Norwich.

1978b Social Organisation and HumanInteraction: the Development ofSome Tentative Hypotheses inTerms of Material Culture. In The

Spatial Organization of Culture,edited by I. Hodder, pp. 199-269.Page Brothers, Norwich.

1982 Theoretical Archaeology. In Sym-

bolic and Structural Archaeology,edited by I. Hodder, pp. 1-16. Cam-bridge University Press, Cam-bridge.

1986 Reading the Past: Approaches toInterpretation in Archaeology.Cambridge University Press, Cam-bridge.

Jackson, L. J.1979 Dawson Creek: An Early Wood-land

Site in South-Central Ontario.

Ontario Archaeology 33:13-32.Jamieson, S. M.

1991 A Pickering Conquest? Kewa

91(5):2-18.1992 Regional Interaction and Ontario

Iroquois Evolution. Canadian Jour-nal of Archaeology 16:70-88.

Justice, N. D.

1987 Stone Age Spear and Arrow Points

of the Midcontinental and EasternUnited States. Indiana UniversityPress, Indianapolis.

Kenyon, W. A.

1986 Mounds of Sacred Earth: Burial

Mounds of Ontario. ArchaeologyMonograph 9. Royal Ontario Mu-seum, Toronto.



MacDonald, R. I.

1993 Regional Trends in the Late Wood-land of South-Central Ontario:Exploring Ecological Relationshipsand Culture Change. Ph.D. disser-tation in preparation, Departmentof Anthropology, McGill University,Montreal, Quebec. Ms. on file atArchaeological Services Inc.,Stratford, Ontario.

MacNeish, R. S.

1952 Iroquois Pottery Types: A Technique

for the Study of Iroquois Prehistory.National Museum of CanadaBulletin 124. Department ofResources and Development,Ottawa.

Moreau, J-F., E. Langevin, and L. Verreault1991 Assessment of the Ceramic Evi-

dence for Woodland-Period Culturesin the Lac Saint-Jean Area, Eastern

Quebec. Man in the North-east41:33-64.

Muller, J.1987 Salt, Chert, and Shell: Mississip-

pian Exchange and Economy. In

Specialization, Exchange andComplex Societies, edited by E. M.Brumfield and T. K. Earle, pp. 10-21. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge.

Murphy, C., and N. Ferris1990 The Late Woodland Western Basin

Tradition in Southwestern Ontario.In The Archaeology of SouthernOntario to A.D. 1650, edited by C. J.Ellis and N. Ferris, pp. 189-278.Occasional Publication of the Lon-don Chapter, Ontario ArchaeologicalSociety 5. London, Ontario.

Nicholson, B. A.

1994 Mississippian Influx and Influence

in South-Western Manitoba During

the Late Prehistoric Period. Paperpresented at the 1994 Annual Con-ference of the Canadian Archaeo-logical Association, Edmonton,Alberta. Ms. on file at Archaeologi-cal Services Inc., Toronto, Ontario.

Nicklin, K.1971 Stability and Innovation in Pottery

Manufacture. World Archaeology3:13-48.

Niemczycki, M. A. P.1984 The Origin and Development of the

Seneca and Cayuga Tribes of NewYork State. Rochester Museum andScience Centre Re-search Records17. Rochester Museum and ScienceCenter, Rochester, New York.

Ozker, D.

1982 An Early Woodland Community atthe Schultz Site 20SA2 in the Sagi-naw Valley and the Nature of the

Early Woodland Adaptation in the

Great Lakes Region. Anthropologi-cal Papers 70. Museum of Anthro-pology, University of Michigan, AnnArbor.

Pauketat, T. R., and T. E. Emerson1991 The Ideology of Authority and the

Power of the Pot. American An-

thropologist 93(4):919-941.Pearce, R. J.

1984 . Mapping Middleport: A Case Studyin Societal Archaeology.Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,Department of Anthropology, Mc-Gill University, Quebec.

Ramsden, P. G.1990 Death in Winter: Changing Sym-

bolic Patterns in Southern OntarioPrehistory. Anthropologica 32:167-181.

Renfrew, A. C.1986 Introduction: Peer Polity Interaction

and Socio-Political Change. In Peer

Polity Interaction and Socio-Political Change, edited by A. C.Renfrew and J. F. Cherry, pp. 1-18.Cambridge University Press, Cam-bridge.

Ritchie, W. A.

1969 The Archaeology of New York State.Revised ed. Natural History Press,Garden City, New York.

1971 A Typology and Nomenclature forNew York Projectile Points. NewYork State Museum and ScienceService Bulletin 384. Revised ed.Albany, New York.

Ritchie, W. A., and R. E. Funk

1973 Aboriginal Settlement Patterns in

the Northeast. New York State

Museum and Science ServiceMemoir 20. Albany, New York.


Rowlands, M. J.1987 Centre and Periphery: A Review of

the Concept. In Centre and Periph-ery in the Ancient World, edited byM. Rowlands, M. Larsen and K.Kristiansen, pp. 1-11. CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge.

Rowlands, M., M. Larsen, and K. Kristiansen

(editors)

1987 Centre and Periphery in the Ancient

World. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge.

Schortman, E. M.1989 Interregional Interaction in Prehis-

tory: The Need for a New Perspec-tive. American Antiquity 54(1):52-65.

Schortman, E. M., and P. A. Urban1992 Current Trends in Interaction Re-

search. In Resources, Power and

Interregional Interaction, edited byE. M. Schortman and P. A. Urban,pp. 235-255. Plenum Press, NewYork.

Schwarz, H. P., J. Melbye, M. A. Katzenberg,

and M. Knyf1985 Stable Isotopes in Human Skeletons

of Southern Ontario: Recon-

structing Paleodiet. Journal of Ar-

chaeological Science 12:187-206.Service, E. R.

1971 Primitive Social Organization: An

Evolutionary Perspective. RandomHouse, New York.

Smith, B. D.1978 Variation in Mississippian Settle-

ment Patterns. In Mississippian

Settlement Patterns, edited by B.D.Smith, pp. 479-503. AcademicPress, New York.

Smith, D. G.1990 Iroquoian Societies in Southern

Ontario: Introduction and Over-view. In The Archaeology of South-

ern Ontario to A.D. 1650, edited byC.J. Ellis and N. Ferris, pp. 279-290.Occasional Publication of theLondon Chapter, OntarioArchaeological Society 5. London,Ontario.

Snow, D. R.1994 Paleoecology and the Prehistoric

Incursion of Northern Iroquoiansinto the Lower Great Lakes Region.

In Great Lakes Archaeology andPaleoecology: Exploring Inter-

disciplinary Initiatives for the Nine-

ties, edited by R. MacDonald and B.Warner, pp. 193-204. Proceedingsof the Quaternary SciencesInstitute Conference. QuaternarySciences Institute, Waterloo, On-tario.

Spence, M. W.1982 The Social Context of Production

and Exchange. In Contexts forPrehistoric Exchange, edited by J.Ericson and T. K. Earle, pp. 173-197. Academic Press, New York.

Spence, M. W., R. H. Pihl, and C. R.Murphy1990 Cultural complexes of the Early and

Middle Woodland Period. In The

Archaeology of Southern Ontario to

A.D. 1650, edited by C. J. Ellis andN. Ferris. Occasional Publication ofthe London Chapter, OntarioArchaeological Society 5. London,Ontario.

Stothers, D.1977 The Princess Point Complex. Na-

tional Museum of Man MercurySeries. Archaeological Survey ofCanada Paper 58. National Muse-ums of Canada, Ottawa.

Syms, E. L.1979 The Devil's Lake - Sourisford Burial

Complex on the Northeastern

Plains. Plains Anthropologist24(86):283-308.

Timmins, P. A.

1992 An Interpretive Framework for the

Early Iroquoian Village. Unpub-lished Ph.D. dissertation, Depart-ment of Anthropology, McGill Uni-versity, Montreal.

Trigger, B. G.

1976 The Children of Aataensic: A His-

tory of the Huron People to 1660.McGill-Queen's University Press,Montreal.

1981 Prehistoric Social and Political Orga-nization: An Iroquoian Case Study. In

Foundations In Northeastern Archae-

ology, edited by D. R. Snow, pp. 1-50.Academic Press, New York.

1990 Maintaining Economic Equality inOpposition to Complexity: An Iro-

quoian Case Study. In The Evolutionof Political Systems: Sociopolitics in

Small-Scale Sedentary Societies,

edited by S. Upham, pp. 119-145.Cambridge University Press, Cam-bridge.

Tuck, J.

1971 Onondaga Iroquois Prehistory. Syra-cuse University Press, Syracuse, NewYork.

von Gernet, A.1992a New Directions in the Construction of

Prehistoric Amerindian Belief Systems.

In Ancient Images, Ancient Thought:The Archaeology of Ideology, edited byA. S. Goldsmith, S. Garvie, D. Selin,and J. Smith, pp. 133-140.Proceedings of the 23rd AnnualChacmool Conference. University ofCalgary, Calgary, Alberta.

1992b A Possible Matouweskarini Hunting

Camp: Excavations at the HighlandLake Site, Renfrew County. OntarioAnnual Archaeological Report 2 (NewSeries), pp. 120-124. Ontario HeritageFoundation, Toronto.

1993 Archaeological Investigations atHighland Lake: 1991 Field Season.

Ontario Annual Archaeological Re-port3 (New Series), pp. 74-79. OntarioHeritage Foundation, Toronto.

Wallerstein, I.

1974 The Modern World-System, Volume 1.Academic Press, New York.

Warrick, G. A.

1990 A Population History of the Huron-

Petun, A.D. 900 - 1650. UnpublishedPh.D. dissertation, Department ofAnthropology, McGill University, Mon-treal, Quebec.

Williamson R. F.

1985 Glen Meyer: People in Transition.Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, De-partment of Anthropology, McGillUniversity, Montreal, Quebec.

1986 The Mill Stream Cluster: The OtherSide of the Coin. In Studies in South-

western Ontario Archaeology, editedby W. A. Fox, pp. 25-31. OccasionalPublications of the London Chapter,Ontario Archaeological Society 1.London, Ontario.

1990 The Early Iroquoian Period of South-

ern Ontario. In The Archaeology ofSouthern Ontario to A.D. 1650, editedby C. J. Ellis and N. Ferris, pp. 291-320. Occasional Publication of theLondon Chapter, Ontario Archaeo-logical Society 5. London, Ontario.

Wolf, E. R.

1982 Europe and the People Without His-tory. University of California Press,Berkeley.

Wright, J. V.

1966 The Ontario Iroquois Tradition. Na-tional Museum of Canada Bulletin210. National Museums of Canada,Ottawa.

1967 The Laurel Tradition and the MiddleWoodland Period. National Museum of

Canada Bulletin 217. National Mu-seums of Canada, Ottawa.

1992 The Conquest Theory of the OntarioIroquoian Tradition: A Reassessment.Ontario Archaeology 54:3-16.

Wylie, A.1989 Matters of Fact and Matters of Inter-

est. In Archaeological Approaches toCultural Identity, edited by S. Shen-nan, pp. 94-109. Unwin Hyman, Lon-don.

Ronald F. Williamson and David A. RobertsonArchaeological Services Inc., 662 Bathurst St., Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5S 2R3


EARLY AND MIDDLE IROQUOIAN REGIONAL INTERACTION

Documents