INTRODUCTION
On Marthaʼs Vineyard, historic documentation and oral histories from modern Wampanoag communities show that the island has been occupied for thousands of years. Prior research on Marthaʼs Vineyard has ranged from amateur archaeologists and local historians to professional cultural resource management (CRM) companies and academic researchers (Guernsey Reference Guernsey1916; Byers and Johnson Reference Byers and Johnson1940; Speck and Dexter Reference Speck and Dexter1948; Huntington Reference Huntington1959; Waters Reference Waters1967, Reference Waters1969; Ritchie Reference Ritchie1969; Perlman Reference Perlman1977; Richardson Reference Richardson1985; Chilton and Doucette Reference Chilton, Doucette and Kerber2002a, Reference Chilton and Doucette2002b; Largy et al. Reference Largy, Burns, Chilton and Doucette2002; Herbster and Cherau Reference Herbster, Cherau and Kerber2006; Chilton and Herbster Reference Chilton and Herbster2008; Duranleau Reference Duranleau2009; Kirakosian Reference Kirakosian2015). Together, their results present a long history of the island, beginning with Paleoindians moving across the region when Marthaʼs Vineyard was an inland knoll and continuing to the present as an island with modern Native communities. Sites increase in size and prevalence across the island over time, likely due to increasing populations and village size as well as differential preservation. The first substantial evidence of human occupation appears during the Late Archaic period (ca. 3700–6000 BP), after which time we can see an almost continual presence for the next 5000 years.
The most common technique used to structure archaeological timelines, however, continues to depend upon non-AMS radiocarbon (14C) and relative dates derived by the earliest researchers (Byers and Johnson Reference Byers and Johnson1940; Ritchie Reference Ritchie1969; Snow Reference Snow1980). As additional sites are excavated and better dating methods developed, the timeline of human history should also be revised to better describe settlement habits on the island and their role in the history of southern New England. The Frisby-Butler and Hornblower II sites, located along the shores of Squibnocket Pond, are both rich palimpsests of cultural debris (Figure 1). The faunal remains from these sites contribute an up-to-date dataset to clarify settlement patterns during the Late Holocene (ca. 5000–1000 BP) and will be explored in light of the published data across the island.
Figure 1 Map of sites used in text.
Research Objectives
There were three main goals for this project: to update the chronology of Hornblower II, to obtain the first 14C dates for Frisby-Butler, and to situate each site within the known Native history of southern New England.
Ritchie published four charcoal 14C dates from Hornblower II in his 1969 text The Archaeology of Marthaʼs Vineyard, along with 14C dates from four other sites (Vincent, Pratt, Cunningham, Peterson) and an artifact-based timescale for a fifth (Howland No. 1). Additionally, results from charcoal samples from the 1982 excavation remain unpublished. These analyses established dates that were used to delineate several seasonal settlements throughout the Late Archaic and Late Woodland periods. The current dataset has added to this suite of early data with six AMS dates from bone.
The artifacts from Frisby-Butler were never fully evaluated and no formal dates were published. Using comparable artifactual evidence, Richardson (Reference Richardson1985) attributed the siteʼs chronology to the same designations as at Hornblower II: Late Archaic in Strata 2, 3, and 4, and Late Woodland in Stratum 1. However, the current project will show a strongly contrasting settlement pattern from that of Hornblower II based on AMS dates. This project obtained AMS dates for 11 bone samples, covering the siteʼs occupation throughout all four strata.
New dates from both sites were compared to an island-wide dataset of 14C dates gathered from published reports and grey literature as well as published data from southern New England, including Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut. This dataset provides a long-term view of early coastal inhabitants in New England.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND
Excavations at the Frisby-Butler Site
Frisby-Butler is located on a terrace rising above the eastern corner of Squibnocket Pond. Richardson and crew excavated 13 excavation units in 1981 with an average depth of 60–90 centimeters, totaling four stratigraphic layers. The topsoil and sod cap layer in Stratum 1, extending an average of 15 cm below ground surface, consisted of a dark humus plow zone with very little shell and a low density of artifacts. Stratum 2 (10–40 cm below ground surface) was the dense shell layer at the site, many of them highly crushed, surrounded by a dark sandy soil. Limited quantities of bone and lithic artifacts were found, as well as some grit- and shell-tempered pottery fragments. In Stratum 3 (48–63 cm below surface), shell almost completely disappears. Dark brown sandy soil surrounds animal bones and stone tools were identified, many made of local quartz. The final layer, Stratum 4 (35–70 cm below surface), contained few diagnostic artifacts in its light yellow or reddish-yellow sandy soil. Although some bone, fire-cracked rock, and quartz flakes were recovered, Stratum 4 marks the bottom of the site and transitions into sterile sand.
The most intensive occupation at the site appears to have been during Stratum 2, likely dating to the Late or Transitional Archaic based on Vinette 1 sherds from Feature 15, although the presence of a Levanna point suggests a later, Late Woodland date (or post-depositional mixing). Richardson (Reference Richardson1985: 40) suggested that the earliest layer, Stratum 1, dated to the Late Woodland, while the underlying Strata 2–4 were all deposited during Late Archaic occupations. However, this conclusion is based on general artifact typologies and dates from the Hornblower II site, which appears to be significantly different upon closer analysis.
Excavations at the Hornblower II Site
Hornblower II was originally excavated in 1964 (Ritchie Reference Ritchie1969) and later revisited in 1982 (Richardson Reference Richardson1985). The site is located farther north along Squibnocket Pond than Frisby-Butler. In Ritchieʼs study, he found evidence of occupation from the past 3650 years based on four 14C dates. He concluded that these groups resided at the site either perennially or during multiple seasons per year as seen from their broad diet of deer and shellfish (Ritchie Reference Ritchie1969: 52–58). This diet was augmented by diverse foods from the nearby marine littoral environment.
The 1982 excavations expanded Ritchieʼs grid on the site, opening up 21 additional units. The depth of Hornblower II was greater than at Frisby-Butler, reaching approximately one meter in depth consistently across the site. The stratigraphy is more complex than seen at Frisby-Butler, divided into seven strata. Stratum 1 (0–13 cm below surface), the sod cap, is a dark sandy loam layer with very little shell and almost no artifacts. The shell in Stratum 1A (13–26 cm below surface) is finely crushed, with the occasional whole shell intermixed in a dark sandy loam. Stratum 1B (30–40 cm below surface) continued the shell matrix but was distinguished from Stratum 1A because of the much larger shell fragments and a soil color described as gray black in contrast to the darker black soil above it. Many units saw a dramatic increase in whole shell. Stratum 2 (40–56 cm below surface) was different from the preceding levels, containing much less or no shell in a darker, greasy soil. Wading River points appeared in Stratum 3 (50–84 cm below surface), contained in the “coco brown” sandy soil. By this stratum, shell was almost completely absent; when present, it was whole shells in non-midden contexts. The final cultural layer was Stratum 4 (70–100 cm below surface). Subsoil appeared in as yellowish-brown sand, devoid of shell and only containing artifacts in the uppermost levels. Field notes list a Stratum 5 in a few units where features dived deep into the subsoil but it is not considered further here.
From the 1982 excavations, Richardson concluded that the siteʼs major occupations occurred in Strata 1 (including 1A and 1B) and 3. The youngest strata show dense shell middens and associated storage and refuse pits from the Late Woodland, suggesting a focus on estuarine resources from Squibnocket Pond and the coastal Atlantic. Strata 1, 1A, and 1B represent the most intensive shellfishing occupation at the site; over 45 percent of all faunal remains were recovered from these strata. Recurring occupation also occurred in Stratum 3, a Transitional Archaic settlement characterized by numerous hearths. Like the later occupation, Stratum 3 appears to have had a specialized use, but for hunting rather than fishing.
Age Estimates for Hornblower II from Prior Research
Originally, estimated date ranges for both sites were based on ceramic and lithic artifacts and charcoal-based 14C dates from Ritchieʼs excavation at Hornblower II (Ritchie Reference Ritchie1969). The stratigraphy at Hornblower II ranged from the Late Archaic (Strata 3-4) through the Late Woodland (Strata 1A and 1B). Charcoal samples were sent to Dr. Minze Stuiver at the Yale University Radiocarbon Laboratory. The four 14C dates obtained by Ritchie are included in Table 1 as Y- samples.
Table 1 Prior results for 14C dates for the Hornblower II site. Abbreviations: Yale University Radiocarbon Laboratory (Y-), Smithsonian Environmental Research Center (SI-), Catalog number (Cat). 2σ dates estimated with CALIB version 7.1.
Richardson retested the site stratigraphy after the 1982 excavation, submitting 16 charcoal and shell samples to Robert Stuckenrath at the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, of which 12 were successful but unpublished. The nine charcoal dates are used here; seven are associated with archaeological features and one with an ash lens. The remaining three dates were derived from quahog (Mercenaria mercenaria) shell and are less reliable than bone or charcoal because of challenges in calibration (Barnosky and Lindsey Reference Barnosky and Lindsey2010). Following their ranking scale (Barnosky and Lindsey Reference Barnosky and Lindsey2010: Table 1), the shell-derived dates only tally to 12 points, a non-robust date. Shell-derived dates from Richardsonʼs analysis were thus excluded in favor of the charcoal dates; the remaining nine samples are listed in Table 1 as SI- samples.
I calibrated the Ritchie and Richardson dates using CALIB version 7.1 based on the original, uncalibrated results. The resulting 2σ date ranges reflect the most current understanding of 14C dating curves, differing slightly from the calibrated BC/AD dates published in Ritchie (Reference Ritchie1969) and originally analyzed by Nate Hamilton in 1986 (personal communication). Little (Reference Little, Lavine, Sassaman and Nassaney1999) reviewed Ritchieʼs dates and found a 100-year difference in final calibrated dates when the modern calibration is employed. I have therefore ignored his published BC/AD dates and referred to his uncalibrated BP results when conducting my own calibration.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Use of shell dates has demonstrably led to inaccurate results at other sites (e.g. Brennan Reference Brennan1974, Reference Brennan1977). The current research project focused on whole bone collagen to obtain new AMS dates for these assemblages. By utilizing collagen in direct association with the sample (extracted from the bone itself) and selected from specific stratigraphic assemblages, the AMS dates tally to 16 out of 17 possible points on the archaeological-date scale (Barnosky and Lindsey Reference Barnosky and Lindsey2010: 12; Table 1), a robust sample. Terrestrial mammal bones were selected when possible to provide consistency in dating; these samples were primarily white-tailed deer with several canids (cf Canis familiaris). One seal (Phocidae sp.) was also tested from Frisby-Butler. Eleven (11) bone samples were selected from the Frisby-Butler assemblage and mailed to the W.M. Keck Carbon Cycle Accelerator Mass Spectrometry Laboratory (UCI) at the University of California, Irvine for AMS dating. All of these samples were successful Table 2. Eight (8) bone samples were chosen from the 1982 Hornblower II excavation assemblage and submitted to UCI; six (6) of these samples were successful (Table 3). Samples were fully prepared at UCI.
Table 2 Results of 14C dating of bone samples from Frisby-Butler measured at the University at Irvine UCI laboratory (UCIAMS-). Abbreviations: Feature (F). UCIAMS-185709 and UCIAMS-186165 were measured from one bone sample and are estimated as a pooled mean (using CALIB version 7.04). 2σ dates estimated with CALIB version 7.1.
Table 3 Results of 14C dating of bone and charcoal samples from Hornblower II (HBII) measured at the University at Irvine UCI laboratory (UCIAMS-). 2σ dates estimated with CALIB version 7.1.
1 The bone fragment submitted for this sample was identified as white-tailed deer during faunal analysis but its δ13C and δ15N values indicate it is more likely a seal. It was calibrated using the IntCal13 terrestrial curve.
Three features were dated from the Frisby-Butler assemblage: Feature 1, a small bone- and fire-cracked rock-filled pit in Stratum 2 associated with a much larger storage pit (Feature 2); Feature 15, an ash lens in Stratum 2; and Feature 19, a dog burial in Stratum 4. No features were dated at Hornblower II. All remaining dates were taken from general level bags. At the time that samples were submitted, the field notes were not available, so I chose to obtain generalized dates for the levels in place of targeting unknown features.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Results were calibrated using CALIB version 7.1 (Stuiver and Reimer Reference Stuiver and Reimer1993; Stuiver et al. Reference Stuiver, Reimer, Bard, Beck, Burr, Hughen, Kromer, McCormac, van der Plicht and Spurk1998, Reference Stuiver, Reimer and Reimer2017; Steel Reference Steel2001). All terrestrial samples were calibrated using the 2013 Northern Hemisphere calibration curve (IntCal13), while the seal sample was calibrated with the 2013 Marine calibration curve (MARINE13). Calibrated dates are shown as years before present (cal BP) and discussion of samples with multiple date ranges focuses on the range with the highest probability.
14C results show prehistoric occupation in southwestern Marthaʼs Vineyard from the Late Archaic period to the Late Woodland. Together, the two sites present an almost continuous timeline during the Woodland era, although there appears to be no substantial overlap in occupation between the sites. These results emphasize the slight stratigraphic differences at the sites and highlight the great variation in shell middens as a site type.
Frisby-Butler
The 11 successful AMS dates from the Frisby-Butler site date occupation to the Transitional Archaic, Early Woodland, and Late Woodland periods (Table 2, Figure 2). One bone fragment was tested twice and the resulting dates were combined (shown as UCIAMS-pooled). Small, mobile groups occupied the site for over 500 years during the Early Woodland period as demonstrated by nine dates ranging between 1992–2489 cal BP, later revisiting the site at the start of the Late Woodland period in Stratum 1 (1064–1179 cal BP, UCIAMS-190569). The earliest dates fall within an estimated range for the Transitional Archaic period in Stratum 4 (2713–2751 cal BP, UCIAMS-185708), although the margin is so slim that this archaeological divide may not be meaningful. This earliest occupation appears to have been continuous, likely being used as a seasonal camp year after year as the Native hunters followed winter prey or took advantage of seasonal yields, such as the harvest of cranberries in the autumn. Faunal remains show that during this era, the foragers at the site relied primarily on terrestrial foods as well as birds and fish, captured from the pond and the ocean shore. Shellfish were not integrated into their diets en masse until at the end of the Early Woodland (Stratum 2). A final, short-term event is dated to the Late Woodland, when the shellfish deposition decreased from its Early Woodland maximum.
Figure 2 Probability distributions for the calibrated dates from Frisby-Butler.
Hornblower II
Six AMS samples from Hornblower II date Strata 1A, 2, 3, and 4, corresponding to the Late Woodland and Late Archaic periods (Table 3). Four of the six dates place occupation squarely in the Late Archaic period. The earliest was taken from Stratum 4 and suggests an early Late Archaic occupation (5161–5282 cal BP, UCIAMS-185712). Two additional dates place the overlying strata in the early half of the Late Archaic as well. The first sample dates Stratum 3 to 4958–5047 cal BP (UCIAMS-185713), and the second dates Stratum 2 to 4950–5047 cal BP (UCIAMS-193956). The final Late Archaic date from Stratum 4 extends this period of occupation, with an estimated date of 4464–4518 cal BP (UCIAMS-192987).
In total, the Late Archaic dates from the newest 14C dates at Hornblower II suggest almost 900 years of continuous occupation. Like Frisby-Butler (and many other sites on the island), the earliest settlement seems to have been seasonal and contingent on available plant and terrestrial resources. A dog burial and a dark soil stain mark the earliest occupation in Stratum 4, followed by the dense deposits in Stratum 3. The marked increase in artifact densities and features all support the development of an intensive settlement, probably corresponding with seasonal peaks in fish and birds. After the boom of Stratum 3 receded, Stratum 2 was deposited, showing a sharp decline in feature density. Together, the Late Archaic components of this site compose most of its history.
The other two dates provide evidence of Late Woodland settlement on the site, ranging from 1069–1179 cal BP (UCIAMS-185714) in Stratum 1A and 462–507 cal BP (UCIAMS-192984) from Stratum 3. The gap between these dates may represent a break in occupation but may also be a result of fewer successful dates from the upper strata. When combined with previous results from Ritchie and Richardson (Figure 3), this gap disappears and suggests that the Late Woodland was a long, continuous occupation and/or continually revisited seasonal site, just like the Late Archaic component.
Figure 3 Probability distributions for all calibrated dates from Hornblower II.
If we assume that, based on diagnostic lithic and ceramic debris and dates from Ritchieʼs investigation, the deposits in Strata 1B, 1A, and 1 are all roughly contemporaneous, we see a second settlement expansion at the site following the Late Archaic occupation in Stratum 3. Many features were recorded from this era, filled with netsinkers, projectile points, and potsherds. Unlike the earlier settlement on the site, the Late Woodland settlement appears to have been more sedentary, likely for several seasons each year based on the faunal assemblage. Like with Stratum 2 at Frisby-Butler, the siteʼs foragers shifted their focus from terrestrial mammals and began to harvest shellfish. Taxonomic diversity increases in fish and birds at this time as well. The biggest change from the Late Archaic to the Late Woodland was the adoption of intensive shellfishing.
When these new data are combined with Ritchieʼs four dates and the nine charcoal-based dates from Richardsonʼs work, a pattern emerges of consistent occupation throughout the Late Archaic, followed by almost 2300 years of abandonment and punctuated by one Early Woodland date from Stratum 2 (2354–2545 cal BP, SI-7118). Afterward, several hundred years of Middle Woodland occupation precede the long, continuous Late Woodland occupation.
Temporal Separation between the Sites
The proximity of the two sites around Squibnocket Pond instigated a comparison to understand how the two sites differed chronologically. Based on fauna and shell remains, both sites were fruitful locales for hunting and fishing, but their periods of occupation are very different. Did the Late Archaic decline at Hornblower II correspond with the emergence of Frisby-Butler in the Transitional Archaic? Similarly, Frisby-Butler declined approximately at the same time as the re-occupation of Hornblower II. Are these events correlated?
The full compilation of dates, including the 19 dates from Hornblower II and 10 from Frisby-Butler (highlighted in gray), are shown in Figure 4. The two sites appear to have sharply distinct settlement periods apart from a temporary overlap in the Early Woodland and Late Woodland periods. In other words, Late Archaic groups used Hornblower II as a semi-permanent base camp, abandoned it for almost 2000 years, and then moved back to the site by the Middle Woodland. Frisby-Butler did not become a base camp and/or village until the start of the Early Woodland period, almost 2000 years after Hornblower II was abandoned and declined in use by the Middle Woodland.
Figure 4 Probability distributions for all calibrated dates from Frisby-Butler (highlighted in gray) and Hornblower II.
These results show us changing settlement preferences along the southwestern shore of Marthaʼs Vineyard, perhaps associated with seasonal migrations. Without any diagnostic artifacts suggestive of cultural affiliation or unique items, we cannot be certain that the residents traded off between the sites directly during those periods of overlap. More likely is the movement of the residents of Hornblower II throughout the area, occupying any number of the numerous sites along Squibnocket and Menemsha Ponds.
Settlement Patterns in Southern New England
A survey of the published literature from Marthaʼs Vineyard shows the importance of Squibnocket and Menemsha ponds during the Late Holocene. Dates were collected from all available Marthaʼs Vineyard site reports, including Ritchie (Reference Ritchie1969), Chilton and Doucette (Reference Chilton, Doucette and Kerber2002a), PAL Inc. (master list published online), dates summarized in Duranleau (Reference Duranleau2009), and the Canadian Archaeological Radiocarbon Database (CARD 2017). At least 25 identified sites have been located along the southwestern ridge of the island, many of them surrounding these ponds, a concentration mimicked only farther to the north along Lagoon Pond and the northern coast (Figure 1).
Movement between the ponds may have been a product of changing subsistence strategies. Prior to Hornblower IIʼs first abandonment, terrestrial species like white-tailed deer and nearshore fish like scup (Stenotomus chrysops) were the primary dietary component; after it was re-occupied, the siteʼs residents adjusted their subsistence to a much more diverse diet, exploring diverse ecozones of the forest, sand plains, marsh, pond, coast, and open ocean. It is at this level that we see the dramatic increase in shellfish deposits and fish remains. While it is likely that these changes were, in part, a response to changing environmental conditions around the ponds, it is also very plausible that the introduction of offshore hunting with canoes and harpoons helped change the village as we see it archaeologically. Additionally, ongoing erosion along the southern and western coasts since the islandʼs formation has drastically cut into the coastline. The former coast during the Archaic era would have been farther from the sites and may have made transporting resources like unprocessed shellfish more difficult, possibly explaining the lack of shell in these levels. The use of many sites around the pond as short-term, seasonal camps for specific resources may have influenced their movement around the pond, forming part of a dispersed settlement pattern of single or small clusters of wigwams (wetu; Chilton Reference Chilton, Hart and Rieth2002). Finally, although we do not have any specific records of tribal locations from the very early periods seen here, the abandonment and reoccupation of Hornblower II may have been a response to social upheavals.
The concentration of sites along Squibnocket Pond and the glacial moraines of the northern border of the island is in direct contrast to the absence of sites in the interior outwash plains, where there was little access to marine resources and no shelter from winds. The few sites that are present in the interior are clustered around the great southern ponds (Foster Reference Foster2017). The eastern region, including Chappaquiddick Island, was occupied relatively late with its earliest sites dating to the Middle Woodland period. In contrast, the western peninsula has the longest timeline, starting in the Late Archaic and continuing consistently until the historic period, although there is a break during the Transitional Archaic period. The prodigious clay deposits and other resources found at Aquinnah may have also encouraged early groups to settle in the southwest. The overall pattern indicates that most indigenous sites are to be found along the margins of multiple ecozones. Indeed, many of the site locations mimic those found back on the continental mainland.
The sites on Marthaʼs Vineyard in many ways reproduce settlement patterns found throughout the coastal belt of southern New England. Groups living in this area took advantage of being at the northernmost growing boundaries for maize and the southernmost extent of migratory fish such as Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and other anadromous fish (Hasenstab Reference Hasenstab, Levine, Sassaman and Nassaney1999). Sites along the interior naturally deviated from the intensive shellfishing and offshore hunting possible along the oceanʼs shore, but patterns of small hunting camps intermixed with larger settlements remains consistent. Other marginalized environments were important, like the mountainous interior that was often overlooked in early surveys (Lacy Reference Lacy, Levine, Sassaman and Nassaney1999).
Throughout the region, settlement patterns have been dependent on site position either in the interior or along the coast (Bourque Reference Bourque2001). Several widespread patterns show that short-term villages tended to be more prevalent in the New England interior where residents relied on migratory game species like caribou and incorporated other foods, like freshwater fish, as a smaller portion of their diet. Their village patterns reflect, to a certain extent, the necessity of following these foods. In contrast, coastal sites have more often been seen as longer-term settlements bolstered by the more stationary food base of marine fish and shellfish. Permanent or flexible sedentary sites are most often located at a confluence of natural resources, permitting longer occupation without depleting the natural environment. In both regions, movement to exploit seasonally available resources was important. This is not to say that coastal residents had a more reliable diet—the terrestrial food base of interior villages was clearly sufficient. Together, the sites along Squibnocket Pond fit into the established coastal pattern.
CONCLUSIONS
The 14C data presented here provide the first absolute dates for Frisby-Butler and update the chronology of Hornblower II. The six new dates for Hornblower II extend the Late Archaic and Late Woodland ranges and create a large, well-tested dataset together with the dates from Ritchie and Richardson. In comparison, although Frisby-Butler has only been dated by the current project, its dataset is almost as large and provides a thorough exploration of the siteʼs history. Its 10 dates point to settlement during the Transitional Archaic, Early Woodland, and Late Woodland periods. Finally, this project also more accurately determined the role of these sites in the Late Holocene history of the island, particularly their context within the southwestern Marthaʼs Vineyard site group. Like many of their neighbors, residents at both Frisby-Butler and Hornblower II likely lived at the sites for extended periods of the year, taking advantage of the many natural resources found in this rich coastal ecosystem. Both expressed regular habitation, ranging from seasonal, terrestrial-focused camps to longer-term, coastal villages, eventually expanded by the introduction of agriculture. Most sites in southwestern Marthaʼs Vineyard fit easily into the Late Woodland or Late Archaic niches found throughout the island, but these two sites present a more complete picture of the continual presence and adaption of early peoples on the island.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I owe thanks to the Robert S. Peabody Institute of Archaeology for allowing me to sample the site collections. I am also very grateful to Jim Richardson for his feedback throughout the project and Bob Feranec for his assistance collecting bone collagen samples and advice during calibration. Comments from two anonymous reviewers greatly improved this manuscript. This study was funded by the University at Albany Benevolent Association and Initiatives for Women.
