Bayesian modelling of radiocarbon dates to construct detailed chronologies has become a key methodology in North America's ‘historic turn,’ though the Middle Atlantic has seen few efforts to apply these techniques. Drawing from 70 legacy dates and 25 new assays, this study develops Bayesian chronological models for 10 Late Woodland (AD 900-1600) sites in the Potomac Valley. Our goal is to assess how the arrival of Luray communities impacted the region's settlement history. During the Late Woodland period Native communities tied to three cultural traditions established a series of towns in the Potomac Valley, at times close to one another. With evidence of population movements, intergroup violence, and coalescent communities, the Late Woodland Potomac Valley appears to have represented a dynamic borderland during these centuries. The chronology developed in this study points toward a landscape of settlements we have labelled Persistent Places, Unsettled Settlements, and Transitory Towns.
AltS (2020) Histories of Greater Cahokian assemblages. In: EthridgeRBeckRBowneEE (eds) The Historical Turn in Southeastern Archaeology. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, pp. 61–81.
2.
ArkushE (2018) Coalescence and defensive communities: Insights from an Andean hillfort town. Cambridge Archaeological Journal28(1): 1–22.
3.
BarberMB (2020) Odocoileus Virginianus metatarsal beamers at Keyser Farm and Trigg sites: Implications of long-distance exchange. Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology36: 1–13.
4.
BarberMB (2022) Keyser Farm (44PA0001), Page county, Virginia: Late Late Woodland bone tools and their implications. Quarterly Bulletin of the Archeological Society of Virginia77(4): 181–204.
5.
BarthF (1969) Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The Social Organization of Culture Difference. Bergen: Universitets Forlaget.
6.
BeckRA (2013) Chiefdoms, Collapse, and Coalescence in the Early American South. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7.
BirchJ (2012) Coalescent communities: Settlement aggregation and social integration in Iroquoian Ontario. American Antiquity77(4): 646–670.
8.
BirchJManningSWSanftS, et al. (2021) Refined radiocarbon chronologies for northern Iroquoian site sequences: Implications for coalescence, conflict, and the reception of European goods. American Antiquity86(1): 61–89.
9.
BlantonDBPullinsSCDeitrickVL (1998) The Potomac Creek Site (44ST2) Revisited. Richmond: Virginia Department of Historic Resources.
10.
BoyceHLFryeLA (1986) Radiocarbon dating of archeological samples from Maryland. In: Maryland Geological Survey Archeological Studies No. 4. Baltimore: Maryland. Maryland Geological Survey, pp. 1–77.
11.
Bronk RamseyC (2009a) Bayesian analysis of radiocarbon dates. Radiocarbon51(1): 337–360.
12.
Bronk RamseyC (2009b) Dealing with outliers and offsets in radiocarbon dating. Radiocarbon51(3): 1023–1045.
13.
ClarkWE (2019) Algonquian Cultures of the Delaware and Susquehanna River Drainages: A Migration Model. Williamsburg: William and Mary Center for Archaeological Research, William and Mary.
14.
CobbCR (2005) Archaeology and the “savage slot”: Displacement and emplacement in the premodern world. American Anthropologist107(4): 563–574.
15.
CobbCRKrusAMSteadmanDW (2015) Bayesian modeling of the occupation span of the Averbuch site in the Middle Cumberland drainage, Tennessee. Southeastern Archaeology34(1): 46–56.
16.
ComstockARCookRA (2018) Climate change and migration along a Mississippian periphery: A Fort Ancient example. American Antiquity83(1): 91–108.
17.
CookRAComstockAR (2014) Evaluating the old wood problem in a temperate climate: A Fort Ancient case study. American Antiquity79(4): 763–775.
18.
CurryDKavanaghM (2004) Excavations at the Rosenstock village site (18FR18), Frederick County, Maryland: A preliminary report. Maryland Archaeology40(1): 1–38.
19.
CusterJF (2004) Cultural context and cordage twist direction. North American Archaeologist25(2): 139–152.
20.
DentRJ (1995) Chesapeake Prehistory: Old Traditions, New Directions. New York: Plenum Press.
21.
DentRJ (2005) The Winslow site: Household and community archeology in the Middle Potomac Valley. Maryland Archeology41(12): 1–51.
22.
DentRJ (2007) Final Report on the 2002 and 2003 Excavations at the Winslow Site (18MO09), Montgomery County, Maryland. Washington, D.C: Department of Anthropology, American University.
23.
DentRJ (2009) Excavations at the Hughes village site: Life on the Middle Potomac Valley bottomland. MarylandArchaeology 45(1–2): 1–28.
24.
DentRJ (2010) Claggett Retreat: Formative settled life in the Middle Potomac Valley. Maryland Archaeology46(1–2): 1–37.
25.
DentRJ (2021) Culture history of the Potomac Valley and Biggs Ford site. Maryland Archaeology54(1–2): 1–5.
26.
DentRJJirikowicCA (2001) Accokeek Creek: Chronology, the Potomac Creek Complex, and Piscataway origins. Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology17: 39–58.
27.
EthridgeRBeckRBowneEE (2020) Introduction: The historical turn in southeastern archaeology. In: EthridgeRBowneEE (eds) The Historical Turn in Southeastern Archaeology. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1–16.
28.
EthridgeRBowneEE (2020) The Historical Turn in Southeastern Archaeology. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.
29.
EthridgeRHudsonC (1998) The early historic transformation of the southeastern Indians. In: HillCEBeaverPD (eds) Cultural Diversity in the U.S. South, Southern Anthropological Society Proceedings, No. 31. Athens: University of Georgia Press, pp. 34–50.
30.
GeierCRWarrenJC (1982) The Noah’s Ark Site (44BA15): A Late Woodland/Protohistoric Site on the Jackson River, Bath County, Virginia. Harrisonburg, VA: James Madison University Archaeological Research Center.
31.
GreenSWPerlmanSM (1985) The Archaeology of Frontiers and Boundaries. New York: Academic Press.
32.
HallCL (2021) Report of the 2009 selective surface collection at the Biggs Ford site (18FR14). Maryland Archaeology54(1–2): 6–23.
33.
HantmanJL (1990) Between Powhatan and Quirank: Reconstructing Monacan culture and history in the context of Jamestown. American Anthropologist92: 676–690.
34.
HudsonCM (2002) Introduction. In: EthridgeRHudsonC (eds) The Transformation of the Southeastern Indian, 1540-1760. Jackson: University of Mississippi Press, xi–xxxix.
35.
JirikowicCA (1995) The Hughes Village Site: A Late Woodland Community in the Potomac Piedmont. Doctoral Dissertation. Washington, D.C: Department of Anthropology, American University.
36.
JirikowicCA (1999) Final Report on the 1990, 1991, and 1994 Excavations at the Hughes Site (18MO1). Washington, D.C.: Department of Anthropology, American University.
37.
JohnsonWC (2018) Population continuity and replacement during the Woodland and early Contact periods in the Potomac River inner Coastal Plain, Piedmont, and Ridge and Valley of Virginia, Maryland, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania: Who were those gals?Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology34: 67–105.
38.
JohnsonWCMeansBK (2020) The Monongahela Tradition of the late prehistoric and protohistoric periods, twelfth to seventeenth centuries AD, in the Lower Upper Ohio drainage basin. In: CarrKWBergmanCRiethCB, et al. (eds) The Archaeology of Native Americans in Pennsylvania. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, pp. 573–624.
39.
JonesEFKrauseMBWatsonCR, et al. (2020) Economic and social in the Piedmont Village Tradition-Mississippian boundarylands of southeastern North America, AD 1200-1600. American Antiquity85(1): 72–92.
40.
KavanaghM (2001) Late Woodland settlement in the Monocacy River region. Maryland Archaeology37(1): 1–12.
41.
KellyRLMackieMERobinsonE, et al. (2022) A new radiocarbon database for the lower 48 states. American Antiquity87(3): 581–590.
42.
KingMMansiusMKStricklandSM (2016) What towne belong you to?” Landscape, colonialism, and mobility in the Potomac River Valley. Historical Archaeology50(1): 7–26.
43.
KowalewskiSA (2006) Coalescent societies. In: PluckhahnTJEthridgeR (eds) Light on the Path: The Anthropology and History of the Southeastern Indians. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 94–122.
44.
KrusAMCobbCR (2018) The Mississippian fin de siècle in the Middle Cumberland Region of Tennessee. American Antiquity83(2): 302–319.
45.
LaphamHA (2005) Hunting for Hides: Deerskins, Status, and Cultural Change in the Protohistoric Appalachians. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
46.
LightfootKGMartinezA (1995) Frontiers and boundaries in archaeological perspective. Annual Review of Anthropology54: 471–492.
47.
MacCordHA (1989) The Intermontane Culture: A Middle Appalachian Late Woodland manifestation. Archaeology of Eastern North America17: 89–108.
48.
MaherLA (2019) Persistent place–making in prehistory: The creation, maintenance, and transformation of an Epipalaeolithic landscape. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory26(3): 998–1083.
49.
MansonCMacCordHAGriffinJB (1944) The culture of the Keyser Farm site. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters29: 375–418.
50.
McKnightJWGallivanMD (2008) The Virginia archeobotanical database project: A preliminary synthesis of Chesapeake ethnobotany. Quarterly Bulletin of the Archeological Society of Virginia62(4): 181–189.
51.
MeansBKMcKnightJW (2009) VDHR Threatened Sites Project Final Report: Constructing Chronologies from Curated Collections for Northern Virginia’s Late Woodland Period. Report prepared for the Virginia Department of Historic Resources.
52.
MeansBKMooreEA (2020) Late Woodland Archaeology of Northern Virginia and adjacent regions. In: MeansBKMooreEA (eds) The Archaeology of Virginia’s First Peoples. Richmond: Archeological Society of Virginia, pp. 161–184.
53.
NashCA (2022) “The Valleys feed numerous herds of Deer and Elks larger than Oxen”: The Pre-Colonial Interior-Coastal Deerskin Trade. Paper presented at the 52nd Annual Middle Atlantic Archaeological Conference, Ocean City, Maryland, March 25.
54.
NaumM (2010) Re-emerging frontiers: Postcolonial theory and historical archaeology of the borderlands. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory17: 101–131.
55.
ParkerBJRodsethL (2005) Untaming the Frontier in Anthropology, Archaeology, and History. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.
56.
PauketatTR (2001) Practice and history in archaeology. Anthropological Theory1(1): 73–78.
57.
PeckDW (1980) Test excavations at the Nolands Ferry site. Maryland Archaeology16(1): 12–17.
58.
PeixottoB (2021) Recent excavations at the Biggs Ford site (18FR14). Maryland Archaeology54(1-2): 24–35.
59.
PendergastJ (1991) The Massawomeck: Raiders and Traders into the Chesapeake Bay in the Seventeenth Century. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society81(2): 1–101.
60.
PluckhahnTJWallisNJThompsonVT (2020) From small histories to big history on the Woodland period Gulf Coast. In: EthridgeRBeckRBowneEE (eds) The Historical Turn in Southeastern Archaeology. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, pp. 43–60.
61.
PotterSR (1993) Commoners, Tribute, and Chiefs: The Development of Algonquian Culture in the Potomac Valley. Charlottesville, Virginia: University Press of Virginia.
62.
PoussonJF (1983) Archaeological Excavations at the Moore Village Site, Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park, Alleghany County, Maryland. Washington, DC: National Park Service.
63.
ReimerPJAustinWENBardE, et al. (2020) The IntCal20 northern hemisphere radiocarbon age calibration curve (0-55 CAL kBP). Radiocarbon62(4): 725–757.
64.
RiceJD (2009) Nature & History in the Potomac Country: From Hunter-Gatherers to the Age of Jefferson. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
65.
RountreeHCClarkWEMountfordK (2007) John Smith’s Voyages, 1607-1609. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.
66.
SassamanKE (2010) The Eastern Archaic, Historicized. Lanham, Maryland: Altamira.
67.
SchifferMB (1986) Radiocarbon dating and the “old wood” problem: The case of the Hohokam chronology. Journal of Archaeological Science13(1): 13–30.
68.
SchlangerSH (1992) Recognizing persistent places in Anasazi settlement systems. In: RossignolJWandsniderL (eds) Space, Time and Archaeological Landscapes. New York: Plenum, 91–112.
69.
SchneiderTD (2021) The Archaeology of Refuge and Recourse: Coast Miwok Resilience and Indigenous Hinterlands in Colonial California. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
70.
SlatteryRGWoodwardD (1992) The Montgomery Focus: A Late Woodland Potomac River Culture. The Archaeological Society of Maryland Bulletin2: 1–184.
71.
SmithJ (1986 [1608]) A map of Virginia. In: BarbourPL (eds) The Complete Works of Captain John Smith (1580–1631), Vol I. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, pp. 119–189.
72.
StearnsRE (1940) The Hughes Site: An Aboriginal Village Site on the Potomac River in Montgomery County, Maryland. Baltimore: The Natural History Society of Maryland.
73.
StewartRM (1997) Early archaeological research in the Great Valley of Maryland. Maryland Archaeology33(1–2): 1–44.
74.
TriplettT (2020) Social Memory, Persistent Place, and Depositional Practice at the Hand Site in Southeastern Virginia. MA Thesis, William & Mary.
75.
WallR (2001) Late Woodland ceramics and Native populations of the Upper Potomac Valley. Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology71: 15–37.
76.
WallR (2004) The Chesapeake Hinterlands: Contact-period archaeology in the Upper Potomac Valley. In: BlantonDBKingJ (eds) Indian and European Contact in Context: The Mid-Atlantic Region. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, pp. 74–97.
77.
WallRLaphamH (2003) Material culture of the Contact period in the Upper Potomac Valley: Chronological and culture implications. Archaeology of Eastern North America31: 151–177.
78.
WhyteTGeierCR (1982) The Perkins Point Site (44BA3): A Protohistoric Stockaded Village on the Jackson River, Bath County, Virginia. James Madison University, Occasional Papers in Anthropology No. 11.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
