This thesis examines changes in prehistoric subsistence and ceramic production in the Middle to Late Woodland periods in the Mid-Atlantic region. The author analyzed archaeological site reports and ceramic and archaeobotanical remains to determine what plants were cultivated and how wild foods contributed to the diet. While maize and some cultigens were identified, foraging on nuts, seeds and marine resources remained important. Ceramic analysis showed a shift from larger, coarser vessels to smaller, finer vessels possibly relating to changes in food processing and storage. However, more research is still needed to fully understand prehistoric subsistence in this region.

1. Re-creating Pre-Historic Subsistence
Archaeobotanical and Ceramic Analysis
Methods
Nicolle Gamez
Thesis Advisor: Dr. Julie Markin
I would like to thank the Compleat
Angler Grant, Washington College
Faculty-Student Research Grant,
Washington College GIS Lab,
Justine McKnight, Professor
Charles Fithian, Daniel Griffith, and
Dr. Julie Markin for their knowledge,
support, and guidance.
Questions Archaeobotanicals SignificanceCeramics Discussion

2. Research Questions
Changes in prehistoric subsistence remains and ceramic production in the Mid-Atlantic during
the Middle to Late Woodland periods appear closely connected and should be able to tell us a
great deal about the utilized methods of prehistoric food acquisition.
Archaeological evidence suggests sedentary settlements, intensive seasonal food processing,
and domestication of crops all contributed to what later became a means of mass food
production and subsequent food storage for a growing population.
Concurrently the size, shape and manufacturing techniques of ceramic vessels transformed
due to changes in subsistence practices given that different foods required different
processing, cooking and storage techniques.
Can we determine changes in vessel forms or sizes that relate to diet, vessel function or
settlement patterns through analysis of ceramic surface treatment, temper, and vessel
manufacture?
What plants were cultivated and when do domestic cultigens appear?
How important were native versus domestic cultigens to the diet?

3. Research Methods
• Maryland Historical Trust - Review of Archaeological
Site Reports for analysis.
– Archaeological Site Criteria
• Maryland and Delaware sites on the Eastern Shore
• Western Maryland sites bordering the Chesapeake Bay
• Primary occupations Middle Woodland (A.D. 1- 900)
to Late Woodland (A.D. 900 – 1650) temporal periods
• Collection of Mockley or Townsend ceramics – at least
100 sherds
• Presence and analysis of Archaeobotanical remains
• Londontown Lab – The Lost Towns Project
– Preview ceramic collections
• Literature Review
– Background research to contextualize and compare to
chosen archaeological sites.

5. Archaeobotanical Results
Hickory, Walnut,
Butternut, Acorn
Amaranth
Chenopodium
• Maize was tentatively identified at 1 site and
potentially used ritualistically at 1 site – both sites are
located on the Western Shore of Maryland (Pig Point
and Thomas Point)
• Foraging remained a large mode of subsistence even
with the presence of small scale plant cultivation
• Heavy reliance on nuts such as hickory, acorn, and
walnuts for protein, carbohydrates, and fat.
• Nuts collected in the fall were processed through
boiling or leaching- nut meat or oil was stored
• Various seeds were parched, ground, or boiled to
make meal, for bread and stews - also a source of
carbohydrates
• Gathering of fruits for vitamins and minerals
• Consumption of marine resources such as oysters
increased.

6. Methodology and Function
•Change in vessel size and shape connected to
dietary changes in subsistence
•Refined temper use based on vessel function –
temper increases durability, thermal resistance
and cracking
•Finer grain temper able to withstand higher
temperatures
•There was a shift in importance from vessel wall
strength to vessel thermal abilities
•Ceramic technologies overlap
•Technical knowledge spread through trade and
exchange
•Ceramics can convey relationships between
cultural groups with temper selection and design
Pottery from 18AN50 – Pig Point
Ceramic Analysis

7. Mockley (A.D. 200 – 900) –
Middle Woodland Ware
•Coil constructed, paddle-malleated
surfaces
•Hemispherical to conoidal shape, round to
semiconical base - medium to large
vessels
•Coarsely crushed unburned shell temper
(oyster)
•Net impressed or cord marked exterior
•Occasionally incised décor below the rim
Townsend (A.D. 950 - 1650) –
Late Woodland Ware
•Coil constructed, thinner vessel walls than
Mockley
•Conoidal shape, conoidal or semiconoidal
base – miniature pots to large, taller
cooking vessels
•Finely crushed unburned shell temper
(mussel or oyster)
•Fabric impressed exterior
•Varying incised and corded exterior décor
•Earlier designs were more complex
Additional Ceramic Data

8. Discussion
The Middle Atlantic region contains a vast resource in the Chesapeake
Bay. The Bay was invaluable to prehistoric populations as it provided an
abundant supply of marine life, and varied settlement choices along
water resources or in nearby forested regions that provided shellfish,
nuts, wild plants and fruits on a seasonal rotation.
It is difficult to discern from the available archaeological remains if
sedentism led to plant domestication or if domestication prompted a
more sedentary lifestyle. Regardless evidence does suggest gathering
of native plants, nuts and fruits still remained an integral part of the diet
regardless of crop domestication.
There appears to be a connection between the gradual transformation of
prehistoric settlement patterns; varied methods of collection, processing
and storage of foodstuffs; and modifications to ceramic manufacture in
regard to function. Although, currently there just isn’t enough data to
clearly identify subsistence change or to directly associate these
changes with ceramic modifications.

9. Significance
This archaeological site assessment highlights the fact that there currently
is such little understanding of prehistoric subsistence in the Middle
Atlantic region and so very little field work completed.
The purpose of this analysis is to provide an added overall view of existing
literature and prehistoric site data in Maryland and Delaware.
However, continued archaeological research regarding prehistoric
subsistence in this region is still needed to attempt to answer remaining
questions in order to complete the full picture of prehistoric existence in
the Middle Atlantic.
Future research should not only involve a continued search for additional
sites but also a re-evaluation of existing site data and artifacts, additional
radiocarbon dates are needed to create a better timeline of activity and
flotation for archaeobotancial materials should be conducted at every site.

10. Significance
This archaeological site assessment highlights the fact that there currently
is such little understanding of prehistoric subsistence in the Middle
Atlantic region and so very little field work completed.
The purpose of this analysis is to provide an added overall view of existing
literature and prehistoric site data in Maryland and Delaware.
However, continued archaeological research regarding prehistoric
subsistence in this region is still needed to attempt to answer remaining
questions in order to complete the full picture of prehistoric existence in
the Middle Atlantic.
Future research should not only involve a continued search for additional
sites but also a re-evaluation of existing site data and artifacts, additional
radiocarbon dates are needed to create a better timeline of activity and
flotation for archaeobotancial materials should be conducted at every site.