discerning regional variation: the terminal archaic period in the quoddy region of the maritime...

Discerning Regional Variation: The Terminal Archaic Period in the Quoddy Region of theMaritime PeninsulaAuthor(s): David SangerSource: Canadian Journal of Archaeology / Journal Canadien d’Archéologie, Vol. 32, No. 1(2008), pp. 1-42Published by: Canadian Archaeological AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41103603 .

Accessed: 10/06/2014 02:03

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

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

.

Canadian Archaeological Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toCanadian Journal of Archaeology / Journal Canadien d’Archéologie.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.160 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 02:03:44 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

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

http://www.jstor.org/stable/41103603?origin=JSTOR-pdf

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


Discerning Regional Variation: The Terminal Archaic Period in the Quoddy Region of the Maritime Peninsula

David Sänger^

Abstract. While the recognition of cultural regionalism in the Maritime Provinces is not new, the over-extension of Northeast- wide macro traditions may have resulted in a lack of focus. The Terminal Archaic (ca. 3800-3000 BP) in the Quoddy Region of New Brunswick and Maine may be a case in point. A consideration of the Susquehanna tradition in Maine indicates that it is not a useful integrative device for the Terminal Archaic of the Quoddy Region. Rather than affiliating with the late Susquehanna tradition, sites in the Quoddy Region affiliate more with the Saint John River. Geographical circumscription, in the form of bold sea coasts that inhibited east-west coastal communication, may be involved. Canoe travel up the St. Croix River and into the Saint John and Penobscot Rivers linked the Quoddy Region with interior, riverine-oriented populations. The end result was the development of a regionally distinct littoral zone adaptation.

Résumé. L'identification de régionalismes culturels dans les Provinces maritimes ne date pas d'hier et la surextension des macro- traditions archéologiques du Nord-Est peut parfois mener à un manque de précision locale. L'Archaïque terminal (env. 3800 à 3000 A.A.) dans la région Quoddy du Nou- veau-Brunswick et du Maine sert ici d'exem- ple. Un examen de la tradition Susquehanna du Maine met en doute la pertinence de ce concept dans l'étude de l'Archaïque terminal dans la région de Quoddy. Les sites s'y apparentent davantage aux sites de la rivière Saintjean qu'à ceux de la tradition Susque- hanna du Maine. Il est possible que la côte

accidentée ait réduit les mouvements côtiers et créé un phénomène de circonscription régionale. À l'opposé, la facilité des déplace- ments en canot de la rivière Sainte-Croix vers les rivières Saint-Jean et Penobscot unissait la région côtière de Quoddy avec l'intérieur des terres et assurait des liens avec des groupes aux modes de vie orientés sur les rivières. Il en est résulté le développement d'une adaptation régionale littorale distincte du reste de la côte.

AN INTEGRATIVE DEVICE, THE Maritime Peninsula region serves

a useful function when discussing early European period First Nations anthropology of the Maritime Provinces, the northern portion of Maine, and Gaspé Peninsula of Quebec (Hoffman 1955) (Figure 1). When compared with their neighbours, the Iroquoian speakers to the west, the horticultural Algonquians to the south, and the sub-arctic dwellers to the north, the Eastern Algonquian- speaking Wabanaki people of the Maritime Peninsula formed a reason- ably cohesive cultural unit. Upon closer examination, however, a certain amount of internal variability becomes evident, whether the criteria are linguistic (i.e., the Mi'kmaq vs. the Maliseet-Pas- samaquoddy and the Eastern Abenaki [Goddard 1978]), or more broadly + University of Maine, Orono, Maine 04473 USA [[email protected]]

Canadian Journal of Archaeology/Journal Canadien d'Archéologie 32: 1-42 (2008)



2 • SANGER

Figure i . The Maritime Peninsula with non-Quoddy Region sites mentioned in the text.

behavioural. Archaeologists research- ing the pre-European period regularly utilize the Maritime Peninsula to dis- tinguish this region from surrounding areas. However, as we have learned more about the region it has become increasingly apparent that within the larger culture area a fair amount of regionalism existed, so that statements appropriate to the southern portion - the modern state of Maine - may not resonate well with the northern region, especially in historic Mi'kmaq homeland (see Blair 2004 for a review).

Increased regional cultural definition of the pre-European Contact period has highlighted a problem, the

Canadian Journal of Archaeology 32 (2008)

importation of cultural types into the Maritime Peninsula. Traditionally, this has occurred when the donor region either has, or has the appearance of being, better understood archaeologically, on occasion if for no other reason than artifact and culture types coined decades ago convey the impression of a level of understanding often not justified by the data. Most notable are names of traditions and artifact types developed in the mid-twentieth century in New York by Ritchie, and then applied with varying degrees of utility to the Mari- time Peninsula. In his attempt to sort out the Terminal Archaic and Ceramic periods of the Maritimes, Wright (1999:



578) lamented the use of Northeast-wide taxonomic units with nothing more than the presence of a single artifact form. The Orient Fishtail point type named by Ritchie (1971) for New York provides a pertinent example.

Throughout the Maritime Peninsula the scattered appearances of expanding stem bifaces, varying in degrees of simi- larity, have been called Orient Fishtail points. While perhaps convenient for some summary statements the problem is that for southern New York and adjacent New England, these points are associated with the late Susquehanna tradition. When that cultural association also is imported into the Maritime Peninsular it has the potential to mask regional variability that many archaeologists have recognized for some time (e.g., Blair 2004; Bourque et al. 2006; Burley 1983; Robinson 2006; Rutherford 1991; Sänger 1988, 1996a, b, 2005a; Sanger et al. 1977; Steward 1989; Tuck 1984; Turnbull and Allen 1988). Cultural regionalism does not, of course, equate with cultural isolation. In this paper I suggest that we now have sufficient data to recognize a regional archaeological expression in the Quoddy Region, a term used for several decades to encompass southwestern New Brunswick and extreme eastern Maine (Figure 2). The time period cov- ered is the Terminal Archaic, roughly 3800 to 3000 BP (uncalibrated)1. Because the Susquehanna tradition taxon has been invoked to explain Terminal Archaic assemblages in the Quoddy Region, following a physical and biological characterization of the region I summarize salient aspects of the Susquehanna in Maine - the sup- posed entry point - followed by descrip- tion and evaluation of the Terminal Archaic in the Quoddy Region. Here,

DISCERNING REGIONAL VARIATION • 3

I present some new data and re-assess some under-utilized site records. I suggest that biological and geographical circumscription may have contributed to a regional cultural expression in the Quoddy Region. Finally, it seems likely that the archaeology presented here has implications for explaining the close cultural links between the Pas- samaquoddy (Peskotomuhkati) Nation of the Quoddy Region and the Maliseet (Wolastoqiyik) of the Saint John River, as seen millennia later.

THE QUODDY REGION The Quoddy Region centers on two major embayments, Passamaquoddy Bay and Cobscook Bay, together with the littoral zone2, the adjacent terrestrial habitat, and many islands, some large enough to support a diverse terrestrial biology (Figure 2). Counting all islands, the Quoddy Region contains roughly 2745 km of shoreline, of which approximately 1052 km comprise an intertidal zone (Thomas et al. 1983: 35). The St. Croix River, which forms the International Boundary, drains a large hinterland (ca. 4,000 km2) dominated by a series of big lakes and wetlands surrounded by numerous archaeological sites. The river was part of a major transit system for Native people linking the Quoddy Region with the Penobscot River to the west and the Saint John River to the east (Cook 2007; Ganong 1899). Smaller rivers and streams provide short access to productive interior wetlands and lakes into which anadromous fish ran in huge numbers. A cold water eco- system, the Quoddy Region is renowned for its high biological productivity, its associated fishery, and extensive intertidal zone created by 6 m and greater tidal ranges (Black 1992; Sänger 1987; Thomas ¿¿a/. 1983).

Journal Canadien d'Archéologie 32 (2008)



4 • SANGER

Figure 2. The Quoddy Region with archaeological sites discussed in the text.

Dense stands of spruce (Picea sp.), together with some balsam fir (Abies balsamea) and tamarack (Larix laricina), dominate Quoddy Region forests (Hines 1983). Research in the eastern Maine coast demonstrated that the red spruce (Picea rubens) forests had been there for much of the Holocene (Schauffler and Jacobson 2002). This has several implications for the culture history of people adapting to the region. First, thick spruce forests create a nearly impene-

Canadi an Journal of Archaeology 32 (2008)

trable barrier to humans on foot; hence, the importance historically of water transport. Second, while prey animals like whitetail deer can penetrate spruce- fir forests by establishing trails in order to feed in the littoral zone, there is little to no long-term sustenance available in spruce forests and the near-barren under story. The same dense forests do supply deer with protective shelter, however. Third, nut-bearing trees are very uncommon. Yet the shell middens of the



region abound with faunal remains from terrestrial habitats (e.g., Black 1992; Bonnichsen and Sänger 1977; Sanger 1987). This is because of the myriad of wetlands, ranging from open lakes, to fens and Sphagnum peat bogs in the coastal lowlands. Many small streams provide canoe access to these environments. The lakes and fens constitute excellent beaver, muskrat, deer, and moose habitat, in addition to seasonally available emergent aquatic plants, fish, and nesting water birds, while the extensive peatlands, or "heaths" and "barrens" in local parlance, seasonally supported woodland caribou. During the winter months frozen streams made the wetlands available to people on snowshoes.

The Quoddy Region and adjacent hinterlands form the heartland of the Passamaquoddy (Peskotomuhkati) Nation homeland, whose people congre- gate today in two reservations, one in the Quoddy Region at Perry and the other inland at Princeton, both in Maine. In recent historical times, however, both sides of the St. Croix River Valley constituted Peskotomuhkati territory (Erickson 1978). The Peskotomuhkati speak Maliseet-Passamaquoddy, reflecting their close cultural affiliations with the Maliseet (Wolastoqiyik) of the Saint John River Valley (Goddard 1978).

Black (1992, 2002) and Sänger (1986, 1987) have published reviews of the archaeology and research history in Passamaquoddy Bay; however, less well known is the history of Cobs- cook Bay research on the Maine site of the Quoddy Region. Archaeologi- cal research has been ongoing in the Quoddy Region for over 150 years, with the result that no comparable area in the Maritime Peninsula is any better known archaeologically, especially for the last 2500 years of the pre-European period,


locally called either the Maritime Wood- land (Black 1992) or the Ceramic period (Sänger 1987). According to Black (2000: 100), the New Brunswick portion of the Quoddy Region alone contains 72 sites with pre-European components, a number which would be much higher except for Holocene sea-level rise, which has truncated severely the archaeological record.

Although geologists have not developed a relative sea-level rise curve specific to the Quoddy Region, the history of sea-level rise on the mid-Maine coast illustrates the problem for the cultural record, the inundation of early to mid- Holocene sites (Figure 3; Belknap et al 2005; Barnhardt et al 1995). Sanger and Kellogg (1989) pointed out that differential rates of sea-level rise (actually land subsidence) have resulted in a longer cultural record in the Penobscot Bay region of Maine, as opposed to the Quoddy Region, where the oldest described intact site deposits date from the Terminal Archaic, although older specimens have been recovered from the ocean floor (Black 1996; Suttie 2007).

The convoluted coastline of the Quoddy Region, combined with the high level of biological productivity, provides many highly desirable localities for people adapted to the littoral zone. Geo- logists and archaeologists have defined three coastal zones based on wave energy and sediment characteristics, which help explain site locations (Belknap 1995; Kellogg 1987, 1995; Sanger 1996a; Shipp et al 1987). Zone II, the interme- diate zone between the outer, wave-swept Zone III and the low-energy mud flats of Zone I, contains nearly 100 percent of all known shell midden sites. According to the Quoddy Region littoral zone characterization by Thomas et al (1983: 35), nearly 66 percent of the Quoddy shore-




6 • SANGER

Figure 3. Relative sea-level rise curve for the mid-coast of Maine with calibrated 14C chronol- ogy (from Belknap et al 2005, with permission).

line might qualify as Zone II, which helps to explain why the area was so desirable for Native Americans. Extensive Zone III landscapes, in the form of rocky shores, dominate the littoral zones to the east and west of the Quoddy Region which, unsurprisingly, have few archaeological sites.

SUSQUEHANNA TRADITION AND THE TERMINAL ARCHAIC

By convention, the appearance of the Susquehanna tradition in Maine marks the beginning of the Terminal Archaic period. Most archaeologists attribute the Susquehanna tradition to immigrants from southern New England who, by ca. 3700 BP, occupied some of the area in the southern part of the Maritime Peninsula previously utilized by the Late Archaic period Moorehead phase population (see Bourque 1995; Bourque et al 2006; Petersen 1995; Sanger 1975, 2006;


Spiess and Hedden 2000 for further discussion and alternative views). A key issue for this paper is the question of whether the Susquehanna tradition penetrated very far into the northern half of the Maritime Peninsula (the Maritime Provinces), or whether the occasional Susquehanna-like specimens represent only the spread of artifact styles. While a review of all these specimens from the entire Maritime Peninsula is well beyond the scope of this paper, Deal et al (2006) have catalogued artifacts assigned to this tradition from various collections in the Maritime Provinces, most of which were, unfortunately, non-systematically excavated and were not dated.

Similar objects occur in minor numbers in sometimes equivocal contexts in the Quoddy Region, and here again the question is whether they represent the penetration of the Susquehanna tradition into the region, as suggested



by Black (2000), or simply the spread of stylistically similar specimens, absent the entire lithic suite. Because the suggested origin for the Susquehanna tradition in the Quoddy Region is Maine, I present a brief review of some coastal and interior finds in that state. Following the review of Susquehanna in Maine I will return to a consideration of the Terminal Archaic period in the Quoddy Region, including the evidence for the Susquehanna tradition.

At one level, it could be argued that it is of little consequence what we call the Terminal Archaic presence in the Quoddy Region. I suggest, however, that by subsuming all these finds into the broader Susquehanna tradition termi- nology we lose the potential to identify the possibility of a local cultural mani- festation that demonstrates some degree of autonomy from events in Maine and the greater Northeast in general. This, in turn, may have something relevant to say about the cultural background of the Passamaquoddy, or Peskotomuhkati people, who reside in the area today.

The Susquehanna Tradition in Maine The most impressive Maine expression of the Susquehanna tradition is the stratified Turner Farm site (29.9) 3, Penob- scot Bay, where the proposed southern migrants had arrived by at least 3700 BP (Bourque 1995) (Figure 1). Prior to this time, the earlier Moorehead phase occupants of Turner Farm Occupa- tion 2 practiced a dualistic approach to subsistence, taking in-shore and pelagic fish species, in addition to terrestrial resources (Bourque 1995; Spiess and Lewis 2001). Moorehead phase people left behind the famous and spectacular red-ochre associated burials, coupled with finely fashioned grave items in large cemeteries of the late Moorehead burial


tradition (Robinson 1996, 2006; Sänger 1973, 2006). Although events leading up to the termination of the elaborate culture remain a mystery, careful appraisal of radiocarbon dates targeted at deter- mining the terminus suggests no over- lap with the subsequent Susquehanna culture (Robinson 2001: 114).

The Turner Farm Susquehanna tradition component (Occupation 3) contains both habitation and burials. While there are other coastal sites with comparable materials, Turner Farm is the only one with detailed descrip- tions of artifacts (Bourque 1995), a full examination of associated fauna (Spiess and Lewis 2001), and human burials (Barbián and Magennis 1995). The number of sites and artifacts plays an important role in evaluating the nature of the Susquehanna tradition in the northern Maritime Peninsula. From the midden deposits at Turner Farm, the excavations recovered 330 artifacts - not including lithic or bone debitage - while a further 373 specimens were associated with 18 mass graves that represented a minimum number of 70 humans (Bar- bián and Magennis 1995: 318; Bourque 1995: 100).

The 700 artifacts from Turner Farm alone outnumber the total Susque- hanna-like artifacts reported for the entire northern portion of the Mari- time Peninsula, many of which actually occur in sites right along the Maine-New Brunswick border in the headwaters of the St. Croix River, such as the Mud Lake Stream site (BkDw-5) (Deal 1986; Deal et al 2006: 266-7). Deal et al (2006) reported other finds in Nova Scotia and a scattering of specimens from the other Maritime Provinces.

Susquehanna tradition people occupied the major rivers and lakes of western and central Maine, spreading




8 • SANGER

inland well above the territory of the previous Moorehead phase (Petersen 1995; Sänger 2006; Spiess and Hedden 2000). Some inland sites are extensive, and made even more impressive by the quantities of chipped stone artifacts.

Early Susquehanna tradition bifaces are large and usually exhibit contracting stems (Figure 4). Named Atlantic points by Dincauze (1972) after a site in Massachusetts, these are perhaps the most widespread form. Later point styles feature triangular blades with both contracting and expanding stems. Exceptional workmanship is a hallmark of these bifaces. Often made from rhyo-

lites, these points are noteworthy for their symmetry and thinness, resulting from an ability to remove large, spatu- late flakes of a kind not duplicated in the region. Cross (1990, 1993), who described Susquehanna tradition lithic biface technology at great length, suggested the excellent workmanship represented craft specialization. This highly distinctive manufacturing technique is critical for evaluating the presence of the tradition in the Maritime Peninsula. Similar appearing specimens in the northern portions should, I suggest, also demonstrate comparable technology in order to qualify as Susquehanna tradi-

Figure 4. Susquehanna tradition artifacts from various Maine sites.




tíon, notjust outline form. In addition to the bifaces, the Susquehanna tradition has highly distinctive, long, elegantly chipped, diamond-section drills, not repeated with other local lithic traditions (Figure 4). Other chipped stone imple- ments include distinctive flake gravers and a few scrapers, often based on broken bifaces. Grooved axes occur with Susquehanna tradition assemblages as a minority trait; for example, out of 700 artifacts excavated at the Turner Farm site, there are only three axes (a fourth was surface-collected) (Bourque 1995), while many Maine sites contain none at all. In southern New England, late Susquehanna tradition sites feature steatite bowls (Bourque 1995; Dincauze 1968). However, they are absent at Turner Farm, and while no complete bowls are known from Maine, a few isolated sherds have been recovered from interior sites. Maine contains no known steatite outcrops used to manufacture Susquehanna tradition stone bowls. One bowl reminiscent of the late Susque- hanna tradition in southern New Eng- land was found decades ago in the lower Saint John River, together with some steatite sherds from the Portland Point site (BhDm-7) in Saint John Harbour (Deal et al 2006). It would be instructive to obtain source provenances for the New Brunswick examples, especially when it seems rather unlikely at this time that they came via Maine. Coastal shell midden sites like Turner Farm also contain a wide range of ground stone, bone, antler, and tooth artifacts, some of which are distinctive; however, the focus here must be on the lithic examples due to poor preservation in most non- shell midden contexts in the Maritime Peninsula.

A number of Maine Susquehanna tradition sites have produced a feature


form which in Maine seems unique to the tradition; this feature type includes extensive spreads of densely packed, fire-cracked rocks covering several meters in extent. The location of sites beside prime fishing localities suggests that these extensive rock features - which may contain 50 percent rock by volume - could have functioned to process fish. Comparable rock-filled features occurred at site 53.38 on Messa- lonskee Stream (Figure 1 ) where Spiess and Hedden (2000: 46-48) reported ca. 5,000 fire-cracked rocks, totaling 234 kg, in densely packed features.

Analysis of site 53.38 suggested that processed white oak and red oak acorns constituted an important dietary contribution in the Susquehanna tradition (Spiess and Hedden 2000: 46, 48-50). Beech nuts joined animal remains as grave inclusions in several Turner Farm burials (Bourque 1995: 157-158).

Based on the number and size of sites reported, it seems that the Susquehanna tradition is primarily a southern New England and New York cultural mani- festation that established a strong presence only in the southernmost portions of the Maritime Peninsula - essentially Maine and the St. Croix River Valley. The concentration of Susquehanna tradition sites of all periods is nowhere more evident than in the lower Kennebec and Androscoggin rivers in the Merrymeet- ing Bay area (Bourque et al 2006), a key area for understanding the termination of the Susquehanna tradition.

Recently, I have traced the distribution of Susquehanna tradition assemblages east along the Maine coast. Site numbers drop off sharply east of the Penobscot Bay-Blue Hill Bay-Frenchman Bay area. Currently, the amateur-collected Mainayr (60.11) site at Steuben, on the banks of a now intertidal stream,




10 • SANGER

marks the easternmost extension of a clear Susquehanna tradition coastal site in Downeast Maine. The Mainayr site is about 100 km in a straight line west of the Quoddy Region.

End of the Susquehanna Tradition The end of the Susquehanna tradition is important because it bears on the transition into the Ceramic or Maritime Wood- land period. In New York and southern New England, late Susquehanna tradition sites feature narrow, expanding stem bifaces, the Orient Fishtail type (Ritchie 1971). Bourque (1995: 254) summed up their distribution in Maine: "Stemmed bifaces that resemble later Susquehanna forms [Orient Fishtail] have occasion- ally been reported from a few sites in southern Maine, but nothing remotely like the coherent sequence reported from southern New England and New York." Spiess and Petersen (2000) commented on a few Orient Fishtail-like points from several interior central Maine sites that have radiocarbon dates in the 3400-3000 BP range. Comparable bifaces occur here and there throughout the northern Maritime Peninsula, but usually in ambiguous (i.e., collections or non-excavated sites) contexts (Black 2000; Dealba/. 2006: 276).

After examining illustrations of many bifaces attributed to the Orient Fishtail point type from the Maritime Penin- sula, it appears that on occasion almost any point with an expanding stem qualifies. Ritchie (1971: 39, plate 19) described the Orient Fishtail point based on his work in southern New York as "A slender, gracefully formed point, of medium size, with characteristically narrow, lanceolate blade merging into a flaring 'fishtail' stem." The latter is usually indented. He noted further that the point "Has a light, sporadic repre-


sentation in central New York, southern New England and northern and central New Jersey." (Ritchie 1971: 39). Ritchie then commented on the "flat flaking scars," which we have come to associate with Susquehanna tradition biface technology.

Archaeologists have disagreed on whether or not there was an occupational lull after the Susquehanna tradition, a hiatus sometimes referred to in New Brunswick as the Little Gap (Blair 2004). In a session at the CAA conference held in Ottawa in 2000 to explore the period in the Maritime Peninsula, two diametrically opposed perspec- tives explained the purported Little Gap in Maine. One hypothesis, basi- cally a discontinuity model, involves an occupation hiatus followed by renewed immigration to explain the onset of the Ceramic period (e.g., Bourque 1995, 2000). The other, founded on a cultural continuity principle, denied the gap by presenting evidence for a few specimens in deposits dated to the appropriate range (Spiess and Petersen 2000). Regardless, the evidence for sites in the Maritime Peninsula, and presumably people, increases quite markedly after about 3000 BP.

Excavations by Cox and Bourque at the Mugford stratified site, Merrymeeting Bay (Figure 1), at the extreme southern end of the Maritime Peninsula, have shed some light on the problem, at least for the central Maine coast. Bourque et al. (2006: 320-323) document, in tightly controlled alluvial sedimentary levels (their stratigraphie packages [SP] 10-8), small, narrow-stemmed points dated to between 3280 ±70 and 2890 ±40 BP Incidentally, they note that some of these specimens bear resemblance to earlier, Late Archaic stemmed points. They com- ment that this occurrence is not unique



to this site, or to the Maine coast, and indicate that Orient Fishtail points are not the typical bifaces of the final centuries of the Terminal Archaic. This surely has implications for our interpretation of broad side-notched and various fish- tailed bifaces throughout the Maritime Peninsula.

To conclude this section, the current evidence suggests a major Susquehanna tradition presence in parts of coastal and interior Maine starting around 3700 BP or a little earlier. As the proposed migrants adapted to the new homeland, they took a mixture of marine and terrestrial species on the coast (Spiess and Lewis 2001), while they captured anadromous fish and mammals inland. Acorns and beech nuts were included in the diet (Bourque 1995, 2001; Spiess and Hedden 2000). Many, but not all, southern New England artifacts occur in Maine sites with a high frequency. Nota- ble among the missing are late Susque- hanna tradition steatite bowls. In style and manufacturing technique, however, early and middle Susquehanna bifaces are commonplace, as are the long drills, biface-based gravers, and grooved axes. Burials comparable to those from southern New England were found at Turner Farm; the Eddington Bend cremation burials (Moorehead 1922), and the fire-associated, feature 3 at the Young site (73.10) on Pushaw Stream (Borstel 1982) constitute other examples in the Penobscot River drainage. The late Susquehanna tradition (Orient phase) as manifest in New York and southern New England remains elusive in Maine, and perhaps never existed. The Mugford site (Bourque et al. 2006) provides an alternative model.

It seems likely that sites like Mud Lake Stream on the upper St. Croix River, discussed below, reflect the penetration


of early Susquehanna tradition people to the New Brunswick border country. Beyond that, however, the trail grows weak, and the Saint John Valley displays only hints of the tradition with no known intact sites or artifact concentrations (Blair 2004: 34). More impressive are the southern Nova Scotia finds (Deal et al. 2006). Along the Maine coast, Susque- hanna tradition assemblages extend currently only to Steuben, well west of the Quoddy Region.

THE TERMINAL ARCHAIC IN THE QUODDY REGION

Although the classic shell middens of the Quoddy Region date to the Ceramic or Maritime Woodland period, apparently earlier artifacts crop up either low down in the deposits or eroded out on the beaches. A recently published state- ment by Black (2000) reviewed some of the finds and presented his research on the Rum Beach site (BgDq-24) in the Bliss Islands, at the eastern end of the Quoddy Region (Figure 2). Previ- ously, Davis (1978: 29, 55, plate V) had reported Terminal Archaic specimens at the Teacher's Cove site (BgDr-1 1 ) on the northern shore of Passamaquoddy Bay, while Sanger (1987: 37, 8, plate lOk-rn) illustrated three probable pre-Ceramic period side-notched points at the Carson site (BgDr-5). Sänger (1986, 1988) also reviewed the appearance of pre-Ceramic period, non-shell midden, littoral zone occupations in the Quoddy Region. Whereas Black (2000) focused on Pas- samaquoddy Bay in New Brunswick, this paper adds new information from the Maine side of the Quoddy Region, especially the Eastport site (80.1), other Cobscook Bay collections, the recently reported N'tolonapemk site (96.2) at the outlet of Meddybemps Lake, and a site (97.2) on St. Croix Island.




12 • SANGER

The Eastport or Moose Island Site The Knapton brothers, John and Douglas, routinely rowed their skiff to various parts of Cobscook Bay, collecting eroded artifacts. One of their stations, the Eastport or Moose Island site (80.1), attracted the attention of a summer resident, Isaac Kingsbury, M.D. In 1947 he solicited the help of Wendell Hadlock, then Curator of the Robert Abbe Museum in Bar Harbor, Maine. Noting that the artifacts and overall site characteristics did not match those expected of local sites - the ubiquitous shell middens - they planned an excavation. In 1948 and 1949, Kingsbury and his guests dug at the site, which then still had considerable intact deposits (Kingsbury and Hadlock 1951). The report, which I judge to be the work of Hadlock (Sanger 2005b), indicated that they excavated 2100 ft2 (ca. 195 m2) , "disclosing seven fire pits, five fire hearths and one hundred forty-five artifacts." (Kingsbury and Hadlock 1951: 22). Absent were shells, other faunal remains, and pottery. The report included an additional 15 beach objects, collected by the Knaptons. The site was situated on the southern side of Moose Island (hence the alternate name Moose Island site) in the town of Eastport, Maine. Located between two rhyolite outcrops approximately 150 m apart, in a small crescent-shaped, south-facing beach, the site had largely escaped the ravages of erosion by the late 1940s, although already at that date local residents reported recent rapid erosion. Roughly 800 m east is Carry- ing Place Cove and a short (ca. 200 m) portage to the Western Passage, Deer Island, and the entrance to Passamaquo- ddy Bay. In short, its location meets our expectations for an important site location (Figure 2).


No trace of the Eastport site remained when I attempted to re-locate it in 1972. A sketch in the Kingsbury and Hadlock (1951) report indicates marine clay (undoubtedly the late Pleistocene Pre- sumpscot Formation) underlying the site, on top of which was a "talus slope" derived from broken bedrock. The Robert S. Peabody Museum in Andover, Massachusetts, loaned me the specimens for further analysis. The Abbe Museum made available additional documenta- tion, daily notes and site drawings made in the second season (1949).

Lack of shell explains the absence of organic remains, except for charcoal. They considered no sample large enough to radiocarbon date by the techniques then available. My recent examination of the collection revealed no charcoal. The authors described the features as fire pits and fire hearths. The seven fire pits, averaging 50 cm in diameter, appeared to have been dug approximately 15 cm into the talus slope at the back of the site. Some fire pits contained a flat stone placed in the bottom, followed by "ash, fire-dirt, fire rocks [fire-cracked rocks?], and surface material." (Kingsbury and Hadlock 1951: 24). In earlier reports, Hadlock uses "fire-dirt" to describe black, highly organic and greasy sedi- ments, which commonly underlie shell middens in the area. In some instances, I judge this to be the original forest soil A-O horizon, and the "ash" to be the A-E, the illuviated or albic zone, typical of northeast coastal spodosols (Sänger 2005b) . They found few flakes or artifacts in the pits, which is significant in any consideration of potential Susquehanna tradition affiliations where artifact caches are common. The pit function remains enigmatic. The five fire hearths were wider than the fire pits and located on the beach on top of the marine clay. They



too contained fire-dirt, ash and broken rhyolite bedrock. Notes indicate the excavators utilized a variety of hand tools, but typical of Maine coastal excavations of the era, screens were not utilized.

In the absence of a radiocarbon date, the artifacts alone provide an estimate of site age. As discussed further below, the assemblage resembles neither the Late Archaic nor the local Ceramic (Maritime Woodland) collections. Since the Susque- hanna tradition is not represented, I judge the site age to lie between 3400 and 2800 BP, or perhaps 3000 BP if Vinette I pottery (Taché 2005) had penetrated the Quoddy Region by that time.

Kingsbury and Hadlock (1951) described 160 artifacts, which included mostly chipped stone, but some hammer stones, celts, and a few abrasives. With the exception of three ground celt bits and one possible celt blank, slate points, plummets, and other artifacts typical of the regional Late Archaic were absent. One celt bit exhibits manufacture first by chipping and then by grinding: it is similar to specimens found in other Ter- minal Archaic and early Ceramic period sites in the area (see below) .

The Eastport site produced a high percentage of chipped bifaces, many of which occur in other Quoddy Region sites, especially in the Knapton collection from Cobscook Bay and the N'tolonapemk site, where the analysts assigned them to the Terminal Archaic period (Brigham et al 2006: 161). When compared with the Maine-based Susque- hanna tradition sites the Eastport site bifaces are quite dissimilar. Also lacking are drills, flake perforators and grooved axes, all of which Kingsbury and his guests surely would have collected.

However, it is the presence of many large, unifacial, end scrapers that is so unlike the Susquehanna tradition on


the one hand and the typical small end scrapers in later Quoddy Region shell middens on the other. Susquehanna sites have few scrapers overall, and they are often based on bifaces (Bourque 1995: 110). As a group, the 15 Eastport site scrapers lie well beyond the size range of the average Ceramic period shell midden scrapers (Figure 5). One is huge, with a mass of 188.5 g, which I eliminated to avoid further skewing the statistical picture (Table 1), while another two are comparable with the more robust end of Ceramic period scrapers, with masses of 6.3 and 7.6 g. Even with the deletion of the largest, and then the two smallest examples, the metric ranges are still huge, as reflected in the high standard deviation values. While the morphological criteria for admission to the scraper class are the same as those used for the normal, small, end scrapers, it is possible that function- ally these are not comparable. Seven of the scrapers illustrate limited bifacial flaking of the preform prior to modification in the form of steep angle flaking, usually on the convex distal end of the flake preform. On one of the small specimens excluded from Table 1, retouch on the ventral surface is reminiscent of that seen on Maine early Ceramic period scrapers (Borstel 1982; Mack et al 2002). Some specimens have lateral margin retouch. While most are made of volcanic rocks, five are of quartzite.

Kingsbury and Hadlock (1951: 25) reported 26 scrapers, whereas, I identified 15 in the collection. While they cited six small scrapers (their thumb nail type), I saw but two, using my criteria. Significantly, they recognized the unusual nature of these artifacts:

Nineteen of the twenty-six scrapers excavated were large, measuring an




14 • SANGER

Figure 5. Large scrapers from the Eastport site.

Table 1 . Dimensions of end scrapers from the Eastport site.

Attribute Number Range Mean Standard Deviation

Length (mm) 12 31.5-92.5 42.58 16.72 Width (mm) 12 29.1-52.0 42.88 7.57 Thickness (mm) 12 11.4-26.8 18.03 5.03 Mass (g) 12 12.5-129.1 50.06 30.43




average of 2.6 inches [66.04 mm] long by 1.8 inches [45.72 mm] wide by .8 inches [20.32 mm] thick.... Scrapers of this type have been reported from Maine shell heaps, and in most instances were confined to the lower horizons. The remaining six were of the small thumb nail type.... (Kings- bury and Hadlock 1951: 25).

Their measurements vary significantly from those in Table 1 only in the length category, and even the inclusion of the one very large specimen would not have raised the overall mean by 20 mm. It does suggest they had slightly different criteria which also resulted in a larger group of specimens. Their assessment of the raw materials involved pertained to all the chipped stone artifacts. They noted that rhyolite (their "felsite") outcrops locally at Hinkley Point, Dennys- ville, while they felt that other specimens were manufactured of rock from the Plaster Rock region of New Brunswick, which today is known to archaeologists as Tobique (River) rhyolite (Blair 2004; Burke 2006: 416). This was a prescient observation.

It is instructive to compare the Eastport scraper dimensions with some measurements from two other Quoddy Region sites, both Ceramic (Maritime Woodland) period shell middens. At the Carson site (radiocarbon dated to about 1000 BP) 27 scrapers had a mean mass of 4.3 g and ranged from 1.2 to 12.2 g. (Sänger 1987: 44). Nearby, at the Teach- er's Cove site, where Davis (1978: 22) recovered a wider range of scrapers, he reported a mean mass of 3.2 g for a small scraper group, and a mean of 18.2 g, for a larger, but spatially separated cluster, which coincided with other Terminal Archaic or early Ceramic period speci-


mens from the same site. Large scrapers like these occur at the N'tolonapemk site (Brigham et al 2006) as well as St. Croix Island (see below) . They may be a defin- ing artifact form for the Quoddy Region Terminal Archaic, a form that helps to document the transition into the earliest Maritime Woodland assemblages.

The abundance of bifaces, or projectile points, undoubtedly attracted attention to the Eastport site: Kingsbury and Hadlock (1951: 24) indicated that they comprised 19.4percent of the assemblage total. I examined and made extensive notes and attribute observations on 29 stemmed bifaces (see Figure 6 for the more complete specimens) . First, what I think they are not, in terms of regional point forms. They lie outside the range anticipated in the Susquehanna tradition, both in morphology and technology. None of them appear similar to the Orient Fishtail points of late Susque- hanna, either as recognized in southern New England, or from various sites here and there around the Maritime Penin- sula (e.g., Deal et al 2006: 276, fig. 7, extreme left) , unless one adopts a most liberal view of the type, involving various side-notched forms. In this regard, I disagree with Black's (2000: 91) characterization of Orient Fishtail points in the Eastport collection after having worked with the original specimens. Kingsbury and Hadlock (1951: 24), in their attempt to find analogous specimens, compared them favourably with stemmed points from the lower (Archaic period) levels at Taft's Point (44.6), Frenchman Bay, the Union River [known today as Smith and Wasp Island sites (58.4,5) at Ellsworth Falls (Byers 1959)], and Moorehead burial tradition sites. They would appear to have conflated a variety of contracting and expanding stemmed points, reflecting Hadlock's knowledge of the




16 • SANGER

Figure 6. Bifaces from the Eastport site.




time. Similar forms occur at the Turner Farm site (Bourque 1995). Large scrapers, many based on ventrally retouched flakes, are fairly common in early Ceramic period coastal sites.

The Eastport site biface specimens are not particularly reminiscent of the Late Archaic small-stemmed points seen at Turner Farm (Bourque 1995) or the N'tolonapemk site, located ca. 24 km to the east, as the seagull flies. From the latter site, however, Brigham et al. (2006: 161, fig. 114) illustrate some Terminal Archaic specimens (their Stemmed Class 3) that are comparable in some respects (Figure 7). At the recent end of the time spectrum, the Eastport bifaces are generally atypical of Quoddy Region shell midden stemmed bifaces, except for those already suspected of representing Terminal Archaic period, or transitional occupations leading into the Ceramic or Maritime Wood-


land period shell midden assemblages, such as Rum Beach and the Weir site (BgDq-6) on Bliss Island (Black 2000), Carson (Sanger 1987), or Teacher's Cove (Davis 1978).

Millennia in acidic soils have created a light-coloured patina or weathering rind on the chert and rhyolite specimens, making further source identifica- tions problematic without cutting and exposing fresh sections. Sufficient surface texture remains to enable identification of some form of rhyolite (whether local or distant), fine-grained materials (potentially chert or a fine-grained volcanic available locally), and some quartz and quartzite, both available locally. As noted in their discussion of the scrapers, Kingsbury and Hadlock (1951: 25) speculated that the rhyolite (their "felsite") derived from local sources, whereas other rhyolites were assigned to the Tobique River area of Northern

Figure 7. Terminal Archaic bifaces from the N'tolonapemk site.




18 • SANGER

New Brunswick. Although they mention numerous flakes, I studied none from the R. S. Peabody Museum collection.

One advance in Maritime Peninsula archaeology, which has added enormous understanding, has been the emphasis on systematic determination (based on pétrographie analysis) of lithic provenances (e.g., Black and Wilson 1999; Blair 2004; Burke 2000, 2006: 427-430, table 1; Crotts 1984). Recently, Gilbert (2007) and Gilbert et al (2007) presented a paper and a poster at the 2007 GAA conference devoted to the analysis of lithics from test pits dug into the Deer Island Point site (BfDr-1) on the south end of Deer Island, less than 5 km from the Eastport site. These artifacts were also compared to "toolstones" from other sites. Pending further research, the precise taxonomic status of the Deer Island Point site is questionable; however, it is possible that some Termi- nal Archaic occupation exists here, as well as on smaller islands in the West Isles group, such as Indian Island and Casco Island (Black 2000). Like other coastal sites that appear ideally situated to accommodate passers-by, the Deer Island Point site exhibits a wide array of lithic types.

The N'tolonapemk Site During the 1950s, the Robert S. Peabody Museum took an active interest in the prehistory of the Maritime Peninsula conducting site surveys in the Quoddy Region and elsewhere. Douglas Byers directed the multi-year program, which included excavation of sites in Cobscook Bay, Passamaquoddy Bay [Holt's Point shell midden (BgDr-9) (Hammon 1984)], and a Palaeoindian site in Nova Scotia- Debert (BiCu-1) (MacDonald 1968). Unfortunately, the results of the overall program, with the notable


exception of Debert, remain relatively unknown and unpublished.

The N'tolonapemk site (96.2) was among the sites documented in the Cobscook Bay area during the R. S. Pea- body surveys. The site lies at the outlet of Meddybemps Lake at the headwaters of the Dennys River, which flows into Cob- scook Bay (Figure 2). As the lake is just 18 km above the head-of-tide, I include it with other littoral zone sites. The lake provided spawning grounds for various anadromous species, especially Atlantic salmon and alewives (gaspereau), as well as catadromous eels. Fish traps set around in the river at the outlet of Med- dybemps Lake would have provided an ample seasonal harvest.

Years of dumping toxic and other wastes on the site eventually resulted in a Superfund Site, requiring Federal funding for clean-up, which triggered an archaeological excavation. In 2000 and 2001 the University of Maine, Farmington, excavated 228 m2, and recovered deposits dating to the Early Archaic period. Close involvement with the nearby Passamaquoddy (Peskoto- muhkati) Nation led to the site name, N'tolonapemk, which means "our ancestor's place." Brigham et al (2001) have published a short preliminary state- ment. The information presented below derived from the two-volume unpublished final report (Brigham et al 2006), which contains an impressive wealth of information that describes occupation from the Early Archaic to the Historic period.

Although ploughing, followed by utilization as an industrial dump, had modified the landform, careful analysis resulted in a number of features, radiocarbon dates, and a great many artifacts, plus floral and faunal remains. Paleo- environmental analysis demonstrated



that Meddybemps Lake, like others in Maine and Québec, had fluctuated in depth during the Holocene (Dorion and Dieffenbacher-Krall 2006), with the result that during Middle Archaic times a lowstand occurred (estimated to be between 8000 and 6500 BP), during which time the outlet was perched and the once-productive fish runs ceased (Brigham et al 2006: 357). As lake levels rose and the outlet became active, the fisheries recommenced, as did human interest in the site.

The evidence for Terminal Archaic occupation is described as "sporadic and of low intensity." (Brigham et al 2006: 360). There are two radiocarbon estimates- 3240 ± 40 BP and 2920 ± 100 BP. In their attempt to set the site within the context of the broader Northeast, they characterize the chipped biface assemblage as:

A single projectile point similar to a Wayland corner-notched point of the Watertown phase [Massachu- setts] of the Susquehanna tradition, three points resembling those of the Orient phase, five projectile points and two utilized flakes somewhat similar to artifacts recovered from the Deadmans [sic] Pool site on the Tobique River in New Brunswick Of these artifacts, two of the projectile points and one utilized flake were of Tobique rhyolite while the other utilized flake was of Tobique or Washade- moak chert (Brigham et al 2006: 360).

Of particular interest is the observation that there is but a single, clear example of a Susquehanna tradition biface, a point made by the authors (Brigham et al 2006: 285, fig. 130).


There are no typical Susquehanna tradition drills, no grooved axes, no steatite, and only one perforator of unknown cultural affiliation. In my opinion, the three points said to resemble Orient Fishtail points (Brigham et al 2006: 176-179, fig. 126, bottom row) fall outside the range illustrated by Ritchie (1971: 93), and are, as the authors stated, "broadly side-notched." In addition, the authors noted the points lack the concave bases often witnessed on Orient Fishtail points of New York. Unfortunately, the three bifaces were associated with undated and culturally unaffiliated features 76 and 149 (Brigham et al 2006: 62, table 2). In short, all the characteristic hallmarks of the Maine variety of the Susquehanna tradition are conspicuous by their absence at the N'tolonapemk site - an absence not explained by sea-level rise erosion or lowered lake levels.

The five Terminal Archaic stemmed class 3 projectile points (Brigham et al 2006: 161, fig. 114) fit well within the range of specimens from the Eastport site, although the latter collection, being so much larger, exhibits more variation (Figure 7). The authors also noted similarities with the Deadman's Pool site (CgDt-3) on the Tobique River (Sanger 1971a), and with a biface reported by Blair (2004: 321) from the Jemseg Crossing site (BkDm-14) in the Saint John River Valley in New Bruns- wick. Consultants identified lithics from known New Brunswick sources as well as Maine sources.

The N'tolonapemk site produced many scrapers, some of which appear big enough to qualify as comparable with those from the Eastport site. The authors did not associate them directly with the Terminal Archaic, however.

Excavations amassed 37,681 pieces of chipped stone debitage on 6.4 mm




20 • SANGER

screens, which represented all time periods (Brigham et al 2006: 245). The team analyzed a 56 percent sample for provenance, among other characteristics. Vein quartz and various rhyolites, both available locally and west along the Maine coast, made up about 60 percent of the sample. Chert, assumed to be imported into the region, comprised 5.3 percent. Chert sources include the well-known Minas Basin region of Nova Scotia, Washademoak chert of the lower Saint John River Valley, and Munsungan Lake in northern Maine, all of which have pétrographie analyses available for comparisons, and none of which were available locally from glacially trans- ported rocks (Burke 2000, 2006). Also of significance is the presence of Tobique rhyolite, which comprised 1.8 percent of the sample. Assuming that the Tobique River area, a major tributary of the Saint John River in northern New Brunswick, is the sole source of this distinctive reddish- coloured rhyolite, it ties the Quoddy Region into the Saint John River Valley cultural sphere. Potentially as diagnostic is the occurrence of Washademoak chert, which has been described as site specific (Black and Wilson 1999). However, it appears that this lithology may not always be readily distinguished from chert known to be available somewhere around the Tobique River (Blair 2004: 198).

Cobscook Bay Collections The bifaces collected by the Knapton brothers include a wide range of forms that reflect occupation of Cobscook Bay dating to the Late Archaic period. While I did not conduct a detailed analysis of all the Knapton collection bifaces, I examined a number of specimens that demonstrate general Susquehanna tradition attributes, including triangular blades, prominent shoulders (sometimes


asymmetric), contracting stems, and flat flaking. Although I observed no finished drills, two stemmed bifaces were in the process of being modified into drills, a known Susquehanna tradition trait. There were no grooved axes.

Summing up the Cobscook Bay and N'tolonapemk collections, it is evident that some Susquehanna tradition influences reached the area, although no site collection exhibits a well-defined assemblage of the tradition. For that, we currently have to look to the small Main- ayr assemblage from Steuben, approximately 100 km to the west.

St Croix Island Late in the summer of 1604, a French group led by the Sieur de Monts and Samuel de Champlain, arrived at St. Croix Island, located in the middle of the St. Croix River estuary (Champlain 1922). After a terrible winter, during which many of the colonists perished, they moved across the Bay of Fundy to Port Royal and a more successful settlement. St. Croix Island lies on the American side of the river, and since the 1930s the U.S. National Park Service has sponsored a number of excavations to learn more about the short-lived French settlement. In 1969, excavation recovered Aboriginal artifacts in a shell-free matrix, which the National Park Service asked me to analyze (Figure 2).

The St. Croix Island site (97.2) pre- European assemblage includes Terminal Archaic and a few Ceramic (Maritime Woodland) specimens. Because the Aboriginal artifacts and features lay beneath the French occupation and later Colonial period habitation, it was not possible to isolate intact assemblages. A radiocarbon date from a possible Terminal Archaic feature reflected seventeenth century charcoal.



There are 12 scrapers, 10 of which qualify as large scrapers, by standards discussed above for the Eastport site (Figure 8). The mean mass of nine complete specimens is 45 g (compared with the Eastport mean of 50 g) , while two St. Croix Island site scrapers each weigh over 60 g. Although weathering of the surface disguises the surface texture, volcanic rocks probably served as raw material. One specimen is reminiscent of Tobique rhyolite. Two exhibit limited bifacial retouch. I suspect two smaller chert specimens to be of Ceramic period age, also recognized by a few pottery sherds and later-looking bifaces.


The St. Croix Island site bifaces form a heterogeneous group. Included are two specimens that exhibit some shallow, broad, flaking reminiscent of Susque- hanna tradition technology, although their general morphology is much less characteristic. These, together with an expanding stem point, which some analysts might place in the Orient Fishtail category, probably represent the Termi- nal Archaic, as they seem out of place in local Ceramic period shell midden sites. Two decades ago, these specimens, as well as those from Teacher's Cove, led me to suggest they represented links to the Susquehanna tradition techno-

Figure 8. Large scrapers, grooved axe, and chipped and ground celt from St. Croix Island site.




22 • SANGER

complex (Sanger 1986: 146), a position I see no reason to modify.

Also in the St. Croix Island assemblage is a pecked and ground, fully grooved axe together with a small chipped and then ground celt (Figure 8), similar to those from the Eastport, N'tolonapemk, and Teacher's Cove sites (Davis 1978: 23), as well as the early Ceramic period, multiple human burial-pit context at Minister's Island (BgDr-10) (Sänger 1987: 106).

Although St. Croix Island is famous for its early French attempt at settlement, Native people had occupied the site spo- radically from Terminal Archaic period times. The chipped stone bifaces, the grooved axe and chipped and ground celt, combined with the large scrapers, fit with our growing understanding of the period. A full report on all the St. Croix Island archaeological and mor- tuary manifestations is in preparation.

Teacher's Cove First excavated in 1970, this multicomponent shell midden site was part of the National Museums of Canada Pas- samaquoddy Bay survey and excavation programme (Sänger 1987). Two years later, Stephen Davis (1978) led a small crew in a second excavation at Teacher's Cove. Separated from the Ceramic period materials was a series of projectile points and large scrapers recognized at the time as being similar to those from the Eastport site (called Moose Island site in Davis 1978: 29). In addition, a chipped, then ground celt came from Teacher's Cove (Davis 1978: 23).

Rum Beach David Black (2000) described the Rum Beach site (BgDq-24) on Bliss Island, at the eastern end of the Quoddy Region, after several years of collecting lithic arti-

Canadi an Journal of Archaeology 32 (2008)

facts from a non-shell deposit underlying a small, actively eroding salt marsh. A radiocarbon date of 2680 ±80 BP from the base of the marsh established a limiting date on the archaeological site. After initially assigning the artifacts early in the Susquehanna tradition, Black later associated the assemblage with the late Susquehanna based on limited similarities with Maine specimens, as described earlier. Like other Terminal Archaic components discussed in this paper, Rum Beach is not without interpretive problems, many of which Black (2000) recognized (Figure 2).

At the time of writing, Black (2000) had collected 98 chipped stone specimens, including nine formal tools, 16 cores and fragments, and 73 pieces of debitage but no grooved axes. Black matched several of the artifacts with finds from various Maine Susquehanna tradition sites. Most convincing, in my opinion, are two specimens, a stemmed biface (Black 2000: 94-95, fig. 3b), and the long drill (fig. 4d). There is a biface, which Black (2000: 95, fig. 6b) felt resembled the Orient Fishtail points described in southern New England and elsewhere in New Brunswick, together with some bifaces, two of which are broadly side-notched (fig. 6d-g) from the lowest levels (assemblage 1) of the nearby Weir shell midden site (BgDq-6), which has associated a few sherds of Early to Middle Maritime Woodland pottery (CP2 in the Petersen and Sänger [ 1991 ] pottery scheme) . One of the Weir site points is of Tobique rhyolite. Black (2000) reported no large scrapers in the Rum Beach site collection, such as those from Eastport and St. Croix Island, although he did note one large scraper in the Weir 1 assemblage.

Bourque et al (2006: 323) evaluated the Rum Beach assemblage from their



perspective of the Terminal Archaic as expressed at the Mugford site as fol- lows: "Assemblages from the Rum Beach and Weir sites in Passamaquoddy Bay believed to be Terminal Archaic (Black 2000) also bear some resemblances to the Mugford assemblage, but show differences as well in biface form, lack of flake perforators and abundance of blades or blade-like flakes, not present at Mugford." The authors do not identify the "resemblances."

Maine Susquehanna sites, whether early or late, do not contain true blades, or even many blade-like flakes. Blade-like flakes, twice as long as they are wide, do occur in low numbers in bifacial collections; however, using criteria developed by Sänger (1970) these are not blades in the technological sense, and care- fully prepared blade cores are absent. Indeed, I have not been able to find any true (technologically defined) blades in Maine Susquehanna collections. Black (2000: 94) indicated that a "significant portion" of the Rum Beach collection consists of blade-like flakes and mac- roblades. In this respect, I would agree with Bourque et al (2006: 323) that the Rum Beach collection does not compare well with Susquehanna tradition lithic technology. One possible explanation is that Rum Beach represents a mixed assemblage, with some Susquehanna- like traits, such as the drill and one or more of the bifaces, intermingled with specimens, such as the blade-like flakes, from a different lithic techno-tradition. Alternately, the assemblage represents a unique culture type, one which amal- gamated forms and technologies from various traditions into a local or regional expression of the Terminal Archaic. If so, where did the blades and blade- like flakes originate? They are not a prominent feature in any other reported


Quoddy Region Ceramic or Maritime Woodland sites [although occasion- ally they co-occur with CP-2 (dentate stamped) pottery] just as they are not a Susquehanna tradition trait.

Brigham et al (2006: 127, figs. 89, 90) reported no blades among thousands of artifacts from the N'tolonapemk site: "None of the artifacts in this category [cores] are prepared blade cores...." Fig. 90, specimens 1045-1 and 1238-1, display structural characteristics reminiscent of cores from Zone 2 at the Beach site, described below. Perhaps they share a similar lithic provenance. Further inquiries of the senior analyst, Michael Brigham (personal communication 2007), indicates that blades are not present. However, neither does the site exhibit much, if anything, of a Susquehanna tradition presence. The N'tolonapemk site (Brigham et al 2006: 297) has by far the largest early Ceramic assemblage in the Quoddy Region, consisting of 562 pottery fragments arranged into 38 CP1 individual vessels (interior-exterior corded similar to Vinette I [Taché 2005]) using the Petersen and Sänger (1991) criteria. Blades are not associated there either. The current Eastport site collection contains no flakes; however, none of the existing cores I studied exhibit any ten- dency towards blade removals, and none of the artifacts suggest that blades served as biface preforms. To date, the only site in the Quoddy Region with any significant number of blades or blade-like flakes is Rum Beach. Do they represent a local development, or is the technology apparent in extra-regional contexts?

The Beach Site on Roque Island One site on the Maine coast known to have a blade technology is the Beach site (61.34) on Roque Island, initially




24 • SANGER

reported in 1983 by Sanger and Chase in a Conference paper, circulated but unpublished. The site is approximately 50 km west of the Quoddy Region (Figure 1). After the initial testing (that reported in 1983) , a second excavation in 1985 added some additional specimens to the collection. Belcher and Sänger are in the process of preparing a final report on materials recovered from the Roque Island site. There are two components at the Beach site, an upper one (Zone 1) which is a middle Ceramic period shell midden and a lower one (Zone 2) , which is a shell-free occupation, probably of Terminal Archaic age. Both appear to be in excellent context and exhibit limited erosion. Although the earlier assemblage contained charcoal, it appeared more like modern root burn and so remains radiometrically undated.

Some artifacts are of significance for this paper, even though the site technically lies well outside the Quoddy Region. It is, however, considerably less than half the distance to the major Maine Susquehanna tradition sites with which we have been comparing the Quoddy Region Terminal Archaic period sites. First, some of the stemmed bifaces from Zone 2 are similar to those recovered from the Eastport site, and other Quoddy Region sites, especially the long, slender forms and the shorter bifaces with expanding stems created by broad side-notches (Figure 9a-c). These are not Susquehanna tradition specimens.

Most intriguing perhaps was the presence in Zone 2 of 14 cores that had produced small blades or microblades, sometimes from more than one platform (Figure 9d-f). Platform angles (angle between the striking platform and the removal surface, measured in 10 degree increments) range between 60 and 80


degrees: 80°= 9; 70°= 5; 60°= 7. We won- dered about the effect of the raw material (probably diabase from local dikes) on the core form. According to Adrian Burke (2007 personal communication) the intersection of flows and joint sur- faces results in rectangular blocks of stone that are roughly 70x50x40 mm. A typical angle between the flows and the joints is ±110 degrees. An angle of 110°, as an example, would result in a platform edge angle of 70°. In Zone 2 there may have been deliberate selection of these rectangular pieces to produce parallel-sided flakes, or blades. Later assemblages show no evidence of this technology despite the use of generally similar lithics.

The conundrum is that while there is no doubt about them being blade cores, we had difficulty finding many blades in the assemblage. I analyzed 80 small linear flakes (twice as long as wide, and therefore blades by some analysts) from Zone 2. Only 9 flakes (11 percent) exhibit more than one parallel dorsal arris, or ridge, running the full length of the flake, a low percentage for a true blade technology, especially by high latitude standards (Sänger 1970), but still unique for published Maine collections. One blade indicates deliberate modification into a drill or perforator (Figure 9d). In some respects this little perforator is quite analogous to imple- ments from the Mugford site collection (Bourque^a/. 2006).

Specimen 52 is based on the medial section of a blade with two arrises. Bilateral, but unifacial, flaking from the ventral surface produced a pile that exhibits polish. The tip has broken away. However, there is evidence that a flake was removed from the tip and parallel with the long axis of the pile, probably to sharpen it. Polish around the base of




Figure g. Bifaces and blade cores from the Beach site, Roque Island. The bottom scale refers to specimens d-f.




26 • SANGER

the artifact suggests it may have been hafted. The blade is 1 1 mm wide and 5 mm thick and probably was removed from one of the cores described above. Total artifact length is 30 mm.

To conclude, the only known eastern Maine site with intact stratigraphy and with a blade technology remotely comparable with the Rum Beach blade- like flakes is Zone 2 at the Beach site on Roque Island, a Terminal Archaic site which produced stemmed bifaces similar to those from the Eastport site. Unlike the latter site, however, we recovered no scrapers, large or small, from the Beach site.

In summary, the frustration of too few sites, most of which lack good context, and the near-absence of radiocarbon dates, makes it difficult to impossible to characterize neatly the Quoddy Region Terminal Archaic period. With the exception of a specimen here and there, however, it bears scant resemblance to Susquehanna tradition sites in Maine. In my opinion, the Terminal Archaic period demonstrates both the absence of a Little Gap, and a considerable amount of cultural regionalism in the Quoddy Region, which probably reflects a combi- nation of external influences and some local developments, a position I will develop further.

THE SAINT CROIX DRAINAGE The St. Croix River drains close to 4100 km2, a large watershed composed of two major lake systems and many wetlands (Figure 10). The West Grand Lake system, which forms the lower end of the drainage, joins the St. Croix River at Kelleyland, Maine. Further upstream, the Chiputneticook Lakes chain outlet becomes the St. Croix River at Vanceboro-St. Croix, the latter on the New Brunswick side of the river. Between


Kelleyland and Vanceboro-St. Croix the river forms the International Boundary and flows through landscapes sparsely inhabited today and apparently so in the pre-European period, contrary to the situation in both the major lake systems, which contain many sites dating from the Late Archaic, Susquehanna tradition, and Ceramic periods (e.g., Cox 1991, 2000; Deal 1986; Kopec 1985; Sänger 1975) . Unfortunately, dams on both lake systems have inundated a great many sites, while those in reservoir draw-down zones are experiencing severe erosion.

The Mud Lake Stream Site In 1983 and 1984 Michael Deal (1986) conducted extensive excavations at the Mud Lake Stream site (BkDw-5) located on the banks of a small stream by that name which links Spednic4 Lake with (East) Grand Lake, both part of the Chiputneticook Lakes chain, which straddles the International Boundary (Figure 10). The site contains some evidence of occupation dating to the Late Archaic period Lauren tian tradition, but the major components include a Termi- nal Archaic Susquehanna tradition presence and Ceramic period occupations.

The Susquehanna tradition component includes 14 stemmed bifaces, equated with early Susquehanna Atlantic points, in addition to two small bifaces and three typical Susquehanna drills. There is a chipped celt, described as unfinished, and a full-grooved ground stone axe (Deal 1986: 73, fig. 4). Seven of the Atlantic points, a number of which exhibited heat fractures, came from Feature 21, together with 32 cal- cined fish bones, 14 of which are probably American shad {Aiosa sapidissima), a species which ascends the St. Croix River in large numbers each spring. Two radiocarbon dates from this feature




Figure io. Map of Penobscot to Saint John River showing travel route between the two major drainages and selected archaeological sites.

yielded estimates of 4010 ± 180 BP and 4010 ± 100 BP (Deal et al 2006: 267), two standard deviations outside the range of most early Susquehanna sites in Maine.

The Mud Lake Stream site is important for several reasons. First, it helps to put into perspective a number of Susque- hanna tradition artifacts, mostly bifaces,

known from the St. Croix drainage, especially the West Grand Lake system (Kopec 1985). Second, because the site contains the key early Susquehanna tradition traits, not just isolated projectile points, it suggests that Susquehanna tradition people quickly penetrated that far to the north and east in the Mari-




28 • SANGER

time Peninsula. Third, the presence of anadromous shad indicates that other, stronger anadromous species, such as salmon, could have overcome the falls at St. Stephen-Calais, and made their way to the inland spawning grounds. Fourth, to the east (the Saint John River Valley) the Susquehanna footprint diminishes quite considerably, which suggests that the St. Croix River drainage marks the extent of any major penetration. It does not, of course, deny the putative influence of the Susquehanna tradition in the form of the occasional bifaces and the enigmatic steatite bowl fragments reported for the lower Saint John River (Deal et al 2006) , as reviewed and assessed by Blair (2004). Finally, given the apparent lack of Susquehanna tradition sites along the eastern Maine (Washington County) coast, the Saint Croix River represents the most likely source for the occasional Susquehanna specimens documented in the Quoddy Region.

DISCUSSION The final chapter on the Terminal Archaic period in the Quoddy Region is far from complete. The lack of radio- metric dating, when combined with the incompleteness of the record due to old excavations, poor context, and marine erosion, means that any attempts to neatly encapsulate the events of the Terminal Archaic period are premature. Intact deposits with isolated components and datable charcoal would be highly desirable. Nevertheless, it seems likely that the so-called Little Gap has been largely eliminated.

As we gather more information it is becoming increasingly clear that the larger taxonomic units, such as the Susquehanna tradition, provide few useful answers for the centuries just preceding the appearance of ceramics


in the region, after which the record becomes much more extensive. Quite to the contrary, when invoked as explanation, implicit or explicit, these all- encompassing taxa tend to confuse and obscure the issues, effectively eliminat- ing the opportunity to discern regional cultural patterns. The idea of Quoddy Region cultural regionalism during the Terminal Archaic is not new (Sänger 1986, 1988). Black (2000) also addresses the issue and describes it as one of the more interesting cultural problems in the general area.

Despite the data limitations, sufficient clues exist to warrant some hypotheses. In Maine, archaeologists recognize the Terminal Archaic period by the appearance of the Susquehanna tradition by 3700 BP. This is convenient, because the change from Late Archaic to Terminal Archaic coincides neatly with the arrival of a totally new culture, absent any obvi- ous cultural transition, and presumably an immigrant population. Bearers of the Susquehanna tradition adapted well to their newly acquired landscapes, living on the coast as well as deep into the interior, following the major rivers upstream. They quickly reached the current Maine- New Brunswick border country and the St. Croix River.

The spread of the Susquehanna tradition east along the coast of Maine appears to have been more limited. While the Turner Farm site, with its big shell midden and minimum of 70 human burials provides a strong focal point, substantial Susquehanna tradition sites occur just to the east, but apparently cease at the Main- ayr site, approximately 100 km west of the Quoddy Region. Sea-level rise and erosion could be involved in this distribution, but other explanations are possible also. Although the Quoddy Region displays hints of Susquehanna tradition influence



in the form of some biface attributes and a few other specimens, like drills and grooved axes, there is nothing to suggest anything like the well organized and integrated cultural expressions witnessed in central Maine, or even in the Mud Lake Stream site (Deal 1986). Indeed, the largest and best preserved site in the Quoddy Region with Archaic, Terminal Archaic, and Ceramic (Woodland) assemblages, the N'tolonapemk site, has virtually no Susquehanna tradition presence. The utilization of negative evidence must always be employed with caution, but consider- ing the large amount of research that has been conducted in the Quoddy Region it seems reasonable to hypothesize that the Susquehanna tradition never existed to any appreciable degree. Further, assuming that the occasional Susquehanna- like specimens are correlative in time, it weakens any hypothesis that erosion constitutes the main explanation for the absence of well-defined Susquehanna tradition assemblages.

With the exception of the N'tolonapemk site, all the Quoddy Region Terminal Archaic period sites discussed herein lie within the eroding portion of the littoral zone. Yet the evidence currently available does not support the conclusion that the inhabitants of these sites practiced the type of inten- sive littoral zone economy witnessed in the Ceramic period shell middens. We know that further west shell middens were accumulating as early as ca. 5,000 years ago (Bourque 1995). A piston core taken in Digdeguash Harbour (Passa- maquoddy Bay) bottom deposits near the Carson site recovered two soft-shell clam shells, each radiocarbon dated to >5000 BP (Sänger 1987: 63; Sanger and Kellogg 1989: 121), thus demonstrat- ing that this important mollusk species, which dominates the local shell mid-


dens, populated the area. There is no reason to conclude that the other species utilized so effectively by the Ceramic period people were not available in Ter- minal Archaic times. Possibly, all the Ter- minal Archaic period sites mentioned represent short-term occupations, and the numbers of shells deposited did not overcome the natural acidity of the local forest soils (usually ca. pH 5.0-5.5), which resulted in no organic preservation, including shells. However, to judge by the number of artifacts (>150 lithic specimens, not including debitage), and extent of deposits (195 m2 excavated), the Eastport site can hardly be characterized as small. The Rum Beach site is apparently also shell-free, while the nearby Maritime Woodland Weir site is a classic shell midden. In short, while a littoral zone adaptation pattern seems plausible based on site location, the available evidence does not support this subsistence pattern to anything like the extent witnessed just a few centuries later. At this time there is nothing obvi- ous in the paleo-environmental record of the Quoddy Region that would suggest a reason for this marked dichotomy in subsistence pattern. Finally, it should be noted that further west along the Maine coast Susquehanna tradition and earlier assemblages have copious shell deposits (e.g., Turner Farm site [Bourque 1995]), which refutes any suggestion that people of this tradition were not involved in shellfish collecting.

Environmental Considerations To help understand the Susquehanna tradition distribution it is useful to view the environments where it took hold, and compare them with environments where the culture seems not to have been as successful. Dietary preferences represent a way to examine this issue.




30 • SANGER

Even in the large Maine sites, knowledge of Susquehanna tradition dietary prac- tices is incomplete. Along the coast, the only site that features a detailed recon- struction of Susquehanna diet is the Turner Farm shell midden site (Bourque 1995; Spiess and Lewis 2001).

Some Maine Susquehanna tradition sites have charred acorns and beech nuts, which prompted Spiess and Hedden (2000) and Bourque (2001: 65) to speculate on the importance of nuts in the diet. Maine is a state in which a number of plant species reach either their northern or their southern limits. Using computer models, McMahon (1990) plotted modern plant distribu- tions and demonstrated two major ecotones where numerous species reach their limits. One is currently mid-way between the Kennebec and the Penob- scot Rivers in the coastal zone. To the west, there are many more deciduous trees: to the east, evergreens dominate. Parenthetically, this region also marks the southern end of the Maritime Pen- insula culture area for much of the pre-European period, with the notable exception of the Susquehanna tradition (Bourque et al. 2006; Robinson 2001; Sanger 2005a, 2006). The other ecotone runs through the interior of the state in a general west to east direction, before turning sharply to the north just before reaching the US-Canadian Border. It fol- lows generally the more inland continental weather pattern less influenced by the cool, moist Gulf of Maine maritime conditions.

McMahon (1990) divided the modern physiographic and botanical environments of Maine into regions. Region 15 is the East Coastal Region which extends in a 20 km-wide belt from Mount Desert Island and Isle au Haut in the west, to the Quoddy Region in the


east. This is a spruce-fir dominated landscape with a large number of fens and peatlands of various types. Paleo-botanical research by Schauffler and Jacobson (2002) indicated that in Region 15 red spruce had been dominant for most of the Holocene. This is a keystone species in the spruce-fir forest type, and it would have been present during the Susque- hanna tradition period on the Maine coast. It seems possible, therefore, that along the Region 15 coastal strip, the lack of terrestrial resources, especially trees producing edible nuts, might have played a role in limiting the spread of Susquehanna tradition people towards the Quoddy Region.

The St. Croix headwaters from West Grand Lake to the Chiputneticook lakes lie in McMahon 's (1990: 60) Region 8, the Eastern Lowlands. The climate is transitional between the coastal Region 15 and the still more continental climate further north and west. By com- parison, while the mean maximum July temperature in Eastport (Region 15) is only 17.1°C, and dense fog "socks in" the region for days on end in the summer, the mean maximum July temperature in Region 8 is 26.2°C, a substantial 9 degree difference (McMahon 1990). The effec- tive summer heat supports a wide range of deciduous trees, including oaks and beech, which, of course, produce acorns and beech nuts. Therefore, based on modern climate regimes and the vegetation, Region 8 would have been more hospitable to interior-adapted Susquehanna tradition populations than Region 15 along the Downeast Maine coast. During Susquehanna tradition times (ca. 3800 to 3400 BP) the interior of the Maritime Peninsula would have been warmer and dryer than today, further enhancing the temperature differences between the ocean-dominated



Quoddy Region and the St. Croix drainage (Sängern al 2007).

One should not, perhaps, make too much of the terrestrial aspect of the Turner Farm Susquehanna tradition diet. They did capture shellfish and finned fish from the sea (Spiess and Lewis 2001), and they lived on many of the coastal islands, a settlement pattern which would have required good small-boat skills. This kind of littoral zone adaptation, as mentioned earlier, is dependent on Zone II coastal environments. These are the sheltered situa- tions with mud flats in coves supporting intertidal zones and good opportunities for canoe-based subsistence activities. As noted earlier, the Quoddy Region shoreline contains ca. 1000 km of high potential Zone II shoreline, such that if Susquehanna tradition coastally-adapted people did move that far east they would have found desirable intertidal habitat.

Mariners describe the more than 30-km shoreline west of the Quoddy Region to Little River and the fishing village of Cutler as a "bold coast," dominated by steep intertidal zones with few coves capable of offering shelter to small boats or sustaining much in the way of clam-bearing, Zone II type sedi- ments. In a site survey I recorded only six ephemeral sites in small coves, most of which would not offer much in the way of suitable intertidal environments5. The mariners' guide, Coast Pilot 1 (Anon. 2007: 178), warns mariners about the coast from West Quoddy Head (western approach to the Quoddy Region) to Moose Cove and beyond to Cutler, by emphasizing that the sea can turn treacherous very quickly, and that small boats may have difficulty in reaching the few sheltered coves. Having traversed this stretch of coast in 8 m and 10 m boats, I know full well the implications


of strong tidal currents at cross purposes with the wind and swells, which can turn relatively calm conditions into a confu- sion of close-spaced, steep waves. Only under ideal sea conditions could skilled canoeists hope to survive in these rough, cold waters. Lowered sea levels in the last several millennia would not have affected this coastal characterization.

In summary, it seems possible that the combined effects of dense spruce-fir forests and the lack of Zone II littoral- zone environments may have inhibited the easterly spread of Susquehanna tradition along the coast to the Quoddy Region. The evidence from Mud Lake Stream and the numerous Susquehanna tradition artifacts in the St. Croix drainage suggests that people of this tradition had no difficulty penetrating this far by following inland waterways.

Quoddy Region Cultural Connections The rough, bold coastal areas east and west of the Quoddy Region would appear to represent poor choices for regular cultural exchanges during and before the Terminal Archaic period. For Native people the easiest access to the Quoddy Region would undoubtedly have been down the St. Croix River. This was probably the source of Susquehanna tradition artifacts, and it may have been the route through which other cultural traits entered. Passing through the lakes of the St. Croix Valley, one of the best known of all Maritime Peninsula Native canoe routes (the so-called Maliseet Trail) linked the upper Penobscot River with the Saint John River via a series of river, streams, lakes, and carries (Figure 10) (Cook 2007; Ganong 1899). The route best explains the presence of Archaic similarities with the Penobscot River seen at the N'tolonapemk site (Brigham et al 2006) , and at sites from the Magaguad-




32 • SANGER

avie Lake to Mill Lake (Suttie 2007) on the lower Magaguadavic River. Although to date there has been no systematic site surveys conducted on the entire U.S. portion of the Maliseet Trail, collectors have reported Susquehanna tradition specimens.

While influences from the Susque- hanna tradition may account for some artifacts in the Quoddy Region, other artifact forms suggest alternative explanations. The distinctive large scrapers constitute a case in point. Small unifacial scrapers are ubiquitous during the Ceramic or Maritime Woodland period, but scarce during the Late Archaic, and

absent in the Maine Susquehanna tradition sites.

The Bob site (74.148) excavation, on Pushaw Stream - a Penobscot River tributary - recovered an undated cache of six medium-large, grey chert scrapers, some with bifacial flaking (Mack et al. 2002: 60). These are larger than scrapers associated with early Ceramic period features at the site. An early Ceramic period component on Deer Isle, Maine, produced 18 scrapers, some fairly large (S. Cox, personal communication, 2007). From the Deadman's Pool site (CgDt-3) on the Tobique River (Figure 1 1 ) , a Saint John River tributary, came eight large

Figure i i . Bifaces and large scrapers from the Deadman's Pool site, Tobique River (modified from Sanger 1971a, with permission).




scrapers, with convex working edges and edge angles in the 70-90 degree range (Sanger 1971a: 12-14). Although site age has yet to be determined, the morphology of the stemmed bifaces suggests the Terminal Archaic period (Figure 11). The mean mass of five complete Dead- man's Pool scrapers is 40.8 g, while the Eastport group mean mass is 50.06 g (Table 1). On average, the former tend to be a little longer (67.0 mm versus 42.58 mm), but less thick (11.2 mm for Deadman's Pool and 18.03 mm for East- port), reflecting the flake preform. As a group, the Deadman's Pool scraper met- rics exhibit much less variability. It may be significant that some N'tolonapemk site Terminal Archaic bifaces were considered similar to Deadman's Pool specimens (Brigham et al 2006: 161), while there are stemmed bifaces from the Eastport site and other Terminal Archaic period sites that also compare favourably (Figures 6, 7). The Deadman's Pool artifacts, with only two exceptions, are of the locally available Tobique rhyolite, a lithology also identified in Quoddy Region sites at N'tolonapemk, Eastport (Kings- bury and Hadlock 1951), Deer Island Point (Gilbert et al 2007), and possibly at St. Croix Island, all of which have Terminal Archaic period associations. Although the Tobique River is a long way from the Quoddy Region, the 300 km canoe trip would make the transport of this distinctive rhyolite relatively easy.

Blair (2004), who has recently evaluated the later archaeology of the lower Saint John River Valley, defined five periods, of which Period 1 is the Ter- minal Archaic and transitional into the Early Maritime Woodland. Blair (2004: 322) cautions against importing point types from other regions in an attempt to develop a cultural sequence, arguing for local definition. While I agree, compari-


sons remain useful for other purposes. A side-notched biface illustrated by Blair (2004: 321, plate 8.3) resembles some Quoddy Region site specimens, a point also made by Brigham et al (2006). One large scraper from a Period 1 site has a mass of 24.5 g, equating it with some Quoddy Region and Deadman's Pool large scrapers. Significantly, there were no small scrapers: neither does Blair (2004) report Susquehanna-like bifaces, drills, and grooved axes in Period 1. The lithic raw material counts, while small, are revealing. In terms of weight, the largest category is Tobique rhyolite, available over 200 km to the north. Second is the local Washademoak chert, followed by a single, large chunk of Munsungan Lake chert from northern Maine. Mun- sungan Lake, drained by the Aroostook River, is also in the Saint John River watershed (Figure 10). Two flakes are of Kineo-Mt. Traveler felsite from western Maine (Blair 2004: 325).

At this time the most reasonable explanation for the similarities between the Quoddy Region Terminal Archaic sites and Maine Susquehanna sites on the one hand, and the Saint John River on the other would be via the St. Croix River and its well-documented water links with the Penobscot River to the west and the Saint John River to the east.

CONCLUSION Historically, the Quoddy Region and the St. Croix Valley formed part of the Pas- samaquoddy Nation (Peskotomuhkati) homeland. Linguistically, and in many other ways, the Peskotomuhkati shared much with the Maliseet or Wolasto- qiyik of the Saint John River, despite the strong coastal aspect to the Pesko- tomuhkati lifestyle (Erickson 1978). The extent to which archaeologists can rely on the early European observations and,




34 • SANGER

more often than not, late-life memories to construct pre-European cultures, has been debated for decades. Both Bourque (1992) and Sanger (1971b) recognized problems with traditional seasonality models as a result of their research in Penobscot Bay and the Quoddy Region, respectively. In 1982 Sänger cautioned against the use of the seventeenth century written records for Nova Scotia and New Brunswick in an effort to overcome the slim archaeological evidence, partly because of errors, misunderstandings, and faulty memories evident in the chronicles (e.g., Bailey 1937: 13; Ganong in LeClerq [1910: 17]; Quinn 1981: 58-59), and partly because of the severe cultural and social dislocation that was taking place by the mid-sixteenth century (Bourque and Whitehead 1985; Salisbury 1982).

Archaeology may provide indepen- dent evidence for cultural relationships prior to the devastating impacts of European colonialism, disease-related depopulation, social displacement, and social modifications. The late Terminal Archaic period of the Quoddy Region - from perhaps 3400 to 3000 BP- suggests strong cultural connections with people of the Saint John River, a relationship that apparently continued into the European period, as witnessed by the similarities in language and other cultural manifestations (Erickson 1978; Goddard 1978). Without decoupling the Quoddy Region and the Saint John River from macro traditions such as the Susquehanna tradition it would, I suggest, be far more difficult to discern these regional cultural dynamics. The reason for the suggested links between the Quoddy Region and the Saint John Valley may have a lot to do with the relative isolation of the Quoddy Region from the coastal cultures of Maine by the long


stretch of forbidding coastline in which a littoral zone adaptation would have been difficult, and regular transit problematic. A somewhat similar geographic and biological circumscription would have occurred to the east of the Quoddy Region along the rocky coastline to the Saint John River estuary. Moreover, the Wolastoqiyik people of the Saint John Valley were primarily river and lake oriented, and not particularly closely adapted to littoral environments, to judge by the known archaeological sites (Blair 2004). Therefore, interior focused travel from the Saint John River to the Eel River and then into the St. Croix River headwaters probably served to link culturally the people of the Saint John River with those living in the Quoddy Region for many millennia.

Previously I have hypothesized that the people of the upper stretches of the Penobscot River represented an interior riverine and lacustrine population, distinct from those adapted to the littoral zone of Maine (Sanger 1996a, 1996b, 2003). Penobscot River people routinely traveled east by The Maliseet Trail - up the Penobscot River to the Mattawamkeag and Baskahegan rivers, and then into the St. Croix headwaters, via the historically well-known canoe and portage routes (Figure 10) (Cook 2007: 82; Ganong 1899). From there, travelers could journey south to the Quoddy Region, or continue east to the Saint John River, by the Eel River and then to the historic village of Meductic. Other riverine routes linked the Quoddy Region to the lower Saint John River Valley from the Magaguadavic River, and from the St. Croix watershed into the Machias River (Cook 2007; Ganong 1899). These web-like connectors, so well known from the European period, may be discerned archaeologically in the



Terminal Archaic period through the distribution of lithics such as Tobique River rhyolite and Munsungan Lake chert from the Saint John River, into the St. Croix River headwaters, and then into the Quoddy Region.

The period immediately prior to the introduction of ceramics into the Mari- time Peninsula region has proved problematic for archaeologists. In part this is due to a very uneven database in which large areas have little to no representa- tion. As the record improves it looks more and more likely that there was no major occupational hiatus, or Little Gap. It was also a period in which cultural ideas emanating from outside the Maritime Peninsula strongly affect our interpretations. Some of the external influences may have impacted local cultures, and others may not. The approach advocated in this article is to examine in detail localized cultural expressions in an attempt to discern how they integrated both local and extra-local constituents. Only following this step can we hope to assess the role of Terminal Archaic cultures in the evolution of the subsequent Ceramic or Maritime Woodland cultures. The latter constituted the cultural bases for the historic Peskotomuhkati and Wolastoqiyik First Nations.

Acknowledgements. The National Museum of Civilization, the Province of New Bruns- wick, and the University of Maine with financial backing from a variety of funding sources, especially the National Science Foundation, supported my early research in the Quoddy Region. I am grateful for many discussions and suggestions from my geology and biology colleagues at the University of Maine, including Harold Borns Jr., Daniel Belknap (who also provided Figure 3), and George Jacobson Jr. Specimen and document loans from the Robert S. Peabody Museum


and the Abbe Museum made it possible to analyze the Eastport site and Cobscook Bay collections. The University of Maine, Farmington, and Michael Brigham kindly provided Figure 7. I am also grateful for the cartography of Michael Hermann with the University of Maine's Canadian-American Center (Figures 1, 2 and 10), and the artifact photography of Stephen A. Bicknell, also of the University of Maine. Brian Robinson, University of Maine, assisted with Figures 9 and 1 1 : the latter is used with permission of the journal Northeast Anthropology. This

paper profited from discussions with Michael

Brigham, Adrian Burke, C. Drew Gilbert, and Steven Cox, who also read an earlier version. I am especially grateful for the thoughtful suggestions of three reviewers and the editor. Adrian Burke and Roland Tremblay kindly translated the abstract into French.

NOTES 1. In keeping with regional tradition,

site radiocarbon dates have not been calibrated to calendar years, with the exception of Figure 3 where the marine reservoir effect is also included in the calendar year calibration.

2. Although some marine biologists use "littoral" as a noun to refer specifically to the intertidal zone (e.g., Thomas et al 1983), in this paper I used littoral as an adjective and the more general meaning of, "of, on, or along the shore" (New Webster's Dictionary) .

3. The unique State of Maine site num- bering system for pre-European sites uses an arbitrarily numbered USGS 15 minute map followed by a sequential site number within the quadrangle.

4. In Canada the official spelling is Spednic: in Maine it is Spednik Lake.

5. The eastern distribution of the now extinct mustelid Mustela macrodon (sea mink) apparently terminates with




36 • SANGER

the Machias Bay area, which suggests the coastline between here and the Quoddy Region was also undesirable for this littoral zone adapted species. The presence of one or possibly two specimens from the Weir site, Passa- maquoddy Bay has been interpreted as part of an exchange network (Blacks al. 1998).

REFERENCES CITED

Anonymous 2007 Coast Pilot 1. Office of Coast Sur- vey, NOAA, Silver Spring, MD.

Bailey, A. G. 1937 The Conflict of European and East- ern Algonkin Cultures, 1504-1700. 2nd Edition, University of Toronto Press, Toronto.

Barbián, L.T., and A.L. Magennis 1995 The Human Burials from Turn- er Farm. In Diversity and Complexity in Prehistoric Maritime Societies, edited by B.J. Bourque, pp. 317-335. Plenum Press, New York.

Barnhardt, W.A., W.R. Gehrels, D.F. Belknap, andJ.T. Kelley 1995 Late Quaternary Relative Sea- Level Change in the Western Gulf of Maine: Evidence for a Migrating Glacial Forebulge. Geology 23(9): 317-320.

Belknap, D.F. 1995 Appendix 5: Geoarchaeology in Central Coastal Maine. In Diversity and Complexity in Prehistoric Maritime Societies, edited by B.J. Bourque, pp. 275-296. Plenum Press, New York.

Belknap, D.F., A.M.Gontz, and J.T. Kelley

2005 Calibrating and Updating the Maine Relative Sea-Level Curve in a Search for Regional Variations in

Crustal Responses. Geological Society of America, Abstracts 37(1): 6.

Black, D.W. 1992 Living Close to the Ledge: Prehis- toric Human Ecology of the Bliss Islands, Quoddy Region, New Brunswick, Canada. Occasional Papers in Northeastern Archaeology, # 6. Copetown Press, Dundas, ON.

1996 A Native Artifact from the Ocean Floor near Indian Island. Field Notes 3(2): 5-7.

2000 Rum Beach and the Susquehan- na Tradition in the Quoddy Region, Charlotte County, New Brunswick. Canadian Journal of Archaeology 24: 89-105.

2002 Out of the Blue and into the Black: The Middle-Late Maritime Woodland Transition in the Quoddy Region, New Brunswick, Canada. In Northeast Subsistence-Settlement Change: A.D. 700-1300, edited byJ.R. Hart and C.B. Reith, pp. 301-320. Bul- letin 496, New York State Museum, Albany, NY.

Black, D.W., J.E. Reading, and H.G.Savage 1998 Archaeological Records of the Extinct Sea Mink, Mustela macrodon (Carnivora: Mustelidae), from Cana- da. Canadian Field Naturalist 112(1): 45-49.

Black, D.W., and L. A. Wilson 1999 The Washademoak Lake Chert Source, Queens County, New Bruns- wick, Canada. Archaeology of Eastern North America 27: 81-108.

Blair, S.E. 2004 Ancient Wolastoq'kew Land- scapes: Settlement and Technology in the Lower Saint John River Valley, Canada. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of





Anthropology, University of Toronto, Toronto. ProQuest Information and Learning Co., Ann Arbor.

Bonnichsen, R., and D. Sänger 1977 Integrating Faunal Analysis. Cana- dian Journal of Archaeology 1: 109-133.

Borstel, C. L. 1982 Archaeological Investigations at the Young Site, Alton, Maine. Occasional Publications in Maine Archaeology, No. 2. Maine Historic Preservation Commission, Augusta, Maine.

Bourque, B.J. 1992 Prehistory of the Central Maine Coast. Routledge: Garland Reference Library of the Humanities, No. 5, New York.

1995 Diversity and Complexity in Prehis- toric Maritime Societies. Plenum Press, New York.

2000 Radiocarbon Dating and the Little Gap. Paper presented at the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Canadian Archaeological Association, Ottawa.

2001 Twelve Thousand Years: American Indians in Maine. University of Nebras- ka Press, Lincoln.

Bourque, B.J., S.L. Cox, and R. E. Lewis 2006 The Archaic Period of the Merrymeeting Bay Region, South Central Maine. In The Archaic of the Far Northeast, edited by D. Sänger and M.A.P. Renouf, pp. 307-340. Univer- sity of Maine Press, Orono.

Bourque, B.J., and R.H. Whitehead 1985 Tarrentines and the Introduction of European Trade Goods in the Gulf of Maine. Ethnohistory 32(4): 327-341.

Brigham, M.S., R.N. Bartone, J.A. Reed, and E. Cowie

2001 Introduction to the Archaeo- logical Phase III Excavations at

NTOLONAPEMK, the Eastern Sur- plus Company Superfund Site, 96.02. The Maine Archaeological Society Bulletin 41(2): 27-39.

Brigham, M.S., E.R. Cowie, R.N. Bartone, S.R. Scharoun, R.A. Cyr, and J.A. Reed 2006 The Archaeology of N'tolonapemk (96.02 ME) "Our Ancestor's Place": Phase III Data Recovery at the Eastern Surplus Superfund Site, Meddybemps, Washington County, Maine. Report on file at the Maine Historic Preservation Commis- sion, Augusta.

Burke, A. L. 2000 Lithic Procurement and the Ceramic Period Occupation of the Interior of the Maritimes Peninsula. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, State University of New York: Albany. University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor.

2006 Stone Tool Raw Materials and Sources of the Archaic Period in the Northeast. In The Archaic of the Far Northeast, edited by D. Sänger and M.A.P. Renouf, pp. 409-436. Univer- sity of Maine Press, Orono.

Burley, D. 1983 Cultural Complexity and Evolu- tion in the Development of Coastal Adaptations Among the Micmac and Coast Salish. In Evolution of Maritime Cultures on the Northeast and Northwest Coasts of North America, edited by R. Nash, pp. 157-172. Simon Fraser University, Department of Archaeol- ogy Publication 11, Burnaby, BC.

Byers, D.S. 1959 The Eastern Archaic: Some Problems and Hypotheses. American Antiquity 24(3): 233-256.

Champlain, S. 1922 The Voyages of the Sieure de




38 • SANGER

Champlain. In The Works of Samuel de Champlain, edited by H. Biggar, pp. 204-469 [1613]. Translated by W.F. Ganong. Vol. I. The Champlain Society, Toronto.

Cook, D.S. 2007 Above the Gravel Bar. 3rd ed. Polar Bear and Company, Solon, Maine.

Cox, S.L. 1991 Site 95.20 and the Vergennes Phase in Maine. Archaeology of Eastern North America 19: 135-161.

2000 An Early Contact Native Site on the Upper St. Croix River. The Maine Archaeological Society Bulletin 40(2): 1-10.

Cross, J.R. 1990 Specialized Production in Non-Strat- ified Society: An Example from the Late Archaic of the Northeast. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

1993 Craft Specialization in Nonstrat- ified Societies. Research in Economic Anthropology 14: 61-84.

Crotts, A. L. 1984 Pattern and Variation in Prehistoric Lithic Resource Exploitation in the Passa- maquoddy Bay Region, Charlotte County, New Brunswick Unpublished M.A. thesis, Institute for Quaternary Studies, University of Maine, Orono.

Davis, S.A. 1978 Teachers Cove: A Prehistoric Site on Passamaquoddy Bay. New Bruns- wick Archaeology, Series 1. Historic Resources Administration, Frederic- ton, New Brunswick.

Deal, M. 1986 Late Archaic and Ceramic Period Utilization of the Mud Lake Stream Site, Southwestern New Bruns- wick. Man in the Northeast 32: 67-94.

Deal, M., D. Rutherford, B.M. Murphy, and S. Buchanan 2006 Rethinking the Archaic Sequence for the Maritime Provinces. In The Archaic of the Far Northeast, edited by D. Sänger and M.A.P. Renouf, pp. 253-283. University of Maine Press, Orono.

Dincauze, D.F. 1968 Cremation Cemeteries in Eastern Massachusetts. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnol- ogy, Vol. 59, No. 1. Peabody Museum, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mas- sachusetts.

1972 The Atlantic Phase: A Late Archaic Culture in Massachusetts. Man in the Northeast 4: 40-61.

Dorion, C.C., and A.C. Dieffenbacher- Krall 2006 The Holocene Paleohydrol- ogy of Meddybemps Lake, Eastern Maine, USA. In The Archaeology of N'tolonapemk (96.02 ME)

u Our Ances- tors Place": Phase III Data Recovery at the Eastern Surplus Superfund Site, Meddybemps, Washington County, Maine. Appendix II, edited by M. Brigham, E. R. Cowie, R. N. Bar- tone, S.R. Scharoun, R.A. Cyr, and J. A. Reed, pp. 479-535. Report on File, Maine Historic Preservation Commission, Augusta.

Erickson, V. O. 1978 Maliseet-Passamaquoddy. In Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 15, edited by B.G. Trigger, pp. 123-136. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Ganong, W. F. 1899 A Monograph of Historic Sites in the Province of New Brunswick. In Transactions of the Royal Society of Cana- da, Section 1, pp. 213-349. Toronto.





Gilbert, CD. 2007 The Archaeology of the Deer Island Point Site, Charlotte County, New Brunswick. Paper presented at the 40th Annual Meeting of the Canadian Archaeological Association, St. John's, Newfoundland.

Gilbert, CD., P.M. Gamblin, and D.W. Black 2007 The Usual Suspects: Exotic Toolstones from Quoddy Region Assemblages. Poster presented at the 40th Annual Meeting of the Canadian Archaeological Association, St. John's, Newfoundland.

Goddard, I. 1978 Eastern Algonquian Languages. In Handbook of North American Indians- -Northeast, edited by B. G. Trigger, pp. 70-77. Vol. 15. Smithsonian Insti- tution, Washington, D.C

Hammon, D. 1984 A Ceramic Period Coastal Adapta- tion at Holt's Point, New Brunswick Unpublished M.A. thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton.

Hiñes, H.R. 1983 The Coastal Forest of the Pas- samaquoddy Bay Area. In Marine and Coastal Systems of the Quoddy Region, New Brunswick, edited by M. L. Thomas, pp. 269-276. Cana- dian Special Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 64, Depart- ment of Fisheries and Oceans, Ottawa.

Hoffman, B. G. 1 955 The Historical Ethnography of the Micmac of the 16th and 17th Centuries. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Califor- nia at Berkley. University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor.

Kellogg, D.C 1987 Statistical Relevance and Site Locational Data. American Antiquity 52(1): 143-150.

1995 How has Coastal Erosion Affect- ed the Prehistoric Settlement Pattern of the Boothbay Region of Maine? Geoarchaeology: An International Journal 10: 65-83.

Kingsbury, I. W., and W.S. Hadlock 1951 An Early Occupation Site, Eastport, Maine. Bulletin of the Mas- sachusetts Archaeological Society, XII (2): 22-26.

Kopec, D. 1985 The Eddie Brown Collection of the West Grand Lake Area, Maine. Maine Archaeological Society Bulletin 25(2): 3-37.

LeClercq, C 1910 New Relation of Gaspesia, with the Customs and Religion of the Gaspesian Indians. Translated by W. F. Ganong. The Champlain Society, Toronto.

MacDonald, G.F. 1968 Debert: A Palaeo-Indian Site in Central Nova Scotia. National Museum of Canada, Ottawa.

Mack, K.E., D. Sänger, and A.R. Kelley 2002 The Bob Site: A Multicomponent Archaic and Ceramic Period Site on Push- aw Stream, Maine. Occasional Publica- tions in Maine Archaeology, No. 12. Maine Historic Preservation Commis- sion, Augusta, Maine.

McMahonJ.S. 1990 The Biophysical Regions of Maine: Patterns in the Landscape and Vegetation. Unpublished M.Sc. thesis, Department of Botany, University of Maine, Orono.

Moorehead,W.K. 1922 A Report on the Archaeology of Maine. Andover Press, Andover.




40 • SANGER

Petersen,J.B. 1995 Preceramic Archaeological Manifestations in the Far North- east: A Review of Current Research. Archaeology of Eastern North America 23: 207-230.

Petersen, J.B., and D. Sänger 1991 An Aboriginal Ceramic Sequence for Maine and the Maritime Provinces. In Prehistoric Archaeology in the Maritime Provinces: Past and Pres- ent Research, edited by M. Deal and S. Blair, pp. 113-170. Council of Mari- time Premiers, Fredericton.

Quinn, D.B. 1981 Sources for the Ethnography of Northeastern North America to 1611. National Museum of Man Mercury Series, Canadian Ethnology Paper No. 76, National Museums of Canada, Ottawa.

Ritchie, W. A. 1971 A Typology and Nomenclature for New York Projectile Points. The New York State Museum and Science Service, Bulletin No. 384. State University of New York, Albany.

Robinson, B. S. 1996 A Regional Analysis of the Moorehead Burial Tradition: 8500-3700 B.P. Archaeology of Eastern North America 24: 95-148.

2001 Burial Ritual, Groups, and Boundaries on the Gulf of Maine: 8600-3800 B.P Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Brown University, Providence.

2006 Burial Ritual, Technology, and Cultural Landscape in the Far North- east 8600-3700 B.P. In Archaic of the Far Northeast, edited by D. Sänger and M.A.P. Renouf, pp. 341-381. University of Maine Press, Orono, Maine.

Rutherford, D. 1991 The Ceramic Period in New Brunswick. In Prehistoric Archaeology in the Maritime Provinces: Past and Present Research, edited by M. Deal and S. Blair, pp. 109-119. Reports in Archaeology. Maritime Council of Premiers, Fredericton.

Salisbury, N 1982 Manitou and Providence: Indi- ans, Europeans and the Making of New England. Oxford University Press, New York.

Sänger, D. 1970 Mid-Latitude Core and Blade Traditions, Arctic Anthropology, VII (2): 106-114.

1971a Deadman's Pool- A Tobique Complex Site in Northern New Bruns- wick. Man in the Northeast 2: 5-22.

1971b Prehistory of Passamaquoddy Bay: A Summary. Maine Archaeological Society Bulletin 11(2): 14-19.

1973 Cow Point: An Archaic Cemetery in New Brunswick. Mercury Series, No. 12. Archaeological Survey of Canada, National Museum of Man, Ottawa.

1975 Culture Change as an Adap- tive Process in the Maine Maritimes Region. Arctic Anthropology 12(2): 60-75.

1982 Changing Views of Aboriginal Seasonality and Settlement in the Gulf of Maine. Canadian Journal of Anthropology 2(2): 195-203.

1986 An Introduction to the Prehisto- ry of the Passamaquoddy Bay Region. American Review of Canadian Studies 16(2): 139-159. 1987 The Carson Site and the Late Ceramic Period in Passamaquoddy Bay, New Brunswick. Mercury Series,





No. 135. Archaeological Survey of Canada, National Museum of Canada, Ottawa.

1988 Maritime Adaptations in the Gulf of Maine. Archaeology of Eastern North America 16: 81-99.

1996a Testing the Models: Hunter- gatherer Use of Space in the Gulf of Maine, USA. World Archaeology 27: 512-526. 1996b An Analysis of Seasonal Tran- shumance Models for pre-European State of Maine. Review of Archaeology 17(1): 54-58.

2003 Who Lived in Pre-European Maine?: A Cosmology Approach to Social Patterning on the Landscape. Northeast Anthropology 66: 29-39.

2005a Pre-European Dawnland: Archaeology of the Maritime Penin- sula. In New England and the Maritime Provinces: Connections and Comparisons, edited by S.J. Hornsby andJ.G. Reid, pp. 15-31. McGill-Queen's University Press, Montreal.

2005b The Contributions of Wen- dell S. Hadlock to the Pre-European Archaeology of Maine. The Maine Archaeological Society Bulletin 45(2): 1-22.

2006 An Introduction to the Archaic of the Maritime Peninsula: The View from Central Maine. In The Archaic of the Far Northeast, edited by D. Sänger and M.A. P. Renouf, pp. 221-252. University of Maine Press, Orono.

Sänger, D., H. Almquist, and A. Diffenbacher-Krall 2007 Mid-Holocene Cultural Adap- tations to Central Maine, USA. In Climate Change and Cultural Dynamics, edited by D. Anderson, D. Sandweiss, and K. Maasch, pp. 435-456. Academ- ic Press, San Diego.

Sänger, D., and T. Chase 1983 An Introduction to the Archae- ology of the Roque Island Group, Maine. Paper presented at the 16th Annual Meeting of the Canadian Archaeological Association, Halifax.

Sänger, D., R.B. Davis, R.G. MacKay, and H.W.Borns, Jr. 1977 The Hirundo Archaeological Project-An Interdisciplinary Approach to Central Maine Prehistory. In Amerinds and their Paleoenvironments in Northeastern North America, edited by W. B. Newman and B. Salwen, pp. 457-471. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Vol. 288. New York Academy of Sciences, New York.

Sanger, D., and D.C. Kellogg 1989 Prehistoric Archaeology and Evidence of Coastal Subsidence of the Coast of Maine. In Neotectonics of Maine, edited by W. A. Anderson and H.W. Borns, pp. 107-126. Bulletin 40, Maine Geological Survey, Augusta, Maine.

Schauffler, M., and G.L. Jacobson, Jr. 2002 Persistence of Coastal Spruce Refugia during the Holocene in Northern New England, USA, Detect- ed by Stand-Scale Pollen Stratigra- phies. Journal of Ecology 90: 235-250.

Shipp, R.C., S.A. Staples, and L.G.Ward 1987 Controls and Zonation of Geo- morphology along a Glaciated Coast, Gouldsboro Bay, Maine. In Glaciated Coasts, edited by D. M. FitzGerald and P.S. Rosen, pp. 210-231. Academic Press, San Diego.

Spiess, A.E., and M. Hedden 2000 Susquehanna Tradition Activ- ity Areas at the Waterville-Winslow Bridge. Maine Archaeological Society Bul- letin 40(1): 23-54.




42 • SANGER

Spiess, A. E., and R.A. Lewis 2001 The Turner Farm Fauna. Occa- sional Publications in Maine Archae- ology, No. 11. The Maine Historic Preservation Commission and Maine Archaeological Society, Augusta.

Spiess, A.E., andJ.B. Petersen 2000 End of the Susquehanna Tradi- tion circa 3000 B.P. in Maine. Paper presented at the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Canadian Archaeological Asso- ciation, Ottawa.

Stewart, F. L. 1989 Seasonal Movements of Indians in Acadia as Evidenced by Historical Documents and Vertebrate Faunal Remains from Archaeological Sites. Man in the Northeast 38: 55-77.

Suttie, B. 2007 A Contribution to the Archaic Period in Southwestern New Brunswick. Occasional Papers in Northeastern Archaeology, No. 16. Copetown Press, St. John's.

Taché, K. 2005 Explaining Vinette I Pottery: The View from the Batiscan Site, Québec. Canadian Journal ofArchaeoIr ogy 29(2): 165-233.

Thomas, M.L., D.C. Arnold, and A. R. Taylor 1983 Rocky Intertidal Communities. In Marine and Coastal Systems of the Quoddy Region, New Brunswick, Vol. 64, edited by M.L.H. Thomas, pp. 35-73. Canadian Special Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Ottawa.

Tuck, J. A. 1984 Maritime Provinces Prehistory. Canadian Prehistory Series. National Museums of Canada, Ottawa.

Turnbull, C.J., and P.M. Allen 1988 Review of Maritime Provinces Pre- history by James Tuck. Canadian Jour- nal of Archaeology 12: 250-260.

Wright, J.V. 1999 A History of the Native People of Canada: Volume II (1, 000 B. C- A.D. 500). Mercury Series, Archaeo- logical Survey of Canada, Paper 152. Canadian Museum of Civilization, Ottawa.

Manuscript received October 5, 2007. Final revision February 12, 2008


