Lattanzi 2007

Archaeology of Eastern North America (2007) 35:125-137

THE PROVENANCE OF PRE-CONTACT COPPER ARTIFACTS:SOCIAL COMPLEXITY AND TRADE IN THE DELAWARE VALLEY

Gregory D. Lattanzi

In order to examine and define exchange networks in any given area, artifacts involved intrade must be chemically characterized to determine their source. Beginning with the Late Archaicperiod, copper artifacts appear in Delaware Valley region collections. Previous trade andexchange models explaining their presence in this region have not adequately defined or explainedthese models quantitatively. In order to test these exchange models an assemblage of Late Archaicto Early Woodland Delaware Valley copper artifacts were analyzed using laser ablation. Incomparing artifacts with known native copper sources from New Jersey, Pennsylvania and theMidwest probable provenance can be assigned. In “fingerprinting” copper artifacts withinarchaeological contexts from the Delaware Valley, it becomes possible to identify models of tradeand exchange and human social systems behind them. This paper attempts to explain types of tradeand the development of social complexity through a shift in copper exploitation in the DelawareValley and Middle Atlantic region.

INTRODUCTION

The Late Archaic and Early Woodland periods (5000 B.P. to 2500 B.P.) (Hantman and Gold 2002:274;Stewart 1995:186) in the Middle Atlantic region was a time of significant climate (Carbone 1976; Curry andCuster 1982) and cultural (Custer and Stewart 1982; Custer 1989; Gardner 1982; Stewart 2004) change.Native populations exhibited increased sedentism, scheduled settlement movements, made an increasedvariety of artifact classes, and participated in inter- and intra-regional trade and exchange networks (Custer1987, 1989; MacNeish 1971; Stewart 1995, 2003). Native groups living within circumscribed environmentslike the Delaware Valley operated within a formalized exchange network, trading both local and non-localitems with neighboring groups. As a result, rudimentary beginnings of social complexity were appearing inthe Early Woodland period throughout the Delaware Valley/Middle Atlantic region (Custer and Stewart 1982;Gardner 1982:74-77), which, by Late Woodland times had devolved, altered or remained egalitarian (Becker1995, 2006a, 2006b; Stewart 1982:27).

During the Early Woodland period in the Delaware Valley, relationships between emerging socialcomplexity and exchange systems are poorly understood. In order to examine and identify prehistoricexchange systems one must accurately identify and delineate source areas for a particular raw material byquantitative means (Goad 1976:17). Identifying the provenance of individual copper objects (from one ormultiple geologic sources) within a single site or burial during the Early Woodland period in the DelawareValley provides direct empirical evidence for trade and also may provide evidence for relatively complexsocial systems (Binford 1971; Saxe 1970). Previous explanations for the presence of copper artifacts on EarlyWoodland Delaware Valley sites had centered on the predominant trade model, invariably assuming that allcopper artifacts come from Michigan or other Midwest sources. This model implied a number of hypotheses,but the proponents never clearly articulated these ideas nor fully explored, evaluated or chemically tested thetheories. The first of these theories assumed that there was an influx of groups into this region carryingfinished copper artifacts with them (Ritchie 1944, 1980; Ritchie and Dragoo 1959). The second is thatceremonial leaders brought copper artifacts with them into the region (Dragoo 1963, 1976). The thirdhypothesis is the notion of resource-foray trips made out of the Delaware Valley by individuals or groupsspecifically for trade (on trading missions) into broad-based networks to obtain most of their exotic goods

126 Archaeology of Eastern North America

which they brought back (Stewart 1989, 2004). Pre-contact copper artifacts from the Delaware Valley orMiddle Atlantic region were not qualitatively analyzed to test these theories.

If artifacts are not from Michigan, but actually from more local sources, what does that say aboutprevious notions of the kind of exchange system in this region? If there is a shift in copper procurement overtime, and does that translate into archaeologically visible social signatures? Is this shift an adaptive responseby local socialized groups to regional cultural conditions of information and exchange networks? Do thesesignatures imply some type of social inequality among Delaware Valley peoples? This paper reports on apilot study carried out to test these assumptions, consisting of 10 pre-contact copper artifacts from burial(ornamental) and non-burial (utilitarian) contexts dating from the Late Archaic to Early Woodland periods.

GEOLOGIC SOURCES OF COPPER IN THE DELAWARE VALLEY REGION

Native copper ore deposits occur from the Carolinas up to Maine (Figure 1). However, depositsoccurring as veins that extend to the surface and run underground must be mined in order to extract the coppermineral. The ore must also occur with natural copper of sufficient purity to be cold worked. The DelawareValley, specifically New Jersey and Pennsylvania, contains some of the richest copper deposits on the EastCoast (Woodward 1944). Historical reports of massive copper boulders plowed up in fields are likelydescribing drift copper. One such report states that in 1789, Jedidiah Morse noted that “lumps of virgincopper weighing from 5 to 30 pounds and totaling 200 pounds were plowed up in a field on Phillip French’sfarm” in New Brunswick, New Jersey (Weiss and Weiss 1963:47). The sources of extractable copper andtheir exact locations within the Delaware Valley have been discussed elsewhere (Lattanzi and Veit 2006;Levine 1996, 2000; Rapp et al. 2000).

Prehistorically two forms of copper were available to native populations – exposed surface veins anddrift copper. The most utilized and familiar type of copper is that which occurs in Michigan in the KeewanawPeninsula, where prehistoric open pits or mines remain visible. These pits typically exploited surface veinsof copper. A thorough search of the literature shows no reported copper mines or open pits used by nativesin the Delaware Valley (Levine 1996). That brings us to the second kind of observable copper - drift copper.Drift or float copper comes in the form of nuggets, boulders or small pieces of whole copper transported byglaciers great distances from their original source or flow, and exploited hundreds of miles away. These formswould be easily transportable and workable. Drift copper would maintain trace elemental characterizationsimilar to the original flow source and thus be similar to the artifact made from that copper (Allert et al.1991). Recently, Halsey (2004:1) has presented the hypothesis that much of the copper employed byNortheast Native Americans came from glacial drift deposits rather than bedrock mining. This argument couldbe true, as glaciers covered the northern third of New Jersey and Pennsylvania during the Wisconsin Ice Age,and moraine deposits are common (Widmer 1964:127-131). It is suggested that drift copper was easilyavailable to native inhabitants in the Middle Atlantic region prior to European contact. Since drift copperdeposits may not now be available for testing, unless they are museum samples, one must rely on samplesfrom mines or veins to provide samples used in most characterization studies. The results of testing samplestaken from drift and vein copper will only tell you whether the trace elements of an artifact are similar to thatsource flow. Trace elements do vary within the same ore body; however, they show significant chemicalcharacteristics for artifact identifications (Allert et al.1991).

THE COPPER DEBATE

Archaeologists have been debating the origins of copper artifacts found in the Delaware Valley for wellover a hundred years (Abbott 1881:411-422, 1885; Cross 1956:121-122; Carpenter 1950; Kraft 1996, 2001;Mounier 2003; Ritchie 1980; Thomas 1969, 1971; Skinner and Schrabisch 1913:29-30; Schrabisch 1917:45;

Provenance of Pre-Contact Copper Artifacts 127

Figure 1. Middle Atlantic Region and beyond showing copper sources(not including drift copper). (From Ross 1935:152, Figure 12.)

Stewart 1989; Williams and Thomas1982:148). The debate centers on thequestion whether all pre-contact copperartifacts found in the region originatefrom the Midwest, or derive from morelocal sources (Abbott 1881, 1885;Decker 1942; Juet 1959; Levine 1996,2000; MacCord 2005; Nelson 1893;Williams et al. 1982; Weld 1807). Assuch, hypotheses were developed toaccount for copper’s presence in theregion, but not the human socialsystems behind it.

Ritchie proposed one of the firsthypotheses to account for the presenceof copper artifacts in the Northeast(Ritchie 1944:324; 1980:202-204;Ritchie and Dragoo 1959). He statedthat the copper found in the Northeastwas brought into the region by Adenapeoples migrating in from theMidwest, taking their goods and burialtraditions with them (Ritchie 1944,1980; Ritchie and Dragoo 1959).Dragoo (1963:287) further notes thatthose Adena/Middlesex “sites in Maryland and Delaware appear to be excellent examples of the presence ofceremonial leaders who gathered their prized possessions and burial traditions when they moved from theOhio Valley (italics added). Later, Kraft (1986:98-104) agreed with this paradigm, noting that althoughcopper deposits exist in New Jersey, they were too poor to be used for the artifacts found within the state(Kraft 2001; Yolton 1984) and that copper found on sites in New Jersey and Pennsylvania must have beenbrought in from Michigan.

Griffin (1961), Thomas (1969, 1971, 1976) and Mounier (1983, 2003) proposed alternative hypothesesabout Adena manifestations in the Northeast. They state that copper and other Adena artifacts and mortuaryrituals were the result of a formalized extensive trading system between the regions that began in the Archaicperiod, rather than a movement of actual groups or individuals into the Northeast. Griffin (1961:573) arguedthat Ritchie and Dragoo did not adequately consider the mechanisms of trade and diffusion. Concerning thelist of Adena-Middlesex traits proposed by Ritchie and Dragoo, a lack of a consistent burial complex becomesclear. According to Griffin (1961:572), this would be what one might expect “if the Middlesex complex wascomposed of several discrete entities separated both geographically and temporally.” It appears that all ofthe Adena traits, artifacts and customs still find themselves in the east, possibly as part of a large trade orexchange network with the Midwest. Additionally, Stewart (1989, 1994, 2004) suggests thatindividuals/entrepreneurs or small groups from the Middle Atlantic would conduct foray trips within broad-based networks to obtain goods, bring them back and hoard them. Focused networks are linked with nascentcomplex societies, where these exotic goods end up in burials or other special contexts (Stewart 2004:342).Like the other hypotheses, Stewart (2004:343-4) sees a cultural mix between Adena and Hopewell traits tothe east, and again artifacts with probable Midwestern origins. Most authors agree that long distance tradepatterns established in the Archaic period continued well into the Woodland period (Pleger 2000).

Recent studies have suggested that copper artifacts from Early Woodland sites are not likely to havecome from the Midwest, but from more local sources. Provenance studies taken up by Levine (1996) for the


Northeast, Hurst and Larson (1958) and Goad (1978) for the Southeast, and initial results from Wellman(1994) for Vermont, support a local-source hypothesis. As will be explained below, these results areimportant for their impact upon earlier notions of Delaware Valley and Middle Atlantic trade and socialcomplexity.

PREVIOUS CHARACTERIZATION STUDIES

To answer questions posed by the models mentioned above about trade and social complexity requiresundertaking characterization studies on copper artifacts. There have only been two previous studies, each withat least two Delaware Valley pre-contact copper samples chemically tested. In these cases, both from NewJersey, copper artifacts are associated with burial contexts from sites dating to the Early Woodland Period:the Abbott Farm National Historic Landmark and the Rosenkrans Ferry site.

Linda Ann Britton (1967), a graduate student of Dorothy Cross, studied copper recovered from theAbbott Farm. In Excavation 2 (Pit 55), Burial 12 consisted of a number of partially cremated individualscovered with red ochre. Exotic artifacts from the burial consisted of a large biface blade made of white-colored Mistassini quartzite found only in the Colline Blanche area of Quebec, over 600 miles to the north(Stephen Loring, 2006 personal communication). Two copper gorgets, 1 copper boatstone, 1 copperhemispherical object, 1 copper disc and over 1,000 copper beads were also part of the assemblage (Cross1956: Plate 30). A typical Adena-like gorget was recovered during the unit clean up. Britton (1967:33) testedthe copper disk from Burial 12 at the Dow Chemical Company in Midland, Michigan using x-rayfluorescence, along with five samples of native copper from several source localities. The Abbott Farmcopper disc contained the same amount of silver (.01 ppm) as did the Michigan sample. The only other traceelement Britton (1967:35) recorded for the disc was iron (.06 ppm). Based on these results she determinedthat the Abbott Farm copper came from a Michigan source.

The late Herbert C. Kraft (1976:16) arranged for the study of an unknown number of copper “ring” beadsfrom Burials #2 and #5 from the Rosenkrans Ferry site. Mr. Henry Wemple, a metallurgist at General ElectricCompany Materials and Processes Laboratory in Syracuse, New York, subjected the beads to “spectroscopic,x-ray diffraction, and other tests” (Kraft 1996:22), along with two control samples of native copper, one piecefrom Michigan and one from Tennessee. The copper that came from Michigan contained 50pp thousand ofsilver (Ag) (Kraft 1996:23), which was the same amount of silver as in the beads from Rosenkrans. UnlikeBritton, Kraft did not publish the trace elemental data in his report.

METHODOLOGY

Elemental concentrations can be discerned at levels of 1-10ppt (parts per thousand) for traditional ICP-MS and down to ppm (parts per million), and a few tenths of ppb (parts per billion) using LA-ICP-MS(Gratuze 1999) offering comparable if not greater sensitivity. Laser ablation sampling is far less destructivethan Inductive Neutron Activation Analysis (INAA), and the pieces are still viable after testing (Levine 1996,Rapp et al. 2000). Laser ablation creates a crater that can range from 20 to 200µm in diameter depending onthe elements measured (Gratuze 1999:870). Damage to objects is minimal in areas of high visualization;therefore, museum specimens can be tested without easily noted change to even exposed areas. A FinniganMAT ELEMENT High Resolution Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometer (ICP-MS) with aMerchantek (Nd-YAG) laser fitted with harmonic generators to yield outputs in the UV range suitable forgeologic samples was used (Jackson 2001:29). Using a National Institute of Standards and Technology copperstandard between slides increased precision on the samples (Bastian 1961:168). Using this copper standardand running a gas blank through the machine between slides would correct any instrumental drift thatsometimes occurs while running multiple slides (Gratuze 1999:873). Six samples were adhered to a single


Table 1. Copper artifacts used in ICP-MS study.

Specimen Catalogue # Description Weight Time Period Source Site/Location1 IL2004.5.585 Celt 560.6g Late Archaic

Early WoodlandPhilhowerCollection

Shawnee, Monroe Co., PA

2 IL2004.5.720 Spearhead 98.3g Late ArchaicEarly Woodland

PhilhowerCollection

Stowe Creek, Salem Co., NJ

3 IL2004.5.721 Spearhead 27.1g Late ArchaicEarly Woodland

PhilhowerCollection

Frenchtown, Hunterdon Co., NJ

4 AE472.57104 Copper pressureflaker/awl

24.3g Early Woodland Cross 1956,Fig. 3, No. 5

Abbott Farm, Mercer Co., NJ

5 AE472.53016 copper tube beadwith 2 endperforations

1.8g Late ArchaicEarly Woodland

Cross 1956,Fig. 3, No. 4

Abbott Farm, Mercer Co., NJ

6 AE472.6194 Bead .2g Early Woodland Cross 1956,Plate 30,b

Abbott Farm,Mercer Co., NJ

7 AE544.19462 Copper tube bead 4.2g Early Woodland Gleason andDumont

Rosenkrans SussexCo., NJ

8 AE544.19463 Copper short tubebead

2.5g Early Woodland Gleason andDumont


9 & 10 AE544.19464 2 copper “ring”beads fusedtogether

7.9g Early Woodland Gleason andDumont


slide; while larger samples (e.g., beads) were placed in the machine whole. A discussion of the methodologyfor sample removal has been published (Lattanzi and Veit 2006). Data on 10 elements were generated. Themajor trace elements that would prove to be most productive for determining the geologic source of nativecopper to compare with artifact samples are silver (Ag), zinc (Zn), arsenic (As), antimony (Sb), lanthenum(La), tungstun (W), gold (Au), mercury (Hg), chromium (Cr), and iron (Fe).

ARTIFACTS

Ten copper artifacts (Table 1) from five archaeological site locations (four in New Jersey and one inPennsylvania) were sent to the Materials Characterization Laboratory at The Pennsylvania State Universityfor analysis. All of the specimens are housed at the New Jersey State Museum, Bureau of Archaeology &Ethnology. It is worth noting the provenance of some of the specimens used in this study. While using onlyprofessionally excavated archaeological objects would have been preferable, the current lack of copperartifacts from controlled contexts in New Jersey necessitated the use of avocationally excavated and collectedfinds (see also Veit et al. 2004). Given that the focus of this paper is on copper sourcing and trade, the site-level provenience available for these artifacts, while not optimal, is sufficient for this type of analysis.

Mr. Charles A. Philhower of Westfield, New Jersey collected Specimens 1 through 3. An avid collector,Mr. Philhower amassed a large collection of archaeological and ethnographic objects. Most of his collectionhas notes as to provenance; however, no exact information was available for these three specimens. Specimen1 is described as a spear point of the Old Copper Culture (Late Archaic period), recovered along Stowe Creekin Salem County, southern New Jersey. Specimen 2 is described as a spear point of the Old Copper Culture(Late Archaic period), recovered from Frenchtown in Hunterdon County, northern New Jersey. Specimen3 is described as a copper axe head (or celt) of the Old Copper Culture (Late Archaic period), found near thetown of Shawnee in Pennsylvania along the Delaware River.


The following artifacts come from the New Jersey State Museum excavations at the Abbott Farm siteunder the direction of Dr. Dorothy Cross. Specimen 4 was first described as a tube bead tapered at both ends,then later as an awl. I would reassign this artifact as a pressure flaking tool, due to clear mushrooming at theone end. Recovered from the Abbott Farm site from Excavation 12 in 1939 (Cross 1956:27, 122-123), thispiece measures approximately 94 mm in length and 9 mm in diameter at the center tapering to 5 mm at eachend (Cross 1956:122-123). This artifact was found at a depth of 28 inches below ground surface. Artifactsalso recovered from this same level in association with this artifact were one Bare Island point, and the baseof an Orient Fishtail projectile point.

Specimen 5, recovered from Excavation 14 at the Abbott Farm site, is a cylindrical rolled tube bead withtwo perforations at either end (Cross 1956:122, Figure 3, No.4). Two additional beads (Cross 1956:122,Figure 3, No. 2 & 3) were found along with Specimen 5 within the same level, a few feet of each other. Thisartifact was recovered at a depth of 28 inches below ground surface. Three diagnostic argillite projectilepoints were excavated along with this specimen. The first two argillite pieces described as triangle points haveheavily worked bases, and the third could possibly be a Bare Island point. Late Archaic-Early Woodlandtriangles from the Delaware Valley are adequately discussed in Stewart and Cavallo (1998) and Katz (2000).A Late Archaic-Early Woodland spear point and two additional rolled copper tube beads were also recoveredfrom the same level. Based on the association of the lithic typology, the copper bead is tentatively assignedto the Early Woodland period. This specimen is still being researched as to its correct provenance based onthe possible evidence of mixing of early and late prehistoric archaeological components in near-surface soilsas mentioned by Stewart (1983:35, 43). Cross (1956:122) even alluded to the possibility that this and theother two other beads were made of sheet copper by whites and later fashioned into beads by the natives.Specimen 6 is a small round bead from Burial 12, Excavation 2 at the Abbott Farm. As mentioned above, thisbead is part of over 1,000 additional beads, 2 gorgets and 1 boatstone excavated from a cremated burial saidto include one adult female, one adult male, and an infant. The artifact measures 3.5 mm in diameter by .4mm high.

The remaining four specimens (7-10) are from the Rosenkrans Ferry site, excavated in the summer of1945 by Kenneth Gleason and Gustave Dumont (Cross 1945:4-5). All of these artifacts were recovered fromBurial #2, a child’s cremation burial (Kraft 1976:16). Additional artifacts from this pit were a jasper arrowpoint and a chalcedony drill, and cord-marked potsherds (Cross 1945:5). Specimen 7, from the RosenkransFerry Site is a cylindrical rolled tube bead with hollow ends, attributed to the Early Woodland period. Itmeasures 5.3 cm in length by 5 mm in thickness measured in the middle. This specimen appears very similarto the tube bead listed above “C”, cited in Kraft (1976:17, Figure 3). Specimen 8 is a cylinder rolled beadcapped at each end and flattened on the sides. It measures 2.6 cm in length by .75 mm in thickness measuredin the middle. This artifact also appears similar to the far right bead in the middle row above E cited in Kraft(1976:17, Figure 3). Specimens 9 and 10 are two large flat ribbons of sheet copper rolled up into balls (.8 cmacross, .4 for each bead). They are thick in the middle and hammered at the ends that overlap each other. Thebeads are fused together side by side due to oxidation, but identified for individual testing. These beadsresemble the “ring” beads as cited in Kraft (1976:17, Figure 3, a) from Burial #2, and may have been testedby him.

ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

The results of the laser ablation sampling were examined in Microsoft Excel format, and then transferredto SPSS statistical software programs for analysis. Using the normalization formula described in Rapp et al.(2000:64), a canonical discriminate analysis was performed to test for similarity in element compositionbetween the copper artifacts and native copper (180 specimens) from New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Midwestsources. These samples were also tested using the same instrument and copper standard in order to maintaincontrol over the data output. Matthew McKnight of Penn State University provided the data for geologicalspecimens used in this study as part of ongoing research collaboration into pre-contact copper studies.


Figure 2. Scatterplot discriminant function 1 by function 2 of source groups and artifacts.

Although the results are preliminary, a few patterns emerge. The artifacts appear closely related to eitherthe Franklin Mine (NJ) or the Cornwall Mine (PA) sources, or another source not accounted for in the dataset.Figure 2 is a scatterplot representing the discriminant function 1 plotted against discriminant function 2.Discriminate function 1 and function 2 account for 88.7 % of the variability in the dataset. The first twofunctions always are the most important variables in discriminant function analysis. Figure 2 displays thedata clumped into distinct copper regions – the Keweenaw sources, the Great Lakes area, Pennsylvania andNew Jersey source areas. Table 2 shows both the Eigenvalues and the Wilk’s Λ statistic for the first threediscriminant functions created through an analysis of 12 geologic sources. All of the data are presentedaccording to source location, 12 separate regions in all (Figure 3). From this graphical representation, theprovenance of most copper artifacts seems very distinct. Based on these graphs, it is clear that the chemicalcomposition of most artifacts are similar to those from more local sources (New Jersey and Pennsylvania)and not from the Midwest.

One interesting note concerns the two Old Copper Culture spear points (Specimens 1 and 2). Based onthe data in these figures, it appears that there is an unknown source for these two objects in the Great Lakesarea. This conclusion would agree with most research concerning Late Archaic utilitarian copper objectsoriginating from the Midwest region. The celt (Specimen 3) may date to the Early or Middle Woodland, basedon its close association to the Pennsylvania and New Jersey native geologic sources. This would agree withthe notion presented here that Late Archaic copper is from the Great Lakes area, while Early and MiddleWoodland copper artifacts are from more local sources. However, since no exact provenance on this objectexists, it is hard to be definitive. Another interesting note is the probable source for Specimen 5. The locationof the artifact on the scatterplot clearly shows little relation between this specimen and geologic sources. Thisspecimen may date to the Late Woodland or Contact period based on colluvium activity on the slope ofExcavation 14 (Stewart 1983). This specimen and the two found at the same level require additional research.A convincing argument against a Midwestern origin for the Early Woodland New Jersey material comes from


Figure 3. Scatterplot discriminant function 1 by function 2 of twelve geological sources and artifacts.

the Rosenkrans Ferry site. The elemental data from Specimens 7 through 10 place these object somewhereTable 2. Eigenvalues and Wilks' Λ for all sources included in canonical discriminate function analysis.

Function Eigenvalue

% of var.

Cumulative%

Canonical Cor.

Wilks’ Lambda

Chi-Square

df Sig.

1 4.341a 60.1 60.1 .902 .034 (1-3) 571.447 33 .0002 2.061a 28.6 88.7 .821 .180 (2-3) 289.137 20 .0003 .817a 11.3 100.0 .671 .550 (3) 100.620 9 .000

a First 3 canonical discriminate functions were used in the analysis.

between the New Jersey and Pennsylvania mine sources. This refutes Kraft’s assertion that the copper fromRosenkrans clearly came from Michigan (Kraft 1976: 42). It is interesting to note that Griffin (1961:573)interpreted the Rosenkrans Ferry copper artifacts as made entirely from local materials. He argued thatalthough there may appear a number of Adena traits at Rosenkrans and other Delmarva/Adena sites, oneshould not mistake a high percentage or number of similar traits/artifacts for groups of people migrating intothe region (Griffin 1961). Griffin also stated that one should not confuse this (Delmarva/Adena) burialcomplex with that of the Ohio Valley Adena.

CONCLUSIONS

This preliminary analysis showed that Early Woodland copper artifacts in the Delaware Valley appearto come from a non-Midwest source, suggesting a more focused pattern of local copper procurement,


manufacture, trade and exchange within the Delaware Valley. During the transition between the Late Archaicand the Early Woodland, the “transport of copper and other exotic materials is being focused toward specificlocations rather than randomly outward from the source” (Goad 1978:114). Pre-contact copper procurementstrategies were not static, suggesting that native populations procured raw material from distinct deposits(Levine 1996:198), including those that they knew locally. Additionally, these local copper artifacts findthemselves within burials along with exotic artifacts, improving our understanding of the development ofsocial complexity during Early Woodland period. To examine the dynamics of native group interactions overthe landscape and through time, more sourcing studies on Late Archaic to Early Woodland copper artifactsthroughout the Northeast should be performed. Pre-contact copper scholars must recognize “the importanceof native copper and its producers varied among indigenous groups over time and space” (Childs 1994:233).

During the Early Woodland period in the Delaware Valley, increased regional and cultural diversitywere greater than previously thought (Stewart 2003; Versaggi 1999). Whether or not the changes noted inthis study were responses to regional environmental changes, inter-group competition over resources, orincreased information and commodity exchange, the archaeological evidence of social inequality is there andwe, as archaeologists specializing in this region, should start examining and talking about the elephant in theroom.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would first like to thanks all the participants of the “Down in the Valley” session at the 2006 ESAFconference in Fitchburg, Mass., where this paper was presented. John Kittleson of Penn State University’s ICP-MSMaterials Characterization Laboratory Lab ran the samples. I would also like to thank R. Michael Stewart for hisdiscussion and comments as part of this session. Dr. Marshall Becker and R. Alan Mounier are thanked for theircomments on earlier versions of this paper. Any errors are, of course, my own.

REFERENCESAbbott, Charles C. 1881 Primitive Industry. George A. Black Publishers. Salem, Mass. 1885 Copper and Native Americans in New Jersey. The American Naturalist 19:774-777.Allert, James D., George R. Rapp, Vanda Vitali and Eiler Henrickson 1991 Trace-Element Variability of Native Copper within a Large Ore Body: The Kingston Mine, Michigan, USA.

Geoarchaeology: An International Journal 6(4):337-354.Becker, Marshall J. 1995 Lenape Maize Sales to the Swedish Colonists: Cultural Stability during the Early Colonial Period. Pages 121-

136 of, New Sweden in America, edited by Carol E. Hoffecker, Richard Waldron, Lorraine E. Williams, andBarbara E. Benson. Newark, Delaware: University of Delaware Press

2006a Foragers in Southern New England: Correlating Social Systems, Maize Production and Wampum Use. Bulletinof the Archaeological Society of Connecticut No. 68: 75-107.

2006b Anadromous Fish and the Lenape. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 76(2):28-40.Binford, Lewis R. 1962 Archaeology as Anthropology. American Antiquity 28(2):217-225. 1971 Mortuary practices: their study and their potential. In Approaches to the social dimensions of Mortuary

Practices, edited by J.A. Brown. Memoirs of the Society for American Archaeology 25:6-29.Britton, Linda Ann 1967 Copper and the Indians of New Jersey. Masters Thesis, Hunter College, the City University of New York.Carbone, Victor A. 1976 Environment and Prehistory in the Shenandoah Valley. Doctor of Philosophy, Catholic University. UMI

Dissertations Services, Michigan.


Carpenter, Edmund S. 1950 “Five Sites of the Intermediate Period”. American Antiquity, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp.298-314.Childs, S. Terry 1994 Native Copper Technology and Society in Eastern North America. In Archaeometry of pre-Columbian sites

and artifacts. Proceedings of a symposium organized by the UCLA Institute of Archaeology and the GettyConservation Institute, Los Angeles, California.

Cross, Dorothy 1945 A Cremation Burial. Newsletter of the Archaeological Society of New Jersey 14:4-5. 1956 The Archaeology of New Jersey. Vol. 2, The Abbott Farm. Archaeological Society of New Jersey and New

Jersey State Museum, Trenton, NJ. Curry, Dennis C. and Jay F. Custer 1982 Holocene Climatic change in the Middle Atlantic Area: Preliminary Observations from Archaeological Sites.

North American Archaeologist 3:275-285.Custer, Jay. F. 1987 Problems and Prospects in Northeastern Prehistoric Ceramics Studies. North American Archaeologist 8:97-123. 1989 Prehistoric Cultures of the Delmarva Peninsula: An Archaeological Study. University of Delaware Press,

Newark.Custer, Jay. F. and R. Michael Stewart 1982 Maritime Adaptations in the Middle Atlantic Region of Eastern North America. Paper presented for the

symposium “New World maritime Adaptations” at the 1983 meetings of the Society for AmericanArchaeology, Pittsburgh. PA.

Dragoo, Don W. 1963 Mounds for the Dead: An Analysis of the Adena Culture. Annals of the Carnegie Museum Volume 37.

Harrisburg. 1976 Adena and the Eastern Burial Cult. Archaeology of Eastern North America, Volume 4, pp. 1-9.Decker, Amelia Stickney 1942 That Ancient Trail (The Old Mine Road). Petty Printing Company, Trenton, New Jersey. Gardner, William M. 1982 Early and Middle Woodland in the Middle Atlantic: An Overview. In Practicing Environmental Archaeology:

Methods and Interpretations, edited by R. W. Moeller, pp. 39-52. American Indian Archaeological Institute,Occasional Paper 3, Washington, Connecticut.

Goad, Sharon I. 1976 Copper and the Southeast Indians. Early Georgia 4(1, 2):49-67. 1978 Exchange Networks in the Prehistoric Southeastern United States. Ann Arbor, Michigan. UMI Dissertation

Services, 1978. 1980 Chemical Analysis of Native Copper Artifacts From the Southeastern United States. Current Anthropology

21(2):270-271.Griffin, James B. 1961 Review: The Eastern Dispersal of Adena. American Antiquity 26(4):572-573. 1965 Hopewell and the Black Glass. The Michigan Archaeologist 11(3 & 4):115-155.Gratuze, B. 1999 Obsidian Characterization by Laser Ablation ICP-MS and its Application to Prehistoric Trade in the

Mediterranean and the New East: Sources and Distribution of Obsidian within the Aegean and Anatolia.Journal of Archaeological Science 26:869-881.

Halsey, John R. 2004 Copper From the Drift. Paper presented at the 50th Midwest Archaeological Conference and the 61st

Southeastern Archaeological Conference, St. Louis, Missouri, October 21.


Hantman, Jeffrey L. and Debra L. Gold 2002 The Woodland in the Middle Atlantic: Ranking and Dynamic Political Stability. In The Woodland Southeast,

edited by D. Anderson, G and J. Mainfort, Robert C., pp. 270-291. The University of Alabama Press,Tuscaloosa.

Hurst, Vernon J. and Lewis H. Larson 1958 On the Source of Copper at the Etowah Site, Georgia. American Antiquity 24(2):177-181.Jackson, Simon E. 2001 The Application of ND:Yag Lasers in LA-ICP-MS. In Laser-Ablation-ICPMS in the Earth Sciences, Principals

and Applications, edited by Paul Sylvester. Volume 29, St. John’s Newfoundland, Mineralogical Associationof Canada.

Juet, Robert 1959 Juet’s Journal, The Voyage of the Half Moon from 4 April to 7 November 1609. The New Jersey Historical

Society. Newark, New Jersey.Katz, Gregory 2000 Archaic Period Triangular Bifaces in the Middle Atlantic region: technological and Functional

Considerations. MA thesis, Department of Anthropology, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA.Kraft, Herbert C. 1976 The Rosenkrans Site, An Adena-Related Mortuary Complex in the Upper Delaware Valley, New Jersey.

Archaeology of Eastern North America. Volume 4, pp.9-50. 1996 The Dutch, the Indians, and the Quest for Copper. Seton Hall Museum, East Orange, NJ. 2001 The Lenape-Delaware Indian Heritage: 10,000 B.C.-A.D. 2000. Lenape Books, Elizabeth, NJ.Lattanzi, Gregory D. and Richard F. Veit 2006 Searching for the Source: Ancient Copper and Early Trade Networks in New Jersey. Paper presented at the

Society of American Archaeology, San Juan, Puerto Rico.Levine, Mary Ann 1996 Native Copper, Hunter-Gatherers, and Northeastern Prehistory. UMI Dissertation Services, Michigan. 2000 Native Copper in the Northeast. In The Archaeological Northeast, edited by Mary Ann Levine, Kenneth E.

Sassaman, and Michael S. Nassaney. pp. 183-200. Bergin and Garvey, Westport, Connecticut. MacNeish, Richard 1971 Speculation about How and Why Food Production and Village Life Developed in the Tehuacan Valley,

Mexico. Archaeology 24:307-315.Mounier, R. Alan 1981 Three Middlesex Sites in Southern New Jersey. In Archaeology of Eastern North America 8:52-63. 2003 Looking Beneath the Surface, the Story of Archaeology in New Jersey. Rutgers University Press, New

Brunswick, New Jersey.Nelson, William 1893 The Indians of New Jersey, Their Origin and Development, Manners and Customs, Language, Religion and

Government with Notices of Some Indian Place-Names. The Press Printing and Publishing Company,Paterson, N.J.

Phillips, George Brinton 1925 The Primitive Copper Industry of America. In American Anthropologist, New Series, Volume 27, No. 2, pp.

284-289.Pleger, Thomas C. 1998 Social Complexity, Trade, and Subsistence During the Archaic/Woodland Transition in the Western Great

Lakes (4000-400B.C.): A Diachronic Study of Copper using Cultures at the Oconto and Riverside Cemeteries.PhD. Dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison.

2000 Old Copper and Red Ochre Social Complexity. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 25(2):169-190.


Rapp, George (Rip), James Allert, Vanda Vitali, Zhichun Jing, and Eiler Henrickson 2000 Determining Geologic Sources of Artifact Copper: Source Characterization Using Trace Element Patterns.

University Press of America, Lanham.Rapp, George, Jr., Eiler Henrickson, Michael Miller, and Stanley Aschenbrenner 1980 Trace-Element Fingerprinting as a Guide to the Geographic Sources of Native Copper. In Journal of Metals.

pp. 35-45.Ritchie, William A. 1944 The Pre-Iroquois Occupation of New York State. Rochester Museum of Arts and Science. Rochester, New

York. 1980 The Archaeology of New York State (revised edition). Harbor Hill Books, Harrison, NY.Ritchie, William A. and Don Dragoo 1959 The Eastern Dispersal of Adena. American Antiquity, Vol. 25(1):43-50.Ross, C. S. 1935 Copper deposits in the eastern United States. In Copper Resources of the World, pp. 151-166. Volume 1. XVI

International Geological Congress, Washington.Saxe, Arthur A. 1970 Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices. PhD. Dissertation. University Microfilms, Inc. Ann Arbor,

Michigan.Schrabisch, Max 1917 Archaeology of Warren and Hunterdon Counties. Bulletin 18. New Jersey Geological Survey, Trenton. Skinner, Alanson, and Max Schrabisch 1913 Preliminary Report of the Archaeological Survey of the State of New Jersey. Bulletin 9. New Jersey

Geological Survey, Trenton, New Jersey. Stewart, R. Michael 1982 The Middle Woodland of the Abbott Farm: Summary and Hypotheses. In Practicing Environmental

Archaeology: Methods and Interpretations, edited by R. W. Moeller, pp. 39-52. American IndianArchaeological Institute, Occasional Paper 3, Washington, Connecticut.

1983 Soils and the Prehistoric Archaeology of the Abbott Farm. North American Archaeologist. Vol. 4(1): 27-49. 1989 Trade and Exchange in Middle Atlantic Region Prehistory. Archaeology of Eastern North America, Volume

17, pp. 47-78. 1992 Observations on the Middle Woodland Period of Virginia: A Middle Atlantic Regional Perspective. In Middle

and Late Woodland Research in Virginia: A Synthesis, edited by T. R. Reinhart and M. E. N. Hodges, pp. 1-38.The Dietz Press, Richmond.

1994 Late Archaic through Late Woodland Exchange in the Middle Atlantic Region. In Prehistoric ExchangeSystems in North America, edited by Timothy G. Baugh and Jonathan E. Erison, Plenum Press, New York.

1995 The status of Woodland Prehistory in the Middle Atlantic Region. Archaeology of Eastern North America23:177-206.

2003 A Regional Perspective on Early and Middle Woodland Prehistory in Pennsylvania. In Forgers and Farmersof the Early and Middle Woodland Periods in Pennsylvania, edited by P. A. Raber and V. L. Cowin. RecentResearch in Pennsylvania Prehistory. vol. Number 3. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission,Harrisburg.

2004 Changing Patterns of Native American Trade in the Middle Atlantic Region and Chesapeake Watershed: AWorld Systems Perspective. North American Archaeologist 25(4) 337-356.

2006 “Question.” E-mail to Gregory D. Lattanzi. January 29, 2006.Stewart, R. Michael and John A. Cavallo 1998 Archaic Triangles at the Abbott Farm National Landmark: Typological Implications for Prehistoric Studies

in the Middle Atlantic Region. Paper accompanying an exhibit of Archaic-Age Bifaces at the Annual Meetingof the Middle Atlantic Archaeological Conference, Cape May, New Jersey. Sponsored by the ArchaeologicalSociety of New Jersey and the New Jersey Department of Transportation.


ARCHAEOLOGY OF EASTERN NORTH AMERICA

The preceding article was subjected to formal peer reviewprior to publication.

Thomas, Ronald A. 1969 Adena Influence in the Eastern United States. Eastern State Archaeological Federation, Bulletin Nos. 27 &

28, pg. 23. 1971 Adena Influence in the Middle Atlantic Coast. In Adena: The Seeking of an Identity. A Symposium held at

the Kitselman Conference Center, March 5-7, 1970. Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana. 1976 A Re-Evaluation of the St. Jones River Site. Archaeology of Eastern North America 4:89-110.Veit, Richard F., Gregory D. Lattanzi and Charles A. Bello 2004 More Precious Than Gold: a Preliminary Study of the Varieties and distribution of Pre-Contact Copper

Artifacts in New Jersey. Archaeology of Eastern North America 32:73-88. Versaggi, Nina 1999 Regional Diversity within the Early Woodland of the Northeast. Northeast Anthropology 57:45-56.Weiss, Harry B. and Grace M. Weiss 1963 The Old Copper Mines of New Jersey. The Past Times Press, Trenton, New Jersey.Weld, Isaac 1807 Travels through the States of North America, and the Provinces of Upper and lower Canada, During the Years

1795, 1796, and 1797. Volumes I and II. John Stockdale, London.Wellman, Howard B. 1994 The Provenance of Copper Artifacts from the Boucher Site. Master of Arts thesis, Boston University.Widmer, Kimbel 1964 The Geology and Geography of New Jersey. D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., Princeton, New Jersey. Williams, Lorraine E., David C. Parris and Shirley S. Albright 1982 Interdisciplinary Approaches to WPA Archaeological Collections in the Northeast. Annals of New York

Academy of Science. Volume 376, pp.141-159.Williams, Lorraine E. and Ronald A. Thomas 1982 The Early/Middle Woodland Period in New Jersey: ca. 1000 B.C. – A.D. 1000. In New Jersey’s

Archaeological Resources: A Review of Research Problems and Survey Priorities The Paleo-Indian Periodto the Present. Historic Preservation Office, NJ Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Parks& Forestry, Trenton, NJ.

Woodward, Herbert P. 1944 Bulletin 57 - Copper Mines and Mining in New Jersey. Department of Conservation and Development, State

of New Jersey, Trenton, NJ.Yolton, James S. 1984 The Pahaquarry Copper Mines. Upsala College, Department of Geology.

Documents

Lattanzi 2007