Petersburg National Battlefield, Virginia

The Pleistocene Epoch, known popularly as the "Ice Age," was in fact composed of an alternating series of cold and warm periods.  Oxygen isotope data from deep sea corings of the ocean floor have indicated that 19 such cold and warm phases have occurred since c.700,000 years ago (Shackleton and Opdyke 1973).  Thus, the last (Weichelian or Wisconsinian) glaciation that commenced c.110,000 BP (before present) actually consisted of three or four cold periods separated by warmer phases.  The Pleistocene ended, in the opinion of some, between 12,000 and 10,000 years ago as the warmer Holocene Epoch emerged; for others, the current Holocene represents an interglacial within the Pleistocene.

During the colder periods within the last glaciation, ocean levels were lowered since sea water was frozen and trapped in glaciers and continental ice sheets.  Milliman and Emery (1968) have utilized data from radiocarbon samples retrieved from the Atlantic continental shelf that sea levels during a warm period 35,000 to 30,000 BP were similar to those encountered today.  During subsequent cold conditions, sea levels may have dropped by 130 meters, with the result that the Atlantic shoreline was perhaps 100 kilometers east of the current Virginia coast.  Other scholars (for example, Belknap and Kraft 1977) agree with the general sequence while questioning the extent to which sea levels were lowered.

Climatic patterns have changed extensively during the Holocene.  Melting ice sheets have released sea water that has in turn led to rise in sea level.  These rising seas have transgressed or covered the former Coastal Plain, which is now the Atlantic continental shelf.  The sea level rise proceeded rapidly until c.7000 BP, although fluctuations in sea level on a more modest scale have continued until the present (Milliman and Emery 1968; Kraft et al. 1983).

These changes had dramatic impacts upon the paleoenvironment and landscape within the Chesapeake Bay region in general and the lower Appomattox River area in particular.  The Pleistocene Susquehanna River, which underlies the modern Chesapeake, became an estuary as sea levels rose.  Vegetation zones were moving northward as marine environments shifted westward with the rising sea.  Climatic periods of greater or lesser rain led to a general replacement of open grasslands with boreal evergreen forests and subsequently by deciduous forests.  Settings along the James River experienced greater impacts as that river became a tidal subestuary, but changes also occurred within interior areas.

The appearance of prehistoric humans during the course of these environmental changes is an issue of enduring fascination and intense debate.  Paleoindian occupation of the southeastern United States may date c.12,000 BP and thus may predate the earliest sites in the northeastern United States (Dent 1995:102).  Even earlier occupations may be indicated by suggested dates of 18,000-20,000 BP for a human presence at Meadowcroft rock shelter in southwestern Pennsylvania (Adovasio et al. 1978; Adovasio 1993).  During the period 12,000-10,000 BP the western portion of the Chesapeake region was covered with a boreal forest composed primarily of pine and birch that shifted, as temperatures warmed, to pine and oak (Dent 1995:131).  However, it should be recognized that factors such as topography, solar orientation, and surface water would have resulted in microenvironmental variability with consequent influences upon prehistoric settlement patterns.

As open grassland habitats were increasingly replaced by more closed forested environments, the Paleoindian inhabitants would have encountered a diverse array of fauna.  Larger fauna such as mammoth and probably the forest mastodon had evidently disappeared prior to arrival of the earliest human occupants in the eastern United States, requiring a reevaluation of the image of Paleoindians as big-game hunters (Meltzer 1993; Custer 1994:332-333).  Some caribou may have been present in the earliest boreal forests and deer were certainly present, in addition to wide range of smaller fauna.  As mentioned above, variation in habitats on a microenvironmental scale would have presented opportunities to exploit a varied range of fauna and flora.

Numerous isolated fluted projectile points are known throughout the region, but larger concentrations of Paleoindian-period artifacts—at times much larger—have also been found.  No isolated points or larger loci have been identified within units of Petersburg National Battlefield, but one such locus does occur in the immediate vicinity of Five Forks.  The Williamson site near Little Cattail Creek in eastern Dinwiddie County was a major lithic extraction and habitation locus.  The site lies along the extreme western margin of the inner Coastal Plain near the Piedmont.  Decades of survey and excavation have yielded in excess of 175 fluted points and more than 2000 end and side scrapers, as well as other retouched tool forms.  Factors that undoubtedly influenced occupation at Williamson included locally-available chert outcrops, water, favorable (i.e., southern) solar orientation, and topography that provided shelter from winds (McCary 1951; Dent 1995:107-109; Hill 1997a,b).

A relatively high number of Paleoindian sites south of the James River has been attributed to the presence of a diverse ecosystem.  Dent has argued that the inner Coastal Plain--particularly along its western boundary with the Piedmont--represented an ecotone setting with abundant and diverse ecological resources.  He suggested that these inner Coastal Plain loci may represent colder season habitations, with warmer season sites located on the outer Coastal Plain and the banks of the ancestral Susquehanna River, now submerged beneath the Chesapeake (1995:133-139).  It should be noted, however, that other models of settlement exist.  Gardner (1974, 1977) suggested that Paleoindian groups were often tethered to sources of high-quality raw materials, with elements of the settlement system conditioned by the availability of such materials.  Group movements and catchment areas in the resulting "cyclical" pattern were centered upon specific raw material sources.  Although Gardner's model emerged from studies at the Flint Run complex of sites in the Shenandoah Valley, a comparable argument could be made for the Williamson site.

Prehistoric occupation during the Archaic period is traditionally divided chronologically as follows (Dent 1995:168,173,178):

These chronological divisions are general ones and are subject to some exceptions.  The Early Archaic period has been combined by Gardner and others (Custer 1989, 1994) with the Paleoindian period into a broad late Pleistocene-early Holocene adaptational continuum.  Custer also favored combining the Late Archaic with the subsequent Early and Middle Woodland phases.  Dent (1995:188-190) argued for a post-Paleoindian adaptational break that extended into the Late Archaic until c.4200 BP.  The final phase of the Late Archaic (4200-3000 BP) represents for Dent an "intensification" of resource extraction activities.  The Late Archaic is therefore viewed as a period of cultural change by various scholars.

Environmental changes undoubtedly exerted an influence upon cultural adaptations during the Archaic.  As the flooded channel of the ancestral Susquehanna became increasingly estuarine with sea level rise, the Appomattox and James Rivers were transformed into subestuaries by 6000 BP, with at least slightly saline waters up to the fall lines.  The Chesapeake had formed as a coastal bay by 3000 BP (Dent 1995:191).  The following vegetational sequence was derived from pollen core data (Dent 1995:190):

Vegetation thus changed from a transitional forest association to a temperate deciduous forest, as the overall environmental setting to the east changed from a freshwater riverine location to a saline subestuary.

The initial portion of the Archaic, which to Dent encompasses the Early, Middle, and initial Late Archaic, witnessed heavier occupation of the inner Coastal Plain and Piedmont, probably because the full extent of estuarine resources had not been developed along the bay and coastal rivers (Dent 1995:197).  Dent did recognize, however, that the advancing marine transgression may have covered some of these earlier sites on the outer Coastal Plain.

The "intensification" of resource utilization during the Late Archaic was manifested in various ways.  The technological component reflected an expanded use of ground stone tools, the appearance of steatite (or soapstone) vessels, and fishing implements in the form of notched cobble netsinkers.  The presence of storage pit features has been noted, and shellfish exploitation occurred, although not on the scale seen later in the Woodland.

The Woodland period may be subdivided chronologically into the following phases (Dent 1995:224):

As mentioned above, Custer (1989) has challenged this traditional tripartite classification, choosing instead to redesignate the Late Archaic and Early-Middle Woodland as Woodland I, and the Late Woodland as Woodland II.

A general intensification of resource extraction activities and associated broadening of the subsistence base is indicated during the Early and Middle Woodland phases.  Early Woodland subsistence efforts sought to utilize a fuller range of resources such as shellfish from the expanding estuary.  Fishing and nut gathering were important activities during the Early phase, as well as the possible exploitation of seed plants.  The importance of sedentary occupation and storage was reflected in the appearance of ceramics.  A certain technological "homogenization" has been noted during the Middle phase, with a more limited range of projectile point and ceramic types (Dent 1995:228-235, 268).  The fall line emerged as a "boundary" between Middle Woodland groups in the Coastal Plain to the east and Piedmont to the west (McLearen 1992; Stewart 1992) and this boundary was maintained through the end of the prehistoric period.

Nevertheless, evidence of interregional contact within eastern North America is also indicated.  The appearance in the Chesapeake region of Adena-related materials from Ohio serves to reenforce the identification of these contacts, and suggests greater complexity during the Early and Middle Woodland (Dent 1995:242-243; 268-269).

During the Late Woodland, the emergence of interacting regional groups is indicated by the presence of ceramic types in specific core areas with wider areas of distribution.  Technological changes included smaller triangular projectile points evidently associated with bow and arrow propulsion.  Increased evidence of sedentism is reflected in estuarine shell middens, refuse middens, storage pits, and house patterns.  House patterns have been excavated from Late Woodland sites along the James River as well as loci along tributaries of the Appomattox River (Dent 1995:245-249).  The c.1820 Wood or Boye map (Hargrove 1820) labels modern Rohoic Creek, a tributary of the Appomattox River in eastern Dinwiddie County, as "Indian Town Creek," which suggests the location of a Woodland village, although such a site would probably have stood near the Appomattox River.  The location of an "Indian Burying Ground" was recorded c.1820 and has been designated site 44Dw20 on the U.S.G.S. Church Road quad map, the same map that covers the western portion of the Five Forks area.  The site lies well northwest of the forks at the head of a drainage.

A broad-based pattern of hunting and gathering was maintained, but scholars disagree concerning the contribution of agriculture to overall subsistence (Custer 1989; Turner 1992; Potter 1993).  The existence of social complexity and possible group territoriality is implied in the appearance of human bone deposits or ossuaries along the James and York Rivers by AD 1300, and of larger, later ones along the Potomac River.  The rise of chiefdoms is postulated from AD 1500 until European contact, including the Powhatan groups from the Rappahannock River to south of the James River.  Once again, scholars disagree concerning the relative importance of ecological and social mechanisms in the emergence of these chiefdoms (Binford 1964; Turner 1986, 1992; Barker 1992; Potter 1993), but the importance of the inner Coastal Plain as the location of major Powhatan villages is documented in early European accounts of the Virginia colony (Dent 1995:254-276).

The existing data base of recorded prehistoric archaeological sites in the general vicinity of Five Forks is a meager one (Table 3.1).  Two sites, 44Dw20 and 44Dw83, are located on the Church Road quad to the west of the forks, with the balance falling within the boundaries of the Sutherland quad to the east of the forks.

These sites are widely scattered across the landscape and most are located several miles from Five Forks.  Some lie near the Appomattox River and its tributary steams such as Rocky Run.  However, the various upland landforms, particularly those adjacent to or at the headwaters of streams, are well-represented within the boundaries of the Five Forks Unit, with numerous upland spurs that are flanked by small tributaries of Hatcher's Run.  Limited temporal attributions are indicated, with Late Archaic Savannah River components found at two sites near tributaries, 44Dw83 and 44Dw154.  The latter locus also yielded ceramic sherds that suggest subsequent occupation during the Woodland period.

A local collector gave Park Historian Chris Calkins a small collection of projectile points that had been found in the vicinity of Five Forks, although no precise locations were indicated.  The six points are illustrated in Figure 3.1 and descriptions are provided below (Ritchie 1971; Fogelman 1988):