The account above, written by Captain Smith while at the north end of the Chesapeake Bay, documents one of the first English encounters with the Susquehannocks, an Iroquoian people who controlled most of central and eastern Pennsylvania at the time.1 Their geographic position allowed them to serve as primary middlemen in the burgeoning European–Native American trade network of this region, trading Native American pelts from the interior for European goods, and vice versa. Trading partners of the late sixteenth to early seventeenth centuries first included English and Spanish explorers, followed by the Swedish, Dutch, and English colonists who settled along the lower Delaware and lower Susquehanna river valleys in the following decades.By the 1680s the Susquehannock population had declined sharply as a result of disease, conflict, and out-migration. In the 1690s the few Susquehannocks that remained joined with Seneca, Delaware, Shawnee, and Conoy refugees to establish a town called Conestoga on land granted to them by the Penn family. By the mid-eighteenth century, the Conestogas, as they became known, were living in relative harmony with their colonial neighbors. Sadly, their peaceful existence ended during the final months of 1763, when the entire population was slaughtered by a group of racist vigilantes from the Harrisburg area known as the Paxton Boys.This volume, the fifth in the Recent Research in Pennsylvania Archaeology series, provides new insights and perspectives on Susquehannock origins, settlement, and cultural identity. As such, this work both complements and challenges the narrative put forth by Barry Kent in his influential synthesis, Susquehanna’s Indians (1989).2 Following a foreword by series editor Paul Raber, and an introduction by archaeologist and noted Iroquois scholar Dean Snow, the seven essays that follow are separated into three sections: “Susquehannock Origins” (chaps. 1 and 2); “Rethinking Susquehannock Material Culture” (chaps. 3 and 4); and “New Studies and Data” (chaps. 5 through 7).In the first chapter Jasmin Gollup evaluates data from previously excavated Proto-Susquehannock sites in the upper Susquehanna River valley in east-central Bradford County, Pennsylvania, for insights into Susquehannock origins. Although it is accepted that the Susquehannock migrated south from this area in the late sixteenth century, their place of ultimate origin remains unclear. Upon reviewing the archaeological data, primarily pottery styles and how they changed through time, Gollup finds little evidence to support the theory that the Susquehannock culture developed in situ. In chapter 2 James Herbstritt appears to have gained a clearer picture of Susquehannock origins by looking at the same subject through a wider lens. Based on the evaluation of artifact attributes and regional settlement patterns, he argues that two Late Woodland cultural traditions, the West Branch Tradition of the Clearfield County area, and the North Branch Tradition of the Wyoming Valley, converged in the Towanda and Sugar creeks region of southwestern Bradford County ca. 1475–1500 to form the group known historically and archaeologically as the Susquehannocks. It is interesting that this coalescence and transformation correlates with the beginning of the Little Ice age (which lasted from 1350 to 1850), a period of lower average temperatures and shorter growing seasons that changed human settlement patterns, encouraged migration, and increased the potential for intergroup conflict among many Native American groups of the Mid-Atlantic region. By the mid-sixteenth century the Susquehannocks had relocated from the Towanda and Sugar creek valleys to the upper Susquehanna River Valley in northcentral Bradford County (i.e., the area examined by Gollup), before migrating to the lower Susquehanna River Valley in the latter half of that century. In this final move they ended up in a prime location to fill the role of intermediary in the burgeoning European fur trade.In section 2 April Beisaw and Lisa Laurea strive to establish a new and less colonial view of Susquehannock identity by critically evaluating changes in material culture that occurred between the late 1600s and late 1700s. In the first essay Beisaw applies the concept of nation (as opposed to ethnic group) to the Susquehannocks to interpret the complexity of group and individual identities that occurred during this period. By the late 1600s the Susquehannock nation was a multi-ethnic body that included individuals of non-Susquehannock origin. She argues that a fluid membership allowed the nation to adaptively navigate shifting economic, political, and social alliances, while the adoption of cultural identities that expressed multiple loyalties benefited the Susquehannock nation in its role as an intermediary in the European trade network. Through the analysis of Susquehannock burials, specifically, body positions and grave goods, she identifies subtle patterns that appear to reveal the loyalties of the deceased and may signal the individual’s place within the community and nation as a whole.In chapter 4 Laurea challenges the colonial narrative of acculturation and culture decline through the analysis of Susquehannock pottery. By the mid-seventeenth century the high-collared, ornately decorated large cooking vessels that had traditionally been displayed over family cooking fires within longhouses had been replaced by European-made brass and copper kettles. However, the continued production of well-made, highly decorated small pots during this time demonstrates that the Susquehannocks’ ability to make fine pottery did not wane with the appearance of metal alternatives. The acceptance of the large metal pots, which could not be broken, represents a logical transition, while the continued manufacture of intricately decorated small pots demonstrates a “continuation of the social mechanisms [that were] responsible for [the decoration’s] appearance in the first place” (113). By striving to understand how Native Americans saw themselves within a changing world, Beisaw and Laurea successfully illustrate ways in which archaeologists can move away from a colonial narrative focused on acculturation and culture decline.In the first of two chapters of section 3, Robert Wall and Andrew Wyatt present archaeological data from recently excavated sites. Wall focuses on recently identified Susquehannock sites located in the western and eastern panhandles of Maryland and West Virginia, respectively. The settlements, comprised of several small dwellings (but no longhouses) within a defensive palisade, document a brief but intense regional presence from ca. 1600 to 1620. The sites, which occur in the North and South Branch Potomac River valleys, appear to represent trading outposts situated along a mercantile corridor that extended from the Alleghenies to the Chesapeake Bay and beyond. In the following essay, Wyatt describes his investigations at the Lemoyne Site, a recently discovered Susquehannock village just south of Harrisburg. Data suggest that the settlement was occupied from ca. 1610 to 1624, a time intermediate between the earlier Schultz village and the later Washington Boro village, both of which are described by Kent, and are located about thirty miles downriver. Taken together the two essays provide important new insights into Susquehannock settlement strategies during the early seventeenth century.In the seventh and final chapter, Marshall Becker critically evaluates Capt. John Smith’s 1608 statement, quoted in the prelude to this review, that the Susquehannocks were a “gyant-like people.” By comparing heights derived from skeletal remains of several contemporaneous Native American populations, Becker concludes that Susquehannock men were, indeed, significantly taller than non-Iroquoian men, and that they were at least four inches taller than the average English man of that time. In addition to concluding that Smith’s description was accurate, he puts forth explanations for their “gyant-like” stature that can be addressed by future research.This volume is a valuable contribution to the existing body of knowledge about the Susquehannock people. My only criticism is that the publisher made decisions that adversely affect the quality of some of the maps and diagrams, making them a challenge to interpret. These images would have benefited from enlargement, by the creative use of cross-hatching (rather than variance in stipple density), or by the use of color (as opposed to black-and-white), any of which would have made the images easier to understand.This volume, like the four that precede it, is derived from a symposium series organized by the Pennsylvania Archaeological Council (PAC)—a professional association devoted to promoting archaeological research in the state.The other books in the series are: The Archaic Period in Pennsylvania: Hunter Gatherers of the Early and Middle Holocene Period, Paul A. Raber, Patricia E. Miller and Sarah M. Neusius, editors (Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1998); Ice Age Peoples of Pennsylvania, Kurt Carr and James Adovasio, editors (Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 2002); Foragers and Farmers of the Early and Middle Woodland Periods in Pennsylvania, Paul A. Raber, and Verna L. Cowin, editors (University Park: Penn State University Press, 2003); and The Nature and Pace of Change in American Indian Cultures: Pennsylvania, 4000 to 3000 BP, R. Michael Stewart, Kurt W. Carr, and Paul A. Raber, editors (University Park: Penn State University Press, 2015).The previous volumes, all of which present up-to-date research on specific topics related to the pre-Columbian occupation of the Commonwealth, include the last volume I reviewed on this list in an earlier volume of this journal.3 Volume 6, currently in the works, is based on the 2016 PAC symposium entitled Lithic Quarries in Pennsylvania: The Archaeology of Tool Stone Procurement. I can’t wait!