North American Archaeology Research Articles

Incipient aquaculture in prehistoric California?: Long-term productivity and sustainability vs. immediate returns for the harvest of marine invertebrates

California archaeologists have proposed two alternative methods for harvesting mussels—“stripping” and “plucking”. These two methods are modeled and compared with experimental data from central California (Jones, T.L., Richman, J.R., 1995. On Mussels: Mytilus californianus as a Prehistoric Resource, North American Archaeologist 16, 33–58) and archaeological data from the Punta Gorda Rockshelter, a well-stratified coastal shell midden in northern California. Foragers at the Punta Gorda Rockshelter appear to have practiced a “stripping” technique at approximately 24 month intervals. It is argued that, while this strategy reduced immediate foraging returns, it increased the long-term net productivity of the mussel beds. These findings are discussed in light of the broader literature regarding resource depression and resource cultivation in California prehistory. The conventional interpretation of reductions in the body size in archaeological assemblages is questioned both in terms of rates of return on these individuals and the impact of human predation on local prey populations.

Quintana Roo Archaeology

Mexico's southern state of Quintana Roo is often perceived by archaeologists as a blank spot on the map of the Maya world, a region generally assumed to hold little of interest thanks to its relative isolation from the rest of Mexico. But salvage archaeology required by recent development along the ?Maya Riviera, along with a suite of other ongoing and recent research projects, have shown that the region was critical in connecting coastal and inland zones, and it is now viewed as an important area in its own right from Preclassic through post-contact times. The first volume devoted to the archaeology of Quintana Roo, this book reveals a long tradition of exploration and discovery in the region and an increasingly rich recent history of study. Covering a time span from the Formative period through the early twentieth century, it offers a sampling of recent and ongoing research by Mexican, North American, and European archaeologists. Each of the chapters helps to integrate sites within and beyond the borders of the modern state, inviting readers to consider Quintana Roo as part of an interacting Maya world whose boundaries were entirely different from today's. In taking in the range of the region, the authors consider studies in the northern part of the state resulting from modern development around Cancun; the mid-state sites of Muyil and Yookop, both of which witnessed continual occupations from the Middle Preclassic through the Postclassic; and new data from such southern sites as Cerros, Lagartera, and Chichmuul. The contributions consider such subjects as ceramic controversies, settlement shifts, site planning strategies, epigraphic and iconographic materials, the impact of recent coastal development, and the interplay between ancient, historic, and modern use of the region. Many of the chapters confirm the region as a cultural corridor between Coba and the southern lowland centers and address demographic shifts of the Terminal Classic through Postclassic periods, while others help elucidate some of Peter Harrison's Uaymil Survey work of the 1970s. Quintana Roo Archaeology unfolds a rich archaeological record spanning 2,500 years, depicting the depth and breadth of modern archaeological studies within the state. It is an important touchstone for Maya and Mesoamerican archaeologists, demonstrating the shifting web of connections between Quintanarooense sites and their neighbors, and confirming the need to integrate this region into a broader understanding of the ancient Maya.

Archaeology, communication, and multiple stakeholders: From the other side of the Big Pond

This article reviews discussions and debates about effective communication within North American archaeology. The development of cultural resource management and the expansion of Native American control over archaeology have both influenced the practice and communication of archaeology. The concept of diverse stakeholders derives from discussions about ethics in archaeology, but is relevant to understanding the complexities of archaeological communication. Rather than focus on criticisms of archaeological communication, various examples of effective communication are provided.

Warfare and Violence in Prehistoric Europe: an Introduction

At the moment, one trend in both North American and European archaeology has been to un-pacify the past. The study of warfare and violence in past societies has long been problematic. The debate has been thrown into much sharper focus during the 1990s by a series of publications, notably Keeley's own War before Civilization (1996) in which he proposed that the past had been effectively pacified by modern anthropologists for broadly ideological reasons. Modern state societies may have an unparalleled ability to organise destructive mass violence; yet both ethnographic studies of groups, such as the Gebusi (Knauft 1987) and the Yanomamo (Chagnon 1968), and archaeological studies, like recent Anasazi reinterpretations, have shown that non-state societies are equally capable of using deadly force, sometimes with rates of homicide and war casualties exceeding any known in the modern West. Keywords: archaeological studies; European archaeology; Keeley's War before Civilization ; modern anthropologists; North American archaeology; warfare; Yanomamo

The Ohio Hopewell episode: paradigm lost and paradigm gained

There is a general consensus among the North American archaeologists specialising in the Middle Woodland period (ca 100B.C. to ca A.D. 400) that the Ohio Hopewell was a rather straight forward complex of small-scaled peer polity communities based on simple gardening and extensive foraging practices and occupying dispersed habitation locales loosely clustered around major earthworks. This book challenges this general consensus by presenting a radically alternative view. It argues that the Ohio Hopewell episode can be better and more coherently characterised by treating it as a complex social system based on dual and mutually autonomous social networks of clan alliances and world renewal cults, and that this dual clan-cult social system was, in fact, the culmination of such social systems that were widely dispersed across the Eastern Woodlands. The cults were devoted to treating their deceased members and/or dependants as sacrificial offerings to enhance the sacred powers of nature and the clans were devoted to transforming their deceased into ancestors and the stresses these opposing mortuary practices generated underwrote the dynamics of the Ohio Hopewell and brought about the monumental earthworks as sacred locales of world renewal cults.

THROUGH WARY EYES: Indigenous Perspectives on Archaeology

Archaeology has been linked to colonialist attitudes and scientific imperialism. But what are the perspectives of Indigenous groups concerning the practice of archaeology? Numerous organizations recognize the distinctive needs of Indigenous communities throughout the world and have adopted agreements and definitions that govern their relationships with those populations. The specific name by which Indigenous groups are known varies from country to country, as local governments are involved in determining the appropriateness of particular definitions to populations within their borders. This paper begins with an examination of the various aspects that have been used to determine whether or not a group of people might be considered “indigenous” under various definitions, and then uses the history of the relationships between North American archaeologists and Indigenous populations as a background for the examination of some of the political aspects of archaeology that have impacted Indigenous populations. It then proceeds to discuss perspectives on archaeology offered by members of various Indigenous populations throughout the World.

Rifts in the Theoretical Landscape of Archaeology in the United States: A Comment on Hegmon and Watkins

Recent papers by Michelle Hegmon (2003) and Joe Watkins (2003) purport to “map the terrain” of North American archaeology. Yet these two metaphorical maps present very different views of the contours of North American archaeology. Taken together, the two papers highlight problematic divisions between (1) theory and practice in North American archaeology, and (2) academic archaeology and cultural resource management. What are the roles archaeological theory plays in the contemporary practice of archaeology? Why do discussions of archaeological theory have so little to offer stakeholders other than academic archaeologists? Although Hegmon has shown many areas of convergence in archaeological theory, her depiction of “processual-plus” archaeologies dulls the edge of postprocessual critiques of the processual status quo. I argue that feminist, Marxist, and postcolonial archaeologies cannot be subsumed by this label because some of their practitioners aspire to contribute to social change beyond the realm of archaeology itself. These practitioners realize that the practice of archaeology always has political consequences, not just for academic archaeologists, but for a diverse set of stakeholders.

No More Theory Wars: A Response to Moss

There is a gap between discussions of theory and of practice in North American archaeology. More political engagement by archaeologists would be desirable. Regarding these and other issues, Moss and I agree. However, I also believe that the open-mindedness and dearth of theoretical schisms characteristic of Processual-plus archaeology is desirable. Critical perspectives such as Marxist and feminist approaches can be included in this broad perspective, and can thus contribute to both the advancement of knowledge and political agendas. More consideration and analysis of the linkages between theory and practice would be fruitful.

Diffusionism Reconsidered: Linguistic and Archaeological Evidence for Prehistoric Polynesian Contact with Southern California

While the prevailing theoretical orthodoxy of North American archaeology overwhelmingly discourages consideration of transoceanic cultural diffusion, linguistic and archaeological evidence appear to indicate at least one instance of direct cultural contact between Polynesia and southern California during the prehistoric era. Three words used to refer to boats - including the distinctive sewn-plank canoe used by Chumashan and Gabrielino speakers of the southern California coast - are odd by the phonotactic and morphological standards of their languages and appear to correlate with Proto-Central Eastern Polynesian terms associated with woodworking and canoe construction. Chumashan and Gabrielino speakers seem to have borrowed this complex of words along with the sewn-plank construction technique itself sometime between ca. A.D. 400 and 800, at which time there is also evidence for punctuated adaptive change (e.g., increased exploitation of pelagic fish) and appearance of a Polynesian style two-piece bone fishhook in the Santa Barbara Channel. These developments were coeval with a period of major exploratory seafaring by the Polynesians that resulted in the discovery and settlement of Hawaii - the nearest Polynesian outpost to southern California. Archaeological and ethnographic information from the Pacific indicates that the Polynesians had the capabilities of navigation, boat construction, and sailing, as well as the cultural incentives to complete a one-way passage from Hawaii to the mainland of southern California. These findings suggest that diffusion and other forms of historical contingency still need to be considered in constructions of North American prehistory.

The Watercraft of Isla Cedros, Baja California: Variability and Capabilities of Indigenous Seafaring Technology along the Pacific Coast of North America

Many of the discussions addressing the issue of the capabilities and significance of early watercraft forms or a regionally specific evolutionary sequence for craft such as the Southern California plank canoe have limited their range of analogies to those forms present among the ethnohistorically documented groups of Southern California. However, this article attempts to demonstrate the existence of at least one additional form of watercraft present on the Pacific coast of Baja California, as well as call attention to the greatly underrepresented capabilities of some long-recognized forms of watercraft. Inference, historic documents, contemporary environmental conditions, and archaeological data are used in an attempt to reconstruct a meaningful picture of Isla Cedros watercraft and their place within the repertoire of indigenous maritime culture and society. It is suggested that modern political boundaries have resulted in the exclusion of Baja California from discussions of North American archaeology. This discussion attempts to be a contribution to concepts of indigenous watercraft along the Pacific coast of North America and a vehicle to expand the research horizons of North American archaeology to include the underinvestigated regions of Baja California and northwestern Mexico.

Two cultures: thought and practice in British and North American archaeology

Despite historical and linguistic connections, archaeology in North America and archaeology in Britain are alienated by a curious mixture of provincialism and mutual indifference. This estrangement is part of a larger cultural alienation that was decades in the making. Field methods and practice and academic organization of the discipline differ in ways that variously favor both regions. Yet, in other respects, British and North American archaeology share a cosmopolitan attraction to glamorous foreign places, a fondness that converged in recent years on China. Ironically, this shared worldliness does not extend to each one's serious contemplation of the other.

Culture Contact or Colonialism? Challenges in the Archaeology of Native North America

What has frequently been termed “contact-period“ archaeology has assumed a prominent role in North American archaeology in the last two decades. This article examines the conceptual foundation of archaeological “culture contact” studies by sharpening the terminological and interpretive distinction between “contact” and “colonialism.” The conflation of these two terms, and thereby realms of historical experience, has proven detrimental to archaeologists’ attempts to understand indigenous and colonial histories. In light of this predicament, the article tackles three problems with treating colonialism as culture contact: (1) emphasizing short-term encounters rather than long-term entanglements, which ignores the process and heterogeneous forms of colonialism and the multifaceted ways that indigenous people experienced them; (2) down-playing the severity of interaction and the radically different levels of political power, which does little to reveal how Native people negotiated complex social terrain but does much to distance “contact” studies from what should be a related research focus in the archaeology of African enslavement and diaspora; and (3) privileging predefined cultural traits over creative or creolized cultural products, which loses sight of the ways that social agents lived their daily lives and that material culture can reveal, as much as hide, the subtleties of cultural change and continuity.

The Rock Art of Eastern North America: Capturing Images and Insight

The Rock-Art of Eastern North America: Capturing Images and Insight. CAROL DIAS-GRANADOS and JAMES R. DUNCAN (eds.). University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, 2004. 426 pp., 175 illus., 7 tables, preface, acknowledgments, introduction, biblio., contributors' biographies, index. $65.00 (cloth), ISBN 0-8173-1394-X; $34.95 (paper), ISBN 0-8173-5096-9. Reviewed by David H. Dye The Rock-Art of Eastern North America is a welcomed addition to the growing literature on prehistoric and historic rock-art. Long overlooked by professional archaeologists, the study of petroglyphs and pictographs is rapidly becoming an important and integral part of current archaeological discussions. Due to the persistence of researchers such as Carol Diaz-Granados, James R. Duncan, and their colleagues, the study of rock-art clearly is a mainstream focus for eastern North American archaeology. Perhaps the most fascinating aspect of this genre of rock-art investigation is its association with Native American ritual, art, and iconography. These topics, until recently, were often avoided by archaeologists because of difficulties in establishing chronological controls; understanding rockart from the perspective of its environmental, social, and ideological contexts; and incorporating rock-art interpretations/discussions within traditional or current archaeological paradigms. The Rock-Art of Eastern North America impresses upon us that these interpretive problems are not insurmountable and that the study of rock-art can be integrated as one facet of our understanding of eastern North American prehistory. The Rock-Art of Eastern North America comprises 20 chapters divided into seven major topics: dendroglyphs; ethnography; patterning of sites and motifs; gender; survey, recording, conservation, and management; historic; and dating methods. The well-written and thoughtful chapters are authored by active rock-art researchers and well-known scholars and avocationals. Illustrated with 175 photographs, line drawings, and maps, the 426-page volume covers a large geographic area, ranging over 12 states and four Canadian provinces in the eastern North American woodlands. Of course, this area generally is in the interior of the continent which contains rocky terrain suitable for rock art. In the opening section which covers dendroglyphs, Fred E. Coy Jr. discusses Native American carvings and paintings on trees that are found throughout much of the Eastern Woodlands. He argues that the relative lack of pictographs on rock surfaces is a result of the more frequent use of tree boles as communicative devices, especially in the upper Eastern Woodlands. The three articles in the second section cover rock art and ethnography. Lori A. Stanley offers the account of the Ratcliffe Sacred Rock in the upper Iowa River Valley and the oral history of the modern Winnebago tribe of Nebraska, while Mark J. Wagner, Mary R. McCorvie, and Charles A. Swedlund outline the ritual landscape and associated rock-art at the Mississippian Millstone Bluff Site in southern Illinois. Kevin L. Callahan follows with a discussion of pica and geoghagy as an explanation of cup-marked boulders in the Eastern Woodlands. In the second section, six chapters deal with the patterning of archaeological sites with rock-art motifs. Charles H. Faulkner, Jan F. Simek, and Alan Cressler describe their long-term research on prehistoric rock-art in Tennessee, with emphasis on open-air sites. Richard Edging and Steven R. Ahler examine rock-art sites and Late Woodland settlement locations in the northern Ozarks of south-central Missouri and Robert Alan Clouse documents the patterning of human activity and possible functioning of the Jeffers Petrogylphs, located at the eastern edge of the Great Plains in southwestern Minnesota. Jack Steinbert identifies elemental forms of rock-art at the Lake-of-the-Woods petroglyph sites in Ontario, Canada, and offers interpretations about the peopling of the Americas based on randomly pecked cup marks on boulders. …

Early Paleoindian foraging: examining the faunal evidence for large mammal specialization and regional variability in prey choice

North American archaeologists have spent much effort debating whether Early Paleoindian foragers were specialized hunters of megafauna or whether they pursued more generalized subsistence strategies. In doing so, many have treated the foraging practices of early North Americans as if they must have been uniform across the continent, even though others have pointed out that adaptations appear to have varied among groups inhabiting different kinds of environments. Resolving these issues fully requires referring to archaeofaunal data and evaluating those data critically. In this paper, we conduct such an evaluation of the existing Early Paleoindian faunal record, which we then use to test the hypothesis that early Americans across the continent specialized in the hunting of megafauna. After detailed attention is given to taphonomic issues, to the limited geographical distribution of sites with secure associations between humans and prey taxa, and to differences among sites in the roles that they likely played in settlement and subsistence systems, it becomes clear that the faunal record provides little support for the idea that all, or even any, Early Paleoindian foragers were megafaunal specialists. It does appear, however, that there was considerable variability in Early Paleoindian prey choice across the continent, which was likely related to variability in the environments that different groups inhabited.

Applauding Mediocrity: Tl Dating and the Navajo Tree Ring Dates Revisited

In their 2002 study comparing Early Navajo period tree ring dates and thermoluminescence (TL) results from sherds and fire-altered rocks, Dykeman et al. (2002:145) applaud the “remarkable correspondence between tree-ring and thermoluminescence results.” However, re-examination of their data suggests that the rate of certain correspondence (40%) is low, and mathematical modeling shows that a similar rate (35%) could be achieved with random guesses for dates. As the Dykeman et al. (2002) article was presented to champion the use of TL dating on sherds and fire-altered rocks, this re-examination yields a call for more extensive controlled testing of the TL method before its widespread use in North American archaeology.

Ethical issues in archaeology

tributed papers, divided into four sections. Part I looks at the origins and development of archaeological ethics. Alison Wylie (Chapter 1) provides an interesting, although brief, look at how archaeological ethics fit into the larger philosophical field. She defines ethics as standards that guide our actions and prescribe and prohibit certain kinds of behaviour. She also points out the difference between ethical justifications based on consequence (i.e., the action's effect) and those based on a deontological approach (i.e., the action's intrinsic qualities) . These two approaches frame the philosophical arena in which the other contributors joust. In Chapter 2, Mark Lynott provides a history of ethics in North American archaeology, principally focused on the development of professional codes. Part II deals with responsibilities to the archaeological record. Chapters 3 (Neil Brodie and David Gill) and 4 (Julie Hollowell-Zimmer) address high and low-end looting. The former serves the international antiquities market while the latter serves small local mar-

Mississippian Chiefdoms: How Complex?

▪ Abstract During the Mississippian period (a.d. 1000–1500) the southeastern United States witnessed a broadscale fluorescence of polities characterized by impressive earthwork construction, rich mortuary offerings, and intensified agriculture. Research on the nature of complexity in these so-called chiefdoms has been an enduring issue in North American archaeology, even as this research has undergone several paradigmatic shifts. This study focuses on the primary dimensions of the archaeological record used to describe and explain variation in Mississippian complexity—polity scale, settlement and landscape, the organization of labor, mortuary ritual and ideology, and tribute and feasting. Changing perspectives toward the organization of complexity and power have become increasingly pronounced in each of these categories.

Setting Theoretical Egos Aside: Issues and Theory in North American Archaeology

Theory in North American archaeology is characterized in terms of foci and approaches manifested in research issues, rather than in explicit or oppositional theoretical positions. While there are some clear-cut theoretical perspectives—evolutionary ecology, behavioral archaeology, and Darwinian archaeology—a large majority of North American archaeology fits a broad category here called “processual-plus.” Among the major themes that crosscut many or all of the approaches are interests in gender, agency/practice, symbols and meaning, material culture, and native perspectives. Gender archaeology is paradigmatic of processual-plus archaeology, in that it draws on a diversity of theoretical approaches to address a common issue. Emphasis on agency and practice is an important development, though conceptions of agency are too often linked to Western ideas of individuals and motivation. The vast majority of North American archaeology, including postprocessual approaches, is modern, not postmodern, in orientation. The relative dearth of theoretical argument positively contributes to diversity and dialogue, but it also may cause North American theory to receive inadequate attention and unfortunate misunderstandings of postmodernism.

Has Feminism Changed Archaeology?

Has Feminism Changed Archaeology?

Some difficulties in modeling the original peopling of the Americas

Preoccupied with bifacial projectile points, North American archaeologists prefer to work with the 60 year old model that the earliest Americans made Clovis fluted points to hunt mammoths on the Great Plains, where several Clovis mammoth kill sites have been dated between 11,200 and 10,900 14C yr BP. Clovis points actually are more common in the Eastern Woodlands, where they have been dated somewhat earlier at several sites. However, only one Clovis megamammal kill site has been found in the Eastern Woodlands, and none west of southeastern Arizona. Clovis points are relatively rarely found in Central America as far as Panama. A few Clovis-like points have been reported from Colombia and Chile, but stemmed “fishtail” points are more common in South America. Several sites in the southern cone of South America have yielded fishtail points dated as early as 11,000 14C yr BP. Some North American archaeologists hypothesize that fishtail points, a few of which appear to be fluted, are the work of Clovis migrants. However, such a hypothesis requires that a viable breeding population traversed about 12,000 km across deserts, mountains, and through jungles within a few hundred years. A simpler alternative hypothesis is that sometime in the Late Pleistocene, the first Americans brought a simple retouched flake industry with them from East Asia. Experimental knappers in various parts of the Americas eventually innovated bifacial points of different styles from these retouched flakes. It is time that this alternative model, which is more than 25 years old, be more seriously considered because it would better explain available evidence in South America as well as North America.