Complex Hunter Gatherers (Anthropology of Pacific North America)

238 Pages·2004·0.59 MB·English

by  William C Prentiss

COMPLEX HUNTER-GATHERERS
The Anthropology of Pacific North America
Herbert D. G. Maschner and
Katherine L. Reedy-Maschner, series editors
COMPLEX HUNTER-GATHERERS
Evolution and Organization of Prehistoric Communities
on the Plateau of Northwestern North America
Edited by
William C. Prentiss and Ian Kuijt
The University of Utah Press
Salt Lake City
The Anthropology of Pacific North America Library of Congress Cataloging-in-PublicationData
Herbert D. G. Maschner and
Complex hunter-gatherers : evolution and organization of
Katherine L. Reedy-Maschner, series editors
prehistoric communities on the plateau of northwestern
North America / edited by William C. Prentiss and Ian Kuijt.
© 2004by The University of Utah Press
p. cm.—(The anthropology of Pacific North America)
All rights reserved
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN0-87480-793-X(hardcover : alk. paper)
The Defiance House Man colophon is a registered
1. Paleo-Indians—Columbia Plateau—Hunting.
trademark of the University of Utah Press. It is
2. Paleo-Indians—Canada, Western—Hunting.
based on a four-foot-tall, Ancient Puebloan
3. Hunting and gathering societies—Columbia Plateau.
pictograph (late PIII) near Glen Canyon, Utah.
4. Hunting and gathering societies—Canada, Western.
5. Columbia Plateau—Antiquities. 6. Canada, Western—
09 08 07 06 05 04
Antiquities. I. Prentiss, William C., 1960– . II. Kuijt,
5 4 3 2 1
Ian. III. Series.
E78.C63C66 2004
979.5'01—dc22 2004002520
CONTENTS
Introduction: The Archaeology of the Plateau Region of Northwestern North America—
Approaches to the Evolution of Complex Hunter-Gatherers vii
William C. Prentiss and Ian Kuijt
I. Chronology and Materials in Plateau Archaeology
1. A Culture Historic Synthesis and Changes in Human Mobility, Sedentism, Subsistence, Settlement,
and Population on the Canadian Plateau, 7000–200BP 3
Mike K. Rousseau
2. Materials and Contexts for a Culture History of the Columbia Plateau 23
William Andrefsky Jr.
3. Cultural Complexity: A New Chronology of the Upper Columbia Drainage Area 36
Nathan B. Goodale, William C. Prentiss, and Ian Kuijt
4. The Evolution of Collector Systems on the Canadian Plateau 49
William C. Prentiss and Ian Kuijt
II. Households,Social Complexity,and the Formation of Aggregate Hunter-Gatherer Communities
5. Safety in Numbers:
The Influence of the Bow and Arrow on Village Formation on the Columbia Plateau 67
James C. Chatters
6. Ritual Structures in Transegalitarian Communities 84
Brian Hayden and Ron Adams
7. Fraser Valley Trade and Prestige as Seen from Scowlitz 103
Michael Blake
III. Social Organization,Plant Resources,and the Abandonment of Pithouse Villages
8. A Question of Intensity: Exploring the Role of Plant Foods in Northern Plateau Prehistory 115
Dana Lepofsky and Sandra L. Peacock
9. The Social Dimensions of Roasting Pits in a Winter Village Site 140
Brian Hayden and Sara Mossop Cousins
10. Villages on the Edge: Pithouses, Cultural Change,
and the Abandonment of Aggregate Pithouse Villages 155
Ian Kuijt and William C. Prentiss
IV. Discussion and Implications
11. A Transcontinental Perspective on the Evolution
of Hunter-Gatherer Lifeways on the Plateau: Discussion and Reflection 171
Jeanne E. Arnold
References Cited 183
Contributors 209
Index 211
v

INTRODUCTION
THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE PLATEAU REGION OF
NORTHWESTERN NORTH AMERICA—APPROACHES TO
THE EVOLUTION OF COMPLEX HUNTER-GATHERERS
William C. Prentiss and Ian Kuijt
Today, as in the prehistoric past, the Plateau rable to that of the much better known Northwest Coast
region of northwestern North America groups, leaving behind a dramatic archaeological record
exists as a land of remarkable environmental and social featuring winter “pithouse” villages, fortifications, spe-
contrasts of which many members of the general public cialized food-collecting sites, meeting grounds, rock art
are unaware. The Plateau is often conceptualized as sites, and cemeteries. Ethnographic research carried out
two regions, the Northern or Canadian Plateau and the in this region during the past 120years has provided one
Southern or Columbia Plateau. From an archaeological, of the most extensive sources of information on indige-
ethnographical, and prehistoric standpoint, this modern nous peoples in North America. The combined ethno-
geopolitical separation is largely meaningless because the graphic and archaeological records make the Plateau,
cultural context of First Nation lifeways often cross-cuts similar to the neighboring Northwest Coast, one of the
significant environmental zones. The Plateau environ- most important regions in the world for study of the evolu-
ment, for example, stretches from the Coast and Cascade tion and organization of complex hunter-gatherer cultures.
ranges to the Rocky Mountains and includes astounding This book seeks to redirect attention to the Plateau
variation in geophysical and vegetative conditions, in- region of western North America as a means of further-
cluding deserts, grasslands, parkland forests, and even ing our understanding of the nature of the prehistoric
rain forest environments. In some areas, the Plateau is social organization, subsistence practices, and lifeways
etched by the deep valleys of the Columbia and Fraser of those living on the Plateau, as well as to expand on
river systems that served as major corridors of movement this foundation to recognize the broader implications of
for fish species, habitats for terrestrial mammals, and this work in understanding the evolution and organiza-
locations for the founding of human communities in tion of complex hunter-gatherers in general. As a first step
prehistory. With its great diversity in plant and animal in this process, we aim to introduce and review the cur-
resources, the Plateau favored an equally high variety rent state of the research in late period archaeology on
of hunter-gatherer societies and social complexity that the Plateau. By “late period” we mean the period associ-
remains largely unrecognized by archaeologists and the ated with the emergence of semisedentary hunter-gatherer
general public. Hunter-gatherers on the eastern margins communities supported by subsistence intensification tac-
of the Plateau were traditionally more mobile, maintain- tics particularly involving salmon and various root crops.
ing somewhat flexible band membership and relatively This period began between 3,500and 4,000years ago
egalitarian social relations. In stark contrast, many on and persisted into recent historic times, and it was peri-
the western edges lived in densely packed winter villages, odically characterized by the presence of large aggregated
controlling access to optimal hunting and fishing loca- communities within which we see material manifestations
tions, participating in elite trade networks, and main- of emerging social inequality. In order to accomplish this,
taining ranked and stratified societies. The indigenous we have organized contributions to the book in four sec-
societies of many areas of the Plateau achieved a high tions. The first section of the book introduces the cultural
degree of social complexity that in many ways is compa- chronology of the Plateau defined as the Southern and
vii
Northern subregions. The next section addresses evolu- be dispensed with, thereby recognizing the inherent com-
tionary processes, household archaeology, and exchange. plexity of all human societies. He correctly notes that
Here, authors explore reasons why the complex commu- even among mobile, low-density hunter-gatherer soci-
nities of the late prehistoric period emerged. The third eties, asymmetrical relationships may exist between indi-
section provides overviews and studies in the archaeology viduals over access to basic subsistence items and other
of Plateau communities, with an emphasis on the exploita- goods. This has the effect of producing some forms of
tion of plant resources. This section offers reviews of incipient social ranking along lines of age, gender, physi-
current research contributions but also provides new cal power, and personal charisma. Speth asserts that in-
contributions to our understanding of the structure and equality is recognizable in a variety of contexts, including
organization of early Plateau societies. The final section prey- and part-distribution procedures, enforcement of
features broad assessments of the current contribution of food taboos, snacking associated with differential skill
Plateau archaeology by a researcher known for her glob- in the food quest, and variability in food-sharing prac-
ally significant contributions to the archaeology of com- tices. It is indeed abundantly clear that even amongsoci-
plex hunter-gatherers. This current chapter starts this eties viewed by anthropologists as egalitarian, competitive
process, seeking to introduce major strands of Plateau social relationships do exist, as reflected, for example, in
archaeological research and provide the reader with a competition over mates, between individuals, and within
short review of critical published resources in Plateau households (see Berreman 1978; Flanagan 1989; Flana-
archaeology. To do this we establish the concept of com- gan and Rayner 1988; Hawkes et al. 2001; Keene 1991).
plex hunter-gatherers and follow with an introduction These competitive relationships may be played out through
to the hunter-gatherers of the Plateau and their environ- differential food-sharing practices, fights, or other strate-
ment. Then, we provide a broad introduction to major gies, and there appear to be good Darwinian reasons for
contributions and research issues in late period Plateau their persistence in different forms in different societies
archaeology. Throughout these discussions, we provide (Hawkes 1993; Hawkes et al. 2001; Hill and Hurtado
a wide range of citations of formally published sources 1996) associated with issues of inclusive fitness.
designed to aid the professional researcher, student, or Many researchers have attempted to define complex
interested layperson in the pursuit of Plateau archaeology. hunter-gatherers. In doing so, Arnold (2001) argues, we
must not democratize the concept of complexity to the
point that there is no way to partition sociocultural vari-
COMPLEX HUNTER-GATHERERS
ability. She argues that significant differences in sociopo-
These days, the term complexhas become an important litical organization are recognizable and that we must
word in archaeological circles. By describing societies in reserve the term complexto those fitting a well-defined
terms of variation in degree of complexity, we attempt criterion. Definitions include those emphasizing “specific
to avoid neo-evolutionary concepts such as band–tribe– traits or developments” (Arnold 1996), sociopolitical
chiefdom–state and their inherent progressivist assump- integration, and subsistence security. Arnold (1996) notes
tions. When they are applied to hunter-gatherers, re- that the trait-based approaches (e.g., Barnard and Wood-
searchers establish a dichotomy between those considered burn 1988; Brown 1985; Price 1985; Woodburn 1980;
complex versus others described as generalized (Hayden Woodman 1985) seek to define specific characteristics,
1995), generic (Binford 2001), or simple (Burch and such as different forms of art, monuments, exchange,
Ellana 1994).Generalized hunter-gatherers are often and storage strategies, as markers of complexity. In gen-
described as egalitarian with a high sharing ethic, residen- eral these definitions look for delayed-return economies,
tially mobile, and organized in bands with flexible group markers of social hierarchy, and extensive exchange net-
membership. In contrast, complex hunter-gatherers are works as indicators of complexity.
typically described as less residentially mobile (often rela- In contrast to the trait-based approach, several authors
tively sedentary), with formal group membership in the have offered organizational approaches to defining com-
form of lineages, sodalities, and so on and a distinct ability plex hunter-gatherers. Along these lines, Arnold (1996)
to acquire and use wealth for purposes of increasing sta- argues that a more effective definition would be one
tus. Indeed, among some groups, wealth, power, and abil- that considers the sociopolitical means by which leaders
ity to command non-kin labor may be inherited. For some, develop and maintain control over labor. Specific traits
such as Burch and Ellanna (1994), the dichotomy between are merely by-products of distinct variation in the means
simple and complex is misleading, and they alternatively by which labor is organized and power is distributed
argue that a wide range of intermediate variation exists. within society. Thus, to Arnold (1993, 1996, 2001, this
Indeed, some archaeologists have suggested that per- volume), complexrefers to societies where leadership
haps all human societies are complex. Speth (1990) has and status are inherited and those leaders have control
argued that the concept of the egalitarian society should over non-kin labor. Hayden (1995) offers a similar,
viii PRENTISS AND KUIJT
though more inclusive, definition, emphasizing the capac- Mesolithic northern Europe (Price 1985; Rowly-Conwy
ity of groups to maintain exclusive control over food 1983). Clearly, these societies featured many precondi-
produced by themselves and to use food surpluses as a tions of complexity including sedentism, the production
means (among others) of leveraging new levels of power. of subsistence surpluses, exchange networks featuring
Haydendefines three types of “transegalitarian” societies, utilitarian and prestige goods, and indicators of differen-
termed despots, reciprocators, and entrepreneurs. Com- tial wealth acquisition between different social units. In
plexity for Hayden does not necessarily require inheri- many cases, however, it remains unclear whether status
tance of status and leadership position. was ascribed or achieved, yet these were clearly far more
A third approach to defining hunter-gatherer complex- complex societies than had come earlier and in some
ity comes from recent work by Lewis Binford (2001), cases were more complex than some later agricultural
termed here the subsistence security approach. Rather forms (see Kuijt 2000). Many contexts, particularly asso-
than partitioning variability in hunter-gatherer systems ciated with the northern Pacific Rim and the western
along lines of power and labor control, Binford is partic- Arctic (Arnold 1996; Burch and Ellana 1994; Koyama
ularly concerned with the strategies employed by hunter- and Thomas 1981; Price and Brown 1985), evolved simi-
gatherer groups seeking to decrease subsistence uncertainty lar societies—varying in subsistence emphases and in
and to minimize risk. Relying on a massive cross-cultural individual and corporate strategies for gaining and main-
survey of ethnographic hunter-gatherer groups, he argues taining power—that never took the step toward agricul-
that hunter-gatherers vary on the basis of degree of popu- ture. Some societies were characterized by hereditary
lation packing. Nonpacked hunter-gatherers (typically status differences (e.g., Haida, Tlingit, Tsimshian, Koniag,
generalized or generic) tend to have a relatively strong Aleut, Lillooet, Chumash, Calusa), whereas others (e.g.,
sharing ethos but still no guarantee of equal rights to every Tareumiut, Mackenzie Eskimo, Norton and Kotzebue
individual. Binford notes that what is most important in Sound Eskimo) depended on wealth acquisition but did
these societies is the maintenance of trust and respectabil- not normally inherit leadership positions. As noted by
ity between members of interreliant groups. This, in turn, Hayden (1995), many Plateau societies embodied these
insures higher degrees of access to critical resources for characteristics and are perhaps best described also as
all participating individuals across large geographic areas. complex hunter-gatherers.
In contrast, groups living under more packed conditions
insure access to their resources through territorial defense,
ETHNOGRAPHIC COMPLEX HUNTER-GATHERERS
labor hierarchies for the production of food surplus, and
ON THE PLATEAU
the reciprocal exchange of nonfood goods for food from
outside groups. Binford’s break point between complex It is well known that the impact of Euro-American and
and generic hunter-gatherers therefore appears to come Canadian contact seriously affected the overall popula-
at the point where a landscape is packed with so many tion levels, economic orientation, and social organization
hunter-gatherers that mobility is constricted and sub- of indigenous societies throughout the continent. None-
sistence intensification pressures occur (for an earlier theless,we are still able to recognize a wide range of
application of this approach, see Binford 1968a). Conse- ethnographic societies from the Plateau. Generalized
quently, hunter-gatherer groups alter their social and ter- hunter-gatherers appear to have only existed on the east-
ritorial arrangements favoring expanding intraregional ern margins of the Plateau. There is little in the ethno-
distinctions in wealth and influence. graphic record, for example, to suggest that the Kutenai,
The advantages of the sociopolitical and security Flathead, or Pend d’Oreille had any form of ranking,
approaches to defining complexityare evident in their individual or corporate resource patch ownership, or
emphasis on organization. Clearly, a wide range of soci- wealth-building strategies such as competitive feasting
eties developed the organizational capacity to maintain or potlatching (e.g., Hayden 1995). Rather, chiefs were
subsistence security under territorial conditions through elected for specific duties based primarily on abilities.
intensification tactics; to manipulate labor, often through Acquired resources were generally dispersed within bands,
the establishment of debt relations; and to develop eco- promoting a substantial degree of socioeconomic egalitar-
nomically based status hierarchies. In areas associated ianism (Brunton 1998; Malouf 1998; Teit 1930).
with agriculture, food production often emerged in con- Ethnographically, complex hunter-gatherers, when
texts associated with the prior presence of complex hunter- defined most broadly (e.g., Binford 2001; Hayden 1995),
gatherers. Examples include Jomon (Imamura 1996), were found throughout much of the Plateau. Two major
Natufian and Neolithic (Bar-Yosef and Meadow 1995; groupings are recognizable: those with ranking based pri-
Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002), Mesolithic China (Chang marily on wealth and those in which status was strictly
1981) and Southeast Asia (Higham 1995), the Archaic of inherited. Together these categories are synonymous with
eastern North America (Brown 1985; Smith 1995), and Feinman’s (1998) network societies. In no case, however,
THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE PLATEAU ix