tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2215563889752669442024-03-11T22:51:14.186-06:00Neolithic RevolutionsArchaeology and prehistory.Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.comBlogger21125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-20698188334691345032011-08-22T19:49:00.000-06:002011-08-24T20:10:18.179-06:00Bocquet-Appel on the NDTIn a <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/content/333/6042/560/suppl/DC1">Science podcast</a>, Jean-Pierre Bocquet-Appel discusses the Neolithic Demographic Transition (NDT). This is in conjunction with his recent <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/content/333/6042/560.abstract">Science editorial</a> marking the milestone of 7 billion humans on the planet earth. This is great exposure for a tremendously important idea that I have been studying for the past six years or so, as you can see in my <a href="http://andean.kulture.org/bandy/">list of publications</a> (particularly <a href="http://andean.kulture.org/bandy/bandy-2005-ca.pdf">this one</a>, and also my <a href="http://www.uapress.arizona.edu/Books/bid2257.htm">recent edited volume</a> with Jake Fox; I need to update that list). <div>
<br /></div><div>I haven't seen a lot of reaction so far. There is a <a href="http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/07/neolithic-demographic-transition.html">post on this on Dienekes' Blog</a>, complete with the kind of superficial, ill-thought-out criticism that can only be found in blog comment threads.</div>Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-91253928655959967432010-11-10T21:36:00.014-07:002010-11-10T22:05:51.011-07:00Huatacoa is now online<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgM4JSH9C2jdfzMBOwfk7l4bKinxRuopkWyQ1Gb0ALMPWORLOqAGDvzyPi3-QFm0lm3xUS_BbD-PTEP_LcfU04RKhJksTSleGvH6oJU5D0ONaf2kId46nmnuKH37REaidUP_lc8pWfPxv9s/s1600/546.1.1.jpg"><img style="float: right; margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; cursor: pointer; width: 183px; height: 75px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgM4JSH9C2jdfzMBOwfk7l4bKinxRuopkWyQ1Gb0ALMPWORLOqAGDvzyPi3-QFm0lm3xUS_BbD-PTEP_LcfU04RKhJksTSleGvH6oJU5D0ONaf2kId46nmnuKH37REaidUP_lc8pWfPxv9s/s320/546.1.1.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5538148382239328866" border="0" /></a><a href="http://andean.kulture.org/cohen/cohen-dissertation.pdf">Amanda Cohen's dissertation is finally </a><a href="http://andean.kulture.org/cohen/cohen-dissertation.pdf">available on-line as a PDF</a>. This important document describes the excavation of the earliest sunken court structure known from the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Titicaca">Lake Titicaca Basin</a>, as well as several subsequent sunken courts constructed in the same location. This is a must-read for any self-respecting Andeanist.Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-90382036092744783522010-11-09T17:00:00.000-07:002010-11-09T17:30:06.472-07:00Why Anthropology is Bad for Archaeology<blockquote></blockquote><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.as.miami.edu/anthropology/"><img style="float: right; margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; cursor: pointer; width: 241px; height: 320px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSh9RA7rks4zgJ1ncgjczYgtNo-temflFt3VNXp-b3ABb14ia2AjAoOARhutnaROTCL9egx2Jn7RnvEWEKT8XcqvEuGd_XZfeDUZmNuGNXVW8qV1LdXvi7QWoTywj8q9wnLpnfHdPfvdx-/s320/4fields.gif" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5490857546101596162" border="0" /></a><br />A recent <a href="http://www.saa.org/Careers/JobAnnouncements/tabid/256/Default.aspx#colgate">job posting for Colgate University</a> on the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">SAA</span> website illustrates some ways in which the continuing identification of archaeology with anthropology is a <span style="font-weight: bold;">Bad Thing</span> for archaeology and for archaeologists. The post in question reads as follows:<br /><blockquote>The Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Colgate University invites applications for a tenure-stream position in Anthropology at the level of Assistant Professor (<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">Ph</span>.D. expected by time of appointment) to commence in the 2011-2012 academic year. The Department invites applications from candidates committed to <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">interdisciplinarity</span>, ethnographic fieldwork, and social theory. [...]. Teaching interests in one or more of the following are desirable: <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">transnationalism</span> or migration; social movements; collaborative or indigenous archaeology; race and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">postcolonial</span> theory; urban ethnography; medicine and the body. Geographic area of expertise is open, but the department especially encourages applications from candidates who work in Latin America, South or Southeast Asia. Teaching duties will include Introduction to Cultural Anthropology or Research Methods, and a Senior Research Seminar, and will include participation in the University’s Liberal Arts Core Curriculum (teaching an interdisciplinary course in the candidate’s areas of specialization). [...]</blockquote>Of course, I have no idea what the context of this advertisement might be, but the fact that it was listed on the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">SAA</span> website suggests that there is some intent to hire an archaeologist. However, a quick read of the text shows that they really want a cultural anthropologist, since their areas of interest and teaching duties have very little to do with anything that archaeology, as a discipline, might find interesting or substantive.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.utulsa.edu/about-TU/OfficeofthePresident/PresidentsProfile.aspx"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">Steadman</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7">Upham</span></a>, currently the president of the University of Tulsa, and an accomplished archaeologist, argues in <a href="http://www.saa.org/Portals/0/SAA/Publications/thesaaarchrec/mar04.pdf">a 2004 essay in the <span style="font-style: italic;"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8">SAA</span> Archaeological Record</span></a>, that archaeology is poorly served by its disciplinary association with <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9">Anthropoology</span>, which he describes as a "mature field" that has "lost important academic ground in the last decade." Reading the Colgate job posting makes clear one of the reasons why this is the case. From a disciplinary perspective, Anthropology is a lodestone hanging from the neck of Archaeology.<br /><br /><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10">Uphams's</span> solution, in part, is this:<br /><blockquote>[...] the field of archaeology must secure a separate and distinct institutional identity within the academy. What this means in different institutional contexts will vary, but archaeology requires an identity that segregates it from its most fractious and fragmented social science and humanistic kin on the one hand and places it outside of departments of anthropology on the other.</blockquote>I agree completely.Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-53325586892367182062010-11-08T22:06:00.018-07:002010-11-10T21:52:54.737-07:00Becoming Villagers<a href="http://www.uapress.arizona.edu/BOOKS/bid2257.htm">The Book</a>, as<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgs7StdqBgFoem0VZEYdB8DlBF-9rdCY82Upl0lV4DjkfiFbUcAwWy6L9hZ9TsJBC6K7Qtnit9cXMeuxCO0Oldmh-vxF4yYUEXNDwO4FV1rL7zjXapCZy-XlrCtFilNiU_p38br5nprCSYH/s1600/bv-cover-source.jpg"><img style="float: right; margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; cursor: pointer; width: 209px; height: 298px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgs7StdqBgFoem0VZEYdB8DlBF-9rdCY82Upl0lV4DjkfiFbUcAwWy6L9hZ9TsJBC6K7Qtnit9cXMeuxCO0Oldmh-vxF4yYUEXNDwO4FV1rL7zjXapCZy-XlrCtFilNiU_p38br5nprCSYH/s320/bv-cover-source.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5537416143986163570" border="0" /></a> I like to call it, is out. It was officially published in September. I think it looks great, contains some terrific scholarship, and I can't wait to hear what people think of it. Thanks to Jake Fox, my wonderful co-editor, without whom this thing would never have been completed. You can <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Becoming-Villagers-Comparing-Societies-Archaeology/dp/0816529019">buy it on Amazon</a>!<blockquote><span style="font-weight: bold;">Becoming Villagers: Comparing Early Village Societies</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Edited by Matthew S. Bandy and Jake R. Fox </span><br /><br />The shift from mobile hunting and gathering to more sedentary, usually agricultural, lifeways was one of the most significant milestones in the prehistory of humanity. This transformation was spurred by an alignment of social and ecological forces, pressures, and adaptations, and it took place in broadly comparable ways in many prehistoric settings.<br /><br />Based on a Society for American Archaeology symposium and subsequent Amerind Advanced Seminar in 2006, Becoming Villagers examines this transformation at various places and times across the globe by focusing not on the origins of agriculture and village life but rather on their consequences. The goal of the volume is to identify regularities in the ways that societies developed in the centuries and millennia following a transition to village life. Using cases that range from China to Bolivia and from the Near East to the American Southwest, leading archaeologists situate their specific areas of specialization in a broad comparative context.<br /><br />They consider the forces acting to divide and fragment early villages and the social technologies and practices by which those obstacles were, in some cases, overcome. Finally, the volume examines the long-term historical trajectories of these early village societies.<br /><br />This transformative collection makes a powerful case for a renewed and invigorated archaeological focus on large-scale comparative studies. It will be an essential read for anyone interested not only in early village societies but also in the ways in which archaeology relates to anthropology, other social sciences, and history. </blockquote><div style="text-align: left;"><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWy_8eE7WUllUbIDkbHWnYOHnuzfN03pHFnmwJjhRLkXkwYzu19JVpLkELMu0w5QS4nn90GDftySTPJgKOOAvIwUDcu8fue_wWZL2p6Vj3Z_gC2_5P2Y4fFXlWyFNys65Z88dO6xEH1jy5/s1600/IH157555.jpg"><img style="float: right; margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; cursor: pointer; width: 385px; height: 304px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWy_8eE7WUllUbIDkbHWnYOHnuzfN03pHFnmwJjhRLkXkwYzu19JVpLkELMu0w5QS4nn90GDftySTPJgKOOAvIwUDcu8fue_wWZL2p6Vj3Z_gC2_5P2Y4fFXlWyFNys65Z88dO6xEH1jy5/s320/IH157555.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5537418000408777746" border="0" /></a></div> The image at the top is the source for the cover art. Unfortunately, it is yet another engraving from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodor_de_Bry">Theodore de</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodor_de_Bry"> Bry</a> depicting a New England village scene. De Bry engravings are a very popular source of imagery for archaeological texts. I had originally proposed an engraving from a 1707 edition of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Staden">Hans Staden's</a> description of his captivity among the <a href="http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/cultural/southamerica/tupinamba.html">Tupinambá</a> of Brazil. (second image). I thought this was great and different until the editor pointed out that it depicted an execution scene in the plaza of a village, and that the palisade was surmounted by severed heads. We all decided that the de Bry image was probably a better choice after all.Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-24271009811086047412010-10-25T10:00:00.009-06:002010-10-25T10:26:29.915-06:00Massacre at Sacred Ridge<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.sciencenews.org/view/download/id/64570/thumbnail/x_large/name/violence_opener.jpg"><img style="float: right; margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; cursor: pointer; width: 161px; height: 190px;" src="http://www.sciencenews.org/view/download/id/64570/thumbnail/x_large/name/violence_opener.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br />There is<a href="http://www.sciencenews.org/view/feature/id/64465/title/Massacre_at_Sacred_Ridge"> a really nice write-up by Science News</a> of some excellent work directed by Jim Potter, a colleague of mine at <a href="http://www.swca.com">SWCA</a>. The tone is a bit breathless, but the data are fascinating and compelling. His team has documented the remains of a massacre of 35 or more people that took place in the early 800s in southwestern Colorado, in which an entire village (Sacred Ridge) seems to have been wiped out in spectacular fashion.<br /><br />It's worth noting, also, that just Jim recently finished supervising and editing a <a href="http://www.uapress.arizona.edu/search.php?search=true&boolean=AND&search=true&terms=animas-la+plata&id=2001&a=add&quantity=1&format=p">16-volume report on the results the Animas-La Plata project</a>, of which the Sacred Ridge Excavations were a part. It's a monumental effort documenting one of the great archaeological projects of recent decades. The skeletal evidence is reported in Volume XV (not available yet on the U of A press website), and the Sacred Ridge excavations in <a href="http://www.uapress.arizona.edu/util/show_search_result.php?file=%2F%2FBOOKS%2Fbid2165.htm&terms=animas-la+plata&case=Insensitive">Volume XII</a>.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.sciencenews.org/view/feature/id/64465/title/Massacre_at_Sacred_Ridge"></a>Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-52041039431927276922010-01-16T20:44:00.000-07:002010-01-16T20:44:00.134-07:00Archaeological Patterning across Southern Wyoming: Part 2In a <a href="http://neolithic-revolutions.blogspot.com/2010/01/archaeological-patterning-across.html">previous post</a>, I visually examined the distributions of some artifact, feature, and site types across southern Wyoming along and East-West gradient. This inspection produced evidence for a transition between the Plains and Wyoming Basin cultural patterns in the vicinity of Rawlins. In this post, I examine the same data using a range of statistical techniques and come to the same conclusion - but with cooler charts! You will need to read the <a href="http://neolithic-revolutions.blogspot.com/2010/01/archaeological-patterning-across.html">previous post</a> first in order for this one to make sense.<br /><br /><hr /><br />Visual inspection of east/west distribution graphs, discussed above, identified eight variables as potential differentiators between the eastern and western areas of southern Wyoming. These are stone cairns and alignments, ceramics, FCR and thermal features, ground stone, housepits, rock art, stone circles, and steatite artifacts. To assess the statistical significance of these visually-identified differences, a chi-squared analysis was conducted. The visual inspection of the graphs suggested that the boundary between the eastern and western parts of the study area should be placed somewhere between R80W and R100W. For most artifact and feature types, the change was observed between R80W and R90W. For the purposes of the chi-squared analysis, therefore, Ranges were placed into two groups: a western group, located in R85W and further westward, and an eastern group, located east of R85W.<br /><br /><table border="1" cellpadding=5><br /><tr><br /><td ></td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="left" >Stone Circles</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="left" >Ceramics</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="left" >Ground Stone</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="left" >FCR Thermal</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="left" >Cairns Alignments</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="left" >Rock Art</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="left" >Housepits</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="left" >Steatite</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="left" >Totals</td><br /></tr><br /><tr><br /><td valign="bottom" align="left" >East</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >426</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >59</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >110</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >1423</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >213</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >5</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >3</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >2</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >2241</td><br /></tr><br /><tr><br /><td valign="bottom" align="left" >West</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >390</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >158</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >636</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >16614</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >361</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >86</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >60</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >13</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >18318</td><br /></tr><br /><tr><br /><td valign="bottom" align="left" >Totals</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >816</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >217</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >746</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >18037</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >592</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >91</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >63</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >15</td><br /><td valign="bottom" align="right" >20559</td><br /></tr><br /></table><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><blockquote><span style="font-size:85%;">Table 1: Selected feature and artifact type counts organized by east/west. East/West line placed between Ranges 84W and 85W</span></blockquote></div><br /><br />Table 1 contains the counts of the potentially significant feature and artifact types organized into eastern and western groups. Pearson’s chi-squared test shows the difference between these two groups to be highly significant (χ2=2083.691, df=7, p<2.2x10-16).<br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhVgjMZvZVkLo6JQYTm0okk5eppfqT9jWAP4QrcSV2oBwzHCSA-m3M58VxGqZHzKgPqDKVBZFA44FSVehGXKRlKWnkB1x5386b0h5_ezvFhZmT8sK5F3rQMWinBcLAJIvELgQcEIpicDSK/s1600-h/chi-square-residuals.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhVgjMZvZVkLo6JQYTm0okk5eppfqT9jWAP4QrcSV2oBwzHCSA-m3M58VxGqZHzKgPqDKVBZFA44FSVehGXKRlKWnkB1x5386b0h5_ezvFhZmT8sK5F3rQMWinBcLAJIvELgQcEIpicDSK/s400/chi-square-residuals.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5425324266261014546" border="0" /></a><blockquote><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size:85%;">Figure 1: Adjusted chi-squared residuals, artifact and feature types by East vs. West. East/West line placed between Ranges 84W and 85W. From left to right: cairns/alignments (C/A), ceramics (Cer), FCR/thermal features (FCR), ground stone (GS), housepits (HP), rock art (RA), stone circles (SC), and steatite (ST).</span><br /></div></blockquote>Further information can be gleaned from an inspection of the adjusted chi-squared residuals (Figure 1). These residuals provide a measure of the importance of specific variables in distinguishing between the two groups. Values above +2 and below -2 indicate significant deviations from expected values in the contingency table, providing a convenient threshold of statistical significance. When plotted, the residuals clearly show that only five of the eight variables meet this threshold of statistical significance. These are cairns and alignments, ceramics, FCR and thermal features, ground stone, and stone circles. Of these, ground stone is the weakest differentiator and stone circles the strongest. In general terms, then, the eastern group has significantly more sites with cairns/alignments, ceramics, and stone circles, and significantly fewer sites with FCR and thermal features than does the western group. This is not to say that there is no difference between the two areas in terms of rock art, housepits, or steatite artifacts, merely that given the current sample these variables do not significantly differ between the two groups. All three of these variables involve very low site counts (Table 1).<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">MDS and PCA</span></span><br /><br />In order to assess the degree to which the five variables identified as significant in the chi-squared analysis distinguish between the eastern and western portions of the study area, a multidimensional scaling (MDS) analysis was conducted. This technique assess the n-dimensional distance between Ranges based on the values of the five variables identified above, and attempts to approximate that relationship in a reduced number of dimensions, such that the data can be visualized on a graph. Only Ranges with more than 50 prehistoric occupations were included in the analysis. The analysis was conducted using the cmdscale function of the R statistical software package.<br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqTnFSjqmu4_pG-vPu_2oJGiStR_EmNGPtNKCy-_MHmgQCEz5NU3-b1vApiRqLD-Tv583zxW7KPoPM7X04WZYl5MjJjgvD3MafmUGzddBl1ZKgxoAPBsr70KoRUKaRC48WXloIooZOQNOD/s1600-h/MDS-range.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqTnFSjqmu4_pG-vPu_2oJGiStR_EmNGPtNKCy-_MHmgQCEz5NU3-b1vApiRqLD-Tv583zxW7KPoPM7X04WZYl5MjJjgvD3MafmUGzddBl1ZKgxoAPBsr70KoRUKaRC48WXloIooZOQNOD/s400/MDS-range.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5425325348244370082" border="0" /></a><blockquote><span style="font-size:85%;"></span><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size:85%;">Figure 2: Multidimensional scaling of site assemblages, grouped by Range.</span><br /></div></blockquote>The results (Figure 2) indicate a clear separation of eastern and western areas in the sample. All of the Ranges west of R89W are located in a tight cluster in the lower right corner of the graph, while all Ranges east of R80W are clearly separated from the western cluster. The tight clustering of the western samples reflects large sample sizes and low variance, while the wider spread of eastern samples is probably produced by lower sample sizes. Interestingly, samples from R80-90W are located between the two other groups in a tight linear cluster, suggesting that this area is a kind of transition zone, consisting of a mix of the attributes that identify the western and eastern archaeological patterns. This could be produced either by a true cultural blend, or, perhaps more likely, by a cyclical shifting of the boundary between these two patterns with changes in paleoenvironmental conditions.<br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEglyWetSolaSsoxbAyC14PIjh1jJQrhUYmD58i-YiF848lfARxDXhyphenhyphenb9w7uOl4FCSq0F21c5zkTdqSfEbstBiptKN613vhChxMbilhmGBuepBQjvJtmRNhA7rpMbwlIMkyijYYhIs4ckfHt/s1600-h/MDS-range-exclude-middle.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEglyWetSolaSsoxbAyC14PIjh1jJQrhUYmD58i-YiF848lfARxDXhyphenhyphenb9w7uOl4FCSq0F21c5zkTdqSfEbstBiptKN613vhChxMbilhmGBuepBQjvJtmRNhA7rpMbwlIMkyijYYhIs4ckfHt/s400/MDS-range-exclude-middle.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5425325699179397426" border="0" /></a><div style="text-align: center;"><blockquote><span style="font-size:85%;">Figure 3: Multidimensional scaling of site assemblages, grouped by Range, labeled E/W. Ranges 80-90W excluded from analysis.</span></blockquote></div>Figure 3 represents the results of a second MDS analysis, this one excluding Ranges in the transition zone (R80-90W). In this figure, Ranges are labeled with a single letter indicating membership in the western or eastern group. The separation of the groups in this graph is complete, with all of the western samples located in a tight cluster in the lower right corner. When the intermediate transition zone is excluded from the analysis, therefore, the groups are completely separated by this technique, with no overlap whatsoever.<br /><div style="text-align: center;"><blockquote><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEcADCZlYq0K6ARqoQVbdKXmGXH4V0M0saKS6UfO4v1P-t4LWu6M-dagxUSpMEq8Tem0zxNxDFSfHfsS4fRaO9fTLglgHDJB4M3JsrltUxtxxKKXuykG0VsstqpwvWrV6rYzild27KqDBc/s1600-h/PCA-range-exclude-middle.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEcADCZlYq0K6ARqoQVbdKXmGXH4V0M0saKS6UfO4v1P-t4LWu6M-dagxUSpMEq8Tem0zxNxDFSfHfsS4fRaO9fTLglgHDJB4M3JsrltUxtxxKKXuykG0VsstqpwvWrV6rYzild27KqDBc/s400/PCA-range-exclude-middle.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5425325927110560322" border="0" /></a><span style="font-size:85%;">Figure 4: Principal Components Analysis biplot of site assemblages, grouped by Range, labeled E/W. Ranges 80-90W excluded from analysis.</span></blockquote></div>Figure 4 displays a biplot of the results of a principal components analysis (PCA) of Ranges using the same five variables that were employed in the MDS analysis. The analysis was conducted using the princomp function of the R statistical software package. The results are the same as the MDS analysis, but the superposition of variables on the biplot provides additional information on what differentiates these clusters. The eastern and western groups are completely separated on Principal Component 1, which is comprised primarily of the cairns/alignments, stone circles, and FCR/thermal variables. Ceramics and ground stone, though statistically significant, are the primary constituents of Principal Component 2, and are only weak differentiators of the two groups.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Summary</span></span><br /><br />The results of this analysis suggest that archaeological patterns in southern Wyoming are strongly separated into distinct eastern and western patterns. The western pattern is characterized by a high frequency of FCR and thermal features, and the eastern pattern by high frequencies of stone circles, cairns, and alignments. The western pattern is predominant from R91W westward, and the eastern pattern from R79W eastward. The area in R80-90W appears to constitute a transitional zone, where elements of both patterns are combined. This could represent a cultural gradient between the two areas, the Plains to the east and the Wyoming Basin to the west. However, it seems more likely that this transition is produced by the east/west movement of the Plains/Wyoming Basin ecotone with changes in critical paleoenvironmental parameters such as temperature and precipitation. However, and adequate evaluation of this hypothesis would require analysis of the east/west pattern distinction through time, which is impossible with the available data.<br /><br />Another significant factor that should be addressed but is currently intractable is the extent to which these western and eastern patterns reflect surface visibility and therefore differential site discovery and site recording in the southeastern and southwestern portions of the state. It is possible that high surface visibility in the Wyoming Basin leads to a higher discovery rate for ephemeral sites containing FCR and thermal features (and not containing stone features). It is not possible to evaluate this hypothesis at present. However, the fact that there is no significant difference between the two areas in terms of lithic artifact frequencies would suggest that differential site discovery is not the dominant factor structuring archaeological patterning at this large scale. A formal test of the influence of surface visibility is needed, though, before this possibility can be entirely discarded.Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-78732723625768288582010-01-09T17:25:00.007-07:002010-01-09T17:38:53.828-07:00Don't get a Ph.D. Seriously.Thanks to John Hawkes for <a href="http://johnhawks.net/node/2397">pointing out </a>this <a href="http://chronicle.com/article/Graduate-School-in-the-Huma/44846/">article in the Chronicle of Higher Education</a>. It deserves to be widely read. Here is a choice quote:<br /><blockquote>It's hard to tell young people that universities recognize that their idealism and energy — and lack of information — are an exploitable resource. For universities, the impact of graduate programs on the lives of those students is an acceptable externality, like dumping toxins into a river. If you cannot find a tenure-track position, your university will no longer court you; it will pretend you do not exist and will act as if your unemployability is entirely your fault. It will make you feel ashamed, and you will probably just disappear, convinced it's right rather than that the game was rigged from the beginning.</blockquote><br />These are hard truths that are seldom aired publicly. Though the article focuses on the humanities, most of what he says also applies to Anthropology.<br /><br />In archaeology, things are a bit different. I would counsel anyone wanting to pursue a career in CRM to get an M.A. It is definitely useful. A Ph.D., however, while it may prove useful at times, will never pay for itself. For the past four years <a href="http://acra-crm.org/index.cfm">ACRA </a>has put out a <a href="http://acra-crm.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=12">report on salaries in archaeology</a>. If you look through the results you will find that for a similar position and responsibilities an archaeologist with an M.A. makes about $10k more per year than an archaeologist with a Ph.D. Add to that the years in graduate school in which you will earn no salary and gain no real useful experience in the industry, and a Ph.D. in archaeology looks like a pretty bad investment. <br /><br />Unless you want to be a tenure-track professor somewhere. Good luck with that. As the author of the Chronicle piece puts is, "the minority of candidates who get tenure-track positions might as well be considered the winners of a lottery."Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-43909780284406196962010-01-06T21:40:00.000-07:002010-01-06T21:40:24.652-07:00Archaeological Patterning across Southern Wyoming: Part 1Recently I did a large file search, for an area spanning southern Wyoming, from Nebraska to Idaho and Utah - an 88 mile wide strip of land along the Colorado line. The study area covers about 81,994 sq km - about the size of the Czech Republic, or, as <a href="http://www.ioa.ucla.edu/people/staff/wake">Tom Wake</a> pointed out to me, slightly smaller than San Bernardino County. I had to develop some custom software for this, in order to be able to automate almost a thousand separate <a href="http://gruyere.uwyo.edu/WYCROWEB/WCRLogin.CFM">WYCRO</a> searches and combine the results into a single dataset. The final dataset contained some 29,000 prehistoric archaeological sites, which is a nice dataset to work with even if we have only a small amount of information for each site.<br /><br />Since WYCRO does not support a UTM boundary search option, the search was conducted by Public Land Survey System (PLSS) township and range units, comprising an area from Township 12N to 26N, and Range 60W to 121W: a total of 930 townships. R60W is, of course, on the far eastern edge of the state, and R121W on its extreme western margin. The point of the exercise was to look at archaeological patterning along the east-west axis, and to attempt to identify a zone in which the transition from the Plains to the Wyoming Basin actually took place, culturally speaking.<br /><br />Here are some of the more interesting results.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLQUjbOpNrQYawbQDf1feEpgu8l4vQvUigcG6rSmh5LHo6rec5oh47wjZFXBqqcsor2UNqAystRnZfOjxReSQkA5TZ-iS3yALAqN8cVt-RfLb5JYc92Rw4KrM5KRgPo9Qc8OlVN2Hur8g8/s1600-h/num_sites.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLQUjbOpNrQYawbQDf1feEpgu8l4vQvUigcG6rSmh5LHo6rec5oh47wjZFXBqqcsor2UNqAystRnZfOjxReSQkA5TZ-iS3yALAqN8cVt-RfLb5JYc92Rw4KrM5KRgPo9Qc8OlVN2Hur8g8/s400/num_sites.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5374881250454386226" border="0" /></a><br /><br />The graph represent the number of recorded prehistoric sites along the east-west axis. The horizontal axis represents Range W, with east to the right and west to the left. All of the townships in a particular range were combined to produce a single prehistoric site count for each Range W value. These values are the gray points. The red line is a loess-fitted trend line, a kind of local average, fitted by the loess function of the <a href="http://cran.r-project.org/">R statistical package</a>. Obviously, there are a lot more recored archaeological sites in the western part of the study area, from about R85W and westward. For reference, R85W is in the vicinity of Rawlins. This high number of recorded sites in the west is no surprise, since oil and gas development on public lands has been quite intensive in southwestern Wyoming.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMrRL7cWSd_rn_jJIwfpA_f7rcvnWhg8uXkPKWD9E95tF1sW5XDozuE8dP5e2TaVgL0p5ELSRNd9zvkNs-z_QtwyqfrcYRpU4Jt-f0yA3ZkY6lJ6EwD_ZH9LkVC2Xhe2KMXWxgh452JWkT/s1600-h/thermal_fcr.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMrRL7cWSd_rn_jJIwfpA_f7rcvnWhg8uXkPKWD9E95tF1sW5XDozuE8dP5e2TaVgL0p5ELSRNd9zvkNs-z_QtwyqfrcYRpU4Jt-f0yA3ZkY6lJ6EwD_ZH9LkVC2Xhe2KMXWxgh452JWkT/s400/thermal_fcr.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5374881077990843522" border="0" /></a><br /><br />The above graph represents the percentage of sites with recorded FCR (fire-cracked rock) or thermal features (hearths) along the east-west axis. The horizontal axis represents Range W, with east to the right and west to the left. All of the townships in a particular range were combined to produce a single percentage for each Range W value. FCR and thermal features are much more common in the western portion of the transect. This could in part reflect lifeway differences, with more processing of marginal resources such as tubers in the Wyoming Basin as opposed to hunting on the Plains. It could also reflect the generally higher surface visibility in the drier western portion of the transect.<br /><br />FCR and thermal features are relatively common, with a mean per-Range frequency of 50.2%, with a maximum frequency of 85.9% and a minimum of 10.3%. The loess-fitted trend line suggests that FCR and thermal features are very common (>40% frequency) to the west of approximately R80W, and somewhat less common (<40% frequency) to the east of that line. The zone from R80-90W appears to be a transition zone, in which FCR and thermal feature frequency declines regularly from west to east. The pattern observed in FCR and thermal feature frequency is complementary to the observed pattern of stone circle frequency (below), with high FCR/thermal feature frequency corresponding to low stone circle frequency, and vice versa.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg09fAY0uc86OslOs7iEs8FSgl0Lq22rxdYAY40_ZdjUllBK6T-tXVgLa6ZQklxDdv3g9aR1Ny3AlYu_qFhP4lleSAjXMQbhCV9NRTrx9tymEx5LmCxEUTXZB5JNLoekdT8owNj29MWro5G/s1600-h/stone_circles.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg09fAY0uc86OslOs7iEs8FSgl0Lq22rxdYAY40_ZdjUllBK6T-tXVgLa6ZQklxDdv3g9aR1Ny3AlYu_qFhP4lleSAjXMQbhCV9NRTrx9tymEx5LmCxEUTXZB5JNLoekdT8owNj29MWro5G/s400/stone_circles.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5374882440462484082" border="0" /></a><br /><br />The above graph shows the percentage of sites with stone circle features along the east-west transect. Stone circles are considerably more common in the East, supporting their association with Plains cultures. <br /><br />Stone circles are relatively common, with a mean per-Range frequency of 7.1%, with a maximum frequency of 37.7% and a minimum of 0%. The loess-fitted trend line suggests that stone circles are very common (>10% frequency) to the east of approximately R90W, and much less common (<5% frequency) to the west of that line. The zone from R80-90W appears to be a transition zone, in which stone circle frequency declines regularly from east to west. The high variance in stone circle frequency in the eastern portion of the study area likely reflects the effect of small samples in some Ranges. The change in stone circle frequency is the most robust pattern observed in the dataset.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwoXkYOTipj-KzmmUZdNHIcXaK9CKNN5cvwBmILREaYI249LFgpuFFu3EqbREb7fiQ2MeVPLq_r3bXRm4jyaqpseeoSetnPKpaqlH8lxNSvVIOLiok-V__AOjk4bKdFTauZDKf13xUU0HJ/s1600-h/cairns_alignments.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwoXkYOTipj-KzmmUZdNHIcXaK9CKNN5cvwBmILREaYI249LFgpuFFu3EqbREb7fiQ2MeVPLq_r3bXRm4jyaqpseeoSetnPKpaqlH8lxNSvVIOLiok-V__AOjk4bKdFTauZDKf13xUU0HJ/s400/cairns_alignments.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5374882450609167730" border="0" /></a><br /><br />The mean per-Range frequency of Stone cairns and alignments (above) is 4.4%, with a maximum of 35.8% and a minimum of 0%. In general, areas to the west of R90W fall below this level, while areas to the east of R90W fall above it. Cairns and alignments, therefore, appear to be more common in the eastern portion of the study area. While some of the high values in the eastern area are no doubt the result of sample effects, the overall patterns appears to be robust.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrW1FHNOPmgLbQ2rjNMkIP4iov7mCawaGvCbUdweV9DeF9MFR4KriYd4prPrtiW3z9tMvtrYo83i4XJhPPKsEDNav8OGMdtEIE2FFXshJjsVUFAXSRTJOii22FjGct4snv7PoJBZyHT5vO/s1600-h/ceramics.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrW1FHNOPmgLbQ2rjNMkIP4iov7mCawaGvCbUdweV9DeF9MFR4KriYd4prPrtiW3z9tMvtrYo83i4XJhPPKsEDNav8OGMdtEIE2FFXshJjsVUFAXSRTJOii22FjGct4snv7PoJBZyHT5vO/s400/ceramics.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5374882452797850130" border="0" /></a><br /><br />Finally, ceramics (above) are much more common in the East than in the West. Areas to the west of R80W seem to have low ceramic frequencies (<1%),while areas further to the east seem to have higher ceramics frequencies (>1%), though the eastern area of course has a high variance as would be expected given its small sample sizes.<br /><br />On the whole then, we get a fairly clear picture of two cultural traditions, one associated with stone circles, cairns, alignments, and ceramics (Plains), and the other associated with FCR and thermal features (Wyoming Basin). These two traditions intersect somewhere in the vicinity of Rawlins, which, unsurprisingly, is also located along the ecotone between the wetter eastern grasslands and the scrub desert of southwestern Wyoming.<br /><br />Since the aggregate radiocarbon record, which I will discuss in another post, show that the archaeological record of southern Wyoming is dominated by Late Prehistoric sites, this difference is probably produced mainly by human habitation within the last two millennia. Whether such a cultural divide existed in the Archaic period remains an open question, one that cannot be addressed with the sort of coarse-grained data that I have used here.<br /><br />In a later post I will present some statistical analysis of these data that further strengthen the notion that there is a clear division between the archaeological record of southwestern and southeastern Wyoming.Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-33443294107216486442009-12-29T11:27:00.001-07:002009-12-29T11:27:54.245-07:00Internet Archaeologists Find Ruins Of 'Friendster' Civilization<span class="status-body"><span class="entry-content"><a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/video/internet_archaeologists_find" class="tweet-url web" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.theonion.com/content/video/internet_archaeologists_find</a></span></span>Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-68019889381726372382009-09-16T21:52:00.006-06:002009-09-16T22:00:15.006-06:00Thinking about tribal consultationI seem to be reblogging just about everything that <a href="http://crmplus.blogspot.com">Tom King</a> posts these days. Here I go again. Dr. King continues his critique of CRM in a <a href="http://crmplus.blogspot.com/2009/09/consultation-requirements-under-section.html">new post</a>, in which he argues eloquently that consultation, with tribes and others, is really the core of historic preservation law, though in practice it is often neglected in favor of formulaic and bureaucratic approaches to management.<br /><br />On CRM practitioners:<br /><em></em><blockquote><em>I naively continue to be surprised by how reluctant many who purport to value cultural and historic preservation (not just expect to make a living at it) consider it unnecessary and/or scary to consult with interested parties about those resources.</em> </blockquote>The big finale:<br /><blockquote>It <strong>can</strong> be scary, no question about it, and it also can be irritating, frustrating, time consuming, and generally a pain in the backside. This is particularly the case because those interested parties – whether they’re tribes or others – probably don’t speak our specialized language; they may not relate very well to the National Register Criteria or the Criteria of Adverse Effect. They may not split hairs the way we do, and they may split different hairs. But the fact remains – here I go on my soap box again – that Congress enacted NHPA and other such laws not for the convenience and enjoyment of CRM practitioners and government officials, but to ensure consideration for places that citizens – that is, taxpayers, voters – care about. And when, in the 1980s, we failed to pay proper attention to the concerns of tribes, the tribes prevailed on Congress to change the law and remind us of our duty. However inconvenient it may be, I don’t think we’re doing our jobs – whether we’re consultants, federal officials, or SHPOs – if we close our eyes to the law’s clear direction to consult with tribes and others. And in evaluating historic places, we can’t pretend that archaeologists speak for anybody but themselves, about what’s important to them. They certainly don’t speak for tribes unless the tribes authorize them to.</blockquote>Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-83889318318967791392009-09-05T07:00:00.000-06:002009-09-05T07:00:01.444-06:00Kokopelli of the North<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhq08SkKauNdOa2PvA0-l96shYP2Y3o2dIksFCpf8FiaRo3yy3eHterWz5cg6KXdbDRtzP3yiRSSV6DsM77vYp2CuTzvlk46OmwdY373Ku_1Dzqh9FTpvy1ELpTn3vqrLR1MRwsPjhFJm9E/s1600-h/kokopelli.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 300px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhq08SkKauNdOa2PvA0-l96shYP2Y3o2dIksFCpf8FiaRo3yy3eHterWz5cg6KXdbDRtzP3yiRSSV6DsM77vYp2CuTzvlk46OmwdY373Ku_1Dzqh9FTpvy1ELpTn3vqrLR1MRwsPjhFJm9E/s400/kokopelli.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5375597292510357490" border="0" /></a><br />As far as I know, this is the northernmost representation of Kokopelli. It is just South of Rangely, CO, in the Canyon Pintado (Douglas Creek), at about 40.05 degrees north latitude. It is almost certainly Fremont. If anyone knows of a representation located further to the north please let me know. I'm interested.Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-49337292238601509932009-08-31T00:00:00.001-06:002009-08-31T22:15:02.036-06:00Apparently someone is reading this blogAwesome. Adam Henne makes mention of several of my posts over at <a href="http://adamhenne.wordpress.com/2009/08/26/four-stone-hearth-74/">The Four Stone Hearth #74</a> on <a href="http://adamhenne.wordpress.com/">natures/cultures</a>. Check it out. I am pleased that he was interested in <a href="http://neolithic-revolutions.blogspot.com/2009/04/farminglanguage-micro-dispersals-in.html">farming/language micro-dispersals</a>, since that is my current obsession, but I am not sure what he meant by <a href="http://www.terralingua.org/">Terralingua</a>'s "argument by coincidence." I guess I'll have to ask him.Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-89019255772256470672009-08-30T00:17:00.000-06:002009-08-30T00:18:14.030-06:00A Wyoming Sitescape<p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEib81Hsp4j2KdFbCA8lVMJpuEN3FUQW6J4p1H8xZoDASfRH4MwkoiECkpRWMemdpDgfolZpTcf2j7c4TDS3QyCkH-AEgqHZ-UPNDS5EhyIgKNq-Z0bVAJ9HhNSKKvxoructekKdRyOA5vNx/s1600-h/photo-794031.jpg"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEib81Hsp4j2KdFbCA8lVMJpuEN3FUQW6J4p1H8xZoDASfRH4MwkoiECkpRWMemdpDgfolZpTcf2j7c4TDS3QyCkH-AEgqHZ-UPNDS5EhyIgKNq-Z0bVAJ9HhNSKKvxoructekKdRyOA5vNx/s320/photo-794031.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5375637309555935266" /></a></p>Yes, that's all FCR.Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-79947329425529637762009-08-29T21:25:00.006-06:002009-09-16T22:06:02.081-06:00What is the NHPA really all about?Tom King enlightens us. Hint: it's not all about the archaeological record.<br /><br /><a href="http://crmplus.blogspot.com/2009/08/what-is-national-historic-preservation.html">Part I</a><br /><a href="http://crmplus.blogspot.com/2009/08/what-is-national-historic-preservation_28.html">Part II</a><br /><a href="http://crmplus.blogspot.com/2009/08/what-is-national-historic-preservation_31.html">Part III</a><br /><a href="http://crmplus.blogspot.com/2009/09/what-is-national-historic-preservation.html">Part IV</a><br /><a href="http://crmplus.blogspot.com/2009/09/what-is-national-historic-preservation_04.html">Part V</a><br /><br />This really is required reading for anyone who wants to understand the history of historic preservation practice in the United States, and how we came to be where we are today.Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-21585697348769490782009-05-18T11:44:00.005-06:002009-08-27T06:20:06.533-06:00Open Data and Archaeology<a href="http://www.archaeogeek.com/blog/">Computing, GIS, and Archaeology in the UK </a><a href="http://www.archaeogeek.com/blog/2009/05/18/making-your-data-open-how-to-start/">point </a>to a <a href="http://www.opendatacommons.org/guide/">short guide to making your data open</a>, provided by the <a href="http://www.opendatacommons.org/">Open Data Commons</a>. This is a topic that will be of increasing importance in archaeology in the next few years with major initiatives like <a href="http://www.digitalantiquity.org/">Digital Antiquity </a>poised to transform the way archaeologists share, archive, and publish basic data.Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-75285599804051959562009-05-03T22:16:00.007-06:002009-08-27T23:01:20.890-06:00Farming/Language Micro-Dispersals in the Titicaca Basin<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigenFTbCqaQwRgluoOsrr8Nyl_1tztoGehSIU6awkVp8OQwaWSogwh66mxa-6jeTDXmejT8y7vQkYgthill_oFuBF3yo8CZJx2lPXrv-WP4uSVGY-gr-aTWhc_TNQQkAGw8T4WC-mocaVd/s1600-h/saa-2009-map.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 368px; height: 314px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigenFTbCqaQwRgluoOsrr8Nyl_1tztoGehSIU6awkVp8OQwaWSogwh66mxa-6jeTDXmejT8y7vQkYgthill_oFuBF3yo8CZJx2lPXrv-WP4uSVGY-gr-aTWhc_TNQQkAGw8T4WC-mocaVd/s320/saa-2009-map.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5331635472821332290" border="0" /></a>The SAAs were a lot of fun, and very productive. My paper presented an alternative model to the standard Farming/Language Dispersal Hypothesis scenario associated with Bellwood, Renfrew, etc. The idea is that in certain situations, such as pertained in most of the New World, farming was likely to spread much more rapidly by cultural than by demic diffusion. We can expect that this would produce a chain-like arrangement of small-scale demic expansions that ultimately constrain one another. I call these faming/language micro-dispersals. In this scenario no clear LBK-like spread zone is produced. Rather, we get a patchwork of early farming cultures, a high level of linguistic and cultural diversity, and a high degree of local cultural continuity across the transition to agriculture. The map above outlines how I think this played out in the Formative Titicaca Basin.<br /><br />The process is very different from the standard Homeland/Spread Zone scenario that archaeologists have come to expect based on our understanding of the Indo-European, Austronesian, and Bantu language expansions. If this sort if micro-dispersal was common in the New World, it would help explain why Bellwood's (2005) attempt to identify LBK-like expansions in the Americas met with such limited success.<br /><br /><u>References</u>:<br /><br />Bandy, Matthew S. 2009. Farming/language micro-dispersals in southern Andean prehistory. Paper presented at the 74th annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Atlanta, GA.<br /><br />Bellwood, Peter. 2005. <span style="font-weight: bold;">First Farmers</span>. London, Blackwell.<br /><span style=";font-family:times new roman;font-size:100%;" ><span lang="en-US" style="font-size:11;"></span></span><div> </div>Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-75651483189307544152009-04-19T21:18:00.008-06:002009-08-07T10:18:54.282-06:00Site Taphonomy and Cultural Traditions in NW Colorado<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSFFAA9LoyxY0OxsgKeoWhJGlFjSQPs58PHWSauGu_2WfUpURhx6oK5-xRqwXRLZlHqyYA7_fe2HqjIo9uRE_JoogMpC28GpRX5YGCY9tHJ8XgNDOkhdvG-VoYDJe5e9qjSSd9F4OkIpk4/s1600-h/5RB322+P1a.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 278px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSFFAA9LoyxY0OxsgKeoWhJGlFjSQPs58PHWSauGu_2WfUpURhx6oK5-xRqwXRLZlHqyYA7_fe2HqjIo9uRE_JoogMpC28GpRX5YGCY9tHJ8XgNDOkhdvG-VoYDJe5e9qjSSd9F4OkIpk4/s320/5RB322+P1a.jpg" alt="Is this a Fremont point?" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5326606886907032370" border="0" /></a><br /><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div>A few weeks ago I presented a paper at the <a href="http://www.coloradoarchaeologists.org/">CCPA</a> <a href="http://www.coloradoarchaeologists.org/2009am.htm">meetings in Alamosa</a> (Bandy and Baer 2009). It was based on some work SWCA did in 2008 in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piceance_basin">Piceance Basin</a> in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rio_Blanco_County">Rio Blanco County</a>, northwestern Colorado. We block surveyed almost 140 square miles and recorded almost 400 prehistoric archaeological sites.<br /><br />There is a low-level but persistent controversy concerning cultural traditions in the Piceance Basin during the Formative Era (400 B.C.E. to 1300 C.E., approximately; Reed and Metcalf 1999). The region is adjacent to major concentrations of Fremont culture settlement in lower elevation areas to the West, particularly in nearby Douglas Creek, but also in Dinosaur National Monument, and in the Uinta Basin and along the Green River in Utah. The Piceance Basin is located in middle elevations, between roughly 6000 and 8000 feet, and is too high for all but the most marginal maize cultivation. There were never any permanent Fremont farming settlements in the region as far as we can tell.<br /><br />The question therefore arises: do the Formative Era sites in the Piceance Basin reflect seasonal use of the area by Fremont populations resident in farming settlements at lower elevations, or was there an indigenous population in the Piceance and similar areas that was contemporary with but distinct from the Fremont, and that possibly derived from local Archaic populations? Or do Formative Piceance Basin sites reflect some mixture of Fremont seasonal use and local hunter-gathers?<br /><br />This question is as old as archaeological research in the Piceance Basin. Jennings (1976) proposed that Piceance Basin Formative sites were produced by a local, non-Fremont population with an Archaic-style hunter-gatherer adaptation. He posited an ethnic frontier between this unnamed local population and the Douglas Creek Fremont. This frontier would presumably have been located somewhere in the vicinity of <a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=cathedral+bluffs,+colorado&ie=UTF8&ll=39.902362,-108.579254&spn=0.624723,0.933838&t=p&z=10">Cathedral Bluffs</a>. Reed and Metcalf (1999) offered a similar scenario, proposing a new term, the Aspen Tradition, to describe these Archaic-style hunter-gatherers living in northwestern Colorado (in the Piceance Basin and elsewhere).<br /><br />On the other hand, Grady (1980) suggested that the Piceance Basin (and the Roan Plateau) was used seasonally by Fremont peoples who farmed at lower elevations (Douglas Creek, Dinosaur National Monument). In his scenario, the Fremont would have planted in the Spring in lower elevations, hunted and gathered in the late Spring/early Summer in the Piceance, spent the Summer in higher elevation areas such as the Roan Plateau, and returned in the Fall to the Piceance Basin and in the late Fall to their low-elevation fields for the harvest and the Winter. Byron Loosle has proposed a similar model for the Uinta Mountains of Utah, though the mobility he envisions is less transhumant and more logistically organized.<br /><br />What interests me is the way in which these arguments are constructed and supported. In general, very little evidence is used. Grady, for example, bases his argument mainly on an abstract model of how humans should exploit the environment of northwestern Colorado. Reed and Metcalf (1999) assert that Formative Piceance Basin sites are "not Fremont" and therefore are related to a different archaeological culture: their Aspen Tradition. However, since Aspen Tradition peoples are postulated to have used small, corner-notched arrow points, identical to Fremont examples, as well as nondescript grayware ceramics, it is not clear what Reed and Metcalf's expectations would be for Fremont seasonal campsites. Apart from temporary campsites containing Fremont ceramics and projectile points, what more can reasonably be expected?<br /><br />Reed and Metcalf's argument seems to be reducible to the single assertion that there is not much Fremont material culture in the Piceance Basin. This does not include Fremont-style projectile points which, of course, are abundant. They seem to be impressed mainly with the paucity of Fremont ceramics in the area. However, since the area never supported permanent agricultural settlements, Fremont sites in the area would all be impermanent campsites and resource extraction locales. Since ceramics have a long use-life (generally estimated at > 1 year for a cooking pot) and campsites have a short duration (probably a month or less), only a small percentage of Fremont campsites would be expected to contain ceramic sherds and therefore to be recognized as Fremont.<br /><br />Several approaches to estimating the percentage of Fremont campsites that are aceramic converge on a figure of about 90%. That is, no ceramic vessels were broken or deposited at approximately 9/10 of Fremont seasonal campsites in the Piceance. When this is taken into consideration, the entire Formative Era occupation of the Piceance Basin can easily be accounted for by Fremont seasonal use. No sites remain unaccounted-for and the Aspen Tradition is therefore analytically superfluous. There is simply no reason to posit the presence of any cultural tradition in the Formative Piceance Basin apart from Fremont.<br /><br />The importance of this kind of simple Middle Range Theory insight (derived from a recognition of the critical role played by a site's length of occupation in the formation of its artifact assemblage) is seldom appreciated in a hunter-gatherer context. And yet it is precisely in these contexts that the effects of short occupation spans will be most pronounced.<br /><br />Here's the abstract:<br /><blockquote>Reed and Metcalf proposed the Aspen Tradition in order to account for Formative Era archaeological remains in the northern Colorado River Basin that seemed not fit into existing taxa such as Fremont or Anasazi. In their argument, they suggested that the Formative Era occupation of the Piceance Basin was dominated not by Fremont seasonal hunting camps (as had been proposed by Grady) but rather by highland-adapted groups similar to and perhaps directly descended from the region's Archaic Era inhabitants. In 2008, SWCA Environmental Consultants conducted extensive block surveys in the Piceance Basin, resulting in the recording of hundreds of archaeological sites representing all periods of regional prehistory. These data make possible a preliminary evaluation of the taxonomic affiliations of the region's Formative Era archaeological remains. Our analysis indicates that Fremont seasonal use can adequately account for the entire Formative Era archaeological record of the project area. The question must therefore be asked: is there any reason to postulate a poorly-defined taxonomic unit such as the Aspen Tradition when the archaeological record can be adequately explained without it?</blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><u>References Cited</u>:<br /><br />Bandy, Matthew S. and Sarah Baer<br />2009 The Formative occupation of the Piceance Basin: Is the Aspen Tradition analytically superfluous? Paper presented at the Colorado Council of Professional Archaeologists annual meeting, Alamosa, CO, April 3.<br /><br />Jennings, Calvin H.<br />1976 An assessment of the potential cultural resources of the proposed utility corridors for the C-b oil shale lease tract. Laboratory of Public Archaeology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins.<br /><br />Grady, James<br />1980 Environmental Factors in Archaeological Site Locations. Bureau of Land Management Cultural Resource Series 9. BLM, Lakewood, CO.<br /><br />Reed, Alan D. and Michael D. Metcalf<br />1999 Colorado Prehistory: A Context for the Northern Colorado River Basin. Colorado Council of Professional Archaeologists, Denver.Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-55689441594278929902009-04-05T09:43:00.043-06:002009-08-27T22:59:04.066-06:00Phil Duke on CRMMany academic archaeologists have a very inadequate understanding of modern CRM. A good example is a recent radio interview given by Phil Duke of Fort Lewis College. In <a href="http://www.chicagopublicradio.org/content.aspx?audioID=18042">an interesting discussion of the geopolitics of archaeology</a>, he was prompted at one point to comment on "the controversies surrounding Cultural Resource Management." His response reveals a profound misunderstanding of the contemporary practice of CRM in the United States. An excerpt:<br /><blockquote>The other downside that I would mention is that it has tended to divorce the archaeological enterprise from an intrinsic political consideration, or an ethical consideration, of the projects that they are actually helping clear. There is no integration ... of political or ethical considerations into the project itself. I don't want to paint the picture that the archaeologists doing this are unethical, quite the contrary, but there is no mechanism by which the political/ethical dialogue is insinuated into the project itself. The project is legitimate, it has been cleared by the Federal government, so that our responsibility, our ethical responsibility, is purely to the archaeological record.<br /></blockquote>Duke appears to be laboring under the significant misaprehension that CRM in the United States is purely concerned with the research value of archaeological sites. What he does not appreciate is that the contemporary practice of CRM requires extensive consultation with interested Native American groups, and others, concerning not only archaeological sites but also cultural landscapes and traditional cultural properties more generally.<br /><br />Scientific value is only one criterion used to evaluate the significance of resources. There are other criteria of equal legal standing that relate to interest groups other than archaeologists. In the case of prehistoric sites, this normally means Native Americans. In fact, it seems to me that CRM archaeologists have more frequent, sustained, and meaningful contact with Native Americans than do academic archaeologists. Most contacts of this type, in the United States at least, take place in a CRM context, since consultation with Native Americans is a standard part of the Section 106 process. I'm not saying that this relationship is perfect, but there is a great deal of communication and consultation that takes place and CRM archaeologists clearly have responsibilities, legal and ethical, to peoples and things other than the archaeological record.<br /><br />However, most of this work does not result in publication in journals and edited volumes, in part because Native Americans often prefer that the details of such consultation remain confidential. Perhaps this is why Duke is not aware of the extent of these relationships.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb38/">National Register Bulletin #38</a> would be a good place for him to start. He might follow that up by reading <a href="http://crmplus.blogspot.com/">Tom King's blog</a>.<br /><br />The interview is <a href="http://audio.wbez.org/wv/2008/02/wv_20080204a.mp3">here</a>. The discussion of CRM begins near the middle, at 17:04.Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-86826799202369978452009-03-26T22:45:00.013-06:002009-04-05T10:48:51.136-06:00Looting and MethArchaeology magazine is running <a href="http://www.archaeology.org/0903/etc/drugs.html">a piece on how the looting of archaeological sites in New Mexico is driven in large part by meth</a>. Tweakers are apparently digging up sites and actually using pots and other artifacts to purchase drugs. Some choice quotes:<br /><blockquote>In the Southwest, antiquities are what a stolen car stereo might be in New York--an untraceable commodity of the criminal underground. "This is what the West has, so this is what the West gives up for its drugs," says N. Artifacts can be looted from remote public lands near impoverished communities with acute drug problems, and there is an infrastructure of shady galleries and trading posts that can "launder" them for sale. A kind of strange synergy is developing with meth in particular that puts every archaeological site and collection at greater risk. Law enforcement officials in the Southwest even have a term for those who combine tweaking and digging--"twiggers." <blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>Wow. "Twiggers."<br /><br />Though well done and interesting, the piece does stray into offensive territory, as in the following:<br /><blockquote>Most of his cases come from the poverty-stricken trailer parks of Farmington, Bloomfield, and Aztec in the state's archaeology-rich northwest corner.<blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote>I happen to be from that area, and my Dad lives in Aztec. Characterizing Farmington, Bloomfied, and Aztec as drug- and crime-ridden slums is really a bit much. Farmington, especially, is really a boom town, at least until the price of natural gas fell off a cliff recently, and the Farmington unemployment rate is <a href="http://www.bls.gov/web/laummtrk.htm">well below the national average</a>.<br /><br /><blockquote></blockquote>Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-27200330698798278472009-02-26T16:05:00.013-07:002011-10-18T11:43:18.279-06:00Dart vs Arrow PointsRecently I have been doing some work related to distinguishing between dart and arrow points and their respective debitage assemblages. The standard discriminant function is that developed by Shott (<a href="http://www.jstor.org/pss/282380">1997</a>), following earlier work by Thomas (<a href="http://www.jstor.org/pss/279405">1977</a>). Shott's function uses shoulder width in two separate formulae to derive dart and arrow scores.<br /><br />Dart=1.4x-16.85<br />Arrow=0.89x-7.22<br /><br />where x is projectile point shoulder width in mm.<br /><br />If the dart score exceeds the arrow score, then the point is classified as a dart point, and vice versa. The method correctly classified 92% of still-hafted arrow points and 77% of still-hafted dart points in Shott's sample.<br /><br />The method is very useful as a guide to classification. However, the double-formula method is cumbersome. Earlier today I flashed to the obvious fact that the two formulae are simply lines, and the point at which they intersect is the shoulder width that distinguishes dart from arrow points.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: left;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtg_ln2Y_rOZmdmvXMp5qa_v98mZyI5YW6BgK-AqLoj8_j_xEoWMzL05X47SlfP9Z28pAM81e5CpfalwtHjBgDBmqMEB_vRNKoGalSdia-bhmsVN9m65zEMpLAVXzJhZdgU7N1Oy0tl8KA/s1600-h/shott-functions.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img style="cursor: pointer; width: 374px; height: 255px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtg_ln2Y_rOZmdmvXMp5qa_v98mZyI5YW6BgK-AqLoj8_j_xEoWMzL05X47SlfP9Z28pAM81e5CpfalwtHjBgDBmqMEB_vRNKoGalSdia-bhmsVN9m65zEMpLAVXzJhZdgU7N1Oy0tl8KA/s320/shott-functions.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5307249900667651202" border="0" /></a><br /></div><br /><div style="text-align: left;">The lines intersect at x=19.26. Therefore, points with a shoulder width of greater than 19.26 mm are classified as dart points, while those with narrower shoulder widths are classified as arrow points. This is a quick and easy rule of thumb that can be remembered in the field without having to sit down and do the math.<br /><br />It's good to simplify.<br /></div></div>Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-221556388975266944.post-65505116112722375002009-02-25T22:15:00.004-07:002009-04-05T10:49:29.782-06:00Sahlins and Service<p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFrO8EFLNm6z0BwaflZDEWxFilJ5jnqSrP3aYsnK-ICqOxn2N3rMiK9YNKb5fWkBGdCjBdcQ_SfSOqMreDxpVN1OwZOIPXiqm6yTN3fr2-i27YghTPtVZ9rN8hcHgVoOAnGJrkuC73OM-A/s1600-h/photo-761925.jpg"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFrO8EFLNm6z0BwaflZDEWxFilJ5jnqSrP3aYsnK-ICqOxn2N3rMiK9YNKb5fWkBGdCjBdcQ_SfSOqMreDxpVN1OwZOIPXiqm6yTN3fr2-i27YghTPtVZ9rN8hcHgVoOAnGJrkuC73OM-A/s320/photo-761925.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5306970517451687202" border="0" /></a></p>First edition, nice find. The use of dominos on the dust jacket photo to represent the evolutionary process is disarmingly forthright.Matt Bandyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09628932289298712134noreply@blogger.com0