Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-26T20:22:09.494Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Traces of the Individual in Prehistory

Flintknappers and the Distribution of Projectile Points in the Eastern Tonto Basin, Arizona

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2017

Joshua Watts
Joshua Watts*
Affiliation:
Arizona State University, P.O. Box 872402, Tempe, AZ 85287 (jswatts@asu.edu)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

There is considerable and largely untapped potential in individual-scale research in the discipline of archaeology. Innovative methods described in this article were developed to identify the work of individual prehistoric flintknappers. Theoretically, the approach was informed by previous researchers' discussions of technological style and utilizes an individual- or nano-scale focus for that concept. New analytical methods were then used to investigate individual flintknappers' participation in the community organization of the prehistoric eastern Tonto Basin, Arizona. Specifically, small triangular stone projectile points (n = 149) collected from Roosevelt phase (A.D. 1275–1325) sites were analyzed to inform an assessment of the spatial distribution of individuals' handiwork in late prehistoric multi-site settlements. This research illustrates how improved individual-scale techniques may provide new insight on topics of considerable interest to archaeologists. For the Tonto Basin case, this project offers a new perspective on the integration of immigrants into local systems and the strength of community ties across natural barriers such as the Salt River during the Roosevelt phase.

En la disciplina arqueológica, la investigación dedicada al estudio del individuo es una escala en gran medida inexplorada, pero que goza de un potencial considerable. Los métodos innovadores, descritos en este artículo fueron desarrollados con el objetivo de identificar el trabajo individual de talladores prehistóricos. Desde un punto de vista teórico, esta aproximación tiene su base en las discusiones previas de investigadores acerca del estilo tecnológico que utilizan un enfoque individual o a nano-escala para estudiar ese concepto. Estos nuevos métodos analíticos se han utilizado para investigar la participación individual de los talladores en la organización de la comunidad prehistórica de la zona este de la Tonto Basin en Arizona. Específicamente, las pequeñas puntas de proyectil de forma triangular (n = 149) que se recolectaron en sitios de la fase Roosevelt (1275–1325 d.C.) fueron analizadas con el fin de estimar la distribución espacial de la producción de individuos en múltiples asentamientos prehistóricos tardíos. Esta investigación demuestra como la mejora de las técnicas a escala individual puede proveer una nueva visión en aquellos temas que sean de gran interés para los arqueólogos. En el caso de la Tonto Basin, este proyecto ofrece una nueva perspectiva sobre la integración de inmigrantes en los sistemas locales y sobre la fortaleza de los lazos comunitarios más allá de las barreras naturales, como el Río Salado, durante la fase Roosevelt.

Type
Research Article
Information
Advances in Archaeological Practice , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , August 2013 , pp. 25 - 36
Copyright
Copyright © Society for American Archaeology 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Adovasio, James M., and Gunn, Joel D. 1975 Basketry and Basketmakers. Kiva 41(1):71–80.Google Scholar
Aldana, Gerardo V., Robertson, Ian G., and Watts, Joshua 2003 Workshops, Knappers, and Technological Style at Teotihuacan. Paper presented at the 68th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Milwaukee.Google Scholar
Andrefsky, William Jr. 1986 A Consideration of Blade and Flake Curvature. Lithic Technology 15:48–54.Google Scholar
Andrefsky, William Jr. 1998 Lithics: Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Bishop, Christopher M. 1995 Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition. Oxford University Press, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Jeffery J. 2001 Tracking Prehistoric Migrations: Pueblo Settlers among the Tonto Basin Hohokam. Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona 66. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costin, Cathy L. 1991 Craft Specialization: Issues in Defining, Documenting, and Explaining the Organization of Production. In Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. 3, edited by Schiffer, Michael B., pp. 1–56. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Crown, Patricia L. 2007 Life Histories of Pots and Potters: Situating the Individual in Archaeology. American Antiquity 72(4):677–690.Google Scholar
Dean, Jeffrey S. (editor) 2000 Salado. Amerind Foundation New World Studies Series 4. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Dietler, Michael, and Herbich, Ingrid 1989 Tich Matek: The Technology of Luo Pottery Production and the Definition of Ceramic Style. World Archaeology 21(1)148–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dietler, Michael, and Herbich, Ingrid 1998 Habitus, Techniques, Style: An Integrated Approach to the Social Understanding of Material Culture and Boundaries. In The Archaeology of Social Boundaries, edited by Stark, Miriam T., pp. 232–263. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C. Google Scholar
Dobres, Marcia-Anne, and Hoffman, Christopher R. 1994 Social Agency and the Dynamics of Prehistoric Technology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 1(3):211–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doelle, William H. 2000 Tonto Basin Demography in a Regional Perspective. In Salado, edited by Dean, Jeffrey S., pp. 81–105. Amerind Foundation New World Studies Series 4. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Elson, Mark D., Stark, Miriam T., and Gregory, David A. 2000 Tonto Basin Local Systems: Implications for Cultural Affiliation and Migration. In Salado, edited by Dean, Jeffrey S., pp. 167–192. Amerind Foundation New World Series 4. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Elson, Mark D., Swartz, Deborah L., Craig, Douglas B., and Clark, Jeffery J. 1994 The Roosevelt Community Development Study, Vol. 2: Meddler Point, Pyramid Point, and Griffin Wash Sites. Anthropological Papers 13. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson, Arizona.Google Scholar
Gillespie, Susan D. 2001 Personhood, Agency, and Mortuary Ritual: A Case Study from the Ancient Maya. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 20:73–112.Google Scholar
Gregory, David A. 1995 Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Eastern Tonto Basin. In The Roosevelt Community Development Study: New Perspectives on Tonto Basin Prehistory, edited by Elson, Mark D., Stark, Miriam T., and Gregory, David A., pp. 127–184. Anthropological Papers 15. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson, Arizona.Google Scholar
Gunn, Joel D. 1972 Idiosyncratic Behavior in Chipping Style: Some Hypotheses and Preliminary Analysis. Paper presented at the 30th Annual Plains Conference, Lincoln, Nebraska.Google Scholar
Gunn, Joel D. 1977 Idiosyncratic Chipping Style as a Demographic Indicator: A Proposed Application to the South Hills Region of Idaho and Utah. In The Individual in Prehistory: Studies of Variability in Style in Prehistoric Technologies, edited by Hill, James N. and Gunn, Joel D., pp. 166–204. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Hegmon, Michelle 1998 Technology, Style, and Social Practices: Archaeological Approaches. In The Archaeology of Social Boundaries, edited by Stark, Miriam T., pp. 264–280. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C. Google Scholar
Hegmon, Michelle, Nelson, Margaret C., and Ennes, Mark J. 2000 Corrugated Pottery, Technological Style, and Population Movement in the Mimbres Region of the American Southwest. Journal of Anthropological Research 56(2):217–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, James N. 1974 Individual Variability in Ceramics and the Study of Prehistoric Social Organization. Paper presented at the 39th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
Hill, James N., and Gunn, Joel D. (editors) 1977 The Individual in Prehistory: Studies of Variability in Style in Prehistoric Technologies. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Hodder, Ian 2000 Agency and Individuals in Long-term Process. In Agency in Archaeology, edited by Dobres, Marcia-Anne and Robb, John, pp. 21–33. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
Hoffman, Christopher M. 1985 Projectile Point Maintenance and Typology: Assessment with Factor Analysis and Cononical Correlation. In Concordance in Archaeological Analysis, edited by Carr, Christopher, pp. 566–612. Waveland Press, Prospect Heights, Illinois.Google Scholar
Hoffman, Christopher M. 1997 Alliance Formation and Social Interaction during the Sedentary Period: A Stylistic Analysis of Hohokam Arrowpoints. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Arizona State University, Tempe.Google Scholar
Huse, Hannah 1976 Identification of the Individual in Archaeology: A Case-Study from the Prehistoric Hopi Site of Kawaika-a. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
Kelly, Robert L., and Thomas, David Hurst 2010 Archaeology. 5th ed. Wadsworth, Belmont, California.Google Scholar
Knapp, A. Bernard, and van Dommelen, Peter 2008 Past Practices: Rethinking Individuals and Agents in Archaeology. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 18(01):15–34.Google Scholar
Lechtman, Heather 1977 Style in Technology—Some Early Thoughts. In Material Culture: Styles, Organization, and Dynamics of Technology, edited by Lechtman, Heather and Merrill, Robert S., pp. 232–263. West Publishing, St. Paul. Minnesota.Google Scholar
Lemonnier, Pierre 1993 Introduction. In Transformation in Material Cultures since the Neolithic, edited by Lemonnier, Pierre, pp. 1–35. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
Lindauer, Owen 2000 Schoolhouse Point Mesa Perspective on Salado Community Development. In Salado, edited by Dean, Jeffrey S., pp. 219–240. Amerind Foundation New World Series 4. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Lindauer, Owen (editor) 1995 Where the Rivers Converge, Roosevelt Platform Mound Study: Report on the Rock Island Complex. Roosevelt Monograph Series No. 4, Anthropological Field Studies 33. Department of Anthropology, Arizona State University.Google Scholar
Lindauer, Owen 1997 The Archaeology of Schoolhouse Point Mesa, Roosevelt Platform Mound Study: Report on the Schoolhouse Point Mesa Sites, Schoolhouse Management Group, Pinto Creek Complex. Roosevelt Monograph Series No. 8, Anthropological Field Studies 37. Office of Cultural Resource Management, Department of Anthropology, Arizona State University, Tempe.Google Scholar
Lindeman, Michael W. 1995 The Chipped Stone Assemblage. In The Roosevelt Community Development Study, Volume 1: Stone and Shell Artifacts, edited by Elson, Mark D. and Clark, Jeffery J., pp. 1–42. Anthropological Papers 14. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson, Arizona.Google Scholar
Loendorf, Chris 2010 Hohokam Core Area Sociocultural Dynamics: Cooperation and Conflict along the Middle Gila River in Southern Arizona during the Classic and Historic Periods. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, School of Human Evolution and Social Change, Arizona State University, Tempe.Google Scholar
Loendorf, Chris, and Rice, Glen E. 2004 Projectile Point Typology: Gila River Indian Community, Arizona. Gila River Indian Community Anthropological Papers 2. Gila River Indian Community Cultural Resource Management Program, Sacaton.Google Scholar
Magurran, Anne E. 2004 Measuring Biological Diversity. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
Mantel, Nathan 1967 The Detection of Disease Clustering and a Generalized Regression Approach. Cancer Research 27(2):209–220.Google Scholar
Nassaney, Michael S., and Brandao, Jose A. 2009 The Materiality of Individuality at Fort St. Joseph: An Eighteenth-Century Mission-Garrison-Trading Post Complex on the Edge of Empire. In The Materiality of Individuality, edited by White, Carolyn L., pp. 19–36. Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
Nelson, Margaret C. 1997 Projectile Points: Form, Function, and Design. In Projectile Technology, edited by Knecht, Heidi, pp. 371–382. Plenum Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nettle, Daniel 1997 On the Status of Methodological Individualism. Current Anthropology 38:283–286.Google Scholar
Pauketat, Timothy R. 2001 A New Tradition in Archaeology. In The Archaeology of Traditions, edited by Pauketat, Timothy R., pp. 1–16. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Plog, Fred 1974 Archaeology and the Individual. Paper presented at the 39th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
Rasband, William S. 2005 ImageJ. U.S. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.Google Scholar
Redman, Charles L. 1977 The “Analytical Individual” and Prehistoric Style Variability. The Individual in Prehistory: Studies of Variability in Style in Prehistoric Technologies, edited by Hill, James N. and Gunn, Joel D., pp. 41–53. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Rice, Glen E. 1994 Projectile Points, Bifaces, and Drills. In Archaeology of the Salado in the Livingston Area of Tonto Basin, Roosevelt Platform Mound Study: Report on the Livingston Management Group, Pinto Creek Complex, Pt. 2, edited by Jacobs, David, pp. 727–738. Roosevelt Monograph Series 3, Anthropological Field Studies 32. Office of Cultural Resource Management, Department of Anthropology, Arizona State University, Tempe.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Michael S., and Anderson, Corey D. 2011 PASSaGE: Pattern Analysis, Spatial Statistics and Geographic Exegesis, Version 2. Methods in Ecology & Evolution 2(3):229–232.Google Scholar
Sackett, James R. 1982 Approaches to Style in Lithic Archaeology. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 1:59–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Walter, and Fisk, Arthur D. 1983 Attention Theory and Mechanisms for Skilled Performance. In Memory and Control of Action, edited by Magill, Richard A., pp. 119–143. Advances in Psychology 12. North-Holland, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shennan, Stephen 2002 Genes, Memes and Human History: Darwinian Archaeology and Cultural Evolution. Thames & Hudson, London.Google Scholar
Simon, Arleyn, and Jacobs, David 2000 Salado Social Dynamics: Networks and Alliances in Tonto Basin. In Salado, edited by Dean, Jeffrey S., pp. 193–218. Amerind Foundation New World Studies Series 4. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Sliva, R. Jane 1997 An Introduction to the Study and Analysis of Flaked Stone Artifacts and Lithic Technology. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson.Google Scholar
Snow, Dean R. 2002 Individuals. In Darwin and Archaeology: A Handbook of Key Concepts, edited by Hart, John P. and Terrell, John E., pp. 161–181. Bergin & Garvey, Westport, Connecticut.Google Scholar
Sokal, Robert R., and James Rohlf, F. 1995 Biometry: The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research. W.H. Freeman, New York.Google Scholar
Statsoft, Inc. 2001 STATISTICA for Windows. Statsoft, Inc., Tulsa, Oklahoma.Google Scholar
Van Keuren, Scott 1994a Design Structure Variation in Cibola White Ware Vessels from Grasshopper and Chodistaas Pueblos, Arizona. Unpublished Master's thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.Google Scholar
Van Keuren, Scott 1994b Judging the Mark of an Individual: An Investigation of Design Variation in Prehistoric Pottery from Grasshopper Pueblo, Arizona. Arizona Anthropologist 11:31–55.Google Scholar
Van Keuren, Scott 1999 Ceramic Design Structure and the Organization of Cibola White Ware Production in the Grasshopper Region, Arizona. Arizona State Museum Archaeological Series 191. Arizona State Museum, Tucson.Google Scholar
Watts, Joshua 2001 Measuring Individual Variation in Obsidian Projectile Points: Identifying Knappers in the Roosevelt Phase Tonto Basin, Central Arizona. Unpublished manuscript on file, School of Human Evolution and Social Change, Arizona State University, Tempe.Google Scholar
White, Carolyn L. 2009 Introduction: Objects, Scale, and Identity Entangled. In The Materiality of Individuality, edited by White, Carolyn L., pp. 3–17. Springer-Verlag, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittaker, John C. 1984 Arrowheads and Artisans: Stone Tool Manufacture and Individual Variation at Grasshopper Pueblo. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.Google Scholar
Whittaker, John C. 1987 Individual Variation as an Approach to Economic Organization: Projectile Points at Grasshopper Pueblo. Journal of Field Archaeology 14(4):465–479.Google Scholar
Whittaker, John C. 1994 Flintknapping: Making and Understanding Stone Tools. University of Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar
Wiessner, Polly 1983 Style and Social Information in Kalahari San Projectile Points. American Antiquity 48(2):253–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilensky, Uri 1999 NetLogo. Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois. http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/. Google Scholar
Winterhalder, Bruce, and Smith, Eric A. 2000 Analyzing Adaptive Strategies: Human Behavioral Ecology at Twenty-Five. Evolutionary Anthropology 9:51–72.Google Scholar
Wood, J. Scott 2000 Vale of Tiers Palimpsest: Salado Settlement and Internal Relationships in the Tonto Basin Area. In Salado, edited by Dean, Jeffrey S., pp. 107–142. Amerind Foundation New World Studies Series 4. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar