Exchange, Embedded Procurement, and Hunter-Gatherer Mobility: A Case Study from the North American Great Basin.

Great Basin;Paleoindians;Hunter-gatherers;Mobility;Toolstone Procurement;Anthropology and Archaeology;Social Sciences;Anthropology

Newlander, Khori S.Zhang, Youxue ;

University of Michigan

关键词: Great Basin;    Paleoindians;    Hunter-gatherers;    Mobility;    Toolstone Procurement;    Anthropology and Archaeology;    Social Sciences;    Anthropology;   

Others  :  https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/91507/irohk_1.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

瑞士|英语

来源: The Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship

【 摘 要 】

Current models of subsistence-settlement in the Great Basin during the Paleoindianperiod (referred to by regional specialists as the ;;Paleoarchaic”) rely heavily on the distributionof obsidian to define the ranges over which groups traveled to procure resources, though GreatBasinists disagree over what these ranges actually reflect: the territory of residentially mobilehunter-gatherers or the logistical forays of men for the provisioning of semi-sedentary wetlandbase camps. Here, I consider a third alternative: obsidian reflects mobility for purposes of socialnetworking and gathering information, and/or exchange.This alternative bears consideration because: (1) the distances over which obsidian wasdistributed in the Great Basin circumscribe areas far greater than anything observedethnographically; (2) many Paleoarchaic sites contain only a small amount of obsidian; and (3)the subset of activities for which obsidian was used likely represents only some members of aPaleoarchaic group. Paleoarchaic people often used obsidian and fine-grained volcanics (FGVs,e.g., andesite and dacite) to make stemmed points and chert for gravers, scrapers, and other;;resource-processing” gear. By considering where Paleoarchaic groups obtained obsidian, FGVs,and chert, this research contributes to a comprehensive understanding of Paleoarchaic adaptationthat likely includes multiple scales of mobility and methods of resource acquisition.In order to develop this model, I analyze more than 18,000 lithic artifacts from severalPaleoarchaic localities in east-central Nevada, focusing especially on chert as a complement toprevious analyses of obsidian and FGVs. I find that the technological and provenance analysis ofthese artifacts may allow the definition of chert procurement ranges that operate within andcross-cut the areas defined by FGV and obsidian provenance, in support of a multi-tiered modelof Paleoarchaic mobility and exchange.This research contextualizes obsidian-based models of Paleoarchaic subsistence-settlementwithin a broader understanding of lithic technological organization, informed byexamples of modern hunter-gatherer mobility and exchange. In turn, this research raises thechallenging, but fruitful, task of developing new models of Paleoindian mobility, intergroupinteraction, and technological organization.