The Archaeological Study of Spanish Colonialismin the Americas

Mary Van Buren

Published online: 31 December 2009

� Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Abstract Spanish colonial archaeology has undergone a fundamental shift since

the Columbian Quincentenary due to the adoption of a bottom-up understanding of

colonialism that emphasizes the analysis of local phenomena in a global context and

the active ways in which people negotiated the processes set in motion by the

conquest. This review examines five key research foci: culture change and identity,

missionization, bioarchaeology, economics, and investigations of the colonial core.

It ends with a consideration of ongoing challenges posed by the archaeology of

colonialism, particularly the relationship of the individual to broader social

processes and the emerging role of comparison.

Keywords Spanish colonialism � Archaeology � Identity � Missions

Introduction

Spanish colonial archaeology has undergone a fundamental shift in perspective over

the last few decades, one that is invigorating the field and encouraging archaeologists

to participate more fully in the broader dialogue in which historical anthropology

engages. This transformation is due to two theoretical perspectives whose influence

became apparent in the 1990s. First was a bottom-up understanding of colonialism

that emphasizes the agency of local actors and the varied consequences of European

expansion, an approach that was explicated most cogently by Wolf (1982). This was

followed by a theoretical current that draws on the ideas of Bourdieu (1977) and

Giddens (1984) to reframe the issue of culture change in terms of the mutually

constitutive interaction of human actors and social structures, particularly with

M. Van Buren (&)

Department of Anthropology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA

e-mail: mary.vanburen@colostate.edu

123

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

DOI 10.1007/s10814-009-9036-8

regard to the often strategic production of new identities. While drawing from

different theoretical sources, both of these approaches are characterized by an

interest in the effects of European expansion on the full range of people who were

caught up in this process, a rejection of the concept of discrete, bounded cultures, and

an emphasis on the active ways in which individuals and social groups negotiated the

processes set in motion by the conquest.

This article reviews developments in the field since 1992 and includes research

conducted by North and Latin American scholars. Coverage of the latter as well as

research produced in the context of cultural resource management in the United

States is less complete due to the difficulties of locating materials. While historical

sources are critical to this subfield, for reasons of space, only archaeology,

bioarchaeology, and some research in underwater archaeology are included. The

review begins with a brief discussion of work produced in association with the

Columbian Quincentenary, followed by an overview of recent research organized in

terms of five key issues that crosscut regions: culture change and identity,

missionization, the biological consequences of colonization, the changing nature of

economic activities, and the urban core. Within each of these bodies of research,

investigators have emphasized the highly variable ways in which people negotiated,

embraced, resisted, and were transformed by their incorporation into a new world

order. The final section briefly considers some of the ongoing challenges posed by

the archaeology of colonialism, particularly with regard to the relationship of the

individual to broader cultural processes, and the emerging role of comparison in

what is often an ideographic endeavor.

The Columbian Quincentenary

The Quincentenary of Columbus’ first voyage to the Americas generated a spate of

publications by historical archaeologists, but the literature produced for the event

itself does not represent a break from previous research traditions. Most of this work

falls into one of two categories: compendia of research that had been conducted in

the decade preceding the event, and visually appealing books intended for the general

public.

The breadth of archaeological, ethnohistoric, and demographic studies of Spanish

colonialism conducted up to 1992 is reflected most notably in ColumbianConsequences, a three-volume collection based on a series of symposia on the

Spanish borderlands that was initiated by the Society for American Archaeology

(Thomas 1989, 1990, 1991; see also Thomas 1992), and the Spanish BorderlandsSourcebooks, 27 volumes of reprinted articles and source materials, each with an

introductory essay by a specialist. The first two volumes of Columbian Consequencesconsist of brief synopses of specific issues that are organized geographically; the

third concludes with a series of essays on the future of borderlands scholarship.

However, only Thomas (1989, 1991) argues for an explicitly different orientation, a

‘‘cubist’’ perspective that rejects the notion of a single truth and encourages the

examination of phenomena from multiple perspectives. Although this is a powerful

metaphor, the volumes themselves primarily reflect differences in regional and

152 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

disciplinary focus rather than the more profound differences generated by distinct

epistemologies (e.g., Sued-Badillo 1992).

Neither are new ways to conceptualize the effects of European expansion

explored in the primary vehicles used by the Society for Historical Archaeology to

commemorate the Quincentenary. The SHA sponsored a series of guides to the

archaeological literature of the immigrant experience in America (e.g., Ayers 1995;

Ewen 1990) and published a special issue of Historical Archaeology (Farnsworth

and Williams 1992) for the event. The guides are primarily bibliographic in nature,

and the special issue of Historical Archaeology includes an eclectic set of articles on

various issues in the investigation of colonial and Republican sites in the northern

borderlands and Mexico that are grounded primarily in processual and economic

perspectives (Figure 1).

A number of other scholarly works were published as a result of symposia or

other events organized to mark the Quincentenary. These include, for example, an

edited volume based on a symposium sponsored by the British Academy (Bray

1994) and a series of papers on Latin American colonial archaeology from a

symposium held at the 1992 Annual Meeting of the Society for Historical

Archaeology in Jamaica (Gasco et al. 1997). An important volume edited by Verano

and Ubelaker (1992) highlighting the variable effects of diseases introduced into the

Americas by Europeans was produced in conjunction with seminars organized by

the National Museum of Natural History, and another on a similar theme (Larsen

and Milner 1994) was based on a symposium at the American Association of

Physical Anthropology meetings. The Quincentenary also inspired, in part, the

innovative project developed by Steckel and Rose (2002) to facilitate communi-

cation between historians and physical anthropologists who shared an interest in

historical patterns of illness and health in the Americas. A 1988 Society for

American Archaeology symposium exploring the consequences of European

expansion from both ethnohistoric and archaeological perspectives resulted in

Ethnohistory and Archaeology (Rogers and Wilson 1993). The latter is one of the

few works that explicitly addresses the challenge of integrating archaeological and

historical data (see also Galloway 1991 and Gannon 1992).

Not surprisingly, scholarly recognition of the Quincentenary was most

pronounced in the circum-Caribbean. In the Dominican Republic, Veloz Maggiolo

and Ortega (1992) produced a volume on the foundation of Santo Domingo to

commemorate the event, and the Ripley P. Bullen Columbus Quincentenary Series

was initiated by the University Press of Florida (McEwan 1993; Milanich and

Hudson 1993; Milanich and Milbrath 1989; Weisman 1992). Much of this work is

about the early exploration of La Florida, particularly de Soto’s entrada, a topic that

continues to elicit both scholarly and popular interest (Ewen and Hann 1998).

Additional works published for the educated public include Milanich’s (1995) long-

term history of Florida Indians before and after the Spanish conquest, and Seeds ofChange (Viola and Margolis 1991), based on a Smithsonian exhibition of the same

name. Many of these volumes are excellent examples of the presentation of current

archaeological interpretations by experts to the public in an accessible and

beautifully illustrated format.

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 153

123

This discussion is not meant to denigrate the scholarship that was published in

conjunction with the Quincentenary but to point out that, for the most part, this body

of work did not constitute a new vision of Spanish colonial archaeology. Little in the

way of explicit critical reflection, synthesis, or programmatic statements regarding

future research was published at the time of the event. However, the Quincentenary

coincided with a shift in theoretical perspective within archaeology as a whole,

specifically the incorporation of postprocessual approaches, variants of which

have come to dominate the field of historical archaeology in the United States. As

Deagan (1998) notes, few archaeologists of Spanish colonialism explicitly espouse

San Francisco

St. AugustineFort Mose

Puerto Real

La Isabela

Santa Catalina

Santa Cruz

San Luis ReySan Diego

Santa BarbaraChannel

Havana

San Juan

San Luisde Talimali

Pueblos

MexicoCity

Caracas

La Guaira

Yaxcab

Bogot

Cuenca

MoqueguaColca Valley

M rrope

Buenos Aires

Mendoza

Potos

Los Adaes

Santa Mariade Galve

Otumba

Soconusco Region

Quito

GuaranMissions

AmaliaSites

Fig. 1 Approximate locations of sites mentioned in text

154 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

postmodern theory, and many investigators continue to pursue their previous

research agendas. However, a number have successfully articulated their research

with two general theoretical currents that are prevalent in the broader intellectual

community, namely, an interest in the varied ways in which people negotiated,

resisted, embraced, and sometimes even escaped incorporation into the global

economy, and a concern with the formation of identities in internally diverse

communities characterized by marked differences in power. The first is influenced

by Wolf’s (1982) examination of the effects of European expansion, and the second

is informed, often very generally, by the postmodern concern with identity, power,

and praxis.

Columbian consequences: Destruction, transformation, creation

Archaeological research on the Spanish colonial period is extremely diverse, shaped

in part by the history of particular regions as well as the research traditions that have

developed within them. However, many investigators are concerned with five broad

themes that crosscut regions and the specific historical trajectories of particular

groups: identity and culture change, the demographic effects of European

expansion, missionization, the changing nature of economic activities, and

urbanization. In all of these areas researchers have emphasized the varied ways in

which people responded to conquest and colonization.

Identity and culture change

The dominant theme in Spanish colonial archaeology—particularly within the

northern borderlands—has long been the issue of culture change, initially phrased in

terms of acculturation. The early history of these concepts and their adoption by

archaeologists has been expertly addressed by Cusick (1998). The best-known

archaeological approach to culture change within this intellectual tradition was

developed by Deagan (1974, 1983) in her landmark research on colonial St.

Augustine. Deagan integrated a processual interest in adaptation with ideas about

acculturation that were drawn from scholars such as Foster (1960) in her examination

of the emergence of creole society in a frontier setting. By employing the pattern

recognition method developed by South (1978), she discovered that the Spanish

colonial pattern at St. Augustine differed from the Carolina pattern associated with

British colonists, primarily in the large percentage of indigenous wares present in the

kitchen activities category (Deagan 2005). This occurred at all socioeconomic levels,

even though higher-status households had larger percentages of European goods

overall. Deagen explained this in terms of gendered spheres of action, with public,

male activities associated with higher-status European objects, and more private,

female activities involving lower-status indigenous goods and also frequently

conducted by indigenous women who married into Spanish households. The result of

these processes was both biological and cultural mestizaje, the development of a new

form of American culture that combined elements from colonizing and colonized

groups.

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 155

123

Deagan’s approach to the emergence of a creole American culture has been

especially influential in the southeastern United States and Caribbean, where she and

her many students have produced an impressive array of studies on European, Native

American, and African groups under Spanish rule. Most notably, Deagan directed

two large, multidisciplinary projects that examined early Spanish adaptations to life

in Hispaniola, one at La Isabela and the other at Puerto Real. The investigation of La

Isabela (Deagan 1996a; Deagan and Cruxent 2002a, b) was a multinational project

that was initiated by the Dominican Republic in 1987 in anticipation of the

Quincentenary. This site, the first intentional European colony in the Americas, was

established by Columbus in 1493 with a contingent of over 1500 who arrived well

equipped to recreate a medieval Spanish town. Nonetheless, the community was

ravaged by illness and food shortages; by 1498 it was abandoned after a group of

rebels sacked the town and established an independent community among Indian

allies. Deagan and Cruxent argue convincingly that La Isabela represents a failed

attempt at transplanting Spanish lifeways directly to Hispaniola without accommo-

dating to local conditions. The genesis of a successful, truly American culture can be

traced, instead, to subsequent communities in which nonelite households combined

cultural practices, frequently—but not always—as the result of intermarriage.

The process of creolization is evident at the slightly later site of Puerto Real,

Haiti, one of 13 towns established in 1503 by the Spanish government to gain

control of Hispaniola (Deagan 1996a). Diets, for instance, were adjusted to local

conditions, with cattle (a species that adapted rapidly to the local environment)

rather than sheep or goats providing the most meat; a variety of wild resources were

consumed as well (Deagan and Cruxent 2002a, p. 291; Reitz and McEwan 1995).

Also unlike La Isabela, utilitarian ceramics at Puerto Real are dominated by locally

produced, non-European wares. For a brief period these were Taino in origin, but

indigenous ceramics were rapidly replaced by colono ware, a shift that reflects the

demise of the native population and the importation of African slaves (Smith 1995).

Ewen’s dissertation research at Puerto Real (Ewen 1991, 2000) constituted a

systematic test of the process of creolization identified by Deagan at St. Augustine.

To accomplish this he examined artifacts and faunal remains from a high-status

household in light of a series of test implications that he derived from Deagan’s

model. The results indicate that similar processes took place at both settlements;

Ewen argues that creolization may have proceeded in much the same fashion

throughout the Spanish empire. However, the investigation of sites in the Andes and

Mexico City suggests that there were regional differences in the proportions of

indigenous and Hispanic goods, particularly ceramics, consumed by households.

Both Smith (1997), who studied colonial wineries in the southern Peruvian valley of

Moquegua, and Van Buren (1999), who examined an elite recreational home near

Potosı, Bolivia, found that while the basic trend is similar in that European-style

pottery was more frequently employed in public contexts, the Andean assemblages

were overwhelmingly dominated by locally produced ceramics, including indige-

nous table wares, even in wealthy households. A number of factors could account

for this difference, including the continued availability of native wares and the lack

of access to contraband goods in the Andes. Yet the larger point is that while

identification of the Spanish colonial pattern provided an important insight into the

156 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

roles played by gender and socioeconomic status in circum-Caribbean culture

change, it cannot account for the diverse processes that shaped household

consumption—or culture change—throughout the empire.

More recently, Rodrıguez-Alegrıa (2005a, b) and Voss (2008) have offered more

fundamental criticisms of Deagan’s model. Rodrıguez-Alegrıa argues against the

underlying assumption that Spaniards universally attempted to distinguish them-

selves from indigenous groups when possessing the means to do so. His analysis of

assemblages from four households occupied by Spaniards in the colonial core of

Mexico City revealed that traditional Aztec serving wares as well as majolicas were

used by all of them, but in varying proportions. Yet, socioeconomic status does not

seem to have determined the quantity of majolicas consumed. A household occupied

by two powerful Spaniards had higher percentages of indigenous serving vessels than

did nearby renters, a pattern that Rodrıguez-Alegrıa interprets as reflecting the

strategic decisions of individuals, some of whom used indigenous serving wares in

contexts in which the collaboration of native peoples was sought. The ubiquity of

Aztec-tradition serving wares in European households in Mexico City makes it clear

that Spaniards did not uniformly reject indigenous culture, and the possibility that the

decision to use these objects was shaped by strategic concerns warrants further

investigation. Yet the fact that the pattern of ceramic use in the core of the empire—

Mexico City and the Andes—differs from that of the circum-Caribbean area does

suggest that regional circumstances also played a role. The distinctive demographic

and historical conditions in the core, most notably the presence of highly stratified

native societies with long traditions of craft specialization, may have influenced the

degree to which native goods were both available and accepted.

Voss (2008) also questions the general applicability of Deagan’s model and

criticizes the assumptions underlying it, particularly the use of binary categories

such as ‘‘public’’ and ‘‘private’’ to analyze household assemblages and the argument

that intermarriage between Spaniards and natives explains their syncretic nature.

While Voss reiterates the importance of race and gender in the examination of

colonialism, she argues that broader economic processes must be investigated in

addition to domestic arrangements. By examining colonial labor regimes, she is able

to articulate these two scales of analysis, proposing, for example, ways in which

tribute systems would have made certain kinds of food and ceramics available to

households that were created by coercion as well as marriage.

Rodrıguez-Alegrıa’s and Voss’s work reflect the different ways of conceptual-

izing culture change in colonial contexts that have emerged over the last decade,

approaches that place more emphasis on the individual negotiation of identity within

communities characterized by highly diverse populations and large disparities in

power. Deagan (1998) discusses the development of these ideas in the wake of the

Quincentenary, which she argues had profound consequences for the way in which

archaeologists have conceptualized culture change in the circum-Caribbean area.

Earlier models of unidirectional culture change have been subsumed by approaches

that emphasize the dialectical nature of the relationship between colonizers and

colonized and the active negotiation of identity by both; what was previously

understood as acculturation has come to be viewed instead as transculturation,

creolization, and ethnogenesis, processes that were shaped by local factors and

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 157

123

resulted in varied outcomes. Deagan attributes this critical shift to the dialogue

engendered by the anniversary of Columbus’ voyage, which was informed by the

concept of transculturation developed by the Cuban cultural anthropologist Ortiz

(1940), as well as the influence of postmodern thought on archaeology. Her work

and that of many of her colleagues in the Southeast has increasingly emphasized the

dialectical nature of culture change and the agency of the variety of actors involved

in this process. As she notes, however, this is not occurring in the context of an

outright rejection of earlier models, nor has it entailed direct reference to specific,

alternative bodies of thought.

More explicit applications of distinct theoretical approaches are found primarily

in the research conducted by scholars working in other regions, particularly

Lightfoot and his students in California (see discussion of Voss [2008] above).

While much of this centers on the Russian colony of Fort Ross (Lightfoot et al.

1998) and thus lies outside the scope of this review, the perspective being developed

by this group of scholars has had an impact on the understanding of Spanish colonial

populations as well. The trajectory of the archaeological investigation of culture

contact in California is parallel to that of the Southeast, with early assimilationist

models being replaced by an acculturation perspective by the 1980s. Farnsworth

(1992), for example, modified a classification system developed by Quimby and

Spoehr (1951) to produce an acculturation profile that he used to assess culture

change in three missions in Alta California. This technique employs a number of

indices based on the relative frequencies of imported and native artifacts and artifact

traits in order to determine the degree of culture change that occurred within the

neophyte population in those communities. The understanding of the relationship

between material culture and culture change that underlies this method is similar to

the approach adopted in the Southeast and is criticized by Lightfoot and his

colleagues (Lightfoot et al. 1998) on three interrelated grounds: first it does not

adequately capture the complex processes underlying the formation of identity,

particularly within pluralistic settings; second, it obscures individual agency and

characterizes native participation in the process as passive; and third it tends to rely

heavily on the analysis of assemblages in terms of the relative proportions of

artifacts displaying European and indigenous influences. As an alternative—or

complementary—strategy, they propose an agency-based approach shaped by

Bourdieu’s theory of practice and Giddens’ notion of structuration, one that focuses

on the reproduction and creative modification of culturally shaped categories and

values through the routine performance of daily activities. They argue that this

perspective is particularly useful for analyzing the ways in which individuals living

in colonial settings characterized by rapidly shifting and internally diverse social

fields reconstituted their practices in ways that allowed them to be both meaningful

and effective under new conditions. Methodologically, this perspective is associated

with a focus on spatial organization, particularly the analysis of the built

environment and the residues that accumulated within it as the result of daily

routines, rather than the quantitative assessment of artifact assemblages.

This approach has been applied by Lightfoot (2005a, b) in his comparison of the

historical trajectory of native Californians living at Fort Ross and that of groups

subjected to the mission system to the south, by his students Silliman (2001a, b, 2004)

158 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

and Voss (2002, 2003, 2005) in their studies of native Californians under Spanish

and Mexican rule, by Loren (2001a, b, 2007, 2008) in the lower Mississippi Valley,

by Scarry (2001) in La Florida, and independently and with a different emphasis by

Jamieson (2000) in Ecuador. While most examinations of acculturation focus on the

colonizer-colonized dichotomy, these scholars emphasize the complex nature of

social identity and the way in which it changes, arguing that most colonial contexts

were characterized by diverse native and European populations that, in turn, were

marked by important differences in gender, class, race, and other parameters. In her

analysis of the Presidio de San Francisco, Voss (2005), for example, examines a

household midden and architectural data to trace the emergence of a Californio

identity. She argues that the evidence of daily practices reflected in the midden

remains, and eventually in architecture, indicates that the presidio residents

downplayed their differences in favor of a shared colonial status. Unlike colonists in

other parts of the empire, such as the circum-Caribbean, this entailed the complete

rejection of indigenous material culture, perhaps as a strategy for highlighting a

distinctive common identity.

Some scholars (Cusick 2000; Ewen 2000) have questioned the degree to which

these new perspectives represent a break with earlier approaches. While the

rhetorical virtuosity of scholars espousing any new theoretical approach tends to

obscure continuity with previous ideas, this does, in fact, represent a fundamental

shift in perspective rather than simple capitulation to current political sensibilities.

The reconceptualization of acculturation in terms of the negotiation of identity

within the shifting fields of social relations that were generated by colonial regimes

allows archaeologists not only to identify the highly variable ways in which

identities were formed and new ethnic groups emerged, but also facilitates

participation in the broader anthropological discourse about these issues. This does

not mean, however, that all phenomena of archaeological interest can be subsumed

by the study of identity. As Brubacker and Cooper (2000) demonstrate, the term

itself now encompasses such broad and contradictory meanings that it is often used

as a way to signal affiliation with a general theoretical stance, rather than as an

analytical tool. Perhaps more importantly, the kind of obsessive concern with

identity that has occurred in other fields could inhibit investigation of the multitude

of processes that were touched but not determined by the relationship between

colonizers and colonized.

Missionization

The term ‘‘missionization’’ is meant here to include the ways in which Spaniards

and natives negotiated the evangelical and acculturative programs instituted at

formal missions along with less well-studied aspects of religious negotiation that

occurred in other contexts. The study of missions obviously demands a consider-

ation of identity and has been of particular interest because these institutions

represent cases of ‘‘directed culture change’’ in which indigenous people were

subjected to explicit programs of acculturation that were often maintained by force.

Missions are discussed here separately, however, because the long history of

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 159

123

research on this institution has generated an identifiable scholarly discourse that

includes issues that extend beyond the topic of acculturation.

Historically, the primary impetus for archaeological investigations of mission

sites has been the need for information on which to base architectural reconstruc-

tions, and more recently cultural resource management requirements motivate much

of this work. Architectural studies, however, continue to be important (e.g., Fox

1993; Weisman 1992), particularly in Mexico (for examples see Fernandez and

Gomez 1998). While the goal of much of this research is to aid the accurate

restoration of mission complexes, some architectural studies go beyond this to

consider the ways in which mission architecture reflects evangelical processes. Ivey

(1993), for instance, compares Franciscan missions along the northern and central

frontier of New Spain and concludes that the relative uniformity of these complexes

reflects the training that friars received in central Mexico, as well as their ability to

direct all but the most difficult types of construction. Others, however, have

emphasized variability in mission architecture. Saunders (1993, 1996) and Marrinan

(1993) note that the plans of missions in La Florida deviate from the supposed

‘‘ideal’’ with regard to overall layout, the size and design of churches, and the

location of burials. They argue that archaeologists working in the Southeast have

imposed the model of mission layout outlined by Jones and Shapiro (1990) on the

data, thus obscuring variation caused by temporal and geographic differences in the

social environment.

The developmental sequence of mission chapel architecture has been analyzed in

detail by Hanson (1995). Building on Kubler’s (1948) work in central Mexico,

Hanson correlates the construction of increasingly more elaborate chapels in the

Yucatan with successive phases of acculturation; temporary chapels were built in

newly visited Maya communities, followed by simple and then permanent ramada

chapels to which large masonry structures were added after a community had

become a center of pastoral activity in its own right. Hanson’s model points to the

important relationship between the built environment and the unfolding process of

missionization, an issue that also is explored by Wernke (2007a). While Hanson

emphasizes how changes in architecture were shaped by Franciscan strategy,

Wernke, drawing on work by the Comaroffs (1986, 1991), highlights the

improvisational and mutually constitutive nature of early missionary work. His

research in the Colca Valley of southern Peru suggests that friars often had to rely

on analogies with existing practices in order to communicate Christian doctrine in

ways that were intelligible to native groups, in this case constructing chapels within

spaces that had been previously used for ritual and political purposes by the Inka.

The use of analogies linking indigenous and Christian symbols for the purpose of

conversion was a strategy that was opposed by some members of the Church and

promoted by others, and one, Wernke argues, that ultimately prevented the complete

eradication of native practice in the long term.

The issue of religious conversion has long been a central component of mission

studies, particularly in California where scholars have sought to explain the

‘‘voluntary’’ entry of large numbers of people into the mission system over a short

period of time (Lightfoot 2005a). A difficulty inherent in this type of research is the

assessment of belief, as its reflection in public behavior is especially distorted under

160 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

conditions of devastating change and frequent violence. Thus the ‘‘idol behind the

altar’’ has been regarded as the conservative retention of old beliefs, as indicative of

an outward and superficial acceptance of Christianity that masks continued

adherence to traditional practices, or more recently as an act of resistance against

state religion. In an important review of mission archaeology, Graham (1998) uses

the Comaroffs’ (1986, 1991) analysis of Protestant missionization in South Africa to

argue against interpreting the persistence of indigenous practices solely in terms of

the rejection or acceptance of Christianity. While efforts to create a unified Christian

society failed, missionization did result in the reformulation of native as well as

European concepts and practices as people attempted to make sense of their

changing worlds. This did not, however, preclude resistance or even open rebellion

and, in many instances, may have actually promoted it. As the Comaroffs (1986, pp.

1–2) state: ‘‘The missionary project was everywhere made particular by variations

in the structure of local communities, in the social and theological background of

the evangelists, and in the wider politico-economic context and precise circum-

stances in which the encounter took place.’’

Archaeological studies of missionization (e.g., McEwan 1993, 2000; Milanich

1995, 1998, 1999; Thomas 1990) have yielded abundant evidence for such

differences, both within and between regions. McEwan (2000) has emphasized the

unique situation that transpired in the Apalachee province of La Florida, where, in

1608, members of the native elite traveled to St. Augustine to request the presence

of missionaries. Although these individuals represented only one faction in a larger

field of competing elites (Scarry 1999), missionization throughout La Florida

appears to have involved much mutual accommodation. At San Luis de Talimali, an

Apalachee council house was constructed on the plaza across from the church,

suggesting, in a sense, a balance of power. McEwan’s (2000) review of mortuary

evidence from mission sites throughout the Southeast indicates that while in most

ways burials conformed to Christian doctrine (see also Jacobi 2000), the friars made

some concessions to native practice, particularly with regard to grave goods. The

influence of Christianity on belief systems is perhaps most convincingly revealed by

the maintenance of a Catholic identity by the Talimali band up to the present day,

and most intimately by the analysis of a crystal cross found at Mission San Luis that

was manufactured using indigenous techniques (McEwan et al. 1993). Even among

the Apalachee, however, resistance was often pronounced and took diverse forms.

Scarry (2001) attributes the wide range of native responses to the fact that the way

in which individuals negotiated this new world was shaped by their specific social

positions in colonial society.

The very complex relationship of Native Americans to mission life is nowhere

more pronounced than in the Rıo de la Plata region of what is now southern Brazil.

In 1750 Spain ceded the territory where seven Jesuit communities were located to

Portugal, leading to the Guaranı War in which Indians fought both Portuguese and

Spanish troops in an attempt to remain on mission lands. While these communities

were far from the idyllic oases that are sometimes depicted in the media, historians

and archaeologists working with the Historic Mission Archaeology Project have

uncovered abundant evidence for the development of a synthesis of indigenous and

European practices at these sites (see volume edited by Kern 1998). For instance,

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 161

123

the Jesuits taught mission Indians how to forge iron, and iron objects, especially

agricultural implements, were used as a means of attracting and co-opting

neophytes. At the same time, ceramics continued to be produced and included

Guaranı, European, and hybrid vessel forms as well as pipes that were associated

with native rituals that the Jesuits attempted to eradicate. Thus, while the Guaranı

may not have become the model Christians that the Jesuits desired, they did produce

a unique amalgam of indigenous and Spanish culture that could be productively

analyzed, perhaps, in terms of the processes identified by the Comaroffs in South

Africa.

The explicit rejection of Christian ideology is most apparent in the American

Southwest. Relatively little work has been conducted in New Mexico and Arizona

on these and other issues related to Spanish colonialism, perhaps, as Snow (1992)

suggests, because of the lack of institutional support for such endeavors and the

overreliance on Franciscan records for understanding mission history (Ivey and

Thomas 2005). The Pueblo Revolt, however, has attracted a substantial amount of

scholarly attention from archaeologists, who have employed diverse perspectives—

many of which derive from prehistoric archaeology—to illuminate not only the

event itself but the ways in which it shaped later Pueblo identity (Liebmann 2008;

Preucel 2002; Riley 1995).

In 1680, the Pueblos and their indigenous allies revolted against Spanish rule,

killing 401 colonists and 21 missionaries and freeing themselves from European

control until 1692 when they were reconquered (Preucel 2002). The revolt entailed a

rejection of missionaries and their teachings, as well as a call for cultural

revitalization in which native religious beliefs figured prominently. A number of

archaeologists have examined the ways in which symbols expressive of religious

and social identity were manipulated to better understand how Puebloan peoples

negotiated the early missionary period as well as the subsequent decade when they

were fending off Spanish attempts to regain control of the region. Mobley-Tanaka

(2002) argues that the use of the cross on prerevolt pottery allowed indigenous

people to maintain some level of religious integrity while outwardly acquiescing to

Catholicism, since the cross is meaningful in both the Christian and Pueblo worlds.

In contrast, the Dongoskes’ (2002) examination of rock art just below the pueblo of

Awatovi revealed very little Christian symbolism.

The decade immediately following the revolt was marked by a rapid shift in

settlement patterns and many other aspects of material culture. Liebmann (2008), in

an examination of Jemez participation in the revitalization movement, emphasizes

the varied ways in which Pueblo people responded. While women in some villages

revived older ceramic styles, emphasizing a shared identity rooted in native

religious practice (Capone and Preucel 2002; Mills 2002; see Saunders 2000, 2001

for a discussion of similar ceramic changes in the Southeast), the Jemez adopted

new ceramic types and constructed dual-plaza pueblos that referenced but did not

imitate earlier architectural forms. As Liebmann argues, the latter not only reflected

but shaped the new moiety system that was adopted by the Jemez as a result of

interaction with their Pueblo neighbors. Revitalization thus did not mean a simple

return to the past but represented, instead, a movement forward that entailed the

162 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

rejection of many aspects of European culture as well as innovative responses to

new conditions that were sometimes rooted in traditional practice.

In addition to issues of identity and religious conversion, the economic

implications of missionization also have been explored. Rickliss (1996) is the only

investigator who examines the impact of missionization from an ecological

perspective that takes the entire indigenous settlement system into account; his

approach is explicitly derived from previous work on prehispanic populations in the

area. He provides a long-term history of the Karankawa of the central coast of Texas,

arguing that this group treated missions as an economic resource analogous in some

ways to the coastal prairie. This strategy allowed them to maintain their traditional

economic and settlement patterns despite initial high rates of mortality, an

interpretation supported by stable isotope analyses on human remains from Mission

San Juan (Cargill and Hard 1999). Only with the arrival of Anglo-Americans and the

subsequent loss of land did their society suffer a rapid and irrevocable decline. Allen

(1998) adopts some aspects of this perspective in her examination of cultural

continuity at the Californian mission of Santa Cruz. She traces the ways in which

neophytes maintained traditional work and dietary practices despite radical changes

in the environment that were induced by the missionary system itself. Lightfoot

(2005a, p. 86) argues that these changes were so deleterious to native lifeways that

they essentially forced indigenous groups into the missions in order to survive.

Despite the apparent importance of environmental factors in postconquest life, very

little research is being done on this topic in California or elsewhere, outside the

context of botanical and zooarchaeological studies that are concerned primarily with

diet (e.g., Scarry 1993) and the adaptation of European domesticates to conditions in

the colonies (e.g., deFrance 1996; Reitz 1993).

In 1993 Costello assessed the economic changes that had occurred in Alta

California during the early 19th century and argued that despite their seeming

homogeneity, missions—even within a single region—cannot be viewed as ‘‘peas in

a pod.’’ Fifteen years of additional research on the social, ideological, and economic

processes that unfolded at missions throughout the Spanish empire make this

assertion incontrovertible. As will be seen in the following section, this observation

is equally valid with regard to the demographic impact of Spanish contact and

missionization on native populations.

Biological impacts of conquest

One of the few debates that crystallized as an immediate result of the research

produced for the Quincentenary centers on the demographic effects of European

contact. Of the nine essays on the future of borderlands studies that conclude the last

volume of Columbian Consequences, three (Dobyns 1991; Dunnell 1991;

Ramenofsky 1991) argue that catastrophic population decline as a result of

epidemic diseases resulted in profound discontinuities between pre- and postcontact

societies. The methodological implication of this bottleneck, with its attendant

decrease in cultural variability, is that the use of ethnographic analogy to understand

prehistoric societies is completely inappropriate. This argument has its roots in a

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 163

123

related debate regarding the size of the indigenous population just prior to the

arrival of Europeans and the magnitude of subsequent population loss. While some

scholars, most notably Cook (1981) and Dobyns (1983, 1991), have provided very

high precontact estimates and contend that the indigenous population suffered a

dramatic decline as the result of the rapid spread of epidemic disease, others, such as

Ubelaker (1976, 1988, 1992), argue for lower initial estimates and thus more

demographic continuity over time.

Scholars agree that the arrival of Europeans had an extremely negative impact on

the health and well-being of Native Americans, resulting in increased levels of

illness and death that in some cases led to the extinction of entire groups. They do

not agree on the timing, nature, and magnitude of the biological effects of the

European conquest on different groups (Larsen and Milner 1994). In 1994 Larsen,

who accepts the lower population estimates generated by Ubelaker, reviewed

research by anthropologists on the biological consequences of European contact up

to that point. He compared six populations, four of which were incorporated into the

Spanish empire, and found varied effects. All populations showed signs of increased

stress, but levels of violence, nutritional status, and other factors differed among

groups.

Since then a substantial amount of bioarchaeological research has confirmed

variability in the biological dimension of the contact experience and has produced

new insights into the physical consequences of colonialism for a number of Native

American groups (e.g., Kealhofer and Baker 1996). A particularly impressive body

of data has been generated by Larsen, his students, and colleagues under the

auspices of the La Florida Bioarchaeology Project, a collaborative research program

that was initiated in the early 1980s to investigate the impact of contact on the Guale

at the Mission Santa Catalina on St. Catherines Island and was later extended to

examine additional Guale, as well as Timucua, and Apalachee populations in La

Florida from a comparative perspective (Larsen 2001; Larsen et al. 2002).

Researchers have employed a range of techniques to examine diet, illness, and

activity patterns in populations incorporated into the Spanish empire. Stable isotope

analysis, for example, has revealed a shift from heterogeneous to homogeneous

diets based largely on maize in mission period populations (Hutchinson et al. 1998;

Larsen et al. 2001). Larsen et al. (2001) attribute this to the Spanish promotion of

maize as both an agricultural commodity and a means of ‘‘civilizing’’ native

populations by encouraging them to forgo wild foods and focus on agricultural

production. Related to this is a striking increase in porotic hyperostosis, most likely

caused by iron deficiencies associated with increased maize consumption and

reduced intake of seafood, as well as diarrheal diseases and parasites that proliferate

in crowded conditions (Larsen and Sering 2000). The latter also appear to have

caused growth disruptions, particularly in young children who, while being weaned,

were particularly susceptible to the severe dehydration caused by diarrhea (Simpson

2001).

The work routines associated with increased reliance on agriculture and the

demands of mission life shaped the bodies of Native American neophytes in other

ways as well. Structural characteristics of the long bones of Guale and Timucua men

suggest that they were experiencing more biomechanical stresses as a result of

164 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

activities such as lifting and pushing, while women in these groups appear to have

become less mobile. Yamasee men, however, showed fewer of these effects and no

differences in the mobility of men and women were apparent (Ruff and Larsen

2001).

Walker’s (2001) comparison of the La Florida data with that from Alta California

and the Pueblos indicates some interesting parallels as well as differences,

particularly with regard to the Pueblos. While populations in the Santa Barbara

Channel area show a shift from marine to terrestrial resources comparable to the

changes in diets in La Florida, people at Pecos—who were more reliant on corn

prior to the conquest—appear to have consumed either less maize or bison and more

wild plants during the mission period. Neither Puebloan people nor missionized

populations in Alta California experienced a sharp increase in porotic hyperostosis,

although the body size of Alta California populations within missions decreased,

with children, in particular, stunted compared to their counterparts in unmissionized

villages (Walker et al. 1996). In the Pueblo case, however, anemia, caries, and other

health problems appear to have been common prior to the Spanish conquest. The

available osteological evidence suggests that while these communities experienced

a small decrease in their health status, probably as a result of an increase in

infectious disease, changes in illness and nutrition were less dramatic than they were

in other populations, at least with regard to the kinds of chronic stresses that leave

evidence in the human skeleton. Yet trauma, particularly cranial trauma suggestive

of violence, did increase markedly, perhaps because of rising conflict between

Pueblo groups and their Spanish and indigenous neighbors (Stodder and Martin

1992; Stodder et al. 2002).

The small quantity of bioanthropological data available for other regions under

Spanish control suggests intriguing differences from the northern borderlands. The

largest and most thoroughly investigated sample comes from Tipu, a Maya

settlement that was also the site of a Spanish visita mission. Tipu is unusual in that

it was located in a political no-man’s-land between areas controlled by the

Spaniards and the Itza and managed to maintain its political autonomy for much of

the early colonial period, effectively escaping missionization as a result (Prudence

Rice, personal communication, 2008). The analysis of over 600 individuals buried

in and around the church revealed a remarkably healthy population with low

frequencies of osteological evidence for trauma, anemia, infection, or episodes of

severe stress compared to precontact Maya populations in the area (Cohen et al.

1994, 1997). Analyses conducted by Storey et al. (2002) on samples from the

Maya sites of Tipu, Xcaret, and Lamanai yielded similar results. The interpretation

of these data is difficult. The relative levels of cultural, political, and dietary

continuity in Maya communities may have buffered these populations from adverse

health effects caused by changes in diets, work routines, and living conditions

(White et al. 1994). Cohen and his team, however, suspect that the cemetery at

Tipu is not complete, as both the elderly and infants are absent, while Storey and

her colleagues suggest that the very young populations found at these sites may be

the result of large numbers of people succumbing to epidemic diseases that leave

no osteological evidence.

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 165

123

Almost no systematic bioanthropological studies of colonial populations have

been conducted in South America, with the exception of urban cemeteries in Ecuador

(Ubelaker and Newson 2002; Ubelaker and Ripley 1999), small samples recovered

during salvage efforts (e.g., Duran and Novellino 2002), and most recently a large

cemetery associated with a church in the Mochica settlement of Morrope on the north

coast of Peru (Klauss and Tam 2008). The latter analysis indicates that compared to

the precontact population in the same area, the colonial sample (n = 459) from

Morrope showed a significant increase in periosteal lesions and degenerative joint

disease, and decreased female fertility. The investigators argue that the people of

Morrope suffered a dramatic decline in health after the conquest as a result of

increased workloads and infectious disease associated with a resettlement program

that forced indigenous households to congregate in reducciones, perhaps comparable

to aggregation in mission communities.

Variability in the biological effects of colonialism is not surprising given the

enormous geographical and cultural differences encompassed by the Spanish empire

as well as temporal changes in conditions over time. Walker (2001) argues that

commonalities within the borderlands are due largely to colonial strategies that were

similar throughout the region, whereas differences in the specific historical

conditions of these groups resulted in divergent experiences. Populations in Alta

California and La Florida, for example, experienced the most profound changes in

diet and living conditions with concomitant shifts in health status; the Pueblos

appear to have suffered less dramatic changes in chronic health conditions as a

result of their continued reliance on maize-based agriculture, but they experienced

higher levels of violence in part because the Spanish presence exacerbated

preexisting political tensions. The apparently anomalous case of the Maya,

particularly at Tipu (if not attributable to sampling issues), may be due to

continuity in living conditions. These data do not, of course, speak to the known

effects of multiple epidemics that affected each of these populations, but even with

regard to infectious disease, we might expect variation. Ramenofsky et al. (2003)

point out that the demographic characteristics of individual populations as well as

the different strains of pathogens themselves also would have shaped the spread of

infections.

Recent research using dental characteristics to determine genetic affinities and

differences within indigenous groups, and thus to detect demographic processes such

as population bottlenecks and the amalgamation of different groups (Jacobi 1997,

2000; Klauss and Tam 2008; Stojanowski 2005b), demonstrates the continuing

potential of bioarchaeological research for revealing the complex trajectories of

Native American history. For example, Stojanowski (2003, 2004, 2005a, b) uses a

large sample of odontometric data to examine genetic variability among the Guale

and Apalachee over time in order to assess the effects of Spanish colonialism on the

biological interaction of these groups. These data, impressively integrated with

historical and archaeological information, are interpreted in evolutionary terms,

specifically gene flow and genetic drift, in order to gain insight into the relative

isolation and interaction of native populations from the precontact to the late mission

period. Stojanowski (2005b) suggests that variation increased immediately after

contact, probably due to lessened interaction among groups, and then declined

166 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

precipitously, most likely as a result of the formation of a polyethnic community

consisting of previously fragmented populations. As he emphasizes (Stojanowski

2005a), these findings help illuminate the process of ethnogenesis in a group whose

local history was ultimately truncated by events associated with British rule, one of

many who ‘‘disappeared’’ as the result of the conquest. Rather than writing off the

postconquest histories of indigenous communities as inappropriate for modeling

preconquest societies, this strategy provides insight into the historical experiences of

generations of Native Americans who attempted to reconstitute their societies in the

wake of dramatic biosocial disruptions.

Osteological analyses do not, however, provide a means for assessing the extent

of population loss or associated cultural collapse immediately before and after

European incursions. This goal can be achieved only through the investigation of

precisely dated archaeological contexts that allow the reconstruction of local

histories. Of the cases investigated thus far (e.g., Burnett and Murray 1993; Ewen

1996; Hutchinson 2006; Johnson and Lehmann 1996; Kulisheck 2005; Lightfoot

2005a; Perttula 1994), few have yielded evidence of regional pandemics during the

protohistoric or immediate postconquest periods (but see Hally 1994; Spores and

Robles Garcıa 2007; Upham 1992 for exceptions). Although this might be the result

of problematic methodologies (Hutchinson and Mitchem 2001), the available

evidence clearly indicates that the demographic collapse was not uniform in either

timing or magnitude and may have been caused by factors other than epidemic

disease. Dunnell’s caution against the use of ethnohistoric analogies must be taken

seriously. Yet given the fine-grained information that is emerging from these

studies, rather than simply assuming a lack of continuity among all populations as

he suggests, we can now examine individual cases to determine when and how

biological and cultural change occurred. Despite the trauma of conquest, Native

Americans continued to have their own histories, intertwined with but not entirely

determined by Europeans and their pathogens.

Local economies in a globalizing world

Interest in cultural persistence and the varied ways in which people negotiated their

involvement in the colonial order also characterizes work on the economic

implications of Spanish imperialism. This body of research is loosely unified by a

general concern with political economy, although specific theoretical approaches

and substantive themes are quite diverse. The majority of investigators engage in

some way with world-systems theory, either rejecting it outright (e.g., Lycett 2005;

Scaramelli and Tarble de Scaramelli 2005; Skowronek 2002; Williams 1992) or

substantially modifying it to address widespread anthropological criticism of the

top-down, homogenizing effects of such an approach (Alexander and Kepecs 2005).

The study of native political economies is, perhaps, best developed in

Mesoamerica where a number of researchers have conducted investigations of

long-term change (e.g., Charlton et al. 2005; Evans 1998; Kepecs 1997, 2005;

Kepecs and Alexander 2005), some of which extend into the 19th and 20th

centuries. Alexander (1997, 1998, 1999, 2004) has produced a sophisticated body of

work on the causes and consequences of the Caste War of Yucatan (1847–1901), as

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 167

123

these are reflected in the settlement pattern and documentary record of Yaxcaba

parish. Her examination of the relationship between variation in the spatial

organization of communities and households and factors such as tax structure and

land stress allows her to reconstruct the ways in which Maya agriculturalists resisted

and accommodated to changes in the local political economy. This long-term,

bottom-up perspective brings the varied responses of Maya householders into view

and places the Caste War in the broader context of peasant adaptation to—and

avoidance of—the exaction of surpluses by state, church, and private entities over

the centuries.

Gasco’s research in the Soconusco region of Chiapas (Gasco 1993, 1996, 1997,

2005) provides an interesting contrast to the situation in Yaxcaba, although

differences in methodology and a focus on earlier colonial times impede a direct

comparison of the two cases. Gasco integrates documentary evidence with

archaeological data from the settlement of Ocelocalco to examine changes in

socioeconomic status within communities over time. Soconusco was an important

cacao-producing zone; while Spanish merchants controlled distribution, production

appears to have remained under the control of indigenous families until late in the

colonial period. Households in Ocelocalco consumed larger quantities of European

goods than their counterparts in other regions, and a process of economic leveling

rather than an increase in stratification occurred over time. Gasco attributes the

relative economic well-being of households in the rural settlements of Soconusco to

the fact that indigenous families retained control over production; their interactions

with Spaniards were primarily commercial in nature. Furthermore, the specific

conditions of cacao production in the area, particularly the ease with which people

with little capital could become independent producers, tended to flatten economic

differences.

While not explicitly focused on political economy, Palka’s (2005) synthesis of

the history, ethnography, and archaeology of the Lacandon Maya is an important

complement to the studies by Alexander and Gasco. Since their ‘‘discovery’’ by

outsiders in the 1940s, the Lacandon have been romantically viewed as the isolated

descendants of the Classic Maya. Palka effectively refutes this view by highlighting

the historical processes that shaped Lacandon history. Most likely originating as an

amalgam of different peoples fleeing Spanish control, the Lacandon maintained

their independence until the 20th century by engaging outsiders on their own terms,

a tactic made possible by their dispersal in a lightly populated ‘‘tribal zone,’’ itself a

strategy for coping with European encroachment. Only in the 19th century (the only

period for which archaeological evidence is now available), with the incursion of

logging, cattle raising, and other activities promoted by postcolonial governments,

did the Lacandon begin to experience rapid culture change and ultimately a loss of

autonomy.

The impact of European expansion on groups who remained largely independent

until the 19th century also has been investigated in Argentina where Spanish

settlement reconfigured the social landscape, resulting in the development of new

economic practices as well as sweeping ethnic change. This issue has been explored

in depth by Mazzanti (2007) from the perspective of the Amalia locality, a set of

sites in the eastern Pampas that was occupied in the second half of the 18th century.

168 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

Drawing on a rich array of archaeological and historical evidence, she argues that

the incorporation of indigenous populations into the global economy resulted in

intensified interaction along preexisting social networks that linked populations on

the Pampas with Mapuche groups to the west. This process is often referred to as

‘‘Araucanization,’’ a term Mazzanti rejects in favor of a perspective that highlights

the complex web of economic, social, and ritual relationships that developed in the

face of Spanish hegemony and that was destroyed only with the consolidation of the

Argentinian and Chilean nation-states at the end of the 19th century.

The studies produced by Alexander, Gasco, Palka, and Mazzanti offer detailed

accounts of the varied historical trajectories of indigenous peoples after the Spanish

Conquest and highlight the very different implications of European expansion for

native groups. This research, as well as the investigations by Evans (1998), Kepecs

(1997, 2005), Lycett (2005), the Rices (2005), Van Buren (1996), and others (e.g.,

Gasco et al. 1997) that are more limited in temporal scope, points to some of the

unique factors as well as the general processes that shaped local histories. Not

surprisingly, control over land, availability of labor, evasion of taxes, and the

existence of market opportunities were among the key variables that conditioned

individual strategies for negotiating the colonial economy. While technologies,

beliefs, and behaviors often persisted, even these continuities must be understood in

terms of the changing historical contexts in which they occurred.

A related body of research examines some of the same issues, but from the

perspective of colonists and missionized Indians whose labor was closely controlled

by Spanish friars. Much of this work has been conducted on the ranchos, missions,

and, especially, presidios of the northern borderlands and addresses adaptation to

local subsistence resources as well as the interplay between Spanish policy and

actual economic practices. Prior to the Bourbon reforms when the Crown attempted

to control economic activity in the colonies and to directly provision settlements

along the northern frontier, the quantity and quality of goods provided by the

situado and the caravans supplying New Mexico were notoriously poor. Colonists

were left with two options, both of which they employed: rely heavily on locally

available goods and engage in illegal commerce.

Reitz (1993) explores the relationship between European colonization and the

degree to which imported livestock could adjust to local conditions; human

adaptation was mediated by the adaptation of domestic animals to their new

environments. Many early Spanish communities in La Florida, where European

cultigens did not flourish, depended largely on aboriginal crops (Ruhl 1993; Scarry

1993) as well as marine resources and game, foods that Europeans often regarded as

unfit for consumption (Reitz 1993). However, in Hispaniola (Deagan and Reitz

1995; Reitz and McEwan 1995), Alta California, and to a more limited degree the

Pimerıa Alta (Pavao-Zuckerman and LaMotta 2007) cattle thrived and were

produced not just for meat but also for the trade in hides and tallow. The

development of haciendas in 17th century La Florida also resulted in the production

of wheat and oranges for both internal markets and, in the case of fruit, for British

colonies along the eastern seaboard (Ruhl 1997). The response of Old World

domesticates to American environments thus played a role in Spanish dietary

adaptations as well as commerce. Although bioarchaeological analyses indicate that

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 169

123

Native American diets were transformed as a result of their incorporation into

missions, the limited botanical and faunal data from autonomous indigenous

settlements suggest that European domesticates were not rapidly adopted (deFrance

1996; Gremillion1993; Ruhl 1993)

Distance from market centers and the challenges posed by extreme aridity appear

to have made communities in the Southwest particularly autonomous. Trigg’s

(2005) investigation of economic activity in New Mexico highlights the largely self-

sufficient nature of households in that part of the borderlands (for treatment of this

issue in Texas, see Bonine 2004; Galindo 2004; Horrell 1999). Her research also

reveals that while most Hispanic households produced goods primarily for their own

consumption (in many cases supplemented by tribute), they also were articulated

with regional and long-distance exchange networks through the entrepreneurial

activities of church and state officials who often manipulated official policy for their

own benefit. Even in this remote corner of the Spanish empire, primary products

such as hides and coarse textiles were produced by missions for sale in the mines to

the south, luxury items were imported, and some goods such as ceramics were

produced by households for local markets in later colonial times (Carillo 1997). The

Camino Real was the critical link allowing the exchange of products and

information between New Mexico and the political and economic centers to the

south (Palmer et al. 1993, 1999; Staski 1998, 2004). In the Sonoran Desert, which

was not even serviced by good wagon roads, self-sufficiency was even more

marked. In an explicit test of the applicability of world-systems theory to northern

New Spain, Williams (1992) examines presidio sites in Arizona to determine the

degree to which these communities were dependent on manufactured goods from

the ‘‘core.’’ He rejects Wallerstein’s model, finding that residents relied primarily on

locally and regionally produced goods, a state of affairs that apparently persisted

until the arrival of the railroad in the1880s.

In general, economic activities at presidios—fortified settlements composed of

military contingents as well as civilians—were highly variable simply because these

communities were located on the fringes of the empire and received little support

from the Crown (Bense 2004). Some of the demand they created was met by nearby

missions (Farnsworth and Jackson 1995) that were often involved in the specialized

production of goods as well as food (Silliman 2004), a trend that intensified over

time, particularly in California (Costello 1992). Presidio residents, though, often had

recourse to economic sources outside those sanctioned by the state. Especially

interesting are the presidios located at the intersection of the Spanish, French, and

later British colonies in the Southeast. Bense’s (1999, 2003) long-term research at

the Presidio Santa Marıa de Galve in Pensacola is one of the most thorough

investigations of presidio life in that region. Santa Marıa was located in an area with

little native population and as a result everything from food to manufactured goods

was imported from one of two sources: the situado that departed from Veracruz, or

legal and illicit trade with the French at Old Mobile (Waselkov 1999). The long-

term investigation of the presidio and mission of Los Adaes (Avery 1995; Gregory

et al. 2004) in northwestern Louisiana has yielded similar evidence of interaction

and interdependence among the Spaniards, French, and indigenous populations.

Excavations at Los Adaes have produced a ceramic assemblage largely dominated

170 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

by Caddoan pottery and a much larger percentage of French, British, and Dutch than

Spanish tin-enameled wares, suggesting a reliance on northern European goods that

is exhibited, as well, in other artifact categories. This cultural symbiosis rather

accurately reflects the intimacy that developed between the Spaniards, French, and

Caddoans who intermarried and provided the sorts of mutual support that were

probably frowned upon by imperial administrators.

The studies described thus far are all located in areas that were economically and

politically marginal. An important exception to this is Schavelzon’s (2000a)

investigation of the evolution of Buenos Aires from a peripheral village at the ‘‘end

of the world’’ to a major urban center. Schavelzon synthesizes data from numerous

excavations throughout the city to document how Buenos Aires developed in

relation to the broader political economy, benefiting from its status as a conduit for

yerba mate from the Jesuit missions, silver from Potosı, and, later, manufactured

goods from Europe as well as cattle hides from its own hinterlands. Throughout

most of the colonial period this trade was both legal and illicit, with contraband

goods playing a key role in the city’s economic success.

The circumvention of mercantilist and other state policies by colonists, and

particularly the role of contraband in local economies, has received quite a bit of

attention by archaeologists (La Rosa Corzo 1995; Skowronek 1992; Skowronek and

Ewen 2006). Studies of illicit trade could be particularly productive in archaeology

because they ostensibly investigate activities that are largely unrecorded in the

documentary record. Deagan (2007) evaluates the contribution that archaeologists

can make in this regard by providing a case study from St. Augustine. She concludes

that the examination of illicit trade at the community level adds little to what is

already known from historical sources, but that a household scale of analysis can

provide information about economic strategies that are not easily discerned in texts.

In addition to yielding information about specific artifact classes that were

involved in long-distance trade (Gordus and Craig 1995, Gutierrez 2003; Marken

1994), shipwrecks provide another potential avenue for the investigation of both

contraband and legal commerce, one that focuses on providers rather than

consumers. El Nuevo Constante, a ship that was part of the Spanish flota on its

return voyage to Spain when it sank off the coast of Louisiana in 1766, contained

silver and gold that was being smuggled by the crew or passengers as well as a cargo

of dye stuffs, purgatives, spices, and hides (Pearson and Hoffman 1995). With few

exceptions, however, the potential of maritime archaeology for shedding light on

legal and illicit trade, as well as other aspects of economic behavior, has not yet

been realized (but see Hunter 2001).

The archaeological data on economic behavior in the Spanish colonies highlight

the diversity of lifeways that existed during the first three centuries of European

expansion and make it clear that world-systems theory does not provide the

necessary tools for analyzing the histories of specific communities. Since the

Quincentenary, if not before, archaeologists have focused on the local negotiation of

global processes and emphasized the importance of agency, both indigenous and

Spanish. This is due in part to the influence of Wolf (1982) but also as a response to

the descendants of colonized peoples who reject the characterization of their

ancestors as simply the objects of change. This trend has intensified in recent years

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 171

123

with more explicit attention to the notion of resistance, the increased application of

practice theory, and a growing interest in bridging the historical divide between

contemporary and prehispanic cultures. Ironically, these developments are not

broadly characteristic of the research being conducted by Latin American historical

archaeologists, an issue that is addressed below.

The colonial core

The social processes that unfolded in the Spanish colonial core differed in many

respects from conditions encountered in the northern periphery of the empire, most

notably with regard to the development of urban centers and the institutions and

activities that they engendered. Urban phenomena have thus been the focus of much

of the research conducted in Latin America by archaeologists interested in the

Spanish colonial world.

Historical archaeology developed relatively late in Latin America, emerging as

an identifiable subdiscipline in many countries in the 1980s, a delay due, perhaps, to

academic factors such as the adoption of antihistorical processual models imported

from the United States (Gomez Romero 2005), as well as prevailing sociopolitical

conditions such as the imposition of military rule in the Southern Cone from the

1960s until the 1980s (Funari 1997). Most early work was conducted by architects

and art historians working on the restoration of buildings with historical

significance, many of them colonial. As in the United States, heritage management

continues to dominate the field today, although now it is often conducted by

scholars trained as archaeologists working in multidisciplinary teams. The

proceedings from the first historical archaeology conferences held in Mexico

(Fernandez and Gomez 1998) and Argentina (Schavelzon 2002) reflect this focus on

colonial archaeology and restoration or salvage efforts.

Much of the research on colonial archaeology in Latin America has been

conducted by urban archaeology programs such as the Buenos Aires Urban

Archaeology Project (Schavelzon 1992a, b), the San Francisco Ruins Project in the

historic center of Mendoza (Barcena 2004; Schavelzon 1998), the Urban Archae-

ology Project in Caracas (Sanoja 1998a; Sanoja and Vargas 2002; Sanoja et al.

1998; Vargas et al. 1998), the Urban Archaeology Program that grew out of the

excavation of the Templo Mayor in Mexico City (Matos Moctezuma 1993, 1999;

Matos Moctezuma et al. 1998), the Panama Viejo Archaeological Project on the

edge of modern Panama City (Rovira 2001a), the Colonia del Sacramento Project in

Uruguay (Fusco Zambetogliris 1995), and the various excavations conducted under

the auspices of the Office of the City Historian in Havana (Domınguez 2003; Mahe

and Menendez 2003). Although work generated by heritage management projects is

often purely descriptive, in many cases archaeologists have been able to conduct

problem-oriented research, sometimes facilitated by the development of an

integrated plan for investigating and restoring historic structures, such as in Havana

(e.g., Domınguez 2003). In other instances, archaeologists have employed creative

approaches to analyze the data made available to them from restoration projects

(e.g., Therrien 1996). Many different issues have been investigated as a result, with

urban geography, the production and consumption of manufactured goods

172 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

(particularly ceramics), and the multiple distinctions among class and ethnic groups

receiving particular attention.

Schavelzon directs one of the most productive and long-running urban

archaeology programs in the Americas. Over the course of two decades and more

than 20 projects, he and his colleagues have not only produced fundamental

descriptive information about the material culture of Buenos Aires, they have also

investigated diverse issues such as the development of residential structures, the

complex history of food and drink, and especially the archaeology of class,

ethnicity, and gender (Schavelzon 2000a, b, 2005). With regard to the latter issue, a

combination of documentary sources and excavations in diverse locations through-

out Buenos Aires have allowed him to sketch the development of a pluriethnic city

that became increasingly white and economically successful over the centuries

(Schavelzon 2000a, b). The nonlinear nature of this process is exemplified by the

history of the black population (Schavelzon 2003). People of African descent

comprised over a quarter of the population in the late 18th century and developed a

rich urban culture. Today, however, they have largely disappeared from view, and

their presence has been erased from historical memory, a loss that Schavelzon’s

book is intended to help rectify.

Research on the Afro-American population of Buenos Aires is of particular

interest since relatively little work has been conducted on the experiences of people

of African descent in the Spanish colonies (Weik 2004). Exceptions include the

investigation of the maroon settlement of Fort Mose in Florida (Deagan and Landers

1999; Deagan and MacMahon 1995; Reitz 1994) and a few studies of colono and

criollo wares in the Caribbean (Smith 1995; Solis Magana 1999) and Colombia

(Suaza Espanol 2006). Most important, however, is the work conducted in Cuba,

which has a long history of research on slaves. Singleton (2001, 2005) has recently

examined the prison-like conditions on a late colonial coffee plantation, and La

Rosa (2005) has launched a project examining cimarron settlements in the rugged

northern sector of the island.

The relationship between the configuration of urban spaces and cultural processes

has been the focus of a number of investigations, as archaeologists have taken

advantage of research opportunities made available by restoration activities or

standing colonial architecture. For example, the production of urban space in

Caracas has been illuminated by Sanoja and Vargas (2002) who examined the

growth of the city’s core in relation to both control over water and the activities of

political and economic elites. Therrien (1995) used the restoration of the roof of the

Cathedral in Bogota to explore the ways in which building materials and

construction techniques were influenced by the broader political economy. Jamieson

(2000), drawing on Bourdieu and Giddens, has examined the layout of colonial

homes in Cuenca in light of the ways that different genders, classes, and ethnic

groups negotiated the exercise of social power. He contrasts the panoptic quality of

elite compounds, which enabled residents to monitor the street and their own patios

without being seen, with the more permeable housing of the poor, which allowed

neighbors to view each other’s activities.

In Mexico City, artifact assemblages generated by salvage and restoration efforts

in the historic core continue to be an important source of data for archaeologists

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 173

123

interested in colonial socioeconomic structure and the emergence of new identities

(Fournier 1998; Rodrıguez-Alegria 2005a, b). Much of this work focuses on the

consumption of ceramics, both imported and locally made. Fournier, for example,

has produced a substantial body of work on the ways in which the consumption of

majolicas reflects socioeconomic status and increasing ties to a global economy, as

well as the continued use of prehispanic production techniques that were linked to

the emergence of new identities (Fournier 1996, 1997a, b, 2004). Comparisons with

data generated by Charlton in Otumba suggest differences in the nature and rate of

these processes in urban and rural areas (Charlton and Fournier 1993; Charlton et al.

2002; Fournier and Charlton 1996–1997). The production and distribution of

ceramics manufactured in the colonies have received less attention, although work

in this area is accelerating in Mexico (Blackman et al. 2006; Gomez et al. 2001;

Monroy-Guzman and Fournier 2003), Central America (Rovira 2001b; Rovira et al.

2006), and South America (Jamieson 2001; Jamieson and Hancock 2004; Therrien

et al. 2002), with Panamanian majolicas being a particular focus.

Other than the investigation of majolicas, surprisingly few studies of commodity

production for local or European markets have been carried out. One of the most

comprehensive was Rice’s investigation of wine and brandy production in the

Moquegua Valley of southern Peru, an industry that developed primarily to meet

demand generated by the mining center of Potosı, in central Bolivia. The Moquegua

Bodegas Project located 130 hacienda sites and examined the technology and

organization of wine production (Rice 1996, 1997), as well as ancillary industries

such as the manufacture of fermentation jars (Rice 1994; Rice and Van Beck 1993).

The success of this very Iberian industry was due, in part, to the adaptation of native

water management and transportation technologies by European producers (deF-

rance 1996; Smith 1997). Comparable research has not yet been carried out at

colonial haciendas in other regions, although there is a growing body of work on

later haciendas, most notably in Mexico (Juli 2003; Meyers and Carlson 2002;

Newman 2008). Other types of production that have been investigated include flour

mills (Aparicio 1997), tar (Stothert 1994), and silver (Van Buren and Mills 2005).

At Porco, a silver-mining center located close to Potosı, the use of technologies

drawn from both European and native repertoires is evident. In that case, however,

indigenous production was rapidly displaced by multiscale mining in which highly

capitalized enterprises owned by Spaniards coexisted with small-scale production

conducted primarily by indigenous people using a combination of European and

native techniques (Van Buren 2003; Van Buren and Mills 2005).

The economic linkages between colonial producers and European consumers

have received even less attention, in part because of the site-centered focus of most

research. Sanoja’s (Sanoja 1998b; Sanoja and Vargas 1996) analysis of Santa Tome

de Guayana in Venezuela, however, explicitly ties local production to the emerging

capitalist economy, identifying the specialized manufacture of goods by different

missions and positing market connections with other countries. Amodio et al. (1997)

document the Camino Real that connected Caracas and the port of La Guaira during

the colonial period, providing information about associated sites and activities as

well as the road itself. Like regional studies, the examination of transportation

routes (see also Fournier 2006; Lugo-Fernandez et al. 2007) encourages the

174 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

investigation of social and economic linkages among communities and institutions,

an approach that archaeologists of the colonial period have yet to develop. Such a

perspective not only would highlight the ways in which surpluses were extracted

and goods moved through developing commodity chains but also would facilitate

the examination of interactions between indigenous groups, an issue that merits

more attention.

Out of colonialism

The archaeological research being conducted in Latin America differs from North

American practice because of both past and current geopolitical conditions. One

aspect of this is that academic communities within different countries have

developed distinct intellectual traditions. A substantial corpus of historiography is

emerging on the development of archaeology, including historical archaeology, in

Latin America that addresses some of the factors that have shaped these different

research trajectories and describes the emergence of new approaches (Fournier

2003; Fournier and Miranda Flores 1992; Funari 1996, 1999; Funari and Zarankin

2004; Garcıa Targa 1995; Jamieson 2005; Lezama 2002; Mogrovejo 1996; Oyuela-

Caycedo 1994b; Podgorny et al. 2005; Politis 1992, 2003; Politis and Alberti 1999;

Williams and Fournier-Garcia 1996).

Most Latin American archaeology has been highly descriptive and conducted

within the framework of a culture history approach (Politis 2003) that was initially

promulgated by U.S. archaeologists working in Latin America in the 20th century

(Zarankin 2004); it has become the norm in part because it is consonant with the

nationalist interests of these states (Oyuela-Caycedo 1994a; Trigger 1994). Over

time, though, this general approach has undergone substantial modification as Latin

American archaeologists have introduced concepts drawn from processual archae-

ology, and more recently postmodern theory, and have developed new approaches

of their own (Politis 2003; Zarankin and Acuto 1999). The focus on local

monuments and the challenges of communicating across and sometimes even within

national boundaries, however, have limited the emergence of unified approaches or

even the development of professional discourses centered on the same themes. This

situation is changing with the creation of international venues in which research

results and theoretical developments can be published. An early example is Stanley

South’s series, Historical Archaeology in Latin America; more recently Latin

American archaeologists have hosted international conferences and are developing

web-based approaches that allow for the rapid dissemination of information (Funari

2007). Perhaps most salient among autochthonous approaches that transcend

national boundaries is social archaeology, a Marxist approach developed in the

1970s by Lumbreras (1974), Sanoja, Vargas, Lorenzo, and others (Lorenzo et al.

1979). Interestingly, while the impact of this perspective on work in the region has

been contested (Oyuela-Caycedo et al. 1997; Patterson 1994, 1997), the very debate

appears to be generating a renewed interest in the approach, particularly among

historical archaeologists (Fournier 1999).

Most important, however, in understanding the development of distinct academic

traditions are the stark economic differences that characterize regions. The social

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 175

123

and economic formations that emerged in the south, shaped in part by the complex

societies that preceded Spanish control, had no direct counterparts in the northern

fringe of the empire. Today many countries in this region are among the world’s

poorest, with little funding available for archaeological research or to meet other,

more basic, needs. The irony of this situation is that relatively few Latin American

historical archaeologists have directly addressed issues of economic and political

inequality. As Zarankin asks in an essay on the future of Latin American historical

archaeology, ‘‘Doesn’t it seem strange that it is almost exclusively ‘first world’

archaeologies that address problems like domination, exploitation, and marginal-

ization when it is we who daily experience such conditions as individuals and as a

society?’’ (Zarankin 2004, p. 131; my translation). He attributes this disjunction to

the hegemonic role played by North American theory, which has tended to reinforce

the expansion of global capitalism that has been embraced by many Latin American

governments. Zarankin argues, though, that like the social archaeologists of the

1970s, contemporary scholars can create counterhegemonic approaches by focusing

on the formation of Latin American societies, thus using archaeology as a tool to

illuminate and critique the development of current conditions. This is, of course,

already happening and should accelerate with the growing number of historical

archaeologists in Latin America and the expansion of contexts in which they

interact.

The challenge of comparison

No single term can capture the multiplicity of experiences that occurred in the wake

of European expansion. Individuals suffered, negotiated, triumphed; cultures were

extinguished, transformed, and created. What is clear is the historically contingent

nature of the encounter, one that did not result in the immediate destruction of

indigenous societies or the imposition of a purely European world. Rather a

complex process has played out for over half a millennium and continues to unfold

today. Archaeological studies allow us to penetrate the seemingly monolithic and

inevitable nature of globalization as viewed from the 21st century and to illuminate

the historical trajectories of specific groups. Yet, with the increasing volume of

work being conducted, we must ask if an ideographic focus on particular cases is

enough.

The examination of individual identity and human agency in recent work is a

welcome corrective to earlier research that reified sociocultural systems. Yet, the

increasing focus on individuals and the concomitant lack of attention to the broader

contexts that they inhabited can itself be problematic. The recent emphasis on

individual identity seems to reflect present-day involvement with the creation of

identity through strategic associations and the consumption of mass-produced goods

as a way of circumventing or denying the power of enormous bureaucracies and

economic networks that shape our lives. Not only is such an endeavor a poor

substitute for substantive control over the conditions we negotiate in daily practice,

it also misrepresents the lived experiences of the people we study and the historical

trajectories of colonized populations. By definition, individuals do not create social

176 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

change. Although they might be instrumental in the process, only the adoption of

beliefs and behaviors by groups of people—as the consequence of conscious

reflection or unconscious processes of social reproduction—result in the transfor-

mation of society. Furthermore, identity is not the only parameter that circumscribes

or motivates human behavior. While it is a key factor in understanding social

relations, as an analytical concept it should not subsume all other aspects of colonial

life.

To contribute more fully to the understanding of colonialism we must be able to

identify the conditions that shaped individual and group practices as well as

constrained and enabled different strategies for negotiating the colonial landscape.

Such a perspective requires comparison, an activity that neither archaeologists

engaged in culture history nor their postmodernist colleagues are inclined to pursue.

A number of scholars, however, have turned to comparison in recent years in order

to both illuminate specific practices and account for regional differences (e.g.,

Garcıa Targa 2002; Hanson 1995).

Two recent books exemplify the important contributions that broad-scale,

systematic comparisons can make to our understanding of the long-term effects of

European colonialism on native groups. The goal of Lightfoot’s (2005a) ground-

breaking volume, Indians, Missionaries, and Merchants, is to determine why some

native Californian groups are federally recognized tribes while others are not. He

approaches this issue by comparing the experiences of the Kashaya Pomo with

Russian fur traders to those of indigenous Californians who were incorporated into

the Franciscan mission system. He then examines how the outcomes of those

interactions subsequently shaped the way in which anthropologists—and then the

government—defined ‘‘authentic’’ Indian tribes. Lightfoot systematizes his com-

parisons by employing seven dimensions of colonial encounters (ranging from

relocation programs to interethnic unions) and in each case counterposes

descriptions of imperial policy with discussions of native agency. His analysis

reveals that Indian identities, although transformed, survived early colonization.

Yet, three broad social processes resulted: political fragmentation and the creation

of ‘‘pan-mission’’ identities among the northern mission groups, continuity in

political and ritual systems among the natives incorporated into the two

southernmost missions, and the development of a tribal organization—that later

provided the basis for federal recognition—by the Kashaya Pomo to the north.

While the Spanish mission system did provoke the breakdown of native polities and

localized identities, the effects were uneven; in the two southern missions where

indigenous villages continued to be occupied, traditional culture displayed greater

continuity with the past.

An interesting contrast to the trajectories analyzed by Lightfoot can be found in

Colonial Encounters in a Native American Landscape by Rothschild (2003a; see

also Rothschild 2003b). She compares the interaction of Puebloan peoples with

Spanish colonists in the Rio Grande drainage to the Mohawk’s encounter with the

Dutch in the Hudson River Valley. Rothschild attributes the distinct outcomes of the

two cases, specifically the retention of much traditional land and culture by the

Pueblos and their loss by the Mohawks of New York, to differences in the flow of

material culture between colonists and indigenous populations, a process that was

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 177

123

itself mediated by factors such as geography, the religion of the colonizers, and

especially the role of women in maintaining or bridging social distance between

groups. Ironically, cultural persistence appears to have been greatest among the

Pueblos who were subjected to a systematic program of enculturation in contrast to

the relatively laissez-faire economic regime in which the Mohawks participated. In

the Pueblo case—like that of the missions in San Luis Rey and San Diego in what is

now southern California—the retention of tribal lands and geographic inaccessi-

bility were key factors shaping this outcome. However, additional factors also came

into play: the Pueblo Revolt appears to have mitigated Spanish policy to some

extent, and in the Californian case the individual padres in charge of the missions

were much more lenient in their approach. Although contemporary archaeologists

have a tendency to depict Spanish policy as homogeneous and entirely coincident

with practice, these cases underscore the importance of agency with regard to the

colonizers as well as the colonized. More importantly, such comparisons allow us to

identify key parameters of the changing socioeconomic fields in which people were

embedded while at the same time making the role of agency—indigenous as well as

European—apparent.

Comparisons of this sort require richly documented cases that include

consideration of a wide variety of factors. Although the negotiation of identity

constitutes one component of the histories of specific groups, archaeologists should

not restrict themselves to the examination of this process and should, in fact,

investigate a broader range of issues than typically has been considered. While

different factors are important in specific historical cases, during the course of this

review it became apparent that three broad issues have received surprisingly little

attention. Perhaps most striking is the lack of research on environmental change and

landscapes, despite the currency of these topics among archaeologists and the

public. Although a number of archaeologists have addressed food ways and human

health (Deagan 1996b), with the important exception of Wernke (2007b) few have

examined changes in human-landscape interactions or the impact of European

expansion on the broader environment, research that is being developed by

geographers and historians (e.g., Endfield 2008; Melville 1994; Preston 1997;

Sluyter 2001). Landscape studies, in particular, have the potential for linking the

past and the present in ways that can be especially meaningful to descendant

communities (Rubertone 2000). Perhaps equally surprising is the lack of work on

regional economic development and interaction, or, even more narrowly, on

production for export. Archaeologists have focused almost entirely on consumption

and have largely ignored the ways in which commodities were produced and

distributed. The generation of wealth through the exploitation of native labor was

the key factor that both motivated Spanish colonization and shaped colonial society

(see Silliman 2001b); it should be a priority for archaeological research. Finally,

indigenous history or, more specifically, the relations among indigenous groups is

usually considered only tangentially in the examination of social and cultural

change. Archaeologists have finally moved beyond the conception of colonial

society as a dyadic relationship between colonizers and colonized, recognizing the

variable and fluid nature of indigenous identity, in particular. Yet the notion that

indigenous groups could have histories that were not entirely determined by their

178 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

relationships with colonizers, and in fact developed at times independently of them,

has not been incorporated into much colonial research. Archaeologists must look

sideways, so to speak, rather than just up and down, to examine the interaction of

people who were not distinguished primarily by differences in power.

All of these issues require a change in scale to encompass the broader

socioeconomic fields in which colonial groups participated. Although the sheer size

of the Spanish empire makes this a daunting task, archaeologists can broaden their

scope in a variety of ways. The sort of landscape reconstruction that is now

occasionally done in urban settings (e.g., Sanoja and Vargas 2002) could be applied

more widely and integrated with studies of settlement patterns and transportation

routes, environmental reconstruction, or landscape approaches that involve

descendant communities in order to provide more holistic understandings of

specific localities. At a larger scale, multinational projects could investigate flows of

commodities, people, and perhaps other organisms across long distances, for

instance between the Yucatan and Cuba or Seville and Mexico City (for an example

see Lightfoot et al. 1998). These approaches would encourage a more explicit

consideration of interaction among groups and help archaeologists break away from

a focus on specific sites that is due, in part, to the continuing interest in architectural

reconstructions of noteworthy monuments.

Over the last 15 years archaeologists have produced an impressive array of

studies that examine the participation of particular groups of people in the colonial

world. Increasing the scale of investigations and encouraging the comparison of

specific historical trajectories are just two approaches that could facilitate our

understanding of the relationship between specific cases and broader processes. Just

as importantly, such work also would enhance the productive relationship between

archaeology and historical anthropology that has been promoted by archaeologists

working in both the north (Lightfoot 1995) and south (Corona 1998; Patterson

1994). And finally, these types of projects are more likely to be relevant to

descendant communities—in the United States, but especially in Latin America—

who are interested in examining the historical roots of their current circumstances.

Acknowledgments I thank Hayley Hendricks and Rosalie Samaniego for all of their work formatting

and correcting the bibliography, as well as Patricia Fournier, Thomas Charlton, Rani Alexander, Steve

Wernke, Jeffrey Quilter, Maria Ximena Senatore, Clark Larsen, Haagen Klaus, Matt Liebmann, and

Pedro Funari for sharing their own work and recommending that of others. Gary Feinman, Linda

Nicholas, Thomas Charlton, Chuck Orser, Pru Rice, and three anonymous reviewers also provided helpful

advice. Most of all I thank Dimitris, Maria, and Michael for their patience during the long process of

writing this review. Given the tremendous amount of research that has been conducted on Spanish

colonial archaeology over the last two decades, I am sure that I have inadvertently omitted interesting and

important work. To those authors, my apologies.

References cited

Alexander, R. T. (1997). Late colonial period settlement patterns in Yaxcaba Parish, Yucatan, Mexico:

Implications for the distribution of land and population before the caste war. In Gasco, J., Smith, G.,

and Fournier-Garcia, P. (eds.), Approaches to the Historical Archaeology of Mexico, Central andSouth America, Monograph 38, Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles,

pp. 29–40.

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 179

123

Alexander, R. (1998). Community organization in the Parroquia de Yaxcaba, Yucatan, Mexico, 1750–

1847: Implications for household adaptation within a changing colonial economy. AncientMesoamerica 9: 39–54.

Alexander, R. (1999). The emerging world system and colonial Yucatan: The archaeology of core-

periphery integration, 1780–1847. In Kardulias, N. (ed.), Leadership, Production, and Exchange:World Systems Theory in Practice, Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, MD, pp. 103–124.

Alexander, R. (2004). Yaxcaba and the Caste War of Yucatan: An Archaeological Perspective, University

of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Alexander, R., and Kepecs, S. (2005). The Postclassic to Spanish-era transition in Mesoamerica: An

introduction. In Kepecs, S., and Alexander, R. (eds.), The Postclassic to Spanish-era Transition inMesoamerica: Archaeological Perspectives, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque,

pp. 1–12.

Allen, R. (1998). Native Americans at Mission Santa Cruz, 1791–1834: Interpreting the ArchaeologicalRecord, Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Berkeley.

Amodio, E., Navarrete Sanchez, R., and Rodrıguez Yilo, A. (1997). El camino de los espanoles:aproximaciones historicas y arqueologicas al Camino Real Caracas-La Guaira en la epocacolonial, Instituto del Patrimonio Cultural, Caracas.

Aparicio, R. (1997). La arquitectura industrial y utilitaria de Santiago, capital del Reino de Guatemala, y

sus alrededores. In Gasco, J., Smith, G., and Fournier Garcıa, P. (eds.), Approaches to the HistoricalArchaeology of Mexico, Central, and South America, Institute of Archaeology, University of

California, Los Angeles, pp. 71–82.

Avery, G. (1995). More friend than foe: Eighteenth-century Spanish, French, and Caddoan interaction at

Los Adaes, a capital of Texas located in northwestern Louisiana. Louisiana Archaeology 22:

163–193.

Ayers, J. (1995). The Archaeology of Spanish and Mexican Colonialism in the American Southwest,Society of Historical Archaeology, Ann Arbor, MI.

Barcena, J. R. (2004). Arqueologıa e historia urbana: investigaciones en la ciudad y conurbano

mendocino. Chungara 36: 187–196.

Bense, J. (ed.) (1999). Archaeology of Colonial Pensacola, University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Bense, J. (ed.) (2003). Presidio Santa Marıa de Galve: A Struggle for Survival in Colonial SpanishPensacola, University of Florida Press, Gainesville.

Bense, J. (2004). Introduction: Presidios of the North American Spanish borderlands. HistoricalArchaeology 38(3): 1–5.

Blackman, M. J., Fournier, P., and Bishop, R. (2006). Complejidad e interaccion social en el Mexico

colonial: la produccion, intercambio y consumo de ceramicas vidriadas y esmaltadas con base en

analisis de activacion neutronica. Cuicuilco 36: 203–222.

Bonine, M. (2004). Analysis of household and family at a Spanish colonial rancho along the Rio Grande

River. In Barile, K., and Brandon, J. (eds.), Household Chores and Household Choices: Theorizingthe Domestic Sphere in Historical Archaeology, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa,

pp. 15–32.

Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Bray, W. (ed.) (1994). The Meeting of Two Worlds: Europe and the Americas, 1492–1650, Oxford

University Press, Oxford.

Brubacker, R., and Cooper, F. (2000). Beyond ‘identity.’ Theory and Society 29: 1–47.

Burnett, B., and Murray, K. (1993). Death, drought, and de Soto: The bioarchaeology of depopulation. In

Young, G., and Hoffman, M. (eds.), The Expedition of Hernando de Soto West of the Mississippi,1541–1543, University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, pp. 227–236.

Capone, P., and Preucel, R. (2002). Ceramic semiotics: Women, pottery, and social meanings at Kotyiti

Pueblo. In Preucel, R. (ed.), Archaeologies of the Pueblo Revolt: Identity, Meaning, and Renewal inthe Pueblo World, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 99–113.

Cargill, D., and Hard, R. (1999). Assessing Native American mobility versus permanency at Mission San

Juan Capistrano through the use of stable isotope analysis. Bulletin of the Texas ArcheologicalSociety 70: 197–213.

Carrillo, C. (1997). Hispanic New Mexican Pottery: Evidence of Craft Specialization, 1790–1890, LPBD

Press, Albuquerque, NM.

Charlton, T., and Fournier G., P. (1993). Urban and rural dimensions of the contact period: Central

Mexico, 1521–1620. In Rogers, J., and Wilson, S. (eds.), Ethnohistory and Archaeology:Approaches to Postcontact Change in the Americas, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 210–220.

180 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

Charlton, T., Fournier Garcıa, P., and Otis Charlton, C. L. (2002). La ceramica del periodo colonial

temprano en la Cuenca de Mexico: permanencia y cambio en la cultura material. In Merino Carrion,

B., and Garcıa Cook, A. (eds.), La produccion alfarera en el Mexico antiguo, Instituto Nacional de

Antropologıa e Historia, Mexico City.

Charlton, T., Otis Charlton, C., and Fournier Garcıa, P. (2005). The Basin of Mexico A.D. 1450–1620:

Archaeological dimensions. In Kepecs, S., and Alexander, R. (eds.), The Postclassic to Spanish-EraTransition in Mesoamerica: Archaeological Perspectives, University of New Mexico Press,

Albuquerque, pp. 49–63.

Cohen, M., O’Conner, K., Danforth, M., Jacobi, K., and Armstrong, C. (1994). Health and death at Tipu.

In Larsen, C., and Milner, G. (eds.), In the Wake of Contact: Biological Responses to Conquest,Wiley-Liss, New York, pp. 121–133.

Cohen, M., O’Connor, K., Danforth, M., Jacobi, K., and Armstrong, C. (1997). Archaeology and

osteology of the Tipu Site. In Whittington, S., and Reed, D., (eds.), Bones of the Maya: Studies ofAncient Skeletons, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, pp. 78–86.

Comaroff, J., and Comaroff, J. (1986). Christianity and colonialism in South Africa. AmericanEthnologist 13: 1–22.

Comaroff, J., and Comaroff, J. (1991). Of Revelation and Revolution: Christianity, Colonialism, andConsciousness in South Africa, Volume 1, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Cook, N. D. (1981). Demographic Collapse: Indian Peru, 1520–1620, Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge.

Corona, E. (1998). Arqueohistoria novohispana: la arqueologıa colonial. In Fernandez Davila, E., and

Gomez Serafın, S. (eds.), Memoria del primer congreso nacional de arqueologıa historica, Oaxaca,1996, Consejo Nacional para la Cultura y las Artes/Instituto Nacional de Antropologıa e Historia,

Mexico City.

Costello, J. (1992). Not peas in a pod: Documenting diversity among the California Missions. In Little, B.

(ed.), Text-Aided Archaeology, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 67–81.

Cusick, J. (1998). Historiography of Acculturation: An Evaluation of Concepts and Their Application in

Archaeology. In Cusick, J. (ed.), Studies in Culture Contact: Interaction, Culture Change, andArchaeology, Occasional Paper No. 25, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois

University, Carbondale, pp. 126–145.

Cusick, J. (2000). Creolization and the borderlands. Historical Archaeology 34(3): 46–55.

Deagan, K. (1974). Sex, Status, and Role in the Mestizaje of Spanish Colonial Florida, Unpublished Ph.D.

dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville.

Deagan, K. (1983). Spanish St. Augustine: The Archaeology of a Colonial Creole Community, Academic

Press, New York.

Deagan, K. (ed.) (1995). Puerto Real: The Archaeology of a Sixteenth-Century Town in Hispaniola,

University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Deagan, K. (1996a). Colonial transformation: Euro-American cultural genesis in the early Spanish-

American colonies. Journal of Anthropological Research 52: 135–160.

Deagan, K. (1996b). Environmental archaeology and historical archaeology. In Reitz, E., Newsom, L.,

and Scudder, S. (eds.), Case Studies in Environmental Archaeology, Plenum Press, New York, pp.

359–376.

Deagan, K. (1998). Transculturation and Spanish American ethnogenesis: The archaeological legacy of

the quincentennary. In Cusick, J. (ed.), Studies in Culture Contact: Interaction, Culture Change, andArchaeology, Occasional Paper No. 25, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois

University, Carbondale, pp. 126–145.

Deagan, K. (2005). Patterns south: The evolution and application of pattern recognition tools in the

archaeology of the Spanish colonies. In Carnes-McNaughton, L., and Steen, C. (eds.), In Praise ofthe Poet Archaeologist: Papers in Honor of Stanley South and His Five Decades of HistoricalArchaeology, The Council of South Carolina Professional Archaeologists, South Carolina,

pp. 30–36.

Deagan, K. (2007). Eliciting contraband through archaeology: Illicit trade in eighteenth-century St.

Augustine. Historical Archaeology 41(4): 98–116.

Deagan, K., and Cruxent, J. M. (2002a). Archaeology at La Isabela: America’s First European Town,

Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.

Deagan, K., and Cruxent, J. M. (2002b). Columbus’s Outpost among the Taınos: Spain and America at LaIsabela, 1493–1498, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 181

123

Deagan, K., and Landers, J. (1999). Fort Mose: Earliest free African-American town in the United States.

In Singleton, T. (ed.), I, Too, Am America: Archaeological Studies of African-American Life,

University of Virginia Press, Charlottesville, pp. 261–282.

Deagan, K., and MacMahon, D. (1995). Fort Mose: Colonial America’s Black Fortress of Freedom,

University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Deagan, K., and Reitz, E. (1995). Merchants and cattlemen: The archaeology of a commercial structure at

Puerto Real. In Deagan, K. (ed.), Puerto Real: The Archaeology of a Sixteenth-Century Town inHispaniola, University Press of Florida, Gainesville, pp. 231–286.

deFrance, S. D. (1996). Iberian foodways in the Moquegua and Torata Valleys of southern Peru.

Historical Archaeology 30(4): 20–48.

Dobyns, H. (1983). Their Number Become Thinned: Native American Population Dynamics in EasternNorth America, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.

Dobyns, H. (1991). New native world: Links between demographic and cultural changes. In Thomas,

D.H. (ed.), Columbian Consequences, Volume 3, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC,

pp. 541–559.

Domınguez, L. (2003). La Habana Vieja, un proyecto de arqueologıa historica en el caribe. Revista deArqueologıa Americana 22: 185–200.

Dongoske, K., and Dongoske, C. (2002). History in stone: Evaluating Spanish conversion efforts through

Hopi rock art. In Preucel, R. (ed.), Archaeologies of the Pueblo Revolt: Identity, Meaning, andRenewal in the Pueblo World, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 114–131.

Dunnell, R. (1991). Methodological impacts of catastrophic depopulation on American archaeology and

ethnology. In Thomas, D.H. (ed.), Columbian Consequences, Volume 3, Smithsonian Institution

Press, Washington, DC, pp. 561–580.

Duran, V., and Novellino, P. (2002). Vida y muerte en la frontera del imperio espanol: estudios

arqueologicos y bioantropologicos en un cementerio indıgena post-contacto del centro-oeste de

Argentina. Anales de Arqueologıa y Etnologıa 54/55: 115–168.

Endfield, G. (2008). Climate and Society in Colonial Mexico: A Study in Vulnerability, Blackwell,

Malden, MA.

Evans, S. (1998). Toltec invaders and Spanish conquistadors: Culture contact in the Postclassic

Teotihuacan Valley, Mexico. In Cusick, J. (ed.), Studies in Culture Contact: Interaction, CultureChange, and Archaeology, Occasional Paper No. 25, Center for Archaeological Investigations,

Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, pp. 335–357.

Ewen, C. (1990). The Archaeology of Spanish Colonialism in the Southeastern United States and theCaribbean, Society for Historical Archaeology, Ann Arbor, MI.

Ewen, C. (1991). From Spaniard to Creole: The Archaeology of Cultural Formation at Puerto Real,Haiti, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

Ewen, C. (1996). Continuity and change: De Soto and the Apalachee. Historical Archaeology 30(2):

41–53.

Ewen, C. (2000). From colonist to creole: Archaeological patterns of Spanish colonization in the New

World. Historical Archaeology 34(3): 36–45.

Ewen, C., and Hann, J. (1998). Hernando de Soto Among the Apalachee: The Archaeology of the FirstWinter Encampment, University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Farnsworth, P. (1992). Missions, Indians, and cultural continuity. Historical Archaeology 26(1): 22–36.

Farnsworth, P., and Jackson, R. (1995). Cultural, economic, and demographic change in the missions of

Alta California: The case of Nuestra Senora de la Soledad. In Langer, E., and Jackson, R. (eds.), TheNew Latin American Mission History, University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, pp. 109–129.

Farnsworth, P., and Williams, J. (eds.) (1992). The Archaeology of the Spanish Colonial and MexicanRepublican Periods, special issue of Historical Archaeology 26(1).

Fernandez Davila, E., and Gomez Serafın, S. (eds.) (1998). Memoria del primer congreso nacional dearqueologıa historica, Oaxaca, 1996, Consejo Nacional para la Cultura y las Artes/Instituto

Nacional de Antropologıa e Historia, Mexico City.

Foster, G. (1960). Culture and Conquest: America’s Spanish Heritage, Viking Fund Publications in

Anthropology 27, Wenner-Gren Foundation, New York.

Fournier, P. (1996). De la Teotlalpan al Valle del Mezquital: una reconstruccion etnohistorico-

arqueologica del modo de vida de los hnahnu. Cuicuilco 3: 175–194.

Fournier, P. (1997a). Tendencias de consumo en Mexico durante los periodos colonial e independiente. In

Gasco, J., Smith, G., and Fournier, P. (eds.), Approaches to Historical Archaeology of Middle and

182 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

South America, Monograph 38, Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles,

pp. 49–58.

Fournier, P. (1997b). Sımbolos de la conquista hispana: hacia una interpretacion de significados de

artefactos ceramicos del periodo colonial temprano en la Cuenca de Mexico. In Marion, M. (ed.),

Simbologicas, Consejo Nacional para la Ciencia y la Tecnologıa and Plaza y Valdes, Mexico City,

pp. 125–138.

Fournier, P. (1998). La ceramica colonial del Templo Mayor. Arqueologıa Mexicana 31: 52–59.

Fournier, P. (1999). La arqueologıa social latinoamericana: caracterizacion de una posicion teorica

marxista. In Zarankin, A., and Acuto, F. (eds.), Sed non satiata: teoria social en la arqueologıalatinomaericana contemporanea, Ediciones Tridente, Buenos Aires, pp. 17–32.

Fournier, P. (2003). Historical archaeology in Mexico: A reappraisal. SAA Archaeological Record 3:

18–19.

Fournier, P. (2004). De Tenochtitlan a la Ciudad de Mexico: migracion y aculturacion en la capital

novohispana durante el periodo colonial temprano (1521–1620). In Arechiga, J. (ed.), Migracion,poblacion, territorio y cultura, XXVI Mesa Redonda, Sociedad Mexicana de Antropologıa, Mexico

City, pp. 265–281.

Fournier, P. (2006). Arqueologıa de los caminos prehispanicos y coloniales. Arqueologıa MexicanaXIV(81): 26–31.

Fournier, P., and Charlton, T. (1996–1997). Patrones arqueologicos de diferencias socioetnicas en Nueva

Espana: contrastes urbanos y rurales. Revista Colombiana de Antropologıa 33: 55–83.

Fournier, P., and Miranda Flores, F. (1992). Historic sites archaeology in Mexico. Historical Archaeology26(1): 75–83.

Fox, A. (1993). Mission builders: Traces of Texas archaeology. In Flowers, S. (ed.), The SpanishMissionary Heritage of the United States: Selected Papers and Commentaries from the November1990 Quincentenary Symposium, San Antonio Missions, Texas, San Antonio Missions National

Historic Park, National Park Service, San Antonio, TX, pp. 119–122.

Funari, P. (1996). Historical archaeology in Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina. World ArchaeologicalBulletin 7: 51–62.

Funari, P. (1997). Archaeology, history, and historical archaeology in South America. InternationalJournal of Historical Archaeology 1: 189–206.

Funari, P. (1999). Historical archaeology from a world perspective. In Funari, P., Hall, M., and Jones, S.

(eds.), Historical Archaeology: Back from the Edge, Routledge, London, pp. 37–66.

Funari, P. (2007). A report on historical archaeology publications in Latin America. International Journalof Historical Archaeology 11: 183–191.

Funari, P., and Zarankın, A. (2004). Arqueologıa historica en America del Sur, Ediciones Uniandes,

Bogota.

Fusco Zambetogliris, N. (1995). La arqueologıa urbana in la colonia del Sacramento. Revista Museu deArqueologıa e Etnologıa 5: 39–49.

Galindo, M. J. (2004). The ethnohistory and archaeology of Nuevo Santander rancho households. In

Barile, K., and Brandon, J. (eds.), Household Chores and Household Choices: Theorizing theDomestic Sphere in Historical Archaeology, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, pp. 179–196.

Galloway, P. (1991). The archaeology of ethnohistorical narrative. In Thomas, D. H. (ed.), ColumbianConsequences, Vol. 3, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, pp. 453–469.

Gannon, M. (1992). The new alliance of history and archaeology in the eastern Spanish borderlands. TheWilliam and Mary Quarterly 49: 321–334.

Garcıa Targa, J. (1995). Arqueologıa colonial en el area maya: aspectos generales y modelos de estudio.

Revista Espanola de Antropologıa Americana 25: 41–69.

Garcıa Targa, J. (2002). Diseno arquitectonico y urbano en comunidades mayas coloniales: un estudio

arqueologico y ethnohistorico. Mesoamerica 23: 54–88.

Gasco, J. (1993). Socioeconomic change within native society in colonial Soconusco, New Spain. In

Rogers, J. D., and Wilson, S. D. (eds.), Ethnohistory and Archaeology. Approaches to PostcontactChange in the Americas, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 163–180.

Gasco, J. (1996). Cacao and economic inequality in colonial Soconusco, Chiapas, Mexico. Journal ofAnthropological Research 52: 385–409.

Gasco, J. (1997). Consolidation of the colonial regime: Native society in western Central America.

Historical Archaeology 31(1): 55–63.

Gasco, J. (2005). The political geography of the province of Soconusco in the Late Postclassic and Early

Colonial periods. In Okoshi Harada, T., and Williams-Beck, L. (eds.), La geografıa polıtica del area

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 183

123

Maya en los periodos postclasico y colonial temprano, Centro de Estudios Mayas, Universidad

Autonoma Nacional de Mexico and Universidad Autonoma de Campeche, Mexico.

Gasco, J., Smith, G., and Fournier Garcıa, P. (eds.) (1997). Approaches to the Historical Archaeology ofMexico, Central, and South America, Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los

Angeles.

Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration, University of

California Press, Berkeley.

Gomez, P., Pasinski, T., and Fournier, P. (2001). Transferencia tecnologica y filiacion etnica: el caso de

los loceros novohispanos del siglo XVI. Amerıstica 7: 33–66.

Gomez Romero, F. (2005). A brief overview of the evolution of historical archaeology in Argentina.

International Journal of Historical Archaeology 9: 135–141.

Gordus, A., and Craig, A. (1995). Metal contents of silver and gold ingots and coins from 16th-18th

century Spanish shipwrecks. In Vandiver, P., Druzik, J, Galvan Madrid, J. L., Freestone, I., and

Wheeler, G. (eds.), Material Issues in Art and Archaeology IV, Materials Research Society,

Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 605–611.

Graham, E. (1998). Mission archaeology. Annual Review of Anthropology 27: 25–62.

Gregory, H., Avery, G., Lee, A., and Blaine, J. (2004). Presidio Los Adaes: Spanish, French, and Caddoan

interaction on the northern frontier. Historical Archaeology 38(3): 65–77.

Gremillion, K. (1993). Adoption of Old World crops and processes of culture change. SoutheastArchaeology 12: 15–20.

Gutierrez, A. (2003). A shipwreck cargo of Sevillian pottery from the Studland Bay Wreck, Dorset, UK.

The International Journal of Nautical Archaeology 32: 24–41.

Hally, D. (1994). The chiefdom of Coosa. In Hudson, C., and Tesser, C. (eds.), The Forgotten Centuries:Indians and Europeans in the American South, 1521–1704, University of Georgia Press, Athens, pp.

227–253.

Hanson, C. (1995). The Hispanic horizon in Yucatan: A model of Franciscan missionization. AncientMesoamerica 6: 15–28.

Horrell, C. (1999). Drawing linkages between global and local processes: Archaeological investigations

of Villa San Marcos de Neve, a Spanish colonial town on the frontier. M.A. thesis, Department of

Anthropology, University of Texas, San Antonio.

Hunter, J. (2001). A broken lifeline of commerce, trade and defense on the colonial frontier: Historical

archaeology of the Santa Rosa Island Wreck, an early eighteenth-century Spanish shipwreck in

Pensacola Bay, Florida. M.A. thesis, Department of History, University of West Florida, Pensacola.

Hutchinson, D. (2006). Tatham Mound and the Bioarchaeology of European Contact: Disease andDepopulation in Central Gulf Coast Florida, University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Hutchinson, D., and Mitchem, J. (2001). Correlates of contact: Epidemic disease in archaeological

context. Historical Archaeology 35(2): 58–72.

Hutchinson, D., Larsen, C., Schoeninger, M., and Norr, L. (1998). Regional variation in the pattern of

maize adoption and use in Florida and Georgia. American Antiquity 63: 397–416.

Ivey, J. (1993). Comparative Franciscan architectural design on the northern and central frontier of New

Spain. In Flowers, S. (ed.), The Spanish Missionary Heritage of the United States: Selected Papersand Commentaries from the November 1990 Quincentennary Symposium, San Antonio Missions,Texas, San Antonio Missions National Historic Park, National Park Service, San Antonio, TX, pp.

177–199.

Ivey, J., and Thomas, D. H. (2005). ‘‘The feeling of working completely in the dark.’’ The uncertain

foundations of southwestern mission archaeology. In Cordell, L., and Fowler, D. (eds.), SouthwestArchaeology in the Twentieth Century, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 204–219.

Jacobi, K. (1997). Dental genetic structuring of a colonial Maya cemetery, Tipu, Belize. In Whittington,

S., and Reed, D. (eds.), Bones of the Maya: Studies of Ancient Skeletons, Smithsonian Institution

Press, Washington, DC, pp. 138–153.

Jacobi, K. (2000). Last Rites for the Tipu Maya: Genetic Structuring in a Colonial Cemetery, University

of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

Jamieson, R. (2000). Domestic Architecture and Power: The Historical Archaeology of ColonialEcuador, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York.

Jamieson, R. (2001). Majolica in the Early Colonial Andes: The role of Panamanian wares. LatinAmerican Antiquity 12: 45–58.

Jamieson, R. (2005). Colonialism, social archaeology, and lo andino: Historical archaeology in the

Andes. World Archaeology 37: 352–372.

184 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

Jamieson, R., and Hancock, R. (2004). Neutron activation analysis of colonial ceramics from southern

highland Ecuador. Archaeometry 46: 569–583.

Johnson, J., and Lehmann, G. (1996). Sociopolitical devolution in northeast Mississippi and the timing of

the de Soto entrada. In Baker, B., and Kealhofer, L. (eds.), Bioarchaeology of Native AmericanAdaptation in the Spanish Borderlands, University Press of Florida, Gainesville, pp. 38–55.

Jones, B. C., and Shapiro, G. (1990). Nine mission sites in Apalachee. In Thomas, D. H. (ed.), ColumbianConsequences, Volume 2, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, pp. 491–509.

Juli, H. (2003). Perspectives on Mexican hacienda archaeology. SAA Archaeological Record 3: 23–24.

Kealhofer, L., and Baker, B. (1996). Counterpoint to collapse: Depopulation and adaptation. In Baker, B.,

and Kealhofer, L. (eds.), Bioarchaeology of Native American Adaptation in the SpanishBorderlands, University Press of Florida, Gainesville, pp. 209–222.

Kepecs, S. (1997). Native Yucatan and Spanish influence: The archaeology and history of Chikinchel.

Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 4: 307–329.

Kepecs, S. (2005). Mayas, Spaniards, and salt: World systems shifts in sixteenth-century Yucatan. In

Kepecs, S., and Alexander, R. (eds.), The Postclassic to Spanish-era Transition in Mesoamerica:Archaeological Perspectives, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 117–138.

Kepecs, S., and Alexander, R. (eds.) (2005). The Postclassic to Spanish-era Transition in Mesoamerica:Archaeological Perspectives, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Kern, A. (ed.) (1998). Arqueologia Historoca Missioneira, EDIPUCRS, Porto Alegre.

Klauss, H., and Tam, M. (2008). Contact in the Andes: Bioarchaeology of systemic stress in colonial

Morrope, Peru. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 138: 356–386.

Kubler, G. (1948). Mexican Architecture of the Sixteenth Century, Volumes 1 and 2, Yale University

Press, New Haven, CT.

Kulisheck, J. (2005). The Archaeology of Pueblo Population Change on the Jemez Plateau A.D. 1200–1700: The Effects of Spanish Contact and Conquest, Unpublished dissertation, Department of

Anthropology, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX.

La Rosa Corzo, G. (1995). Arqueologia en sitios de contrabandistas, Editorial Academia, Havana.

La Rosa Corzo, G. (2005). Subsistence of cimarrones: An archaeological study. In Curet, A. L., Dawdy,

S. L., and La Rosa Corzo, G. (eds.), Dialogues in Cuban Archaeology, University of Alabama Press,

Tuscaloosa, pp. 163–180.

Larsen, C. (ed.) (2001). Bioarchaeology of Spanish Florida: The Impact of Colonialism, University of

Florida Press, Gainesville.

Larsen, C., and Milner, G. (1994). In the Wake of Contact: Biological Responses to Conquest, Wiley-Liss,

New York.

Larsen, C., and Sering, L. (2000). Inferring iron deficiency anemia from human skeletal remains: The

case of the Georgia Bight. In Lambert, P. (ed.), Bioarchaeological Studies of Life in the Age ofAgriculture, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, pp. 116–133.

Larsen, C., Griffin, M., Hutchinson, D., Noble, V., Norr, L., Pastor, R., Ruff, C., Russell, K., Schoeninger,

M., Schultz, M., Simpson, S., and Teaford, M. (2001). Frontiers of contact: Bioarchaeology in

Spanish Florida. Journal of World Prehistory 15: 69–123.

Larsen, C., Crosby, A., Griffin, M. Hutchinson, D., Ruff, C., Russell, K., Schoeninger, M., Sering, L.,

Simpson, S., Takacs, J., and Teaford, M. (2002). A biohistory of health and behavior in the Georgia

Bight. In Steckel, R., and Rose, J. (eds.), The Backbone of History: Health and Nutrition in theWestern Hemisphere, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 406–439.

Lezama, A. (2002). Arqueologıa historica en el Uruguay: practicas y reflexiones. In Schavelzon, D. (ed.),

Arqueologıa historica en Argentina: actas del primer congreso nacional de arqueologıa historica,

Corregidor, Buenos Aires, pp. 931–938.

Liebmann, M. (2008). The innovative materiality of revitalization movements: Lessons from the Pueblo

Revolt of 1680. American Anthropologist 110: 360–372.

Lightfoot, K. (1995). Culture contact studies: Redefining the relationship between prehistoric and

historical archaeology. American Antiquity 60: 199–217.

Lightfoot, K. (2005a). Indians, Missionaries, and Merchants: The Legacy of Colonial Encounters on theCalifornia Frontiers, University of California Press, Berkeley.

Lightfoot, K. (2005b). The archaeology of colonization: California in cross-cultural perspective. In Stein,

G. (ed.), The Archaeology of Colonial Encounters: Comparative Perspectives, School of American

Research Press, Santa Fe, NM, pp. 207–235.

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 185

123

Lightfoot, K., Martınez, A., and Schiff, A. (1998). Daily practice and material culture in pluralistic social

settings: An archaeological study of culture change and persistence from Fort Ross, California.

American Antiquity 63: 199–222.

Loren, D. (2001a). Manipulating bodies and emerging traditions at the Los Adaes Presidio. In Pauketat, T.

(ed.), The Archaeology of Traditions: Agency and History Before and After Columbus, University

Press of Florida, Gainesville, pp. 58–76.

Loren, D. (2001b). Social skins: Orthodoxies and practices of dressing in the early colonial lower

Mississippi Valley. Journal of Social Archaeology 1: 172–189.

Loren, D. (2007). Corporeal Concerns: Eighteenth-century casta paintings and colonial bodies in Spanish

Texas. Historical Archaeology 41(1): 23–36.

Loren, D. (2008). In Contact: Bodies and Spaces in the Sixteenth- and Seventeenth-Century EasternWoodlands, AltaMira, Lanham, MD.

Lorenzo, J., Lumbreras, L., Matos, E., Montane, J., and Sanoja, M. (1979). Hacıa una arqueologıa social.

Nueva Antropologıa 3: 65–92.

Lugo-Fernandez, A., Ball, D., Gravois, M., Horrell, C., and Irion, J. (2007). Analysis of the Gulf of

Mexico’s Veracruz-Havana route of La Flota de la Nueva Espana. Journal of Maritime Archaeology(http://www.springerlink.com/content/m177kp3246574204/).

Lumbreras, L. (1974). La arqueologıa como ciencia social, Ediciones Histar, Lima.

Lycett, M. (2002). Transformations of place: Occupational history and differential persistence in 17th-

century New Mexico. In Preucel, R. (ed.), Archaeologies of the Pueblo Revolt: Identity, Meaning,and Renewal in the Pueblo World, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 61–76.

Lycett, M. (2005). On the margins of the peripheries: The consequences of differential incorporation in

the colonial Southwest. In Kepecs, S., and Alexander, R. (eds.), The Postclassic to Spanish-eraTransition in Mesoamerica: Archaeological Perspectives, University of New Mexico Press,

Albuquerque, pp. 97–116.

Mahe Lugo Romera, K., and Menendez Castro, S. (2003). Barrio de Campeche: tres esudiosarqueologicos, Fundacion Fernando Ortız, Havana.

Marken, M. (1994). Pottery from Spanish Shipwrecks, 1500–1800, University Press of Florida,

Gainesville.

Marrinan, R. (1993). Archaeological investigations at Mission Patale, 1984–1992. In McEwan, B. (ed.),

The Spanish Missions of La Florida, University Press of Florida, Gainesville, pp. 244–294.

Matos Moctezuma, E. (1993). Programa de arqueologıa urbana. Antropologicas 8: 34–44.

Matos Moctezuma, E. (ed.) (1999). Excavaciones en la catedral y el sagrario metropolitanos, Programa

de Arqueologıa Urbana, Instituto Nacional de Antropologıa e Historia, Mexico City.

Matos Moctezuma, E., Hinojosa, F., and Barrera Rivera, J. (1998). Excavaciones arqueologicas en la

Catedral de Mexico. Arqueologıa Mexicana 6: 12–19.

Mazzanti, D. (2007). Arqueologıa de las relaciones inter-etnicas posconquista en las sierras de Tandilla,

Ph.D. dissertation, Facultad de Filosofıa y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires.

McEwan, B. (ed.) (1993). The Spanish Missions of La Florida, University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

McEwan, B. (ed.) (2000). Indians of the Greater Southeast: Historical Archaeology and Ethnohistory,

University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

McEwan, B., Davidson, M., and Mitchem, J. (1993). A quartz crystal cross from the cemetery at Mission

San Luis, Florida. Journal of Archaeological Science 24: 529–536.

Melville, E. (1994). A Plague of Sheep: Environmental Consequences of the Conquest of Mexico,

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Meyers, A., and Carlson, D. (2002). Peonage, power relations, and the built environment at Hacienda

Tabi, Yucatan, Mexico. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 6: 225–252.

Milanich, J. (1995). Florida Indians and the Invasion from Europe, University Press of Florida,

Gainesville.

Milanich, J. (1998). Florida’s Indians from Ancient Times to the Present, University Press of Florida,

Gainesville.

Milanich, J. (1999). Laboring in the Fields of the Lord: Spanish Missions and Southeastern Indians,

Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.

Milanich, J., and Hudson, C. (1993). Hernando de Soto and the Indians of Florida, University Press of

Florida, Gainesville.

Milanich, J. T., and Milbrath, S. (eds.) (1989). First Encounters: Spanish Explorations in the Caribbeanand the United States, 1492–1570, University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

186 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

Mills, B. (2002). Acts of resistance: Zuni ceramics, social identity, and the Pueblo Revolt. In Preucel, R.

(ed.), Archaeologies of the Pueblo Revolt: Identity, Meaning, and Renewal in the Pueblo World,

University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 85–98.

Mobley-Tanaka, J. (2002). Crossed cultures, crossed meanings: The manipulation of ritual imagery in

early historic Pueblo resistance. In Preucel, R. (ed.), Archaeologies of the Pueblo Revolt: Identity,Meaning, and Renewal in the Pueblo World, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque,

pp. 77–84.

Mogrovejo Rosales, J. D. (1996). Arqueologıa urbana de evidencias coloniales en la ciudad de Lima,

Instituto Riva-Aguero, Lima, Peru.

Monroy-Guzman, F., and Fournier, P. (2003). Elemental composition of Mexican colonial majolica using

INAA. In Nuclear Analytical Techniques in Archaeological Investigations, Technical Reports Series

No. 416, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria, pp. 147–161.

Newman, E. (2008). San Miguel Acocotla: The History and Archaeology of a Central Mexican Hacienda,

Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Yale University, New Haven, CT.

Ortiz, F. (1940). Contrapunteo cubano del tabaco y azucar, Ediciones Ciencias Sociales, Havana.

Oyuela-Caycedo, A. (1994a). Nationalism and archaeology: A theoretical approach. In Oyuela-Caycedo,

A. (ed.), History of Latin American Archaeology, Ashgate, Aldershot, UK, pp. 3–17.

Oyuela-Caycedo, A. (ed.) (1994b). History of Latin American Archaeology, Ashgate, Aldershot, UK.

Oyuela-Caycedo, A., Anaya, A. A., Elera, C. G., and Valdez, L. M. (1997). Social archaeology in Latin

America? Comments to T. C. Patterson. American Antiquity 62: 365–374.

Palka, J. (2005). Unconquered Lacandon Maya: Ethnohistory and Archaeology of Indigenous CultureChange, University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Palmer, G., Piper, J., and Jacobson, L. (1993). El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro, Vol. 1, Cultural

Resources Series No. 11, Bureau of Land Management, Santa Fe, NM.

Palmer, G., Fosberg, S., and Piper, J. (eds.) (1999). El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro, Vol. 2, Cultural

Resources Series No. 13, Bureau of Land Management, Santa Fe, NM.

Patterson, T. (1994). Social archaeology in Latin America: An appreciation. American Antiquity 59:

531–537.

Patterson, T. (1997). A reply to A. Oyuela-Caycedo, A. Anaya, C. G. Elera, and L. M. Valdez. AmericanAntiquity 62: 375–376.

Pavao-Zuckerman, B., and LaMotta, V. (2007). Missionization and economic change in the Pimerıa Alta:

The zooarchaeology of San Agustın de Tucson. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 11:

241–268.

Pearson, C., and Hoffman, P. (1995). The Last Voyage of the El Nuevo Constante: The Wreck andRecovery of an Eighteenth-Century Spanish Ship off the Louisiana Coast, Louisiana State University

Press, Baton Rouge.

Pertulla, T. (1994). Material culture of the Koasati Indians of Texas. Historical Archaeology 28(1):

65–77.

Podgorny, I., Tobıas, M., and Farro, M. (2005). The reception of New Archaeology in Argentina: A

preliminary survey. In Funari, P., Zarankin, A, and Stovel, E. (eds.), Global Archaeological Theory:Contextual Voices and Contemporary Thoughts, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York,

pp. 59–76.

Politis, G. (ed.) (1992). Arqueologi9a en America Latina hoy, Fondo de Promocion de la Cultura, Bogota,

Colombia.

Politis, G. (2003). The theoretical landscape and the methodological development of archaeology in Latin

America. American Antiquity 68: 245–272.

Politis, G., and Alberti, B. (eds.) (1999). Archaeology in Latin America, Routledge, London.

Preston, W. (1997). Serpent in the garden: Environmental change in colonial California. CaliforniaHistory 76: 260–298.

Preucel, R. (ed.) (2002). Archaeologies of the Pueblo Revolt: Identity, Meaning, and Renewal in thePueblo World, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Quimby, G., and Spoehr, A. (1951). Acculturation and Material Culture, Fieldiana: Anthropology 36(6),

The Field Museum, Chicago.

Ramenofsky, A. (1991). Beyond disciplinary bias: Future directions in contact periods studies. In

Thomas, D. H. (ed.), Columbian Consequences, Volume 3, Smithsonian Institution Press,

Washington, DC. pp. 431–436.

Ramenofsky, A., Wilbur, A., and Stone, A. (2003). Native American disease history: Past, present, and

future directions. World Archaeology 35: 241–257.

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 187

123

Reitz, E. (1993). Evidence for animal use at the missions of La Florida. In McEwan, B. (ed.), The SpanishMissions of La Florida, University Press of Florida, Gainesville, pp. 376–398.

Reitz, E. (1994). Zooarchaeological analysis of a free African community: Gracia Real de Santa Teresa

de Mose. Historical Archaeology 28(1): 23–40.

Reitz, E., and McEwan, B. (1995). Animals, environment, and the Spanish diet at Puerto Real. In Deagan,

K. (ed.), Puerto Real: The Archaeology of a Sixteenth-Century Town in Hispaniola, University Press

of Florida, Gainesville, pp. 287–334.

Rice, D., and Rice, P. (2005). Sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Maya political geography in central

Peten, Guatemala. In Kepecs, S., and Alexander, R. (eds.), The Postclassic to Spanish-era Transitionin Mesoamerica: Archaeological Perspectives, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp.

139–160.

Rice, P. (1994). The kilns of Moquegua, Peru: Technology, excavations, and functions. Journal of FieldArchaeology 21: 325–344.

Rice, P. (1996). The archaeology of wine: The wine and brandy haciendas of Moquegua, Peru. Journal ofField Archaeology 23: 187–204.

Rice, P. (1997). Wine and brandy production in colonial Peru: A historical and archaeological

investigation. Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27: 455–479.

Rice, P., and Van Beck, S. (1993). The Spanish colonial kiln tradition of Moquegua, Peru. HistoricalArchaeology 27(4): 65–81.

Ricklis, R. (1996). The Karankawa Indians of Texas: An Ecological Study of Cultural Tradition andChange, University of Texas Press, Austin.

Riley, C. (1995). Rio del Norte: People of the Upper Rio Grande From Earliest Times to the PuebloRevolt, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Rodrıguez-Alegrıa, E. (2005a). Consumption and the varied ideologies of domination in colonial Mexico

City. In Kepecs, S., and Alexander, R. (eds.), The Postclassic to Spanish-era Transition inMesoamerica: Archaeological Perspectives, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 35–

48.

Rodrıguez-Alegrıa, E. (2005b). Eating like an Indian: Negotiating social relations in the Spanish colonies.

Current Anthropology 46: 551–573.

Rogers, J. D., and Wilson, S. D. (eds.) (1993). Ethnohistory and Archaeology: Approaches to PostcontactChange in the Americas, Plenum Press, New York.

Rothschild, N. (2003a). Colonial Encounters in a Native American Landscape: The Spanish and Dutch inNorth America, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.

Rothschild, N. (2003b). Colonialism, material culture, and identity in the Rio Grande and Hudson River

Valleys. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 10: 73–108.

Rovira, B. (2001a). Actualizando el pasado: el Proyecto Arqueologico Panama Viejo. ArqueologıaPanama La Vieja August: 1–11.

Rovira, B. (2001b). Presencia de mayolicas panamenas en el mundo colonial: algunas consideraciones

acerca de su distribucion y cronologıa. Latin American Antiquity 12: 291–303.

Rovira, B., Blackman, J., van Zelst, L., Bishop, R., Rodgriguez, C., and Sanchez, D. (2006).

Caracterizacion quımica de ceramicas coloniales del sitio de Panama Viejo: resultados preliminares

de la aplicacion de activacion neutronica instrumental. Canto Rodado 1: 101–131.

Rubertone, P. (2000). The historical archaeology of Native Americans. Annual Review of Anthropology29: 425–446.

Ruff, C., and Larsen, C. (2001). Reconstructing behavior in Spanish Florida: The biomechanical

evidence. In Larsen, C. (ed.), Bioarchaeology of Spanish Florida: The Impact of Colonialism,

University Press of Florida, Gainesville, pp. 113–145.

Ruhl, D. (1993). Old customs and traditions in new terrain: Sixteenth- and seventeenth-century

archaeobotanical data from La Florida. In Scarry, C. M. (ed.), Foraging and Farming in the EasternWoodlands, University Press of Florida, Gainesville, pp. 255–283.

Ruhl, D. (1997). Oranges and wheat: Spanish attempts at agriculture in La Florida. HistoricalArchaeology 31(1): 36–45.

Sanoja, M. (1998a). Arqueologıa del capitalismo: estudio de casos: Santo Tome de Guayana y Caracas,

Venezuela. Tierra Firme 16: 637–660.

Sanoja, M. (1998b). Arqueologıa del capitalismo. Santo Tomas y las misiones capuchinas catalanas de

Guayana, Edo. Bolıvar, Venezuela. Boletın Museo Arqueologico de Quıbor 6: 135–154.

188 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

Sanoja Obediente, M., and Vargas Arenas, I. (1996). Tendencias del proceso urbano en las provincias de

Caracas y Guayana, siglos XVI-XIX: el modo de vida colonial venezolano. Revista de ArqueologıaAmericana 11: 57–77.

Sanoja Obediente, M., and Vargas Arenas, I. (2002). El agua y el poder: Caracas y la formacion delestado colonial caraqueno, 1567–1700, Banco Central de Venezuela, Caracas.

Sanoja Obediente, M., Vargas Arenas, I., Alvarado, G., and Montilla, M. (1998). Arqueologıa deCaracas, Tomo 1: Escuela de Musica Jose Angel Lamas, Academia Nacional de la Historia,

Caracas, Venezuela.

Saunders, R. (1993). Architecture of the Missions Santa Marıa and Santa Catalina de Amelia. In

McEwan, B. (ed.), The Spanish Missions of La Florida, University Press of Florida, Gainesville, pp.

35–61.

Saunders, R. (1996). Mission-period settlement structure: A test model at San Martın de Timucua.

Historical Archaeology 30(3): 24–36.

Saunders, R. (2000). Stability and Change in Guale Indian Pottery, A.D. 1300–1702, University of

Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

Saunders, R. (2001). Negotiated tradition? Native American pottery in the mission period in La Florida.

In Pauketat, T. (ed.), The Archaeology of Traditions: Agency and History Before and AfterColumbus, University Press of Florida, Gainesville, pp. 255–283.

Scaramelli, F., and Tarble de Scaramelli, K. (2005). The roles of material culture in the colonization of

the Orinoco, Venezuela. Journal of Social Archaeology 5: 135–168.

Scarry, J. (1993). Plant production and procurement in Apalachee Province. In McEwan, B. (ed.), TheSpanish Missions of La Florida, University Press of Florida, Gainesville, pp. 322–375.

Scarry, J. (1999). Elite identities in Apalachee Province: The construction of identity and cultural change

in a Mississippian society. In Robb, J. (ed.), Material Symbols: Culture and Economy in Prehistory,

Occasional Paper 26, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University,

Carbondale, pp. 342–361.

Scarry, J. (2001). Resistance and accommodation in Apalachee Province. In Pauketat, T. (ed.), TheArchaeology of Traditions: Agency and History Before and After Columbus, University Press of

Florida, Gainesville, pp. 34–57.

Schavelzon, D. (1992a). La arqueologıa urbana. In Schavelzon, D. (ed.), La arqueologıa urbana en laArgentina, Centro Editor de America Latina, Buenos Aires, pp. 11–36.

Schavelzon, D. (ed.) (1992b). La arqueologıa urbana en la Argentina, Centro Editor de America Latina,

Buenos Aires.

Schavelzon, D. (ed.) (1998). Las ruinas de San Francisco: arqueologıa e historia, Municipalidad de

Mendoza, Editorial Tintar, Mendoza, Argentina.

Schavelzon, D. (2000a). The Historical Archaeology of Buenos Aires: A City at the End of the World,

Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York.

Schavelzon, D. (2000b). Historias del comer y del beber en Buenos Aires: arqueologıa historica de lavajilla de mesa, Aguilar, Buenos Aires.

Schavelzon, D. (2002). Actas del primer congreso nacional de arqueologıa historica, Corregidor, Buenos

Aires.

Schavelzon, D. (2003). Buenos Aires negra: arqueologıa historica de una ciudad silenciada, Emece

Editores, Buenos Aires.

Schavelzon, D. (2005). El cambio como tradicion: Buenos Aires y su historia de la vivienda desde una

lectura arqueologica. Anales de la Arqueologıa y Etnologıa 59–69: 253–277.

Silliman, S. (2001a). Agency, practical politics, and the archaeology of culture contact. Journal of SocialArchaeology 1: 190–209.

Silliman, S. (2001b). Theoretical perspectives on labor and colonialism: Reconsidering the California

missions. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 20: 379–407.

Silliman, S. (2004). Lost Laborers in Colonial California: Native Americans and the Archaeology ofRancho Petaluma, University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Simpson, S. (2001). Patterns of growth disruption in La Florida: Evidence from enamel microstructure. In

Larsen, C. (ed.), Bioarchaeology of Spanish Florida: The Impact of Colonialism, University Press of

Florida, Gainesville, pp. 146–180.

Singleton, T. (2001). Slavery and spatial dialectics on Cuban coffee plantations. World Archaeology 33:

98–114.

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 189

123

Singleton, T. (2005). An archaeological study of slavery at a Cuban coffee plantation. In Curet, A. L.,

Dawdy, S. L., and La Rosa Corzo, G. (eds.), Dialogues in Cuban Archaeology, University of

Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, pp. 181–199.

Skowronek, R. (1992). Empire and ceramics: The changing role of illicit trade in Spanish America.

Historical Archaeology 26(1): 109–118.

Skowronek, R. (2002). Global economics in the creation and maintenance of the Spanish colonial empire.

In Dannhaeuser, N., and Werner, C. (eds.), Social Dimensions in Economic Practice, Research inEconomic Anthropology 21: 295–310.

Skowronek, R., and Ewen, C. (2006). Identifying victims of piracy in the Spanish colonial Caribbean. In

Skowronek, R., and Ewen, C. (eds.), X Marks the Spot: The Archaeology of Piracy, University Press

of Florida, Gainesville, pp 248–267.

Sluyter, A. (2001). Colonialism and landscape in the Americas: Material/conceptual transformations and

continuing consequences. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 91: 410–428.

Smith, G. (1995). Indians and Africans at Puerto Real: The ceramic evidence. In Deagan, K. (ed.), PuertoReal: The Archaeology of a Sixteenth-Century Town in Hispaniola, University Press of Florida,

Gainesville, pp. 335–376.

Smith, G. (1997). Hispanic, Andean, and African influences in the Moquegua Valley of southern Peru.

Historical Archaeology 31(1): 74–83.

Snow, D. (1992). A review of Spanish colonial archaeology in northern New Mexico. In Vierra, B. (ed.),

Current Research on the Late Prehistory and Early History of New Mexico, Special Publication 1,

New Mexico Archaeological Council, Albuquerque, pp. 185–193.

Solis Magana, C. (1999). Criollo pottery from San Juan de Puerto Rico. In Haviser, J. (ed.), African SitesArchaeology in the Caribbean, Markus Weiner, Princeton, NJ, pp. 131–141.

South, S. (1978). Pattern recognition in historical archaeology. American Antiquity 43: 223–230.

Spores, R., and Robles Garcıa, N. (2007). A prehispanic (Postclassic) center in colonial transition:

Excavations at Yacundaa Pueblo Viejo de Teposcolula, Oaxaca, Mexico. Latin American Antiquity18: 333–353.

Staski, E. (1998). Change and inertia on the frontier: Archaeology at the Paraje de San Diego, Camino

Real, in southern New Mexico. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 2: 21–44.

Staski, E. (2004). An archaeological survey of El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro, Las Cruces—El Paso.

International Journal of Historical Archaeology 8: 231–245.

Steckel, R., and Rose, J. (eds.) (2002). The Backbone of History: Health and Nutrition in the WesternHemisphere, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Stodder, A., and Martin, D. (1992). Health and disease in the Southwest before and after Spanish contact.

In Verano, J., and Ubelaker, D. (eds.), Disease and Demography in the Americas, Smithsonian

Institution Press, Washington, DC, pp. 55–73.

Stodder, A., Martin, D., Goodman, A., and Reff, D. (2002). Cultural longevity and biological stress in the

American Southwest. In Steckel, R., and Rose, J. (eds.), The Backbone of History: Health andNutrition in the Western Hemisphere, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 481–505.

Stojanowski, C. (2003). Differential phenotypic variability among the Apalachee mission populations of

Florida: A diachronic perspective. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 120: 352–363.

Stojanowski, C. (2004). Population history of native groups in pre- and -postcontact Spanish Florida:

Aggregation, gene flow, and genetic drift on the southeastern U.S. Atlantic coast. American Journalof Physical Anthropology 123: 316–322.

Stojanowski, C. (2005a). The bioarchaeology of identity in Spanish colonial Florida: Social and

evolutionary transformation before, during, and after demographic collapse. American Anthropol-ogist 107: 417–443.

Stojanowski, C. (2005b). Biocultural Histories in La Florida: A Bioarchaeological Perspective,

University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

Storey, R., Marquez Morfin, L., and Smith, V. (2002). Social disruption and the Maya civilization of

Mesoamerica: A study of health and economy of the last thousand years. In Steckel, R., and Rose, J.

(eds.), The Backbone of History: Health and Nutrition in the Western Hemisphere, Cambridge

University Press, Cambridge, pp. 283–306.

Stothert, K. (1994). Early petroleum extraction and the archaeology of tar boiling in coastal Ecuador. In

Craig, A., and West, R. (eds.), In Quest of Mineral Wealth: Aboriginal and Colonial Mining andMetallurgy in Spanish America, Geoscience and Man 33, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge,

pp. 343–354.

190 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

Suaza Espanol, M. A. (2006). Arqueologıa historica en la provincial de Neiva. Los esclavos en las

haciendas, siglo XVIII. Boletın de Arqueologıa 21: 35–54.

Sued-Badillo, J. (1992). Facing up to Caribbean history. American Antiquity 57: 599–607.

Therrien, M. (1995). Terremotos, movimientos sociales y patrones de comportamiento cultural:

arqueologıa en la cubierta de la catedral primada de Bogota. Revista Colombiana de Antropologıa32: 147–183.

Therrien, M. (1996). Sociedad y cultura material de la Nueva Granada >Preferencias o referencias?

Aportes de la arqueologıa historica en Colombia. Revista colombiana de antropologıa 33: 6–51.

Therrien, M., Uprimny, E., Lobo Guerrero, J., Salamanca, M. F., Gaitan, F., and Fandino, M. (2002).

Catalogo de ceramica colonial y republicana de la Nueva Granada: produccion local y materialesforaneos (Costa Caribe, Altiplano Cundiboyacense - Colombia), Banco de la Republica, Bogota,

Colombia.

Thomas, D. H. (ed.) (1989). Columbian Consequences: 1. Archaeological and Historical Perspectives onthe Spanish Borderlands West, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.

Thomas, D. H. (ed.) (1990). Columbian Consequences: 2. Archaeological and Historical Perspectives onthe Spanish Borderlands East, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.

Thomas, D. H. (ed.) (1991). Columbian Consequences: 3. The Spanish Borderlands in Pan-AmericanPerspective, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.

Thomas, D. H. (1992). A retrospective look at Columbian consequences. American Antiquity 57:

613–666.

Trigg, H. (2005). From Household to Empire: Society and Economy in Early Colonial New Mexico,

University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Trigger, B. (1994). Alternative archaeologies: nationalist, colonialist, imperialist. Man 19: 355–370.

Ubelaker, D. (1976). Prehistoric New World population size: Historical review and current appraisal of

North American estimates. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 45: 661–665.

Ubelaker, D. (1988). North American Indian population size, A.D. 1500–1985. American Journal ofPhysical Anthropology 77: 289–294.

Ubelaker, D. (1992). North American Indian population size: Changing perspectives. In Verano, J., and

Ubelaker, D. (eds.), Disease and Demography in the Americas, Smithsonian Institution Press,

Washington, DC, pp. 169–176.

Ubelaker, D., and Newson, L. (2002). Patterns of health and nutrition in prehistoric and historic Ecuador.

In Steckel, R., and Rose, J (eds.), The Backbone of History: Health and Nutrition in the WesternHemisphere, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 343–375.

Ubelaker, D., and Ripley, C. (1999). The Ossuary of San Francisco Church, Quito, Ecuador: HumanSkeletal Biology, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.

Upham, S. (1992). Population and Spanish contact in the Southwest. In Verano, J., and Ubelaker, D.

(eds.), Disease and Demography in the Americas, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC,

pp. 223–236.

Van Buren, M. (1996). Rethinking the vertical archipelago: Ethnicity, exchange, and history in the south-

central Andes. American Anthropologist 98: 338–351.

Van Buren, M. (1999). Tarapaya: An elite Spanish residence near colonial Potosı in comparative

perspective. Historical Archaeology 33(2): 108–122.

Van Buren, M. (2003). Un estudio etnoarqueologico de la tecnologıa de fundicion del sur de Potosı,

Bolivia. Textos Antropologicos 14: 133–148.

Van Buren, M., and Mills, B. (2005). Huayrachinas and tocochimbos: Traditional smelting technology of

the southern Andes. Latin American Antiquity 16: 3–25.

Vargas Arenas, I., Sanoja Obediente, M., Alvarado, G., and Montilla, M. (1998). Arqueologıa deCaracas, tomo 2: San Pablo, Teatro Municipal, Academia Nacional de la Historia, Caracas,

Venezuela.

Veloz Maggiolo, M., and Ortega, E. (1992). La Fundacion de la Villa de Santo Domingo, Serie Historia

de la Ciudad 1, Coleccion Quinto Centenario, Santo Domingo.

Verano, J., and Ubelaker, D. (eds.) (1992). Disease and Demography in the Americas, Smithsonian

Institution Press, Washington, DC.

Viola, H., and Margolis, C. (eds.) (1991). Seeds of Change: A Quincentennial Commemoration,

Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.

Voss, B. (2002). The Archaeology of El Presidio de San Francisco: Culture Contact, Gender, andEthnicity in a Spanish-colonial Military Community, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropol-

ogy, University of California, Berkeley.

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 191

123

Voss, B. (2003). Culture contact and colonial practices: Archaeological traces of daily life in early San

Francisco. Boletın The Journal of the California Mission Studies Association 20: 63–77.

Voss, B. (2005). From casta to Californio: Social identity and the archaeology of culture contact.

American Anthropologist 107: 461–474.

Voss, B. (2008). Gender, race, and labor in the archaeology of the Spanish Colonial Americas. CurrentAnthropology 49: 861–893.

Walker, P. (2001). A Spanish borderlands perspective on La Florida bioarchaeology. In Larsen, C. (ed.),

Bioarchaeology of Spanish Florida: The Impact of Colonialism, University Press of Florida,

Gainesville, pp. 274–307.

Walker, P., Drayer, F., and Siefkin, S. (1996). Malibu Human Skeletal Remains: A BioarchaeologicalAnalysis, Resource Management Division, California Department of Parks and Recreation,

Sacramento.

Waselkov, G. (1999). Old Mobile Archaeology, Center for Archaeological Studies, University of South

Alabama, Mobile.

Weik, T. (2004). Archaeology of the African diaspora in Latin America. Historical Archaeology 38(1):

32–49.

Weisman, B. (ed.) (1992). Excavations at the Franciscan Frontier: Archaeology of the Fig SpringsMission, University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Wernke, S. (2007a). Analogy or erasure? Dialectics of religious transformation in the early doctrinas of

the Colca Valley, Peru. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 11: 152–182.

Wernke, S. (2007b). Negotiation, community and landscape in the Peruvian Andes: A transconquest

view. American Anthropologist 109: 130–152.

White, C., Wright, L., and Pendergast, D. (1994). Biological disruption in the early colonial period at

Lamanai. In Larsen, C., and Milner, G. (eds.), In the Wake of Conquest: Biological Responses toConquest, Wiley-Liss, New York, pp. 135–145.

Williams, J. (1992). The archaeology of underdevelopment and the military frontier of northern New

Spain. Historical Archaeology 26(1): 7–21.

Williams, J., and Fournier-Garcia, P. (1996). Beyond national boundaries and regional perspectives:

Contrasting approaches to Spanish colonial archaeology in the Americas. World ArchaeologicalBulletin 7: 65–75.

Wolf, E. (1982). Europe and the People without History, University of California Press, Berkeley.

Zarankin, A. (2004). Hacia una arqueologıa historica latinamericana. In Funari, P., and Zarankin, A.

(eds.), Arqueologıa historica en America del Sur: los desafios del siglo XXI, Uniandes, Bogota, pp.

131–143.

Zarankin, A., and Acuto, F. (eds.) (1999). Sed non satiata, teorıa social en la arqueologıalatinoamericana contemporanea, Tridente, Buenos Aires.

Bibliography of recent literature

Abal, C., Chiavazza, H., Contreras, O., Puebla, L., and Zorilla, V. (1996). Arqueologıa ‘historica’, ‘de

rescate’, ‘etc.’: la casa solariega de Don Jose A. Ozamis, depto. de Maipu, prov. de Mendoza,

Argentina. Historical Archaeology in Latin America 16: 95–102.

Agorash, K. (1993). Archaeology and resistance history in the Caribbean. The African ArchaeologicalReview 11: 175–196.

Aguirre Cantero, E. (1996). La ciudad de Antigua Guatemala: el centro historico de la ciudad de

Guatemala. In Segundo seminario nacional y primero internacional sobre preservacion yconservacion de la fisionomıa urbana en las ciudades virreinales, Memoria de la Academia

Mexicana de Ingenierıa, Instituto Nacional de Antropologıa e Historia, Mexico City, pp. 19–27.

Akins, N. (2001). Valencia: A Spanish Colonial and Mexican-Period Site along NM 47 in ValenciaCountry, New Mexico, Archaeology Notes 267, Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Alcala Erosa, R. (1998). Historia y vestigios de la Ciudadela de San Benito, Direccion de Desarollo

Urbano, H. Ayuntamiento de Merida, Merida, Mexico.

Alegrıa, R., and Rodrıguez, M. (eds.) (1995). Proceedings of the XV International Congress forCaribbean Archaeology, Centro de Estudios Avanzados de Puerto Rico y el Caribe, San Juan,

Puerto Rico.

192 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

Alexander, R. (1997). Haciendas and economic change in Yucatan: Entrepreneurial strategies in the

Parroquia de Yaxcaba, 1775–1850. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 4: 331–351.

Alexander, R. (1999). Households and communities in Yaxcaba, Yucatan, Mexico, 1750–1847. In

Tannenbaum, N., and Small, D. (eds.), At the Interface of Households and Beyond, Monographs in

Economic Anthropology 15, University Press of America, Lanham, MD, pp.175–199.

Alexander, R. (1999). Mesoamerican house lots and archaeological site structure: Problems of inference

in Yaxcaba, Mexico, 1750–1847. In Allison, P. (ed.), The Archaeology of Household Activities,

Routledge, London, pp. 78–100.

Alzate, L. (2000). Clasificando ceramica colonial en el Museo Universitario de la Universidad deAntioquia. Mayolicas del siglo XVI, Fondo Mixto para la Cultura y las Artes de Antioquia, Medellın,

Colombia.

Andrews, A., and Castellanos, F. R. (2004). An archaeological survey of northwest Yucatan, Mexico.

Mexicon XXVI: 7–14.

Andrews, A., and Jones, G. (2001). Asentamientos coloniales en la costa de Quintana Roo. TemasAntropologicos 23: 30–35.

Arnold, J., Watson, D., and Keith, D. (1995). The Padre Island crossbows. Historical Archaeology 29(2):

4–19.

Arnold, J., Colten, R., and Pletka, S. (1997). Contexts of cultural change in insular California. AmericanAntiquity 62: 300–318.

Arrazcaeta, R., Quevedo, A., Rodriguez, I., and Cueto, T. (1999). Ceramica inglesa en la Habana colonial.Opus Habana 3: 45–49.

Avery, G. (1997). Pots as Packaging: The Spanish Olive Jar and Andalusian Transatlantic CommercialActivity, 16th–18th Centuries, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of

Florida, Gainesville.

Baker, B., and Kealhofer, L. (eds.) (1996). Bioarchaeology of Native American Adaptation in the SpanishBorderlands, University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Bamforth, D. (1993). Stone tools, steel tools: Contact period household technology at Helo’. In Rogers, J.,

and Wilson, S. (eds.), Ethnohistory and Archaeology: Approaches to Postcontact Change in theAmericas, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 49–72.

Barrandon, J-N., Le Roy Ladurie, E., Morrisson, C., and Morrisson, C. (1995).The true role of American

precious metals transfers to Europe in the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries: New evidence from coin

analyses. In Hook, D., and Gaimster, D. (eds.), Trade and Discovery: The Scientific Study ofArtefacts from Post-Medieval Europe and Beyond, Occasional Paper No. 109, British Museum

Press, London, pp.171–179.

Beristain Bravo, F. (1996). El templo dominico de Osumacinta, Chiapas, Centro de Investigaciones

Humanısticas de Mesoamerica, Instituto Nacional de Antropologıa e Historia, y el Estado de

Chiapas-UNAM, Mexico City.

Blind, E., Voss, B., Osborn, S., and Barker, L. (2004). El presidio de San Francisco: At the edge of

empire. Historical Archaeology 38(3): 135–149.

Boyer, R. (1997). Negotiating calidad: The everyday struggle for status in Mexico. HistoricalArchaeology 31(1): 64–73.

Brew, J. (1994). St. Francis at Awatovi. In South, S. (ed.), Pioneers in Historical Archaeology: BreakingNew Ground, Plenum, New York, pp. 27–47.

Brown, K., and Vierra, B. (eds.) (1997). Excavations at Valencia Pueblo (LA 953) and a Nearby HispanicSettlement (LA 67321), Valencia County, New Mexico, Office of Contract Archaeology, University

of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Brown, M. (ed.) (1997). Data Recovery along the Alameda Boulevard Improvement Project, BernalilloCounty, New Mexico, Office of Contract Archaeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Brown, R. B., Fournier, P., Peterson, J., Hill, D., and Willis, M. (2004). Settlement and ceramics in

northern New Spain: A case study of brownware pottery and historical change. In Newell, G., and

Gallaga, E. (eds.), Surveying the Archaeology of Northwest Mexico, University of Utah Press, Utah,

pp. 265–288.

Burgos Villanueva, F. (1993). La ex-aduana de Progreso, Yucatan: arquitectura y arqueologıa historica.

Cuadernos de Arquitectura de Yucatan 6: 25–37.

Burgos Villanueva, F. (1995). El Olimpo: un predio colonial en el lado poniente de la Plaza Mayor deMerida, Yucatan, y analisis ceramico comparativo, Coleccion Cientıfica, Instituto Nacional de

Antropologıa e Historia, Mexico City.

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 193

123

Burton, J. (1992). San Miguel de Guevavi: The Archaeology of an Eighteenth Century Jesuit Mission onthe Rim of Christendom, Publication in Anthropology 57, Western Archeological and Conservation

Center, National Park Service, Tucson, AZ.

Carrara, M., and De Grandis, N. (1992). El proceso de articulacion social en Santa Fe la Vieja a traves del

registro arqueologico. In Reflexiones sobre el V centenario, Faculty of Humanities and Arts,

University of Rosario, Argentina, pp.143–153.

Carruthers, C. (2003). Spanish botijas or olive jars from the Santo Domingo monastery, La Antigua,

Guatemala. Historical Archaeology 37(4): 40–55.

Castellon Huerta, B. (1995). Excavaciones arqueologicas en la Catedral Metropolitana de San Salvador.

In Laporte, J. P., and Escobedo, H. L. (eds.), VIII simposio de investigaciones arqueologicas enGuatemala, 1994, Museo Nacional de Arqueologıa y Etnologıa, Guatemala, pp. 335–348.

Charlton, T., Fournier Garcıa, P., and Cervantes Rosado, J. (1995). La ceramica del periodo colonial

temprano en Tlatelolco: el caso de la loza roja brunida. In Presencias y encuentos, investigacionesarqueologicas de salvamento, Direccion de Salvamento Arqueologico, Instituto Nacional de

Antropologıa e Historia, Mexico City, pp. 135–155.

Clark, J. W., Jr. (1998). Archaeological Test Excavations at Mission Nuestra Senora del Refugio (41RF1),U.S. 77, Refugio County, Texas, Archaeological Studies Program, Environmental Affairs Division,

Texas Department of Transportation, Austin.

Cobb, C. (ed.) (2003). Stone Tool Technology in the Contact Era, University of Alabama Press,

Tuscaloosa.

Cohen-Williams, A. (1992). Common majolica types of northern New Spain. Historical Archaeology26(1): 119–130.

Con Uribe, M. J. (1998). Xcaret prehispanico y colonial. In Memorias del tercer congreso internacionalde mayistas, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City, pp. 377–393.

Con Uribe, M. J. (2000). Xcaret, Quintana Roo. Memorial Patrimonio de Todos 8: 102–105.

Cordell, A. (2002). Continuity and change in Apalachee pottery manufacture. Historical Archaeology36(1): 36–54.

Costello, J. (1993). Putting Mission Vieja la Purısima on the map. Proceedings of the Society forCalifornia Archaeology 7: 67–85.

Costello, J. (1997). Brick and tile making in Spanish California, with related Old and New World

examples. In Rice, P. (ed.), Prehistory and History of Ceramic Kilns, American Ceramic Society,

Westerville, OH, pp. 195–217.

Cox, W. (1995). Documentation of the San Pedro Acequia (41BX337) at Trevino Street, San Antonio,Texas, Archaeological Survey Report No. 230, Center for Archaeological Research, University of

Texas, San Antonio.

Craig, A. K., and West, R. C. (1994). In Quest of Mineral Wealth: Aboriginal and Colonial Mining andMetallurgy in Spanish America, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge.

Curbelo, C. (2003). Analogy in historical archaeology: The case of San Francisco de Borja del Yı. SAAArchaeological Record 3: 26–27.

Curet, L. A., Dawdy, S. L., and La Rosa Corzo, G. (eds.) (2005). Dialogues in Cuban Archaeology,

University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

Danforth, M., Jacobi, K., and Cohen, M. (1997). Gender and health among the colonial Maya of Tipu,

Belize. Ancient Mesoamerica 8: 13–22.

Deagan, K. (2001). Dynamics of imperial adjustment in Spanish America: Ideology and social

integration. In Alcock, S., D’Altroy, T., Morrison, K., and Sinopoli, C. (eds.), Empires: Perspectivesfrom Archaeology and History, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 179–194.

Deagan, K. (2002). Artifacts of the Spanish Colonies of Florida and the Caribbean, 1500–1800, Volume2: Portable Personal Possessions, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.

Deagan, K. (2003). Colonial origins and colonial transformations in Spanish America. HistoricalArchaeology 37(4): 3–13.

Deagan, K. (2004). Reconsidering Taıno social dynamics after Spanish conquest: Gender and class in

culture contact studies. American Antiquity 69: 597–626.

Deagan, K., and Cruxent, J. M. (1993). From contact to criollos: The archaeology of Spanish colonization

in Hispaniola. Proceedings of the British Academy 81: 73–78.

Deagan, K., and Cruxent, J. M. (1995). The first European artefacts in the Americas: La Isabela,

Dominican Republic (1493-8). In Hook, D., and Gaimster, D. (eds.), Trade and Discovery: TheScientific Study of Artefacts from Post-Medieval Europe and Beyond, Occasional Paper No. 109,

British Museum Press, London, pp. 3–11.

194 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

deFrance, S. (1999). Zooarcheological evidence of colonial culture change: A comparison of two

locations of Mission Espiritu Santo de Zuniga and Mission Nuestra Senora del Rosario, Texas.

Bulletin of the Texas Archeological Society 70: 169–189.

deFrance, S. (2003). Diet and provisioning in the high Andes: A Spanish colonial settlement on the

outskirts of Potosı, Bolivia. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 7: 99–125.

del Cairo, C., Fuquen, C., Garcıa, C., Perez, F., Pena, O., and Montaguth, K. (2003). 1741, el ataque

ingles a Cartagena: arqueologıa de un naufragio. In Castillo Murillejo, N. C., and Alvis Palma, D. N.

(eds.), El mundo marino de Colombia: investigacion y desarrollo de territorios olvidados,Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogota, pp. 262–273.

Delgado, J. (ed.) (1997). Encyclopedia of Underwater and Maritime Archaeology, Yale University Press,

New Haven, CT.

Elkin, D. C. (2002). Water: A new field in Argentinean archaeology. In Ruppe, C. V., and Barstad, J. F.

(eds.), International Handbook of Underwater Archaeology, Kluwer Academic/Plenum, New York,

pp. 313–329.

Ferguson, T .J. (1996). Historic Zuni Architecture and Society: An Archaeological Application of SpaceSyntax, Anthropological Papers No. 60, University of Arizona, Tucson.

Fernandez Pequeno, J. M., and Hernandez, J. L. (eds.) (1996). El Caribe arqueologico, Casa del Caribe,

Santiago de Cuba, Cuba.

Fournier, P. (1998). Arqueologıa del colonialism de espana y portugal: imperios contrastantes en el nuevo

mundo. Boletın de antropologıa americana 32: 89–96.

Fournier, P., and Fournier, M. (1992). Catalogacion y periodificacion de materiales historicos de Sonora.

In Braniff, B. (ed.), La frontera protohistorica Pima-Opata en Sonora, Mexico, Volume III,

Coleccion Cientıfica 241, pp. 923–962.

Fowler, W. R. (1993). The living pay for the dead: Trade, exploitation, and social change in early colonial

Izalco, El Salvador. In Rogers, J., and Wilson, S. (eds.), Ethnohistory and Archaeology: Approachesto Post-Contact Change in the Americas, Plenum, New York, pp. 181–199.

Fowler, W. (1995). Caluco: historia y arqueologıa de un pueblo pipil en el siglo XVI, Patronato Pro-

Patrimonio Nacional, San Salvador.

Fowler, W., and Gallardo Mejıa, R. (2001). Proyecto arqueologica Ciudad Vieja: temporada 1999.

Entorno 17: 45–53.

Frank, R. (1993). The changing Pueblo Indian pottery tradition: The underside of economic development

in late colonial New Mexico, 1750–1820. Journal of the Southwest 33: 282–320.

Funari, P. (2003). Latin America and historical archaeology: A Latin American viewpoint. SAAArchaeological Record 3: 16–17.

Funari, P., and Zarankin, A. (2003). Social archaeology of housing from a Latin American perspective.

Journal of Social Archaeology 3: 23–45.

Funari, P., Hall, M., and Jones, S. (eds.) (1999). Historical Archaeology, Back from the Edge, Routledge,

London.

Garcıa, E. V., and, Velasquez, J. L. (1999). Investigaciones en Miramar, sitio fluvial en la Bahıa de

Amatique, Izabal. In Laporte, J. P., Escobedo, H. L., and Monzon de Suasnavar, A. C. (eds.), XIISimposio de investigaciones arqueologicas en Guatemala 1998, Instituto de Antropologıa e

Historia, Guatemala City, pp. 605–621.

Garcıa Barcena, J. (1998). Patrimonio cultural bajo las aguas de Mexico. Arqueologia Mexicana VI:

64–71.

Garcıa Targa, J. (1995). Arqueologıa colonial en el area maya: aspectos generales y modelos de estudio.

Revista Espanola de Antropologıa Americana 25: 41–69.

Garcıa Targa, J. (1995). El concepto de muerte en la cultura maya colonial: etnohistoria y arqueologıa

como formas de aproximacion al proceso de sincretismo cultural de los siglos XVI y XVII. BoletınAmericanista 45: 87–99.

Garcıa Targa, J. (1996). Caracterısticas arquitectonicas y urbanısticas del sitio colonial de Tecoh (Estado

de Yucatan, Mexico). Mayab 10: 59–68.

Garcıa Targa, J. (1996). Urbanismo colonial en el area maya. Siglos XVI y XVII: modelos comparativos

en Chiapas y Yucatan. In Garcıa Jordan, P. (ed.), Las raices de la memoria, VI encuentro-debate:

America Latina ayer y hoy, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, pp. 37–56.

Garcıa Targa, J. (1998). Arqueologıa maya colonial: tendencias interpretativas del registro material. In

Garcıa Jordan, P. (ed.), Lo que duele es el olvido: recuperando la memoria de America Latina, VII

encuentro-debate: America Latina ayer y hoy, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, pp. 35–49.

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 195

123

Garcıa Targa, J. (2000). Arqueologıa historica: planteamientos teoricos y lineas de trabajo. BoletınAmericanista 50: 83–99.

Garcıa Targa, J. (2000). Analisis historico y arqueologico del asentamiento colonial de Tecoh (Estado de

Yucatan, Mexico), Siglo XVI. Ancient Mesoamerica 11: 231–243.

Gasco, J. (1992). Material culture and colonial Indian society in southern Mesoamerica: The view from

coastal Chiapas, Mexico. Historical Archaeology 26(1): 67–74.

Gasco, J. (1996). Arqueologıa y etnohistoria del Soconusco postclasico y colonial. In V foro dearqueologıa de Chiapas, Universidad de Ciencias y Artes del Estado de Chiapas, Tuxtla Gutierrez,

pp. 143–147.

Gasco, J. (2005). Spanish colonialism and processes of social change in Mesoamerica. In Stein, G. (ed.),

The Archaeology of Colonial Encounters: Comparative Perspectives, School of American Research

Press, Santa Fe, NM, pp. 69–108.

Gavin, R. F., Pierce, D., and Pleguezuelo, A. (eds.), Ceramica y Cultura: The Story of Spanish andMexican Majolica, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Gnivecki, P. (1995). Rethinking ‘‘first’’ contact. In Alegrıa, R. E., and Rodrıguez, M. (eds.), Proceedingsof the XV International Congress for Caribbean Archaeology, Centro de Estudios Avanzados de

Puerto Rico y el Caribe, San Juan, Puerto Rico, pp. 209–217.

Gongora Salas, A., Andrews, A., and Robles Castellanos, F. (2000). La capilla colonial de Tzeme,

Yucatan. Mexicon XXII: 77–80.

Gosden, C. (ed.) (1997). Culture contact and colonialism. World Archaeology 28: 275–460.

Graham, E. (2001). Collapse, conquest, and Maya survival at Lamanai, Belize. Archaeology International2000/2001, Institute of Archaeology, University College London, London, pp. 52–56.

Guillen Oneeglio, S. (1993). Identificacion y estudio de los restos del virrey Conde de la Monclova en la

cripta arqobispal de la Catedral de Lima. Sequilao: Revista de Arte, Historia y Sociedad [Lima] 2:

7–15.

Gutierrez, A., and Iglesias, R. (1996). Identificacion y analisis de los restos de fauna recuperados en los

conventos de San Francisco y Santo Domingo de Quito. Revista Espanola de AntropologıaAmericana 16: 77–100.

Hall, G., Hindes, K., Wolf, M., and Gilmore, K. (1995). The Rediscovery of Santa Cruz de San Saba, AMission for the Apache in Spanish Texas, Archaeology Laboratory, Texas Tech University,

Lubbock.

Hann, J., and McEwan, B. (1998). The Apalachee Indians and Mission San Luis, University Press of

Florida, Gainesville.

Hard, R., Cox, I., Gross, K., Meissner, B., Mendez, G., Tennis, C., and Zapata, J. (1995). Excavations atMission San Jose y San Miguel de Aguayo, San Antonio, Texas, Center for Archaeological Research,

University of Texas, San Antonio.

Hauser, M., and DeCorse, C. (2003). Low-fired earthenwares in the African diaspora: Problems and

prospects. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 7: 67–98.

Haynes, D., and Wuerch, W. (1993). Historical Survey of the Spanish Mission Sites on Guam, 1669–1800,

2nd ed., Micronesian Area Research Center, University of Guam, Guam.

Herman, C. (1994). La muralla-fortaleza de Ciudad Flores: descripcion e interpretacion de los datos

arqueologicos. Kinich k’akmo 2/94: 1–11.

Hernandez Pons, E. (2000). La arqueologıa historica en Mexico: su situacion actual. Arqueologıa 23:

103–126.

Herrera Angel, M. (1998). Desparacion de poblados caribenos en el siglo dieciseis. Revista Colombianade Antropologıa 34: 125–165.

Hill, E. (1995). Thimbles and thimble rings of the Circum-Caribbean region, 1500–1800: Chronology and

identification. Historical Archaeology 29(1): 84–92.

Hoffman, K. (1995). The material culture of seventeenth-century St. Augustine. El Escribano 32: 91–112.

Hoffman, K. (1997). Cultural development in La Florida. Historical Archaeology 31(1): 24–35.

Honychurch, L. (1997). Crossroads in the Caribbean: A site of encounter and exchange in Dominica.

World Archaeology 28: 291–304.

Hoover, R. (1992). Some models for Spanish colonial archaeology in California. Historical Archaeology26(1): 37–44.

Hudson, C., and Tesser, C. (eds.) (1994). The Forgotten Centuries: Indians and Europeans in theAmerican South, 1521–1704, University of Georgia Press, Athens.

Huelsbeck, D. (1993). Native American cultural continuity at California’s missions. In Flowers, S. (ed.),

The Spanish Missionary Heritage of the United States: Selected Papers and Commentaries from the

196 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

November 1990 Quincentennary Symposium, San Antonio Missions, Texas, San Antonio Missions

National Historic Park, National Park Service, San Antonio, TX, pp. 123–139.

Hutchinson, D. (1996). Brief encounters: Tatham Mound and evidence for Spanish and Native American

confrontation. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 6: 51–65.

Hutchinson, D. (2004). Bioarchaeology of the Florida Gulf Coast: Adaptation, Conflict, and Change,

University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Hutchinson, D., and Mitchem, J. (1996). The Weeki Wachee Mound: An early contact mortuary locality

in Hernando County, West-Central Florida. Southeastern Archaeology 15: 47–65.

Ivey, J. (1998). Convento kivas in the missions of New Mexico. New Mexico Historical Review 73:

121–152.

Ivey, J., and Fox, A. (1999). Archaeological Investigations at Mission Concepcion and Mission Parkway,

Center for Archaeological Research, University of Texas, San Antonio.

James, S. (1995). Change and continuity in Western Pueblo households during the historic period in the

American Southwest. World Archaeology 28: 429–456.

Jamieson, R. W. (2000). Dona Luisa and her two houses. In Delle, J. A., Mrozowski, S. A., and Paynter,

R. (eds.), Lines That Divide: Historical Archaeologies of Race, Class, and Gender, University of

Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 142–167.

La Rosa Corzo, G., and Perez Padron, J. (1994). La resistencia esclava en La Sierra del Grillo: estudio

arqueologico. In Estudios arqueologicos compliacion de temas, Editorial Academia, Havana.

Lambert, J., Graham, E., Smith, M., and Frye, J. (1994). Amber and jet from Tipu, Belize. AncientMesoamerica 5: 55–60.

Larsen, C. (1994). In the wake of Columbus: Native population biology in the postcontact Americas.

Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 37: 109–154.

Larsen, C., and Hutchinson, D. (1992). Dental evidence for physiological disruption: Biocultural

interpretations from the eastern Spanish borderlands. Journal of Paleopathology 2: 151–169.

Larsen, C., Huynh, H., and McEwan, B. (1996). Death by gunshot: Biocultural implications of trauma at

Mission San Luis. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 6: 42–50.

Lawrence, J. (2009). Archaeology and ethnohistory on the Spanish colonial periphery: Excavations at the

Templo Colonial in Nicoya, Guanacaste, Costa Rica. Historical Archaeology 43(1): 65–80.

Liebmann, M., Ferguson, T. J., and Preucel, R. (2005). Pueblo settlement, architecture, and social change

in the Pueblo Revolt era, A.D. 1680–1696. Journal of Field Archaeology 30: 45–60.

Loren, D. (2005). Creolization of the French and Spanish colonies. In Pauketat, T., and Loren, D. (eds.),

North American Archaeology, Blackwell, London, pp. 297–318.

Low, S. (1995). Indigenous architecture and the Spanish American plaza in Mesoamerica and the

Caribbean. American Anthropologist 97: 748–762.

Luna Erreguerena, L., and Roffiel, R. (eds.) (2001). Memorias del congreso cientıfico de arqueologıasubacuatica, Coleccion Cientıfica 435, Instituto Nacional de Antropologıa e Historia, Mexico City.

Mackay, W. I. (1995). Gold extraction equipment at Maukallqta[sic]: The merging of indigenous and

Spanish colonial technologies. In Hook, D. R., and Gaimster, D. (eds.), Trade and Discovery: TheScientific Study of Artifacts from Post-Medieval Europe and Beyond, British Museum Press,

London, pp. 159–170.

Mansilla Lory, J. (1997). Indicadores de respuesta al estres (agresiones ambientales) en la coleccionosteologica del Templo de San Jeronimo, Ciudad de Mexico. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of

Anthropology, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City.

Mansilla Lory, J., Pijoan Aguade, C., and Pompa y Padilla, J. (1994). Catalogo de los esqueletos deentierros primarios de la coleccion San Jeronimo, temporada 1976, Instituto Nacional de

Antropologıa e Historia, Mexico City.

Marrinan, R., Halpern, J., Heide, G., and Blackmore, C. (2000). Recent investigations at the O’Connell

Mission site (8Le157), Leon County, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 53: 224–249.

Martin, C. (2001). Departicularizing the particular: Approaches to the investigation of well-documented

post-Medieval shipwrecks. World Archaeology 32: 383–399.

McEwan, B. (2000). The spiritual conquest of Florida. American Anthropologist 103: 633–644.

McEwan, B., and Poe, C. (1994). Excavations at Fort San Luis. Florida Anthropologist 47: 90–106.

McNair, A., Rice, D., Drake, H., Pugh, T., Sanchez Polo, R., and Rice, P. (1996). Investigaciones del

Proyecto Maya-Colonial en el sitio arqueologico Nixtun-Ch’ich, Pet _en, Guatemala. In Laporte, J.,

and Escobedo, H. (eds.), 10th simposio de investigaciones arqueologicas en Guatemala, Instituto de

Antropologıa e Historia, and Asociacion Tikal, Guatemala City, pp. 513–519.

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 197

123

Meadows Jantz, L., Jantz, R., Herrmann, N., Sparks, C., Weisensee, K., and Kopp, D. (2002). NuestraSenora del Refugio (41RF1), Refugio County, Texas, Volume II, Osteological Analysis, Center for

Archaeological Research, University of Texas, San Antonio.

Mendoza, R. (2002). This old mission: San Juan Bautista archaeology and the Hispanic tradition.

California Mission Studies Association Boletın 19: 35–40.

Monroy, F., Fournier, P., Smit, Z., Miranda, J., Ruvalcaba, J., and de la Torre, J. (2005). Tecnicas de

manufactura de vidriados en mayolicas coloniales. In Esparza, R., and Cardenas, E. (eds.),

Arqueometrıa, El Colegio de Michoacan, Zamora, Mexico, pp. 55–71.

Moore, J., Boyer, J., Levine, D., Carillo, C., and Maxwell, T. (2004). Adaptations on the Anasazi andSpanish Frontiers: Excavations at Five Sites Near Abiquiu, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico, Office

of Archaeological Studies, Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Moore, J., Gaunt, J., and Maxwell, T. (2003). Occupation of the Glorieta Valley in the Seventeenth andNineteenth Centuries: Excavations at LA 76138, LA 76140, and LA 99029, Office of Archaeological

Studies, Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Myers, T. P. (1990). Sarayacu: Ethnohistorical and Archaeological Investigations of a Nineteenth-Century Franciscan Mission in the Peruvian Montana, University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

Nickels, D. (2000). Excavations at Mission Rosario, Goliad County, Texas, Center for Archaeological

Research, University of Texas, San Antonio.

Novellino, P., Duran, V., and Prieto, C. (2003). Capiz Alto: aspectos bioarqueologicos y arqueologicos

del cementerio indıgena de epoca post-contacto (provincia de Mendoza, Argentina). Paleopatologıa1: 1–16.

Orozco Melgar, M. E. (1994). El nacimiento de la higiene urbana en Santiago de Cuba y el ‘‘exilio de los

muertos.’’ Del Caribe 23: 19–29.

Orser, C. (1998). The archaeology of the African diaspora. Annual Review of Anthropology 27: 63–82.

Orser, C., and Funari, P. (2001). Archaeology and slave resistance and rebellion. World Archaeology 33:

61–72.

Orser, C., Zarankin, A., and Senatore, M. X. (2000). Introduccion a la arqueologıa historica, Asociacion

Amigos del Instituto Nacional de Antropologıa, Buenos Aires.

Otis Charlton, C. (1995). Las figurillas prehispanicas y coloniales de Tlatelolco. In Presencias yencuentros: investigaciones arqueologicas de salvamento, Direccion de Salvamento Arqueologico,

Instituto Nacional de Antropologıa e Historia, Mexico City, pp. 157–175.

Palomar Puebla, B., and Gassiot Ballbe, E. (1999). Arqueologıa en Nicaragua: 140 anos construyendo

discurso patrimonial. Revista Espanola de Antropologıa Americana 29: 207–232.

Paredes Martınez, C. (1998). Arquitectura y espacio social en poblaciones purepechas de la epocacolonial, Instituto de Investigaciones Historicas, Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolas de

Hidalgo, Morelia, Mexico.

Paynter, R. (2000). Historical archaeology and the Post-Columbian world of North America. Journal ofArchaeological Research 8: 169–217.

Pedrotta, V., and Gomez Romero, F. (1998). Historical archaeology: An outlook from the Argentinean

pampas. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 2: 113–121.

Pendergast, D., Jones, G., and Graham, E. (1993). Locating Maya lowlands Spanish colonial towns: A

case study from Belize. Latin American Antiquity 4: 59–73.

Pendergast, D., Jones, G., and Graham, E. (1993). La mezcla de arqueologıa y etnohistoria: el estudio del

perıodo hispanico en los sitios de Tipu y Lamanai, Belice. In Iglesias Ponce de Leon, M. J., and

Ligorred Perramon, F. (eds.), Perspectivas antropologicas en el mundo maya, Sociedad Espanola de

Estudios Mayas, Madrid, pp. 331–353.

Poujade, R. (1992). Poblamiento prehistorico y colonial de misiones. Estudios Ibero-Americanos 18: 29–

69.

Ramenofsky, A. (1996). The problem of introduced infectious diseases in New Mexico: 1540–1680.

Journal of Anthropological Research 50: 161–184.

Ramenofsky, A., and Feathers, J. (2002). Documents, ceramics, tree rings, and luminescence: Estimating

final native abandonment of the lower Rio Chama. Journal of Anthropological Research 58: 121–

160.

Reff, D. (1993). An alternative explanation of subsistence change during the early historic period at Pecos

Pueblo. American Antiquity 58: 563–564.

Reitz, E., and Ruff, B. (1994). Morphometric data from cattle from North America and the Caribbean

prior to the 1950s. Journal of Archaeological Science 21: 699–713.

198 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

Rice, P. (1995). Wine and ‘‘local Catholicism’’ in Colonial Moquegua, Peru. Colonial Latin AmericanHistorical Review 4: 369–404.

Rice, P. (1996b). The archaeology of wine: The wine and brandy Haciendas of Moquegua, Peru. Journalof Field Archaeology 23: 187–204.

Ricklis, R. (1999). The Spanish Colonial missions of Espiritu Santo (41GD1) and Nuestra Senora del

Rosario (41GD2), Goliad, Texas: Exploring patterns of ethnicity, interaction, and acculturation.

Bulletin of the Texas Archaeological Society 70: 133–168.

Rodrıguez-Alegrıa, E., Neff, H., and Glasock, M. (2003). Indigenous ware or Spanish import? The case of

indi9gena ware and approaches to power in colonial Mexico. Latin American Antiquity 14: 67–81.

Rothschild, N., Mills, B., and Ferguson, T. (1993). Abandonment at Zuni farming villages. In Cameron,

C., and Tomka, S. (eds.), Abandonment of Settlements and Regions: Ethnoarchaeological andArchaeological Approaches, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 123–137.

Rovira, S. (1995). New native metallurgical technology after Hispanic contact in Peru. In Hook, D., and

Gaimster, D. (eds.), Trade and Discovery: The Scientific Study of Artefacts from Post-MedievalEurope and Beyond, British Museum Press, London, pp. 299–308.

Sanders, W., Evans, S., and Charlton, T. (2001). Colonial period cultural geography of the Teotihuacan

Valley and Temascalapa region. In Sanders, W., and Evans, S. (eds.), Teotihuacan Valley ProjectFinal Report, Vol. 5., The Aztec Period Occupation of the Valley, Part 3, Syntheses and GeneralBibliography, Occasional Papers in Anthropology No. 27, Matson Museum of Anthropology,

Pennsylvania State University, University Park, pp. 889–930.

Scarry, J., and McEwan, B. (1995). Domestic architecture in Apalachee Province: Apalachee and Spanish

residential styles in the late prehistoric and early historic period Southeast. American Antiquity 60:

482–495.

Schaedel, R. P. (1992). The archaeology of the Spanish colonial experience in South America. Antiquity66: 216–242.

Schavelzon, D., and Silveira, M. (1998). Excavaciones en Michelangelo, Corregidor, Buenos Aires.

Senatore, M. X. (1995). Tecnologıas nativas y estrategias de ocupacion espanola en la region del Rıo de la

Plata. Historical Archaeology in Latin America 11: 1–120.

Seymour, D. (2007). A Syndetic approach to identification of the historic mission site of San Cayetano de

Tumacacori. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 11: 269–296.

Shepard, H. (2003). Geometry in Apalachee buildings at Mission San Luis. Southeastern Archaeology 22:

165–176.

Shulsky, L. (1998–1999). Chinese porcelain in Spanish colonial sites in the southern part of North

America and the Caribbean. Transactions of the Oriental Ceramic Society 63: 83–98.

Silliman, S. (2005). Culture contact or colonialism? Challenges in the archaeology of native North

America. American Antiquity 70: 55–74.

Silliman, S. (2005). Social and physical landscapes of contact. In Pauketat, T., and Loren, D. (eds.), NorthAmerican Archaeology, Blackwell, Malden, MA, pp. 273–296.

Simmons, S. (1995). Maya resistance, Maya resolve: The tools of autonomy from Tipu, Belize. AncientMesoamerica 6: 135–146.

Singer, S. (1997). Shipwrecks of Florida, 2nd ed., Pineapple Press, Sarasota, FL.

Skowronek, R. (1998). Sifting the evidence: Perceptions of life at the Oholone (Costanoan) Missions of

Alta California. Ethnohistory 45: 45–78.

Skowronek, R. (1998). The Spanish Philippines: Archaeological perspectives on colonial economics and

society. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 2: 45–71.

Skowronek, R. (2005). Recognizing pattern and evolution on the Spanish colonial frontier: A view from

California and the Pacific. In Carnes-McNaughton, L., and Steen, C. (eds.), In Praise of the PoetArchaeologist: Papers in Honor of Stanley South and His Five Decades of Historical Archaeology,

The Council of South Carolina Professional Archaeologists, South Carolina, pp. 112–119.

Skowronek, R., and Wizorek, C. (1997). Archaeology at Santa Clara de Asis: The slow recovery of a

moveable mission. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 33: 54–92.

Smith, M., Graham, E., and Pendergast, D. (1994). European beads from Spanish-colonial Lamanai and

Tipu, Belize. Beads 6: 21–47.

Smith, R. (ed.) (1998). The Emanual Point Ship: Archaeological Investigations, 1997–1998, Report of

Investigations 68, Archaeology Institute, University of West Florida, Pensacola.

Smith, R., Miller, J., Kelley, S., and Harbin, L. (1997). An Atlas of Maritime Florida, University Press of

Florida, Gainesville.

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 199

123

South, S., and DePratter, C. (1996). Discovery at Santa Elena: Block Excavation 1993, Institute of

Archaeology and Anthropology, University of South Carolina, Columbia.

Tarrago, M. (1992). Continuidad y cambio en Yocavil: una aproximacion arqueologica. In Reflexionessobre el V centenario, Faculty of Humanities and Arts, University of Rosario, Argentina, pp. 137–

141.

Tennis, C. (2001). Archaeological Investigations at a Spanish Colonial Site (41KA26-B), Karnes County,Texas, Texas Department of Transportation and Center for Archaeological Research, University of

Texas, San Antonio.

Tennis, C. (2001). Mission Nuestra Senora del Refugio, Volume 1, Archaeological Investigations, Center

for Archaeological Research, University of Texas, San Antonio.

Therrien, M. (1996). Persistencia de practicas indıgenas durante la colonia en el altiplano cundiboya-

cense. Boletın Museo del Oro [Bogota] 40: 89–99.

Therrien, M. (2002a). Estilos de vida en la Nueva Granada: teorıa y practica en la arqueologıa historica de

Colombia. Arqueologıa de Panama La Vieja: Avances de Investigacion 2: 19–38.

Thibodeau, A., Killick, D., Ruiz, J., Chesley, J., Deagan, D., Cruxent, J., and Lyman, W. (2007). The

strange case of the earliest silver extraction by European colonists in the New World. Proceedings ofthe National Academy of Science 104: 3663–3666.

Thiel, J. H., Faught, M., and Bayman, J. (1995). Beneath the Streets: Prehistoric, Spanish, and AmericanPeriod Archaeology in Downtown Tucson, Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson, AZ.

Thomas, D. E. (2000). Excavations at Mission San Marcos, New Mexico, Summer 1999, American

Museum of Natural History, New York.

Thomas, D. H. (ed.) (2000). The Search for San Miguel, Anthropological Papers No. 76, American

Museum of Natural History, New York.

Tobar, O. (1995). Ceramica colonial del sitio La Tintina, Penınsula de Santa Elena. In Alvarez, A.,

Alvarez, S. G., Faurıa Roma, C., and Marcos, J. G. (eds.), Primer encuentro de investigadores de lacosta ecuatoriana en Europa, Abya-Yala, Quito, Ecuador, pp. 207–257.

Toll, M. (1997). Plant Remains from San Antonio (LA 24): A Late Coalition/Early Classic Pueblo withHispanic Reoccupation in Tijeras Canyon, New Mexico, Office of Archaeological Studies, Museum

of New Mexico, Santa Fe.

Tomka, S. (1999). Historic period lithic technology at Mission San Jose y San Miguel de Aguayo.

Bulletin of the Texas Archaeological Society 70: 241–264.

Tomka, S., and Fox, A. (1999). Mission San Jose Indian Quarters Wall Base Project, Bexar County,Texas, Center for Archaeological Research, University of Texas, San Antonio.

Tomka, S., Fox, A., Horrell, C., Meissner, B., and Robinson, R. (1998). Mission San Jose Indian QuartersFoundation Project, Bexar County, Texas, Center for Archaeological Research, University of Texas,

San Antonio.

Towner, R. (ed.) (1996). The Archaeology of Navajo Origins, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Trigg, H. (2004). Food choice and social identity in early colonial New Mexico. Journal of the Southwest46: 223–252.

Ubelaker, D. H. (1995). Osteological and archival evidence for disease in historic Quito, Ecuador. In

Saunders, S. R., and Herring, A. (eds.), Grave Reflections: Portraying the Past Through CemeteryStudies, Canadian Scholars Press, Toronto, pp. 223–239.

Ubelaker, D. H., and Rousseau, A. (1993). Human remains from Hospital San Juan de Dios, Quito,

Ecuador. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 83: 1–8.

Veloz Maggiolo, M., and Ortega, E. (1992). La fundacion de la villa de Santo Domingo: un estudioarqueo-historico, Comision Dominicana Permanente para la Celebracion del Quinto Centenario del

Descubrimiento y Evangelizacion de America, Santa Domingo, Dominican Republic.

Vierra, B. (ed.) (1992). Current Research on the Late Prehistory and Early History of New Mexico, New

Mexico Archaeological Council, Albuquerque.

Vierra, B. (ed.) (1996). The Presidio and River on the Borderlands: The Phase III Testing Program,

Office of Contract Archaeology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Vierra, B. (ed.) (1997). A Presidio Community on the Rio Grande: Phase III Testing and HistoricalResearch at San Elizario, Texas, Office of Contract Archaeology, University of New Mexico,

Albuquerque.

Voss, B. (2000). Colonial sex: Archaeology, structured space, and sexuality in Alta California’s Spanish-

colonial missions. In Schmidt, R., and Voss, B. (eds.), Archaeologies of Sexuality, Routledge,

London, pp. 35–61.

200 J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201

123

Voss, B. (2007). Image, text, object: Interpreting documents and artifacts as ‘labors of representation.’

Historical Archaeology 41(4): 147–171.

Voss, B. (2008). ‘Poor people in silk shirts’: Dress and ethnogenesis in Spanish-colonial San Francisco.

Journal of Social Archaeology 8: 404–432.

Voss, B. (2008). Domesticating imperialism: Sexual politics and the archaeology of empire. AmericanAnthropologist 110: 191–203.

Walter, T. (1997). The Dynamics of Culture Change and Its Reflection in the Archeological Record atEspıritu Santo de Zuniga, Victoria County, Texas, Texas Archaeological Research Laboratory,

University of Texas, Austin.

Weik, T. (1997). The archaeology of Maroon societies in the Americas: Resistance, cultural continuity,

and transformation in the African diaspora. Historical Archaeology 31(2): 81–92.

Weissel, M. (2003). A needle in a haystack: Buenos Aires urban archaeology. SAA ArchaeologicalRecord 3: 28–30.

Werner, P., and Molina Carrillo, M. (2000). La urbanizacion hispanica en la colonia de Nicaragua en el

siglo XVI. Huellas: Revista de Antropologıa 1: 83–102.

Wesson, C., and Rees, M. (2000). Protohistory and Archaeology: Advances in InterdisciplinaryResearch, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

Williams, J. (1994). The Presidio of San Carlos de Monterey: The Evolution of the Fortress-Capital ofAlta California, Center for Spanish Colonial Archaeology, Tubac, AZ.

Wylie, A. (1992). Rethinking the quincentennial: Consequences for past and future. American Antiquity57: 591–594.

Zarankin, A. (1994). Arqueologıa urbana: hacia el desarrollo de una nueva especialidad. HistoricalArchaeology in Latin America 2: 31–40.

Zarankin, A. (1995). Arqueologıa urbana en Santa Fe la Vieja: el final del principio, University of South

Carolina, Columbia.

Zarankin, A., and Senatore, M. X. (2002). Arqueologıa da sociedade moderna na America do Sul,Tridente, Buenos Aires.

Zucchi, A. (1995). Arqueologıa historica en la Barra de Maracaibo (Venezuela): fortificaciones y

asentamientos. In Alegrıa, R., and Rodrıguez, M. (eds.), Proceedings of the XV InternationalCongress for Caribbean Archaeology, Centro de Estudios Avanzados de Puerto Rico y el Caribe,

San Juan, Puerto Rico, pp. 83–94.

Zucchi, A. (1997). Tombs and testaments: Mortuary practices during the seventeenth to nineteenth

centuries in the Spanish-Venezuelan Catholic tradition. Historical Archaeology 31(2): 31–41.

J Archaeol Res (2010) 18:151–201 201

123