DOCSLIB.ORG

An Examination of Food Storage in Grand Canyon National Park And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Examination of Food Storage in Grand Canyon National Park And AN EXAMINATION OF FOOD STORAGE IN GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK AND GRAND STAIRCASE-ESCALANTE NATIONAL MONUMENT By Jenny Engleman A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Masters of the Arts in Anthropology Northern Arizona University May 2018 Christian Downum, Ph.D., Chair Francis Smiley, Ph.D. Michelle Parsons, Ph.D. ABSTRACT AN EXAMINATION OF FOOD STORAGE IN GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK AND GRAND STAIRCASE-ESCALANTE NATIONAL MONUMENT JENNY ENGLEMAN Ancient occupation of the American Southwest was full of uncertainty. Precipitation was unreliable, and sufficient edible plants and animal resources were linked to the productivity of the environment. Communities had to be resourceful and flexible in the face of scarcity. To ensure reliable food sources, ancient peoples often stored crops and other plant foods in sealed masonry structures, or granaries, protected in alcoves high on canyon walls. This thesis research compares ancient methods for coping with scarcity by examining the presence of patterns in prehispanic granary construction in the Grand Canyon and the Fiftymile Mountain region of Grand Staircase-Escalante. Granaries in the two regions date between A.D. 1000 and A.D. 1250 and are associated with three main cultural groups: the Kayenta branch of the Ancestral Puebloans, the Virgin branch of the Ancestral Puebloans, and the Cohonina. Food storage practices are analyzed using adaptive concepts of optimization and risk minimization, adding to the understanding of the complex nature of human interaction with the environment. Although similar Ancestral Puebloan groups occupied the Grand Canyon and Grand Staircase-Escalante, the results of the research show variability in how granaries were incorporated into scarcity management. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I could not have completed this research without the guidance of my committee, Dr. Christian Downum, Dr. Francis Smiley, and Dr. Michelle Parsons. Thank you for your valuable feedback and encouragement along the way. Special thanks to Ellen Brennan, Matt Zweifel, and Meghann Vance for access to data and other resources. I would like to thank my friends and family for their unrelenting support and belief that I could make it through the process of writing. Special thanks to the queen of grammar, my Mom. iii Table of Contents Abstract………………………………………………………………………………………........ii Acknowledgments …………………………………………………………………………….…iii List of Tables …………………………………………………………………………………….vi List of Figures …………………………………………………………………………………vii Chapter One – Why food scarcity? ................................................................................................. 1 Research Questions ..................................................................................................................... 2 Significance ................................................................................................................................. 3 Chapter Two – Environmental and Cultural Context and the Archaeology of Food ..................... 5 Environmental Overview of the Northern Southwest ................................................................. 6 Culture History in the Southwest .............................................................................................. 10 Grand Canyon ........................................................................................................................... 11 Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument ....................................................................... 15 Previous Archaeological Research ............................................................................................ 17 Legacy Data ............................................................................................................................... 20 Archaeology of Food Storage ................................................................................................... 21 Food stress ................................................................................................................................. 21 Scarcity and Surplus .................................................................................................................. 23 Coping with Food Stress ........................................................................................................... 23 Sedentism .................................................................................................................................. 25 Social Complexity ..................................................................................................................... 25 Carrying Capacity ..................................................................................................................... 26 Economics ................................................................................................................................. 27 Nutrition .................................................................................................................................... 27 Threats ....................................................................................................................................... 28 Chapter Three – Theoretical Framework ...................................................................................... 29 History of Human Behavioral Ecology ..................................................................................... 30 Key Concepts in Human Behavioral Ecology ........................................................................... 31 Ecological Conditions ............................................................................................................... 33 Critique ...................................................................................................................................... 35 Chapter Four – Data Collection and Analysis .............................................................................. 37 Grand Canyon Data ................................................................................................................... 37 Grand Staircase-Escalante Data ................................................................................................ 39 iv Assumptions .............................................................................................................................. 39 Statistical Analysis .................................................................................................................... 40 Challenges ................................................................................................................................. 40 Chapter Five – Construction Patterns ........................................................................................... 42 Grand Canyon Results ............................................................................................................... 42 Variation by Cultural Group ..................................................................................................... 49 Granary Style ............................................................................................................................. 50 Granary Size .............................................................................................................................. 50 Quantity of Granaries ................................................................................................................ 51 Chronology ................................................................................................................................ 53 Grand Staircase-Escalante Results ............................................................................................ 57 Granary Style ............................................................................................................................. 57 Granary Size .............................................................................................................................. 58 Variation by Group .................................................................................................................... 58 Comparative Results ................................................................................................................. 59 Chapter Six – Modeling Food Storage in the Southwest .............................................................. 64 Quantifying Storage Capacity ................................................................................................... 64 Assumptions .............................................................................................................................. 65 Regional Comparison ................................................................................................................ 66 Chapter Seven – Discussion and Conclusions .............................................................................. 70 Patterns ...................................................................................................................................... 70 Discussion ................................................................................................................................. 73 Grand Canyon Chronology ....................................................................................................... 75 Optimization .............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Student Worksheet (Grades 6–8)
    Name ______________________ Pueblo Indian History for Kids Student Worksheet (Grades 6–8) Overview Pueblo Indian History for Kids is an online timeline that tells the history of the Pueblo Indian people of the American Southwest. The timeline covers more than 15,000 years of history! Use this worksheet to guide your exploration of the timeline. As you move through the timeline, answer the questions below. Keep a list of questions you have as you explore. Go to: www.crowcanyon.org/pueblohistorykids Introduction 1. Who are the Pueblo Indians? 2. What other names are used to describe this group of people? 3. Where is the Mesa Verde region? 4. What does “Mesa Verde” mean, and what is the region’s environment like? 5. How is the environment of the Mesa Verde region similar to the environment where you live? How is it different? 6. What are two ways we can learn about Pueblo history? Can you think of others? 1 Pueblo Indian History for Kids―Student Worksheet (6–8) Paleoindian 1. What does the term “hunter-gatherer” mean? 2. How would you describe how people in your culture acquire food? Where do you get your food? 3. Identify two similarities and two differences between your life and that of Paleoindian people. Archaic 1. There were several major differences between the Paleoindian and Archaic periods. What were they and what is the evidence for these differences? 2. What important tools were used during the Archaic period? How did they change ways of life for people in the Mesa Verde region? 3. Why do you think there is not as much evidence for how people lived during the Paleoindian and Archaic periods as there is for later time periods? 2 Pueblo Indian History for Kids―Student Worksheet (6–8) Basketmaker 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Tribal Perspectives on the Hohokam
    Bulletin of Old Pueblo Archaeology Center Tucson, Arizona December 2009 Number 60 Michael Hampshire’s artist rendition of Pueblo Grande platform mound (right); post-excavation view of compound area northwest of Pueblo Grande platform mound (above) TRIBAL PERSPECTIVES ON THE HOHOKAM Donald Bahr, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus, Arizona State University The archaeologists’ name for the principal pre-European culture of southern Arizona is Hohokam, a word they adopted from the O’odham (formerly Pima-Papago). I am not sure which archaeologist first used that word. It seems that the first documented but unpublished use is from 1874 or 1875 (Haury 1976:5). In any case, since around then archaeologists have used their methods to define and explain the origin, development, geographic extent, and end of the Hohokam culture. This article is not about the archaeologists’ Hohokam, but about the stories and explanations of past peoples as told by the three Native American tribes who either grew from or replaced the archaeologists’ Hohokam on former Hohokam land. These are the O’odham, of course, but also the Maricopa and Yavapai. The Maricopa during European times (since about 1550) lived on lands previously occupied by the Hohokam and Patayan archaeological cultures, and the Yavapai lived on lands of the older Hohokam, Patayan, Hakataya, Salado, and Western Anasazi cultures – to use all of the names that have been used, sometimes overlappingly, for previous cultures of the region. The Stories The O’odham word huhugkam means “something that is used up or finished.” The word consists of the verb huhug, which means “to be used up or finished,” and the suffix “-kam,” which means “something that is this way.” Huhug is generally, and perhaps only, used as an intransitive, not a transitive, verb.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Physalis Longifolia in the U.S
    The Ethnobotany and Ethnopharmacology of Wild Tomatillos, Physalis longifolia Nutt., and Related Physalis Species: A Review1 ,2 3 2 2 KELLY KINDSCHER* ,QUINN LONG ,STEVE CORBETT ,KIRSTEN BOSNAK , 2 4 5 HILLARY LORING ,MARK COHEN , AND BARBARA N. TIMMERMANN 2Kansas Biological Survey, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA 3Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis, MO, USA 4Department of Surgery, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA 5Department of Medicinal Chemistry, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA *Corresponding author; e-mail: [email protected] The Ethnobotany and Ethnopharmacology of Wild Tomatillos, Physalis longifolia Nutt., and Related Physalis Species: A Review. The wild tomatillo, Physalis longifolia Nutt., and related species have been important wild-harvested foods and medicinal plants. This paper reviews their traditional use as food and medicine; it also discusses taxonomic difficulties and provides information on recent medicinal chemistry discoveries within this and related species. Subtle morphological differences recognized by taxonomists to distinguish this species from closely related taxa can be confusing to botanists and ethnobotanists, and many of these differences are not considered to be important by indigenous people. Therefore, the food and medicinal uses reported here include information for P. longifolia, as well as uses for several related taxa found north of Mexico. The importance of wild Physalis species as food is reported by many tribes, and its long history of use is evidenced by frequent discovery in archaeological sites. These plants may have been cultivated, or “tended,” by Pueblo farmers and other tribes. The importance of this plant as medicine is made evident through its historical ethnobotanical use, information in recent literature on Physalis species pharmacology, and our Native Medicinal Plant Research Program’s recent discovery of 14 new natural products, some of which have potent anti-cancer activity.
    [Show full text]
  • Pueblo Indian History for Kids Student Worksheet (Grades 4–6)
    Name ______________________ Pueblo Indian History for Kids Student Worksheet (Grades 4–6) Overview Pueblo Indian History for Kids is an online timeline that tells the history of the Pueblo Indian people of the American Southwest. The timeline covers more than 15,000 years of history! Use this worksheet to guide your exploration of the timeline. As you move through the timeline, answer the questions below. Keep a list of questions you have as you explore. Go to: www.crowcanyon.org/pueblohistorykids Introduction 1. Who are the Pueblo Indians? 2. What other names are used to describe this group of people? 3. Where is the Mesa Verde region? What is the environment like there? 4. How is the environment of the Mesa Verde region similar to the environment where you live? How is it different? 5. What are some of the different ways we can learn about the Pueblo past? 1 Pueblo Indian History for Kids―Student Worksheet (4–6) Paleoindian 1. What does the term “hunter-gatherer” mean? 2. How do you get your food? Where does it come from? Archaic 1. How is the Archaic period different than the Paleoindian period? 2. What two important tools were used during the Archaic time period? How were they used? Basketmaker 1. What made the Basketmaker time period different than the Archaic period? 2. Describe the diet of the Pueblo people during the Basketmaker time period. 3. What important structures were used during the Basketmaker period? How were they used? What structures do people use today with similar purposes? 2 Pueblo Indian History for Kids―Student Worksheet (4–6) Pueblo I 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Southern Sinagua Sites Tour: Montezuma Castle, Montezuma
    Information as of Old Pueblo Archaeology Center Presents: March 4, 2021 99 a.m.-5:30a.m.-5:30 p.m.p.m. SouthernSouthern SinaguaSinagua SitesSites Tour:Tour: MayMay 8,8, 20212021 MontezumaMontezuma Castle,Castle, SaturdaySaturday MontezumaMontezuma Well,Well, andand TuzigootTuzigoot $30 donation ($24 for members of Old Pueblo Archaeology Center or Friends of Pueblo Grande Museum) Donations are due 10 days after reservation request or by 5 p.m. Wednesday May 8, whichever is earlier. SEE NEXT PAGES FOR DETAILS. National Park Service photographs: Upper, Tuzigoot Pueblo near Clarkdale, Arizona Middle and lower, Montezuma Well and Montezuma Castle cliff dwelling, Camp Verde, Arizona 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Saturday May 8: Southern Sinagua Sites Tour – Montezuma Castle, Montezuma Well, and Tuzigoot meets at Montezuma Castle National Monument, 2800 Montezuma Castle Rd., Camp Verde, Arizona What is Sinagua? Named with the Spanish term sin agua (‘without water’), people of the Sinagua culture inhabited Arizona’s Middle Verde Valley and Flagstaff areas from about 6001400 CE Verde Valley cliff houses below the rim of Montezuma Well and grew corn, beans, and squash in scattered lo- cations. Their architecture included masonry-lined pithouses, surface pueblos, and cliff dwellings. Their pottery included some black-on-white ceramic vessels much like those produced elsewhere by the An- cestral Pueblo people but was mostly plain brown, and made using the paddle-and-anvil technique. Was Sinagua a separate culture from the sur- rounding Ancestral Pueblo, Mogollon, Hohokam, and Patayan ones? Was Sinagua a branch of one of those other cultures? Or was it a complex blending or borrowing of attributes from all of the surrounding cultures? Whatever the case might have been, today’s Hopi Indians consider the Sinagua to be ancestral to the Hopi.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 242/Thursday, December 17, 1998
    Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 242 / Thursday, December 17, 1998 / Notices 69651 representatives of the Camp Verde remains at the time of death or later as professional staff in consultation with Yavapai-Apache Indian Community, the part of the death rite or ceremony. representatives of the Jamestown Havasupai Tribe, the Hopi Tribe, the Lastly, officials of the USDA Forest S'Klallam Tribe. Hualapai Tribe, the Navajo Nation, the Service have also determined that, During 1975- November 16, 1990, Pueblo of Zuni, and the Yavapai- pursuant to 43 CFR 10.2 (e), there is a human remains representing six Prescott Indian Tribe. relationship of shared group identity individuals were recovered from the Between 1965-1975, human remains which can be reasonably traced between Walan Point and Bugge Spit sites at Port representing 21 individuals were these Native American human remains Hadlock Detachment located on Indian recovered from four sites (AZ and associated funerary objects, the Island near Port Hadlock, WA during N:04:0002; AZ N:04:0005; AZ Hopi Tribe, and the Yavapai-Prescott archeological surveys and construction N:04:0012; and AZ N:04:0017) within Indian Tribe. projects by U.S. Navy personnel. No the Prescott National Forest during This notice has been sent to officials known individuals were identified. The legally authorized excavations of the Camp Verde Yavapai-Apache 42 associated funerary objects include conducted by Arizona State University. Indian Community, the Havasupai an antler tine, worked bone, an antler No known individuals were identified. Tribe, the Hopi Tribe, the Hualapai wedge, bone blanket pin, pendant, shell The 23 associated funerary objects Tribe, the Navajo Nation, the Pueblo of bead, dentalium, holed pectin shell, include ceramic fragments; bone and Zuni, and the Yavapai-Prescott Indian olivella shel bead, glass trade beads, and stone tools; burned animal bones; Tribe.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Presentación. 2.Fundamentación
    1 UNIVERSIDAD VERACRUZANA INSTITUTO DE INVESTIGACIONES HISTORICO-SOCIALES INTRODUCCION A MESOMERICA Y NUEVOS DESCUBRIMIENTOS PROFR. DR. PEDRO JIMENEZ LARA I.I.H-S 1. Presentación. El presente curso pretende ofrecer una visión de los elementos y períodos culturales que identifican al México Antiguo. Las regiones son: oasisamérica, aridoamérica y mesoamérica Los horizontes que la componen son: arqueolítico, cenolítico inferior, cenolítico superior, protoneolítico, oasisamérica, aridoamérica, mesoamérica y los primeros contactos en el s. XVI: Planteamiento que se hace de esta manera para una mejor comprensión del curso y entender la evolución de los grupos asentados en territorio mexicano. 2.Fundamentación. Las área culturales del México Antiguo no solo se reduce a Mesoamérica como el período de máximo florecimiento que le antecedió a la conquista. En otros tiempos, antes de conocerse esta macroárea cultural, llegaron diversos grupos de cazadores-recolectores nómadas. El proceso evolutivo de estos grupos fue largo y lento, permitiendo avanzar e ir tocando diferentes niveles de desarrollo y los conocimientos necesarios para el cultivo y domesticación de las plantas como uno de los descubrimientos mas importantes durante esta fase que cambio el curso de la historia. Otra de las regiones es la llamada Oasisamérica localizada al sw de E.U. y norte de México, compuesta por grupos sedentarios agrícolas pero con una complejidad similar a la Mesoamericana. El área denominada mesoamérica, espacio donde interactuaron y se desarrollaron diversos grupos culturales, fue la “…sede de la mas alta civilización de la América precolombina. (Niederbeger, 11, 1996), se desarrollo en la mayor parte del territorio mexicano. Mesoamérica, definida así por Kirchhoff en 1943, es punto de referencia no solo para estudiosos del período prehispánico, en el convergen diversos especialistas amparados en diferentes corrientes ideológicas y enfoques: antropólogos, geógrafos prehistoriadores, historiadores, sociólogos, arquitectos, biólogos, sociólogos, por mencionar a algunos.
    [Show full text]
  • Archeology of the Funeral Mound, Ocmulgee National Monument, Georgia
    1.2.^5^-3 rK 'rm ' ^ -*m *~ ^-mt\^ -» V-* ^JT T ^T A . ESEARCH SERIES NUMBER THREE Clemson Universii akCHEOLOGY of the FUNERAL MOUND OCMULGEE NATIONAL MONUMENT, GEORGIA TIONAL PARK SERVICE • U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 3ERAL JCATK5N r -v-^tfS i> &, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fred A. Seaton, Secretary National Park Service Conrad L. Wirth, Director Ihis publication is one of a series of research studies devoted to specialized topics which have been explored in con- nection with the various areas in the National Park System. It is printed at the Government Printing Office and may be purchased from the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C. Price $1 (paper cover) ARCHEOLOGY OF THE FUNERAL MOUND OCMULGEE National Monument, Georgia By Charles H. Fairbanks with introduction by Frank M. Settler ARCHEOLOGICAL RESEARCH SERIES NUMBER THREE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE • U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR • WASHINGTON 1956 THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM, of which Ocmulgee National Monument is a unit, is dedi- cated to conserving the scenic, scientific, and his- toric heritage of the United States for the benefit and enjoyment of its people. Foreword Ocmulgee National Monument stands as a memorial to a way of life practiced in the Southeast over a span of 10,000 years, beginning with the Paleo-Indian hunters and ending with the modern Creeks of the 19th century. Here modern exhibits in the monument museum will enable you to view the panorama of aboriginal development, and here you can enter the restoration of an actual earth lodge and stand where forgotten ceremonies of a great tribe were held.
    [Show full text]
  • Pinworm Infection at Salmon Ruins and Aztec Ruins: Relation to Pueblo III Regional Violence
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Karl Reinhard Papers/Publications Natural Resources, School of 12-2019 Pinworm Infection at Salmon Ruins and Aztec Ruins: Relation to Pueblo III Regional Violence Karl Reinhard Morgana Camacho Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/natresreinhard Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, Environmental Public Health Commons, Other Public Health Commons, and the Parasitology Commons This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Natural Resources, School of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Karl Reinhard Papers/ Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. ISSN (Print) 0023-4001 ISSN (Online) 1738-0006 Korean J Parasitol Vol. 57, No. 6: 627-633, December 2019 ▣ BRIEF COMMUNICATION https://doi.org/10.3347/kjp.2019.57.6.627 Pinworm Infection at Salmon Ruins and Aztec Ruins: Relation to Pueblo III Regional Violence 1 2, Karl J Reinhard , Morgana Camacho * 1School of Natural Resource Sciences, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, USA; 2Escola Nacional de Saúde Pública Sergio Arouca, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Abstract: The study of coprolites has been a theme of archaeology in the American Southwest. A feature of archaeopar- asitology on the Colorado Plateau is the ubiquity of pinworm infection. As a crowd parasite, this ubiquity signals varying concentrations of populations. Our recent analysis of coprolite deposits from 2 sites revealed the highest prevalence of infection ever recorded for the region. For Salmon Ruins, the deposits date from AD 1140 to 1280.
    [Show full text]
  • Information to Users
    Great kivas as integrative architecture in the Silver Creek community, Arizona Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Herr, Sarah Alice, 1970- Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 02/10/2021 15:30:52 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/278407 INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, soms thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy.
    [Show full text]
  • Spagnuolo.Pdf
    University of Utah UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH JOURNAL ESTABLISHING A TEMPORAL DISTRIBUTION FOR CERAMICS OF THE WASHINGTON COUNTY, UT VIRGIN RIVER BRANCH OF THE ANCESTRAL PUEBLOAN Crystal Spagnuolo (Dr. Brian Codding; Kenneth Blake Vernon, MA) Department of Anthropology Dating archaeological sites is important for establishing patterns in settlement, trade, resource use, and population estimates of prehistoric peoples. Using dated sites, we can see patterns in how a culture such as the Ancestral Puebloan went from a foraging subsistence to agricultural settlements with far-reaching trade networks. Or, we can understand when the Ancestral Puebloan abandoned certain areas of the American Southwest and pair this with climate data to understand how climate might be a factor. In order to do so however, we must first have a reliable timeline of these events, built from archaeological sites that are reliably dated. Unfortunately, direct dating via radiocarbon or dendrochronology is costly and not always possible due to the biodegradable nature of the organic materials needed for such dating. Using a relative dating system that employs ceramics is a cost-effective alternative. Here I continue work begun by The Archaeological Center at the University of Utah to generate a ceramic dating system for the area encompassing Southwest Utah, focusing on Washington County, using extant site data from this region. While the prehistoric inhabitants of this area were Ancestral Puebloan, the ceramic traditions were separate, and therefore merit their own dating analysis (Lyneis, 1995; Spangler, Yaworsky, Vernon, & Codding, 2019). Currently, dating of sites in the region is difficult, both due to the expense of direct dating techniques (radiocarbon and dendrochronology) and the lack of defined time periods for ceramics types.
    [Show full text]
  • Karen G. Harry
    Karen G. Harry Department of Anthropology University of Nevada Las Vegas 4505 Maryland Parkway, Box 45003 Las Vegas, NV 89154-5003 (702) 895-2534; [email protected] Professional Employment 2014-present Professor, Department of Anthropology, University of Nevada Las Vegas 2007-2014 Associate Professor, Department of Anthropology, University of Nevada Las Vegas 2001-2007 Assistant Professor, Department of Anthropology, University of Nevada Las Vegas 1997-2001 Director of Cultural Resources, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Austin 1997 Adjunct Faculty, Pima Community College, Tucson 1990-1996 Project Director, Statistical Research, Inc., Tucson Education 1997 Ph.D., University of Arizona, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona 1987 M.A., Anthropology, University of Arizona 1982 B.A., Anthropology, Texas A&M University, cum laude Research Interests Southwestern archaeology; ceramic analysis, sourcing, and technology; organization of craft production; trade and exchange issues; chemical compositional analysis; prehistoric leadership strategies; prehistoric community organization Ongoing Field Projects Field Research on the Parashant National Monument: I am involved in a long-term archaeological research project concerning the Puebloan occupation of the Mt. Dellenbaugh area of the Shivwits Plateau, located within Parashant National Monument. Field and Archival Research in the Lower Moapa Valley: A second area of ongoing research involves the Puebloan occupation of the lower Moapa Valley of southern Nevada. I have recently completed an archival study of the artifacts and records associated with the early (1920s-1940s) field research of this area, and have on-going field investigations in the area. updated Sept. 1 , 2020 Books & Special Issues of Journals 2019 Harry, Karen G. and Sachiko Sakai (guest editors).
    [Show full text]