Sociopolitical Complexity and the Bow and Arrow in the American Southwest

Evolutionary Anthropology 22:111–117 (2013)

ARTICLE

TODD L. VANPOOL AND MICHAEL J. O’BRIEN

The evolution of sociopolitical complexity, including heightened relations of Southwestern ethnographic and cooperation and competition among large nonkin groups, has long been a cen- archeological evidence indicates tral focus of anthropological research.1,2 Anthropologists suggest any number of arrows were used in warfare, hunt- variables that affect the waxing and waning of complexity and define the precise ing, and ritual.14–17 Southwestern trajectories that groups take, including population density, subsistence strat- arrows are: self-arrows, made of a egies, warfare, the distribution of resources, and trade relationships.3,4 Changes single piece of hardwood, or com- in weaponry, here the introduction of the bow and arrow, can have profound pound arrows, made of a wooden implications for population aggregation and density, subsistence and settlement foreshaft and a lighter material such 5 strategies, and access to resources, trade, and warfare. as cane or reed.9,12,14,18,19 Through Bingham and Souza provide a general conceptual model for the relationship time, wooden self-arrows became between complexity and the bow and arrow, arguing that this compound increasingly common, perhaps as a weapon system, whereby smaller projectiles travel at higher speed and are ca- result of warfare and the need to pable of hitting targets more accurately and at greater distances than hand- pierce wicker shields.12 Some arrows thrown darts, fundamentally favors the formation of larger groups because it were fitted with a stone tip (arrow- allows for cost-effective means of dealing with conflicts of interest through head), whereas others were either 6 social coercion, thereby dramatically transforming kin-based social relations. left blunt at the tip, perhaps for tar- Here we consider the impacts the introduction of the bow and arrow had on get practice or stunning small game, sociopolitical complexity in the North American Southwest. or tapered to a sharp point.11,20 Pointed ends allow penetration and are effective for killing, although LATE PREHISTORIC stone projectile points, especially of SOUTHWESTERN WEAPONRY cyptocrystaline/noncrystaline materi- als such as chert and obsidian, allow The bow and arrow were present in Todd L. VanPool is Associate Professor deeper penetration and produce of Anthropology at the University of Mis- the Southwest perhaps as early as AD larger wounds.21–23 souri, Columbia. His research focuses on 500 and became the dominant weapon Southwestern stone arrowheads are applying evolutionary theory in the con- system by AD 700.7,8 Southwestern text of Southwestern archeology and small,typicallyweighinglessthan5 stone artifact analysis. His field research bow technology was comparatively gm, and vary considerably in shape.23 focuses on excavations of Casas simple. Short self bows, those made Grandes settlements in southern New They are among the most common Mexico and northwestern Mexico. from a single piece of wood and stone tools recovered from late Email: [email protected] which, in profile, are usually straight prehistoric Southwestern contexts, Michael J. O’Brien is Professor of An- or, less commonly, slightly recurved, thropology and Dean of the College of but arrow-shaft fragments recovered Arts and Science at the University of were the primary form until sometime from caves and other contexts Missouri. His research focuses on under- after AD 1200, when compound indicate that blunt-end arrows and standing various aspects of human evo- recurve bows, those made from wood lution and behavior, including the spread tapered-end arrows likely were more of early populations through North and backed with sinew (hence the common.15 For example, Haury’s 9–12 America. term “compound”) replaced them. excavation of Ventana Cave (Fig. 1) Bows were made from a wide variety produced more arrows with tapered of woods. In a cache of 94 bows found ends (n > 27) and blunt tips (n 5 44) Key words: bow; Hohokam; Ancestral Pueblo; in a small cliff house in the Mogollon than stone-tipped arrows (n < 11).18 Casas Grandes; political complextity Mountains of New Mexico, which, The use of stone tips may have been based on associated ceramic sherds, tied at least partly to warfare, where

VC 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. appears to date to AD 1000–1150, Hib- the increased penetration and wound DOI: 10.1002/evan.21355 ben13 identified black oak, pine, pinon,~ size would have been particularly Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). mountain mahogany, and sycamore. useful. 112 VanPool and O’Brien ARTICLE

15 km from their source. Social differentiation and architectural elaboration increased through time, leading to the development of a regional architectural style characterized by ball courts and central plazas surrounded by pithouses.29 Irrigation systems appear to have been man- aged at the community level.31 Com- plexity in these communities predates adoption of the bow and arrow in the Southwest, indicating that the initial formation of nonegalitarian societies was not initially influenced by or sub- sequently controlled by the weapon system. Between AD 950 and AD 1100, well after the bow and arrow became the dominant Hohokam weapon system, community organization did change through the formation of multivillage irrigation communities in which politically distinct groups cooperated with each other to build and maintain large irrigation works.31 As part of this reorganization, some settlements that had been occupied for hundreds of years, such as Snaketown, were abandoned. There is no evidence of defensive locations or architecture, warfare, or violent coercion during this time.12 After AD 1100, archery-based warfare may have become a more signifi- cant consideration for the Hohokam. A 40-km-long line of defensive “lookout” settlements was built by neighboring peoples living in the Cohonina region of northern and Figure 1. Culture areas of the American Southwest showing locations of sites mentioned western Arizona along their border in the text. with the Hohokam.12,32 These settlements were small habitations, often with two-story towers, which are SOUTHWESTERN SOCIOPOLITICAL Sociopolitical complexity in the interpreted as lookout posts on prom- COMPLEXITY Hohokam region resulted from the inent land forms with excellent views nucleation of smaller settlements into of the surrounding area (Fig. 2). They Most researchers conclude large communities relying on irriga- were constructed using a highly visi- that Southwestern sociopolitical tion agriculture.28 The process began ble red-yellow sandstone that made complexity developed as a result of with a rise in population and them visible from quite a distance, three interrelated factors: irrigation increased social complexity associ- suggesting that they served as both agriculture, population aggregation, ated with the cultivation of domesti- 24–26 and warfare. Similarly, complex- cates, including maize; the lookouts and deterrents to possible ity in the Southwest often is construction of irrigation ditches encroachment from Hohokam and described in terms of three general associated with small pithouse vil- other hostile groups, perhaps regional systems: the Hohokam lages; and the use of food-storage launched in retaliation for raids per- region along the Salt and Gila river facilities in the Tucson Basin.29 By petrated by the comparatively dis- drainages of south-central Arizona, AD 400, populations had settled into persed and smaller Cohonina 32 the Chaco/Aztec Ruins region of more permanent settlements, many groups. Still, based on available evi- northwestern New Mexico, and the of which remained continuously dence, the introduction of the bow Casas Grandes region of northern occupied for hundreds of years.30 and arrow did not significantly affect Chihuahua and southern New Mex- These communities built massive irri- the development or trajectory of polit- ico (Fig. 1).27 gation systems, stretching as long as ical complexity in the Hohokam ARTICLE Sociopolitical Complexity and the Bow and Arrow in the American Southwest 113

Box 1. Evidence of the Use of the Bow and Arrow in Southwestern Warfare

Although people throughout the Further, arrows likely were removed LA 15845 (northwestern New prehistoric Southwest used a variety when possible, either from wounded Mexico) (Fig. 1): A body found of weapons, including clubs, axes, individuals who survived or from on the floor of a collapsed pit- and even rocks thrown from pueblo bodies recovered after battle. Evi- house had a projectile point em- rooftops, as well as projectile sys- dence of the use of bow and arrow bedded between the third and tems such as the thrusting spear, in warfare will consequently be lim- fourth cervical vertebrae. A bro- and the atlatl and dart, the bow and ited primarily to those cases where a ken point and three whole arrow were central to Southwestern point became embedded in a bone points were also associated warfare after their introduction.12,19 and could not be recovered; where a with the skeleton and likely had Zuni archers formed phalanx-like bone shows unambiguous evidence been embedded in the individu- battle formations during the initial of a projectile impact; or where al’s soft tissue.57 hostilities associated with the Span- bodies could not be recovered Pueblo Bonito, Chaco Canyon ish entradas, and archers were cen- because of circumstances (for exam- (north-central New Mexico) (Fig. tral to subsequent warfare among ple, a burning building collapsed on 1): A point was embedded in the Apache, Navaho, Pueblos, an injured individual or there were the third cervical vertebra of a Tohono and Akmiel O’odam, Utes, too many dead to recover). Despite disarticulated skeleton.19 and other Southwestern native peo- these issues, several archeological 29SJ1360, Chaco Canyon ples.14,54 Rock-art imagery shows a cases demonstrate the use of the (north-central New Mexico) (Fig. strong association between the bow arrow as a weapon: 1): The skeleton of a female and prehistoric warriors. 17 adult had a projectile point in Despite archery’s clear role in Site 616, Mariana Mesa (west- the abdominal region and Southwest warfare, evidence of vio- central New Mexico) (Fig. 1): another in the chest cavity. A lence done using the bow and arrow Two skeletons show evidence of hole in the right elbow may is limited relative to other weapon violence. One, an adolescent have been caused by a pointed systems. Arrows tend to cause soft- female, had a severed left arm wood-tipped arrow.58 tissue wounds that do not leave any and was likely killed by a blow evidence of violent trauma on the from a stone axe to the head. A Additional examples are listed by skeleton except where a point hap- young adult male had a projec- Wilcox and Haas.59 pens to hit bone. Even then, the tile point embedded in his leg.56 damage may not be recognizable.55

region before the influx of war refu- part on warfare, was central to the constituted the primary projectile- gees, starting around AD 1275, which system’s formation and based weapon. Arrows have also been we will discuss. operation.27,33,34 found in ritual contexts at Pueblo Bo- The bow and arrow fundamentally Before the rise of the large nito in Chaco Canyon and at Aztec changed the form of warfare and Chacoan settlements, warfare in Ruins. These arrows were painted contributed to development of the the northern Southwest was charac- green, unlike most arrows from else- regional systems at Chaco Canyon terized by tit-for-tat raiding in which where, which typically lack paint or and later at Aztec Ruins in north- small numbers of people fought and were painted red, indicating the pres- 12,35 central New Mexico (Fig. 1). Chaco died. Occasional massacres of ence of distinct Chacoan ritual prac- 12,36,37 tices focused on the bow and Canyon was the heart of an expan- whole villages occurred. During arrow.15 sive political system characterized by and after development of the Chaco The significance of the bow to soci- large pueblos with distinctive archi- Canyon polity around AD 900, warfare appears to have been generally opolitical complexity increased even tectural styles that included enclosed curtailed in favor of targeted killings more after the end of the Chaco Can- plazas and large kivas. The system of specific individuals or family yon/Aztec Ruins regional system grew from large pithouse settlements groups. These were violent executions around AD 1250, as the northern such as Shabik’eschee village in in which the victims were killed, their Southwest became enmeshed in bru- Chaco Canyon and reached its maxi- bodies burned and perhaps cannibal- tal, sustained warfare that often led to mum extent between AD 900 and AD ized, and their bones shattered.35,36 the destruction of entire villages.12 33 1125. It then likely retrenched into Given the evidence of what Lekson During this time, the recurved bow a slightly smaller regional system has called “Chacoan enforcers,” war- likely became the dominant weapon centered on Aztec Ruins until it col- fare and war symbolism were likely system, which may have increased lapsed around AD 1250.33 Control of central to the development of Chaco the deadliness of archery-based war- political power, based at least in Canyon.35 The bow and arrow fare. The result was the migration of 114 VanPool and O’Brien ARTICLE

Figure 2. NA26344, a lookout “fort” in Sycamore Basin on the Hohokam/Cohonia frontier. Photo courtsey of David R. Wilcox. [Color figure can be viewed in the online issue, which is available at wileyonlinelibrary.com.] thousands of people out of the north- bow and arrow led to population Settlements in the Hohokam region ern Southwest into communities migration and aggregation, as well as changed as the previous integrative along the Rio Grande and throughout intra- and intercommunity social dif- architecture such as ball courts fell central New Mexico and Arizona.38 ferentiation throughout the central from favor, walled village compounds Increased warfare spread with the portion of the North American South- became more common, and platform movement of these groups and trans- west. This pattern remained and inten- mounds formed the heart of elite resi- formed the settlement strategies used sified through the historic period. dential districts.29,35,38 throughout the region, including Shifting attention to central New Hohokam settlements in Arizona and Mexico, warfare made possible by western New Mexico. With the influx Thus, the intensely lethal the bow and arrow transformed po- of immigrants, previously dispersed warfare made possible litical organization, but did not nec- communities with long histories of essarily cause increased political occupation, sometimes lasting hun- at least in part by the complexity relative to the preceding dreds of years, were eventually aban- bow and arrow led to Chacoan system. To the contrary, doned, often after being burned. reorganization of the existing com- Groups began to shift to much larger, population migration munities and immigrant populations more aggregated settlements in de- and aggregation, as well flowing from the Chaco/Aztec region fensive locations. Communities also as intra- and into the area adjacent to the Rio formed defensive clusters—what Wil- Grande after AD 1275 included the cox and colleagues39,40 have called intercommunity social development of social structures defense by layers, and likely formed differentiation such as the kachina religion, which intercommunity defensive alliances. established diffuse power structures Wooden palisades were also built throughout the central and prevented the institutionaliza- around some Hohokam habitation portion of the North tion of extreme social differentiation. clusters and mounds, perhaps for This, in turn, limited the amount of defense. American Southwest. political differentiation and the abil- Thus, the intensely lethal warfare ity of elites to exert political control. made possible at least in part by the Some researchers have suggested ARTICLE Sociopolitical Complexity and the Bow and Arrow in the American Southwest 115 these movements reflected a direct, increased dramatically around AD were burned and not buried in a conscious rejection of the sort of 1300.48,49 This “quickening” of the manner that is typical of the Casas social inequity or political complex- Casas Grandes system may reflect Grandes culture were the remains of ity associated with the Chaco/Aztec the real or perceived threat of war- massacred individuals. However, system.41 Certainly no integrated re- fare made possible by the bow and Walker suggested that Paquime may gional system rose to take its place. the increased warfare to the north. have been burned as part of a cere- During the same time that warfare Evidence cited as indicating warfare monial closing of the settlement, and caused population aggregation includes atalayas, circular stone fea- Casserino concluded that the bodies throughout the central Southwest, tures on hilltops throughout the do not reflect a single event but were increased political complexity and Casas Grandes region. Charles Di instead deposited over time.51,52 A aggregated communities also formed Peso, the original excavator of handful of trophy skulls found in rit- in the Casas Grandes region of Paquime, and others have argued ual contexts could reflect warfare, northern Chihuahua and the south- that these atalayas formed a warning although again, alternative explana- ern edge of New Mexico.42 The cen- system used to alert people at tions such as ancestor worship have ter of this system was the large Paquime and nearby communities of been suggested.43,49 Analysis of addi- community of Paquime (Fig. 1), pending attacks, the idea being that tional burials also does not reflect which became the heart of one of brush was piled on top of the ata- substantial evidence of warfare- the most politically complex systems layas and then set on fire.43,50 The related trauma, although slain war- in post–AD 1300 North America.43 atalayas do have greater intervisibil- riors could have been buried else- Research into the Casas Grandes ity than expected by chance, but it is where. Cannibalism was apparently region is limited relative to the areas unclear whether fires were ever lit present, but no evidence indicates it previously discussed, and our knowl- on them and, if so, whether their was focused on captured or killed edge of the culture history is compa- role was ritual or related to enemies.49,52 Further, settlements ratively incomplete. However, it is defense.50 throughout the Casas Grandes clear that Casas Grandes political Di Peso also proposed that region do not have the evidence of complexity grew as dispersed settle- Paquime was abandoned because of defensive locations and settlement ments nucleated into larger villages warfare.43 The entire community clusters characteristic of settlements and village clusters, as was the case was burned at the end of its occupa- to the north. Based on the available among the Hohokam and at Chaco tion, and Di Peso proposed that evidence, then, it is unclear that war- Canyon. about 80 fragmentary bodies that fare was a major factor leading to Intensive warfare, presumably aggregated settlements in the Casas using atlatl-thrown darts and hand- Grandes region. Instead, most thrown spears, likely affected settle- authors argue that sociopolitical ment patterns during the Late Ar- In some contexts, the complexity was based on access to chaic period (1500 BC – AD 700), as imported goods and rituals associ- shown by at least 13 villages created bow and arrow ated with the Aztatlan trading sys- by using dirt and rubble to fill spaces encouraged and tem of western Mexico.43,46,49,53 behind rock walls built on the sides facilitate the formation of steep hill slopes—highly defensi- DISCUSSION ble locations.44 In contrast, settle- of extreme social ments founded between AD 700 and Using the criteria provided by AD 1200, during which the bow differentiation and led to Bingham and coworkers in their spread to the area, were widely dis- larger corporate units, as introduction to this issue,60 our anal- persed, small communities in areas predicted under the ysis does not support the utility of where maize agriculture was possi- the warfare theory in the North ble.45 To our knowledge, there is no social coercion theory. American Southwest. In none of the evidence of warfare or systematic vi- In other contexts, the cases does it appear that intense olence, although tit-for-tat warfare warfare led to the formation of social presumably was present there as resulting social inequity complexity. If anything, available evi- elsewhere in the Southwest.45,46 Af- and corporate-unit size dence indicates that the increased ter AD 1200, political complexity complexity in the Chaco/Aztec Ruins increased and large settlements such may have been smaller, region, where the link between com- as Paquime and Galeana (Fig. 1) even in the same plexity and archery is most clear, is were built in river valleys, where irri- associated with a decrease in warfare gation and other water-control strat- environment and with intensity, which is the exact opposite egies were possible.47,48 similar demographic of the expected pattern of the war- The role of warfare in the forma- fare hypothesis. tion and form of aggregated com- structures... Our analysis lends only limited munities is unclear. Complexity and support for the social coercion the degree of social differentiation theory. In the Chaco/Aztec Ruins 116 VanPool and O’Brien ARTICLE region, archery fundamentally changes in weaponry did, in time, The Hohokam and Casas Grandes altered the structure of human inter- affect the nature of interpolity and regions do not seem to fit well with action, helping to determine where intrapolity coercion strategies. Arch- the social coercion theory. In the humans lived and the form of their ery at least allowed for potentially case of the Hohokam, cultural com- social relationships. As predicted by increased social complexity relative plexity developed too early (before Bingham and colleagues60 the to what was possible without the the adoption of the bow and arrow), implied and realized social coercion weaponry, even if the bow and arrow and its continued elaboration was made possible by the bow and arrow were not used to their maximum not clearly affected by the presence (and related weaponry such as potential in coercive relations. of archery. Factors other than shields) apparently transformed both improved weaponry and/or warfare intrapolity “law enforcement,” in the apparently led to the social coopera- ACKNOWLEDGMENTS form of targeted killings of specific individuals, and interpolity relations, tion/coercion necessary for the devel- We thank Paul Bingham and with the formation of the large opment of complexity in the Joanne Souza for inviting us to partic- Chaco/Aztec Ruins regional system, Hohokam region. This situation ipate in the symposium and Barbara both of which led to increasingly changed as the direct threat of Roth, Stephen Lekson, David Wilcox, hierarchical social structures. armed conflict increased after AD John Fleagle, and two anonymous After the Chaco/Aztec Ruins sys- 1100 and especially after AD 1300. reviewers for numerous helpful sug- tem ended in brutal warfare, how- The development of cultural com- gestions for strengthening the ever, descendants did not reestablish plexity in the Casas Grandes region, manuscript. a comparable regional system, indi- is, in contrast, too late to fit with the cating that the effect of the bow and social coercion theory. Meaningful cultural complexity such as that REFERENCES arrow on both intrapolity and inter- reflected in the Hohokam and 1 Johnson AW, Earle T. 2000. The evolution of polity relations is not fixed within a Chaco/Aztec Ruins regions postdates human societies: from foraging group to agrar- particular demographic and environ- ian state, 2nd ed. Stanford, CA: Stanford Uni- the general adoption of the bow and versity Press. mental context. Instead of using the arrow by up to 500 years. Although bow and arrow to increase the inten- 2 Vaughn KJ, Eerkens JW, Kantner J, editors. our understanding of the region’s 2010. The evolution of leadership transitions in sity of social coercion and reestab- prehistory is limited, the lack of decision making from small-scale to middle- lish extreme social differentiation, as range societies. Santa Fe, NM: School for changes in settlement size and loca- Advanced Research Press. seemingly implied by the social coer- tion toward defensible settings and 3 Feinman GM. 2011. Size, complexity, and cion theory, the offspring of those unambiguous evidence of increased organizational variation: a comparative who lived in the Chaco/Aztec Ruins violence or social coercion indicates approach. Cross-Cult Res 45:37–58. systems adopted social structures that the bow and arrow did not sig- 4 Turchin P., Gavrilets S. 2009. Evolution of complex hierarchical societies. Soc Evol Hist such as the kachina religion, which nificantly change inter- or intrapolity 8:167–198. directly prevented such coercive rela- relations until the thirteenth century, 5 Gat A. 2008. War in human civilization. New tionships and limited the degree of as warfare spread across the York: Oxford University Press. social differentiation. This is not to Southwest. 6 Bingham PM, Souza J. 2009. Death from a distance and the birth of a humane universe. say that all warfare stopped, that Ultimately, our study indicates Charleston, SC: BookSurge. intracommunity coercion was not that the impact of weaponry is vari- 7 Blitz JH. 1988. Adoption of the bow in prehis- present, and that the bow and arrow able and must be understood in its toric North America. N Am Archaeol 9:123–145. did not impact community structure cultural-historical context. In some 8 Roth B, Toney E, Lorentzen L. 2011. The and the negotiation of conflicts of in- contexts, the bow and arrow encour- advent of bow and arrow technology in the Mimbres Mogollon region. Kiva 77:87–109. aged and facilitate the formation of terest. Large, defensive community 9 Cosgrove CB. 1947. Caves of the upper Gila clusters formed, and there was con- extreme social differentiation and and Hueco areas in New Mexico and Texas. tinued emphasis on warrior symbol- led to larger corporate units, as pre- Papers Peabody Mus Am 24:1–181. ism, but large regional systems did dicted under the social coercion 10 Rogers SL. 1940. The aboriginal bow and arrow of North America and Eastern Asia. Am not re-form, and intrapolity social theory. In other contexts, the result- Anthropol 42:255–269. complexity never reached the level of ing social inequity and corporate- 11 Pope ST. 1923. Bows and arrows. Berkeley: the Chaco/Aztec Ruins systems, de- unit size may have been smaller, University of California Press. spite similar demographic and envi- even in the same environment and 12 LeBlanc SA. 1999. Prehistoric warfare in the American Southwest. Salt Lake City: University ronmental contexts and even general with similar demographic structures, of Utah Press. improvements in the bow and arrow, such as the Ancestral Puebloan cul- 13 Hibben FC. 1938. A cache of wooden bows such the increased prevalence of ture before and after the end of the from the Mogollon Mountains. Am Antiquity recurved bows. This is not necessarily Chaco/Aztec systems. Still, the even- 4:36–38. 14 Cushing FH. 1895. The arrow. Am Anthro- contradictory to the social coercion tual impact of the bow and arrow on pol 8:307–349. theory, but it does indicate that addi- political complexity and related cul- 15 Holly LE. 2010. Beyond the point: arrow tional factors beyond weaponry may tural attributes such as settlement shaft technology of the prehistoric Southwest. limit social coercion below its poten- location in all three regions does MA thesis, Department of Anthropology, Uni- versity of Colorado, Boulder. tial maximum expression in a given support the general thrust of the 16 Martin PS, Rinaldo JB, Bluhm E, et al. cultural context. social coercion theory in that 1952. Mogollan cultural continuity and change: ARTICLE Sociopolitical Complexity and the Bow and Arrow in the American Southwest 117

the stratigraphic analysis of Tularosa and Cor- 33 Lekson SH. 2012. Chaco’s hinterlands. In: Mexico. Salt Lake City: University of Utah dova caves. Fieldiana: Anthropol 38:1–232. Pauketat TR, editor. The Oxford handbook of Press. p 149–176. 17 Schaafsma P. 2000. Warrior, shield, and North American archaeology. Oxford: Oxford 48 Whalen MA, Minnis PE. 2009. The neigh- star: imagery and ideology of Pueblo warfare. University Press. p 597–607. bors of Casas Grandes: excavating medio Missoula, MT: Mountain Press. 34 Plog S, Heitman C. 2009. Hierarchy and period communities of northwest 18 Haury E. 1950. The stratigraphy and social inequality in the American Southwest, Chihuahua, Mexico. Tucson: University of archaeology of Ventana Cave. Tucson: Univer- A.D. 800–1200. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA Arizona Press. sity of Arizona Press. 107:19619–19626. 49 Rakita GFM. 2009. Ancestors and elites: 19 Judd NM. 1954. The material culture of 35 Lekson SH. 2002. War in the Southwest, emergent complexity and ritual practices in Pueblo Bonito. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian war in the world. Am Antiquity 67:607–624. the Casas Grandes polity. Lanham, MD: Miscellaneous Collections 124. 36 Kuckelman KA, Lightfoot RR, Martin DL. AltaMira. 20 Hamm J. 1991. Bows and arrows of the 2000. Changing patterns of violence in the 50 Swanson S. 2003. Documenting prehistoric Native Americans. Guilford, CT: Lyons Press. northern San Juan region. Kiva 66:147–165. communication networks: a case study in the Paquime polity. Am Antiquity 68:753–767. 21 Waguespack NM, Surovell T, Denoyer A, 37 Potter JM, Chuipka JP. 2010. Perimortem et al. 2009. Making a point: wood- versus mutilation of human remains in an early village 51 Walker WH. 2002. Stratigraphy and practi- stone-tipped projectiles. Antiquity 83:786–800. in the American Southwest: a case for ethnic cal reason. Am Anthropol 104:159–177. 22 Odell G, Cowan F. 1986. Experiments with violence. J Anthropol Archaeol 29:507–523. 52 Casserino CM. 2009. Bioarchaeology of vio- spears and arrows on animal targets. J Field 38 Lowell JC. 2007. Women and men in war- lence and site abandonment at Casas Grandes, Archaeol 13:195–212. fare and migration: implications of gender Chiahuahua, Mexico. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Ore- 23 VanPool TL. 2003. Explaining changes in imbalance in the Grasshopper region of Ari- gon, Eugene. projectile point morphology: a case study from zona. Am Antiquity 72:95–123. Ventana Cave, Arizona. Ph.D. dissertation, 39 Wilcox DR, Robertson G Jr, Wood JS. 2001. 53 VanPool CS, VanPool TL. 2007. Signs of the Department of Anthropology, University of Antecedents to Perry Mesa: early Pueblo III de- Casas Grandes shamans. Salt Lake City: Uni- New Mexico, Albuquerque. fensive refuge systems in west-central Arizona. versity of Utah Press. 24 Gumerman GJ, Gell-Mann M, editors. 1994. In: Rice GE, LeBlanc SA, editors. Deadly land- 54 Winship GP. 1896. The Coronado expedi- Understanding complexity in the prehistoric scapes: case studies in prehistoric southwestern tion, 1540–1542. 14th Ann Rep Bureau Am Eth- Southwest. Boulder, CO: Westview. warfare. Salt Lake City: University of Utah nol, pt. 1, p 811–988. Press. p 109–140. 25 Kohler TA, Varien MD, editors. 2012. Emer- 55 Milner GR. 2005. Nineteenth-century arrow gence and collapse of early villages: models of 40 Wilcox DR, Wiegand PC, Wood JS, et al. wounds and perceptions of prehistoric warfare. central Mesa Verde archaeology. Berkeley: Uni- 2008. Ancient cultural interplay of the Ameri- Am Antiquity 70:144–156. versity of California Press. can Southwest in the Mexican northwest. J 56 McGimsey CR. 1980. Mariana Mesa: seven Southwest 50:103–206. 26 Leonard RL, Reed HE. 1993. Population prehistoric settlements in west-central New aggregation in the prehistoric American South- 41 Fowles S. 2012. The Pueblo village in an age Mexico. Papers Peabody Mus Am A 72. Cam- west: a selectionist model. Am Antiquity of reformation (AD 1300–1600). In: Pauketat bridge, MA. 58:648–661. TR, editor. The Oxford handbook of North 57 Wiseman RN. 1982. The Tsaya project: American archaeology. Oxford: Oxford Univer- 27 Lekson SH. 2009. A history of the ancient archaeological excavations near Lake Valley, sity Press. p 631–644. Southwest. Santa Fe, NM: School for Advanced San Juan County, New Mexico. Santa Fe, NM: Research. 42 Phillips DA. 1989. Prehistory of Chihuahua Laboratory of Anthropology Note 308. 28 Bayman JM. 2001. The Hohokam of south- and Sonora, Mexico. J World Prehist 3:373–401. 58 McKenna PJ. 1984. The architecture and west North America. J World Prehist 15:257–311. 43 Di Peso CC. 1974. Casas Grandes: a fallen material culture of 29SJ1360, Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. Reports of the Chaco Center 7. Al- 29 Fish SK, Fish PR, editors. 2008. The Hoho- trading center of the Gran Chichimeca (vols. buquerque, NM. kam millennium. Santa Fe, NM: SAR Press. 1–3). Flagstaff, AZ: Northland. 59 Wilcox DR, Haas J. 1994. The scream of the 30 Haury E. 1976. The Hohokam: desert farm- 44 Hard RJ, Roney JR. 2007. Cerros de trincheras butterfly: competition and conflict in the pre- ers and craftsmen: excavations at Snaketown. in northwestern Chihuahua: the arguments for historic Southwest. In: Gumerman GJ, editor. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. defense. In: Fish SK, Fish PR, Villalpando ME, editors. Trincheras sites in time, space and soci- Themes in Southwest prehistory. Santa Fe, 31 Woodson MK. 2010.The social organization ety. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. p. 11–52. NM: School of American Research Press. p of Hohokam irrigation in the middle Gila River 211–238. valley, Arizona. Ph.D. dissertation, Department 45 Stewart JD, Kelley JH, MacWilliams AC, 60 Bingham PM, Souza J, Blitz JH. 2013. of Anthropology, Arizona State University, et al. 2005. The Viejo period of Chihuahua cul- Social complexity and the bow in the prehis- Tempe. ture in northwestern Mexico. Latin Am Antiq- uity 16:169–192. toric North American record. Evol Anthropol 32 Wilcox DR, Vogel JP, Weiss T, et al. 2008. 22:81–88. The hilltop defensive and communication sys- 46 Whalen ME, Minnis PE. 2003. The local and tem of the greater Prescott area, A. D. 1100 to the distant in the origin of Casas Grandes, Chi- 1275, and their Cohonina neighbors. In: Robin- huahua, Mexico. Am Antiquity 68:314–332. son CK, Breternitz CD, Mitchell DR, editors. 47 Cruz Antillon R., Maxwell TD, Leonard RD, Prescott to Perry Mesa: 4,000 years of adapta- et al. 2004. Galeana, Villa Ahumada, and Casa tion, innovation, and change in central Arizona. Chica: diverse sites in the Casas Grandes Prescott, AZ: Sharlot Hall Museum Press. p. region. In: Newell GE, Gallaga Murrieta E, edi- VC 16.1–16.39. tors. Surveying the archaeology of northwest 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.