Journal of Caribbean Copyright 2010 ISSN 1524-4776

BOUNDARY-WORK, REPUTATIONAL SYSTEMS, AND THE DELINEATION OF PREHISTORIC INSULAR CARIBBEAN CULTURE HISTORY

William F. Keegan Florida Museum of Natural History P.O. Box 117800 University of Florida Gainesville, Florida 32611 [email protected]

Abstract Boundary-work is a term introduced by sociologists of science to recognize the initial defini- tion of a field of scientific inquiry, while reputational systems are the manner in which these inquiries are hierarchically stratified. The present paper explores the ways that these have been used to delimit and structure the investigation of culture history in the prehistoric insu- lar Caribbean. This inquiry demonstrates that representations of culture history are a prod- uct of historical contingencies within the discipline of Caribbean archaeology and not nec- essarily an accurate portrait of human movements into and within the islands.

Résumé Le concept de “travail frontière” (Boundary work) a été introduit par les sociologues des sciences pour définir les bornes initiales d’un champ de recherche scientifique, tandis que la notion de “systèmes de réputation” (reputational systems) désigne la manière dont cette re- cherche est hiérarchiquement stratifiée. Cet article examine la façon dont ces concepts ont été utilisés pour délimiter et structurer l’étude de l’histoire culturelle de la préhistoire cari- béenne. L’enquête menée démontre que les représentations de cette histoire culturelle sont le produit des contingences historiques que connaît l’archéologie caribéenne et pas nécessai- rement un tableau exact des mobilités humaines extra et intra-insulaires.

Resumen "Boundary-work" es un término introducido por sociólogos de ciencia para reconocer la definición inicial del campo de investigación científica, mientras que “reputational systems” es la manera a través de la cual la investigación está jerárquicamente estratificada. Este artículo explora las maneras como estos métodos han sido aplicado para delimitar y estructurar la investigación de historia cultural ("culture history") en el Caribe prehistórico insular. Esta investigación muestra como las representaciones de historia cultural son históricamente contingentes en la disciplina arqueológíca del Caribe y no necesariamente un reflejo exacto de movimientos poblacionales dentro y alrededor de las islas.

Introduction proper way to describe, predict, and ex- All sciences are faith-based organiza- plain the phenomena that fall within the tions. By this I mean that they all have ba- purview of a discipline. It all boils down to sic beliefs and assumptions concerning the epistemology and the philosophy of ar-

Journal of Caribbean Archaeology, Special Publication #3 2010 138 Boundary-work, Reputational Systems Keegan chaeology (Bell 1994; Salmon 1982; Schif- (2004) identified two meta-theories fer 1988; Wylie 1985) as reflected in the (paradigms) in Caribbean archaeology. We differences between conceptual systems suggest that neither of these is adequate for and archaeological practice (cf. Hodder accurately interpreting and understanding 1999; Keegan 2007a). the of the islands. One meta- One of the most influential writers on theory is a focus on Marxist notions of this topic is Thomas Kuhn (1962) who “modo de vida” (ways of life) that charac- identified what he called scientific terizes the majority of research by Hispanic “paradigms.” For him, science operates archaeologists (e.g., Moscoso 1986; Veloz under a particular set of rules (called para- Maggiolo 1976). Bradley Ensor (2000) ex- digms), and that science is often business amined this approach in detail, so it will as usual until sufficient evidence accumu- not be considered here. This paper will fo- lates to overthrow previous beliefs in a sci- cus on the culture-historical model devel- entific revolution. Since Kuhn, there has oped by Irving Rouse. Rouse’s (1992) been a dramatic growth in the field of Sci- paradigm has been the dominant approach ence Studies or Science and Technology in Caribbean archaeology for decades. The Studies (STS). Practitioners of this field time has come to examine the assumptions study what scientists do in comparison to and beliefs that underlie this belief system. what they say. Scientific research is not as objective as scientists would lead us to be- Boundary-work and Reputational Systems lieve. The work of science involves con- Boundary-work is a term introduced by tinuous feedback from the public, col- sociologists of science to recognize the ini- leagues, and funding agencies (Latour tial definition of a field of scientific in- 1999). Moreover, science often is more of quiry, while reputational systems are the an art than a strict adherence to some scien- manner in which these inquiries are hierar- tific method. chically stratified (Ramsden 2002). These Kuhn’s (1962) notion of paradigm was two concepts recognize that there are spe- quite vague, and several new concepts have cific ways of conducting research, that been added to clarify the concept. These there are limits to the range of subjects in- include “boundary-work” and “reputational cluded in such inquiries, and that there are systems” (Ramsdsen 2002). This paper ad- structures or rules of practice that define dresses the beliefs and assumptions that the manner in which such studies are con- underlie archaeological practice in the in- ducted. Although there are numerous ways sular Caribbean. To a large degree these to characterize the prehistory of the insular have gone unrecognized or unquestioned Caribbean, only some of these are accepted by the archaeologists who work in the re- by the archaeological community. For ex- gion. From the majority perspective, Carib- ample, we would immediately reject the archaeology has been business as absurd notion that space aliens were re- usual. However, many of our basic tenets sponsible for the development of human are the product of ancient debates as syn- . This interpretation is viewed thesized by one individual. These debates as outside the boundaries of scientific in- are relevant toward the goal of understand- quiry. ing the orientations of current studies, but A variety of different means for classify- in some cases they continue to hamper our ing and describing Caribbean prehistory ability to progress. have been developed over the years Recently, Keegan and Rodríguez Ramos (Petersen et al. 2004). Ripley Bullen

Journal of Caribbean Archaeology, Special Publication #3 2010 139 Boundary-work, Reputational Systems Keegan

(1964), Luis Chanlatte Baik (1981; historical school (Willey and Sabloff Chanlatte Baik and Narganes Storde 2005), 1974). Jacques Petitjean Roget (1970), Charles Rouse’s continuing influence is evident Hoffman (1963), and William Sears (Sears in debates during the 1950s and 1960s con- and Sullivan 1981) have all offered alterna- cerning the proper way to classify artifacts tive approaches to the one pursued by and cultures (e.g., Ford 1954; Hill and Ev- Rouse. Yet in the end, it is Rouse’s ap- ans 1971; Rouse 1960; Spaulding 1953). proach that has held sway. Moreover, He took a sabbatical in England where he Rouse (1972, 1978) has offered clear ex- completed the book An Introduction to planations of his hierarchical ordering of Prehistory: A Systematic Approach (Rouse investigations (reputational system). The 1972), and he recognized David Clarke point is that all of these approaches define (1978) as a kindred spirit in the effort to the data we need to collect and how these classify and order the past. His hierarchical should be interpreted. If you stray outside approach to writing the past is clearly the “boundaries,” then your work will be stated, and he went on to propose an over- rejected for not conforming to the all approach to archaeology in which spe- “reputational system.” cific aspects of the past must be examined in turn (Rouse 1978). According to Rouse, The Rousean Paradigm one needed to define time (chronology), When Rouse began conducting research space (geography), economy, social organi- in the Caribbean in the 1930s there was no zation, political organization, and ideology systematic method for relating the cultural in order. In other words, until you have remains on different islands (see Keegan tight chronological and spatial controls it 2007b). He created what is called the was impossible to address the higher-order “modal” approach, which focuses on par- categories of economy, society, and polity. ticular attributes, especially as these relate While each category of data is important, to the decoration of pottery (Rouse 1939). few would agree that we must climb this He developed this approach because most “ladder of inference” rung by rung. of the sites he worked on lacked clear natu- Rouse recognized the need to consider ral or cultural strata, and because most of language, biology, material culture, and the artifacts were potsherds that lacked spe- ethnohistory together in order to accurately cific evidence for the shape of the original describe a prehistoric culture we need vessel (see Siegel 1996). His approach was (Rouse 1992). At the time, relevant studies based on the McKern Midwestern Taxo- of language and biology were in their in- nomic System, and on his training in for- fancy, and he focused his attention on ma- estry. In sum, he attempted to combine the terial culture and ethnohistory. With regard Linnaean classification used in biology to ethnohistory he was somewhat ham- (Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, pered by the attitudes of his day in which Genus, species) with the archaeological the written record was taken as fact. More classification developed by McKern. His recent work has identified issues with the efforts were so successful that Willey and Spanish chroniclers who wrote about the Sabloff (1974), in A History of American native peoples. It has become increasingly Archaeology, placed Rouse at the base of apparent that they did not really understand the tree they used to describe the develop- Taíno societies, that their interpretations ment of American archaeology. Rouse was were based on the characteristics of Span- the founding father of the classificatory- ish culture, and that their writings often

Journal of Caribbean Archaeology, Special Publication #3 2010 140 Boundary-work, Reputational Systems Keegan served political agendas. With regard to were expected to work within the bounda- material culture, Rouse focused on ceram- ries he established. ics and on identifying particular character- Rouse’s approach begins by defining istics on potsherds (“modes”) as a means local styles based on a set of attributes de- for identifying “peoples and cultures.” He fined as “modes.” These local styles are believed that modes reflected the mindset situated in time and space, and are then of the peoples who manufactured them, an grouped into “series” that share a substan- approach that received the pejorative label tial number of modes (see Curet 2004). of “normative” archaeology (see Binford These series represent groups of “peoples 1965). and cultures” that share a common identity Rouse (1939) recognized both behavioral and ancestry. The first site at which a par- (functional) and cognitive aspects to the ticular style was identified determines the production of material culture. He was name for these styles and series. This prac- among the first to adopt the “scientific tice follows what Rouse learned from bio- method,” although he erroneously assumed logical taxonomy, and unfortunately has that there were only two possible hypothe- caused much confusion among those trying ses and that if one was disproved the other to use this system. There is a tendency in was proved. He recognized that all ele- archaeology to consider the site used to ments of material culture needed to be name a style as the ‘type site’ (meaning the studied, albeit he focused his attention on site at which the most characteristic modes the attributes of ceramics. Finally, he or attributes are present), but several of the sought multiple levels of analysis, origi- named styles and series actually come from nally two – style and series. He developed atypical sites at which the style just hap- a comprehensive framework for investigat- pened to be present and was found first. ing the past. Yet, despite his efforts to ap- For example, the Saladero site for which ply his approach on an international scale the series is named actually is (Rouse 1986), the insular Caribbean is the dominated by Barrancas style pottery and only place it has been adopted and main- the Saladoid component is an intrusive pit tained (cf. Kirch 1978). (Barse 2009). Also, the Troumassoid series It is necessary to recognize a fundamen- is named for the Troumassée site on Saint tal flaw in his thinking. Rouse believed that Lucia where the materials also were exca- there was only one “right way” to do ar- vated from a large pit (McKusick 1960). In chaeology. As he told Peter Siegel: “As I sum, these sites are not characteristic of the look back, I’m impressed by the fact that styles or series, but simply reflect the first archaeology in the 1960s had reached the site at which they were identified. same of maturity in classification that Rouse conducted research in Haiti biology had reached when I was an under- (Rouse 1939, 1941), Puerto Rico (1952a, graduate” (Siegel 1996:672). “Just before 1952b; Rouse and Alegría 1990), Cuba the revolution in archaeology took place, (Rouse 1942), Trinidad (Bullbrook 1953), archaeologists had a very high prestige in (Rouse and Cruxent 1963) and the discipline of anthropology because we Antigua (Rouse and Morse 1999). His stu- knew what we wanted to do. Then Binford dents investigated Saint Lucia (McKusick and his generation destroyed all 1960), Jamaica (Howard 1950), Martinique that“ (Siegel 1996:677). Thus, his ap- (Allaire 1977), and the Cuban Archaic proach was the only correct reputational (Hahn 1961). The evidence from these and system, and all Caribbean archaeologists other studies were used to construct his

Journal of Caribbean Archaeology, Special Publication #3 2010 141 Boundary-work, Reputational Systems Keegan time-space diagram for the Caribbean. In ples. every case, the classification of peoples Rouse contributed articles to Julian and cultures was based on Rouse’s beliefs Steward’s Handbook of South American regarding the prehistoric colonization of Indians on The Arawaks and The Caribs of the Antilles. the West Indies (Rouse 1948a, 1948b; The emphasis on local styles and re- Steward 1946). Steward recognized that he gional series produced a two-tier hierarchy. needed a way to organized the six volumes The key factor in Rouse’s analysis was and to classify these native groups. He de- documenting a linear sequence in which all veloped a four-part schema that identified subsequent developments in the insular Marginal Tribes, Tropical Forest Cultures, Caribbean derived from a single source. Circum-Caribbean Chiefdoms, and Andean This taxonomy quickly ran into problems, Civilizations. According to Steward, the with the nudge coming from Luis Circum-Caribbean Chiefdoms, including Chanlatte’s (1981) Huecoid. If each of the Taínos (nee Island Arawaks), were de- these series, identified with –oid as the suf- rived from Andean Civilizations by people fix, were distinct groups of “peoples and who spread along the Caribbean littoral and cultures,” then where did they come from? into the Antilles (Steward and Faron 1959). Several archaeologists suggested that they Rouse (1953) rejected that notion, and represent different migrations of peoples set out to prove that the Taínos were a cul- into the islands (e.g., Veloz Maggiolo ture unique to the Caribbean that had not 1991; Zucchi 1990). developed through outside influences. In- These multiple migration hypotheses stead, he traced the origins of the Ceramic contradicted Rouse’s most cherished be- Age Caribbean to lowland South America liefs. Therefore, he adopted a suggestion and peoples living along the Orinoco River by Gary Vescelius and added a “subseries” in eastern Venezuela. Over the years he to his model. Subseries are noted by the strongly defended this position, despite use of –an as a suffix. The result was that counter arguments from James Ford the separate and distinct Ostionoid, Meilla- (1969), Betty Meggers and Clifford Evans coid, and Chicoid series were transformed (1983), and Donald Lathrap (1970). His into Ostionan, Meillacan, and Chican sub- assertions were supported by the discovery series of the Ostionoid series. Thus, there of potsherds decorated in what would be could not possibly be different “peoples called the Saladoid series at the site of and cultures” arriving from different places Saladero on the lower Orinoco, and similar when they all developed from the same ce- pottery at Wonotobo Falls in western Suri- ramic tradition. name (Boomert 1983; Rouse 1992). Thus, while Steward’s followers proposed that Establishing the Boundaries people moving along the north coast of As STS scholars have pointed out, every South America settled the Caribbean is- discipline has boundaries within which lands, Rouse placed their origins in the their research is contained. Two fundamen- lowlands and along the east coast of Vene- tal “laws” of insular Caribbean culture his- zuela, the Guianas, and Trinidad where the tory were established in the 1940s and Orinoco drains into the Atlantic Ocean. early 1950s. The first was that insular Car- After concluding that coastal South and ibbean peoples came from lowland South Central American peoples were not in- America. The second was that there was volved in the colonization of the insular only one migration of Ceramic Age peo- Caribbean (they came instead from low-

Journal of Caribbean Archaeology, Special Publication #3 2010 142 Boundary-work, Reputational Systems Keegan land South America and the Orinoco ba- All of these migrations have been re- sin), he turned his attention to a new threat jected by Rouse, and in his culture history to his beliefs. Rouse initially worked with the islands were hermetically sealed from Froelich Rainey in Haiti (Rainey 1941; outside incursions. Rouse did recognize Rouse 1939, 1941) and then followed that the peoples of the insular Caribbean Rainey in his research in Puerto Rico probably were in contact with their (Rainey 1940; Rouse 1952a, 1952b). neighbors on the surrounding mainland. Rainey identified two cultures in Puerto However, he was never willing to accept Rico. A “crab culture” (Saladoid) based on that any other mainland peoples migrated the high incidence of crab claws in the de- to the islands after the initial Saladoid posits, and a “shell culture” (Ostionoid) (Rouse 1986, 1992). As he expressed it based on the high incidence of marine bi- (Siegel 1996:682): “My efforts have been valves in the deposits. Rainey (1940) pro- largely devoted to trying to counteract the posed that these cultures represented sepa- assumption that everything had to come in rate migrations into the islands based on from outside”. their stratigraphic position at the Cañas site in Puerto Rico, and the very different ap- The Reputational System pearance of the pottery recovered (see There are at least seven key assumptions Rodríguez Ramos 2005). Rouse rejected that underlie the classification scheme now Rainey’s interpretation, and proposed that employed for the insular Caribbean. Many this situation actually reflected a gradual of these beliefs have gone unrecognized, transition from one to the other (Rouse and investigators who violate these as- 1952a, 1952b; see Siegel 1996). sumptions are viewed as operating outside It is not clear the degree to which the reputational system. The current system Rouse’s interpretation reflected the ar- amounts to dogma, based on the best ef- chaeological evidence, his belief in the forts of one archaeologist. The time has uniqueness of insular Caribbean prehistory, come to recognize these assumptions and or personal animosity toward Rainey. It is beliefs, and to give them the scrutiny they absolutely clear in Rainey’s (1992) book deserve. We need to redefine our bounda- Reflections of a Digger that he and Rouse ries, and reform the reputational system. did not particularly like each other. There First, when Caribbean archaeology was potentially is a subjective element here that first systematized there were two theories we no longer can explore (see Keegan concerning the migration of peoples into 2007b; Siegel 1996). In any event, Rouse the Antilles. Julian Steward, and others, maintained his belief in the uniqueness of argued that the origins of Caribbean peo- insular Caribbean cultures, and refused to ples could be traced to the expansion of accept that there were other migrations peoples out of the and along the (Rouse 1992). Other archaeologists also Caribbean coast of South America have proposed separate migrations into the (Circum-Caribbean Theory). Rouse re- islands. Luis Chanlatte (1981) proposed an jected this theory and instead proposed that Agro-I (or Huecoid) migration, Marcio Caribbean peoples originated in lowland Veloz Maggiolo (1991) has suggested a South America along the banks of the Ori- Meillacoid migration from , and noco River. In contrast, recent evidence Alberta Zucchi (1990) has proposed a indicates strong ties between the islands Cedeñoid migration from coastal, western and the Isthmo-Colombian region of South Venezuela. and Central America (Rodríguez Ramos

Journal of Caribbean Archaeology, Special Publication #3 2010 143 Boundary-work, Reputational Systems Keegan

2010; Rodríguez Ramos and Pagán Jimé- The pottery vessels from la Hueca repre- nez 2007; Wilson 2007a). Moreover, sent a completely different ceramic tradi- Saladoid deposits at the Saladero site in tion (Chanlatte Baik and Narganes Storde Venezuela date to after AD 1000 (Barse 2005), and the lithic artifacts are very dif- 2009). How is it possible that a site dating ferent from those in typical Saladoid sites to AD 1000 was the precursor of sites dat- (Rodríguez Ramos 2005). This situation ing to as early as 400 BC in the central needs to be explained, and not simply clas- Caribbean? The distribution and move- sified. ments of peoples on the South American Third, it is assumed that pottery decora- mainland require more detailed study be- tion is adequate to define different peoples fore overwater exchanges can be defined and cultures. Rouse (1992) did recognize more accurately (Heckenberger 2002; the need to include language, biology, and Lathrap 1970; Zucchi 2002). other items of material culture in these A subset of this assumption is that peo- definitions. However, in many cases, these ples spread through the stepping-stone is- other aspects of culture have simply been lands of the Lesser Antilles until they added as frosting to the established frame- reached Puerto Rico, where their progress work. We need to consider all of these ele- was halted (Rouse 1986, 1992). New evi- ments to redefine the peoples and cultures dence suggests that the Windward Islands of the prehistoric Caribbean. were by-passed during the initial migra- Fourth, it is assumed that Ceramic Age tions (Fitzpatrick 2006; Keegan 2004), and cultures developed in a linear sequence. that a direct jump across the Caribbean was The original formulation is like the biblical not only likely, but was the most efficient accounting of genealogies – Saladoid begat route (Callaghan 2001, 2010). We need to Huecoid, Troumassoid, Elenoid and reconsider the source(s) and migration Ostionoid, Troumassoid begat Suazoid, routes for the earliest colonists. The time Ostionoid begat Meillacoid, and Meillacoid has come to reexamine the Circum- begat Chicoid. The classification of these Caribbean Theory. material expressions as distinct “series of Second, it is assumed that there was only peoples and cultures” undercut the assump- one migration of Ceramic Age peoples into tion that one had developed from the other. the Antilles. This assumption forms the Other archaeologists looked outside the basis for identifying all later Ceramic Age Caribbean for the sources of these of these styles as developing from the previous series, but because migrations were not al- style in a unilinear sequence. New evi- lowed, Rouse needed to change the system. dence suggests that this was not the case, He did so by adopting Gary Vescelius’ and the possibility of multiple migrations suggestion that subseries be added between and contacts between the islands and a va- style and series. Thus, Ostionoid became riety of places in South and Central Amer- the parent class and the other series were ica need to be considered. A case in point relegated to subseries status as part of a is Luis Chanlatte’s (1981) identification of singular line of development – Ostionan, a completely different ceramic and lithic Elenan, Meillacan, and Chican Ostionoid. inventory at the site of La Hueca on If you compare the characteristics of these Vieques Island off the east coast of Puerto pottery styles, it is hard to believe that they Rico (Rodríguez Ramos 2005, 2010). The all developed in a linear sequence from a bottom line is that la Hueca is a distinct single tradition (Figures 1, 2, and 3 from and contemporaneous cultural expression. Keegan 2007a).

Journal of Caribbean Archaeology, Special Publication #3 2010 144 Boundary-work, Reputational Systems Keegan

We need to look carefully at the possibil- cal styles, and more than just decorative ity of multiple migrations, and/or the diffu- techniques. There are a variety of new ap- sion of people, goods, and ideas from in- proaches to the study of ceramics, includ- side and outside the insular Caribbean. For ing whole vessel analysis (Donop 2007; example, the evidence from Jamaica indi- Espenshade 2000); ethnotypology (Harris cates that there were two separate migra- 1995), and various techniues for sourcing tions to the island, one by Ostionan peoples and use-wear analysis (Descantes et al. and one by Meillacan peoples (Keegan and 2008). These approaches need to be added Atkinson 2006); the origins of the Huecoid to the current emphasis on modal analysis. remain obscure (Chanlatte Baik 1981; Fifth, the time-space diagrams are based Chanlatte Baik and Narganes Storde 2005), on the assumption of hard-and-fast bounda- and the Meillacoid does have striking re- ries. For example, in Hispaniola the semblances to pottery manufactured at the Ostionoid begins around AD 500, it ends same time in Colombia (Veloz Maggiolo around AD 800 when the Meillacoid be- 1991) and western Venezuela (Zucchi gins, which in turn ends around AD 1200 2002). It is possible that one developed when the Chicoid begins. Yet we now from the other, but this needs to be proven know that each of these series began and and not simply assumed (Keegan 2001). ended at different times in different places The focus has been on similarities as a way (Keegan 2001, 2004). Some groups were of demonstrating continuity in cultural de- conservative and maintained the old ways velopment. The time has come to empha- of doing things (Oliver 1995), while others size differences. This change in emphasis were more precocious in adopting new will require a more concerted focus on lo- styles and practices. We need to stop using

Figure 1. Ostionan pottery. Caribbean collection, Florida Museum of Natural History.

Journal of Caribbean Archaeology, Special Publication #3 2010 145 Boundary-work, Reputational Systems Keegan

Figure 2. Meillacan pottery. Caribbean collection, Florida Museum of Natural History.

Figure 3. Chican pottery. Caribbean collection, Florida Museum of Natural History.

Journal of Caribbean Archaeology, Special Publication #3 2010 146 Boundary-work, Reputational Systems Keegan hard-and-fast temporal boundaries, and in- Ben Rouse developed a method for clas- stead adopt the method used in radiocarbon sifying archaeological materials that dating where there is a statistical range for greatly contributed to the Classificatory- different expressions of time and culture. Historical approach in American archae- Sixth, it is assumed that there were only ology, and established the basic framework three migrations into the Caribbean, and for the study of insular Caribbean culture that following each new migration the pre- history. By classifying material culture ac- vious inhabitants were displaced (Rouse cording to time-space systematics the es- 1992). Thus, the Lithic Age peoples were sential components of Caribbean archae- displaced by the Archaic Age peoples, who ology were for the first time organized in a were in turn displaced by the Ceramic Age systematic way. Yet no one, including peoples. There are several problems with Rouse, would accept that our initial formu- this assumption. It is no longer clear that lations will last forever. We are at the point there was a separate migration of Archaic at which similarities trump differences, and Age peoples (Callaghan 2010). It now ap- we have created generalized trends over pears that a ground-stone technology either space and through time to the point that diffused into the Caribbean or was inde- such generalities become meaningless. For pendently invented in the islands. There example, Rouse’s framework pigeonholes also is increasing evidence that Archaic cultures in time and space, despite increas- and Ceramic Age peoples interacted, that ing evidence that these boxes cannot con- Archaic peoples were making pottery long tain the variability evident in the archaeo- before the Ceramic Age peoples arrived, logical record. The native peoples of the and that the Ostionoid may actually have Caribbean did not all stop making a par- developed first among Archaic peoples ticular style of pottery and all change to a (Keegan 2006; Rodríguez Ramos 2005; new style at the same time. There is enor- Samson 2010). mous variability in styles even within the Seventh, it generally is accepted that ma- same time period. In addition, the calibra- terial culture is more similar across water tion of radiocarbon dates shows clearly that passages than across the breadth of a single a variety of different styles were made dur- large island (Watters and Rouse 1989). The ing the same time period (e.g., Davis classic example is Puerto Rico where the 1988). island was divided in half between a west- In the early days of Caribbean archae- ern Ostionan Ostionoid and an eastern Ele- ology there was not much data, and evi- nan Ostionoid. Yet the evidence shows that dence from one site often was used to char- these differences in subseries do not simply acterize an entire culture period. Thus, evi- bisect the island on a north/south axis dence of structures (houses) at the Golden (Torres 2009), and that there is a much Rock site in St. Eustatius were taken as more complicated distribution of ceramic characteristic of all Saladoid sites styles on the island (Rodríguez Ramos (Versteeg and Schinkel 1992), the commu- 2010). In sum, there probably are greater nity plan at Maisabel became the template similarities among groups living on either for all Saladoid sites and the notion of an- side of a water passage, but this does not cestor veneration was generalized to all exclude the possibility of equally complex Saladoid cultures (Siegel 1992; cf. Keegan distributions on the island itself. 2009), and the presence or absence of a single mode (e.g., white-on-red painted or Paradigm Shift zoned-incised-crosshatch) came to be em-

Journal of Caribbean Archaeology, Special Publication #3 2010 147 Boundary-work, Reputational Systems Keegan blematic of a particular ceramic series (Rouse 1948a, 1992). He then proposed which translated as a “people and culture”. (assumed) that their story began in lowland A major problem is that “modes” have South America (Rouse 1953, 1992). The never been prioritized so it is difficult to development of the Taíno became fossil- determine which modes are essential to the ized as a singular course of development, definition of a style. Do we need one, ten, and the time-space systematics was devel- one hundred? oped specifically to demonstrate unilinear Recent studies have shown dramatic dif- progress toward the ultimate (Taíno) out- ferences in the distribution of cultural char- come. Over the years this schema has been acteristics. These differences are especially tested, and has proved to be wanting. Yet apparent in specific items of material cul- many practitioners refuse to accept the con- ture such as duhos (Ostapkowicz 1997), trary data, and still cling to the old beliefs, three-pointed stones and stone collars while others assume it is business as usual. (McGinnis 1997; Walker 1997), ball courts The challenge today is to develop a new and stone-lined plazas (Wilson 2007a), paradigm that preserves enough of past for- lithics (Rodríguez Ramos 2005), and mulations to allow us to communicate, but “jewelry” (Chanlatte 1981). In sum, the moves us toward a more complete under- general characteristics that have been as- standing of the Taínos, their ancestors, and cribed to a singular culture are actually their neighbors. demonstrating that numerous cultures in- habited the Caribbean islands in the past Conclusions (Wilson 2007b). The same is true for lan- The burden of Caribbean archaeology does guage (Granberry and Vescelius 2004), not rest solely on the shoulders of Irving burial practices (Curet and Oliver 1998; Rouse. Sixty years ago Rouse set out to Hofman and Hoogland 2004; Keegan systematize the archaeology of a region 2009), and mobility and exchange (this col- that lacked any form of organization. He lection), especially between the peoples of developed a classificatory approach that the Greater and Lesser Antilles in the im- integrated the region and provided a foun- mediate pre-contact period (Hofman et al. dation for research. His was one of 2008). There is also new evidence concern- many approaches, and was found to be the ing biological differences (Coppa et al. most useful, at least in terms of the number 2008). In sum, the paradigm of homology of practitioners who adopted it (Wilson is finally on the verge of being replaced by 2007b). a paradigm of diversity (e.g., Curet 2003; We do need to recognize that he had par- Wilson 2007b). Should we expect any less ticular goals and objectives in mind. He for a region that, as the Jamaicans say: sought to prove that Caribbean peoples “Out of many, one people”? The key issue were not the product of migration and dif- for Caribbean archaeology today is to iden- fusion from the Andean area. He sought to tify the “many”. prove that the peoples of the islands were Real dangers in writing the past occur not the product of multiple migrations, and when you believe that you know the begin- he did so by defining a unilinear sequence ning and the end of the story, and then try of cultural development from the Saladoid to fill in the gaps. This is the situation we to the Taínos. He sought to prove that face with the dominant paradigm in Carib- every new cultural innovation (stone bean archaeology. Rouse defined Taíno blades, ground stone tools, ceramics) was culture based on ethnohistoric accounts the product of a separate migration and that

Journal of Caribbean Archaeology, Special Publication #3 2010 148 Boundary-work, Reputational Systems Keegan every new migration obliterated the previ- 1983 Saladoid Occupation of Wonotobo ous inhabitants. If you accept Rouse’s ap- Falls, Western Suriname. In Pro- proach, then you accept these fundamental ceedings of the IX International truths. Congress for the Study of Pre- Most Caribbean archaeologists do not Columbian Cultures of the Lesser explicitly acknowledge the objectives and Antilles, edited by L. Allaire and F.- goals toward which the regional culture- M. Mayer, pp. 97-120. Montreal: historical systematics were created. The Centre de Recherches Caraïbes, . assumptions that underlie the system must Bullbrook, J. A. be made explicit and carefully examined. 1953 On the Excavation of a Shell “Conservative arguments, as arguments, Mound at Palo Seco, Trinidad, ensure the maintenance of the status quo. B.W.I. Yale University Publica- There can be no scientific paradigm tions in Anthropology, No. 50. New shifts” (Pauketat 2007:44). It is my belief Haven: Yale University Press. that a critical examination of our reputa- Bullen, R. P. tional past is necessary to define new 1964 The archaeology of Grenada, West boundaries and a more encompassing repu- Indies. Contributions of the Florida tational system. State Museum, Social Sciences, no. 11. Gainesville:Florida State Mu- seum References Cited Callaghan, R. T. Allaire, L. 2001 Ceramic Age Seafaring and Interac- 1977 Later Prehistory in Martinique and tion Potential in the Antilles: A the Island Carib: Problems in Eth- Computer Simulation. Current An- nic Identity. Ph.D. dissertation, thropology 42: 308-313. Yale University. Ann Arbor: Uni- 2010 Crossing the Guadeloupe Passage versity Microfilms. in the Archaic Period. In Island Barse, W. P. Shores, Distant Pasts: New Per- 2009 Early Ronquin, Its Vessel Shapes, spectives on the Prehistoric Settle- Chronological Sequence, and ment of the Caribbean, edited by S. Broader Relationships. In Recent M. Fitzpatrick and A. H. Ross, pp. Caribbean Archaeological Re- 127-147. Gainesville: University search at the Peabody Museum Of Press of Florida. Natural History, Bulletin of the Chanlatte Baik, L. Peabody Museum of Natural His- 1981 La Hueca y Sorcé (Vieques, Puerto tory 50(1), edited by M. DaRos and Rico): Primeras Migraciones R. Colten, pp. 85-98. agroalfereras Antillanas. Santo Bell, J. A. Domingo: Taller. 1994 Reconstructing Prehistory: Scien- Chanlatte Baik, L., and Y. Nargannes tific Method in Archaeology. Phila- Storde delphia: Temple University Press. 2005 Cultura La Hueca: Finca Sorcé, Binford, L. R. Barrio La Hueca, Vieques. Recinto 1965 Archaeological Systematics and the de Río Piedras: Museo de Historia, Study of Culture Process. American Antropología y Arte, Universidad Antiquity 31: 203-210. de Puerto Rico. Boomert, A. Clarke, D. L.

Journal of Caribbean Archaeology, Special Publication #3 2010 149 Boundary-work, Reputational Systems Keegan

1978 Analytical Archaeology. Second 2007 A Reanalysis of Ripley P. Bullen’s Edition. New York: Columbia Uni- Savanne Suazey Ceramics. In Pro- versity Press. ceedings of the XXI Congress of the Coppa, A., A. Cucina, M. L. P. Hoogland, International Association for Car- M. Lucci, F. Luna Calderon, R. G. A. M. ibbean Archaeology, edited by B. Panhuysen, G. Tavarez María, R. Valcárcel Reid, H. Petitjean Roget and L. A. Rojas and R. Vargiu Curet, pp. 9-19. St. Augustine: Uni- 2008 New Evidence of Two Different versity of the West Indies, Trinidad. Migratory Waves in the Circum- Ensor, B. E. Caribbean Area During the Pre- 2000 Social Formations, Modo de Vida, Columbian Period from the Analy- and Conflict in Archaeology. sis of Dental Morphological Traits. American Antiquity 65: 15-42. In Crossing the Borders: New Ford, J. A. Methods and Techniques in the 1954 The Type Concept Revisited. Study of Archaeological Materials American Anthropologist 56: 12- from the Caribbean, edited by C. L. 54. Hofman, M. L. P. Hoogland and A. 1959 A Comparison of Formative Cul- L. van Gijn, pp. 195-213. Tusca- tures in the Americas: Diffusion or loosa: University of Alabama Press. the Psychic Unity of Man. Smith- Curet, L. A. sonian Contributions to Anthropol- 2003 Issues on the Diversity and Emer- ogy, No. 11. Washington, D.C.: gence of Middle-Range Societies of Smithsonian Institution Press. the Ancient Caribbean: A Critique. Fitzpatrick, S. M. Journal of Archaeological Re- 2006 A Critical Approach to 14C Dating search 11: 1-42. in the Caribbean: Using Chrono- 2004 Island Archaeology and Units of metric Hygiene to Evaluate Analysis in the Study of Ancient Chronological Control and Prehis- Caribbean Societies. In Voyages of toric Settlement. Latin American Discovery: The Archaeology of Is- Antiquity 17: 389-418. lands, edited by S. M. Fitzpatrick, Granberry, J., and G. S. Vescelius pp. 187-202. Westport: Praeger. 2004 Languages of the Pre-Columbian Curet, L. A., and J. R. Oliver Antilles. Tuscaloosa: University of 1998 Mortuary Practices, Social Devel- Alabama Press. opment, and Ideology in Precolum- Hahn, P. G. bian Puerto Rico. Latin American 1961 A Relative Chronology of the Cu- Antiquity 9: 217-239. ban Nonceramic Tradition. Ph.D. Descantes, C., R. J. Speakman, M. D. Glas- dissertation, Yale University. Ann cock, and M. T. Boulanger (eds) Arbor: University Microfilms. 2008 An Exploratory Study into the Heckenberger, M. J. Chemical Characterization of Car- 2002 Rethinking the Arawakan Diaspora: ibbean Ceramics. Journal of Carib- Hierarchy, Regionality, and the bean Archaeology, Special Publica- Amazonian Formative. In Com- tion Number 2. http:// parative Arawakan Histories: Re- www.flmnh.ufl.edu/JCA/ thinking Language Family and Cul- current.htm ture Area in Amazonia, edited by J. Donop, M. C. D. Hill and F. Santos-Granero, pp.

Journal of Caribbean Archaeology, Special Publication #3 2010 150 Boundary-work, Reputational Systems Keegan

99-122. Urbana: University of Illi- 1981 Artifacts in Archaeology: A Carib- nois Press. bean Case Study. MA thesis, Flor- Harris, P. O’B. ida Atlantic University, Boca 1995 Ethnotypology: The Basis for a Raton. New Classification of Caribbean 2001 Archaeological Investigations on Pottery. In Proceedings of the XVI Ile a Rat, Haiti: Avoid the –oid. In International Congress for Carib- Proceedings of the XVIII Interna- bean Archaeology, pp. 345-366. tional Congress for Caribbean Ar- Basse Terre: Conseil Régional de la chaeology, edited by l’Association Guadeloupe. Internationale d’Archéologie de la Hill, J. N., and R. K. Evans Caraïbe Région Guadeloupe, Mis- 1971 A Model for Classification and Ty- sion Archéologique, pp. 233-239. pology. In Models in Archaeology, Basse-Terre: l’Association Interna- edited by D. L. Clarke, pp. 231- tionale d’Archéologie de la Caraïbe 273. London: Metheun. Région Guadeloupe, Mission Ar- Hodder, I. chéologique. 1999 The Archaeological Process: An 2004 Islands of Chaos. In The Late Ce- Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell. ramic Age in the Eastern Carib- Hofman, C. L., and M. L. P. Hoogland bean, edited by André Delpuech 2004 Social Dynamics and Change in the and Corinne L. Hofman, pp. 33-44. Northern Lesser Antilles. In Late BAR International Series 1273. Ox- Ceramic Age Societies in the East- ford: British Archaeological Re- ern Caribbean, edited by A. ports. Delpuech and C. L. Hofman, pp. 2006 Archaic Influences in the Origins 47-58. BAR International Series and Development of Taino Socie- 1273. Oxford: British Archaeologi- ties. Caribbean Journal of Science cal Reports. 42 : 1-10. Hofman, C. L., A. J. Bright, M. L. P. 2007a Taíno Indian Myth and Practice: Hoogland and W. F. Keegan The Arrival of the Stranger King. 2008 Attractive Ideas, Desirable Goods: Gainesville: University Press of Examining the Late Ceramic Age Florida. Relationships between Greater and 2007b Benjamin Irving Rouse, 1913-2006. Lesser Antillean Societies. Journal Bibliographic Memoir, National of Island and Coastal Archaeology Academy of Sciences, Washington, 3: 17-34. D.C. (http://www.nasonline.org/ Hoffman Jr., C. A. site/PageServer?pagename=- 1963 Archaeological Investigations on MEMOIRS_R) Antigua, West Indies. M.A. thesis, 2009 Central Plaza Burials in Saladoid University of Florida, Gainesville. Puerto Rico: An Alternative Per- Howard, R. R. spective. Latin American Antiquity 1950 The Archaeology of Jamaica and 20(2): 375–385. Its position in Relation to Circum- Keegan, William F. and Lesley-Gail Atkin- Caribbean Culture. Ph.D. disserta- son tion, Yale University. Ann Arbor: 2006 The Development of Jamaican Pre- University Microfilms. history. In The Earliest Inhabi- Keegan, W. F. tants: The Dynamics of the Jamai-

Journal of Caribbean Archaeology, Special Publication #3 2010 151 Boundary-work, Reputational Systems Keegan

can Taino, edited by Lesley-Gail 1995 The Archaeology of Lower Camp Atkinson, pp. 13-33. University of site, Culebra Island: Understanding the West Indies Press, Jamaica. Variability in Peripheral Zones. In Keegan, W. F., and R. Rodríguez Ramos Proceedings of the XV International 2004 Sin Rodeos. El Caribe Ar- Congress for Caribbean Archae- queológico 8: 8-13. ology, edited by R. E. Alegría and Kirch, P. V. M. Rodríguez, pp. 485-500. San 1978 The Lapitoid Period in West Poly- Juan: Centro de Estudios nesia: Excavations and Survey in Avanzados de Puerto Rico y el Niuatoputapu, Tonga. Journal of Caribe. Field Archaeology 5: 1-13. Ostapkowicz, J. M. Kuhn, T. S. 1997 To be Seated with “Great Courtesy 1962 The Structure of Scientific Revolu- and Veneration”: Contextual As- tions. Chicago: University of Chi- pects of the Taíno Duho. In Taíno: cago Press. Pre-Columbian Art and Culture Lathrap, D. W. from the Caribbean, edited by F. 1970 The Upper Amazon. New York: Bercht, E. Brodsky, J. Alan Farmer Praeger. and D. Taylor, pp. 56-67. New Latour, B. York: The Monacelli Press. 1999 Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Re- Pauketat, T. R. ality of Science Studies. Cambridge: 2007 Chiefdoms and Other Archaeologi- Harvard University Press. cal Delusions. New York: AltaMira Meggers, B. J., and C. Evans Press. 1983 Lowland South America and the Petersen, J. B., C. L. Hofman, and L. A. Antilles. In Ancient South Ameri- Curet cans, edited by J. D. Jennings, pp. 2004 Time and Culture: Chronology and 287-335. San Francisco: W. H. Taxonomy in the Eastern Caribbean Freeman. and the Guianas. In Late Ceramic McGinnis, S. Age Societies in the Eastern Carib- 1997 Zemi Three-Pointer Stones. In bean, edited by A. Delpuech and C. Taíno: Pre-Columbian Art and Cul- L. Hofman, pp. 17-32. BAR Inter- ture from the Caribbean, edited by national Series 1273. Oxford: Brit- F. Bercht, E. Brodsky, J. Alan ish Archaeological Reports. Farmer and D. Taylor, pp. 92-105. Petitjean Roget, J. New York: The Monacelli Press. 1970 L’Archeologie Martiniquaise. McKusick, M. B. Parallèles 36/37: 4-10. 1960 The Distribution of Ceramic Styles Rainey, F. G. in the Lesser Antilles, West Indies. 1940 Puerto Rican Archaeology. In Sci- Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University. entific Survey of Porto Rico and the Ann Arbor: University Microfilms. Virgin Islands vol. 18, part 1. New Moscoso, F. York: New York Academy of Sci- 1986 Tribu y Clases en el Caribe ences. Antiguo. Universidad Central del 1992 Reflections of a Digger: Fifty Years Este: San Pedro de Macoris. of Archaeology. Philadelphia: Uni- versity of Pennsylvania Press. Oliver, J. R. Ramsden, E.

Journal of Caribbean Archaeology, Special Publication #3 2010 152 Boundary-work, Reputational Systems Keegan

2002 Carving Up Population Science: 1948b The Carib. In Handbook of South Eugenics, Demography and the American Indians, vol. 4: The Controversy over the ‘Biological Circum-Caribbean Tribes, edited Law’ of Population Growth. Social by J. H. Steward, pp. 547-565. Studies of Science 32: 857-899. Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Rodríguez Ramos, R. American Ethnology. 2005 The Crab-Shell Dichotomy Revis- 1952a Porto Rican Prehistory. Introduc- ited: The Lithics Speak Out. In An- tion: Excavations in the West and cient Borinquen: Archaeology and North. In Scientific Survey of Porto Ethnohistory of Native Puerto Rico, Rico and the Virgin Islands, vol. 18: edited by P. E. Siegel, pp. 1-54. pp. 307-460. New York: New York Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Academy of Sciences. Press. 1952b Porto Rican Prehistory. Excavations 2010 Rethinking Puerto Rican Precolo- in the Interior, South, and East: nial History. Tuscaloosa: Univer- Chronological Implications. In Sci- sity of Alabama Press. entific Survey of Porto Rico and the Rodríguez Ramos, R., and J. R. Pagán Virgin Islands, vol. 18: pp. 463- Jiménez 578. New York: New York Acad- 2007 Las Antillas en el Contexto del emy of Sciences. Circun-Caribe: Cincuenta Años 1953 The Circum-Caribbean Theory: An Después. In Proceedings of XXI Archaeological Test. American An- Congress of the International Asso- thropologist 55: 188-200. ciation for Caribbean Archaeology, 1960 The Classification of Artifacts in edited by B. Reid, H. Petitjean Ro- Archaeology. American Antiquity get and L. A. Curet, pp. 778-786. 25: 313-323. St. Augustine: University of the 1972 Introduction to Prehistory: A Sys- West Indies, Trinidad. tematic Approach. New York: Rouse, I. McGraw-Hill. 1939 Prehistory in Haiti: A Study in 1977 Pattern and Process in West Indian Method. Yale University Publica- Archaeology. World Archaeology tions in Anthropology, No. 21. New 9: 1-11. Haven: Yale University Press. 1986 Migrations in Prehistory: Inferring 1941 Culture of the Ft. Liberté Region, Population Movements from Cul- Haiti. Yale University Publications tural Remains. New Haven: Yale in Anthropology, Nos. 23 and 24. University Press. New Haven: Yale University Press. 1992 The Tainos: Rise and Decline of the 1942 Archaeology of the Maniabon Hills, People who Greeted Columbus. Cuba. Yale University Publications New Haven: Yale University Press. in Anthropology, No. 26. New Ha- Rouse, I., and R. E. Alegría ven: Yale University Press. 1990 Excavations at María de la Cruz 1948a The Arawak. In Handbook of South Cave and Hacienda Grande Village American Indians, vol. 4: The Site, Loíza, Puerto Rico. Yale Uni- Circum-Caribbean Tribes, edited versity Publications in Anthropol- by J. H. Steward, pp. 507-546. ogy, No. 80. New Haven: Yale Uni- Washington, D.C.: Bureau of versity Press. American Ethnology. Rouse, I., and J. M. Cruxent

Journal of Caribbean Archaeology, Special Publication #3 2010 153 Boundary-work, Reputational Systems Keegan

1963 Venezuelan Archaeology. New Ha- New York: McGraw-Hill. ven: Yale University Press. Veloz Maggiolo, M. Rouse, I., and B. Faber Morse 1976 Medioambiente y Adaptacion 1999 Excavations at the Indian Creek Humana en la Prehistoria de Santo Site, Antigua, West Indies. Yale Domingo. Santo Domingo: University Publications in Anthro- Editoria Taller. pology, No. 82. New Haven: Yale 1991 Panorama Histórico del Caribe University Press. Precolombino. Santo Domingo: Salmon, M. H. Edición del Banco Central de la 1982 Philosophy and Archaeology. New República Dominicana. York: Academic Press. Versteeg, A. H., and K. Schinkel (eds) Samson, Alice V. M. 1992 The Archaeology of St. Eustatius: 2010 Renewing the House: Trajectories The Golden Rock Site. Publications of Social Life in the Yucayeque of the St. Eustatius Historical Foun- (Community) of El Cabo, Higüey. dation 2/Publications of the Foun- Dominican Republic, AD 800 to dation for Historical Research in 1504. Ph.D. Dissertation, Faculty of the Caribbean 131. St. Eustatius/ Archaeology, Leiden University. Amsterdam: St. Eustatius Historical Leiden: Sidestone Press. Foundation/The Foundation for Sears, W. H., and S. D. Sullivan Historical Research in the Carib- 1978 Bahamas Prehistory. American An- bean. tiquity 43: 3-25. Walker, J. B. Schiffer, M. B. 1997 Taíno Stone Collars, Elbow Stones, 1988 The Structure of Archaeological and Three-Pointers. In Taíno: Pre- Theory. American Antiquity 53: Columbian Art and Culture from 461-485. the Caribbean, edited by F. Bercht, Siegel, P. E. E. Brodsky, J. Alan Farmer and D. 1992 Ideology, Power, and Social Com- Taylor, pp. 80-91. New York: The plexity in Prehistoric Puerto Rico. Monacelli Press. Ph.D. dissertation, State University Watters, D. R., and I. Rouse of New York, Binghamton. Ann 1989 Environmental Diversity and Mari- Arbor: University Microfilms. time Adaptations in the Caribbean 1996 An Interview with Irving Rouse. Area. In Early Ceramic Population Current Anthropology 37: 671-689. Lifeways and Adaptive Strategies in Spaulding, A. C. the Caribbean, edited by P. E. 1953 Statistical Techniques for the Dis- Siegel, pp. 129-144. BAR Interna- covery of Artifact Types. American tional Series 506. Oxford: British Antiquity 18: 305-313. Archaeological Reports. Steward, J. H. Willey, G., and J. Sabloff 1946 Introduction. In Handbook of South 1974 A History of American Archae- American Indians, vol. 1: The Mar- ology. San Francisco: Freeman and ginal Tribes, edited by J. H. Stew- Sons. ard, pp. 1-9. Washington, D.C.: Wilson, S. M. Bureau of American Ethnology. 2007a Stone Pavements, Roads and Enclo- Steward, J. H., and L. C. Faron sures in Central America and the 1959 Native Peoples of South America. Caribbean. In Proceedings of XXI

Journal of Caribbean Archaeology, Special Publication #3 2010 154 Boundary-work, Reputational Systems Keegan

Congress of the International Asso- ciation for Caribbean Archaeology, edited by B. Reid, H. Petitjean Ro- get and L. A. Curet, pp. 381-389. St. Augustine: University of the West Indies, Trinidad. 2007b The Archaeology of the Caribbean. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wylie, M. A. 1985 Between Philosophy and Archaeology. American Antiquity 50: 478-490. Zucchi, A. 1990 La Serie Meillacoide y Sus Relaciones con la Cuenta del Orinoco. In Proceedings of the XI Congress of the International Asso- ciation for Caribbean Archaeology, edited by A. G. Pantel, I. Vargas and M. Sanoja Obediente, pp. 272- 286. San Juan: La Fundación Ar- queológica, Anthropológica e Histórica. 2002 A New Model of the Northern Ara- wakan Expansion. In Comparative Arawakan Histories: Rethinking Language Family and Culture Area in Amazonia, edited by J. D. Hill and F. Santos-Granero, pp. 199- 222. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Journal of Caribbean Archaeology, Special Publication #3 2010 155