Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Janetskitrade JAA2002
Janetskitrade JAA2002
net/publication/222328382
CITATIONS READS
27 997
1 author:
Joel C. Janetski
Brigham Young University - Provo Main Campus
54 PUBLICATIONS 826 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Joel C. Janetski on 15 May 2019.
Received 9 March 2001; revision received 26 September 2001; accepted 5 February 2002
Abstract
Marine shell, turquoise, exotic ceramics, and toolstone, and raw minerals are common in archaeological
assemblages generated by the Fremont, small scale farmers and foragers who occupied the eastern Great
Basin and Colorado Plateau of western North American between AD 400 and 1300. Although researchers
routinely describe such artifacts, little attention been paid to the means whereby these items were acquired
or the implications those mechanisms have for understanding Fremont socio-economic patterns and re-
lations. This paper presents the spatial patterning of both local and exotic goods from Fremont occupa-
tions and offers a range of social contexts for exchange as well as contrasts with Virgin Anasazi contexts for
such goods. A trade fair/festival model is proposed as an important mechanism or context for the dis-
tribution of exotics at Fremont sites. Ó 2002 Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.
0278-4165/02/$ - see front matter Ó 2002 Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 2 7 8 - 4 1 6 5 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 0 3 - X
J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370 345
Basin/Colorado Plateau region: the Sun Dance exchange relations which illustrate ecologically
(Ute), Datura ceremony (Southern Paiute/Chem- complementary or mutualistic relationships as in
ehuevi), Bear Dance (Ute), Girl’s Dance (Washo) both cases garden produce of farmers moved
all concluded with feasting (see Jorgenson, 1986 against meat and hides brought by hunters
for brief descriptions). The social, political, and (Spielmann, 1991; see also discussion of feasting
economic blended on these occasions. as related to ritual as well as long distance ex-
A functional aspect of this blending is exchange change in Potter, 2000 and references therein).
relations as a means of risk reduction (Cashden, Likewise, Huron farmers of the Great Lakes re-
1990; Wiessner, 1982). The uncertainties of life gion maintained multiple exchange relations with
among hunter-gatherers and subsistence farmers Iroquois to the south and Algonkian peoples to
required the maintenance of fall-back strategies, the north to obtain locally scarce meat, fish, and
often including exchange for food, either indirectly hides or additional maize supplies (O’Shea, 1989).
or directly. Sahlins has argued that food moved Davis (1974, p. 11) notes that food was the class of
mostly in generalized rather than balanced ex- materials most frequently traded by native Cali-
change. He states as principle ‘‘. . .one does not fornians, although the ecological differences of
exchange things for food, not directly that is, those trading is not immediately apparent. Clearly
among friends and relatives. Traffic in food is food was a common component in traditional
traffic between foreign interests.’’ (Sahlins, 1972, exchange between and among farmers and hunt-
p. 216). Spencer’s account of restrictions on trade ing and gathering peoples, although protocols
in food among the Alaskan Eskimo illustrates this varied with social circumstances [Winterhalder
notion: (1997) also points out that food is, at times, an
exchange item and argues for understanding
Again, the feeling was present that to trade for exchange in material terms]. Ford (1983, pp. 715–
food was reprehensible, but since each setting
717) provides excellent insights into subtle shifts
had its own specialties, this attitude was in some
in expectations as goods or services were provided
measure obviated. . .The pattern with respect to
food was less concerned with formal exchange. It for relatives, friends, nonrelatives but fellow
was used to cement good relations between part- villagers, and those from other villages or tribes.
ners and when given as a gift, the notion of trading In summary, exchange was embedded in the
for food was avoided. (Spencer, 1976, p. 199) social and economic fabric of band and segmen-
tary societies. It enriched lives socially and made
Spencer’s statement that ‘‘each setting had its life more secure by reducing hostilities and the risk
own specialties’’ anticipates circumstances of shortfalls of both food and non-food items.
wherein food would be an exchange commodity: Exchange cemented relations and obligated re-
ecologically or economically contrasting regions. cipients to offer hospitality to givers. Material
Ethnographic examples of trade flourishing in evidences of traveled goods should conjure up
such circumstances suggest the importance of images of such activities. The archaeological evi-
food as a commodity but expectations varied with dence of exchange is highly variable and neces-
social distance. Indirect trafficking in food was sarily under represents the extent of such
practiced by !Kung hunter-gatherers through behavior, since perishable trade items (especially
hxaro exchange (Lee, 1979; Wiessner, 1982). This food) are usually invisible in the archaeological
system provided access to alternative resource record. However, the presence of non-local ma-
areas and maintained obligations to even out terials in excavated assemblages provide an em-
differences in resource abundance in times of lo- pirical base for discussing the direction and
calized shortfalls. In this system socio-economic mechanisms for Fremont trade, both long dis-
relations were maintained through delayed return tance and more local or regional.
gifting that anticipated future need. Although
non-food gifts were common, the importance of
considering location in choosing partners em- Exchange mechanisms: some ethnographic exam-
phasizes food sharing as a critical component of ples in Western North America
the system (Wiessner, 1982, p. 74).
Direct trade in food is most evident when, in Several models that describe mechanisms and
contrast to the !kung gift exchange, consumables social contexts of prehistoric exchange are present
cross ethnic boundaries. Examples include in the ethnographic literature for western North
the Mandan/Arikara-Plains and Plains-Pueblo America and provide potential analogues for the
J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370 347
Fremont case. Hughes and Bennyhoff (1986), for partner relations with individuals in distant vil-
example, discuss exchange for the ethnographic lages. Ford (1983) explores interesting ecological,
Great Basin and conclude that exchange here was economic, and social nuances of these patterns,
accomplished either by casual bartering between but it is clear that exchange was important and
individuals or during festivals. The ubiquity of well-developed in the ethnographic Southwest.
casual bartering is suggested by the journals of The complexity and range of mechanisms op-
early Spanish explorers Dominguez and Escalante erating in the ethnographic Great Basin and
(Warner, 1976). Southern Paiute in the St. George Southwest are daunting to archaeologists at-
area, for example, wanted to trade strings of tur- tempting to understand past exchange patterns. It
quoise and shell and told the Spanish that their seems that patterning might be most visible over
nets had been obtained through trade from groups large regions which, in turn, suggests that the
to the south (Warner, 1976, p. 81). These accounts ethnographic mechanisms that facilitated long
suggest some trade occurred on a simple encounter distance trade, or trade between tribes (see Ford’s
basis without formal or elaborated circumstances. examples above), might provide the most testable
Such exchange would suggest a down-the-line analogues. A discussion of both regional and in-
model of goods moving from person to person tracommunity exchange mechanisms is offered
with only a few having direct access to the source below.
of the goods. However, Hughes and Bennyhoff
(1986, p. 238) state that most traditional trade Long distance exchange: trade festivals
activities took place during more organized festi-
vals (see below). The social and economic events termed trade
Given the suggestion of Southwest influences fairs are widely documented in Australia, Alaska,
in the Fremont area, documented exchange California (Jackson, 1991; Wood, 1980), and
mechanisms for Puebloan and Athapaskan peo- closer to the Great Basin, at the Big Camas Prairie
ples to the south of the Fremont are of interest. on the Snake River (cf. Murphy and Murphy,
Ford (1983) has described a complex system of 1960; Statham, 1982; Steward, 1938). In more
exchange in the Southwest intertwined with social complex societies, feasting and trading festivals
relations, social distance, and scale. He notes that took on a competitive air and a means for build-
mechanisms or modes of exchange shift depend- ing prestige and status (various in Hayden, 1992,
ing on whether trade is occurring within commu- 1995) or a combination of prestige building and
nities, between communities, or between tribes risk reduction (Upham, 1982, p. 122). Accompa-
(Ford, 1983, p. 715). ‘‘Mutual assistance, gam- nying the feasting and bartering were the usual
bling and gaming, ceremonial redistribution, and social activities of sweat bathing, gambling, races,
trading parties’’ are identified as mechanisms for and dances. Trade fairs or festivals lasted several
intravillage exchange. Mutual assistance or shar- days and were undoubtedly high points of the
ing along with community gambling were the year for the participants.
most common exchange activities within the vil- Ford (1983; see also various in Spielmann,
lage, although gambling was clearly very impor- 1991) identifies festivals or trade fairs as impor-
tant during trade fairs as well (see below). tant mechanisms for both intervillage and long
Ceremonial redistribution (the giving of gifts distance exchange in the Southwest. Trade fairs
during life events such as birth, puberty ceremo- were held at Taos and Pecos as well as other
nies, marriage, and death) occurred less often, but pueblos and were attended by various nomadic
was important in establishing social or political groups (Comanche, Apache, etc). Here traditional
positions of prestige by lineage leaders (see enemies met together under truce to exchange
McGuire, 1995, p. 49). Trading parties, a ‘‘quasi- goods, especially foodstuffs, but also objects nec-
market’’ held within Hopi villages, seems peculiar essary for ritual activities (Ford, 1983; Simmons,
to a few Puebloan communities. 1979). The Pima held similar fairs in the Phoenix
Formally scheduled festivals were important area (Ford, 1983, p. 719). The Southwest trade
occasions for intercommunity trade and trade fairs fair pattern intensified and was controlled in part
along with expeditions facilitated movement of by the Spanish to enhance economic purposes in
goods over long distances. Haggling and expecta- the 1700s (see Levine, 1991). Fairs were held in the
tions regarding immediacy of payment increased late summer and fall when agricultural products
with social and literal distance. The latter could be were ready and bison hides and meat were avail-
ameliorated by establishing quasi-kin or trade able (Simmons, 1979, p. 189).
348 J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370
Fall was also the usual time for festivals in the gambling activities that occurred there and, by
Great Basin as the pine nut crop was in and extension, the large social gatherings at these
rabbits were fat and available through drives (cf. historic trade centers. The gambling was in itself a
Steward, 1938). However, in areas of significant mechanism to redistribute goods among trade fair
fisheries, festivals were held in the spring during attendees (Wood, 1980).
the spawning runs. At Utah Lake on the eastern
edge of the Great Basin in central Utah, for ex- Intracommunity exchange
ample, the availability of spawning fish was an
occasion for the gathering of Utes from neigh- Although an annual festival model could ex-
boring valleys. An early pioneer journal provides plain significant portions of Fremont trade activ-
important details: ity (especially that between more distant groups),
Ford’s (1983) description of intracommunity ex-
We soon found out that [the] Provo River region change suggests that sharing and gaming among
was the great gathering place of all Ute tribes of members of a village may have been the most
central Utah valleys, too, on account of the won- common mechanisms at work in the past. These
derful supply of fish moving up the stream from
behaviors would have moved items from house-
the Lake to their spawning grounds every spring-
. . .While these Bands of Indians met each spring
hold to household based on luck and good will.
for fishing, they engaged in good sporting as well, Archaeological consequences of these activities
horse-racing, trading, gambling, foot racing, wres- relative to the distribution of exotics and other
tling, etc. Some spent weeks here. (Bean, 1945, pp. goods would be to almost randomize their oc-
51–52) currence within the community.
Ceremonial redistribution in the aboriginal
Compare the above with descriptions of an- Southwest, although apparently less common than
nual trade visits on the Plains of North America gambling and sharing, was important not only for
between the Sioux and the Arickara by Edwin T. the exchange of material goods, but, as noted
Denig in the 1830s (Ewers, 1973, p. 47). The corn- above, also as a means to validate social position.
farming Arickara lived in villages on the Missouri As in the Southwest, Great Basin aboriginal peo-
River and the Sioux brought buffalo robes, skins, ples made gifts on the occasion of birth, puberty
meat, and other commodities that they traded for rites, marriage, and death. Ute and Southern
corn. Denig states, ‘‘When these nations meet, Paiute fathers often gave up first gambling win-
however, the one well supplied with corn and the nings following the birth of a child (Stewart, 1942,
other with robes, the times are lively, feasting and p. 307). Bride wealth payments, although not
dancing goes on constantly, both in the village formalized, were common among the Southern
and camp—horse racing, gambling in many Paiute (Kelly, 1964, p. 99) and were the tendency
ways.’’ among many Great Basin groups. With the ex-
Gambling during festivals is of special interest. ception of death, these events and the associated
Wood (1980, p. 106) states that ‘‘Gambling at social actions may be difficult to identify in the
trading fairs was rampant’’ Nearly all accounts of archaeological record. Nonetheless, the assump-
fairs, festivals, or social gatherings mention gam- tion made here is that such activities occurred and
bling and, given that archaeologically recoverable commodities were circulated as a result. Burial
evidences of these festivities are few, the recovery goods, of course, mark the final life event and are
of gambling paraphernalia, such as gaming bones sometimes provided to symbolize the status of the
or dice, is important. At Fort McKenzie (initially deceased (for a discussion, see Brown, 1981). The
Fort Piegan), a small trade fort established on the traditional wisdom regarding the relationship be-
upper Missouri in the 1830s, excavations recov- tween status and burial goods is that individuals of
ered trade goods of all sorts ranging from glass higher special status (achieved or otherwise)
beads to dentalium shells and clay pipes (Shu- would be accompanied in death by greater quan-
mate, 1973; Wood, 1977). Among items recovered tities or different kinds of goods and/or unique or
were numerous gaming bones representing the prestigious burial locations (Brown, 1981, p. 29).
four-stick-game or travois gambling (Wissler,
1911). Hunt (1985) reports identical gaming bones Summary and archaeological implications
from Fort Union several hundred km down the
Missouri at the mouth of the Yellowstone. These At a minimum, these ethnographic patterns
bone counters alone document the ubiquitous suggest directions for building models that might
J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370 349
1
The challenge here is to avoid ethnic assumptions for
‘‘Fremont people.’’ Ethnic diversity in the region could
be as complex as that seen within the northern Rio
Grande Pueblos, for example, or as simple as that in the
ethnographic eastern Great Basin. By stating that long
distance trade was between the Fremont and Anasazi,
the implication is that these are two distinct ethnic
Fig. 2. Predictions of spatial distribution of goods dis- groups and such may have not been the case, although
tributed via down-the-line versus directional trade (after the archaeological record demonstrates both material
Renfrew, 1977). and non-material differences.
350 J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370
What was the source of these shells? Olivella via the Humboldt River reaching the Wasatch
occurs on the Pacific Coast of California as well as Front by skirting the northern shore of the Great
in the Gulf of California. These small shells were Salt Lake. An additional northern route into Utah
widely used and traded by the Indians of Cali- may have been up the Columbia—Snake River
fornia and the western Great Basin (Bennyhoff system and then south by the Portneuf and Malad
and Hughes, 1987; Hughes and Bennyhoff, 1986) Rivers. The southern route traveled directly east
and were likely obtained by Fremont peoples via from Los Angeles to the Colorado River then
trade networks. Both northern and southern trade northward into Utah along the Virgin River and
routes for moving shell into the eastern Basin have the Wasatch Front. Other routes certainly existed,
been proposed by Hughes and Bennyhoff (1986) but these river ways were probably the primary
(see also Lyneis, 1984; Malouf, 1940; Tower, avenues for the movement of people and trade
1945). The northern route crossed the Sierras in goods. Given that northern shells such as Denta-
the vicinity of Lake Tahoe and the Great Basin lium and O. baetica are more scarce than those
J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370 351
Table 1
Occurrence of Olivella and other marine shell ornaments at Fremont sites north of the Colorado/Virgin Rivers
Location Olivella Abalone Cerith Clam Other Reference
Colorado Plateau
Caldwell Village 164 — — — — Ambler (1966)
Gilbert Site 1 — — — — Shields (1967)
Whiterocks Village 4 — — — — Shields (1967)
Huntington Canyon 11 — — — — Montgomery and Montgomery
(1993)
Snake Rock 1 — — — — Aikens (1967)
Poplar Knob 4 — — — — Taylor (1957)
Round Spring 44 1 — — — Metcalf et al. (1993)
Turner Look 10 — — — — Wormington (1955)
Bull Creek 2 — — — — Jennings and Sammons-Lohse
(1981)
Combs Village 122 — — — 36 Lister et al. (1960), author
analysis
Eastern Great Basin
Bear River No. 1 2 — — — — Aikens (1966)
42WB144 4 Simms et al. (1997)
42WB32 4 Fawcett and Simms (1993)
Woodard Mound 22 — — — — Richens (1983)
Benson Mound 13 — — — — Bee and Bee (1934–1966)
Peay Mound 3 — — — — Bee and Bee (1934–1966)
Hinckley Mounds 1 — — — — Berge (1966)
Grantsville 1 — — — — Steward (1936)
Tooele 2 — — — — Gillin (1941)
Nephi Mounds 6 — — — — Sharrock and Marwitt (1967)
Kanosh 4 — — — — Steward (1936)
Backhoe Village 1 — — — 1 Madsen and Lindsay (1977)
Five Finger Ridge 20 — — — — Talbot et al. (1997)
Radford Roost 7 — — — — Talbot et al. (1999)
Icicle Bench 2 — — — — Talbot et al. (1999)
Marysvale 3 — — — — Gillin (1941)
Baker 112 Frags(?) — — 15 Wilde and Soper, 1999
Garrison 2 — — — — Taylor (1954)
Paragonah 50+ — — — — Judd (1919, 1926); Meighan
et al. (1956)
Evans Mound 17 1 1 1 — Dodd (1982); Alexander and
Ruby (1963)
Turquoise
Although less common than marine shell, tur-
quoise is present in several Fremont sites (Table 2,
Fig. 5). Turquoise occurs almost always as beads
or pendants with even small fragments exhibiting
some modification. Since turquoise was not
available in surface mines in Utah, all turquoise
from Fremont sites is exotic and obtained from
mines in Nevada, California, Arizona, Colorado,
Fig. 4. Selected marine shell beads from Baker Village. or New Mexico (Harbottle and Weigand, 1992).
352 J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370
Table 2
Occurrence of turquoise from Fremont/Anasazi occupations in Utah north of the Colorado/Virgin Rivers
Location Quantity Reference
Colorado Plateau
Snake Rock 2 Aikens (1967)
Round Spring 1 Metcalf et al. (1993)
Coombs Village (Anasazi) 218 Lister et al. (1960);
Anasazi State Park Collections
Eastern Great Basin
Woodard Mound 1 Richens (1983)
Kanosh 1 Steward (1936)
Pharo Village 1 Marwitt (1968)
Backhoe Village 1 Madsen and Lindsay (1977)
Five Finger Ridge 53 Talbot (1997)
Baker Village 15 Wilde and Soper (1999)
Evans Mound 2 Alexander and Ruby (1963)
Quail Creek (42WS392) (Anasazi) 67 Walling et al. (1986)
Table 3
Results of neutron activation analysis of turquoise from Five Finger Ridge (42SV1686)
Sample/FSNo Site Provenience (42SV1686) Provenience of matching samples
TQA106/FS1123 Pit Structure 29, Floor Artifacts from Tucson, Arizona
TQA107/FS1135 Pit Structure 29, Floor Central Nevada Mines as possible source, artifacts
from Chaco area
TQA198/FS2130.1 Pit Structure 20, Floor Poor match with artifacts from Arroyo Hondo,
New Mexico
TQA109/FS2130.2 Pit Structure 20, Floor Multiple matches with artifacts from Chaco Canyon
TQA110?FS8239 Secondary Pit Structure 51, Floor Pendant, Bald Eagle Cache, White Sands,
New Mexico
occur (see McDonald, 1994, p. 224 for a sum- Change through time
mary, although Geib, 1996 suggests the quantities A concern in this paper is that the data are
of Anasazi wares here may be much lower) and presented as though they are synchronic, which is
the Great Salt Lake sites (Bear River 1, 2, and 3, not the case. Table 4 presents the occurrence of
Levee and Knoll, Injun Creek) where no Anasazi exotic items by coarse time periods, AD 500–900,
sherds were recovered. Anasazi ceramics are AD 900–1100, AD 1100–1300. The total numbers
scarce (less than 1%) even in Parowan Valley, of exotics argue for an increase in quantities
despite the close proximity to Anasazi sites to the through time. However, the numbers of sites ex-
south (various, but see Dodd, 1982; Marwitt, cavated from each of these time periods biases the
1970). picture; that is, more Middle and Late sites have
Interesting evidence of interaction between been excavated than Early sites (see for example,
Fremont and Anasazi comes from Coombs Vil- Janetski et al., 1997, Appendix B). The middle
lage, a Kayenta Anasazi site on the Colorado period is greatly bolstered by the find of 164
Plateau (Lister et al., 1960). Here excavators Olivella beads at Caldwell Village which likely
found 22 whole or restorable Ivie Creek Black on dates to the mid tenth century AD based on the
White bowls indistinguishable from Ivie Creek presence of early Pueblo II ceramics. Turquoise
ceramics found 80 km north at Snake Rock (Ai- appears to occur late in the Fremont sequence
kens, 1967, p. 21; Lister et al., 1960, p. 216) and (post-AD 1100). Baker Village (Wilde and Soper,
five Fremont jars. Jennings (1966, p. 56) points 1999) and Five Finger Ridge account for nearly
out that 10% of the whole vessels from Coombs 90% of Fremont turquoise and both sites date to
are Fremont. Although the proveniences of the after AD 1100. Of course, the sample is so small
Fremont vessels at Coombs appear unremarkable that the temporal distribution of turquoise could
in that they were found in rooms and burials in change with even one or two additional finds. If
contexts similar to Kayenta vessels, the numbers this tendency for the occurrence of turquoise to be
of bowls is surprising given the usual percentages late in Fremont contexts is valid, the heaviest
of painted to gray wares in Fremont sites (Lister Fremont use of turquoise appears to post-date the
et al., 1960, pp. 215–216). Some movement of heaviest use of the mineral in the Southwest
material goods from Coombs to the north is also (Harbottle and Weigand, 1992, p. 81; McDonald,
evident at Snake Rock Village where a few 1994; Weigand and Harbottle, 1993). The bulk of
Coombs Variety sherds were found. Whether the the turquoise recovered in the Southwest is from
bowls were trade items or contained goods that Chaco Canyon (cf. Toll, 1991, p. 81) and dates to
were being traded is not known (the latter seems between AD 900 and 1150. The bulk of the data
more likely given the disposal pattern of the presented here represent roughly a 300 year time
bowls). Certainly, however, here is evidence of span (AD 1000–1300).
contact and the movement of exotic goods (in
this case Fremont ceramics) moving into the Evidence for local and regional trade
Anasazi sphere from the Fremont region. What
might have moved the other direction, that is, Obsidian
back to the north in exchange (if anything) is not Obsidian is often used to trace the movements
known. It does not appear to have been Coombs of people and goods across the landscape, since it
pottery. can be sourced to specific volcanic flows. Primary
354 J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370
Table 4
Occurrence of exotic goods at Fremont sites by time period
Exotic items time period Marine shell Turquoise Total
Late (1100–1300) 264 67 331
Middle (900–1100) 210 2 212
Early (500–900) 10 1 11
Total 484 70 554
obsidian flows exploited during Fremont times are Amounts of obsidian in chipped stone assem-
Topaz Mountain, Black Rock, Mineral Moun- blages from Fremont sites vary from site to site as
tains, Modena (all in western Utah), and Malad in do the sources represented. Table 5 lists selected
southern Idaho (Fig. 6) (various in Hughes, 1984, Fremont sites and percentages of obsidian in
1994; Nelson, 1984; Nelson and Holmes, 1979). the total chipped stone assemblage (tools plus
Fig. 6. Obsidian sources within and adjacent to the Fremont area (after Nelson and Holmes, 1979) and location of Utah
Valley and Clear Creek study areas.
J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370 355
Table 5
Obsidian frequency at selected Fremont sites
Site % Obsidian km to nearest km to nearest km to farthest Reference
source utilized source utilized source
Eastern Great Basin
Levee 56.9 100 (MD) 100 (MD) 100 (MD) McDonald (1994)
Knoll 78.2 95 (MD) 95 (MD) 95 (MD) McDonald (1994)
Bear River 1 50 98 (MD) 98 (MD) 98 (MD) McDonald (1994)
Bear River 2 66.5 97 (MD) 97 (MD) 97 (MD) McDonald (1994)
Bear River 3 45.4 102 (MD) 102 (MD) 102 (MD) McDonald (1994)
42SL98 12.3 145 (MD) 145 (MD) 225 (BR) Talbot et al. nd
(Block 49
Hinckley 2 124 (TZ) 190 (BR) 250 (MD) McDonald (1994)
Mound
Woodard 4.2 107 (TZ) 107 (TZ) 150 (BR) Richens (1983)
Mound
Kay’s Cabin 5.6 95 (TZ) 95 (TZ) 170 (MM) Burnside (2000)
Backhoe Village 24.2 60 (BR) 60 (BR) 70 (MM) McDonald (1994)
Mukwitch 7 60 (BR) — — Talbot and Richens (1993)
Village
Icicle Bench 13 45 (MM) 45 (MM) 50 (BR) Talbot et al. (1999)
Radford’s Roost 14 42 (MM) 42 (MM) 43 (BR) Talbot et al. (1999)
Five Finger 24 39 (MM) 39 (MM) 41 (BR) Talbot et al. (1995)
Ridge
Lott’s Farm 11.7 42 (MM) — — Hawkins and Dobra (1982)
Topaz Slough 73.4 40 (TZ) 40 (TZ) 80 (BR) McDonald (1994)
Garrison 49.4 107 (BR) 107 (BR) 120 (MM) McDonald (1994)
Baker 61 115 (BR) 115 (BR) 130 (MO) Wilde and Soper, 1999
Village
Median 4 80 (MM) 90 (MO) 90 (MO) McDonald (1994)
Village
Evans Mound 14.2 80 (MM) 80 (MM) 89 (MO) McDonald (1994)
Colorado Plateau
Caldwell Village 0 280 (TZ) — — Ambler (1966)
Huntington Cyn 0.1 165 (BR) — — Montgomery and
Montgomery (1993)
Windy Ridge 0.1 177 (BR) — — McDonald (1994)
Innocents Ridge 0.1 140 (BR) — — McDonald (1994)
Old Woman 0 120 (BR) — — Taylor (1957)
Poplar Knob 0.1 120 (BR) 120 (BR) 120 (BR) McDonald (1994)
Snake Rock 0 130 (BR) — — Aikens (1967)
Mickey’s Place 22.9 97 (MM) 97 (MM) 102 (BR) Adams (1996)
Round Spring 0.1 114 (MM) 114 (MM) 135 (BR) McDonald (1994)
Bull Creek 0.1 180 (MM) — — McDonald (1994)
MD: Malad Source, TZ: Topaz, BR: Black Rock, MM: Mineral Mountains, MO: Modena.
debitage), distance to closest source of docu- Some patterning is apparent in Table 5. First,
mented use, and distance to closest and most it is clear that Fremont sites on the Northern
distant sources utilized. Source analysis was not Colorado Plateau seldom contain much obsidian,
always performed so data on sources utilized is while those in the Great Basin reflect a much
variable. Only sites that quantified all chipped greater use of this toolstone. Logically, this pat-
stone and amounts of toolstone material were tern seems best explained by proximity. All Utah
used. If obsidian was present in very small quan- obsidian sources are located in the Great Basin
tities, a value of 0.1% was used. Distances are and people on the Plateau simply did not have
linear measurements from the site to the sources. easy access. However, the pattern is more com-
356 J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370
Fig. 9. Probable source areas for minerals recovered from Fremont sites in Clear Creek Canyon.
358 J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370
The frequency with which minerals occur in the Fremont region (however, see conclusions by
Fremont contexts argues that they were important Simms et al. (1997, p. 789) that suggest minimal
and sought after, although the mode of access for trade in ceramics).
many minerals remains problematic. The simplest
explanation is that acquisition was embedded in
hunting or other kinds of forays. Some sources are A model of long distance Fremont trade
so remote from the site of occurrence that trade
seems probable. The above data argue for the movement of
goods within the Fremont region and between the
Ceramics Fremont and people to the south and perhaps to
Fremont trade also involved non-local, painted the west across the Great Basin. How do these
and corrugated, Fremont ceramics. This has been data support (or not) the models of long distance
suspected for some time, but not rigorously tested. trade presented earlier: (1) down-the-line trade or
Geib and Lyneis (1996) have cautioned against (2) directional trade? To test the down-the-line
assuming trade based on macroscopic inspections model, some assumption must be made regarding
of temper alone. However, Richens (1997), relying the source of materials. Previous discussions sug-
on temper analysis and refiring experiments, has gested the source of exotic goods (turquoise and
argued that approximately 95% of corrugated and Olivella) in Fremont sites lies south and west (e.g.,
53% of painted sherds (Fig. 10) recovered from at Lyneis, 1984). If the direction and source of those
Five Finger Ridge in Clear Creek Canyon was goods is accurate and a down-the-line mechanism
made outside of Clear Creek Canyon and most is operating, we should expect to see greater
likely was imported from Parowan Valley to the numbers of exotics in the southwestern portion of
south (see also Talbot et al., 1998, p. 48). Similar the Fremont area and fewer and fewer as one
numbers of imports were found at Radford Roost moves to the north and east. To clarify the pat-
(87% of corrugated, 75% of painted) and Icicle tern, all sites are collapsed to a southwest to
Bench (98% of painted, no corrugated at Icicle northeast straight line. Fig. 11 graphically dem-
Bench), also located in Clear Creek Canyon (Tal- onstrates a gradual, although somewhat noisy,
bot et al., 1999). Ceramics from Baker Village fall-off in raw numbers of exotics (combined tur-
appear to argue even more strongly for ceramic quoise and marine shell) from southwest to
trade. Wilde and Soper (1999) (see also Schuster, northeast (Caldwell Village with its single neck-
1996; Wells, 1993) concludes that at least 35% (and lace is an exception). This distribution could be
perhaps as high as 85%) of the floor contact ce- interpreted as empirical support for goods moving
ramics at Baker were imported. These findings are from the south to the north in down-the-line
strong arguments for the movement of ceramics, fashion.
especially decorated wares, between locales within However, within the larger pattern of general
decline from south to north there is an additional
spatial pattern of sites with relatively larger
amounts of exotics interspersed among sites with
fewer exotics. If raw numbers are adjusted for
volume (e.g., exotics/excavated residence), the fall-
off pattern is less clear, while a pattern of higher
frequencies in the context of lower frequencies
emerges (Fig. 12). Put another way, the pattern is
one of occasional blips of high frequency in a
landscape of low frequency. A conservative in-
terpretation of this pattern would maintain that
such blips are a function of sampling size and/or
fortuitous finds. On the other hand, spatial pat-
terning in the distribution of goods being traded
can be informative about the mechanisms in-
volved in the exchange. This pattern resembles
Renfrew’s directional trade model (Fig. 2).
Fig. 10. Percentage of imported ceramics from floors in If the departures from the fall-off model rep-
Clear Creek Canyon Fremont houses. resent a valid pattern (i.e., directional trade),
J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370 359
Fig. 11. Frequency of exotic items from Fremont sites, straight line distribution, southwest to northeast.
it could be argued that the pattern supports the below). However, it is not being argued that fes-
notion of central places on the Fremont land- tivals are markets nor is there a suggestion of es-
scape. In other words, the locales exhibiting tablished control of the trade of items; they
higher frequencies of exotics hint at the possibility provide a time and place for people to congregate
that these are places where people with items to and for goods to change hands either through
trade might have congregated. Again following direct bartering or gambling.
Renfrew (1977, p. 85): ‘‘The central place is a lo-
cus for exchange activity, and more of any mate- Discussion
rial passes through it (per head of population)
than through a smaller settlement.’’ He goes on to This paper argues that Fremont peoples were
say, ‘‘If the archaeological record is formed in involved in exchange among themselves and with
proportion to the quantity of material handled, people to the south, specifically with the Anasazi.
the central place will show a greater frequency (This does not deny trade in other directions, but
than its population alone would warrant, since it data to support such connections are few at
is acting as a supply center’’ (Renfrew, 1977, present.) The amount of exotic goods involved is
p. 85). In this last statement, Renfrew is making modest. However, it is often assumed that ex-
reference to either central place redistribution or change in perishables such as food or hides, robes,
central place market exchange both of which re- slaves, or other archaeologically invisible com-
quire control of goods and neither of which has modities was occurring and most likely made up
been documented for the Fremont, which are the bulk of trade goods (cf. Davis, 1974; Ford,
traditionally described as egalitarian (Sammons- 1983; Hughes and Bennyhoff, 1986; Wood, 1980);
Lohse, 1981; however, see Barker, 1994; Hockett, therefore, the exotics and more durable goods
1998; Janetski and Talbot, 1997 for discussions of (minerals) are likely only symptomatic of the lar-
Fremont social complexity). This pattern could be ger volume of trade [however, Plog (1989) has
argued as support for the trade fair or festival (see argued for caution in such assumptions]. Previous
360 J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370
Fig. 12. Distribution of exotics/excavated Fremont house, straight line distribution, southwest to northeast.
discussions of exchange in foodstuffs (e.g., Davis, The festival model is attractive for conceptu-
1974; Spielmann, 1991 and also Small Scale alizing how the Fremont might have implemented
Societies and Exchange section above) argued that exchange between communities and with the
trade in food increases in the context of ecological Anasazi or other neighbors. Given that resource
or other contrasts (e.g., farm products vs hides). availability was a critical factor, the timing of
Kelly’s (1964, p. 90) example of non-farming, festivals in the central and southern portion of the
Kaibab Southern Paiute trading deer hides to St. area would most likely have followed the general
George Southern Paiute farmers for corn is a case Great Basin pattern, i.e., in the fall. The locations
in point. The former lived in more upland country of such festivals would have depended on resource
with few perennial streams while the latter lived in availability and could have shifted depending on
the lower elevations along the Virgin River. The the productivity of certain resources. Places such
popular model of Fremont variability (Madsen as Parowan Valley near Cedar City in south-
and Simms, 1998) emphasizes strategy differences central Utah, the Sevier River Valley in central
across space and through time. Strategies shifted Utah near Richfield, Utah Valley, and others, are
depending on the costs of farming versus gather- possible choices based on ethnographic patterns,
ing of wild foods (see also Barlow, 1997). If such site densities, and/or resource availability. Loca-
variability were operating, one would expect food tions such as the Baker Village site, positioned on
items to be an important item of exchange much what is considered the periphery of the Fremont
like that seen among the Southern Paiute as well area seems an especially attractive locale for fes-
as across ethnic boundaries as exemplified by the tivals that could include not only Fremont but
Plains and Southwest. Kelly (1964, pp. 86–91) also non-farming neighbors to the west. Steward
does not specifically mention exchange mecha- (1938, p. 130), for example, identified nearby
nisms for trade between Southern Paiute bands, Garrison, Nevada, as a location for Western
but her accounts suggest informal encounter ex- Shoshone festivals. The aggregations in Utah
change. However, the context for the Plains and Valley were noted earlier.
Southwest intertribal exchange was the trade fair The application of a trade fair/festival model
or festival model (Ford, 1983). can provide useful insights into temporal shifts in
J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370 361
obsidian distribution in the eastern Great Basin. dice is evidence of the importance of gambling
Sourcing of obsidians from Utah Valley in central and attendant community interaction perhaps at
Utah documented a shift in the direction of ob- both the intra- and inter-village level, and the
sidian movement through time. During the Fre- occurrence of these gaming pieces along with ex-
mont era, obsidian came primarily from southern otic goods may be primary archaeological resi-
sources (Black Rock and Mineral Mountains); dues of events such as trade festivals (cf.
during the subsequent Late Prehistoric, northern Gunnerson, 1969, p. 141; McDonald, 1994, p. 54).
obsidians (particularly from Malad) dominate the The ethnographic data also predict that direct
collections, and obsidian from Brown’s Bench in trade in foodstuffs might be greatest across eco-
Idaho and the Yellowstone region appear for the logical and ethnic boundaries. Although, recog-
first time (Fig. 7) (Janetski, 1994; Nelson, 1984; nizing ethnic boundaries is a complex issue,
Nelson and Holmes, 1979). Importantly, Topaz ecological differences are more apparent in the
Mountain obsidian, which is closer to Utah Valley area under discussion. The sharpest natural
than either the Black Rock/Mineral Mountain or boundary within the Fremont region is that be-
Malad sources, is only present in modest amounts tween the Great Basin on the west and the Colo-
during either period. These patterns suggest two rado Plateau on the east and differences in
things: (1) the inhabitants of Utah Valley did not Fremont material culture from east to west have
directly access obsidian during either the Fremont been noted from the beginnings of Fremont stud-
or Late Prehistoric periods but obtained this ies (Judd, 1926; Madsen, 1982; Marwitt, 1970;
commodity through intermediaries, and (2) for Morss, 1931). Further, Madsen (various, but see
some reason relations shifted to the north after especially 1979) has argued that Fremont farmers
A.D. 1300 or 1400. One has only to invoke a living in the eastern Basin relied more on marsh
change in who was attending festivals to account and other wild foods while those living on the
for the shift in goods present. A more northerly Colorado Plateau were more committed to corn
swing of social and economic relations following farming. It is more likely that the better watered
the demise of farming would account for the surge eastern Basin had access to a richer resource base,
in northern obsidians in Utah Valley during the including farm products, and supported a larger
Late Prehistoric. It is possible the variable pat- population than the Plateau, and these differences
terning in obsidian in lithic assemblages (which in resource availability might have encouraged
seems unrelated to proximity to obsidian sources) east-west exchange in consumables. Food might
could be explained in part by socio-economic re- have been traded against deer or mountain sheep
lations; however, an additional critical variable hides as in the Southern Paiute case, for example.
would be the availability and proximity of other This expectation is not well met based on the ob-
toolstone quarries. This possibility remains to be sidian data presented earlier, however. In fact, the
explored. obsidian data suggests the Basin/Plateau boundary
Recognizing exchange activities archaeologi- was a barrier of sorts. Although some obsidian
cally (other than through the presence of nonlocal from western sources found its way onto the Pla-
items) is challenging as is devising material tests of teau, quantities fall off sharply from west to east
the festival model. The earlier discussion of trade (Table 5). It is possible, of course, that the obsidian
and exchange in small scale societies provides data are not a reliable indicator of the degree of
ethnographic models that might be testable, interaction or of the movement of foodstuffs.
however. For example, nearly all accounts of Olivella shell, for example, is about equally com-
festivals or gathering include references to gam- mon in Basin and Plateau sites (Table 1). The
bling activity (see above), and gambling para- ceramic data seem to suggest that interaction was
phernalia, especially bone dice, may be evidence more north to south than east to west, a conclusion
of this activity. Bone dice, usually referred to as also reached by McDonald relying on multiple
gaming counters in the Fremont literature (e.g., variables (1994; see the several maps of proposed
Dalley, 1970), are common in Fremont worked micro-interaction spheres from pp. 289–296).
bone assemblages. In fact, next to bone awls, dice On a different note, the suggestion that ce-
are the most abundant artifact recovered from ramics and perhaps other bulky items such as
Fremont sites (Table 6). The dice range in style hides were produced for trade provokes interest-
from being carefully polished with rows of dots or ing questions. How, for example, were pots
incisings to rather roughly made specimens; center moved from one village to another? A possible
drilling is common (Fig. 13). The abundance of ethnographic analogue for the movement of
362
Table 6
Quantities of certain bone artifacts from selected Fremont structural sites
Site Awls Eyed Weaving Pendants Beads Rings Tubes Dice Figurines/ Antler Harpoons Antler Whistles
emerging concern with prestige building among the shell beads and a wristlet containing stone and
Fremont (Janetski and Talbot, 1997). The usually small, unidentified shell beads (Lister et al., 1960).
mundane contexts for these exotics, however, Turquoise also occurred in greater absolute
suggest that the goods were not laden with social, quantities, in differing contexts, and in more
political, or ideological symbolism. Intriguing ev- variable stages of manufacture at Coombs than
idence to the contrary includes the previously seen at Fremont sites (Table 2). To date over 200
mentioned Olivella shell look-alike beads from turquoise items, mostly small pendants or beads
Five Finger Ridge (Fig. 8). Both preforms and are documented from Coombs and nearly all came
finished beads of calcite occurred here and suggest from burials (Lister et al., 1960; Larry Davis,
local production. If this interpretation is correct, personal communication 2000). Recent analysis of
that is, Fremont were mimicking exotics, one could the collections by the author documented evidence
argue that Olivella was both scarce and valued. of on-site turquoise pendant production in the
As noted, the rarity of exotic goods in Fremont form of preforms and production by-products,
burials is in stark contrast with patterns at con- both turquoise powder or paste and small frag-
temporary Anasazi sites. All exotics increase ments. Prince et al. (1997, p. 125) report that 11
dramatically in Anasazi sites to the south (Lyneis, turquoise samples submitted for chemical analysis
1992; Shutler, 1961) and there are sharp differ- appear to all be from the same source, although
ences in contexts. As noted, Olivella and turquoise they don’t speculate what that source might be.
in Fremont sites are almost always found in resi- What can be made of these stark differences in
dential structures and rarely in burials. But the distribution and quantities of exotics in
Anasazi residences along the Virgin River (Dalley Anasazi and Fremont sites? Explanations could
and McFadden, 1985; Shutler, 1961; Walling take the form of a simple proximity argument: the
et al., 1986) as well as further east near Kanab Anasazi simply had better access (i.e., they were
(Aikens, 1965; Nickens and Kvamme, 1981), have closer) to marine shell and turquoise sources,
yielded few exotics. Anasazi burials, on the other therefore these items are more common in Anas-
hand, contain relatively massive quantities of shell azi sites. Or perhaps the Anasazi were operating
and other goods and the shift occurs in dramatic within a different kind of social and political
fashion as one moves south from the Fremont structure. Rafferty (1990), for example, has argued
region into the Virgin and Colorado River that the burial data argue for a ranked society
drainages. Walling et al. (1986) report marine operating at Lost City; if so, the accumulation of
shell ornaments (Haliotis and Glycymeris) and goods to mark differential status makes sense.
turquoise beads in small quantities from burials Lyneis (1992b), however, has systematically re-
along Quail Creek just south of the large Fremont futed Rafferty’s claim for ranking and argued that
sites in Parowan Valley. At Willow Beach on the the distribution of burial goods is typical of
Colorado River in northeast Arizona a single egalitarian societies ‘‘. . .in which the differences
(apparently Anasazi) burial (Burial 2) contained among burials reflects differences by age, sex
860 Olivella beads (Schoeder (1961), more than all and. . ..achievement’’ (Lyneis, 1992b, p. 210). As
the Olivella found to date in the Fremont region. mentioned, Fremont scholars have also charac-
And Lost City [a Virgin Anasazi site in southern terized the Fremont as egalitarian with some evi-
Nevada (Fig. 3)] burials contained large quantities dence of achieved status and emerging social
of marine shell and often turquoise (Lyneis, differentiation (for example, Hockett, 1998; Ja-
1992a; Shutler, 1961). Of 289 Lost City burials, at netski and Talbot, 1997, p. 327). If one accepts
least 45 contained either turquoise or marine shell some degree of social and political similarity in
(Shutler, 1961, pp. 44–49). Olivella was by far the Fremont and Anasazi societies, the differences in
most common, although numbers are hard to fix treatment of the dead would be evidence of con-
as data are often in the form of ‘‘many’’ or ‘‘jar of trasting ideologies, a conclusion supported by
beads’’ (see Lyneis, 1992a, Table 65). In addition other material differences such as the widespread
to quantities of marine shell increasing in Anasazi occurrence of anthropomorphic figurines in the
sites, the variety increases with Haliotis, Gly- Fremont area (however, see Wilde and Soper,
cymeris, Conus, and ‘‘clam’’ shells found rather 1999, p. 244). It is certainly the case that Olivella,
commonly (Lyneis, 1992a). turquoise, and other objects exotic to the Fremont
At Coombs Village, a Kayenta Anasazi site in area but present in Fremont sites were available
south central Utah considered within the Fremont from the Anasazi to the south and are the most
region, burials yielded a necklace of 122 Olivella logical source of such items.
J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370 365
among those who provided specific suggestions Brown, J.A., 1981. The search for rank in prehistoric
and prodding to publish. Suggestions by anony- burials. In: Robert, C., Ian, K., Klavs, R. (Eds.), The
mous reviewers resulted in significant improve- Archaeology of Death. Cambridge University Press,
ments and I thank them for their time. Of course, Cambridge, pp. 25–37.
I accept blame for this final version and for failure Bullock, K.C., 1981. Mineral and mineral localities of
Utah. Utah Geological and Mineral Survey Bulletin
to mention others who may have read and com-
No. 117. Salt Lake City.
mented on the paper.
Burnside, R.C., 2000. XRF sourcing of Fremont and
late prehistoric obsidian. Ms on file, Department of
Anthropology, Brigham Young University, Provo.
References cited Cashden, E., 1990. Risk and uncertainty in Tribal and
peasant societies. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.
Adams, P., 1996. Fish Lake obsidian analysis. Ms on Clark, J.E., Parry, W.J., 1990. Craft specialization and
file, Department of Anthropology, Brigham Young cultural complexity. Research in Economic Anthro-
University, Provo. pology 12, 289–346.
Adovasio, J.M., 1979. Comment by Adovasio. Ameri- Cole, S.J., 1990. Legacy on Stone: Rock Art of the
can Antiquity 44, 723–730. Colorado Plateau and Four Corners Region. John-
Aikens, C.M., 1965. Excavations in Southwest Utah. son Books, Boulder.
Anthropological Papers No. 76, Glen Canyon Cordell, L., 1997. Archaeology of the Southwest, second
Series No. 27. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake ed. Academic Press, New York.
City. Crown, P.L., 1991. The role of exchange and interaction
Aikens, C.M., 1966. Fremont-Promontory relationships in Salt-Gila Basin Hohokam prehistory. In: Gumer-
in northern Utah. Anthropological Papers No. 82. man, G.J. (Ed.), Exploring the Hohokam. University
University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 383–416.
Aikens, C.M., 1967. Excavations at Snake Rock Village Dalley, G.F., McFadden, D.A., 1985. The archaeology
and the Bear River No. 2 Site. Anthropological Papers of the Red Cliffs site. Cultural Resource Series
No. 87. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. No. 17. Bureau of Land Management, Salt Lake
Aikens, C.M., 1969. Comment by Aikens. American City.
Antiquity 44, 7731–7732. Davis, J.T., 1974. Trade routes and economic exchange
Alexander, W., Ruby, J.W., 1963. 1962 excavations at among the Indians of California. Publications in
Summit, Utah: a progress report. In: 1962 Great Basin Archaeology, Ethnology and History No. 3. Ballena
Anthropological Conference. Anthropological Papers Press, Ramona, California.
No 9. Nevada State Museum, Carson City, pp. 17–32. Dodd, W.A., 1982. Final year excavations at the Evans
Ambler, J.R., 1966. Caldwell Village. Anthropological Mound Site. Anthropological Papers No. 106. Uni-
Papers No. 84. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake versity of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
City. Earle, T.K., 1994. Positioning exchange in the evolution
Barker, J.P., 1994. Sequential hierarchy and political of human society. In: Baugh, T.G., Ericson, J.E.
evolution along the western Fremont frontier. Paper (Eds.), Prehistoric Exchange Systems in North
presented at the 24th Great Basin Anthropological America. Plenum Press, New York, pp. 419–438.
Conference, Elko. Ericson, J.E., Baugh, T.G. (Eds.), 1993. The American
Barlow, R.K., 1997. Foragers that farm: A behavioral Southwest and Mesoamerica: Systems of prehistoric
ecology approach to the economics of corn farming exchange. Plenum Press, New York.
for the Fremont case. Ph.D. Dissertation, Depart- Ewers, J.C. (Ed.), 1973. Edwin Thompson Denig, Five
ment of Anthropology, University of Utah. UMI Indian tribes of the upper Missouri: Sioux, Arick-
Dissertation Services, Ann Arbor. aras, Assiniboines, Crees, Crows. University of
Bean, G.W., 1945. Autobiography of G.W. Bean, a Oklahoma Press, Norman.
Utah pioneer of 1847. Utah Printing, Salt Lake City. Fawcett, W.B., Simms, S.R., 1993. Archaeological test
Bee, J.W., Bee, R.G., 1934–1966. Archaeological collec- excavations in the Great Salt Lake wetlands and
tions, Utah county, Utah. Notes and maps on file, associated analyses. Contributions to Anthropology
Museum of Peoples and Cultures, Brigham Young 14. Utah State University, Logan.
University, Provo. Ford, R.I., 1983. Inter-Indian exchange in the South-
Bennyhoff, J.A., Hughes, R.E., 1987. Shell bead and west. In: Ortiz, A. (Ed.), Southwest, Sturtevant,
ornament exchange networks between California W.C. (general editor.), Handbook of North Amer-
and the western Great Basin. In: Anthropological ican Indians, vol. 10. Smithsonian Institution, Wash-
Papers Vol. 64, Part 2. American Museum of ington, DC, pp. 711–722.
Natural History, New York, pp. 82–175. Geib, P.R., 1996. Formative cultures and boundaries.
Berge, D., 1966. Archaeological investigations in central In: Geib, P.R., Glen Canyon revisited, Anthropo-
Utah: 42UT110. Ms on file, Museum of Peoples and logical Papers No. 119. University of Utah Press,
Cultures, Brigham Young University, Provo. Salt Lake City, pp. 98–114.
J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370 367
Geib, P.R., Lyneis, M.M., 1996. Sources of igneous J.E. (Eds.), Exchange Systems in Prehistory. Aca-
temper for Fremont ceramics. In: Geib, P.R., Glen demic Press, New York, pp. 141–151.
Canyon revisited. Anthropological Papers No. Jackson, H.E., 1991. The trade fair in hunter-gatherer
119. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. interaction: the role of intersocietal trade in the
167–179. evolution of poverty point culture. In: Gregg, S.A.
Gillin, J., 1941. Archeological investigations in central (Ed.), Between bands and states. Center for Archae-
Utah. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American ological Investigations Occasional Paper No. 9,
Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 17, No. 2. Har- Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, pp. 265–288.
vard University, Cambridge. Janetski, J.C., 1994. Recent transitions in the eastern
Gregg, S.A. (Ed.), 1991. Between bands and states. Great Basin: The archaeological record. In: Madsen,
Occasional Paper No. 9. Center for Archaeological D.B., Rhode, D. (Eds.), Across the West: Human
Investigations Southern Illinois University at Car- Population Movement and the Expansion of the
bondale. Numa. Anthropological Papers, University of Utah
Gunnerson, J.H., 1969. The Fremont culture: a study in Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 157–178.
culture dynamics on the northern Anasazi Frontier. Janetski, J.C., Talbot, R.K., 1997. Social and commu-
Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and nity organization. In: Janetski, J.C., Talbot, R.K.,
Ethnography, Harvard University, vol. 59, no. 2. Newman, D.E., Richens, L.D., Wilde, J.D. (Eds.),
Peabody Museum, Cambridge. Results and Synthesis. Clear Creek Canyon Archae-
Harbottle, G., 1995. Turquoise analysis and taxonomy, ological Project, vol. 5. Museum of Peoples and
Five Finger Ridge (42SV1686). Appendix J, In: Clear Cultures Technical Series No. 95-9, Brigham Young
Creek Canyon Archaeological Project, Volume University, Provo, pp. 363–382.
Four: Excavations of Open Habitation Sites, part Janetski, J.C., Timican, G., Timican, D., Pikyavit, R.,
3: Five Finger Ridge. Museum of Peoples and 1999. Cooperative research between Native Ameri-
Cultures Technical Series No. 95-8. Brigham Young cans and archaeologists: the Fish Lake archaeolog-
University, Provo, pp. 1155–1157. ical project. In: Beck, C. (Ed.), Current Models in
Harbottle, G., Weigand, P.C., 1992. Turquoise in pre- Great Basin Anthropology. University of Utah
Columbian America. Scientific American 266 (2), Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 223–237.
78–85. Jennings, J.D., 1966. Glen Canyon: A summary. An-
Hawkins, B., Dobra, L., 1982. Archaeological investi- thropological Papers No. 81. University of Utah
gation at the Lott’s Farm site. Ms on file, Antiquities Press, Salt Lake City.
Section, Utah State Historical Society. Salt lake City. Jennings, J.D., Sammons-Lohse, D., 1981. Bull Creek.
Hayden, B. (Ed.), 1992. A complex culture of the British Anthropological Papers No. 105. University of Utah
Columbia Plateau. University of British Columbia Press, Salt Lake City.
Press, Vancouver. Jorgenson, J.G., 1986. Western Indians: Comparative
Hayden, B., 1995. Pathways to power: principles for environments, languages, and cultures of 172 West-
creating socioeconomic inequalities. In: Price, T.D., ern American Indian tribes. W.H. Freeman and
Feinman, G.M. (Eds.), Foundations of Social In- Company, San Francisco.
equality. Plenum Press, New York, pp. 15–86. Judd, N.M., 1926. Archaeological observations north of
Hockett, B.S., 1998. Sociopolitical meaning of faunal the Rio Colorado. Bulletin No. 82. Bureau of
remains from Baker Village. American Antiquity 63, American Ethnology, Smithsonian Institution,
289–302. Washington, DC.
Hughes, R.E. (Ed.), 1984. Obsidian studies in the Great Kelly, I.T., 1964. Southern Paiute ethnography. An-
Basin. Contributions, Archaeological Research Fa- thropological Papers No. 64. University of Utah
cility No. 45. University of California, Berkeley. Press, Salt Lake City.
Hughes, R.E., 1994. Mosaic patterning in prehistoric Kidder, A.V., 1924. An introduction to the study of
California —Great Basin exchange. In: Baugh, T.G., Southwestern archaeology, with a preliminary ac-
Ericson, J.E. (Eds.), Prehistoric Exchange Systems in count of the expeditions at Pecos. Papers of the
North America. Plenum Press, New York, pp. 363– Southwestern Expedition, Phillips Academy, No. 1.
383. Yale University Press, New Haven.
Hughes, R.E., Bennyhoff, J.A., 1986. Early trade. In: Lee, R.B., 1979. The !Kung San: Men, women, and
d’Azevedo, W.L. (Ed.), Great Basin. Sturtevant, work in a foraging society. Cambridge University
William C. (general editor). Handbook of North Press, Cambridge.
American Indians, vol. 11. Smithsonian Institution, Levine, F., 1991. Economic perspectives on the Coman-
Washington, DC, pp. 238–255. chero trade. In: Spielmann, K.A. (Ed.), Farmers,
Hunt, W.J., 1985. Bone gaming pieces, ethnic identity, and Hunters, and Colonists. University of Arizona Press,
trade: an example from Fort Union trading post, Tucson, pp. 155–169.
North Dakota. Archaeology in Montana 26 (1), 44–51. Lister, R.J., Ambler, R., Lister F.C., 1960. The Coombs
Irwin-Williams, C., 1977. A network model for the site, part II. Anthropological Papers No. 41. Uni-
analysis of prehistoric trade. In: Earle, T.K., Ericson, versity of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
368 J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370
Lyneis, M.M., 1984. The western Anasazi frontier: McGuire, R.H., 1995. The Greater Southwest as a
cultural processes along a prehistoric boundary. In: periphery of Mesoamerica. In: Champion, T.C.
DeAtley, S.P., Finlow, F.J. (Eds.), Exploring the (Ed.), Center and Periphery. Routledge, New York,
Limits: Frontiers and Boundaries in Prehistory, London, pp. 40–66.
International Series 223. British Archaeological Re- McGuire, R.H., Adams, E.C., Nelson, B.A., Spielmann,
ports, Oxford, pp. 81–92. K.A., 1994. Drawing the Southwest to scale: per-
Lyneis, M.M., 1992a. The main ridge community at spectives on macroregional relations. In: Gumerman,
Lost City: Virgin Anasazi architecture, ceramics, and G.J. (Ed.), Themes in Southwest Prehistory. School
burials. Anthropological Papers No. 117. University of American Research, Santa Fe, pp. 239–266.
of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. Metcalf, M.D., Pool, K.J., McDonald, E.K., McKibbin,
Lyneis, M.M., 1992b. Social complexity among the A. (Eds.), 1993. The Round Spring site, vol. III.
virgin Anasazi. Kiva 57, 197–212. Hogan Pass: Final Report on Archaeological Inves-
Madsen, D.B., 1979. The Fremont and the Sevier: tigations Along Forest Highway 10 (State Highway
defining prehistoric agriculturalists north of the 72), Sevier County, Utah. 3 vols. Metcalf Archaeo-
Anasazi. American Antiquity 44, 711–722. logical Consultants, Eagle, Colorado. Report pre-
Madsen, D.B., 1982. Get it where the gettin’s good: a pared for Interagency Archaeological Services, US
variable model of Great Basin subsistence and Department of the Interior, National Park Service,
settlement based on data from the eastern Great Lakewood, Colorado. Contract No. CS-1200.-6-
Basin. In: Madsen, David B., O’Connell, James F. B052.
(Eds.), Man and Environment in the Great Basin. Montgomery, K.R., Montgomery, J.A., 1993. Utah
SAA Papers No. 2. Society for American Archaeol- Department of Transportation State Route-31 Hun-
ogy, Washington, DC, pp. 207–226. tington Canyon Project: archaeological excavations
Madsen, D.B., 1989. Exploring the Fremont. at Sites 42Em2109 and Em2095, Emery Country,
University of Utah Occasional Publications No. Utah. Abajo Archaeology, Bluff, Utah.
8. Utah Museum of Natural History, Salt Lake Morss, N., 1931. The ancient culture of the Fremont
City. River in Utah. Papers of the Peabody Museum of
Madsen, D.B., Lindsay , L.W., 1977. Backhoe Village. American Archaeology and Ethnology vol. 12, no. 2.
Antiquities Section Selected Papers, Vol. IV, Harvard University, Cambridge.
No. 12. Utah State Historical Society, Salt Lake Murphy, R.F., Murphy, Y., 1960. Shoshone-Bannock
City. subsistence and society. Anthropological Records No.
Madsen, D.B., Simms, S.R., 1998. The Fremont com- 9, University of California, Berkeley, pp. 235–273.
plex: a behavioral perspective. Journal of World Neitzel, J., 1989. Regional exchange networks in the
Prehistory 12, 255–336. American Southwest: a comparative analysis of long-
Malouf, C., 1940. Prehistoric exchange in the northern distance trade. In: Lightfoot, S.U.K.G., Jewett, R.A.
periphery of the Southwest. American Antiquity 9, (Eds.), The Sociopolitical Structure of Prehistoric
319–328. Southwestern Societies. Westview Press, Boulder, pp.
Marshall, L., 1961. Sharing, talking, and giving: relief of 149–198.
social tensions among !Kung Bushman. Africa 31, Nelson Jr., F.W., 1984. X-ray fluorescence analysis of
231–249. some western North American obsidian. In: Hughes,
Marwitt, J.P., 1968. Pharo Village. Anthropological R.E. (Ed.), Obsidian studies in the Great Basin.
Papers No. 91. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake Contribution of the University of California Archae-
City. ological Research Facility No. 45. Berkeley, pp. 27–
Marwitt, J.P., 1970. Median Village. Anthropological 62.
Papers No. 95. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake Nelson Jr., F.W., Holmes, R.D., 1979. Trace element
City. analysis of obsidian sources and artifacts from
Marwitt, J.P., 1979. Comment by Marwitt. American western Utah. Antiquities Section Selected Papers
Antiquity 44, 732–736. Vol. 6, No. 15. Utah State Historical Society, Salt
Marwitt, J.P., 1986. Fremont cultures. In: d’Azevedo, Lake City.
Warren L. (Ed.), Great Basin. Sturtevant, W.C. Nickens, P.R., Kvamme, K.L., 1981. Archaeological
(general editor), Handbook of North American investigations at the Kanab site. In: Fike, R.E.,
Indians, vol. 11. Smithsonian Institution, Washing- Madsen, D.B. (Eds.), Excavation of Two Anasazi
ton, DC, pp. 161–172. Sites in Southern Utah. Bureau of Land Manage-
Mauss, M., 1990. The Gift. W.W. Norton, New York. ment, Utah State Office, Salt Lake City.
McDonald, E.K. 1994. A spatial and temporal exam- O’Shea, J.M., 1989. The role of wild resources in small-
ination of prehistoric interaction in the eastern scale agricultural systems: Tales from the Lakes and
Great Basin and on the Northern Colorado the Plains. In: Halstead, P., O’Shea, J.M. (Eds.), Bad
Plateau. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Depart- Year Economics: Cultural Responses to Risk and
ment of Anthropology, University of Colorado, Uncertainty. Cambridge University Press, Cam-
Boulder. bridge, pp. 57–67.
J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370 369
Plog, S., 1989. The sociopolitics of exchange (and Sharrock, F.W., Marwitt, J.P., 1967. Excavations at
archaeological research) in the northern Southwest. Nephi, Utah 1965–1966. Anthropological Papers
In: Kent, S.U., Lightfoot, G., Jewett, R.A. (Eds.), The No. 88. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake
Sociopolitical Structure of Prehistoric Southwestern City.
Societies. Westview Press, Boulder, pp. 129–148. Shields, W.F., 1967. 1966 Excavations: Uinta Basin. In:
Potter, J.M., 2000. Pots, parties, and politics: Commu- Shields, W.F., Marwitt, J.P., Keller, G.N., Hunt,
nal feasting in the American Southwest. American J.D., Reed, E.K. (Eds.), Miscellaneous Collected
Antiquity 65, 471–492. Papers 15–18, Paper no. 15, Anthropological Papers
Prince, T., Latady, W.R., Spaulding, W.G., 1997. No. 89. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City,
Anasazi occupation of the northeastern portion of pp. 1–32.
the Grand Staircase/Escalante National Monument. Shumate, M., 1973. Fort McKenzie (1832–1843): his-
In: Hill, L.M. (Ed.), Learning from the Land: Grand torical site salvage archaeology. Archaeology in
Staircase-Escalante National Monument, Science Montana 14 (2), 20–43.
Symposium Proceedings. US Department of the Shutler Jr., R., 1961. Lost city: Pueblo Grande De
Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Utah State Nevada. Anthropological Papers No. 5. Nevada
Office, Salt Lake City, pp. 121–132. State Museum, Carson City.
Rafferty, K., 1990. The Virgin Anasazi and the Pan- Simmons, M., 1979. History of Pueblo-Spanish relations
southwestern trade system. Kiva 56, 3–24. to 1821. In: Ortiz, A. (Ed.), Southwest. Sturtevant,
Renfrew, C., 1977. Alternative models for exchange and W.C. (general editor), Handbook of North American
spatial distribution. In: Earle, T.K., Ericson, J.E. Indians, vol. 9. Smithsonian Institution, Washing-
(Eds.), Exchange Systems in Prehistory. Academic ton, DC, pp. 178–193.
Press, New York, pp. 71–90. Simms, S.R., 1986. New evidence for Fremont adaptive
Renfrew, C., Bahn, P., 2000. Archaeology: Theories, diversity. Journal of California and Great Basin
methods, and practice, third ed. Thames and Hud- Anthropology 8 (2), 204–216.
son, New York. Simms, S.R., 1990. Fremont transitions. Utah Archae-
Richens, L.D., 1997. Ceramics. In: Janetski, J.C., ology 3 (1), 1–18.
Talbot, R.K., Newman, D.E., Richens, L.D., Wilde, Simms, S.R., Bright, J.R., Ugan, A., 1997. Plain-Ware
J.D. (Eds.), Results and Synthesis. Clear Creek ceramics and residential mobility: a case study from
Canyon Archaeological Project, vol. 5. Museum of the Great Basin. Journal of Archaeological Science
Peoples and Cultures Technical Series No. 95-9. 24, 779–792.
Brigham Young University, Provo, pp. 109–132. Spencer, R.F., 1976. The North Alaskan Eskimo.
Richens, L.D., 1983. Woodard mound: Excavations at a Dover, New York.
Fremont site in Goshen Valley, Utah County, Utah Speth, J.D., 1991. Some unexplored aspects of mutual-
1980-1981. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department istic Plains-Pueblo food exchange. In: Spielmann,
of Anthropology, Brigham Young University, Pro- K.A. (Ed.), Farmers, Hunters, and Colonists. Uni-
vo. versity of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 18–35.
Roberts, H., 1991. A comparative analysis of human Spielmann, K.A. (Ed.), 1991. Farmers, Hunters, and
skeletal remains from Parowan Fremont, Virgin Colonists. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Anasazi, and Kayenta archaeological sites. Unpub- Spinden, H., 1993. Songs of the Tewas. Sunstone Press,
lished Masters Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Santa Fe.
University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Statham, D.S., 1982. Camas and the northern Shoshoni:
Sahlins, M., 1972. Stone Age economics. Aldine Pub- a biogeographic and socioeconomic analysis. Ar-
lishing, Chicago. chaeological Reports No. 10, Boise State University,
Sammons-Lohse, D., 1981. Households and communi- Boise.
ties. In: Jennings, J.D., Sammons-Lohse, D. (Eds.), Steward, J.H., 1936. Pueblo material culture in Western
Bull Creek. Anthropological Papers No. 105. Uni- Utah. Bulletin No. 287. Anthropological Series,
versity of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 111–136. Vol. 1, No. 3. University of New Mexico, Albu-
Schaasma, P., 1994. The rock art of Utah. University of querque.
Utah Press, Salt Lake City. (originally published as Steward, J.H., 1938. Basin-Plateau aboriginal socio-
Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and political groups. Bulletin of American Ethnology
Ethnology, vol. 65, Harvard University). No. 120, Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC
Schroeder, A.H., 1961. The archeological excavations at (reprinted 1970. by University of Utah Press).
Willow Beach, Arizona 1950. Anthropological Pa- Stewart, O.C., 1942. Culture element distributions
pers No. 50. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake XVIII: Ute-Southern Paiute. University of Califor-
City. nia Anthropological Records 6 (4), 231–356.
Schuster, L.J., 1996. Fremont pottery production: Talbot, R.K., Richens, L.D., 1993. Archaeological
Ceramic evidence from Baker Village (26WP63), investigations at Richfield and Vicinity. Museum of
Nevada. Unpublished Master Thesis, Department of Peoples and Cultures Technical Series No. 93–15.
Anthropology, Brigham Young University, Provo. Brigham Young University, Provo.
370 J.C. Janetski / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21 (2002) 344–370
Talbot, R.K., Richens, L.D., 1996. Steinaker Gap. Walling, B.A., Thompson, R.A., Dalley, G.F., Weder,
Museum of Peoples and Cultures Occasional Papers D.G., 1986. Excavations at Quail Creek. Cultural
No. 2, Brigham Young University, Provo. Resources Series No. 20. Bureau of Land Manage-
Talbot, R.K., Richens, L.D., Wilde, J.D., Janetski, J.C., ment, Utah State Office, Salt Lake.
Newman, D.E., 1997. Clear Creek Canyon archae- Warner, T.J. (Ed.), 1976. The Dominguez-Escalante
ological project volume four, part 3: Five Finger Journal. Brigham Young University Press, Provo.
Ridge. Museum of Peoples and Cultures Technical Weigand, P.C., Harbottle, G., 1993. The role of
Series No. 95-8. Brigham Young University, Provo. turquoises in the ancient Mesoamerican trade struc-
Talbot, R.K., Richens, L.D., Wilde, J.D., Janetski, J.C., ture. In: Ericson, J.E., Baugh, T.G. (Eds.), The
Newman, D.E., 1998. Clear Creek Canyon archae- American Southwest and Mesoamerica: Systems of
ological project: Surveys and small site tests. Mu- Prehistoric Exchange. Plenum Press, New York, pp.
seum of Peoples and Cultures Occasional Paper No. 159–177.
3. Brigham Young University, Provo. Wells, S.J., 1993. Archeological investigations at Great
Talbot, R.K., Richens, L.D., Wilde, J.D., Janetski, J.C., Basin National Park: testing and site recording in
Newman, D.E., 1999. Excavations at Icicle Bench, support of the general management plan. Western
Radford Roost, Lott’s Farm, Clear Creek Canyon, Archeological and Conservation Center, National
Utah. Museum of Peoples and Cultures Occasional Park Service Publications in Anthropology No. 64.
Papers No. 4, Brigham Young University, Provo. Tucson.
Taylor, D.C., 1954. The Garrison Site. Anthropological Wiessner, P., 1982. Risk, reciprocity and social influ-
Papers No. 16. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake ences on !Kung San economics. In: Leacock, E., Lee,
City. R.B. (Eds.), Politics and History in Band Societies.
Taylor, D.C., 1957. Two Fremont sites and their Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 61–84.
position in Southwestern prehistory. Anthropologi- Wilde, J.D., Soper, R.A., 1999. Baker village: Report of
cal Papers No. 29. University of Utah Press, Salt excavations, 1990–1994 (DRAFT). Museum of Peo-
Lake City. ples and Cultures Technical Series No. 99-12. Brig-
Thompson, C.T., Allison, J.R. 1988. Symbolism and ham Young University, Provo.
meaning in Fremont painted ceramics. Paper pre- Winterhalder, B., 1997. Gifts given, gifts taken: the
sented at the 21st Great Basin Anthropological behavioral ecology of nonmarket, intragroup
Conference, Park City. exchange. Journal of Archaeological Research 5,
Toll, H.W., 1991. Material distributions and exchange in 121–168.
the Chaco system. In: Patricia, L.C., Judge, W.J. Wissler, C., 1911. The social life of the Blackfoot
(Eds.), Chaco and Hohokam, Prehistoric Regional Indians. Anthropological Papers Vol. 7, Pt. 2.
Systems in the American Southwest. School of American Museum of Natural History, New York.
American Research Press, Santa Fe, pp. 77–108. Wood, G.C., 1977. Fort McKenzie (24CH242): a study
Tower, D.B., 1945. The use of marine mollusks and their in applied historical and archaeological methods.
value in reconstructing prehistoric trade routes in the Archaeology in Montana 18 (1), 43–62.
American Southwest. Papers of the Excavators Club Wood, W.R., 1980. Plains trade in prehistoric and
2:3, Cambridge. protohistoric intertribal relations. In: Raymond
Upham, S., 1982. Polities and Power: An Economic and Wood, W., Liberty, M. (Eds.), Anthropology on
Political History of the Western Pueblo. Academic the Great Plains. University of Nebraska Press,
Press, New York. Lincoln, pp. 98–109.
Vayda, A., 1967. Pomo trade feasts. In: Dalton, Wormington, H.M., 1955. A reappraisal of the Fremont
G. (Ed.), Tribal and Peasant Economies. Natural Culture. In: Proceedings of the Denver Museum of
History Press, Garden City, New York, pp. 494–500. Natural History 1. Denver.