Rethinking "Redistribution" in the Archaeological Record

Obsidian Exchange at the Marana Platform Mound

Bibliographic Data

ID2993836
AuthorsJames M Bayman (corresponding author)
Year1995
Volume51
Issue1
Pages37-63
Publication date1995-04-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Anthropological Research (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0091-7710 • E-ISSN: 2153-3806
PublisherUniversity of Chicago Press (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1086/jar.51.1.3630371
OpenAlexW2318800106
LanguageEN
Citations received33
References cited24

Economic concepts of redistribution and reciprocity (e.g., Service 1962; Sahlins 1972; Earle 1977) often play important roles in models of exchange, even though prehistorians are poorly equipped to discriminate between these processes in the archaeological record. Spatial analyses and geochemical characterization (X-ray fluorescence) of obsidian from the Classic period (A.D. 1100-1300) Hohokam multi-site community of Marana in the American Southwest reveal patterns that do not match idealized archaeological expectations of redistribution. These data support an interpretation of restricted obsidian consumption at communal ceremonial gatherings that centered on the platform mound. However, households in the platform mound settlement (the largest site in the community) had roughly equivalent amounts of obsidian, whereas households in settlements away from the mound had highly limited access. This unexpected pattern indicates that normative models of exchange are inadequate for characterizing prehistoric economy in prestate societies like the Hohokam

Archaeological record · Archaeology · Geography · Human settlement · Political science · Prehistory · Redistribution (election) · Settlement (finance) · Archaeology and ancient environmental studies · Historical and Cultural Archaeology Studies · History · Indigenous Studies and Ecology · Law