1848, ended the US-Mexico war.

1. Lubbock forceful advocate for unilineal evolution. The arguments about analogy offered to help justify the scientific use of ethnographic analogy. • Lubbock believed natural selection created not only cultural differences but also caused differences in the biological capacities of humans to use culture. • Europeans were the product of substantial cultural and biological evolution. • Differential natural selection also explained criminality and class differences. • Because women were protected by men, women were biologically inferior to men in terms of both intellectual capacity and emotional self-control.

2. Darwinian theory provided a naturalization of the class system, gender discrimination, and colonialism. • The widespread support for such ideas among the middle classes suggests that, • Having achieved political power, middle-class European males regarded their exalted status not as a passing phase inhuman history but as a reflection of their own biological superiority. • Industrial Revolution led to domination of society by the physically strong and martially inclined • This provided an opportunity for intelligent and prudent males to rise to the top of society. • New elite wanted to believe that no one was biologically able to challenge their dominance.

3. Lubbock sought to counter Rousseau’s assertion that development of civilization meant a decrease in human happiness. • Lubbock cast “primitive” people as leading a difficult existence, wretched, and morally depraved.

4. Reason and progress, influenced from the Enlightenment, factored into the American Revolution and subsequent territorial expansion. • Sustained belief that progress was inherent, Euro-American society placed at forefront of this advancement. • Lewis Henry Morgan (1818-1881) Ancient Society (1877) • Otis Mason (1838-1908) The Origins of Invention (1895) • Declining numbers of Indigenous North Americans accorded with Lubbock’s views about extinction. • Assumed incapacity to change, archaeologists often stressed the changeless quality of the archaeological record.

5. 1848, ended the US-Mexico war. • Mexicans seen as inferior due to Spanish settlers interbreeding with indigenous population. • L.H. Morgan maintained that Spanish chroniclers exaggerated cultural sophistication of Aztecs and Inca. • Argued that they differed little from Iroquois of New York and no indigenous group evolved beyond a tribe. • Morgan (1881) published comparative study of indigenous architecture, and continued to equate Mseoamerican masonry with Iroquois longhouses. • Did not rule out that Indigenous people could evolve, but this would require an increase in brain size. This could only happen slowly. • In 1860s, widespread belief that surviving indigenous people of Western Hemisphere were biologically primitive and cultures had remained static during ancient times.

6. Willey and Sabloff (1993) suggest this static view resulted from: • Failure of indigenous groups to evolved beyond Stone Age • Dearth of stratified sites • Lack of familiarity with techniques for developing chronology in absence of major technological changes. • Trigger asserts the evidence does not support these claims. • Low numbers of post-Paleolithic sites in Europe did not inhibit simple seriation to construct chronologies. • All chronological methods in Europe were known in the US and were applied in situations where US scholars attempted to emulate European research. • By 1860s shell mounds were studied seriationally and stratigraphically and cultural chronologies were developed from changes in pottery and technology. • US Southeast: Jeffries Wyman (1875), S.T. Walker (1883), Clarence B. Moore (1892) • Alaska: William Dall (1877) • California: Max Uhle (1907) visiting German archaeologist • Lyman, O’Brien, and Dunnell (1997) demonstrate that stratigraphic methods were used at excavations across the US by the late 1800s.

7. At Emeryville mound in California, Uhle found evidence for “the gradual elaboration and refinement of technical processes”. • Kroeber (1909) asserted that indigenous cultures of the area were so primitive that there could not have been significant cultural development in the past. • Dixon (1913) and Wissler (1914) also expressed doubt regarding significant change interpreted from the archaeological record.

8. Uhle’s (1909) excavations >700 individuals buried in mound "...physical remains (houses, artifacts and other materials) of past people who were probably revered as ancestors by the living. The repeated construction and use of the mounds forged a direct link between the living and the dead. Bay Area peoples dwelled on top of mounds whose cores encapsulated the sacred remains of their ancestors going back many generations..." (Lightfoot:1997) 1926, mound leveled to make paint factory

9. Stemming from a belief that there was little change, most cultural variation was ordered geographically rather than chronologically. • This paralleled the American Ethnological approach of studying cultural similarity and difference in terms of culture areas. • In 1887, Franz Boas (1858-1942) argued that ethnological material should be exhibited in museums according to geographical areas rather than in terms of hypothesized evolutionary sequences or typological categories. • Chicago world’s fair 1892-1893. • This followed German museum practices. • In 1896, Otis Mason published the first ethnographic treatment of culture areas • Curator at Smithsonian • In 1914, this was followed by Clark Wissler. • American Museum of Natural History

10. 1894, Cyrus Thomas (1825-1910), worked as archaeologist for Bureau of American Ethnology, subdivided Mounds into 8 geographical units. • Suggested that these were different nations • Some persisted into historic times. • 1898, Introduction to the Study of North American Archaeology, divided North America into three major cultural zones: Arctic, Atlantic, and Pacific. • 1899, J.D. McGuire (1842-1916) ordered Indian pipes in terms of 15 geographic divisions. • 1903, W. H. Holmes (1846-1933) used style and technological attributes to define pottery regions for the eastern US. • 1914, divided North America into 26 general “cultural characterization areas”. • These works paralleled ethnologists.

11. Culture areas generally corresponded to major ecological zones. • Rather than seeing variability as skillful adaption to diverse environments, it was interpreted as domination of Native People by natural forces. • Shortly after arrival in New World, environmental demands shaped people’s customs and once adjusted to those forces, remained relatively static. • This was contrasted to a dynamic interpretation of European technology that permitted humans to impose their will on the environment and transform it.

12. Evidence for change in the archaeological record was interpreted in terms of migration and movement rather than modification of single cultures. • Example: many believed that Mesoamericans migrated north to produce the southwestern Pueblos.

13. W.H. Holmes is often cited as the first to systematically apply the direct historical approach. • 1875, began studying Anasazi of San Juan River, Utah. • 1883, Art in Shell of the American Indians • 1886, Pottery of the Ancient Pueblos • Direct Historical Approach applied earlier • William Bartram (1739-1823) Exploration of the Cherokee Nation • European Archaeologists.

14. 1879, Bureau of Ethnology founded as a branch of the Smithsonian Institution. • John Wesley Powell (1834-1902) headed the Bureau. • Bureau established to promote more effective administration of Native People. • Bureau employed a flat view of aboriginal history as it linked ethnology and archaeology. • Denial of change position, just like the extreme unilineal evolutionary view, subordinated archaeological research by implying that archaeology could not provide information otherwise obtainable by ethnography. • While the “flat” view unified anthropology, it subordinated archaeology. • To validate a “flat” view, Bureau anthropologists sought to undermine aspects of prehistory that could not be studied by the direct historical approach.

15. US Congress decided that Bureau should spend 5,000 a year on mound studies. • 1882, Powell chose Cyrus Thomas to direct research. • Thomas undertook survey and excavation. He concluded that many mounds built after European contact. Based on direct historical approach, Thomas concluded that all of the mounds had been built by ancestors of modern Indigenous people. Argued that the people who built the mounds were no more advanced than Native People who lived in the eastern US during the 1600-1700s. • Thomas (1898) suggested that once settled, indigenous people tended to remain in the same place. • The archaeological record produced by the same people who lived in a specific region. • Could assume this was the case unless evidence to the contrary.

16. Trigger points out that, “at this time archaeologists had either to credit the Moundbuilders with possessing an advanced culture and deny that they were Indians or accept them as Indians and deny that their culture had been more advanced than those of any Indian groups living north of Mexico in historical times.”

17. Frank Cushing (1875-1900) and J.W. Fewkes (1850-1930) made many ethnographic parallels in interpreting Pueblo artifacts. • Assumed little differences between prehistoric and modern pueblos. • Efforts to learn about the past melded with study of the present.

18. Born in Erie County Pennsylvania. • Began collecting relics, fossils, and minerals at age 8 • At 17, wrote a paper to the Smithsonian on antiquities of Orleans County, New York. The paper was published. • Later hired as a curator at the SI and joined Bureau of American Ethnology. • In 18798, John Wesley Powell sent Cushing, and others, to Zuni Pueblo. • Cushing lived at Zuni from 1879-1884. • Adherent to the participant-observer method of ethnography. Began to dress Zuni and destroyed his own clothes. Frank Hamilton Cushing