North American archaeologists have long been interested in distinguishing between dart and arrow points in order to establish when bow-and-arrow technology was adopted in the Eastern Woodlands. A quantitative analysis of point form and qualitative reconstructions of bifacial reduction trajectories from Plum Bayou culture sites in central Arkansas indicate that arrow points were abruptly adopted and became widespread about A.D. 600. Moreover, arrow points are metrically discrete entities that were not developed through gradual modification of dart points in this region as appears to be the case elsewhere. Comparisons with patterns observed in other regions of the East show significant variation in the timing, rate, and direction of the adoption of the bow and arrow, as well as the role of this technological change in Native American economies and sociopolitics. These observations suggest that the bow and arrow were: (1) introduced significantly earlier than some researchers have posited; (2) independently invented by some groups and diffused to others; and (3) relinquished and later readopted in some areas of the Eastern Woodlands in response to changing social, historical, and environmental conditions. Our data also call into question simple unilinear or diffusionary models that claim to explain the development and spread of this technological innovation.

No abstract

When community partners authorize investigations and interpretations of heritage sites, there is an increased likelihood that the needs and desires of various stakeholders will diverge. Further complications arise when natural forces threaten site integrity, making it incumbent on heritage professionals to reach reasoned decisions in the interest of the public good while balancing research and preservation needs. Community partnerships succeed when they contain the tensions between competing goals among partners. How do heritage professionals enter into and sustain large-scale, multi-year projects in the face of opposing demands, some of which come into conflict with ethical principles like site conservation? The Fort St. Joseph Archaeological Project suggests how navigating these turbulent waters can lead to sustainable practices with long-term mutual benefits. By preserving the past for the future at Fort St. Joseph, we aim to sustain the results of our investigations for future generations.

Public archaeologists are turning to community service learning (CSL) as a model for resolving the perceived learning crisis in the field, and to redress the limitations of archaeological pedagogy and practice. Examples drawn from various projects in the United States show how the CSL approach encourages students who practise archaeology to become civically engaged, capable of confronting real-world problems, and empowered to see themselves as catalysts for change. Service-learning practitioners emphasize research problems that emanate from the community, the learning experiences of students who are committed to civic engagement, and the opportunity for the community to collaborate fully in the teaching and the research. The reform in archaeological pedagogy and practice through CSL will keep the discipline of archaeology cognizant of its anthropological roots and allow it to contribute theoretically, methodologically, and substantively to the social sciences while serving to expand the current scope of service learning.

No abstract