A multivariate perspective on lithic technological organization at Housepit 54, Bridge River Site (EeRl4), British Columbia

Emergence of persistent institutionalized inequality at the Bridge River site, British Columbia: the roles of managerial mutualism and coercion

“…We cannot yet determine if these new residents were kin or non-kin. The IIe floor does appear to loosely meet expectations of Smith and Choi's [17] simulation model for managerial mutualism given the apparent appearance of one higher wealth group during a time of population growth with moderate increases in the rate of goods production [37]. Unfortunately, some aspects of their model (enforcement cost and management fee, for example) are very hard to measure with archaeological data.…”

“…Some groups would remove the old roof and floor when reestablishing the house, as for example at the large housepits of Keatley Creek [34,44]. Other groups, such as at Bridge River, would remove the roof with minimal disturbance to the floor and simply add a new layer of silty-loam over the old floor, effectively starting the cycle again [37]. If the house persists across enough generations under the Bridge River formation processes model, then the housepit accumulates a record of long-term persistence and change stored on superimposed anthropogenic floors as opposed to a record of redeposited floors and roofs in middens surrounding the house.…”

“…However, these earliest floors appear to have been small and thus likely representative of single family houses (probably 5-7 persons). Floors IIf-IIl reflect a larger rectangular-shaped house (occupied by populations that could have ranged between about 10 and 30), while floors IIa-IIe represent the house at full size, an approximate 13 m diameter oval, with house populations estimated between about 25 and 45 [26,37]. Prentiss et al [54] provide a phylogenetic model suggesting that rules for social interactions evolved from a communalistic (IIh-IIl) to a more collectivist (IIa-IIg) social strategy.…”

“…Wealth distinctions between domestic groups, when present, appear not to have been kept hidden as wealth-related items (prestige objects and raw materials) are commonly found on house floors [37]. Teit [38] provides an account of Nlaka'pamux people sitting over trap doors covering caches of food.…”

“…Archaeologists can measure variation between family groups based upon spatial arrangements of redundant domestic areas on house floors [34–36]. Wealth distinctions between domestic groups, when present, appear not to have been kept hidden as wealth-related items (prestige objects and raw materials) are commonly found on house floors [37]. Teit [38] provides an account of Nlaka'pamux people sitting over trap doors covering caches of food.…”