“…Such approaches have been rejected, among many reasons, for being either too unidirectional in how they model the effects of power relationships for culture change or for failing to account for structural power imbalances (e.g., Cusick, 1998;Worth, 2006). While other approaches for theorizing and describing colonial culture change have been employed, such as creolization (Ferguson, 1992;Deetz, 1996;Cusick, 2000;Dawdy, 2000;Delle, 2000;Mullins and Paynter, 2000;Wilkie, 2000), hybridization (e.g., van Dommelen, 2005, and ethnogenesis (Sider, 1994;Hickerson, 1996;Hill, 1996Hill, , 1998Voss, 2008aVoss, , 2008bStojanowski, 2010), practicebased approaches have been effective by highlighting native agency, as well as by being particularly well suited for archaeological materials. Indeed, as Lightfoot, Martinez, and Schiff (1998: 201-202) have argued:…”