No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The published paper by Patterson (1994) gives the impression that Latin American archaeology has a significant orientation toward social archaeology. We present evidence, however, that indicates the restricted nature of social archaeology in time (1970s and early 1980s) and space (Cuba, Mexico, Peru, and Venezuela). Social archaeology developed only in a political context where the model pursued by the state was sympathetic to marxist ideology during a specific historical period. Further, at the academic level, social archaeology gradually lost appeal to students in those countries where it developed because of the politicization of the archaeological discourse at universities and the lack of a relationship between practice and theory (epistemological theory). The practical aspects of social archaeology have never passed beyond those of cultural history produced under the schema of a national state archaeology. Consideration of the realities under which archaeology developed in each Latin American country leads to a broader understanding of the context in which social archaeology exists in Latin America today.

O n May 16, 1994, the academic community lost one of its greatest researchers. The father of Colombian anthropological archaeology died in Bogota. More than 50 years of continuous research by Gerardo Reichel-Dolmatoff and his wife, Alicia, have built a solid foundation for anthropological academia in Colombia. To Reichel-Dolmatoff no division existed between anthropological and archaeological research. He always thought of research holistically, following the model of knowledge that developed through work with the native inhabitants of Colombia. More than once he expressed the view that if humanity wanted to survive and stop its destruction of nature, we had to start learning the lessons of the past and incorporating them into our understanding, and that some of the models developed by indigenous societies may be worth emulating. His vast knowledge of several fields from botany to linguistics, and his impressive command of Spanish, English, German, and French, and an understanding of several indigenous languages made him a real encyclopedist.

This volume is a major contribution to the study of mortuary practices in the Andes. The book is the result of the annual symposium on a specific topic or area of Latin America organized by the Dumbarton Oaks institution. The editor's excellent introduction reviews the theoretical perspectives on mortuary practice studies, and the ten articles range from Chile to Colombia and from the pre-ceramic of the Chinchorro culture in Chile up to the present ayllus of the Kallawayas in Bolivia. The methodologies and research objectives also range widely. John H. Rowe contributes a historical review of the study of burials in Peru, while other articles offer archaeological interpretations of the burials in relation to status, rank, specialization, ideology, trade, and empowerment of the elites. The approaches are exemplified by papers on the mummification practices of the kin-based Chinchorro society by the Chilean archaeologist Mario Rivera, the tombs of the San Agustin chiefdoms in Colombia by Robert D. Drennan, the ='Jazca by Patrick H. Carmichael, and state societies on the Moche by Christopher Donnan. An article by John W. Verano describes the nature of human remains as offerings and trophies for the Nazca, Paracas, Moche, and Chimor cultures. This mosaic of articles even includes a very interesting discussion by Jane Buikstra on the variety of mortuary practices found at the Osmore Valley cemeteries in Peru. Her analysis is cast in regard to the valley'S possible relationship as a colony of the Tiwanaku state. Another set of chapters concentrates on the ethnohistory of mortuary rituals in colonial Peru by Frank Salomon, ethnoarchaeology and ethnohistory of the Araucanian funeral mounds by Tom D. Dillehay, and finally, a very interesting ethnography of a funeral in a Quechua ayllu in Bolivia by Joseph W. Bastian. All these diverse chapters are discussed at the end of the book by Patricia J. Lyon and James A. Brown. These final two essays tie together very well the tapestry of chapters that share only the same object of study. Indeed, this book would be easier to follow if it had a common research problem. Nevertheless, as expected, once more Tom Dillehay and Dumbarton Oaks have made an important contribution to Latin American studies by producing this Significant volume.

No abstract