Crucible of Andean Civilization

Tom Dillehay (ed.). Where the land meets the sea: fourteen millennia of human history at Huaca Prieta, Peru. 2017. Austin: University of Texas Press; 978-1-4773-1149-3 $75.

“…For Dillehay, the major concern of Preceramic populations like the one settled around Huaca Prieta was "the maintenance of cohesion and the reproduction of individual communities and their kinship and household group identities", and, in this regard, "mound building was essential for the creation of a sense of community among dispersed foragers who were incorporating crops and needing a permanent place to integrate" (Dillehay,. This view is radically different from current views of mound building during the early stages of social complexity in the Central Andean region (compare with Haas & Creamer 2006;Shady 2009). Dillehay posits that the social process or 'social construction' of monumental architecture is a necessary result of human interaction, rather than the interest of corporate groups or elites imposing their monumental desires over the population.…”

“…16–17). This view is radically different from current views of mound building during the early stages of social complexity in the Central Andean region (compare with Haas & Creamer 2006; Shady 2009). Dillehay posits that the social process or ‘social construction’ of monumental architecture is a necessary result of human interaction, rather than the interest of corporate groups or elites imposing their monumental desires over the population.…”

Preceramic Adoption of Peanut, Squash, and Cotton in Northern Peru

“…These processes in Ñanchoc [and other areas of the Andes (23)] also served as catalysts for rapid social changes that eventually contributed to the development of intensified agriculture, institutionalized political power, and towns in both the Andean highlands and on the coast between 5500 and 4000 yr B.P. (24). The Ñanchoc data indicate that agriculture played a more important and earlier role in the development of Andean civilization than previously understood, especially within suitable, low-elevation mountain environments.…”

Sociopolitical organization, landscape change, and hydraulic engineering in the Teotihuacan Valley, Mexico: 1250 B.C.–A.D. 1810

“…Even if a bottom-up organization is identified, ethnographic studies suggest it can easily be incorporated into a broader state structure (Hunt & Hunt, 1976). Collective institutions arising from highly mosaiked agricultural landscapes are thought to have emerged in the Indus Valley (Possehl, 1998;Wright, 2010), while similar conditions of subsistence diversification have been identified in the Preceramic Norte Chico region of Perú (Haas et al, 2013;Haas & Creamer, 2006;Shady Solís, 2006;Shady Solís & Leyva, 2003) and in the Middle Horizon Tiwanaku/Late Titicaca area (Bruno, 2014;Bruno & Whitehead, 2003;Capriles, Moore, Domic, & Hastorf, 2014;Janusek, 2008).…”