Theory Testing in Prehistoric North America: Fruits of One of the World's Great Archeological Natural Laboratories

Abstract

This paper has several interconnected goals. First and most generally, we will review the project represented by the papers in this dedicated issue and the SAA Symposium (2012) on Social Complexity and the Bow. This project centers on the ever-stronger and broader theory testing now becoming feasible in archeology and anthropology, in this case exploiting the unique natural laboratory represented by what we refer to as the North American Neolithic transitions. Second, we will strive to synopsize the papers in this issue as opportunities to falsify two general theories of the cause of increases in social complexity associated with the North American Neolithic: warfare and social coercion theories.(1) We argue that, though much work remains to be done, the current evidence supports one of the central predictions of both these theories, that the local arrival of elite bow technology was a central driver of local transitions to increased social complexity. This conclusion, if ultimately verified, has profound implications for the possibility of general theories of history. Third, we will argue that several important details of this evidence falsify warfare theory and support (fail to falsify) social coercion theory (the authors' favored perspective). Moreover, several potential falsifications of social coercion theory are amenable to alternative interpretations, leading to new falsifiable predictions. Finally, we discuss how interactions with our colleagues in this project produced new insights into several details of the predictions of social coercion theory, improving our interpretative capacity.

Introduction: Social Complexity and the Bow in the Prehistoric North American Record

“…Having provisionally eliminated many potential sources of causation, we are arguably left with only one. While there is evidence of some apparently primitive forms of the bow at earlier intervals (see, especially, Maschner and Mason, Walde, and references therein) we argue that there is strong evidence of a relatively synchronous, continent‐wide adoption of an advanced form of the elite bow at or near the appropriate time for this weapon to act as a driver of local North American Neolithic transitions …”

“…By the time of European colonial contact, many Native North Americans already had more than 300–500 years of history of living in relatively complex societies . Indeed, some of these complex North American cultures were successful in negotiating with European state‐level societies from a position of strength and with political sophistication for nearly two centuries after initial contact .…”

“…For example, among such potential sources of causation are developments in religious or ritual belief and in adaptive know‐how, such as foraging and nonweapon‐related manufacturing techniques. There are sound theoretical reasons for rejecting these developments as causes rather than effects of the North American Neolithic transition . Moreover, there are also compelling empirical reasons for skepticism.…”

“…The atlatl, held in the throwing hand, then amplifies the normal human throwing motion, allowing the bolt to be projected much farther than with the unaided arm (Fig. 2) . The atlatl was apparently brought to North America by the first human settlers millennia before the Neolithic.…”

“…For example, contemporary members of advanced market economies enjoy per capita wealth about 30–50‐fold higher than did their ancestors for many millennia preceding the “modern economic miracle” of the last four centuries . Similarly, the Mississippians of late prehistoric North America lived in settlements that were much larger and more long‐lived than those of their ancestors of just a few centuries before, in settlements sustained by newly intensified subsistence economies …”