In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

1 Introduction A camp in an isolated location with some permanent buildings and an assured water supply is an important feature of the University of Arizona program. Archaeological research is often carried out in out-of-the-way places in large measure because so much of the potential evidence is destroyed by urban, industrial, and agricultural expansion near centers of population. Field training therefore should take this fact into account by providing students with both a sample of the kind of living conditions necessary in isolated regions and an opportunity to learn something of the logistic problems they might face themselves as research scientists.- Emil Haury (1964: 3) Grasshopper. To those who do not know the place, the word may conjure up odd and uncertain images-insect, plague, perhaps a character in an old martial-arts television show. Grasshopper is, however, none of these things, but rather a place name labeling a remote locale in eastcentral Arizona, a dot that appears on only the most detailed maps. For those who know it best, Grasshopper is far more than this. It is a place of many pasts that will never live again, a palimpsest recording the traces of diverse peoples who lived and worked there over its six-hundred-year history. People of vastly different cultures came, marked the country to create distinct landscapes, and then left. The uppermost layer is modern. Grasshopper was the last of the archaeological field schools isolated in the mountain backwoods of central Arizona and the last large, prehistoric pueblo village in the American Southwest to be thoroughly investigated by professional archaeologists working in a field-school situation. In this unique context and stunning natural landscape, dozens of students learned what it takes to become a professional archaeologist, and many of them went on to achieve considerable success in that field. 3 The next layer bears traces of the Western Apache peoples who lived near Grasshopper for centuries and who own the land today. The lowest layers hide the material record of the more distant past. A rich and unparalleled archaeological record reveals the lives of prehistoric Mogollon and Anasazi peoples who occupied the region long before the Apache and Euroamerican peoples arrived. It is difficult to imagine a richer database for unraveling the complicated threads of past human lives. Grasshopper is unique in another way. Grasshopper research is a fascinating and revealing historical record of change and development in American archaeology and in the discipline as a whole. The Grasshopper Field School-which, hereafter, we label simply the Field School-reflected in microcosm the paradigm shifts that irrevocably changed the discipline. The Field School began in the era of culture history, rapidly shifted to the emerging processual archaeology, and served as a laboratory and proving ground for behavioral archaeology. In its final years, it absorbed influences that can be attributed broadly to postprocessual archaeology. Perhaps no other archaeological endeavor can claim the longevity necessary to reflect these changes. Moreover, each of Grasshopper 's three directors-Raymond Harris Thompson, William Atlas Longacre, and James Jefferson Reid-can claim prominence in the development of the three archaeological programs with which they were associated. It is remarkable that Grasshopper's unmatched archaeological record could serve the needs of three schools of American archaeology and hold research interests for three decades. We have used this singular situation as an opportunity to chronicle the history of the Field School. This book looks closely at the ways in which three different archaeologies and three directors tackled the same archaeological context, cataloguing their successes and failures. In addition to this unique window on American archaeology, we tackle this daunting historical task for a number of reasons. In chronicling the bits and pieces of thirty summers of survey and excavation in one of the most remote and beautiful regions of the American Southwest , we sought to catalogue the minor triumphs and seeming disasters that characterize any field endeavor. Emil Haury-longtime director of the University of Arizona (UA) Archaeological Field School, past director of the Arizona State Museum (ASM), head of the Department of Anthropology at the UA, and one of southwestern archaeology's most important scholars-said it well in his history of the Point of Pines field school. He writes (Haury 1989: 122), "Technical reports on archaeo4 CHAPTER 1 logical studies seldom, if ever, touch on certain successes and failure, the traumas and pleasure of getting the work done. The feeling that guided me throughout this writing was that the 'other...


Additional Information

Related ISBN
MARC Record
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.