Archaeology of Formative Ecuador: A Symposium at Dumbarton Oaks, 7 and 8 October 1995 (review)

Born out of the October 1995 symposium at Dumbarton Oaks, Archaeology of Formative Ecuador seeks to expand the existing literature on this portion of Ecuadorian prehistory. To accomplish this, eleven essays exploring a diverse array of subjects, including human skeletal analysis, zooarchaeology, paleoethnobotany, and iconography, are included within the symposium proceedings. These essays are supplemented with four appendices detailing aspects of Formative Period chronology in different geographical regions of the country. Given the varied contributions and limited space for review, only selected essays will be discussed here.

Of particular note is the contribution by Peter Stahl on the state of the zooarchaeological record for the Formative Period. His essay provides concise descriptions of taphonomic processes, acting on the rich faunal assemblages. In addition, his cogent highlighting of existing biases toward coastal excavations and his self-critical examination of how much of the Formative Period literature is written provides cautionary notes to future researchers.

Like Stahl's contribution, Deborah Pearsall's essay detailing aspects of paleoethnobotanical remains of the Ecuadorian Formative Period and Coastal Peru deserves mention. She provides an excellent overview of her work in Ecuador and focuses on the myriad problems faced by those seeking to recover botanical remains. This includes a discussion on how to interpret these remains in the context of the increasingly sophisticated recovery techniques that have reduced previous sampling biases. Her contribution marks a good starting point for those not familiar with paleoethnobotanical research.

Last, mention is needed of the contribution by Douglas Ubelaker. After thirty years of research, Ubelaker's name is almost synonymous with the analysis of skeletal material. When this work was written, he had conducted analysis of nearly 1700 individuals from contexts dating from ca. 8250 BP to the mid-twentieth century. In this text, Ubelaker concentrates on health issues of the Early Formative Period. Although he acknowledges his small sample, his analysis indicates that the Early Formative Period was a period of increasingly poor health. The frequency of infectious disease and interpersonal violence appeared to be on the rise compared with the Preceramic Period.

I selected only three of the eleven contributions for a brief overview of their content because they represent topic areas that I find interesting. I would, however, like to emphasize the scope of the contributions not mentioned in this review, which include analysis of ceramic variation, ideological expression, social formation, settlement processes, and naturalistic representation in Chorrera art.

A few minor problems do exist with Archaeology of Formative Ecuador. With the intent to both expand and make more accessible the literature on this portion of the prehistory of Ecuador (viii), I anticipated a work suited to all levels of academia. Unfortunately, given the technical nature of some of the essays and the lack of explanation of some terms, Archaeology of Formative Ecuador is better suited to the graduate level and beyond. This could have been resolved with better in-text explanation of terms or with the inclusion of a glossary. In addition, several of the essays proved a challenging read and would have benefited from additional editing. Finally, given a nearly decade-long delay between the symposium and the publication of the papers presented, some of the contributions, for obvious reasons, lack the inclusion of current research.

Because of the diversity of topics encapsulated within this single monograph, Archaeology of Formative Ecuador is an important contribution to the literature. Not only is this diversity thought provoking but it also highlights the prehistory of a country that is often paid short shrift, especially in comparison to the literature dedicated to Peruvian prehistory. For those interested in South American archaeology, this is a valuable contribution.

This volume is also available electronically from the publisher at http://www.doaks.org.