Augusto Oyuela-Caycedo’s edited volume on Latin American archaeology is divided into two sections. The first consists of seven chapters written by Latin American authors on the archaeology of their respective countries (Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Panama, Peru, and Venezuela), plus an introductory chapter by the editor. The second section, with four chapters by North American authors, offers thematic historical accounts of specific topics (maize research, lithic studies, ethnological contributions to archaeology, and a review of Donald Lathrap’s influential works). Although University of Pittsburgh authors arguably are overrepresented and chapters on the rich archaeological prehistories of Argentina and Ecuador are sorely missed, the volume nevertheless achieves a broad and integrative perspective on trajectories of development and change in Latin America’s archaeology. Local information and perspectives have long been lacking in the Anglo-American literature, and understandings of the social context of a developing field have too often been ignored.
The introductory chapter outlines a model for considering parallel developments in nationhood and in archaeology from the perspective of a nonhegemonic archaeology. Both governments and archaeologists working at the state level invent homogeneous cultural areas within territorial boundaries; and as states achieve integration of these ever-larger areas, characteristic stages of archaeological practice can be identified. (This model is applied to Colombia in chapter 4.)
Subsequent chapters on specific national archaeologies detail different developmental dynamics, but consistently weigh the effects of research from a dominant core area on local developments. These considerations of foreign influence reiterate a deep ambivalence toward the North American and European centers, which have regularly established chronological frameworks for Latin American areas, summarized their archaeological histories, and undertaken more and bigger research projects than those conducted by national archaeologists. Gassón and Wagner, discussing Venezuela, put forward a model of scientific and intellectual dependency whereby the research paradigms of dominant countries are reproduced in peripheral countries, the quality of research is privileged over its relevance to local interests, funding and technologies are imported from abroad, the local scientific community remains small, with comparatively few resources, and research results are generated largely in the dominant countries but not locally. Matos reports that in Peru, North American influences, including the “New Archaeology,” have over-emphasized theoretical frameworks and discussions at the expense of traditional research concerns and lasting empirical contributions.
Another major theme examines the relationship between the interests of emerging bureaucratic institutions (academic, governmental, and museological) and the theoretical directions taken in archaeology. Here the chapters on Mexico and Panama make an excellent contrast between highly centralized and extremely decentralized governmental oversight of archaeological practice.
In contrast to these politically sensitive considerations, the four chapters by North American authors underplay socioeconomic and political contexts of research and focus instead on substantive issues, even when they effectively integrate North and South American research results. These valuable and well-written historical summaries perhaps best illustrate the Latin Americans’ main point: foreign influence has produced excellent research but is out of touch with local national interests.
