Customer Reviews

Prehistoric Warfare in the American Southwest

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This book is one of a triad published almost simultaneously by three different professionals assaulting traditional assumptions about the prehistory of the Southwest. Each of these works is formidable and collectively they will probably result in a paradigm shift in the interpretation of the nature of prehistoric society in the region. The other two works are Man Corn by Christy Turner, and The Chaco Meridian by Stephen Lekson. LeBlanc's work will jolt those comfortable with past versions of southwestern prehistory characterized by peaceful farmers living in harmony with one another and nature. LeBlanc offers a history, typology, and context for violence in the prehistoric Southwest. He devotes much space on a period of unusual warmth and moisture in the Southwest, 900 to 1200 AD. This era was dominated by a political center in Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. The Chacoans may have dominated as much as fifty thousand square miles of the Southwest at this time. Chaco's political/military structure may justify calling it a regional variant of a Mesoamerican statelet.

For Chacoan times, LeBlanc feels there is much evidence of cannibalism, but very little of actual warfare. This is explained by the likelihood that those bold enough to defy the Lords of Chaco were exterminated and cannibalized. Cannibalism was an instrument of policy to terrorize potential rebels and ensure Chaco's dominion. Benign climate and enforced peace created a population explosion. The party ended when a series of droughts undermined the agricultural base. By the late 1200's the Southwest entered a prolonged period of unusual cold and drought. The societal response was the disintegration of the Pax Chaco and a bloody free-for-all in competition for fewer arable acres. Small villages had too few warriors to defend them and were abandoned. Many show evidence of a violent end.

To survive in such an age, it was necessary to gather into large villages that could close out or fight off marauders. With less rain and more frosts, many Anasazi were killed by others wanting their land or their stored food. Others starved. Evidence for violence and warfare is common in this age from 1275 to 1400. By the end of this age the Anasazi are living in four regional groupings occupying in large, fortresslike Pueblos. Groups of villages are linked by political and military alliances. The empty lands separate the four great clusters the Spanish called "Despoblados".

In his review of violence, cannibalism, and warfare, LeBlanc almost inadvertently answers one of the great questions in southwestern archaeology, why was the Colorado plateau largely abandoned by the Anasazi after 1300. His answer is that many did not leave, but rather died in situ from starvation and warfare. Others crowded into ever larger, distant settlements in search of the security of numbers.

I found this LeBlanc's arguments tightly reasoned and backed by a studious, often innovative, review of the archaeological record. The result is a believable reworking of the history of the Southwest. This book will be distasteful to many Native Americans, New Agers, and anthropologists who have invested careers in portraying the Anasazi as exempt from the evil and violence that characterize mankind in other times and places. LeBlanc, Turner, and Lekson are spearheading a radical transformation in how the educated public interprets the prehistory of the Southwest. The currently dominant "beau model" of peaceful farmers, directed by wise elders living in harmony and balance is another manifestation of the noble savage fantasy that has beguiled the West for centuries now.

History and archaeology have much to tell us about human nature and how to understand and resolve the problems confronting us as a species. For this information to be of any help to us in our current struggle, our perceptions of our past must be as accurate as possible. In my assessment, these three authors are bringing the experience of mankind in the Southwest into a focus that seems more realistic and human than what has previously been offered to the literate public.

This book is very interesting (at least for someone who has lived in the area all his life and seen many of the sites it mentions)and convincing. As one of the earlier reviews reflects - and as the book itself clearly expects - this interpretation of the evidence highly offends those for whom ideology trumps acheology. The books' tone is rather dry; this is written as a scholarly work, not a popularization, and may not be exciting reading except for archeology majors.

This book is absolutely fabulous! The author has done a good job of providing a read that is both very informative, but not at all a "dry read" so to speak. I found this book enjoyable, as a matter of fact.

Also, i'm about to enter college as an anthropology major, and i am interested in pursuing a topic simular to the the subject of this book (it will be something dealing with warfare in the southwest, that's for certain) as a thesis, so no doubt this book will help me with that as well when the time comes for that.

Good to get a truly fact based analysis. Prose is more workman like than graceful. Organization is clear albeit somewhat repetitive. Well worth the read if the subject interests you.

With this book, author Leblanc allies himself with Christy Turner, both who appear to be fixated on their belief that Native Americans of the southwest were cannibals. Turner is notorious for shaping evidence to fit his narrow interpretation for cannibalism in the southwest. Leblanc appears to be following in the same narrow sphere of opinionated and inflamatory analysis of partial facts in order to make his case.

For example, Leblanc illustrates a group of atifacts he calls "swords" (105), although we do not know that what these are. There are people who know what these things are and what they mean. Why don't we hear their voices here?

Chapter Two, entitled "Evidence for Warfare" cites an excerpt of the story "The Destruction of Awatovi" (44), as written by Malotki (1993), suggesting to the reader that the fall of Awatovi was an act of war. Actually, Awatovi's destruction is a much more complex story, and was not an act of war but one of resistence and survival.

Leblanc claims that "warfare is a subject we would all like to ignore", although evidence is clearly to the contrary. History is an accounting of wars. Today's political manuvers use war as a mechanism to foster capitalism, trade, and world commerce.

There are other evidentiary problems in the text. A strong editor could have helped with these difficulties.