Which of the following was not a notable feature of the sixteenth-century Spanish America?

Which of the following was not a notable feature of the sixteenth-century Spanish America?

Which of the following was not a notable feature of the sixteenth-century Spanish America?
Which of the following was not a notable feature of the sixteenth-century Spanish America?

Which of the following was not a notable feature of the sixteenth-century Spanish America?

A. Indians were compelled to work, either as slaves or as wage laborers, in gold and silver mines or on large haciendas.

B. The Spanish crown took initially little interest in the administration of colonial affairs.

C. A Black Legend regarding the harshness of Spanish colonial rule spread across the Atlantic world.

D. A blending of Indian and Spanish culture took

ANSWER: B. The Spanish crown took initially little interest in the administration of colonial affairs.

Conflict and Cooperation in the Southwestern United States During the Sixteenth Century: Object-Oriented Methodologies for Analyzing Native-European Encounters and Trajectories
Conflict and Cooperation in the Southwestern United States During the Sixteenth Century: Object-Oriented Methodologies for Analyzing Native-European Encounters and Trajectories

Introduction

Although the Southwestern United States was the focus of the largest entrada in North America during the sixteenth century, evidence for the indigenous use, modification, and consumption of early European objects in this region has been surprisingly modest. This is despite the fact that this region was the focus of the largest entrada.

When looking at the archaeological record of entradas in the Southwest during the sixteenth century, there is a noticeable lack of early European artifacts in native household, funerary, and other settings. This is something that stands out. Despite the fact that there are artifacts from Europe dating back to the sixteenth century located in the Southwest, the majority of these artifacts are connected with locations associated with the Spaniards and their native Mexican allies rather than with native American sites.

More striking is the fact that, despite the fact that large assemblages of European contact period items are discovered in areas where Spanish-led expeditions spent the most time and encountered the greatest indigenous resistance, these same regions present limited evidence that early European objects were utilized in any significant way by indigenous communities. This includes as tools, for display, or for ceremonial purposes.

Early encounter did occur in the interchange of items and their incorporation into indigenous settings in other parts of the Southwest, where more amicable ties predominated; nevertheless, these artifacts seldom bore traces of deliberate alteration since they were not intentionally altered. This discussion argues that the clash and entanglement of material culture and ideational systems at the earliest phase of contact in the Southwest cannot be understood without reference to the types of initial contacts between indigenous peoples and Europeans (antagonistic or peaceful), the frequency of contacts and the primary motivations behind them, as well as the political histories of various indigenous groups encountered by early entradas.

In other words, the clash and entanglement of material culture and ideational systems at this time cannot be understood without reference to One of the most important concerns that arises in this context is the reason why prolonged indigenous interaction with big Spanish-led expeditions that carried abundant supplies of European commodities did not result in widespread indigenous usage, modification, and consumption of European products.

The last section of this chapter provides a summary of the various conflicts that took place during Francisco Vasquez de Coronado’s entrada in 1540–1542, as well as the material transactions that took place. The transformation of objects, communities, and strategic policies in these regions was locally variable and underwent significant shifts by the end of the sixteenth century.

This was despite the fact that conflict and “conquista” campaigns characterized many of the early contacts between indigenous and European groups in New Spain, La Florida, and the interior Southeast. Materials that are typical of these changes and various reactions may be found all across the Southwest, but they have only rarely been investigated for the insights they bring into larger anthropological issues like as agency, resistance, and trade.

While part of this work focuses on the contextual examination of items, its wider purpose is to begin comparing cultural trajectories at an interregional scale, notably the American Southwest and Southeast in the first century of New-Old World encounter. Both regions saw a change during the latter half of the 1600s from the first imperial tactics of resource acquisition and warfare to the policies of settlement and missionization.

At the same time, both regions had access to a comparable collection of European items. However, the methods in which these things were used, altered, and eaten by indigenous tribes and Europeans are vastly different. These differences provide light on crucial elements of the early colonial interactions that took place in North America.

Comparisons of Macroregional Developments and Trajectories

Before going to objects and assemblages, it is vital to grasp some of the larger contexts and histories in which these materials were immersed. This should be done before moving to the items and assemblages themselves. In the sixteenth century, the cultural and physical landscapes that ran along the southern margins of North America held very different potentialities in terms of geography, demographics, economics, and geopolitics for the indigenous polities that lived there as well as the expanding Spanish Empire.

Although early Southeast entradas concentrated on the coastal boundaries of La Florida and on the indigenous chiefdoms in the surrounding area, subsequent expeditions targeted bigger, more aggregated, and hierarchical Mississippian chiefdoms in the interior. These chiefdoms were located farther inland. The Southeast was located closer to the commercial routes connecting Spain’s wealthy colonial operations in the Americas to its operational home base in Iberia.

This was in contrast to the Trans-Mississippi West, which was farther away from these lines. Mississippian groups did exhibit multi-tiered site hierarchies, well-defined social ranking, institutionalized disparities in resource access, and clear signs of local and regional tribute payments; however, they were less socially and politically stratified than state-level societies in Mexico and Peru.

By contrast, indigenous societies in the sixteenth-century Southwest were more “nodal,” with extensive deserted or sparsely populated expanses spanning 50—100 miles between some key population clusters – notably in dry interfluvial areas. In addition, there was a large buffer zone of hostile sedentary and hunter-gatherer groups that populated large swaths of territory for many hundreds of miles between Spanish-occupied regions in central Mexico and autonomous Pueblo communities situated on New Spain’s northern frontier. These groups were collectively referred to by the Spaniards in a derogatory manner as “Chichimeca.” This obstacle remained in place until the early 1590s, which was the time when a pan-regional megadrought came to an end, more lenient Crown policies of gift exchange and relocation of indigenous groups were enacted, and the almost 50-year long Chichimec War came to an end (Powell 1967).

During the whole of the sixteenth century, the American Southwest was located a significant distance away from the main concentrations of Spanish colonial activity, which were located in the Caribbean and the Valley of Mexico. Located on the northern frontier of New Spain, it was mainly landlocked, peripheral to major colonial trade routes, and of doubtful economic importance with regard to agricultural, ranching, craft production, trading, and mining industries.

When compared to the Spanish-led expeditions that took place in the Southeast, the entradas that took place in the Southwestern region were almost exclusively pedestrian affairs. They involved little to no maritime travel and frequently required overland journeys of 800–1000 miles in order to reach their initial destinations. Within the Southwest, there were very few indications of the vertically linked regional and interregional polities that may be seen in communities located in the present Southeast.

The sophisticated systems of warfare, social hierarchy, and financial inequities that were similar to those seen in numerous Mississippian and Peninsular Florida chiefdoms were similarly difficult to distinguish in the Southwest throughout the sixteenth century.

Analyzing the Different Paths Taken by Material

It is important to highlight the general similarities in the types of materials and object types that can be found in the archaeological record of both the American Southeast and Southwest in order to get a head start on the process of assessing the indigenous-European material encounters that took place in those two regions. Table 14.1 includes a listing of the early item and material kinds, the majority of which date back to the early to middle of the sixteenth century (below).

In it, we can see that iron things like flat axes, chisels, knives, and awls, as well as copper bells, and unusual kinds of glass beads, were items that were regularly described as “trading products” or “gifts” in expedition documentation. These similar artifacts have been found in archaeological settings in the Southeast and Southwest that are connected with indigenous tribes that are known to have been in touch with Spanish-led entradas.

The overall similarities are striking and are clearly important in helping to distinguish early entradas and contacts (ca. ad 1500–1550), from later expeditions and encounters (ca. ad 1551–1600) in both regions. This is because there are some morphometric differences between early Spanish-European objects that are currently documented in these regions. Despite these differences, the overall similarities are striking and are clearly important (Blanton 2018; Little 2008; Smith 1987).

As Mathers (2013) has suggested, some of the most important contrasts between these assemblages, pre- and post-1550, relate to a fundamental change in Crown strategy away from “conquista” operations and toward missions and colonization. This transition occurred after 1550.

Other key aspects to consider when assessing the early indigenous-European material trajectories in the Southeast and Southwest include the following:

– the frequency of interactions between indigenous people and Europeans; – the timing of these interactions; and – the kinds of activities that these interactions reflect (for example, what kinds of ethnic groupings and social classes were involved?). And within just which spatial-behavioral contexts?)

1.Contact Frequency.

The frequency of interactions between indigenous people and Europeans is one factor that starkly differentiates the cultural development of La Florida and the interior of the Southeast on the one hand, and the northern region of New Spain on the other. In the second decade of the 1500s, documented meetings between indigenous groups and Europeans started in the Southeast and lasted with some regularity until the end of the century.

These documented encounters persisted in this region (Table 14.2). In contrast, the first known interaction between indigenous people and Europeans in the Southwest did not take place until 26 years later, in 1539, when Esteban the Moor and his indigenous friends arrived at the Zuni settlement of Hawikku (Flint and Flint 2005, 59–64).

Indigenous-European contacts in the Southeast are not only more common throughout the entirety of the sixteenth century, but they also represent efforts to establish colonies and missions earlier than in the Southwest (for example, compare the 1526 colonization attempt by Vázquez de Ayllón in coastal Georgia (Hoffman 1994), to Oate y Salazar’s 1598 colonial efforts in northern New Mexico (Ellis 1989, 9–23), and the 1566 mission established at Santa Elena in Georgia by Menéndez The relatively slow pace of colonization and missionization in the Southwest, combined with the general lack of Spanish exploration in that region until the late 1500s, were significant contributors to the indigenous communities’ awareness of only a relatively small number of European artifacts throughout the entirety of the sixteenth century.

The low frequency of indigenous-European contact in the Southwest during the sixteenth century was due in large part to the following factors: (1) its peripheral geopolitical and geographic position in relation to other strategic assets; (2) the success of Chichimec groups in limiting Spanish activities north of Mexico City; (3) the general lack of large, aggregated villages with stored food reserves; and (4) the severe megadrought that dominated the region between the middle of the 1570s and the middle of the 1590s (Van West et al. 2013, 88, 93).

2. The Chronologies of Contact

Given the significant shift in emphasis that Spanish-led expeditions underwent around the middle of the century – shifting from large, “conquista”-style military efforts to smaller, evangelical missionary efforts and settlement – it is appropriate to pay some attention to the timing of indigenous and European encounters in the Southwest and Southeast. Mathers (2013) suggests that the disruptive effects, crippling costs, and unfavorable international visibility that resulted from “conquista” campaigns and their associated encomienda rewards system characterized the early sixteenth century.

This is because these campaigns were associated with the encomienda rewards system. Native American uprisings were widespread during the whole of the sixteenth century in the Americas (Figure 14.1) and were difficult and costly to quell. The adverse and far-reaching effects of these wars encouraged the Spanish Crown to enact new policies and legislation (most notably the New Laws of 1542–1543), which were designed to reorient its priorities in the New World toward smaller, less overtly aggressive expeditions.

When looking at the two areas side by side, it is interesting that throughout the sixteenth century there is just one known entrada in the Southwest that was built in the “conquista” style. In addition, the amount of time that can be established as a period of interaction between indigenous peoples and Europeans in the Southwest is only approximately a fifth of the amount of time that can be established as a period of contact in the Southeast (Table 14.2).

Encounters in the Southeast began earlier and were more frequent and varied than in the Southwest. These encounters included a variety of terrestrial and maritime contacts, as well as an earlier shift from military-style expeditions to entradas, which involved a greater emphasis on settlement, gift exchange, and missionization. In contrast, the Southwest experienced encounters that began later and were less frequent and varied.

3.The Characteristics and Circumstances of Contacts

In the sixteenth century, interactions between indigenous people and Europeans in the Southwest and Southeast ranged from peaceful and fleeting to bloody and drawn-out struggle and open warfare. This was true in both regions. Significantly, perhaps, the effect of terrestrial entradas remaining for a lengthy period of time among indigenous groups in both regions was conflict that persisted (see, for example, Clayton et al. 1993a, 71–73; 1993b, 192–194; Mathers 2013).

Smaller, more mobile maritime expeditions seldom met similar antagonism, in part because they bulk hauled their goods, decreasing the constraints on local populations to feed them with food, housing, and clothes. This was one of the reasons why smaller expeditions were more mobile. Entradas that involved marine and riverine transport could frequently move quickly from one indigenous area to another with less effort, defend themselves more easily with large, well-armed water-borne vessels, and retreat more readily from danger than their counterparts who relied on land-based transportation.

Food shortages were a constant problem for the entradas and colonies that were established in the sixteenth century, all the way from La Florida (Hudson 1997, 102–104, 167–171, 185–187, 378; Priestly 1928a, 139, 153, 203, 209; 1928b, 57) and Tierra Nueva (Flint and Flint 2005, 255–257, 291, 557–558) south to the Rio de la When Europeans kept making considerable demands on indigenous people for an extended period of time, it tended to put a pressure on their relationship as they tried to provide big expeditions. On the other hand, tiny expeditions faced an almost constant threat of being attacked and/or wiped off entirely.

Smith and Hally (2019) have hypothesized that indigenous societies in the Southeast got sixteenth-century European artifacts via a variety of methods, including formal gift exchange, trade, combat trophies, theft/pilfering, scavenging, and shipwreck recovery. Transfers of European commodities from indigenous guides and allies might be added to this list. These indigenous people had received these objects via a variety of routes, but most often as a consequence of services performed to European expeditionaries.

This latter form of exchange is particularly significant due to the fact that the “chaine opératoire” for the transmission of European materials is made more complex in expeditions that included significant numbers of indigenous allies. Examples of this include the large number of Mexica and Tlaxcalans who participated in Vázquez de Coronado’s entrada in the Southwest (Flint 2009) and similar groups who participated in Luna y Arellano’s expedition in the Southeast (Bratten 2009, Conventional archaeological approaches have frequently viewed indigenous-European exchanges in rather simple linear terms, with exchanges taking place primarily between elites.

This is despite the fact that it is known that Spaniards engaged in early expeditions presented a variety of European-made goods to indigenous communities, particularly as a means of establishing peaceful relations and strategic alliances (Flint 2002, 281–282; Hernández 2005, 110; Wilson 1990, 69). (Figure 14.2). These straightforward models do not take into account indigenous allies as major actors in expeditions led by the Spanish across the Americas, nor do they take into account the opportunities indigenous people had to actively participate in the exchange of European objects at a variety of social levels.

Because indigenous allies are referenced in entrada-related tales very occasionally, there are very few instances of cash and awards being given to indigenous expedition participants. These examples, when they do exist, are often reserved to those of higher social positions. Examples of this include allowing Tlaxcalan allies of Hernán Cortés to carry swords and firearms, wear Spanish clothing, and ride horses (Flint 2009, 75; Gibson 1968, 155), the gifts given by Marcos de Niza to discourage the desertion of his Mexican allies (Flint and Flint 2005, 74), and Adelantado lvar Nez Cabeza de Vaca offering “provisions for gratuitous distribution” to It appears as well that not all allies were regarded in the same manner, and that the Spanish recruitment of indigenous auxiliaries frequently made a distinction between well-trained warriors (like the Nahau) and others (like the Tabascans), and apportioned expedition tasks accordingly. This suggests that not all allies were regarded in the same manner (Chuchiak 2007, 199).

After obtaining European things via various means, such as gifts or purchases, some allies may have devised their own policies regarding the circumstances under when, what, and with whom they might engage in commerce. These policies may have applied to both everyday and unusual European commodities. Accounts of indigenous auxiliaries starving to death and freezing to death on various expeditions, such as Vázquez de Coronado’s in the Southwest (Flint and Flint 2005, 235–236), or Diego de Almagro’s on the Argentine-Chilean border (Pocock 1967, 26–27), suggest that the difficulties associated with Spanish-led entradas could be extreme and have lethal consequences for many indigenous allies – whether through combat, illness, exposure (e.g., Clayton et al. 1993a, 242; Flint 2009, 74; Francis 2007, 35; Restall and Asselbergs 2007, 16).

Therefore, trading European artefacts for food in instances when there was a shortage of resources or where people’s lives were in danger may have been a regular practice — and this applies to both indigenous allies and Europeans. When compared with traditional “gift items” like beads and axes, the utilitarian nature of many of the European objects dating back to the sixteenth century that have emerged recently from the Stark Farm and Glass sites in Mississippi and Georgia, respectively (Cobb and Legg 2017; Blanton 2019) suggests that we may be seeing material evidence of these more broadly-based trade relations between indigenous and European non-elites.

The complexities that are already inherent in the process of modeling indigenous-European exchange are compounded further in the Vázquez de Coronado entrada because, after the expedition returned to Mexico City in 1542, a number of Mexican allies remained behind, choosing to live the remainder of their lives in indigenous communities such as the Zuni pueblo of Halona:wa. This adds another layer of complexity to the modeling of indigenous-European exchange processes, which is already quite challenging (Hammond and Rey 1967, 89, 93).

In consideration of these complexity and difficulties, the following case studies concentrate on assemblages and artefacts that have been historically and/or archaeologically established as being related with the entrada of Francisco Vasquez de Coronado in the years 1540–1542. The historical progression of this trip is followed in general by these four case studies, which focus on geographically separate places, indigenous American populations that are unique in terms of ethnicity, and typically follow in their footsteps.

4, Hernando de Alarcón’s Naval Contingent in the Sea of Cortes and Lower Colorado River in 1540 (May–September(?))

The lack of navigable waterways in the Desert Southwest prevented the naval component of this expedition from ever successfully completing its primary mission, despite the fact that it was intended to serve as a supplementary supply link for the terrestrial portion of this entrada and possibly conduct some general reconnaissance.

Alarcón’s nautical voyage set out from Acapulco, and subsequently Culiacán, in what is now the western region of Mexico. The mission was fully stocked with food, clothes, and weaponry, and it had an unknown number of crew members. As soon as Alarcón arrived in the Colorado River, he felt compelled to continue utilizing the two small launches because they were better equipped to manage the erratic and unpredictable currents.

According to the account that Alarcón provided of his interactions with native Yuma communities located in the Lower Colorado River (LCR) Basin (Flint and Flint 2005, 185–205), his connections were distinguished by the following characteristics:

–Generally peaceful relationships, with no signs of conflict in the extant archaeological record or historical documents; –Amicable gift giving, which involved the presentation of European goods such as clothing, beads, and food; –The presence of amicable gift exchanges; –The presence of amicable gift exchanges; –The presence of amicable gift exchanges; –The presence of

Alarcón also tells that several big wooden crosses were constructed by Spanish expeditionaries, and that indigenous Yuma people venerated them. This is more indication that amicable relations existed between the two groups.
The voyage was primarily responsible for Alarcón’s generally positive interactions with indigenous people in the LCR. These interactions included:

1.Small Size: the proportional similarity in size between the expedition and the native populations that it encountered;
2.The Expedition Placed Minimal Demands on the Community Due to Their Relative Capability to Provide for Themselves in the Areas of Clothing, Food, and Shelter, the Expedition Placed Minimal Demands on the Local Communities.
3.Minimal Threats: The potential threat posed by Alarcón’s entrada was negligible, due to the expedition’s modest size and requirements, minimal periods of occupation, and the relatively modest investment of Yuman communities in institutionalized social ranks (i.e. positions that could have been negatively impacted by the Spaniards, their alternative cultural values, and the dissent created by differential acquisition of exotic European objects); Alarcón’s entrada was accompanied by a relatively modest amount of
4.Exchanges of Goods That Were Beneficial to Both Parties Alarcón’s copious supply and the method by which he dispersed them contributed to the development of cordial relationships with the Yuman villages;
There is no archaeological evidence from the LCR area that has been found to yet that suggests how early commerce products purchased from the Spaniards were used or eaten by indigenous tribes in the region.

5, Zuni, the second case (July–December 1540)

As the Vázquez de Coronado expedition moved north from their initial departure point in western Mexico, they entered what is now the border zone between New Mexico and Arizona. There, they came across a largely uninhabited area known as “despoblado,” where their provisions began to run dangerously low. When Vázquez de Coronado arrived to the Zuni pueblo of Hawikku, he was met by indigenous warriors who cautioned him not to approach their village. Vázquez de Coronado did not enter the Zuni pueblo.

Following a brief conflict between Spaniards and their friends on the one hand and Zuni warriors on the other, the Spaniards and their allies were victorious in their efforts to beat the Zunis and occupied Hawikku for the following four to five months. In the immediate aftermath of the Battle of Hawikku, Vázquez de Coronado traveled to the many Zuni pueblos in search of their respective caciques in order to establish more harmonious ties.

These encounters led to the trade of tangible goods between Spanish colonists and the leaders of the Zuni people, a fact that is attested to in papers written in Spanish throughout the sixteenth century as well as in the archaeological record (Flint 2002, 281–282, Howell 2001; Mathers et al. 2011).

Because the size of the Vázquez de Coronado expedition at Zuni approached 3,000 people (with approximately 75 percent of them consisting of indigenous Mexican auxiliaries), and more than 7,000 animals, local indigenous communities were faced with an immediate logistical and military conundrum of considerable magnitude. To ensure that the Spaniards would soon look elsewhere for labor, clothing, food, and shelter, the Zuni communities opted for a more tactical plan that consisted of passive resistance and active reconnaissance.

This was done because they were unable to defeat the Spaniards and their allies in direct combat. As part of this plan, Zuni guides spent several months directing the Vázquez de Coronado expedition to various locations across the American Southwest. These locations included the Grand Canyon in the north, the Hopi Pueblos in the west, the Piro region in the south, and the Buffalo Plains in the east.

The large-scale excavations that took place between 1917 and 1923 at Hawikku (Smith et al. 1966) and Kechiba:wa have provided us with the most compelling archaeological evidence for interactions between the Vázquez de Coronado entrada and the Zuni (Hodge 1920; Lothrop 1923). Investigations conducted in both pueblos led to the discovery of artefacts associated with Vázquez de Coronado in domestic and burial contexts; nevertheless, archaeologists were unable to determine either the date or the importance of these artifacts.

Only 8.4 percent of the 266 corpses that were excavated at Kechiba:wa were found to include European goods, according to analyses of artefacts brought to the site by Vasquez de Coronado and conducted by Mathers and colleagues in 2011. Adults were found in each of these graves, but the gender of the deceased was never determined. Howell’s research (2001, 151) on the 955 burials excavated there indicates only 13 included iron objects (1.4 percent), and only 3 (0.3 percent) contained copper artifacts; children and adults are more or less equally represented in these totals.

In addition, while no comprehensive analyses have been conducted of the Vázquez de Coronado materials from Hawikku, Howell’s research indicates that Vázquez de Coronado materials were found in Hawikku. Only seven of the tombs at Hawikku (0.73 percent) were found to have European glass beads (Smith et al. 1966, 265), and only two of the burials that were excavated at Kechiba:wa were found to contain Vázquez de Coronado-period glass beads — a proportion that is virtually similar (0.75 percent ). Based on these findings, it is evident that the following commercial items date to the time of the Vázquez de Coronado entrada:

–Were directed towards a small percentage of adults and children at Zuni, indicating the presence of well-defined social ranks there (evidence of such hierarchical status and ranking is present at Zuni in both the prehistoric and early historic periods); –These findings are congruent with Spanish narratives describing trade with Zunicaciques following the Battle of Hawikku; –The exchange of European objects at Zuni emphasized items with a ceremonial, rather than utilitarian

The construction of large wooden crosses, which were documented by members of the Espejo entrada who observed these large, well-built crosses throughout the Zuni area in 1583, is further evidence of the relatively peaceful relations that existed between the Zuni communities and the Vázquez de Coronado expedition after their initial confrontation at Hawikku (Hammond and Rey 1967, 89).

A small fragment of reshaped ceramic with Mexican painted motifs on the interior surface is another important find from the Hawikku excavations (National Museum of the American Indian Reference No. 085899.000 (1)). This fragment is part of the collection that is housed in the National Museum of the American Indian. An infant was buried in Hawikku Burial 899 alongside a small, finely woven basket or tray, and this broken, decorated bowl fragment was placed on its legs (Hodge 1918b, 140–141). The exterior surface of this fragment features a small annular ring base. This fragment was included as part of Hawikku Burial 899.

The piece of ornamentation that has been preserved looks to be a figure that resembles a duck floating on water, and it has a variety of other symbols and characters around its edges. Following a series of conversations with Mexican ceramic experts located in the United States, Canada, and Mexico, we have come to the conclusion that this piece:

–Originates from Central Mexico – maybe the Puebla-Tlaxcala area or, more likely, the Southern Basin of Mexico; –Dates back to the middle to late sixteenth century; –Originates from the Southern Basin of Mexico; –

Contains glyphs consisting of dots, which represent numbers, and a tepetl, which stands for a location (Philip Arnold, Joseph Ball, Patricia Fournier, Geoffrey McCafferty, and Jeffrey Parsons, personal communications February 2017).
According to Patricia Fournier’s personal letter from April 2012, she hypothesized that the design theme “could be part of early colonial era traditions that display dramatic degradation and simplistic patterns, surface treatment, and colors of the Postclassic Cholula polychrome wares.” In addition, the surface treatment of this sherd, as well as its iconography and circular base, are compatible with a Mexican chronology ranging from the middle to the late sixteenth century, and may perhaps belong to Azteciv-style pottery traditions (Griffin and Espejo 1950, Jeffrey Parsons personal communication, February 2017).

The weight of the evidence suggests that this bowl is associated with the Vázquez de Coronado entrada because the Vázquez de Coronado expedition camped at Hawikku for between four and five months with approximately two thousand Mexican auxiliaries, and at least three or four Mexican allies remained at Zuni after the expedition returned to Mexico City.

It seems that this fractured sherd was reshaped with a reasonable amount of care in order to achieve a regularized edge that mimics the circular base on its outer surface. Importantly, a range of additional altered pottery pieces have been discovered at Hawikku (n=16), all of which were discovered in settings associated with burials (Smith et al. 1966, 237). These round or rectilinear shards have been linked to cremations as well as inhumations, as well as burials involving adults, adolescents, and children of all ages.

One of the child burials had a single shaped sherd on its legs and another on its knee, in a manner that was comparable to the positioning of the shaped Mexican fragment from Burial 899. Although the positioning of these sherds on the body was recorded in only three of the cases, one of the burials involved a child. Even though there is evidence that local ceramic fragments were reshaped and incorporated into burials at Zuni, similar mortuary practices during the early historical period have not been documented to this day in Central Mexico. This is the case despite the fact that there is evidence for such practices (Patricia Fournier personal communication, February 2017).

Whether the decorated Mexican fragment from Hawikku was associated with material left by Spaniards associated with the Vázquez de Coronado entrada, by Mexican allies during their occupation in 1540, or by indigenous auxiliaries remaining behind after the expedition returned to Mexico, it seems likely that this fragment: a) Was associated with material left by Spaniards associated with the Vázquez de Coronado entrada; b)

–Represents only a fraction of the extant indigenous Mexican material and behavioral repertoire from the contact period in the Southwest; –Was modified and then grafted into a set of existing Zuni mortuary practices that had previously been based largely, if not exclusively, on locally available indigenous American objects and materials; –Constitutes one of the few material signatures of indigenous Mexicans known to date in the contact period Southwest; –Was modified and then grafted into Further evidence is suggested by a votive stone object from Hawikku Burial 59 that has a similar appearance to the sword-like Mexica weapons known as “macanas” or “macuahuitls,” and undecorated Mexican ceramic fragments, both of which were discovered in the Western Cemetery. Both of these artifacts were found in the same area (Hodge 1918a:376, Fig. 8; 1918b, 371, 375).

6 The Third Case: Tiguex (from the Summer of 1540 until the Spring of 1542)

In the fall of 1540, the Zuni started to have some success with their efforts to extricate themselves from the control of this vast invading army and to divert Vázquez de Coronado to other regions of the Southwest. Vázquez de Coronado and his commanders were convinced that the Tiguex region (which is now the metropolitan area surrounding Albuquerque, New Mexico) was the best place to establish themselves for the winter of 1540–1541. This conviction was based on the fact that they had conducted extensive reconnaissance in the regions surrounding Zuni.

Extremely cold weather, the failure of Alarcón’s supply ships to deliver the clothes and other materials that were anticipated, and the challenge of adequately supplying such a huge expedition were all factors that contributed to the escalation of tension and conflict. These tensions did not take long to escalate into open enmity and continued conflict beyond the first outbreak. The Tiguex War lasted for almost a year and a half, caused a significant number of fatalities, and ended in each and every Tiguex pueblo being destroyed or severely damaged.

This conflict, despite its scale and intensity, appears to have been regarded as rather inconsequential by generations of scholars. There were neither major nor long-lasting consequences for the trajectory of indigenous-European relations in the Southwest as a result of this conflict, according to this school of thought. However, archaeological digs are now yielding evidence of the fury of the Tiguex War and its ramifications, which have been absent from the very narrow viewpoint of Spanish documentation (Mathers and Marshall 2014).

These new findings give a fresh look at the tangible expressions of warfare, conflict, commerce, and cultural transmission, and a chance to re-evaluate the Tiguex War utilizing the rich detail of the archaeological record. One illustration of these fresh viewpoints is provided by a single artefact from Europe that was discovered in Santiago Pueblo.

During the years 1934 and 1935, while the excavation of Santiago Pueblo took place, there was a great deal of excitement around the celebration of the 400th anniversary of the Vázquez de Coronado entrada. Excavations were carried out at Santiago and at the nearby Pueblo of Kuaua in the year 1940, with the objective of locating tangible evidence of this expedition in time for the anniversary of that year. Ironically, the items that were unearthed at Santiago revealed precisely what the excavators sought to find but failed to notice.

Copper crossbow quarrels, a caret-headed nail, and long copper lace chapes were some of the diagnostic Vázquez de Coronado artifacts discovered during excavations at Santiago (Ellis 1957; Museum of Indian Arts and Culture n.d., Tichy 1939, 161–162).

These artifacts were discovered by Ellis in 1957 and by Tichy in 1939. Crossbow quarrels at Santiago were considered to be possible “pen tips,” just as they had been in earlier investigations at Pecos Pueblo, despite their distinctive shape, size, form of manufacture, and widespread presence on European sites, in museums, and in the historical/archaeological literature. This is because crossbow quarrels have a distinctive shape, size, and form of manufacture (Kidder 1932, 307, Figure 251, i).

As a consequence of this, the discovery of a crossbow quarrel inside the chest cavity of an indigenous person who had been buried in Santiago was met with very little reaction or examination (Tichy 1939, 162).

Ellis (1957) was the first person to recognize crossbow quarrels in the American Southwest. He directed his paper exclusively to the samples that were recovered at Santiago Pueblo. However, in his groundbreaking paper, Ellis (1957, 213-214) proposed that crossbow quarrels might have been salvaged and repurposed by native communities for “re-use in Indian ways.” In addition, Ellis (1957, 214) made a direct reference to a crossbow quarrel-like item that was discovered in the excavations at Santiago (Museum of Indian Arts and Culture, Catalog No. 44778/11, Bp 38/15).

Ellis hypothesized that it was similar to the “tinklers” that were used by Pueblo and other indigenous cultures located in the Southwestern United States. The object that Ellis describes is, in fact, a crossbow quarrel; however, there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that it was found in a context suggesting indigenous use, that there were modifications after it was distorted and broken following discharge, or that such objects had been modified and used by either Southern Tiwa communities or any other Pueblo or indigenous group in the Southwest.

Having predicted, and then discovered, a large Vázquez de Coronado battle assemblage in the vicinity of Santiago Pueblo (Mathers 2011, Mathers and Marshall 2014), questions arose about the function of Vázquez de Coronado objects found in the 1930s excavations, as well as the possibility of indigenous modification of those objects. Mathers (2011), Mathers and Marshall (2014). In instance, it is unknown whether crossbow quarrels were just discharged and left unchanged or if they were things that were subsequently repurposed by indigenous Pueblo people into the shape Ellis considered as tinkler-like or attractive.

The re-examination of the object that Ellis hypothesized could be a crossbow quarrel that was transformed into a tinkler-type ornament by indigenous groups suggests that the following is true:

–This object is heavy, thick, and an unsuitable size and shape for producing any audible resonance; –Furthermore, its wall thickness (1.4 mm) would have made it difficult to reshape without a knowledge of annealing, and there are no tell-tale surface indications of the dimpling and impressions of stone tool working that are necessary to produce a more suitable tinkler-form; –These characteristics make it unlikely that this object was used

Instead, its maximum length, width, and thickness (37.5 millimeters, 9.6 millimeters, and 0.5 millimeters) are all close to the mean and standard deviation (SD) of 18 nearly complete crossbow quarrels from Santiago with length and thickness measurements, and 11 crossbow quarrels with meaningful width measurements – i.e., mean = 38.9 millimeters, 9.2 millimeters, and 0.7 millimeters, and SD = 1

There is only one burial known to have crossbow quarrels or metal tinklers of any kind, and that burial was found at Santiago. None of the other 394 excavated burials at Santiago, as well as the approximately 600 burials found at the Southern Tiwa Pueblo of Kuaua (Dutton 1963, 26), or the 42 and 23 burials with data from the Tiguex Pueblos of Alameda and Chamisal (Cordero 2013, 201–22 At the Towa Pueblo of Pecos, where there were approximately 2000 excavated burials, as well as at the Zuni Pueblos of Hawikku and Kechiba:wa, where there were approximately 955 and 266 excavated burials, respectively, the absence of both types of objects is notable.

Although it is known that the Vázquez de Coronado entrada had touch with all of these Southern Tiwa, Towa, and Zuni groups, none of them have produced graves containing metal tinklers or crossbow quarrels.

This investigation of Vázquez de Coronado materials from the Tiguex region reveals many noteworthy patterns, including the following:

–Despite the scale of the expedition and the length of time it occupied this territory, there are no unambiguous indicators that early European goods were used, changed, or eaten by Southern Tiwa populations. This is the case despite the extensive excavations that were conducted at six Tiguex sites (Cordero 2013; Dutton 1963; Marshall 1982; Pooler 1940; Sargeant 1985; Tichy 1939).

Early European objects found to date in and around Tiguex Pueblos appear to be the result of occupation, and/or attacks by the Vázquez de Coronado entrada; –Mortuary, ethnohistorical, and anthropological evidence from Tiguex suggests a history marked by little emphasis on the display of high value, exotic goods for marking rank and status (evidence of social “leveling,” or distributed authority, ranks, and status are marked features of Southern Tiwa mort

7 The Southern Plains (Spring and Summer of 1541), Case 4

After a two-month siege, the expedition finally departed Tiguex in the spring of year 1541 in quest of Quivira and other significant indigenous villages on the Great Plains. This was after they had successfully taken Moho. They journeyed east from Pecos Pueblo into the region of Querecho and Teja tribes in the Texas Panhandle, western Oklahoma, and Kansas. Their journey was directed by local indigenous guides (Habicht-Mauche 1992). In these places, mobile buffalo hunters were represented by relatively small groups and most of their sites were only transitory. Despite their reputation as terrible warriors, it seems that relations between the expedition and these indigenous populations were calm. This is despite the fact that the latter had (Flint and Flint 2005, 421, 423).

There are archaeological traces of European and Mexican objects from the Vázquez de Coronado entrada recorded in this region, as well as documentary evidence of wooden crosses being erected, despite the generally small and migratory nature of Querecho and Teja communities in the Southern Plains (Billeck 2009; Sudbury 1984; Bell 1959; Hoard et al. 2008, 223–225 and Flint and Flint 2005, 517, respectively). Additionally, there are archaeological traces of European and Beads made of Nueva Cádiz obsidian and faceted chevron obsidian, a potential prismatic core of Mexican obsidian, and three specimens of Pachuca obsidian are among the artifacts.

It is likely that the overwhelming size and firepower of the Vázquez de Coronado expedition dissuaded any hostile encounters with Querecho-Teja groups in the Southern Plains. Furthermore, it is likely that the expedition’s demands on these indigenous communities would have been minimal given the latter’s relatively modest size and resources. It is impossible to ascertain at this moment whether or not such things were oriented at limited social levels since objects associated with the Vázquez de Coronado expedition do not exist in any conclusive settings showing trade intended only at indigenous Querecho-Teja leaders. To this day, there is no evidence to suggest that the initial shape of these artifacts was altered or rearranged in any way. And once again, the setting up of crosses and the generally upbeat tone of voyage reports for this area show that the expedition had amicable ties with the locals across this region.

8, Concluding Remarks

This chapter has placed an emphasis on the role that war and peace had in shaping the first interactions between indigenous populations and European communities in the American Southwest. It has also highlighted a degree of congruence between the documentary and archaeological records on aspects of indigenous-European material trades and interactions. This has been brought to light as a result of the previous point. In addition, it has shed light on a number of the primary elements that played a role in the development of these interactions and relationships all the way through the sixteenth century; the history of these exchanges and the consequences of those interactions continued to reverberate throughout the seventeenth century as well.

Its largely arid and landlocked landscapes; marginal productivity; peripheral position relative to other Crown assets; a historic mega-drought in the late 1500s; the paucity of large aggregated indigenous communities with significant stored food supplies; and a protracted, region-wide indigenous-European conflict all contributed to the Southwest’s relatively low level of indigenous-European contact. These factors, among others, helped to maintain a relatively low level of indigenous-European contact in the Southwest.

However, as the case studies shown above demonstrate, the response of native groups to interactions with Europeans in the Southwestern United States throughout the sixteenth century was anything from standard. Some communities, particularly those that were not overburdened by competing demands for their labor, food, and other resources, seem to have maintained rather cordial relationships with Vázquez de Coronado and successive entradas. And among those indigenous communities, such as the Zuni, whose social hierarchy and material distinction had some historical foundations, European artifacts taken during expeditions commanded by the Spanish were used to establish and maintain higher socio-political and economic positions. Some of the most amicable indigenous-European contacts in the Southwest seem to have been characterized by the following fundamental features:

–Limited exposure/contact with Europeans (which included relatively brief expedition stays in the lands of any one indigenous group); –Limited demands placed on indigenous resources; and –Indigenous regions with limited to moderate economic output (especially areas where stored food supplies and village sizes were restricted).
It would seem that these circumstances persisted in the Southern Plains, the Lower Colorado River Valley, and at Zuni (after some early fighting). At Tiguex, on the other hand, the conditions were not favorable for a peaceful resolution of the conflict. This was particularly the case due to the fact that the expedition arrived during a period of the year in which the Southern Tiwa communities relied heavily on the resources they had stored away for the coming year.

In addition, the large occupying force of the Vázquez de Coronado expedition included a large number of livestock. Both communities struggled to survive in this area due to a lack of available resources, and the tension between them quickly became a threat to the whole region. The political history of Southern Tiwa communities had a significant part as well in reducing interest in, as well as the purchase and exhibition of, foreign materials and artefacts. This was accomplished by discouraging the display of such items.

Recent work in the Southeast to model entrada assemblages associated with Hernando de Soto (for example, Blanton 2019; Mitchem 2014) has suggested that as this expedition moved inland and began to deplete its supplies and personnel, the resources available for distribution to indigenous communities began to diminish. This was suggested by the fact that as the expedition moved further inland, it also began to move farther away from the coast.

Although their resource reduction model is a novel and significant step forward in comprehending early indigenous-European encounters, as well as the nature and course of resource use over the course of time, the Tiguex example that was presented earlier makes it abundantly clear that the availability of “trade goods” (however defined) is only one component in a complex constellation of factors that need to be taken into consideration when attempting to comprehend concerns regarding the utilization, modification, and consumption of objects.

This essay has made an effort to take into account a significant number of the “vectors” of material exchange that were engaged in the early indigenous-European connections as well as the collections of artifacts that were the direct outcome of those exchanges. The indigenous materials collected by European expeditionaries, either through their indigenous partners (such as cotton-quilted armor and Mexica-indigenous weaponry), or from indigenous American populations, are one of the least visible aspects of this phenomenon (such as blankets, ceramics, and food).

Archaeologists looking into the early historical era still have a hurdle when it comes to discovering remnants of these less obvious artifacts or trades. Notwithstanding this, the repurposed ceramic vessel from Hawikku, the Pachuca (Mexican) obsidian from the Vázquez de Coronado encampment near Santiago Pueblo in Tiguex (Vierra 1989, 119), the Mexica ceramics and obsidian from Luna y Arellano sites in the Pensacola area of Florida (Worth 2016), and the Coosawattee book/box plate from the Poarch It is possible that additional material evidence of the presence of Mexicans in early Spanish-led entradas will assist us in uncovering the breadth and depth of the multidirectional, rather than unidirectional, nature of indigenous-European exchanges and relations during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.

A model from the sixteenth century, in which Spanish-led expeditions included indigenous allies recruited in Mexico, was replaced in the seventeenth century by indigenous American auxiliaries recruited locally. This may help us understand the major organizational shift that occurred during this time (a practice more typical of the seventeenth century). In addition, as we come to recognize more of these objects and the ethnic groups that are associated with them, we may begin to pierce beneath the catch-all terminology of “indiosamigos” and begin the more interesting analyses of the varied ethnic origins, roles, and cultural practices within different groups of indigenous allies during the first century of European contact. This may allow us to begin to better understand the historical context of these relationships.

Examples of indigenous Mexicans and Africans in the Southwest (Hammond and Rey 1967, 89; Flint and Flint 2005, 502), and examples of Africans in the Southeast (e.g., Clayton et al. 1993b, 313), who remained behind when the expeditions they belonged to originally returned home, serve to remind us that there are aspects of the early historical period that continue to be silent and await thoughtful analysis. Hopi villages were to incorporate Tano refugees for similar reasons following the First Pueblo Revolt in the late seventeenth century (Brooks 2016, 69–71, 83, 85).

This is similar to how Zuni pueblos may have welcomed Mexica allies into their communities because of their military prowess and knowledge of Spanish customs and tactics. These kinds of cases serve as a reminder that, as we learn more about the wars and peaces that occurred in the early Americas, our comprehension of the material encounters between indigenous people and Europeans, as well as the complex cultural forces that lie beneath those encounters, becomes richer and more nuanced. It is anticipated that this relatively small effort to disentangle a particular web of motives, histories, agencies, and processes would begin to motivate comparable comparative research in other locations, including methods that are both regional and interregional in scope. By doing so, we shall continue the difficult process of linking the specific events and artifacts of microhistory (as well as the “lived lives” of indigenous and European actors) to the overarching patterns of macrohistory in ways that are historically significant.

F.A.Q Which of the following was not a notable feature of the sixteenth-century Spanish America?

F.A.Q Which of the following was not a notable feature of the sixteenth-century Spanish America?
F.A.Q Which of the following was not a notable feature of the sixteenth-century Spanish America?

What were the most notable characteristics of the Spanish dominion across the Americas?

What were the most notable characteristics of the Spanish dominion across the Americas? When the Spanish had a huge empire, more riches, and more authority, they developed a legal document that everyone had to agree to in order to enter the empire. This document required everyone to sign.

What are three characteristics that were most prominent in the Spanish American empire?

What were the three most prominent characteristics of the Spanish empire in the Americas? Indians were subjected to forced labor, permanent colonization, and Christianization at the expense of their religion.

In the 1500s, did the majority of males in Europe have the right to vote and possess property?

In the 1500s, the majority of males in Europe were able to vote and held property. The term “repartimiento” refers to the system that allowed people of Indian villages to maintain their legal freedom and rights to salaries while also requiring them to do a certain amount of work on an annual basis.

Which three plants served as the foundation for agriculture in Native American communities?

The “three sisters,” maize, beans, and squash, are the crops that were used to construct the basis of the traditional Native American diet. This trio of foods is a mix of foods that supplies the majority of the necessary vitamins, nutrients, and calories for a nutritious diet.

What kind of people were the mestizos?

persons whose ancestry is a mixture of Spanish and Native American

What did the Spanish not find to be noteworthy about the Americas in the sixteenth century?

The management of Spanish colonial affairs was not a particularly high priority for the Spanish monarchy.

In what ways did Native American religious beliefs not include the following?

The name of their written book of religious doctrine was the Wicca.

What specific components of religion did Native American people practice?

The majority of Native Americans maintained the belief that there is only one creator deity who was responsible for creating the planet.
The vast majority of Native Americans held the belief that spiritual qualities could be found wherever in nature, including in animals, plants, trees, water, and wind.
Both shamans and medicine men had significant roles in the social hierarchy.
The performance of religious rites was an important factor in determining membership in a community.

What was the name of the person who was given the command to never mention again during the Pueblo Revolt?

Mary

What names were considered appropriate to use during the Pueblo Revolt?

Isabella \s Elizabeth \s Rebecca

Which of the following was not a primary crop that was grown by Native Americans?

Wheat

Which plants were most important to the Native American agricultural system?

Squash \sCorn \sBeans

When the Spanish colonized Central and South America in the 1500s and 1600s, they depended heavily on members of what group to labor in the fields and mines.

First Nations Peoples

Which of the following was not a feature of coverture?

Upon the death of a father, legal custody of the children was transferred to the state.

An important consequence of the Portuguese conquest of West Africa was the establishment of:

An increase in Africa’s practice of domestic slavery

Which of the following did not have a major role in the decision to establish European colonies in the New World?

The propagation of democratic ideals across the Americas

Which of the following was not a distinguishing characteristic of Spanish America in the sixteenth century?

The management of colonial affairs was not a priority for the Spanish monarch, which had little interest in the matter.

Which one of the following is correct? On the seventeenth century, European nations did not have a colonial presence in the continent of North America.

Germany

Which of the following was not a quality of the “coverture”?

Upon the passing of a spouse, a child’s legal custody was transferred to the state.

Which of the following did not contribute to Cortez’s conquest of the Aztecs?

From his Spanish galleons, he pounded the Aztec city with cannon fire.

The following locations hold the record for being the oldest sites in the United States that have been continuously inhabited by Europeans:

St. Augustine, Florida

Where did the mestizos come from?

People who have ancestry that is Spanish as well as Indian

Before the year 1800, the area that is now the United States included the most populous permanently populated settlement.

Cahokia

Which one of these plants did not play a fundamental role in the agricultural practices of the Native Americans?

Wheat

See more articles in category: Wiki