Annual Interdisciplinary Graduate Symposium presented by the Anthropology Graduate Student Association

2^nd Annual Interdisciplinary Graduate Symposium presented by the Anthropology Graduate Student Association

Edited by

Dominique Bertrand

A.J. Gottschalk

Erin McDonald

Britta Spaulding

© 2012 by Anthropology Graduate Student Association

University at Buffalo, State University of New York

All rights reserved. No part of this volume may be reproduced or transmitted in any form, or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, or stored within a retrieval system, without prior permission of the publisher.

Being Human

DOMINIQUE A. BERTRAND. is a Ph.D. student in the Department of Anthropology (Physical Anthropology), University at Buffalo and President of the Anthropology Graduate Student Association.

Residing at Teotihuacan's Foreign Compounds

6 Sacredness and Ski Resorts: Being Human and Being in Conflict 41

7 The Human Being: Understanding Humanity through God and Reason 49

9 Catastrophic Change in the Lives of Indigenous Children as Seen through Their Eyes 66

Of Standing Rock Reservation

11 Wallace “Mad Bear” Anderson: ‘Media-Hound,’ Rabble-Rouser, or Renowned 82

Indigenous Activist

Laticia McNaughton
12 Transnational Sorcerers in the Shadows: A Cameroonian “Spring” That Could Have 93

Been?

Department of Anthropology

Department of Anthropology

Department of Anthropology

Department of Anthropology

Department of Philosophy

Program of Visual and Media Studies, University of Rochester

Department of Anthropology

Department of Global Gender Studies

Department of

Department of Classics

Department of Anthropology

Department of Educational Fundamentals

Sociology

Anthropology

Anthropology

Dominique A. Bertrand.

President, AGSA
Chapter 1
Introduction
Dominique Bertrand
SYMPOSIUM AIMS
As the academic world continues to shrink and the divisions that separate the various focuses blur and dissipate, it is vital that there is open communication between disciplines in order to facilitate further understanding.  The State University of New York at Buffalo Graduate Anthropology Student Association Interdisciplinary Symposium provides a venue where such communication is encouraged and the free and open exchange of ideas between all fields is welcome.  Together we can continue to discuss and examine the human condition from the past, present and into the future (Brass 2011). This year we expanded the symposium to include other universities from around Western New York. It is our hope that in the future "Convergence" will continue to function as an annual event for graduate students to share their ideas, network, and see how their research fits into other disciplines.

BEING HUMAN

FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Last, but certainly not least, I would like to thank AGSA officers Vice President Arthur Gottschalk, Secretary Erin McDonald and Treasurer Britta Spaulding. As well as the Convergence Committee comprised of last years e-board and a few very dedicated AGSA members (Mike Rienti, Kate Whalen, Caitlin Curtis, Jennifer Faux, Laura LeVon, David Brass and Jacob Brady). They assisted with choosing a new (easier to manage) symposium title, selecting the symposium topic, writing grants, attending finance meetings, reviewing submissions and many other details. Many also wrote and presented a paper at the symposium itself, and have contributed to the editing of this volume. I could not have accomplished all of these tasks by myself, and without them there would have been no symposium and this volume would not exist.

Chapter 2

Jenn Faux

Anthropology

Although commonly accepted by Teotihuacan experts that the Zapotec, Veracruz and Maya people resided at Teotihuacan, the subject of ethnicity and ethnic enclaves has received little attention aside from DNA studies. The subject of ethnicity, however, is an important area of inquiry to identify ethnic boundaries and ethnic interaction. This paper seeks to evaluate ethnic boundaries of the Zapotec and Merchants’ Barrio, foreign enclaves located in the city of Teotihuacan, Mexico. By evaluating ethnicity through the study of craft production, one can begin to offer a glimpse of ethnicity at Teotihuacan, allowing one to determine whether the Zapotec, Veracruz and Maya people residing in Teotihuacan were accepted by the city’s populace or were seen as outsiders. By addressing the production of ceramics and figurines at the Zapotec and Merchants’ Barrio through the assessment of either foreign or local production taking place within foreign boundaries (and determining if the foreign production was distributed throughout the city or within the compound only), we can begin to understand how foreigners recognized themselves within the city and determining what ethnic identity they identified. As a topic that allows humans to identify themselves within a given group, ethnic boundaries seek to recognize in which group an individual identifies himself or herself, a subject that distinguishes groups of people as belonging, propagating an inherent human condition.
Household craft production has been a research concern of archaeologists for decades in hopes of reconstructing the economy of past societies. How and where these goods were produced, but probably most difficult to define, who produced these materials have puzzled archaeologists, leading them to surmise that the identities of craft workers may be indeterminable.

At Teotihuacan, where the populations may have reached 120,000 residents, the citizens constructed apartment compounds for housing their expanding population. Varying in size, these over 2,000 compounds housed populations in kinship-based residential units, according to DNA analysis (White et al 2000; White et al 2002; White et al 2004), occupationally-based (Millon 1973; Manzanilla 1996, 2002 and 2003; Price, Manzanilla, and Middleton 2000; Rattray 1991 and 2001; Spence 1992 and 1998; Widmer and Storey 1993), and ethnically-based households (Clayton 2005; Croissier 2000; Millon 1973; Manzanilla 1996, 2002, 2003, Rattray 1992; Spence 1998; Sugiyama and Lopez Lujan 2007; White and Spence 1998; White, Storey, Longstaffe, and Spence 2004). To understand the implications of everyday life, several excavations of apartment compounds were undertaken. While excavating several apartment compounds, archaeologists successfully reconstructed residential units, determining the living conditions, diet, religion, craft production, and food preparation. Teotihuacanos.Although excavations were undertaken at these sites, little is known regarding the craft production at the apartment compounds, especially the foreign compounds. This is mostly attributed to the lack of full-scale excavations of residential craft production zones (Manzanilla 1996).

Although commonly accepted by Teotihuacan experts that the Zapotec, Veracruz and Maya people resided at Teotihuacan, the subject of ethnicity and ethnic enclaves has received little attention aside from isotopic studies. The subject of ethnicity, however, is an important area of inquiry to identify ethnic boundaries and ethnic interaction. This paper seeks to evaluate ethnic boundaries of the Oaxaca and Merchants’ Barrio, foreign enclaves located in the city of Teotihuacan, Mexico. Here, foreign enclaves are defined as “…culturally distinct occupation that is demographically representative of the society of origin and constitutes a minority group located within the boundaries of a foreign state, it is a ‘culture-bearing unit’” (Croissier 2000). By evaluating ethnicity through the study of craft production, one can begin to offer a glimpse of ethnicity at Teotihuacan, allowing one to determine whether the Zapotec, Veracruz and Maya people residing in Teotihuacan were accepted by the city’s populace or were seen as outsiders. By addressing the production of ceramics and figurines at the Zapotec and Merchants’ Barrio through the assessment of either foreign or local production taking place within foreign boundaries (and determining if the foreign production was distributed throughout the city or within the compound only), we can begin to understand how foreigners recognized themselves within the city and determining what ethnic identity they identified.

The paper begins by addressing evidence for foreign occupation at the city of Teotihuacan. It then delves into the notion of ceramic production in these foreign enclaves in an attempt to discern how production varies or mimics that of non-foreign compounds. Finally, an evaluation of whether or not foreigners were accepted into the social strata of the city and how they maintained their ethnic identity while residing in a primarily Teotihuacan homogenous community will be evaluated. As a topic that allows humans to identify themselves within a given group, ethnic boundaries seek to recognize in which group an individual identifies himself or herself, a subject that distinguishes groups of people as belonging, propagating an inherent human condition.

Teotihuacan’s ruins are located in an area of 20 square kilometers and are dominated by massive architectural structures, such as the Pyramid of the Sun and Moon (Millon 1973). The occupation of the city ranged from circa 150 B.C. to circa A.D. 600 and is considered to be the sixth largest city in the world during its pinnacle at 450 CE (Barbour 1975; Goldsmith 2000; Millon 1973, 1976, 1988 and 1993). As an important urban site in ancient Mexico, Teotihuacan is an ideal location for evaluation because of its cosmopolitan nature and the large number of material artifacts recovered.

Teotihuacan has been studied by archaeologists since the early 19^th century. Research conducted at that time yielded abundant interpretations regarding the role of Teotihuacan in Mesoamerica’s prehistory. In 1962, Rene Millon began the Teotihuacan Mapping Project (TMP), which expanded archaeologists’ interpretations of Teotihuacan in Mesoamerica’s prehistory (Appendix 1). The completion of the TMP demonstrated the urban nature of ancient Teotihuacan. Recent research has suggested a dominant, albeit complicated, role Teotihuacan played in Mexican prehistory. As one of the earliest complex societies in Mesoamerica, Teotihuacan’s influence, reflective in material culture like obsidian, architecture like talud-tablero, and stylistic motifs, can be seen as far as Guatemala. When conducting surface surveys of the site, archaeologists found an array of artifacts that permitted them to identify areas of craft production in Teotihuacan’s prehistory. These artifacts include, but are not limited to, obsidian, lapidary, ceramics, and figurines (Millon 1973).
Did foreigners reside at the city?

Foreign Occupation: Merchants’ Barrio

Evidence of the occupation of individuals from the Gulf Coast, Maya and Morelos regions are indicative when evaluating both cultural materials and osteological remains (See Appendix 2). Although cultural materials do not indicate specifically where the Gulf Coast and Maya cultures originated, there is discrete evidence suggesting that people from the Gulf Coast and Maya regions resided at the city within the borders of the Merchants’ Barrio. The Merchants’ Barrio differs from that of other apartment compounds in that earlier architectural feats found at the site were circulate in nature, varying greatly with the traditional Teotihuacan style features. The circular pattern found therein is similar to that of architecture found in the Gulf Coast. Later constructions found at the Merchants’ Barrio were constructed to mimic that of Teotihuacan style architecture, presumably adhering to Teotihuacan leader’s desire to have all architecture of the city fashioned in a uniform style (Cowgill 2007).

Evidence of spindle whorls found at the site indicates that the individuals residing at the Merchants’ Barrio may have also produced cotton goods; however, due to the perishable quality of these materials, their role as weavers is merely speculative (Cowgill 2007). Few figurines are found at the Merchants’ Barrio, leading many archaeologists to infer that figurine production did not take place at the Merchants’ Barrio. Containing the largest quantity of foreign pottery throughout the site, the Merchants’ Barrio is thought to have been a region where foreign merchants and traders resided, varying greatly with that of the Oaxaca Barrio where residents were groups of families residing at the city (Rattray 1987 and 1990) and leading many to believe that the Merchants’ Barrio was not a foreign enclave but a “trader’s colony” (Croissier 2000:11). However, until further excavations takes place, the role of foreign occupation at the Merchants’ Barrio and determining whether it can be considered an enclave or a “trader’s colony” is merely speculative. This is further compounded by an incongruent understanding of the burial practices which would aid in assessing where the individuals residing at the compound were from; indeed, few burials have been recovered due to a lack of excavations and a discrete understanding of the mortuary program.

The Oaxaca Barrio

While there is concrete evidence indicating that foreigners resided at Teotihuacan, the Oaxaca Barrio offers more opportunity to understand foreign occupation and foreigners’ roles within the city mostly because the Oaxaca Barrio, as the nomenclature indicates, is a foreign enclave where the people from the Valley of Oaxaca lived, produced children, and died. As a homogeneously autonomous area, the Oaxaca Barrio allows for the examination of foreign occupation in more minute detail. Evidence for Zapotec (or the people of Oaxaca) occupation, can be seen in the material culture and material remains of the once vibrant inhabitants. The barrio itself is designed in typical Teotihuacan style architecture; indeed, all architecture found at Teotihuacan is uniform (aside from early constructions of the Merchants’ Barrio. Later constructions maintained the uniform Teotihuacan style architecture), adhering to the Teotihuacan norm. Deviations in the cultural norm of that of Teotihuacan can be seen in the material found in burials. The Zapotecs that resided at Teotihuacan buried their dead in the typical fashion found in the Valley of Oaxaca rather than that of Teotihuacan, including the construction of tombs that consisted of burial chambers and anti-chambers and the covering of the bodies with red pigments (all of which are trends not found in Teotihuacan burials).

Isotopic experiments conducted on burials found in the Oaxaca Barrio concur with the belief that the individuals that lived and died at the Oaxaca Barrio were from the Valley of Oaxaca. Experiments conducted on 10 skeletons offers indications that several of the buried individuals were Oaxacan. Many offered signatures indicating that they resided in Teotihuacan for part, if not most, of their lives while two offered conflicting indications, they appeared to mimic the strontium and oxygen isotopic marks found at Teotihuacan (leading experts to infer that these individuals both were born and died at Teotihuacan). While two individuals presumably died in the city of their birth, that does not mean that they were Teotihuacanos (Price et al 2000; White et al 1998). They could have been individuals that were born in Teotihuacan of Zapotec parents. Since their mothers were eating foods and drinking water from Teotihuacan and, later, they ate foods and drank water near Teotihuacan, they would exhibit signatures that mimic that of Teotihuacan; however, if their parents were Zapotec, they may have had conflict of identity. As an individual born at Teotihuacan, they may have considered themselves to be Teotihuacanos, but could also identity themselves as Zapotecs owing to their parents’ ethnicities.

Further evidence for Zapotec occupation can be found in the burial remains and burial goods found with these individuals, found buried with Oaxaca-style urns, braziers, censers, and figurines; all used in ritualized manners. While the Zapotecs residing at Teotihuacan continued utilizing and producing goods found in their homelands, they also adopted Teotihuacan-style ritual paraphernalia. Indeed, both insensarios and candeleros (elements of Teotihuacan ritual) were recovered from altars and burials of people that were thought to have been from Oaxaca. Unlike that of the other areas of Teotihuacan with evidence of foreign interaction, the Zapotecs of the Oaxaca Barrio continued participating in important ritual practices found in their homeland while adopting new methods for rituals. This may be a comparable case for the Merchants’ Barrio, however a lack of excavation and research inquiry leaves one questioning whether this was a typical case or a unique one found only at the Oaxaca Barrio (Croissier 2000; Rattray 1992; Spence 1998). While the inherent ethnicity of these individuals is convoluted at best, one thing is for certain: people from the Valley of Oaxaca resided and died at Teotihuacan.

Further evidence of foreign occupation can be seen not at the Merchants’ and Oaxaca Barrios, but at non-foreign apartment compounds at Teotihuacan like that of Tetitla and Tlajinga 33. Archaeologists recovered murals of a knotted design that was intertwined with Veracruz scrolls, incorporating examples from the site of El Tajín, alluding to contact with the Gulf Coast. Additional murals found at another apartment compound, Tetitla, offers a glimpse of a kneeling jaguar which is a common image from the Gulf Coast (Taube 2003). Furthermore, a ballcourt marker and numerous murals that display classic Veracruz scroll designs have been found at the La Ventilla apartment compound (Taube 2003).

Evidence for the presence of Mayans residing at Teotihuacan can be seen in iconography, material culture and human remains. Iconography and murals found at Tetitla allows for the inference that the Teotihuacanos had some interaction with people of Maya descent; depictions of human figures appearing on Tetitla reliefs are painted in Classic Maya style. Furthermore, in a study devoted to Teotihuacan writing systems, Clara Millon identified Maya glyphs on reliefs found at Tetitla (Millon 1973)., similar glyphs appear on stelas located at the Maya city of Tikal. Maya censers, relief vessels, and ceramics have also been recovered in Teotihuacan domestic spheres (Taube 2003).

Osteological Evidence for Foreign Occupation

In addition to material evidence for the presence of Gulf Coast and Maya populations residing at Teotihuacan, there is also osteological evidence indicating that the people of Michoacán, Veracruz, Maya and Morelos regions resided there. Thought to have focused primarily within the corridors of the Oaxaca Barrio and Merchants’ Barrio, most archaeologists believe the influence of foreign craft production is centralized in those regions. However, isotope analysis indicates that foreigners resided not only within the Oaxaca Barrio and Merchants’ Barrio, but also in apartment compounds such as Tlajinga 33 and Oztoyahualco (further inquiry of additional apartment compounds may demonstrate similar threads). Although foreigners were rare at Oztoyahualco (only two individuals), they were common at Tlajinga 33. The burials at Tlajinga 33 offers discrete evidence suggesting that numerous members of the apartment compound (both male and female) were from foreign regions, specifically Michoacán, based primarily on strontium and oxygen isotopic studies (Price et al 2000). Evidence for foreign members residing in a previously conceived local apartment compound has been interpreted as foreign recruitments brought in and married into the compound for their craft skill.

Finally, in an oxygen isotopic study conducted on the sacrificial victims from the Feathered Serpent Pyramid, the victims may have been from the Gulf Coast, Michoacán, Maya, and Valley of Oaxaca regions, with most offering signatures indicating that they were born in a foreign region but spend considerable time at Teotihuacan (many appear to have resided in Teotihuacan since childhood or adolescence). White et al. suggest that the soldiers may have been mercenaries or recruited soldiers that trained, resided, and defended Teotihuacan. Furthermore, several females buried there may have been from Gulf Coast, Valley of Oaxaca, Michoacán, or Maya highlands. Many of these women were born in a foreign area and moved to Teotihuacan at adolescence. White et al. argue that the women may have been foreigners that married into the local populations (White et al. 2002). Although the evidence addressed above clearly indicates that individuals from foreign region resided at Teotihuacan, owing to a lack of excavation at the Merchants’ Barrio and the limited number of isotopic evidence, their inherent role in Teotihuacan’s political economy is still unknown.