Archaeological research on the Gallina (AD 1100–1300) inhabitants of the region west of the Rio Chama and centered on the Llaves valley has focused on constructing a culture history and examining functional characteristics of artifacts... more
Archaeological research on the Gallina (AD 1100–1300) inhabitants of the region west of the Rio Chama and centered on the Llaves valley has focused on constructing a culture history and examining functional characteristics of artifacts and architecture. Limited research has attempted to understand who the residents of the Gallina heartland were. In this article, using new findings and historical contexts, we argue that the Gallina people had a complicated identity forged around resistance and a deep connection to their past. To better understand them we need to move past previous binary categories used to describe them and perceive them not as isolated or connected, aggressors or victims, traditionalists or innovators, but as an intersectional mix of these axes of identity. Moreover, the process-oriented discussion of ethnogenesis can be problematic. Instead it might be best to think of Gallina social identity as one of being, instead of becoming, because for them identity was not a process, it was a position, although one variably shifting along intersecting axes of identity—it was not static. Just as critically, becoming is a category of hierarchical power in some Indigenous communities in the Southwest.
Many of these frontier and borderland zones in the Greater American Southwest—these non-places—are often non-hierarchical, or at least less hierarchical than many areas in the Chacoan World. Some of these non-places even prefer a more... more
Many of these frontier and borderland zones in the Greater American Southwest—these non-places—are often non-hierarchical, or at least less hierarchical than many areas in the Chacoan World. Some of these non-places even prefer a more traditional style of architecture. Places like the crater houses around Chimney Rock (Chuipka 2011), the Gallina, the Valdez Phase near Taos (Boyer 1997; Fowles 2010), and Homol’ovi Pueblo III pithouse communities (Barker and Young 2017) often get labeled as “Out-of-Phase,” as though they failed to predict the eventual rise of the Pecos Classification System or the Northern Rio Grande Sequence. This highlights one of the major underlying processes for the construction of “sexy,” the construction of archaeological popularity, in archaeology. Things that look more like us, get more attention. And in the US Southwest at least, hierarchy is sexy (Borck under review).
