Antiquities Section Selected Papers Volume VII Number 16

Introduction

INTRODUCTION The papers included in this monograph were produced as the result ol a scries of events initiated by the publica­tion of Back hoe Village {Madsen and Lindsay 1977). The Backhoe Village monograph included an attempt to re­concile a number of opposing views on the nature of the Fremont, the origins of Fremont groups, and the classifi­cation of its areal variation. It also included much of the recently accumulated data on Fremont subsistence. Since this was both a new approach and the first attempt in syn­thesis in a decade or more, its publication stimulated a number of informal discussions among Friends of the Fremont. These discussions were both written and oral, and included exchanges of lengthy letters on variety of topics. The most enlightening aspect of this informal ex­change was that Fremont research was currently in a state of flux, and that there was much to be gained by a formal and well-structured exchange of views. As a result, plans were made to hold a Fremont/Sevier symposium at the 1978 Great Basin Anthropological Conference in Reno, Nevada. It was structured by topic and differed from a similar attempt at a structured Fremont symposium, which dealt mostly with trait-list distributions, during the 1970 SAA Conference in Mexico City. Discussion of the theoretical implications of this approach or of any other approach was avoided, due to ihe limited amount of subsistence/environmental data. However, with the accumulation of data, since then, it became obvious that the relative usefulness of the var­ious methodological approaches must be a primary topic of discussion. Prior to the conference a list of proposed topics was circulated to Fremont specialists. These topics fell into two major areas: theoretical/methodological and descrip­tive. Several specific descriptive topics were included be­cause of the rather biased nature of Fremont research. While work on the Fremont has been almost entirely descriptive, it has mostly been limited to defining space/ time relationships and to investigating a few of the more prominent artifact categories, such as ceramics. Since resolution of many of the theoretical controversies which surround the Fremont is dependent on more adequate descriptive studies, several such topics were included in the symposium. These included a comparison of artifact categories and their contrasting utility in defining a co­herent "Fremont" material culture inventory(Adovasio), a discussion of Fremont subsistence (Madsen), a discus­sion of Fremont architecture and settlement patterns (Lohse), and an investigation of the chronology and dis­tribution of Fremont lithic materials (Holmer and Weder). Theoretical topics included a discussion of the history of Fremont research and how this peculiar history had itself structured present conceptions of the Fremont (Mar-wilt); a discussion ol the cultural classification systems which have been applied to the Fremont was included since the nature of the systems has controlled, to a large degree, the manner in which relationships between groups has been defined (Hogan and Sebastian); a topic of Fre-moni "origins" was included since this has been one of the major areas of controversy within Fremont research (Berry). Two additional topics were proposed, but were not discussed. One was on the limits of the Fremont and external contacts, and the other was on Fremont "de­mise." In both cases, it became obvious lhat even at this late date no Fremont specialist was capable of framing a definition of the Fremont which would allow these topics to be investigated. After volunteers were strong-armed into preparing papers on these topics, discussants with a broad back­ground and many years' experience in Fremont research were solicited to provide some historical perspective (Aikens and Ambler). With the structure of the sympo­sium and its participants set, papers were prepared and circulated in advance. It was intended that this would allow all participants to familiarize themselves with each other's material and to prepare additional comments on the olher topics if they felt so inclined. Unfortunately, time limitations at the 1978 Great Basin symposium pre­vented a free exchange after the presentation of papers, and comments were limited to those prepared by the discussants. However, since the papers were prepared for publication, as well as for oral presentation, it was pos­sible to accept written comments by the participants for inclusion in this monograph, and thus allow at least a moderate exchange of views. After the symposium, par­ticipants were allowed to revise their papers if they so desired and to prepare comments if they were in an argumentative mood. The few substantially revised papers were again circulated, and commenters were allowed to revise their comments. Editing of the papers has been kept to a minimum. Other than grammar, punctuation, and spelling correc­tions, no changes have been made in the texts. The only major change has been the compilation of all references into a single bibliography. This was done because cited references are redundant from paper to paper, and because by combining the references it is possible to achieve a relatively complete Fremont bibliography which should be easier for future students of the Fre­mont to use. The papers are presented in the same order as in the symposium. They are followed by the discus­sants' remarks and by those participants who chose to comment.