Pox, Empire, Shackles And Hides Summary

The English Contact period in the New World is an established focus among historians as well as archaeologists. Jon Bernard Marcoux takes a step further with his innovative approach to explore how Cherokee households would transform during the English Contact period? Marcoux also questions why the Cherokee even settled in the southern Appalachian region only to abandon it in the 1700s. The origins of the Cherokee settling in the area can only be hypothesized since limited data recovery at older sites exist and there are no historical documents to support archaeological theories. In Pox, Empire, Shackles, and Hides, Marcoux centers his research on the Townsend Site in Tennessee that holds three archaeological excavation sites. Marcoux wisely

Marcoux asserts that this historical background is crucial to understanding the events for the rest of the eighteenth century (18). This discussion also provides readers with an explanation for the distinguishable book title. He briefly introduces the shatter zone concept theorized by historians only to challenge the concept by contending three historical forces must be given a more significant role in the discussion of the shatter zone concept. The three include: “…the spread of epidemic disease, European colonial competition, and the trade in Indian slaves” (21). Marcoux argues that Cherokee were, for the most part, more isolated than most Indian groups and the isolation was by strategic intention. The isolation was an additional measure of safety from the shatter zone. The shatter zone effect other Indian groups and was a caused by direct interaction with the Europeans. This does not mean that the Cherokee did not suffer any effects of the shatter zone since they did engage in deer hid trade, but their population was not wiped out due to disease or

Marcoux’s professional background in archaeology provided him with new vocabulary that the layperson is unfamiliar with. Although this study is obviously geared toward academic and other professionals, is is advisable explain terms and concepts that apply specifically to southeastern archaeology. Basic archaeological terms like wares, temper, and even the research theory he approached were explained. However, he did not explain exactly why he chose a historical particularist approach, he simply justified his perspective with out explaining why other theories would not have been acceptable. Readers with archaeological theory background would note that a number of different theories would also fit this study, depending on how one would want to look at the data. Disputing other theories, or at minimum acknowledging there are other theories, would have strengthened his