through some meticulously documented analyses including, inter alia, provenance and chaîne opératoire analyses of more than 2,000 obsidian artifacts to ascertain how these materials were worked through the courses of journeys from their source at 4,100 m asl at Quispisisa / Jichja Parco down across the Paracas world; the identification and quantification of mollusks to track their movement inland in significant quantities more than 60 km from the ocean and lomas, and as artifacts even up to the high sierra; and last, but not least, analyses of the remains of the beasts of burden that articulated Paracas mobility, including strontium isotope analyses of the teeth of 30 camelids from the Palpa Valley, showing that these were likely raised in the highlands. Mader’s interpretations of these data are strictly, even fastidiously qualified, but it will doubtless disappoint anthropologists of the past that he can discern no evidence for verticality expressed through Murra’s vertical archipelago model, sensu stricto, or for interactions in Paracas driven much by redistribution or reciprocity. Instead of archipelagos of colonies, what emerges is ecological complementarity through the aegis of longdistance exchanges articulated by intense camelid caravans throughout an entirely Paracas landscape (for which Mader coins the term “economic directness”). By Late Paracas this landscape, as documented by the Nasca-Palpa Archaeological Project, had become peppered with dozens of settlements of different scales along rivers and atop ridgelines, all sharing in a material culture yet also exhibiting increasing evidence of internecine conflict. For me this begs additional questions about how long-distance mobility was pursued within such a milieu and indeed what that might mean for the nature of Late Paracas society and economy. Sea Shells in the Mountains and Llamas on the Coast is founded on the fixed, tangible elements of the past excavated from particular places, yet the patterns drawn from those data are those of movement between those places. Mader himself has walked the 200 km of Paracas routeways from the high Andean obsidian sources at Quispisisa, via many of the settlements studied such as Collanco, down to the Pacific shore at the estuary of the Río Grande de Nazca. With this excellent study he has reanimated ancient Paracas for us and moreover has done so over hitherto unrecognized geographies.

中文翻译：

---

加拉帕戈斯群岛的历史生态学和考古学：人类职业的遗产。PETER W. STAHL、FERNANDO J. ASTUDILLO、ROSS W. JAMIESON、DIEGO QUIROGA 和 FLORENCIO DELGADO。2020. 佛罗里达大学出版社，盖恩斯维尔。240 页。 90.00 美元（精装），ISBN 9780813066271。

通过一些精心记录的分析，包括对 2,000 多件黑曜石文物的出处和 chaîne opératoire 分析，以确定这些材料是如何在 4,100 米处的 Quispisisa / Jichja Parco 的起源地穿越帕拉卡斯世界的过程中加工的; 识别和量化软体动物，以追踪它们在距海洋和洛马斯 60 公里以上的大量内陆运动，甚至作为人工制品，甚至高达山脉；最后但并非最不重要的是，对阐明帕拉卡斯移动性的驮兽残骸的分析，包括对来自帕尔帕谷的 30 只骆驼科动物牙齿的锶同位素分析，表明它们很可能是在高地饲养的。马德尔对这些数据的解释是严格的，甚至是挑剔的，但无疑会让过去的人类学家失望，因为他无法辨别出通过穆拉的垂直群岛模型表达的垂直性的证据，严格意义上的，或者帕拉卡斯的互动很大程度上受再分配或互惠驱动。出现的不是殖民地群岛，而是通过长距离交流的支持而出现的生态互补性，这些交流由贯穿整个帕拉卡斯景观的激烈骆驼商队所表达（Mader 为其创造了“经济直接性”一词）。到帕拉卡斯晚期，根据纳斯卡-帕尔帕考古项目的记录，这片景观已经在河流沿岸和山脊线上布满了数十个不同规模的定居点，所有这些定居点都共享物质文化，但也显示出越来越多的相互冲突的证据。对我来说，这引发了额外的问题，即在这样的环境中如何追求长距离流动，以及这对晚帕拉卡斯社会和经济的性质可能意味着什么。山上的贝壳和海岸上的美洲驼建立在从特定地方挖掘出来的固定的、有形的过去元素之上，但从这些数据中得出的模式是那些地方之间的运动模式。Mader 本人已经从 Quispisisa 的高安第斯黑曜石矿源，经过许多研究的定居点（如 Collanco），沿着 200 公里的帕拉卡斯（Paracas）路线一直走到纳斯卡河口的太平洋海岸。通过这项出色的研究，他为我们重振了古老的帕拉卡斯，而且还为迄今为止未被认识的地理区域进行了改造。