ABSTRACT
Similarly, arguments about the technological superiority of European material culture reveal assumptions about progress and evolution that are evident in many contemporary archaeological studies of process (cf. Miller & Tilley 1984). These assumptions posit the primacy of techno-environmental factors in accounting for social transformations, ignore social imperatives, and essentially deny the importance of historical processes in explaining change. As such, these generalizations about the relative utilitarian value of European versus Indian objects has no special relevance to Indian people, to their histories, or their current political struggles. By analysing the data in this manner, the interests of Euroamerican society rather than those of Indian people are served. By imposing our values on 17th-century Native America, we are creating the impression that these Indians are like us, and because they are like us, they are not separated or excluded from the colonial past, but assimilated into our view of it. This allows us to hide the fact that although Indians made accommodations to, and even participated in, the changes introduced by the expansion of capitalism, they also resisted them. Moreover, by saying that they are like us, we are dismissing the actions taken to dominate them.
