This article presents radiocarbon dates on 29 perishable objects deposited in shrine caves in the Jornada and Mimbres Mogollon regions of far west Texas and southern New Mexico. The dated objects include tablita fragments, effigies, prayer sticks, hafted projectile point foreshafts, and flat curved sticks. Analysis of the dates reveals three significant trends: a particular set of Indigenous ritual practices involving shrine caves in the North American Southwest was of extraordinary temporal depth and continuity; the meanings and material culture associated with shrine caves changed through time; and a signature iconographic expression of Jornada and Mimbres origin cosmologies, the Goggle-eye or “Tlaloc” entity, is older than previously understood. The dating of shrine caves and iconographic motifs provides new insights on early eras of religious expression in the southern Southwest, clarifying both the nature and time depth of foundational cosmologies and providing a deep time perspective for interpretations of how such cosmologies and their material and iconographic expressions changed through time.

Ohio Hopewell is an archaeological concept that is known worldwide but that suffers from “a disarray of radiocarbon results” (Lynott 2015:60). Here, we establish a comprehensive dataset of 425 14C dates from Ohio Hopewell sites and apply formal chronometric hygiene criteria to all dates. We then iteratively assess the temporal placement and span of the six most important Ohio Hopewell sites—the Hopewell Mound Group, Liberty, Mound City, Seip, Tremper, and Turner. A staged relaxation of hygiene criteria for our best three categories (Classes 1–3) permits alternate but generally consistent conclusions. As the first large-scale analyses of Ohio Hopewell temporality since the publication of IntCal20 (Reimer et al. 2020), the available data show a ritual complex that begins 90 or more years later than generally has been recognized circa 2010 14C BP, or as Bayesian modeled, AD 90–120. Our analysis reveals site histories of differing spans, more late dates than early dates, and with most Hopewell activity ending across these sites circa 1640 14C BP, or as Bayesian modeled, AD 395–430. An increased consideration of contingency in contemporary temporal reckoning increases the utility of the historical narratives that we as archaeologists can construct.

The places in which people live and spend time are steeped in history, memory, and meaning from the intersection of daily life, environmental interactions, cultural practices, and ritual. Geologic features, plants, animals, and ecosystems merge with these cultural histories, forming critical parts of the landscape and areas of “high cultural salience,” or “cultural keystone places” (CKPs). We identify Kumqaq’ (Point Conception) and the surrounding area in California as a Chumash CKP. Ethnohistoric accounts and contemporary Chumash community members have long demonstrated the importance of Point Conception in Chumash worldview and identity, whereas biologists, ecologists, and conservationists reference the area's rich biodiversity and significance as a biogeographical boundary. Recent archaeological survey of the coastline surrounding Kumqaq’ highlights these connections, identifying over 50 archaeological sites—including shell middens, villages, lithic scatters, and rock art—with at least 9,000 years of occupation. Ongoing collaborations among archaeologists, the Nature Conservancy, and Chumash community members help document and understand the long-term linkages between cultural and biological diversity and how integrating these perspectives can help ensure the resilience of this nexus of human and natural history in the Anthropocene future.

A juniper fiber net discovered in a cave near Cody, Wyoming, had been radiocarbon dated at 8860 BP (6910 ± 170 BC; RL-396) in 1986. Reanalysis and four additional AMS radiocarbon dates indicate an age younger than 1300 cal BP. Net metrics are consistent with archaeological and ethnographic examples identified as rabbit nets.

Blair provides a thorough review of data he claims stands in opposition to our narrative concerning the origins of IIa40/Early Blue glass trade beads and their presence in arctic Alaska prior to Columbus’ initial voyage. He employs three lines of evidence: historical and archaeological data, Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis, and radiocarbon dating. Our reply addresses his application of these data sets, clarifying his use of our data to arrive at his conclusions. While we continue to disagree with Blair, we do wish to acknowledge his time spent on debating the issue thereby furthering all of our understanding on this topic.

We thank our colleague for his comment, address concerns raised, and encourage future collaborative research to answer important questions about the Middle Preclassic at Cahal Pech.