The Bioarchaeology of Social Control is the ninth volume in Springer's very successful “Bioarchaeology and Social Theory” book series, now at more than 20 volumes in six short years and still going strong. Ryan P. Harrod takes on the issues of violence and social control during the so-called Pax Chaco of the Pueblo II period (AD 900–1150) in the San Juan Basin of northwestern New Mexico in the US Southwest. Using the archaeologically rich and still decidedly enigmatic Chaco fluorescence and collapse as his empirical backdrop, Harrod explores how and why violence—particularly nonlethal violence—is deployed by some individuals in middle-range societies. Archaeologists and anthropologists have been arguing about the social and political complexity of (both prehistoric and contemporary) Native societies in the Southwest for generations. They have also made various pronouncements regarding the nature of violence and the meaning of that violence in these societies. However, I think Debra Martin, the series editor, is apt in wondering in her preface to this work why researchers of the Southwest have so often neglected bioarchaeological data. Harrod's volume goes a long way to rectify this omission. Of course, bioarchaeologists must also embrace a new normal that requires authentic and committed collaboration and partnership with descendant communities throughout the entire research process.

Harrod's argument unfolds across 10 chapters. The first and last chapters are short introductory and concluding statements. Chapter 2 provides a background to the culture history of the region, including short summaries of the prehistoric Puebloan, Hohokam, Mogollon, Salado, Sinagua, and Athabascan cultures. Chapter 3 outlines theories of social control and structural violence. Harrod defines the former as “a social contract as a means of ensuring the society continues to operate in cohesive manner” (p. 42). The latter is described in this way: “[structural] violence often is not recognized by the society because it is socially sanctioned and therefore does not violate the cultural norms of the group” (p. 45). Chapter 4 provides a detailed description of the Chaco Phenomenon proper, whereas Chapter 5 contextualizes Chaco by exploring population movements before, during, and after its acme. These two chapters also introduce us to the sites from which Harrod's bioarchaeological data will be drawn. Chapter 6 provides a primer on bioarchaeological methods, and it details the biological profile (age, sex, and mortuary context) of the skeletal samples examined. Chapter 7 provides Harrod's assessment of the biocultural identity of his samples, which includes a discussion of osteological indicators of diet, activity patterns, and pathologies—especially evidence of perimortem trauma and nonlethal injuries. Chapter 8 explores how such trauma may indicate violence toward lower-status societal members or competition among those vying for status. Ultimately, Harrod argues that “at the height of Chaco Canyon, most of the traumatic injuries that are associated with violence are nonlethal in nature” (p. 136) and that therefore the Pax Chaco may not have been so peaceful for all members of society. Chapter 9 looks at the impact of migration and changing religious and ideological structures on the post-Chacoan world.

The Bioarchaeology of Social Control is a published version of Harrod's 2013 doctoral dissertation, and unfortunately this shows at times. Although the writing and prose are excellent, there are the disjointed, sometimes meandering aspects that often mark dissertations. There are repetitive portions of the text (see, for example, the top and bottom of p. 9). There is an extremely abbreviated discussion of possible “witch” killings, and overly long sections on gambler myths and hunter-gather mobility patterns of the Southwest are poorly integrated into the volume's argument. There are in-text citations—for example, “Marden et al. 2012” on p. 88—that are not found in the references section, and figure captions that do not match figures (e.g., Figure 6.3). That said, transitioning a rich bioarchaeological dissertation into a published volume that makes both archaeologists and human osteologists (most of whom are unfamiliar with one's particular empirical world area) happy is an especially tall order. Therefore, I toss these stones knowing full well that I do so from the glass house of my own very flawed published works.

What is done well is that Harrod has distilled or excised much of the methodological and empirical handwringing and minutiae of his dissertation thesis. Moreover, as Martin notes in her preface to this volume, contemporary bioarchaeology is embracing the “use of multiple lines of evidence to build robust interpretive frameworks” (p. viii). That is true, and this volume does just that. Harrod is right to note that “relatively few studies have analyzed violence among the Ancestral Pueblo by recording nonlethal trauma” (p. 52). This work reminds us that high status and good health may not always be correlated, that Puebloan society is and has been complex and varied, and that we do well to explore in detail that complex variation.