Robert Cook blends various forms of archaeological and ethnohistoric data in this insightful book on the descendants of Fort Ancient, a long-recognized archaeological manifestation in the Ohio River Valley of eastern North America dating from AD 1000 to 1650. This work comes at an important time in consultations between archaeologists/anthropologists and Indigenous groups. For many reasons, there were few Native Americans living in areas near Cincinnati, Ohio, by the time of European settlement in the eighteenth century, and connections between precontact groups such as the Fort Ancient and currently federally recognized tribes were either lost or not maintained. Although it does not identify specific tribes as descendants, Cook's book provides some guidance about the complexities of connections between Fort Ancient sites and contemporary descendant communities.

Cook presents his arguments in eight chapters. In Chapter 1, he reviews archaeological scholarship on Fort Ancient culture as well as extant data on connections between Fort Ancient and Mississippian groups; he outlines some potential historical connections between Fort Ancient culture and historically known Indigenous groups; and he provides some insights on getting past approaches to affiliation that have not worked. He sees Fort Ancient and Mississippian as part of a cultural continuum—one that began with the arrival of Mississippians to the central Ohio Valley during the early eleventh century AD. Cook positions Mississippians as likely Dhegihan Siouan groups, and he identifies the already resident populations of the central Ohio Valley as Central Algonquians.

In Chapters 2 and 3, Cook summarizes major characteristics of Fort Ancient culture and outlines the anthropological framework for his “direct macrohistoric approach,” a variant of the “direct historic approach” (p. 2). He prefers a broader framework with more closely examined social contexts in an attempt to identify “macro groupings of shared traditions” (p. 2) that connect the living to the archaeological record. Fort Ancient culture is defined through characteristics of material culture, burial form, housing, and site structure. Not surprisingly, given temporal and spatial variation in these characteristics at Fort Ancient sites, Cook argues “that it is clearly not a homogenous entity” (p. 32).

The region of interest here, as discussed in Chapter 4, encompasses areas from the Little and Great Miami Rivers in southwest Ohio to southeast Indiana. Through a variety of climatic data, Cook argues that this region was the only part of the Ohio Valley that maintained above-average moisture conditions throughout much of the Fort Ancient period, thereby providing a “pull” for Mississippians to come.

In Chapter 5, Cook provides most of his bioarchaeological data connecting Mississippians to Fort Ancient and discussing biodistance between and among groups. His data indicate that connections between Mississippians and Fort Ancient villages are clear and that the earliest Fort Ancient sites in the study region are among the largest villages. These early villages demonstrate evidence of some of the highest levels of maize consumption, houses with wall trenches, Mississippian pottery, and Mississippian peoples. In contrast, he provides evidence that the Madisonville site—perhaps the most well-known late Fort Ancient site—is biologically unique when compared to the others, suggesting that people at Madisonville may not have been closely related to those at other Fort Ancient sites.

Cook introduces ethnographic analogies in Chapter 6 to account for the development of the typical Fort Ancient circular village layout. He sees this template as a structural concept that could accommodate and incorporate multiple cultural groups, such as those present in early hybrid villages in the Central Ohio Valley. He discusses village plans among the Omaha (Siouan) and Winnebago (Siouan, but more closely aligned with Algonquian groups) at length and compares them in depth to the village layout at SunWatch, the most intensively excavated Fort Ancient site in the study area. Although there is evidence in favor of each of the examples, Cook sides with the Omaha Dhegiha Siouan influences at SunWatch (middle Fort Ancient) and with Winnebago Central Algonquian influences at the Madisonville site (late Fort Ancient).

Chapter 7 considers the “end” of Fort Ancient culture as an archaeological manifestation. Cook argues that some members of the Fort Ancient culture may have departed the study area at around AD 1400, when a cooler and drier climate may have led to decreased maize consumption. He further argues—based on strontium isotope data from Illinois, the Ohio Valley, and the Middle Cumberland Valley—that if there was migration into the study area after about AD 1400, it did not involve Mississippian groups from the west and south for which he had data.

Cook's comprehensive and insightful consideration of diverse datasets has provided researchers and others involved in NAGPRA issues with some valuable guidance about site connections, cultural affiliations, and potentially descendant communities of the Fort Ancient culture. Clearly, these interpretations require Native involvement and consultation, which hopefully will occur in the future.