My long reply got devoured so for the sake of my own sanity I will reiterate my original point from a quote with the resource you linked:
> In conceptual terms, scholarship on the past should revisit the bibliocentric assumptions of “prehistory,” and pursue, instead, the study of “ancient American history”-an approach that treats oral documents as respectable siblings of written documents.
I agree with both of those points and I'm well known in my social circle to go on long rants about the term prehistory. I avoid using it.
Though, in that same vein is another semantic paper called something like "Rehumanizing Pleistocene People", can't remember the author with bad Internet.
> In conceptual terms, scholarship on the past should revisit the bibliocentric assumptions of “prehistory,” and pursue, instead, the study of “ancient American history”-an approach that treats oral documents as respectable siblings of written documents.