Guilá Naquitz : archaic foraging and early agriculture in Oaxaca, Mexico 9780122598302, 012259830X

Table of contents :
The research problem / Kent V. Flannery --
Ecosystem models and information flow in the Tehuacán --
Oaxaca region / Ken V. Flannery --
Guilá Naquitz in spatial, temporal, and cultural context / Kent V. Flannery --
The physical environment of the Guilá Naquitz cave group / Michael J. Kirkby, Anne V. Whyte, and Kent V. Flannery --
The excavation of Guilá Naquitz / Kent V. Flannery, Chris L. Moser, and Silvia Maranca --
Chipped-stone tools / Frank Hole --
Sources of the Guilá Naquitz chipped stone / Michael E. Whalen --
Ground-stone artifacts / Kent V. Flannery --
Preceramic cordage and basketry from Guilá Naquitz / Mary Elizabeth King --
Artifacts of wood and related materials / Kent V. Flannery --
Woods used as fuels / Kent V. Flannery --
Artifacts of deer antler / Kent V. Flanner --
Coprolites and animal fur / Eric O. Callen --
Radiocarbon dates / Kent V. Flannery --
Pollen analysis of the Oaxaca archaic / James Schoenwetter and Landon Douglas Smith --
Comparing the preceramic and modern microfauna / Kent V. Flannery and Jane C. Wheeler --
The quantification of subsistence data: an introduction to part V / Kent V. Flannery --
Wild food resources of the mitla caves: productivity, Seasonality, and annual variation / Kent V. Flannery --
Preceramic plant remains from Guilá Naquitz / C. Earle Smith, Jr. --
Cocurbits from preceramic levels at Guilá Naquitz / Thomas W. Whitaker and Hugh C. Cutler --
Preceramic phaseolus from Guilá Naquitz / Lawrence Kaplan --
Animal food remains from preceramic Guilá Naquitz / Kent V. Flannery and Jane C. Wheeler --
Nutritional significance of the Guilá Naquitz food remains / J.R.K. Robson and J.N. Elias --
Food procurement area and preceramic diet at Guilá Naquitz / Kent V. Flannery --
Special analysis of Guilá Naquitz living floors: an introduction to part VI / Kent V. Flannery --
Spatial variation of debris at Guilá Naquitz: a descriptive approach / Charles S. Spencer and Kent V. Flannery --
A spatial analysis of four occupation floors at Guila Naquitz / Robert Whallon --
Multidimensional scaling of four Guilá Naquitz living floors / Robert G. Reynolds --
Episodal analysis of Guilá Naquitz: a synthesis of Spencer's, Whallon's, and Reynolds' results / Kent V. Flannery --
The modeling of foraging strategy: an introduction to part VII / Kent V. Flannery --
An adaptive computer model for the evolution of plant collecting and early agriculture in the eastern valley of Oaxaca / Robert G. Reynolds --
Adaptation, evolution, and archaeological phases: some implications of Reynolds' simulation / Kent V. Flannery --
A visit to the master / Kent V. Flannery --
Resumen en Español / David J. Wilson.

Citation preview

- ·--·-

Frontispiece. Autumn in the upper piedmont near Guila Naquitz, ca. 7000 B,C. A Naquitz phase forager removes a cottontail (Sylvilagus sp,) from a snare while his son collects prickly pear fruit (Opuntia sp.) with a knotted net bag. To the boy's right is an oak tree (Quercus sp.); to his left is a nanche (Malpighia sp.) heavy with fruit. The adult forager is careful to avoid the large ma/a mujer Uatropha urens) in the lower right foreground, a plant which can produce a nettle-like sting. Behind him we see a garambullo or organ cactus (Myrtillocactus sp.), its trunk partly hidden by the fruit-laden boughs of another nanche. In the lower left foreground we see a flowering prickly pear, partly hidden by a susf bush Uatropha neodioica) with its edible nuts borne in paired seed case~. Still further back is a saw-toothed lech11guilla (Agave karwinskii), sending its quiote or inflorescence 3 meters mto th~ air. More shru_b oaks and susl bushes appear behind the /ech11guilla. In the center foreground, between the sus, and ma/a mu;er, we see a single Hechtia plant. _The rabbit, aco~s, s~sl nuts! nanches, and prickly pear fruits will all be eaten this autumn; the garambu/lo st w'.ll bear mo of its frui~ later 1n the winter, when Guila Naquitz has been abandoned. The agave inflorescence will be used as a fire-dnll hearth, and the Hechtia will be used for fiber. (Drawing by Nancy Hansen.)

--------Bookkeeper· De~ddific:uion for libraries ilnd Archives julylOIS

I

I I

i For SCOTTY MACNEISH . u1bo introduced me to the ;ays l , 10,000-year-old trash of rummaging through other peop es

i Contents Contributors xv Preface xvii Acknowledgments xix

COPYIUGll"r '' !!lll6 DY ,\CADl:MIC PRESS, INC. Al.I. Rl(lll'Th Rf.SERVED. 1'(1 rART OF nus P~BIJC.~TION MAY BE REPRODUCED OR TM~S,\Hl1'W IN ANY FOJ\.\I OR B'i ,\NY MEANS, f.LECT)lONIC 01\ MrCHANICAL, INCLUDING PHbTOCOrY, llECORDING, OR ,\N) INFOll\L\TION STORAGE AND I\ETIVtVAL S\')"Til,I. WITHOUT Pf:J\MISSION IN WIVTING fROM THE PUDLISHtR.

ACADEMIC PRESS, INC. Otl::mW>. Ar,od;a J'lW

I THE PROBLEM AND THE MODEL l. The Research Problem

1

3

KENT V. FLANNERY Un11,d Ai11gdom Ed,tfrm publuhtd by ACADE~UC PRESS INC. (LONDON) LTD. Jt-:.!k U\,11 Ro:td, L.•m.lon NWI 70\'.

1.1\\Mkl Ot Cu~Glt i-~ C.H.\LOGING IN PCBLIClt rl()N DATA

Guil.i i'hq1Hu

'J Introduction 3 Agriculture: "How" or "Why"? 3 The Paleobotanical Evidence 5 Gourds and Squashes 6 Beans 7 'i- Teosinte and Maize 7 ·v The Maize-Bean-Squash Association 8 .J Models and Theories for Early Domestication Universal Aspecrs of the Model 16 Epilogue 18

9

2. Ecosystem Models and Information Flow in the Tehuacan-Oaxaca Region 19 KENT V, FLANNERY

Pll.tt.-no IN TIil U~llEll SlAHS m ,\\tF.1uc,

Introduction 19 Matter, Energy, and Information 20 The Choice of an Ecosystem 21 Constructing a Multiple-Loop Model 21 Deriving a Systems Model from the Tehuacan and Oaxaca Data 22 Zea versus Prosopis: An Example of Two Genera Linked through 26 Their Relationship to Humans Modeling Environmental Vanation 27 Scheduling 28 Summary 28 vii

Contcms

viii

Conrfnts

II THE CULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 29 3. Guila Naquitz in Spatial, Temporal, and Cultural Context

31

KENT V. FLANNERY Introduction 31 The Valley of Oaxaca 31 The Discovery of Guil:I Naquitz 36 The Chronological and Cultural Placement of Guila Naquitz 38 Guila Naquitz in Its Demographic Context 39_ Guil:I Naquin in the ContcXt of Binford's Forager-Coll~ctor D1cho~omy 40 Guila Naquitz in the Context of MacNeish's Macroband-Microband Dichotomy 40 Guil:I Naquitz in the Context of Oaxaca-Tehuacan Settlement Types 40 Summary 42

4. The Physical Environment of the Guila Naquitz Cave Group 43

65

KENT V. FLANNERY, CHRlS L. MOSER, and SILVIA MARANCA Introduction 65 Excavation Techniques 67 Stage 1: Initial Test 70 Stage 2: Squares D8 and ES 7 5 Stages 3-5: Beginning the Main E . Stages 6 7. C . xcavauon 77 0 The Precera~i~ L '.°P1eFlnng the Main Excavation 78 . Th ,vmg. oors· 80 • · Summary Descnptions e 1mphcaaons of Zone B 87 The Postclassic Levels g9 Ephemeral Formative Occupations 95

97

FRANK HOLE

Introduction 97 Technology and Raw M arena! .

MICHAEL E. WHALEN

Within 10 Kilometers 141 At Distances of 25 Kilometers 143 At Distances of 45-55 Kilometers 143

8. Ground-Stone Artifacts 147 KENT V. FLANNERY

III EXCAVATION AND ARTIFACT ANALYSIS

6. Chipped-Stone Tools

7. Sources of the Guila Naquitz Chipped Stone 141

Preliminary Discussion 147 One-Hand Manos 147 Metates 150 Mortars 151 Miscellaneous Categories 151 Summaries of Individual Living Floors 152

MICHAEL J. KIRKBY, ANNE V. WHYTE, and KENT V. FLANNERY Introduction 43 Geology and Soils 44 Climate and Hydrology 48 Vegetation Zones and Their racies 48 Native Animals 53 More Distant Environments 54 Conclusion: Factors in Preceramic Site Location 56

5. The Excavation of Guila Naquitz

Typology 99 The Basics of the Guila Naquitz Industry 99 Pounding and Flaking Tools 99 Cores and Core Fragments 101 Choppers, Scrapers, and Knives 101 Tools for Slotting and Perforating 106 Other Flake and Blade Tools 109 Projectile Points 112 Bifaces US Unretouched Pieces 120 Summary 121

9. Preceramic Cordage and Basketry from Guila Naquitz 157 MARY ELIZAl!ETH KING

63

Introduction 157 Knorted Netting 157 Cordage 158 Fiber 159 Basketry 159 Summaries of Individual Living Floors 160

10. Artifacts of Wood and Related Materials 163 KENT V. FLANNERY Fire-Making Equipment 163 Atlatl-Hafting Equipment(?) 164 Nopal-Roasting Equipment 165 Miscellaneous Items 167 Summaries of Individual Living Floors 168

11. Woods Used as Fuels 169 KENT V. FLANNERY

12. Artifacts of Deer Antler 171 KENT V. FLANNERY

Artifact Categories 171 Summaries of Individual Living Floors 171 97

ix

Contents Contents

Annual Variation 260 Estimating the Productivity of Food Animals 260 Converting Raw Productivity to Calories and Protein 261

d Anilllal Fur 173 13. Coprolites an ERIC o. CALLEN 14. Radiocarbon Dates 175

19. Preceramic Plant Remains from Guila Naquitz 265

KENT V. rI.ANNERY

C. EARLE SMITH, JR.

Catalogue of the Plant Remains 265 Interpretation of the Plant Remains 272 Agriculture in the Preceramic 272 Vegetational History of the Guila Naquirz Area Summary 273

Comparisons with Tehuacan 175

&~

IV COMPARING THE ARCHAIC AND MODERN ENVIRONMENTS 177

20. Cucurbits from Preceramic Levels at Guila Naquilz 275 THOMAS W. WHITAKER and HUGH C. CUTLER

179 15 • Pollen Analysis of the Oaxaca Archaic GLASSMITH

21. Preceramic Pbaseolus from Guila Naquitz 281

JAMES SCHOENWETTER and LANDON DOU

Project Description

273

LAWRENCE KAPLAN

179

The Modem Pollen Rain 180

Introduction 281 Description of Guila Naquitz Type 1 281 Native Wild Beans of the Guila Naquitz Area 282 Possible Genetic Influence of Guila Naquitz Type 1 on Domesticates

Plant Ecology of the Valley 184 Surface Pollen Records 186 Fossil Pollen Records 201 Appendix 15.1: Surface Sample.Observa~ons 219 Appendix 15.2: Fossil Sample Observations .227 Appendix 15.3: Discriminant Functions Classifications of Fossil Pollen Spectra 233

22. Animal Food Remains from Preceramic Guila Naquitz 285 KENT V. FLANNERY and JANE C . WHEELER

16. Comparing the Preceramic and Modem Microfauna 239

Introduction 285 Animals Hunted or Trapped 285 Mammals and Reptiles 286 Birds 287 Summaries of Individual Living Floors 288

KENT V. FLANNERY and JANE C. WHEELER

Introduction 239 Modem Rodent Samples 239 Preceramic Rodent Samples 242 Comparing Ancient and Modem Samples 242 Songbirds 244 Small Lizards 245 Mollusks 245 Summary and Conclusions 246

23. Nutritional Significance of the Guila Naquitz Food Remains 297 J. R. K. ROBSON and J. N. ELIAS

Introduction- 297 Discussion 297 Hypothetical Daily Intakes for Guila Naquirz 300

V ANALYSIS OF SUBSISTENCE 247

24. Food Procurement Area and Preceramic Diet at Guila Naquitz 303

17· The Quantification of Subsistence Data: An Introduction to Part V 249

KENT V. FLANNERY

The Relation berween Food Genera and 100-g Portions 303 Plant Foods 303 Animal Foods 306 Harvest Areas Represented by the Cave Remains 307 A Summary of the Living Floors 313 The Sustaming Area for the Guila Naquirz Population 313 Daily Plant Consumption at Guila Naqu,tz 313 Calculating the Sustainmg Area 314 Changes m Diet through Time 315

KENT V. FLANNERY Introduction 249 The Nature of the Guil:1 Naquin Food Residues The Fonnat for Pan V 253

283

249

18 Wild Food Resources of the M'U C 1 a Productivity s li aves: , easona ty, and Annual Variation 255 KENT V. FLANNERY Plant Censuses, 1966-1976 255 Seasonal Variation 257

/

xi

Contents

xii

Contents

VI S 319 SPATIAL ANALYSIS OF LIVING FLOOR Spatial Analysis of Guila Naquitz Living Floors: 25. An Introduction to Part VI 321 KENT V. FLANNERY Graphic Display Techniques 321 Defining Activity Areas 322 The Data Set 323 Sources of Spatial Co•Occurrence and Separation 323

26. Spatial Variation of Debris at Guila Naquitz: A Descriptive Approach 331 CHARLES S. SPENCER and KENT V. FLANNERY

Introduction 331 Descriptive Measures 331 Contour Mapping 333 Interpreting the Contour Maps 336 Zone E 336 Zone D 339 Zone C 346 Zone B3 352 Zone B2 352 Zone Bl 360 Summary and Conclusions 364

27. A Spatial Analysis of Four Occupation Floors at Guila Naquitz 369 ROBERT WHALLON

Statistical Methods 369 An Introduction to Dimensional Analysis of Variance 369 The Statistical Technique 370 The Guihl Naquitz Occupation Floors 372 Results for Individual Occupation Floors 373 Conclusion 382

28. Multidimensional Scaling of Four Guila Naquitz Living Floors 385 ROBERT G. REYNOLDS

. lnttoduction 385 Acnv,ty Areas: A Problem in the Partitioning of Space 385 The Stru~re of _Cognized Activity Areas 386 Partmon Distance Techniques 388 Q-Mode and R-Mode Analyses 390 Results and Discussion 390 Changes through Time 404 Summary and Conclusions 405

29. Episodal Analysis of Guila Naquitz: A Synthesis of Spencer's, Whallon's, and Reynolds' Results 425 KENT V. FLANNERY

Episodal Analysis 425 Episode 1: The Deposition of Zone E Episode 2: The Deposition of Zone D Episode 3: The Deposition of Zone C Episodes 4 and 5: The Deposition of Zones ll3 Episode 6: The Deposition of Zone Bl Artifacts and Activity Areas 431

426 427 428 and B2 429

429

VII SIMULATING FORAGING AND EARLY AGRICULTURE IN OAXACA 433 30. The Modeling of Foraging Strategy: An Introduction to Part VII 435 KENT V. FLANNERY

Reynolds' Model in the Context of Ocher Computer Simulations 436 Alternative Ways of Modeling Hunter-Gatherer Subsistence Strategies 437 The Rationale for Our Approach 437

31. An Adaptive Computer Model for the Evolution of Plant Collecting and Early Agriculture in the Eastern Valley of Oaxaca 439 ROBERT G. REYNOLDS

Pan 1: Introduction 439 Pan 2: Modeling Hunter-Gatherer Decision Making 441 Pan 3: The Eastern Valley of Oaxaca Data 446 i ' Part 4: The Informal Preagricultural Model 447 > Part 5: Developing the Formal Model 452 ( f Pare 6: The Preagriculrural Simulation 468 ' Pan 7: Modeling Incipient Agriculture 477 Pan 8: Simulating the Acquisition of Incipient Agriculture 479 Pan 9: Simulating Climatic Change and Population Growth 494 Pan 10: Summary and Conclusions 498

32. Adaptation, Evolution, and Archaeological Phases: Some Implications of Reynolds' Simulation 501 KENT V. FLANNERY

The Preagriculcural Scage 501 fmplicacions 501 The Incip1enc Agricultural Scage 503 Implications 503 Agriculture as an Extension of the Preagriculrural Parcern 504 Adaptation and Time 506 Adaptation and Archaeological Chronology 506 ,,

xiii

VIII

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 509 33. A Visit to the Master 511 KENT V. FLANNERY The Master 512 Afternoon 513 Evening 514 Midnight 517 Dawn 518

Contributors

34. Resumen en Espanol 521 DAVID J. WILSON

Pane I 521 Pane II 522 Pane III 522 Parte [V 522 Pane V 522 Pane VI 522 Pane VII 523 Pane VIII 523

References 525 Index 535

Numbers in parentheses indicate the pages on which the authors' contributions begin.

Eric 0. Callen' (173), Department of Plant Pathology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada PQ H3A 2T7 Hugh Cutler (275), Missouri Botanical Garden, and Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri 63130 . J. N. Elias (297), Department of Medicine, Indiana University Medical Center, Indianapolis, Indiana 46202 Kent V. Flannery (3, 19, 31, 43, 65, 147, 163, 169, 171, 175, 239, 249, 255, 285, 303, 321, 331, 425, 435, 501, 511), Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109 Frank Hole (97), Depamnent of Anthropology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520 Lawrence Kaplan (281), Department of Biology, University of MassachusettS, Boston, Massachusens 02125 Mary Elizabeth King (157), Laboratory of Anthropology, Museum of Indian Arts and Culture, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87504 Michael J. Kirkby (43), School of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, England Silvia Maranca (65), Museu Paulista da USP, 04263 Sao Paulo, Brazil Chris L. Moser (65), Riverside Municipal Museum, Riverside, California 92501 Robert G. Reynolds (385, 439), Department of Computer Science, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 48202 J. R. K. Robson (297), Department of Family Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina 29425 James Schoenwener (179), Department of Anthropology, Arizona Scace University, Tempe, Arizona 85287 C. Earle Smith, Jr. (265), Department of Anthropology, University of Alabama, University, Alabama 35486 Landon Douglas Smith (179), USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Computer Systems, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 Charles S. Spencer (331), Department of Anthropology, University of Connecticut Storrs Connecticut 06268 Michael E. W.halen' (141), Department of Anthropology, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74104

c:

'Deceased.

,m

O,ntributor>

I Robert Wballon (369), Museum of Anthropo ogy, Arbor Michigan 48109

University of Michigan, Ann .

£ Anthropology,

University of

Jane C. Wheeler (239, 285), Department o Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 8030!nment of Agriculture, and Department Thomas Whitaker (275), U. ~- De~ S D' La Jolla California 92038 . • f c bforrua an 1ego, • . '. al S . ces UNESCO 75700 Paris, of Biology, U01versity O a Anne V. Whyte (43), Division of Eco1og1c c1en ' ,

w.

France David Wilsonl

J.

U·

'ty of Michigan, Ann

(521), Museum of AnthropoIogy, ruvers1

Arbor, Michigan 48109

Preface This is the report of an interdisciplinary srudy of the ongins of agriculture in the southern Mexican highlands. It begins in the preagricultural era and ends with the earliest evidence for cultivated plants in the eastern Valley of Oaxaca. The disciplines employed include archaeology, botany, zoology, palynology, and computer modeling. There are a number of precedents for this kind of study. I have been lucky enough to participate in some earlier projects on the origins of agriculture, in Mesoamerica with .,,,_ Richard S. MacNeish (1960-1964) and in the Near East with ' RoberrJ. Braidwood (1960) and Frank Hole(1961-1963). The Guila Naquitz report builds on their earlier work, and would probably never have been undertaken had I not been able to tag along on their projects. Guila Naquin was a small cave, not in a class with larger sites such as Coxcatlan Cave in Mexico's Tehuacln Valley, or Hayonim Cave in Israel's Galilee Hills. Its small size, however, meant that it could be excavated m its entirety, giving us a very good look at what MacNe,sh has called a "microband camp." Microband camps are only one type of site in a complex settlement system, and Guila Naquitz ts only one of four preceramic sites on which we ultimately intend to report. Therefore, while this is our final report on the preceramic levels at Guila Naquin, it is certainly not our final word on the Oaxacan preceramic sequence. Eventually, when other sites such as Cueva Blanca and Gheo-Shih have been reported, we will be able to sec the Guila Naquitz data in clearer perspective.

Since Guila Naquin was first rested in 1966, it will be evident that this was a long-term study. Indeed, the exca,•.ition itself was the most rapid phase of the proicct. Analyzing the artifacts took several years, and the pollen study took longer than that. The censuses of wild vegetation described in Chapter 18 took most of a decade (1966-1976). Only after those censuses were complete could computer modeling of subsistence strategies begm, and that modeling consumed another 4 or 5 years. Smccwe needed previously uncollected darn on annual variation in rainfall and wild productivity, there was no way the ecologiClll phases of rhe stud)' could have been done any faster. We now see the value of such long-term analysis and have more or less resigned ourselves ro it, but many of our Mcsoamerican colleagues remain puzzled as to how 1t could cake 15 years to analyze such a small site. I can sympathize with their position, because I used 10 feel that way myself. As a graduate student 20 years ago, [ u~ed to kid Bob Braidwood about how long it was taking him to complete the interdisciplinary study of Jarmo. First rested in 1948,Jarmo was finally published in 1983, after a lapse of time thar no longer seems astonishing to me at all. In fact, as I told Braidwood on the occasion of his Festschrift present' ation in 1982, my experience with Guila Naquirz has converted me to what might be called the "Paul Masson'" approach to archaeolo1,,y: "I will publish no site... before its rime.,· ,/

/

ip;,cnt addre, . s. Dcpanmcnr of Anthro pology, Southen, M cthodist Umvcrsi"' Dall .,,

.,.

as, •exas 75275 XVll

Acknowledgments A number of institutions contributed ro the support of the research described in this volume, which was part of a project entitled "The Prehistory and Human Ecology of the Valley of Oaxaca." Smithsonian Research Foundanon Grant 019 funded the excavation of Guila Naquitz in 1966; our analysis of artifacts, plant remains, pollen, and animal bones continued into the. decade of the 1970s and was supported by National Science Foundation Grants GS-1616, GS-2121, and GS-42568. The NSF also funded additional studies, including several years of wild plant censuses (1967-1976). Finally, the University of Michigan supported an extensive series of computer analyses and simulations berween 1976 and 1984. In this age of padded budgets and inflated grants, however, I should probably point out that the entire excavation of Gulla Naquitz cost only $5000, and the subsequent analyses less than $7000. The John Simon Guggenheim Foundation made the writing and editing of this volume possible by providing me with a fellowship during the 1981-1982 academic year. I am grateful to Mexico's lnstiruto Nacional de Antropologfa e Historia for permission to excavate GuiH Naquitz and other preceramic sites. In Mexico City, Jose Luis Lorenw Oefe, Depanamento de Prehistoria) and Ignaoo Bernal (Director of I.N.A.H., 1968-1971) were insrrument_al in arranging our permits. In Oaxaca, Lorenzo Gam10 (1966-1972) and Manuel Espana (1973-1981) were the I.N.A.H. representatives who facilitated our wor~. Our colleagues from the University of the Amencas and its regional headquancrs, the Museo Frissell de Arte

Zapoteca in Mitla, provided us with a laboraroty and a home away from home during the early years of the Oaxaca Project. In particular, we could always depend on John Paddock for his help and archaeological advice, and on Dario Quero for his hospitality. Cecil Welte, of the Oficina de £studios de la Humanidad de! Valle de Oaxaca, gave us the benefit of his extensive knowledge of the area. Humberto and LiT.a Arredondo (then of Mexico City} loaned me a vehicle for the initial survey of Oaxaca caves, Rich ard S. MacNeish, who had done a preliminary study of projectile points in the Frissell Museum collections, was the first ro suggest that I begin my preceramic surveys in the Mitla area. My intellectual debt to MacNeish, to whom this volume as dedicated, is obviously very great indeed. Marcia Johnson and Carnie Moody typed the manuscript of the book, and a series of talented artists provided the illustrations. Three who should be singled out for special mention are Katherine Clahassey, who did the chans and diagrams in Chapters 28-32; Nancy Hansen, who did the frontispiece, the artifact drawings in Chapters 6-8, and the plant illustrations in Chapter 4; and Lisa Klofkorn, who did the contour maps in Chapter 26 . Virtually all the excavation and artifact photographs are by Chris L. Moser. Finally, we cannot close our acknowledgments without a word about the kindness and generosity of the people of Mitla. Our Mitla workmen were some of the best excavators and nicest people we have ever met. Indeed, we found the Mitleiios to be just as Elsie Clews Parsons (1936:x} found them 30 years before, "buena genie, gente muy carinosa."

xix

Il THE PROBLEM AND THE MODEL

11 The Research Problem Kent V. Flannery

We save rhe cl11pil seeds ro pl:tnt for the rime when there arc.none m the fidd'i so we will h:lve greens to eat. Znpotec mfonnu.nt, SJX'.:iking to ethnobot,uust

Ellen Messer, ea. 15112 (Messer 1978:88).

harvest. They had dcvel~ed a technology that included pro• .• . , , 1 1 tective mague :f~t:=.-~J.he:itfail:iiupeai'="E§~e 'I'.:'iatton have instead been deflated or uncovered unul

36

Ke =-s. p,edm to dmurb the stratigraphy. Zone A was a thick layer of ash and plant rernams m'erlying what appeared to be a bed of grass. Below 1t, Z.Onc Bl had expand· ed to include cwo components-an upper white ash with few amfacrs and a lower gray ash with flint debitage, oak leaves, acorns, and nanche ;ecds. We rook~ pollen sample from che

6,..!. P'l

5. The Exc,vation of Guila Naqu1rz

GI

.,, C

g

iu,

!

-0

la &l

e

" & _g ~

"' "!"' R 0

:!3

8.

~

t,,

t

] ;1l

j

(/)

i!l

ed the: term. l11.11ng floor for aoy byer rh:1r cons1.stS 3~ lc,;;ist p2.rdy of maten.aJ brought mlo the aJ:\'.C' by h\1.JlllOS and that sct1m to h:l'e bc::cn u.ioed .u lcil\t parrly as. a surface on whkh pcopk camped, ...n!ked, y,-"Orked, and/or oooo;ttuetcd fe:atun::,. It is nC)l intended as. ;); uni,·erul definmon ht docs not corrt.,p(lnd. for a.tmpl~ with umr.i uHed "'hving floors-" llt ~me opcn•;ur Lower Pa.lcol1th1c Sile,). ~~ LJ!.C 1t prim•ar1h• to coot:rast YiJth cniddcn layers on ,.vh1ch pcoplt- dtd oOl ,,ccll.'.Jlly lt\'C or wuh IC\'l'.'.IS produced by tht forces of nature, !i.Uch .IS b)C-1'$ of wind-blown 1:md or dust

82

. Kent V. Flannery, Chns L. ,Moser, and Silvia Maranca

-.. :.,.

"IJ C: 0

0

0 (/)

tr

let:

0

z

·:

"'

ez -~

Q 0

en

0

f·.

~

., E

rs .,. C

FIGURE 5 19 Gulla Naquilz as It looked on Februoiy 24, 1966. The initial test trench bas een remove an b d d work.men are excavating two extra squares, 08 and ES. Moser's lailhlul watchdog keeps stray goats out o{ the cave.

originally have been brought into the cave as bedding, bur at some point they had caught fire. In other places the color was gray from wood ash, presumably resulting from the kickIng around of hearth materials. One such hearth, Feature 22, was found m Square F8. Three other femures (Features 2, 3, and 10) were pits, presumed to he for the storage or processing of •corns because of the large quantines of that plant food found m and around them. The average thickness of debns m Zone D was 20 cm, and it might present an autumn encampment (August-December) by a ~mall group of people. The presence of four features leaves no doubt that tt was a rrne living floor. B1facial and unifacial retouched tools, sreep denuculate scrapers, utilized flakes, and one-hand manos were Jrnong the artifacts found (Fig. 5.33). Deer, rabbit, and mud tunle contributed the bulk of the animal bone. Beside rbc abundam acorns, plant foods included mesquite, si,sf nuts, nanchcs, piiion nuts, hackberry, g11111e, prickly pear sterns and &uits, magucy quids, nnd wild onions. Three ol the more exciting cthnobotanical discoveries were bottle gourds, C11cu1b11, ta< Al.I rif'bc. of rep:roductl()Q U\ ,.tlf f ' mm. D

. .

.

fl escn~non: The smgle example from Guila Naqui12 is a alee ~Vlth one end blunted by steep retouch. The edge is convex outline · 1i.rad'mon • allY, these have been considered tool f mh'd mce t he other preceramic sites have S or I e work1 ng. s· 1 :re:!:\ sagthmpl~ of end scrapers, they will be discussed at E en m future reports. . and nd scrapers were common .m the Tehuacan precenun1c, an e as_a re~ult MacNeish et al. (1967:30-43) have devoted nnre c apter to them.

TOOLS FOR sLOTTING AND PERFORATING

FIGURE 6.10. Choppers/knives: a, silicilied tuil specimen from Zone Bl, Square E9; and b, chert specimen !tom Zone B2, Square 011 (maximum length, ll0 mm).

in general that it was considered not worthwhile to subdivide the category. Burins are generally considered to have been used for slot· ting, gouging, and cutting wood or bone. In this case, they might have been used for preparing wooden hafts, such as adad foreshafts, or for cutting wooden tools such as those described m Chapter 10. Our Oaxaca bunns are most like the simplest types from Tehuac:in (MacNeish et al. 1967:45--47).

Burins F'igs. 6.15a, b and 6.16 Numb 0 f n· e~ specimens: a.4. S-10imens10ns· mm · hei ght, 3-4 cm; width 2-3 cm· rh1ckiless,

.

'

'

DeSCI:ipn' on: The G 'I' N • lef ui a aquitz specimens are siinP 0 burins that h flakes rough! ave an acute angle formed by the rernoval _ tersecuon / perpend1cular ro one another or frorn the ,o· 0 A few burin/f transverse break and a perpendicular flake, 3 ha"e . m rom other ore than one fl k preceram1c sites in rhe are thus technically al ehremoved from each direction and are5 po y edric. However, there are so few burio

Drills Figs. 615c and 6.166. Number of specimens: 1. Dimensions: length, 5.2 cm; width, 2.5 cm; thickness, ca. 6 mm. 15 Description: The single specimen from Guila Naq~itz 3 an elongated flake with rerouch on one end, producmg point. The retouch occurs on both edges of the IIP and is directed from both the dorsal face and the bulbar face. In general, drills from preceramic Oaxaca show little apparent

standardization. At Gheo-Sh1h, some drills show wear that suggests they were used to convert sandstone disa; into possi· ble beads, but no such discs were found at Guila Naquirz. One possibility for the Guilt\ Naquitz speamcn is tbat it w:is used tO drill the sockets m wooden fire drill hearths such as those described m Chapter 10. No drills found in the Tehuac:ln :irea appear stylistlcally similar to our specimen. Pointed Pieces Number of specimens: I. Description: Pointed pieces are defined as flakes with a up or pomt created by retouch or use. T hey are distinguished from drills by the foct that they show very few signs of deliberate retouch; rather, the clupp1og usuJlly seems to have resulted from light use. At their best, some specimens may resemble MacNe1sh et (1/.'s "flake gravers" (1967:47, Fig. 26). Ar their 51mplcst, as in rhe case of the lone Guihl Naquic,. specimen, they may be no more than a use-retouched p.,,. forat0r for starung or enlargmg holes m wood or hide.

6. Cluppcd-Stonc Tools

109

a

E

:~ :G=.

6.12. Steep denticulate scrapers: a, Zone E, Square ClO; b, Zone Bl, Square FS; and c, Zone C, Square Dll (maximum length,

OTHER FLAKE AND BLADE TOOLS Crude Blades, Plain Figs. 6.17 and 6.18. Number of specimens: 10. _Dimensions: length 3.5-6.5 cm; width, 0.8-3 cm; thickness 3-8 mm. Description: Blades are defined as thin flakes at least tw1ce : long as they are wide and with relatively parallel sides. _oSc of the Guila Naquitz speamens appeared co be fortllltous. They were not srruck from prepared pyramidal cores; rather, they appear to be flakes suuck from typical flake cor ' out long and narrow. As _es, t h at just happened to come w,11 be discussed in later reportS however, that 1s not . ariiY true of all the examples' from other preceram1c necess Sites• No ne o f the Guila · Naquitz blades were retouched , and 1atively few seem to have been used for any task ocher than tght-duty cutting. _lt is Significant that most blades w-ere made of local chert, W1t h only a few being of silicified ignimbrite. The difference

r

in raw material is such that it 1s much less likely that lo parallel-sid?d flakes would come off a silicificd ignimb~7; core. In regional terms, the blades from Guila Naquitz and the Martinez Rocksbelter are the "crudest" specunens, while the smallest blades (and the largest number) came from Gh _ Sh!h· However, given the small sample from Gu1l6 Naqu:, this may not mean much. "Crude blades with unprepared striking platforms" wer also present in the Tehuac:ln preccramic as far back as th t Ajuereado phase (MacNe1sh el al. 1967:20, Fig. 3). e

Notched Flakes Figs. 6.19 and 6.20. Number of specunens: 40. Dimensions: virtually coextensive with those of the population of £lakes in general. The best examples are: length, 3-8 cm; width, LS-5 cm; thickness, 6-15 mm. Descnption: These arc Oakes of any size or shape that have a notch or notches chipped into an edge. The chipping that

UO

6. Chipped-Stone Tools

frJJ1k Hole

a

Ill

b

a

-~------~

d

~

FIGURE 6 13 Sc B3, Squa,e D9 rapers· •• b, two aide •

2

-..L---..J' cm

~ GURE 6.14. Scrapers: a, silicihed tufl stdescraper, Zone B2, Square E9 (maximum width, 75 mm): b, chert sidesoraper, Zone B2, quare E9; c, silicilied tuH sidescraper, Zone Bl, Square Ell; and d, chalcedony end scraper, Zone B3, Square D9.

L_

scrapers, Zone B2 Sq , ua.re ES· c 'd ' ' s1 escraper, Zone Bl • Square Ell; and d, end scraper, z,,ne

produced the notch through use O may have been d I' ha,e both material, Some ~:terate or caused arc ordinarily I dnd use-retouched . es, in fact, may pieces dassifiedess chunky and have th notches. These flakes of the continuu•sshtecp dcnticulatc sc lllncr edges than the ni t ey rapers b • Ut at one end approach the 1 Notched flak :ir Guihl N .es were the lam atter. aquu:i d .•est sing\ I few of the delibe,:t~l)·most precerami; :.~:•~ory of amfact retouched ex s Ill the area) A amp\es may ha,·e b. een

p~;~~rd

0

used as spokeshaves f . I but the tremendo . or working wooden or cane toO s, Oaxaca sites s~s variety and abundance of notched f13keS :'. ably, the occu ggeSt th ey were used for many acdviciCS, Pro · pants of G ·11 N . on',en1em\y shaped k u, " aqu1,t; picked up any c modifying tt fuOa he when they had a cutting cask to perfor11'• Some of M ttNe~ as they saw fit. Tc h . ac e1sh et I' " I5,, fr0n' e uacan (196 , F' a .s spokeshave-like too but 7 47 they do not mat h' hig. 27) overlap w1rh chis caregorY• 3 c t e full range of our notched fl keS-

Flakes with Sheen ~gs. 6.21 and 6.22. umber of specimens: 6. Dimensions: length, 3-7 cm; width, 2-5 on; thickness, 5-15 mm. h De5cription, These are flakes that have one or more edges : at display the kind of glassy sheen, or "corn gloss," usua.1Y_seen on flint sickle blades from Near Easrern sires. Flakes Wt th such sheen occur at the ocher precerarnic sites LO the ar~a, so the specimens from Guila Naqmtz are in no way U1Uque. Mose examples have thin, sharp edges, but similar

sheen was noted even on one steep denticulace scraper. These tools were probably held in the hand; there is no evidence for hafting, and, indeed, the shape of many of rhe flakes would make hafnng d,fficulr. There have _been numero~s articles written on the possi?le cause$ of stckl~ sheen, wrth ~omc authors suggesting thar tt tS caused by focuon between the ~tlica or opal deposits LO grass seems (Curwen 1930; Witthoft 1967). However, a series of uopubhshed expenments that my srudents and I con· ducted at Rice Umvcrs,ty suggested that sheen can also form when the grass stems (or other marenal that t5 being cut) are dirry. In other words, some sheen may io fact be a kind of

112

6. Chipped-Stone Tools

Fr.ink Hok

U3

.6

b

d

a

0

FIGURE 6.15. Burtns and drill: a, burin, Zone D, Square G7; b, burin, Zone Bl, Square ES; and c, drill with tip partially broke,, Zone D, Square DB.

"soil polish" analogous to the luster on some Neolithic or Miss1ss1ppian hoes, call5ed more by the fine-grained dirt on the plants than by the plants themselves. What might have caused the sheen on these flakes from the Oaxaca preceram,c? One obvious suggestion, based on the remams from Gui!.\ Naquitz, would be the trimming of rbe leaves from maguey hearts prior to roasting. Maguey hearts were dug up from underground •nd th fra fI f ," e gments frer base found at Gu,la Naquitz suggest that they were c . ny rarher than washed with water. In the process of through_the tough, fibrous leaves in order to trim the d::~of:rbr~asnngT,hany flint would be subjected to a great • raSlon. ere arc also m 1 bean. Tentative! . th any eaves on each maguey Y, erefore, we could suggest that the sheen

f

~awm1

on these flakes may result from the combination of din, sand, and tough fiber encountered over a long period of maguey processing. No equivalent tool category is mentioned for preceranuc Tehuacan, but we would expect these flakes with sheen to appear elsewhere if we have interpreted them correctly. Utilized Flakes Figs. 6.23 and 6.24. Number of specimens: 21. Dimensions: virtually coextensive with those of the popul~tion of flakes in general; best examples-length, 5-7 cm; width, 3-7 cm; thickness, 5-15 mm. ~escription: These are flakes or chunks of silicified ignim· ~~ite, chert, or flint that have light, shallow chipping limited par_t of an edge. In view of the irregular occurrence of the chipping, it appears to have resulted from light use. Thell flakes.are the second most common type of artifact at Guill Naquttz, and once again it looks as if the occupants simply t~:ked u_p whatever conveniently shaped flake might ha,~ use n avatlable to perform a cutting task. Had they been un· 5 H 1•tt would have lumped these with the chipping debn · all h ey been used for a longer period of rime, they mi~h! "h'e ave turned into one of our notched flakes or flakes widt s een.

2

1--.I__._____.I

Cm

FIGURE 6.17. Crude blades: a, Zone E, Square Ell; b, Zone B2, Square C2; c, Zone B2 + 3, Squaro E6; and d , Zono D, Square F4.

presumably intended for use either with a thrusting spear or with the atlatl, or spear-thrower. Most specimens from Guila Naquitz were chipped from relatively good chert or chalcedony, although both silicified ignimbrite and lowquality chert or flint were widely used for projecole points in the Oaxaca preceramic. Projectile points are traditionally considered the most useful artifact for identifying preceramic phases in Mexico and for comparing one preceramic site with another. Their value lies

in the fact that they are .relatively better made and more standardized than other ch1ppcd-s1one cools, they ter1d to contain more "information" in the form of stylistic attributes, and they show some relatively distinctive changes through time. Unforrunately, the sample of in situ projectile points from Gmla Naqunz is so small it would be foolish co attempt to describe them individually. Only four whole or partial points were found in Zones B-E. Two more whole or parnal pomts

C

d

In t~r:ms of comparisons with the Tehuacan precenuni:, ~th~ uuflhzked flakes probably correspond to MacNeish eral_;: flakm a .es (with] one or two edges utilized" and "hid r _;;{wit b] one or two edges utilized" (1967:47-51, fiSS28 FIGURE 6.16. Burin and dnll: •• •ilictfied I If Square ES· and b Squ•ro oa' (inuUZ:~1cedony dnll With b;o_:u~, Zeno Bl,

ongth, 50 tntn).

n lip, Zone D,

PROJECTILE POINTS All projectile · ·wcia!IJ worked, and all points fr?m Guila Naquitz were bi ,,(r' are relanvely large, heavy points that

. b Zo e B2 Square C7 (maximum length, 62 tnm); c, Zone BZ-, 3, Zo ESquare Ell, , n ' FIGURE 6.18. Crude blades, all silici!ied tufi: a, ne ' Square E6; and d , Zone D, Square F4.

114

Frank Hole

0 I

o

2

,cm

.. "" " ~

.!: Cb

"'C: "

..::..c: u~

1 .... ~

NN

/86 by kademi< Pins, b,c. AU n:ghu of reproducuoo l-n lltlf form ~ -

170

Kent V. Flanner)'

r

Because rhe native caregories of firewood used by Mesoamenc.m Indians ha,-e been a topic of scholarly inYesrigarion (sec, for example, Merzger ,ind Williams 1966), it 1s worth noting chis possible change in crhnoboranical classification. Between 8000 and 6000 B.C., the Indians of the Valley of Oaxaca evidently considered a wide variety of woody gener-a ro be acceptable firewood. By 1000 B.C. they had settled on pine as the strongly preferred culinary fuel and, m retrospect. this change had serious environmental consequences. Of the five generJ represcnred in the Naquitz phase debris, four are still preseot near 1he cave; only Pin11s has disappeared. We mention chis for 1he benefit of those archaeologisrs who may srill belieYe that narive ethnobo1anical

classification is an effete topic without im human ecology. P tcattoas ,Q Of all the preceramic living floors, Zone D . richest data. Square F6 produced a series provided the fragments that we suspected to be the scatt d of charcoaJ a campfire. Included were oak (Quercus) ere d~bris frolil U11glans), a conifer (possibly pine) and a ' a:abcia, Walnut of mesquite (Prosopis). Square 010' in an posSih le fragment . h . , area t at Rey as having bee d nolds (chapter· 28) asdmterpreted O d nevotedt£ preparation, pro uce a sample of pine l Ood c di b d . arge enough to use ,or ra ocar on aang. We suspect that h d h other living floors been larger, they would ~a~e :iarnples from the same range of genera. OWn roughly

Artifacts of Deer Antler Kent V. Flannery

j ,

,.

purposefully fire hardened (Table l2.1). One of these (from Zone B3} IS buml'4' a,

I ultivated valley lowland plots.

Uen ralJl.S O c

uJtl

,.

15. Pollen Analysis of Oaxoca Archaic

~nwetter aod Landon Douglas Smith

192

Janics Scb

. . . e llen frequency values, and pine pollen ltnle vananon m pm po oo;. of the pollen rain 1 4 will, sratisricallr, acrountdfor ar) e~~t h {J76) has published . • • (at the 0.95 level of confi ence • 15 surfidal sediment pollen records from Wisconsm that md1care this proposinoo m.1)' also be vnlld for the temperate lanrudes of North America.

'.,. . f

193

V\.

The T/Jorn Forest Zo11e. The floras of Thorn Forest sampling locations are quire varied in the Valley of_Oaxaca, and one might thus anticipate that their pollen rams would be similarly variable. This expectation 1s not fulfilled by the fre. quency values of pollen samples collected at Thorn Forest locations. Thorn Forest pollen ram samples, taken as a group, produce a significantly greater variety of types of pollen than samples recovered &om other zones. However, the vanecy of pollen rypes is not sraristically greater in any given Thom Forest sample than in any sample drawn at random from the valley as a whole. Again, then, we may identify a pollen frequency dJSnnction chat can only be applied to evaluation and interpretation of groups of samples ostensibly drawn from the same population; the occurrence of a larger or smaller frequency of pollen types does not allow diagnosis of any specific sample as reflecting the ecological characteristics of the Thorn Forest zone. One of the pollen types occurring m the pollen rain of the Valley of Oaxaca is charactenzed by a tricolporate aperrure morphology, subprolate shape, and tecrate, finely striate, sculptunng, The pollen of 463 plants from the valley and env1rons has been .compared with this pollen type, and also the pollen descnpaons published m a number of sources but we have been unable to cdentify the botanical taxon in~olved, The morphology of thJS pollen most closely approximates that of cert:11n genera of the Anacardiaceae {cashew family). The most common member of this family m the Thom Forest zone {Rims s1a11dleyi; R. Mollis, HBK) is represented in our modem pollen reference collection but does not seem to b the taxon that produces this pollen type. We identify it sim Ie as Type IV P?llen. Schoenwetter (1972) has also observed t~{s pollen type m surface samples from the Thorn F d Shore Tree F . oresr an nor Tsukadao~::~es m}~nora. Neither Fish {1977, 1978) samples from the T~p~l F:e"CY ~67) _have observed it in Tl h d rest o Behze or Guatemala 10ug we o not know th f . e name o the plant that prod.uces T,-pe IV pollen . ' we arc aware of the e I I . tions rcsponstblc for its oc co og,ca cond,L currence m statistic I · • c.,e po1!en rain of the Vall fO a quanuty m ey o axaca 'F· IV 11 reguIarIy occurs at frequen val . J pe po en 5% (at the O.9S level of conf.d u~s grea~er than or equal to from Thorn Forest zone lo _ence ;nly m samples collected regularly at this &equencycaai°os. ype IV pollen occurs irOak Forest ,one. In tho e va ue at sample locauons in the s cases, however th k quency is greater thai, 130, • ' c aa · pollen frefrcqucncy value Since ,~esplective of the Type IV pollen wh k . is on y true of s 1· ere oa ,s dominant, a poll . amp mg locales be misdtagnoscd as derivi fen ram of this son would not In terms of our classificngti romf the Thom Fcrest zone the Valley of Ooxaca.(Tabl: o ecological conditions i~ Type IV pollen reflect lowsamples containing 2: 5% mo erate effecnve moisture·-• v..uues

th:

150;

d ),

and the presence of a layered, scattered canopy situ . It would appear that such samples (unlike those I a~?"· 1 oak pollen frequency is > 13%) reflect ecological pan w ch h rameters . I immediate to the sampImg ocus rat er than surround' . l I tngthe sampling station. T h e sing c samp e available fr · 'th' h Th F cultivated location w1 tn t e orn orest zone is not om • il a . dl .. d sun ar to those from uncu Iti vate oc1 m rcgar to Type IV poIIen frequency.

1:

The Low-Elevatton Zo11es. The Mesquite Grassland M quite Forest, and Mesophyric Forest zones occur at the elevations of the valley. In sharp contrast to the plane zon of higher elevations, their distribution is not principally co~~ trolled by temperature and precipitation values. The Mesquite Grassland zone is restricted to the southern portion of the Mitla arm of the valley where, as a consequence of modern prevailing wind direction, rain shadow effects are most intensive. C. E. Smith {1978) does not reconstruct the aboriginal occurrence of Mesquite Grassland, as his position is deliberately conservative. It would be submerged into the Mesquite Forest zone in his assessment. If temperature and precipitation values were like those presently obtained, season for season, but the prevailing wind direction was changed from its present southeasterly flow during the monsoon pedod to a northeasterly or southern flow, the Mesquite Grassland probably would not exist as a plant zone in the Valley of Oaxaca. Instead, the plant associations characteristic of the Mesquite Grassland zone would occur in scattered locations throughout the valley within the Mesquite Forest and the Thorn Forest zones where rain shadow effects combined with local topography and sedimentology to produce the specific ecological parameters that allow the survival of these associations. The distributions of the Mesquite Forest and the ~esophytic Forest plant zones are conrrolled by the disrribu· no~s of the substrate required for cheir development and mruntenance: alluvium. Though individual raxa common to these zones-or even common associations-may survive in disuiru where alluvium is not the normal substrate, the zonal vegetation patterns cannot exist as such except on deep soils. In _the Valley of Oaxaca, only alluviaced districts provide such soils bec~use of the geology of the region and the geometry of us basms of deposition. Furthermore the Pine Forest, Oak Fore5t, and Thorn Forest zones canno~ exist as such on e,x~anses of deep soils irrespective of temperature and precipica· non ~~lues. If the climatic regime were to become so marke~ly ~odified-say by temperature decrease-chat the Mesquite oreSt and Mesophytic Forest zones became decimated, they would not be replaced by Thorn Forest, Oak Forest, or pine · · or associations we can I·denthJ ''--• rodForest · plant comrnunmes Because the alluvial substrate would remain in place, t dey would be replaced by other zonal vegetation pattecns a Re apted ta "·· iat form o f su bstrace condirions. conScruction of paleoecological conditions in the Valle}' 0 f O axaca muse l take t hese faces .mto account. w,hatever w pa eote~pemrure or paleoprecipitation values might ha,-e occurred m former times, Mesquite Forest and ,, i; ,v,esoph}'nc . orest could never h ave occurred at a geographic - l0 caoon

:Y·

. where an alluvial subsrrate did not occur. Similarly, •Mesquue Grassland could not ~ave occurred ~s a zonal vegetation pattern except at a locan?n where an mtensive rain shadow cf. feet could be felt durmg a ~ons_oonal growing season. 'fhere are fo~ arcbaeologtcal snes from which samples of ollen rain attributable to the preceramic period have been ~ollected in the Valley of Oaxaca. Three are located in the 'fhorn Forest plant wne today, near its upper elevarional margin, in a distri_ct of broken topography. None of these sites could possibly have been locauons supporting Mesophytic Forest, Mesquite Forest, or Mesquite Grassland zonal vegetation patterns at the time of occupancy. The fourth archaeological site of concern is located in the district of alluvial substrate in the Mitla arm of the valley. Presently, the site area is a cultivated field so tbe vegetation pattern it supports must be reconstructed fcom knowledge of its edaphic, topographic, and hydrological condition rather than &om observation of flora. Since the site occurs at a locus of alluvial substrate where the water cable is deeper than 9 m and within the district of intensive rain shadow effect, it is classified as a cultivated locus of the Mesquite Grassland plane zone-probably a member of plane association B{ii). If the water table was more elevated at this site in the past, but annual precipitation and temperature values were essentially similar to those chat occur today at this elevation, the site might once have su pporced a Mesophytic Forest vegecanon pattern of the plane commumty A type. If the direction of the prevailing wind during the monsoon season were different in the past, but temperature, precipitation, and water cable height were essentially as they are today, the site might have supported a Mesquite Forest plant zone vegetation pattern. Under any other sec of paleoecological conditions, however, the site could only have supporred {1) the same sort of ~egetation pattern existing today {though potentially unculnvated) or (2) a vegetation pattern chat does not exist today at all in the Valley of Oaxaca. . •oo To control the fossil pollen record of the preceramic pen · th · · ry that we deter• m e Valley of Oaxaca, then, 1t is necessa . . mine only a few-quite specific-palynological charactensacs · G sland Mesof the modern pollen rains of the Mesquite ras • Onl quite Forest and Mesophytic Forest plant zones. It ,s Y ' II · t all because necessary for us to deal with chose po en rams a . 0f of their potential to control evaluarion and interpreraoonl ' . . h loo,cal s,ce. At nat th• e ,ossil pollen ram from one arc aeo I .,..£ v poss,.b,1mes . . site, It is only necessary that we contra a e, . b_ 'bl relanonsh1ps e because its location obV1ates many poss, e . . d It ,s 1mposs1· d tween modern and fossil pollen ram recor s. bl f • · 10 ever have suppone e, or example for the site locaaon I om' h · Forestpantc what we can today observe as Mesop ync municy B vegetation. . consider 1t There are three significant possibilines we I meal con· 1m 'b'l chat eco o.,. porranr to control, (1) the poss1 1 ,cy G land zone d" M te rass it,ons presently occurnng ,n the ' esqw 'bilicy that ocCllrred at the sire prehistorically, {~) tbe P~~esoph)'nc ;cological conditions presently assooac~d ';rcype occurred orest ;egetation of the plant conununitYd {J) the p0ss1biliat the site dunng its period of occupanC}', an he )\!esqulle 10 ty th at ecolog,cal conditions now prevalent c

Forest zone formerly occurred at the site. To assess these we m~SI attempt to identify those characteristics of the pollen rai~ that specify a lack of canopy coverage; high effecrin, moJStUre values; and low, dense canopy coverage, respectively. ~ese are the ecological conditions distinguishing such loca• lions today according to the classifirotion scheme of Table 15.2. We remind our readers chat all of the modern pollen samples available from Oaxaca that might reflect such ecological conditions were collccred at locations that have been highly influenced by human activities. The Mesophytic Forest, Mesquite Forest and Mesquite Grassland zones have been e.xtensively fanned and lun1bered for at least 2500 years under varymg technolog1es. Dunng the past 500 years, tl1ey ha\'e been the pnncipal grazing dismcts for domestic livestock as well. We cannot assume such activity has had no effect-or even slight effect-on the pollen rain of our sampling locations, but we feel justified in assuming that the pollen rains .are more directly affected at culcivatcd plots than uncultivared ones. In essence, we have made the assumption that uncultivated plot pollen rains m these zones offer prospect of variation in response 10 such ecological par:tmeters but that cultivated plots, because of direct human management of tl,eir ecology, do not. We therefote do not consider the pollen rain records of cultivated plots of the Mesophytic Forest, Mes· quite Forest, or Mesquite Grassland plant iones (fig. 15.4) useful for control purposes and have ignored them m tins frequency analysis. Pollen frequency values of the low-elevation unculriv,1ted piers (e.g., hedgerows, unfarm~d epdo, mound s~rface~, or reha stands) are diagr:uned on Fig. 15,3. It will be ,mmedcately noted that the pollen freque~cy values of s?mc md1v1dual samples &om these zones m,m,c charactcnsuc pollen0 val~es of higher elevation plots. Three samples contam 2: 40 Yo_pme poUen and < 13% oak pollen, and four samples '?ncam > 13% oak pollen. This docs not obviate use of this sample series as controls, however. All of the samples of Fig. 15.3 re collected from districts of unbroken topography and/or :~~uv,al subsrrate. Even ,fa low-elevation fossil pollen sam· I d ced this wn of pollen record, we would not evaluate p e _pro u ec that record as a reflection of ecological condior mterp< cions now occurring in the Pme Forest or Oak Forest 1.0nes. ·u·ons cannot occur-nor can they be expressed Such cond, . d' . f in these fash10ns palynologicaHy-except m 15mcts o hy and nonalluv1al subsrrace. Whatever com· broken topograp 'gh · I bination of ecological parameters m1 t causle ccr_ram low• n rains to mimic those of h,gh-e evauon pots, . be the same combmauon. · elel'aaon po· lie nor possibly ·5·mce we assume It can . plots are so rnre, the ains of the tow-elevanon m1m1c po11en r be h ·ghl Jocahz.ed ibl ecological parameters seem to I Y • rcs~:s~rrence of mimic pollen rai~s, however, and the th denve from plots more likely than not to be fact we ~ cced by human agency, requires us to rake a somehowrive aucposture. We aho note the dcgree o f van.a · bil.,ry conse;;v3 frequencies of different samples drawn from the in pO en pattern type in this r.egard. It seem, co us -' . o f sueh same vegcraoon . . d.cious even to consider scnousIy anaiys,s whollymJU other 1 . terms. than popufot1on sampIes in

194

James SchoJc

TABLE 15.S Discriminant Function Analysis of Valley Highland Samples ol El!eclive Moisture Categones, AdjUBted Sum•

Predicted group membership Actual group

Number of cases

High

Moderate

Low Moderate

22.

14. 63.6%

8. 36.4%

o. .0% o.

High effective moisrure

2.

I.

3.

Moderate effective

0. .0%

10.

Low-Moderate effective moisrurc

.0%

66.7%

33.3%

moisture

9. 90.0%

l. 10.0%

apcrcCJ1t3gc of grouped cases correctly cbssificd is 71.43%.

TABLE 15.6

d5

. f Annual Rainfall Categorl••• AdJUDlO Discriminant Function Analym o

.

um

•

Pred1cttd group membership Low

Number of cases

Actual group

127.

Low annual rainfall

13.

Low-Moderate annual rainfall Moderate annual rainfall High-Moderate annual rainfall High annual

low

Moderate

30.8%

18. [4.2% 8. 61.5%

.0%

.Oo/o

97.

76.4% 4.

o.

8.

o.

6

o.

o.

,0% 2. 9.1%

0

22.

H,gh

Moderate

o. .0%

0 .0%

5.

. 0%

62.5% 2. 33.3%

.0%

.0%

0.

Moderate 0. .0%

o.

.0% 2. ZS 0%

3. 50.0% I.

4.5%

High

12. 9.4%

l. 7.7% J. 12,5%

I. 16.7% 19 . 86.4%

rainfall -

l · cJ:iss,fttd "7S.OO"•·

apcrce-ncagc of grouped cases correct J

I and the . Forest samp es Th h.1gh group includes Mesquite d samples. e I ·ce Grass an · moderate group includes Mesqui h actenscic raxa ,n occurrence of Acacia and Prosopis as c ar, lien discribupo d boch vegetation patterns probablY, influences h overlap observe tion patterns sinularly and produces t c palynologically. t wholly sat1sfac·0 T hese results were encouraging, but nothrough exc1usio tory. First, adiustment of the pollen swn d us as (l) frcquen· of the Compos1tae pollen taxon conccr~\choenwcner J970; cy analyses previously used (Flanner)' an xon c0uld be of Schoenwener 1974) indicate that th15 ,ca crprecaoon, (2 ) · menta inc 5tgn1ficanc uttltty in paleoenv,ron

. much greater frequency m some foss~ the ta.xon occurs 1n ds and (3) the frequency analy:s,s · 11en rccor , po than in modcrn ch cb Compositae--Gramineae rauo 4 • d'catcs at • of page 19. m t retauon of effective moisture values, Setaluc; of Zea and C11curbrta are ,s relevant Ill intcrp , the frequency v f ond, thougl d' n·m,·nau(>n of culuvated rom. un· · 1·o cbc !SC . sigruficant d I they are mucl, less s1g01'f,cant th cultivated plots in isf mquoe:~y values. Third, we antiapatcd coroposirae re - L th ch than e Jd ha,,c s1gn1ficantly greater strengu, an chat che models wou , •nd1caccs. thtS ana1ys1s i m ro,·e the siru~tion, it would be neces,.,ry In order to I p det:111 the specific contnbuuon t!ktde to 12,000

High (Zone F)

High (Zone

E)

5-.:

25 cm

Moderate Low Modcraie

30 cm

High

Low

35 cm

Moderate

40cm 45 cm 50 an 55 an

Low Mod.tr.ate Low Moderate Low Moderate

60 an

Low

65 cm

Low Moderate (1g111mbnte)

Low Moderate

"'

2'° "'5u

N

d

208

,·

-~ ,.

James Scho,nwener and Lan on

Douglas Smith

15. Pollen Analysis of Q,xaca Archaic

lied che chfrd model Pursuing this line of though;, we apph confidence in this to these dnia. We hesitate co p ace m~c I r· because . cigraphic corre a 10n model for purposes Of b,osrra h II h' bland • • nl m terms of the t ree v-a cy ,g 11 classifies resu1ts 0• Y • Th - f rmation potential cate ories of effccnve moisture. e in o . . d1 ' re J~ve• than the annual rainfall g modcl .·IS Ibere,o of the v, ' I mo •eh, which differentiates five categories. A second prob er;;, w11_ 11 the valley highland effective ~~isture m~del 1s a~ references an ecolog1cal condmon covering a sma 1er geoi:raphic area. Finally, it is not as precise a model as the others because it is based on a smaller number of samples. However, applicanon of the model produced almost the same results (Table 1516) as the first test. _ We consider the fact that the outcomes of the first and thtrd tescs suggesred the same points of biostracigraphic correlation to be ,-ery significant. This is especially meaningful when it is recognized chat the overall classification srrengths of the cwo models are not compamble, and the probability of correct classificacion of panicular samples is much higher in some instances than others when the annual temperature model 1s applied. We believe ir extremely unlikely that the comparab1Jicy of Outcomes in the first and third rests could be an artifact produced by machematical manipulations of the data. We also consider it significant that application of the annual rainfall model produces results not comparable 10 the other two at three out of four pocential poincs of corrclanon. ThLS seems to us no chance effect. It is likely that the pal)'nological expression of the ecological condition modeled m that case is somewhow incrins1cally differcnc from the palynological e.xpression of the other two ecological conditions. The biosrratigraphic corrclacions indicated by Tables 15.14 and 15.16 suggest an integraced chronology for the three cave

sites that, witb no apparent ga~s, spans the period frorn ± 1l,OOO to ± 4000 B.:. According to the e~idence provided by comparison of arufactual records, the site of Gheo-Shih dates ro the 6000-7000 B.P. horizon. Though Gheo-Shih. located on the upper alluvium of the valley floor, not in thts foothills district where the caves are found, biostratigraph,: comparison of the pollen record from Gheo-Shih with thos pollen records from the ca~es attri_butable to the appropriat: time interval should provide an mdependent check on the absolute daca attributed to Gheo-Shih. If Gheo-Shih has been accurately dated, it should yield a pollen record classified co the high annual temperature category. Samples from Cueva Blanca dated 4200-5200 B.P. have this classification, as does the 15-cm level Zone B record from Marunez Rockshelter. There should be a similar comparability of classification in regard to effective moisture between the roughly contemporary records from Gheo-Shih, Cueva Blanca, and Martinez Rockshelter. In the case of GheoShih, it is necessary co apply the lowland effective moisture ' model to obtain accurate classification as it is a lowland sice. But one would anticipate classification of all these presumably contemporary pollen records to the high effective moisture category. These predictions are exactly confirmed when the GheoShih pollen record is classified according to the standard sum annual temperature and effective moisture models (Appendix 15 .3). On these grounds, stratigraphic correlation of the Gheo-Shih pollen data with that from Cueva Blanca and the upper portion of Zone B at Martinez Rockshelter serves independently co support the arrifactually evidenced assessment of absolute chronology for this site. It should be noted, however, that the effective moisture conditions occurring at che time Gheo-Shih was occupied apparently persisted

TABLE 15.16 Valley Highland Elfeative Moisture Classification ol the Fossil Records

Years

B.P

Cueva Blanca

Guila Naquitz

iOO

±4000 ±4200-5200

H,gh (Zone C) High (Zone DJ

Martinez R.S. 5 cm

Low

w

10 cm

High

~
12,000

High

High (Zone E)

N

w

2.,

the horizon of preceramic occupation at Cueva Blanthrough . th b ca and lasted mto e_ su _sequent archaeological phase. . -cigraphic correlanon supports the dating of Gheo-Shih s,os"~ . but does not disconfirm any he 6000-7000 B.P. honzon :c:rnate hypothesis that would dace Gheo-Shih between 4000 and 7000 B.P. _ _ • . In summary, palynological evidence of b1ostrat1gmphic correlations among the four preceramic sites offer substantive, . dependent support of hypotheses of chronological rclacion:ip evidenced thro~gh radiocarbon dating and temporal ssessment of the amfact assemblages represented at the dif;erent sites (Table 15.17). The biosrratigraphic correlations are developed through application of the mathemancal models of palynological reflections of ecological conditions chat are controlled by analysis of modern pollen rain variations. Thus the correlations are not made in terms of inde."< fossils or temporally diagnostic assemblages of pollen types. They are made in tenns of ecologically conditioned responses of the total pollen rain at unique intervals of time. Because this form of biostratigraphic evidence is less convincing than chat based on index fossil types or assemblage types, two redundant tests were performed using separate mathemacical models. One confirmed the original test and one did not. We maintain that the lack of confirmation in this case results from a Jack of comparability in the precision of the three tests in identification of ecological conditions. Essentially, che mathematical model that allows identification of annual rainfall parameters seems to be too sensitive co variations imposed by rain shadow effects. The effective moisture and annual temperature parameters are less precise and therefore allow correlations within a district at a given rime horizon. The earliest temporal horizon idencifiable ~rom t_he palynological record available appears to be chat dunng which the ignimbrite of the cave walls ar Cueva Blanca and Martinez Rockshelcer were broken down co create the Cueva Blanca F and Martinez 65-cm strata. This horizon was initiated prior to the earliest evidence of human occupation of che Valley of Oaxaca and, judging from its stratigraphic relanonship to radiocarbon dates, occurred earlier than 12,000 B.P

horizon

7 35 cm

6

Low Moderate

40 cm 45 cm 50 cm 55 cm 60 cm

High High High High High

65 cm

High (1gn11nbrtte)

"'~u N

The existence of burned and broken remams of Ple1s1ocene fauna in this zone at Cueva Blanca, ho,vc,-er, .indicates human occupacions of the d,scricr before the termination of rhis interval. The following horizon is represented palynologically by records associated with the cultural remains of Zone E ar Guil:I Naquitz, the Zone E deposit at Cueva Blanc.,, and the deposits sampled ac 40-60 cm at Martinez Rockshelter, The Zone D deposits at Guila Naqu1t1. that might also be referable to this horizon failed to yield a sufficlcnt number of pollen grams for analysis. Radiocarbon assa)'s for Zone Eat Cueva Blanca range from 10,050 ± 350 to ll,000 ± 400 ll.l'. Judging by anifacc sinularity, these dares probabi)' apply co an earlier interval within chis horizon than 1s represcnced at Zones D and E of Guila Naquitz. This is also attested to by the 14 C dates for Zone E at Guila Naquitz, which mnge from 9790 ± 240 to 10,700 ± 350 B,l'. We consider the pollen records of this horizon, which indicate high annual temperature and high effective moiscurc cond1t1ons, co date primarily to the 9500-12,000 B.P interval. The 40-cm level sample from Martinez Rockshelter provides evidence that annual temperntllre values had decl ined before the end of this incerval, though effective moiscure values remained constant w1th111 che parameccrs we may presently measure. However, the evidence provided by a \ingle pollen record is not normally considered suffic1en'. for recogn11ion of an ecologically distinctive temporal homon. The pollen record of this sample, therefore, has n_o t been isolated as representative of a uruque cemporal umr. The thud temporal honzon of the sequence 1s represented palynologically m the sample collected ac 35-cm depth ar Mactinez Rockshelcer and in chc pollen record of Zones C and B at Guila Naquitz. Radiocarbon assays associated with the larcer establish the an11qu1ty of chis honzon as roughly 8500--9500 u.r Moderate annual temperatUre condmon, and low-moderate effective moisture cond1t1ons apparently occurred at this time, chough the former represent a continua· tion of annual temperature conditions evidenced ne.1r the end of che preceding time interval.

TABLE 1517 . . all D fin d Chronology of the Cave Deposits Blostratigraphlc Y 8 e

Chronological

~} 3

2

Antiquity

Slle where evidenced

BJ'

4000-6500 6500-8000 7500-8500 8500-9500 9500-12,000 > 12.000

209

Martinez Rocl

3

1

-I

-

-

-2 -

31 18 8

22 15 5

-

-

1 I

--

1 1

I

1

23 22 7

9 12 8

10 13

EricJcc:te

R,b,s Composirae Cramineae Chenopodiaccae cf. Salvra Nycrag1naceac Onagtaccae cf. Jatropha Polygalaceae cf. Sphaara/cea cf. Sidalcea cf. Zea mays

-2

-

-

d . Zea mexicana cf. T npsacmn C11curb1ta Unknowns

15 5

7

--- - - - -

Total V crrucated spore

101

100

100

6

19 20

19 27 9

3

2

2

4

27 14 11

40 16 17

4

--

--

--

----

--

103

100

100

100

100

41 20

8

8

4

3

-109 p

1

--

--

101

--

100

46

5

3

-59

ap I prcstnL

TABLE 15.26

Pollen Observed, Guila Naquilz Sample.Zone Bl

Pollen type

Ulmus Abits Pmm Qucrcus Almts 8et11l.1 Ccltu- Morace.ac Letumino,ac Prosoµis Rosaccae Type IV T)'l>cVlll

Dodouaea

I:::

"'

Square E9 proc. 1977

Square E6 proc. 1967

-

-

-

-

-

P1cta

Agac.1t TncolpJtt Cao.iccac Plat}·op1m11a Liha~eac ErtLJC:cae

R1b1•$ Compo~1tac Gr,rnuneat Chtnopodbct:ae d SJlt:M

N) cugm.,cc,.u· C,,pn(ohl\tt.1ro.c., ~pie. proas,-c:J.

104

p

102 p

100

-

l 4 9

l 13

I 2

IOI

p

I

-102

-

-2

103

-

p

-

2

.104

-

2

102

I

2

39

101

101 p

_,

,.~ I"

•I"

,:._' ,.,,_. ,;..,..

TABLE 15.27 Pollen Observed, Cueva Blanca Sa.mplesO

P0Ue1i type

Squore GJ4 4S cm proc. 1977

-

U/mus ficl~O

-

A.bu:s Pmus Quercus Afml.S Hetu/.:,

Celr1s-Moracc:ae Legununosac Prosop1s Rosaceat.· Type IV Type Vlll Dodonaea

Agave Tricolpate CactacCJC P/aJyop:mtia

UJiaceac Ericaceat R,bes Composirac Gramineae Chenopodiaceae

cf. Salvia Nyccagmacea.e Caprifoliaceae Onagraccae cf. Jatropha Polygalaceae cf. Sphaeralcea cf. S,dalcea cf. Zea mays

cJ Zea mex,cana

cf. Tripsawm Cucurbita Unknowns

Total

9

4

-

---

Squ"re Gl4

55

en\

pro,;. J 967

Zone E

Square G14 60 cm proc. 1967

Square G14

SquMe Gl4 85 cm 1968

SquJre ES 100-JJ0 cm 1968

---

-65 -I

-

81

-89

1

J

-1

-

-

-

-

-76 -4 -1

-2

-I

-10

75 cm

proc, 1967

SB

2

p

r

2

-2 -

-

-7

-6

-16

-9

3

6 2

8

7

-

1

--

-

Square Gl4 95 cm 1968

Squme Gl4 100 ,m 1968

-97 -

p

Square D10 llOcm 1968

-

p p 99

91

r r

-

p

-

p p

p p

-

-

-

-

26

Zone F

Zone D

Zone C

-

-

2 1

6

8 8

4

-

-

100

100

J

7 l

100

100

-

p

2 2

100

83

100

JOO

ap I present; proc., sample processed.

.,.

~ fQ~~~~~?~iJ~9QQ~~[~~~i~~~l~~·~~?~lS e..

a s~ 1f;:J~a:.gi~~~ atg ~-~ r~-~-i ~~ ~~~ ~ o1 ~i~ ~ a~·E ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ g-- ~ a~ ~- s. ~ ~ ~ ii < < "!· s· -1a -0 ::,

0BIIIR~A~Ag~1aw • aa~~~r;1f;g ~nR ~ ~-\, ~ ~ a ~

n

t.l

"'O

nnS~

~n ~

~

~5

ff

~

A)

n

c~

~;

,, B n

i

[; V,

c,-g ;;i

11

0- ..

=,;;

I I I - I I I I I I I .;:~:::: I I I I I I I I I I I - I I - J I I I I

g

Cl

~

N

"'

+III

i' ,,..-g O"

I I I I I I.,,~:::; I I I I I I I l I I I I I I ___ I I I

V,

a;:: ;:i n

"'O o-

0

V,

Sl

~

"V,

6 0

I I I I I I I I I I I I t:::'.l~ I I I I I I I I I I I .,.1 I I_ 1 I I I

"

..~

:i

!~ f5

"'"' f;.:'ill

1i

~

i

.: ,J:)

:,

g t~

> :,

f;f

g' C)

Ct,J

:, Q,.

~

"'

e.

l

a_

f>

"C ~

8-

*· N

I=!

Appendix 15.3: Discriminant Functions Classifications of Fossil Pollen Spectra

15. l'ollm Anol)sis of O.1.xaca ArchJtc

234

],mes Schocn1wtrer ,nd Landon Douglas Smith TABLE 15 30 Adjusted Pollen Sum T0 1 1 p

TABLE 15.29 Standard Pollen Sum, Total Populations

Sample

\

!. '·!

Guil.i N:,qum, Zone B Zone C Zone E Martinez Rockshclter Floor + 65 on Floor + 60 cm Floor + 55 cm Floor + 50 cm Floor + 45 cm Floor + 40 cm Floor + 35 cm Floor + 30 cm Floor + 25 cm Floor + 20 on Floor + 15 cm Floor + 10 an Floor + 05 cm Cue\'a Blanca 55 cm 65 cm 75 cm 85 an 95 cm 1.00 an Zone E 100-110 cm Zone F 100- 110 cm Chco-Sbih Zone B

Lowland elfecttve moisture

High

a

'

Highland effective moisture

Annual temperature

Annual rainfall

Low Moderate Low Moderate High

Moderate Moderate Low

High Moderate High Moderate High

High High High High High High Low Moderate Htgh High High High High High

Low High High Low Low Low Moderate Moderate High High High High Low

Low Moderate Low Moderate Low Moderate Low Moderate Low Moderate High Moderate Low Moderate Low Moderate Low Moderate Low Moderate Low Low Moderate

High High High High High High High High

High High High High Low Low High Low

Low Low High High High High High High

High

Low

Lowland effective moisture

opula.tions

Highland cffecu~e mo,~turc

Annual tcmperaru.rc

Low Moderate Low Moderate High

Moderate Moderorc Low Moderate

Martfnez Rocksheltet Floor + 65 cm

High

Low Moderate

Floor+ 60 cm Floor + 55 cm

High High

Low Moderate

Floor + 50 cm Floor + 45 cm

High High

Low Moderate Low Moderate

Floor + 40 cm

High

Low Moderate

+ + + + +

Moderate ModerJte Moderate Moderate High

Moderate Low Moderate Low

High High

Low Low Modcr:!tc

Moderate High High ?\-lodc:rate

High High High High High High High High

Low Modr .o

Q)

>,

~

ec ""Q §i

i

~

~

. , V10St were probably brought back to the cave_and stored; a few surplus pods may have been left uneaten tn the refuse. Most pods, however, were probably cooked up to produce the edible syrup (or miel) favored by some Zapocec villages tod and such pods would not survive archaeologically. Howev:~• even in the case of those pods, the seeds may have been saved and stored to be roasted at a later date. We recovered many uneaten seeds that could have come from such pods. Acacia pods may have been processed much as mesquite but the plant is much less palatable and was rare in the cav; refuse; our remains consist mainly of pods that were left behind uneaten. Fruits of the organ cactus (Lemaireocere11s) and prickly pear (Op11ntia) probably had similar routines. Many were probably eaten on the spot by slitting open the leathery skin and peeling it away to reveal the juicy fruit below. Those brought back to the cave appear to have had their spines removed, either plucked off or singed off over the campfire. Occasionally, a desiccated uneaten fruit appeared in the cave debris, bur most uneaten fruits evidently rotted, leaving only the seeds. Prickly pear supplies can be made to last several weeks by splitting the fruit open and sun-drying it (Pennington 1963:117-118), but eventually even those fruits would spoil. It is the tough, indigestible seeds that survive archaeologically, and some found in Guila Naquitz could even have resulted from the disintegration of human coprolites. Most, however, probably came from uneaten or partially eaten fruits. Prickly pear stems, like maguey, could reach the cave from many p0tnts m the processing routine. Since they are unlikely to have been eaten on the spot, much of this processing probably took place in or near the cave. The tender young nopales had their spines removed (some of these were left in the refuse) and must have been scored at least briefly (some that were unused dried out and were left behind). Most evidently were cooked, one common method being to roast them over the fire on a wooden skewer. Burnt fragments of both nopal and skewer were found in the cave (see Chapter 10). Finally, cucurbits went through yet another routine. We have no reason to believe that either the wild form or the early cultivar had edible fruit, so it is likely that all those harvested were brought back to the cave. There the edible ~eeds could be removed, with the discarded rinds left broken m the refuse. The seeds could be stored either before or after r~aSring; obviously, it is only the unea~en leftovers that survived archaeologically. Many of the cucurbit seeds from Gutl3 Naquitz s~ow evidence of roasting (Chapter 20l, The vanous procurement and processing rourines considered above make it clear that we would be overconfidenr to assume that the Gui!:\ Naquitz plant remains give us the exact proportion of the diet that each species made up, What can be done about this? How can the residues of plants th at were earea (such as sus/ seed coats) be compared ro th e uneaten surplu••s = 0 f other p1ants (such as acorns)? And w hat 0 f those species th Fi Id, H at may often have been earen raw 1n the e · ow can they be compared to species such as ibe It IS

Maguey (Agave spp.) is a plant whose harvest and pro:essing produce several different kinds of an:haeological rem~ms. We have already seen rhar agaves were used when the qurote, or inflorescence, had been senr up, and chat the q11iote was frequently cropped. Q11fotes were sometimes brought back to the cave, where inflorescence fragments and seed capsules occur in the refuse. The heart of the plant was dug up and the leaves trimmed off, sometimes to be used for fiber- Both lea( fragments (including spines) and actual maguey fiber cordage occurred in the cove. Because it is inedible when raw, magucy could not be eaten on the spot like some vegetal foods. Ir was brought back to rhe cave, where a roasting pit was, prepared and the hem cooked for 24-72 hours. The fiberlc.>$ core of rhe heart could then be eaten, leaving no archaeological trace (see Chapter 24); ne-,t earen were the leaf bases, each of which would produce a quid. If these quids were expectorated in the cave, we found them in the refuse (Fig. 17.2); when "chews" of maguey were taken along on mps away from the cave, the quids would never be found. Acorns present a somewhat different problem. Because they cannor be eaten raw, they had to be brought back to tbe cave after harvesting, perhaps to be stored m basketS or in pits like ,hose found in Zone D. \Y/e presume that many would have been made into acorn flour by grinding in a mortar or with a one-hand mano and slab merate; this flour would be unrecoverable b)' our archaeological methods. Only the surplus acorns, those left behind unused, would survive in the refuse. One could argue that one reason acorns were so abundant at the cave is that they all had to be brought back for processing. However, it is also likely that if so many were left over, many must have been harvested_ Oak galls represent another case where only uneaten, leftover speomens would be archaeologically recovered. Hackberries and nanches are both fruitS that can be eaten raw, and many were probably consumed on the spot during rhe h~rvest; one could therefore argue that they may be chromcallr underrepresented in the cave. Those that were brou_ght ba~k and eaten in the cave left behind either an in) credibly resi1rant white seed (in the case of the backb or a fragtle bur readily identifiable brown seed (m thee;:~e of the nanche). Smee I gua1e seeds can be eaten raw' they probably were frequent y eat~n on the spot and may therefore be underrepresented m the cave. The refuse found consists maml of pods that have been opened and the seeds removed so Yob v1ousIy some guajes were brought ba k th ' W~d b c ro e cave cans cannot be earen raw It a h : were collected and bro h · ' ppears t at their pods th could either have bee~gp~:~~k;o c ~ve, where the seeds some method unknown to e mto our or softened by boiled). For them beaus (perhaps soaked in w·.ttcr or ost part, ns are represented b h al of pod, thar have been opened and d. y t e v ves also occnsional unused s ed . h iscarded, but there are 'Id e s m t e cave refu , s I w1 beans also have an ed·bl se. ome ocal I left behind uneaten Wo Id e '.°0 t, but only those tubers There al u survive archaeologicallv. , . are sever, procurement a d by which mesquite co Id . n preparauon routmes Alh u germtothec fres h green mesquite pod be ave. t ough very scan chewed (producing a qmd),

I

I

which had to be processed for days back at h maguey ' assume that h a lf o fall hackberries were eat t e cave, ,.,e h. . h enonte Can"and mulnply t e hackberry seeds in the cav by 2 ., e to spo, t correct for underrepresentation. Can we assume that l0% of all acorns harvested went uneaten, and multiply by 10 to e true number harvested? get th I believe that the answer to all these questions is "N ,, In my opinion, we have no ~olid basis for "adjusti~g" a~y of che figu~s on plane re~ams. The procurement and processing rounnes _are too dtffe~ent, a~d mvolve too many addittonal assumpnons, to permit fiddling around with the data. Almost certainly, the errors we would introduce would be as great as any already inherent in the data. The raw figures from the cave, however 1.n1perfecr, at least reflect the activities of the prelustoric occupants, rather than the fantasies of the archaeologist. In the chapters that follow, therefore, we use the actual numbers of plant remains as recovered from the cave. These numbers are not sacred, but they are the only ones we have. Their use does not imply that the percentage of acorns or nanches in the cave refuse reflects the exact percentage of acorns or nanches in the diet. It reflects a much simpler assumption: that the cave remains give us some idea of hunian preference and use. Regardless of how the plants were procu.red and processed, if there are many acorns in the cave, it is because many were harvested. If there are few acacia pods, it is because few were harvested. In addition to problems of plant species comparability, rhere is a problem of comparability berween plant and animal debris. No matter how carefully remams are recovered and counted, we have no reliable way of assessing the proportion of meat versus plants in the diet. Coprolites come the closest to providing this information, for they sometimes allow the determination that a given meal was, let us say, 40% meat and 60% plant- Even in this case, however, we would need a lot of coprolites, from many different individuals and many different meals, before we could see an overall pattern for even one limited season. A fauna! analyst can find che humerus of a deer and cont clude that at least one individual deer was killed. A botamS , however, cannot find six acorns and conclude that one entire individual tree was harvested. To be sure, we could th estimate the amount of meat on a humerus (rather th an e sttll whole deer) and restrict ourselves t0 that; but we w?uld have no guarantee that the occupants of the cave ate SIX acorns

253

fat every model rhedee rel r h. ume_rus. About all we can do is attempt to anonshtp, and that is whar we do later in Part V.

THE FORMAT FOR PART V :art _ v proceeds with rwo bodies of raw data: the plants an anunals recovered by excavation and the results of a sevenyear plant census conducted near Guil:I Naquitz. The plant remains were organized by C. E. Smith (Chapter 19), who sent the beans to Lawrence Kaplan (Chapter 21) and the cucurbits to Thomas W. Whitaker and Hugh CCutler (Chapter 20). Ammal bones were studied by K. Flannery and Jane C. Wheeler (Chapter 22). This gave us the quanmauve data from which further studies could proceed. The plant censuses (Chapter 18) gave us data on the density of various species in the Gu1l:i Naqu"z cm•1ronment, as well as their seasonahty and annual van.moo. They also provided the relationship berween archueologicnl plant and animal debris and 100-g edible portions (Chapter 24 ). NutmionistsJ. R. K. Robson andj. N. Elias (Chapter 23) analyzed the Guil:i Naquin foods from the standpoint of calories, protein, carbohydrates, furs, and other eleme.nts and proposed hypothettcal diets for several living floors, Their data could then be combined with the plant cen~us data to estimate the productivity of the Guil:1 Naquin environment (Chapters 18 and 24), Finally, all of the stud ies above could be combined to reconstruct the average diet of the cave occupants, estimate the number of hectares neces~ary to support the pcr;ons seen there, and discuss the environmental lim1tnttons of their preceram1c lifeway (Chapter 24). There is one additional set of studies we would like to have but do not: an input-output analysis comparing the calories and proreio expended ro procure the Gu1l:i Naquirz foods with the calories and protein obrameears. Transects were _also sampled at several different seasons of the year, depe_nding on che durauon of the field season and_ the ava1lab1hry of personnel. The sampling procedure ,nvolved walkmg each transect slowly, with one person countmg the number of plants of h ecies present and a second person recording the ::cmb: of fruirs or edible paro per plant. The latter figure

C.pynght ~ 1986 by ,..._,, ""~ Inc. All .ng.htt ol rqrodumon 10. tmy !onn ruerred.

25 6

IS. Wild Food Resources of rhe M1da Ca,·es

Ki:n< V. Ffaanery

wa~ obrained by,having a group ofZapotee workme~ harvest

each plant. ·This cask varied considerably an d1Htculty; hm·esting a small s11si bush by hand might take only a few minutes, while harvesang all the acorns from an oak tree might rake hours. Alth6ugh rhc cerisuses were aimed primarily at vegetation, we recovered data on the density of cottontail rabbits as well. Cononrruls have relatively small home ranges (frequently no greater than JOO en m diameter) in which they leave small piles of dung pellets as territorial markers. By counting the small piles of pellets we could frequently determine the number of home ranges within a transect. WhJe Smith, Krrkby, \l'.'hyce, and Schomwetter inaugurated the plant censuses, virtually every member of the Oaxaca project panicipated over the ye Cuc1.1rblt seed,

I. Acorns

4

2. ~g~ heart 3. Hockbemes 4. §!!gl! seeds

6

800

Io. Susi nuls

5. Mesquite pods

10

2 ~

c0

60

>-

10

(.) C:

~

9

15

400~

9

_g

·;;; 4 0

I

9

'0

15

5

2

0 0

"-

0 Q.

E

0 (.)

200

10

9

20

6 4

5

I

fil

1

0

10

2683745

Fat

Moisture

I()

34

d6dl 84'11

Fiber

Av01l0ble

Protein

56

61 9?~11 74213~,lil

34 8

Ash

2 3

fif

8 11

0

Food Energy

carbohydrate ·uon ol

Fi . 23.J. Proximate compo"

selected P1an

g

beans (Phaseolus sp.), - (' .,,caena sp.)various leguminous seeds-such as d g11a1c ,.,, mesquite (Prosopis sp.), Da Iea, an d boh)·drate content, ·h . . • h an car • Wit their relauvely h1g protein f carbohydrates ,a s11s1. d ave (Agave spp.), could help to balance the lack O Si"'.ilarly, both acorns (Q11erct1s sp.) :h ~~tes, would raise which contain large amounrs of ca\fic:ntly. ds the animal foods the caloric content of the diet sign 0 In addition co the abov"."rnenoon~; ,) ~ay be consider_ed tdenrified at Gml:l Naqu1rz (Table - ·- •vailabu1r)' of in. th stap1es. I' d mal 1·mporrant conmbutors co e of plant an JOI d . 'd ual foods w11hm . - t h',s pnm~, · • .., group r but there woul d•vt . f r to yea ' b n1u· ~pcc,es may have varied rom yea I P co perrn•t SU 5 appear to be sufficient nutritiooal over a riouslY affccrmg non of one food for another wtrbout se overall nument ava1labilit)'.

t foods !tom Guila Naquitz. ,

.

. al . ms especially noteworthy in view One mineral, c c,um, see t1on of dairy products f the rc!Ju,ely hm1ted consum[> , !cs [t ha, been o . □-c of most Mesoamencan peop ·. I' charJctens f king corn m unewaL" c, d out that the practice" so• of dietary pamie -d mporrant source nor to !llllliJig prov1 cs an ' ' 1958). Howl!\·tr, there are P -um (Bressam and Scnmsha\\ . c soura:s of this ::er vegetable foods, that coij!c/::;,c;;;::;. caloum w1thm mmeraL Nopales ha,e bcener I00 edible poruon. Challa, the range of 46-JOS mg P ~ns as much JS 2!n mg of also of the Op:intra sp•t~~~~ravioto et al. 1945; food O 1 calcium (CallowJy el • (~AA] l972 J The presence of . Assoc1~1wn , . · . •nd Agr1cu1turc f opales 31 Guilt\ Naqu1tz suggests ~ relative!)' JaJlle amoun~~ ob o an ,mporrant sc,urce o f d',e1ary d may have ecn rhat this foo . 5 of d,e cave. c.alaum ro the occupant

300

J.R.K. Robson ,nd J. N . Ellas TABLE 23.2

• W'ld Animal, Eaten at Gulla Naqultz Cave, Based on a 100-Grdlll • Nutritional Content of Vanous 1 . Portion•

Animal

Ash

(g)

(g)

21 ,0 29 .2 21.0 18.6 25.0 16.0

0 0 0 0 0 0

0

1.0

0 0 0 0 0

1.5

Moisture

Protein

(%)

(g) 4.0 14.5

74.0 54.8 73.0 58.0 65.9 80.0

Deer Raccoon Cottontail Pigeon Quail Tunic

fiber

(g)

Carbohydrate (gJ

Fat

s.o

22.1

6.8 l.0

~.E:!::2f ! ' ! ~ ~:~~-7.,.:zr=.

=:~-:~==- E': ~

~ ~"":- ~ ..::tc _;zt:::. ~ --'-ii:"

-~ ~-F

HYPOfHETICAL DAILY INTAKES FOR GUT.LA NAQUITZ Tables 23.3-23.5 are based on the plant remains identified m three levels at Guila Naquitz. They present three

hypothetical daily intakes that would easily meet the 1974 Reco'.11mended Dietary AUowance (RDA) for protein and cal_ones. Each diet mcludes 150 g of meat and 1350 g total da,ly food mtake. Ahrens and Boucher (1978) found that 3

Fat (g)

Zone E 150 150 550 300

g deer o, cottontad g pilion nuts g ,1coms g beans

6.8 90.8 51.3 1.8

50 g sud nuh

26.3

100 g Op1mt1a fruit 50 S h,ckbcrnes

0.5 0.2

1350 g

Krlocaloriesb Per«ntage of kiloulonc!

Protein

1.0

1.5

279

1.6 1.2

168

79

(g)

(g)

3 1.S 19.5 13.4 13.4 88

1.1 0,2.

30.8 238.2 63 .6 J. 7 6 .3 3 .8

177.7

97.9

344.4

1599.3 47.5

391.6

1377,6 40.9

11.6 •'Th d' lrr e iet ,usumes i:om11mp1ioo u( 1350 g of rooq - d ot:tl k1lCJCi1lones cquJt 3368.5.

J)tr :iy.

.... .,

~-

;51 r.

~..::

:...11

~;7i..\'"llil ~ ~

simulated American diet based on a U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) household consumption survey provided 1583.4 g of food/person/day, including 107.5 g of protein 136.9 g of fat, 298.9 g of carbohydrates, and a total of 2858 kcal (Table 23.6). The proponion of calories provided by protein, fat, and carbohydrates, respectively, was 15%, 43%, and 42%. The hypothetical diets shown in Tables 23.3-23.5 compare favorably with the simulated American diet, as they provide similar proponions of nutrients and easily exceed the U.S. caloric levels on less total food. This latter property would enable the occupants of Guila Naquitz to achieve nutritional adequacy on less bulk. That indigenous foods are so easily able to provide significantly higher quantities of nutrienl5 than contemporary diets suggests that the occupants probably did not experience difficulty in meeting their nutrirional needs during the season when they were at Guila Naquitz. In addition to the requirements for protein and energy, there are, of course, requirements for other nutrients, panicularly Vttamms and minerals. Mixtures of several fruits and vegetables could easily have provided these, and the variery

Hyp~thetical Daily Intake for an Occupant of Zone C, Gulla Naqu1tz, Based on Plant and Animal Remains Recovered from that Level•

150 200 150 400 300 50 40 50 10

g deer or cottontail g p1iion nuts g Agave heart g acorns g mesquite pods g gua,e seeds g nanche fruits g Opu11tia fruit g hackberrics

1350 g Krlocaloriesb Percentage of k11oca1ories

Fat (g) 6. 8 121.0 0 .1 37.3 3 0 .5

Protein (g)

Carbohydrate (g)

31.5 26.0 0 .5

9 .7 17.1 4 .1

0.7 0 .3 0 .1

\J:DA :b' ..:..ztt.;,,.~·~~~- }~p'.t.:.::.. :,i_ :.:-:i-. ~ ·-►'

tl4£--"

J:'.1

ft_;;':2- ..-

0.6

41.0 47.3 173.2 137.1 4 .2 7 .0 3.2 0 .8

169.1

90.2

413.8

1521.9 43.0

360.8

1655.1

10.1

:The die_r n.ss_urues consumpuon of 1350 g of food per dt1y. Tau.I ltiloca!orics •qual 3S37.9.

46.8

J,";,fA!-= ffi