An Unexplored Realm in the Heartland of the Southern Gulf ... - Famsi

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The site has been variously described as a principal Olmec site (Pohl 1999:21; Weaver 1993:53), an Olmec capital (Adams 1997), a primary Olmec center (Drennan 1991:267; Gillespie 2000a:95), and a site comparable to San Lorenzo and La Venta (Soustelle 1984). Other interpretations conclude that Laguna de los Cerros dominated the settlement hierarchy (Santley et al. 1997:203), was one of “the most powerful settlements in the realm of the Olmec” (Feder 2007:432), and was a great Olmec twin capital along with San Lorenzo (Coe and Diehl 1980a:293, 394). All of these conclusions, as to the significance of Laguna de los Cerros during the late Early Formative period, are based on the presence of numerous Olmec-style sculptures and extensive architectural remains. The site is located a few kilometers south of the present-day town of Corral Nuevo in southern Veracruz (see Figure 1.1). For all of its notoriety, the site has been subject to only two brief on-site archaeological investigations spaced more than 60 years apart (Cyphers 2003; Medellín-Zeníl 1960) and a number of tangential studies of surface collections and artifact re-analyses (Borstein 2001; Bove 1978; Gillespie 2000a; Grieder 1968). More than 40 stone monumental sculptures have been recovered in or near Laguna de los Cerros. As has been the case in many interpretations of Southern Gulf Lowlands sites, it is these carvings that draw the greatest attention of scholars and the public. At Laguna de los Cerros, the presence of these sculptures and the more than 90 mounds that cover the site have been interpreted as evidence for a large Formative period population (Diehl 2004:47) and have directly led to its assigned status as a major center as pointed out above. 58
Medellín-Zeníl (1960) found large quantities of late Classic ceramics across the site, including underneath the “Olmec-style” stone sculptures, and for this reason temporarily assigned the site and its contents to AD 600 to 900 (Diehl 2004:47). The ceramic materials recovered by Medellín-Zeníl was re-analyzed by Bove (1978) who convincingly demonstrated that there was also evidence for an Early Formative occupation. As a result of this analysis, he directly associated the Early Formative ceramics with the construction of the architectural remains in which they were recovered. The implication was that the buildings were of Formative period origin and the significant number of carved “Olmec” monuments indicated the site was a primary Olmec center. In 1997 and 1998, Cyphers (2003:7) conducted dozens of excavations at the site, some adjacent to the locations of Medellín-Zeníl’s 1960 tests. She found that the Formative period material had been used as construction fill for the Late Classic structures. The stratigraphy in the excavations plus burials and their contents indicated that the older Formative material was deposited over newer Late Classic deposits (Cyphers 2003:6-8). Borstein (2001:168) also conducted surveys of the site in 1997 and 1998, and concluded that during the San Lorenzo Horizon, the period of the sculptural corpus at the site, Laguna de los Cerros was a small administrative site. Various lines of indirect evidence suggest the site was established by inhabitants of San Lorenzo as a subsidiary or support site. For example, the absence of Pre-Olmec ceramics (i.e., Chicarras phase material) at Laguna de los Cerros (Coe and Diehl 1980a:150; Medellín-Zeníl 1960) and the abrupt appearance of diagnostic San Lorenzo pottery (Borstein 2001; Bove 1978; Cyphers 2003:7) suggest that the initial occupation of 59
Page 1 and 2:
An Unexplored Realm in the Heartlan
Page 3 and 4:
“Note to Reader” The original o
Page 5 and 6:
Confederacy Model 39 Feudalistic Mo
Page 7 and 8:
Elemental Analysis of the Soils fro
Page 9 and 10:
The Initial Occupation of El Marque
Page 11 and 12:
List of Tables Table 5.1. Ceramic C
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 3.14. Plan view of the Olmec
Page 15 and 16:
Figure 5.7. Site map illustrating l
Page 17 and 18:
Figure 5.53. El Marquesillo throne
Page 19 and 20:
the resulting data do not fit many
Page 21 and 22:
Furtherance of my academic career w
Page 23 and 24:
Introduction Chapter 1. Archaeology
Page 25 and 26:
esearch being conducted along the S
Page 27 and 28:
its introduction to Mesoamerican ar
Page 29 and 30: participants. It is especially crit
Page 31 and 32: interpretations. Finally, I compare
Page 33 and 34: analogy (Diehl 1989:25; VanDerwarke
Page 35 and 36: change, fluctuates according to “
Page 37 and 38: embedded misconceptions about these
Page 39 and 40: The “Heartland” has been deline
Page 41 and 42: than a century after their occurren
Page 43 and 44: inference as opposed to evidence. T
Page 45 and 46: Sanders and Webster (1988:544) argu
Page 47 and 48: Park (1992:90) presents the Olmec a
Page 49 and 50: lowland subsistence economy until a
Page 51 and 52: Maya are lineal descendents of the
Page 53 and 54: continued to inhibit scientific inq
Page 55 and 56: describes this attempted conformanc
Page 57 and 58: The models used for evaluation of t
Page 59 and 60: number of archaeological correlates
Page 61 and 62: Confederacy Model Pool (2000:150;20
Page 63 and 64: Limitations and Cautions in the Use
Page 65 and 66: Lorenzo is considered the earliest
Page 67 and 68: Several lines of evidence suggest a
Page 69 and 70: turn, gave budding Olmec leaders co
Page 71 and 72: apid growth of settlements and thei
Page 73 and 74: techniques (Berger et al. 1967; Hei
Page 75 and 76: appear to characterize it as a “c
Page 77 and 78: iconographic detail, and appear to
Page 79: Formative period Southern Gulf Lowl
Page 83 and 84: de Agua, and the famous, iconograph
Page 85 and 86: egarding subsistence, settlement, p
Page 87 and 88: Introduction Chapter 3. El Marquesi
Page 89 and 90: 300-900). Historical documentation
Page 91 and 92: The features of the San Juan are ch
Page 93 and 94: Figure 3.4. Aerial photograph of El
Page 95 and 96: At each of these three points of co
Page 97 and 98: El Marquesillo’s geographic locat
Page 99 and 100: of the location for more than 3,500
Page 101 and 102: The extensive Villa Alta architectu
Page 103 and 104: of constructions. This formal archi
Page 105 and 106: To achieve and maintain this elevat
Page 107 and 108: Figure 3.11. Map of the Southern Gu
Page 109 and 110: Teotihuacán and Aztec trade routes
Page 111 and 112: land was not in the form of gold an
Page 113 and 114: Huaspaltepec (Playa Vicente), betwe
Page 115 and 116: as listed in these records, include
Page 117 and 118: community members had to work the l
Page 119 and 120: The 1944 flood was a momentous even
Page 121 and 122: of ancient structures, including Ce
Page 123 and 124: to recover as much information as p
Page 125 and 126: Figure 3.17. Photograph of El Seño
Page 127 and 128: collection along the cut bank was a
Page 129 and 130: its termination line (Borstein 2001
Page 131 and 132:
Figure 3.18. Illustration of San Lo
Page 133 and 134:
is seated transitionally between th
Page 135 and 136:
Introduction Chapter 4. El Marquesi
Page 137 and 138:
Grove 1997; Tolstoy 1989). Landscap
Page 139 and 140:
Determination of the Survey Area Th
Page 141 and 142:
Surface Mapping and Terrain Modelin
Page 143 and 144:
Global Positioning System (GPS) Map
Page 145 and 146:
Figure 4.4. Map of El Marquesillo g
Page 147 and 148:
have the potential to record points
Page 149 and 150:
The topographic images and terrain
Page 151 and 152:
Figure 4.8. Digital Terrain Model o
Page 153 and 154:
Figure 4.11. View to the east of lo
Page 155 and 156:
The western third of the platform h
Page 157 and 158:
Figure 4.15. Elevated view of Field
Page 159 and 160:
Figure 4.17. Topographic map of El
Page 161 and 162:
Figure 4.19. Northwest view of spri
Page 163 and 164:
Information Systems (GIS) approach
Page 165 and 166:
Figure 4.21. Illustration of docume
Page 167 and 168:
Magnetic Properties of Basalt The m
Page 169 and 170:
Magnetic Data Collection, Condition
Page 171 and 172:
The magnetometer was set to the bas
Page 173 and 174:
Figure 4.23. Topographical base map
Page 175 and 176:
of basalt, but instead, a body of s
Page 177 and 178:
Figure 4.25. Topographic contour ma
Page 179 and 180:
mercuric sulfide in the soil. There
Page 181 and 182:
Coyote, Honduras (Terry et al. 2000
Page 183 and 184:
intersection on the numbered rows a
Page 185 and 186:
The results were reported in parts
Page 187 and 188:
Figure 4.28b. Box plot summaries of
Page 189 and 190:
Elemental Analysis of the Soils fro
Page 191 and 192:
Summary of the Soil Analyses When t
Page 193 and 194:
Figure 4.31a. Potassium distributio
Page 195 and 196:
estriction prohibiting further exca
Page 197 and 198:
The average depth of any observed a
Page 199 and 200:
Figure 5.7. Site map illustrating l
Page 201 and 202:
Figure 5.8. River cut profile 1A Le
Page 203 and 204:
Figure 5.9. River cut profile 1B in
Page 205 and 206:
Figure 5.10. River cut profile 2A L
Page 207 and 208:
Figure 5.11. River cut profile 6B o
Page 209 and 210:
Formative to Protoclassic ceramics
Page 211 and 212:
fabrication methods, technologies,
Page 213 and 214:
some of the Formative period wares
Page 215 and 216:
The San Lorenzo Olmec Period (c. 11
Page 217 and 218:
Figure 5.19. Examples of Middle For
Page 219 and 220:
The Late Classic Period (c. AD 550-
Page 221 and 222:
English annular ware (c. AD 1785-18
Page 223 and 224:
Ceramic Collection Areas The identi
Page 225 and 226:
Figure 5.26. Distribution of cerami
Page 227 and 228:
Formative period accounted for 785
Page 229 and 230:
The survey was conducted along the
Page 231 and 232:
Figure 5.29. Diagram of Olmec thron
Page 233 and 234:
Figure 5.30. Map illustrating the l
Page 235 and 236:
Late Formative (263), Protoclassic
Page 237 and 238:
demonstrates an analogous situation
Page 239 and 240:
Offering I Figure 5.32. Locations o
Page 241 and 242:
Figure 5.34. Offering I is at the c
Page 243 and 244:
Figure 5.36. Two reconstructed plat
Page 245 and 246:
crescent with its concave and conve
Page 247 and 248:
The two figurine types are common t
Page 249 and 250:
vessels that were deposited into a
Page 251 and 252:
Figure 5.45. Two of three similar s
Page 253 and 254:
Obsidian and Lithic Analyses The Ob
Page 255 and 256:
Throne Units Test Units Offerings I
Page 257 and 258:
inhabitants from other sites, or in
Page 259 and 260:
Figure 5.50. Examples of stones tho
Page 261 and 262:
Figure 5.51. El Marquesillo throne
Page 263 and 264:
accomplished through violent blows
Page 265 and 266:
Figure 5.56. Close-up of the figure
Page 267 and 268:
Figure 5.58. Illustration of magnet
Page 269 and 270:
Modifications to this pattern occur
Page 271 and 272:
class occurred only in the presence
Page 273 and 274:
appearance of ceramics occurred dur
Page 275 and 276:
series of interrelated residential,
Page 277 and 278:
The Early Formative period appearan
Page 279 and 280:
Evidence of these constructions is
Page 281 and 282:
and the excavated pit is not known,
Page 283 and 284:
For the Gulf Olmec, monumental exhi
Page 285 and 286:
precisely. This method would also m
Page 287 and 288:
An earlier discussion suggested sty
Page 289 and 290:
approximately 100 cm to 120 cm belo
Page 291 and 292:
Nevertheless, the structural design
Page 293 and 294:
discussion about the antiquity of t
Page 295 and 296:
6.3). At La Venta equivalent basalt
Page 297 and 298:
shamanistic ritual and rulership (F
Page 299 and 300:
elevation provides an excellent ove
Page 301 and 302:
further support to the idea that El
Page 303 and 304:
Also contributing to the ceramic pr
Page 305 and 306:
Another possible basalt deposition
Page 307 and 308:
off is dramatic to say the least. T
Page 309 and 310:
direction, a series of hills approx
Page 311 and 312:
Finally, the selection and investig
Page 313 and 314:
a metaphor for the movements of the
Page 315 and 316:
plaza complex is also oriented to p
Page 317 and 318:
the traditional communal ideology.
Page 319 and 320:
where new diagnostic ceramic types
Page 321 and 322:
Understanding of the early Postclas
Page 323 and 324:
ceramics probably arrived at the en
Page 325 and 326:
investigation before the direction
Page 327 and 328:
Marquesillo, past and present. Fitt
Page 329 and 330:
Through the integration of a sequen
Page 331 and 332:
experienced an upward trend in popu
Page 333 and 334:
prehispanic occupation would have b
Page 335 and 336:
Assmann (2006) argues that prehisto
Page 337 and 338:
1997:288). These changes in residen
Page 339 and 340:
structures that could provide long-
Page 341 and 342:
Analysis of these three components
Page 343 and 344:
Early architectural units, specific
Page 345 and 346:
activities and that these activitie
Page 347 and 348:
political structure. Was it an inde
Page 349 and 350:
subordinate to a nearby primary cen
Page 351 and 352:
Explanation of Spatial Organization
Page 353 and 354:
conjunction with other forms of arc
Page 355 and 356:
Mesoamerican worldviews (Vogt 1981:
Page 357 and 358:
Expanding the Boundaries and a Look
Page 359 and 360:
to illustrate their power and wealt
Page 361 and 362:
emains is striking. This disproport
Page 363 and 364:
the earliest detectable occupation
Page 365 and 366:
and Uxpanapa River Basins, I wonder
Page 367 and 368:
Arnaiz-Villena, A., G. Vargas-Alarc
Page 369 and 370:
Bassie, K. 2006 The Fire and Water
Page 371 and 372:
Blake, M. and J. E. Clark 1999 The
Page 373 and 374:
Butler, R. F. 1992 Paleomagnetism:
Page 375 and 376:
2001 Gulf Lowlands: South Region. I
Page 377 and 378:
Coe, M. D., D. Snow and E. Benson 1
Page 379 and 380:
2003 Laguna de los Cerros: Una Capi
Page 381 and 382:
2003 Analysis of Formative Period O
Page 383 and 384:
Elachi, C. 1987 Introduction to the
Page 385 and 386:
Foster, G. M. 1940 Notes on the Pop
Page 387 and 388:
2001 La Venta, Tabasco, Mexico. In
Page 389 and 390:
Halbwachs, M. 1992 On Collective Me
Page 391 and 392:
Hester, T. R., H. J. Shafer and K.
Page 393 and 394:
Johnston, K. J. and N. Gonlin 1998
Page 395 and 396:
Kruger, R. P. 1996 An Archaeologica
Page 397 and 398:
Madry, S. L. H. 1987 A Multiscalar
Page 399 and 400:
Middleton, W. D. 2004 Identifying C
Page 401 and 402:
Ortíz, P. 1975 La Ceramica de los
Page 403 and 404:
Plog, S. 1990 Agriculture, Sedentis
Page 405 and 406:
Rapoport, A. 1990 History and Prece
Page 407 and 408:
Rueda, H. G. 1989 Nuevas Exploracio
Page 409 and 410:
Santley, R. S., S. A. Nelson, B. K.
Page 411 and 412:
1989 Olmec Studies: A Status Report
Page 413 and 414:
Stark, B. L. and P. J. Arnold 1997
Page 415 and 416:
Tarling, D. H. 1983 Geomagnetism. C
Page 417 and 418:
Tykot, R. H. 2004 Stable Isotopes a
Page 419 and 420:
Wallerstein, I. 1974 The Modern Wor
Page 421 and 422:
2003 The Role of Kinship and Demogr
Page 423 and 424:
Appendix 1a. Ceramic Analysis: Type
Page 425 and 426:
Appendix 1b. Ceramic Analysis: Type
Page 427 and 428:
Appendix 2. Ceramic Types and Count
Page 429 and 430:
Page 431 and 432:
Page 433 and 434:
Page 435 and 436:
Page 437 and 438:
Page 439 and 440:
Page 441 and 442:
Page 443 and 444:
Page 445 and 446:
Appendix 2 Ceramic Types and Counts
Page 447 and 448:
Page 449 and 450:
Page 451 and 452:
Page 453 and 454:
Page 455 and 456:
Page 457 and 458:
Appendix 3a. Obsidian from Test Uni
Page 459 and 460:
Appendix 3b. Obsidian from Throne E
Page 461 and 462:
Appendix 4a. Lithics from Surface C
Page 463 and 464:
Appendix 4b. Lithics from River Cut
Page 465 and 466:
Appendix 5a. Soil Survey I Element
Page 467 and 468:
Appendix 5a. Soil Survey I Element
Page 469 and 470:
Appendix 5b. Soil Survey II Element
Page 471 and 472:
Appendix 5b. Soil Survey II Element
Page 473:
About the Author Travis F. Doering
show all

An Unexplored Realm in the Heartland of the Southern Gulf ... - Famsi

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?