07.06.2022 Views

Pre-Colombian Jamaica: Caribbean Archeology and Ethnohistory

by Phillip Allsworth-Jones

by Phillip Allsworth-Jones

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

166 / Appendix A.<br />

sparse. In 1965 a controlled molluscan sample was obtained for comparison<br />

with Howard’s vertebrate sample from 1964, <strong>and</strong> from the account given by<br />

Silverberg <strong>and</strong> colleagues (1972:36–37) it seems that two 5 x 5 ft units were<br />

dug, presumably at some point on Howard’s grid. “Five successive occupational<br />

strata” were identified, four separated from one another by “thin b<strong>and</strong>s of culturally<br />

sterile reddish- brown soil,” whereas the fifth was distinguished on the<br />

basis of different ash color only. The ceramics excavated by V<strong>and</strong>erwal in 1965<br />

<strong>and</strong> 1966 formed “the primary control” for his seriation of south coast sites.<br />

His diagram showed the material both from a trench (White Marl IV, with 11<br />

levels) <strong>and</strong> a test pit (White Marl VI, with 4 to 5 levels) (V<strong>and</strong>erwal 1968a:87,<br />

120, 123, Figure 6). It is interesting to compare these results with those V<strong>and</strong>erwal<br />

obtained from his study of 1,325 potsherds excavated by Howard in 1964<br />

in his trenches A <strong>and</strong> B levels 0–IX (Silverberg et al. 1972:13–17, Figure 5). In<br />

the diagram for 1964, as V<strong>and</strong>erwal put it, “the class of filleted rims increased<br />

at the expense of, <strong>and</strong> gradually replaced, the class of plain rims.” Filleted rims<br />

were, however, present to some degree in the lowest level. This was not the case<br />

in V<strong>and</strong>erwal’s own trenches, where filleted rims are not present at all in the<br />

lower half of the sequence.<br />

In 1967, during his operations in the southern portion of the site, V<strong>and</strong>erwal<br />

uncovered a burial of “a woman who had cradled in her arms a child aged<br />

between 1 <strong>and</strong> 3 years” (V<strong>and</strong>erwa1 1967). He also found a complete (but<br />

broken) circular vessel with another smaller one inside; it was suspected (although<br />

it was not confirmed) that it also contained the bones of an infant. In<br />

all, according to V<strong>and</strong>erwal, “24 excavations 5′ x 5′ were made, yielding a total<br />

of 173 discrete collections <strong>and</strong> approximately 5,000 decorated potsherds”<br />

(V<strong>and</strong>erwal 1967).<br />

In 1968, for the most part, attention was shifted to the northern portion of<br />

the site, where Howard’s excavations had taken place. The work was done “expressly<br />

to obtain more information on burial patterns, <strong>and</strong> new display material,<br />

in as much as previously excavated burials were in a poor state of preservation”<br />

(V<strong>and</strong>erwa1 1968d). The burials were discovered in two areas.<br />

(1) In Howard’s mound B, immediately west of his excavated trench, in<br />

squares 12 J <strong>and</strong> K <strong>and</strong> 14 J. In 12 J <strong>and</strong> K a single flexed burial was found,<br />

with no grave goods. In 14 J three burials were encountered, at different stratigraphic<br />

depths. The lowest was undisturbed, but the uppermost had intruded<br />

upon the middle one. V<strong>and</strong>erwal described the latter as fully flexed, with a large<br />

boat- shaped vessel placed over the skull <strong>and</strong> a small circular bowl by the feet.<br />

By the head was the body of a dog.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!