Society for American Archaeology

Early Pottery in the Amazon: A CorrectionAuthor(s): Denis WilliamsSource: American Antiquity, Vol. 62, No. 2 (Apr., 1997), pp. 342-352Published by: Society for American ArchaeologyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/282516 .Accessed: 10/07/2011 20:02

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sam. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Society for American Archaeology is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toAmerican Antiquity.

http://www.jstor.org

EARLY POTTERY IN THE AMAZON: A CORRECTION

Denis Williams

Based on subtnission firmns anid other documents deposited in the Smiiithsontiani Intstitltioni archives onl terminationt of the

Snmithsonian Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory in 1986, Anntia Roosevelt atrgues that shell miiiddents ont the coast of Guyana and

niortheastern Brazil contain potterv, and that the dates ssupport her argumtenit that "Amazonian ear/v pottery is the mtiost

securel/ dated ear/v pottery in the New World" (1995:128). Penidinig publication of a detailed miioniograph, I maintain that

the Guyana sites in question are preceranuic and thus offer 1to suipport to Roosevelt'v thesis.

Tomiianido conio base los formtiularios de entrega v otros documentos depositados eni el archivo de la Smiiithsonian Institition

cuando se cerr6 el Laboratorio de Fechados Radiocarb6nicos en1 1986, Antita Roosevelt sostiente que los conchales existelntes

en la costa de GuYana ! el noreste de Brasil conitienen ceraimica, Yt p/0 lo tanito los fechados de estos sitios corroboran su

argtutmento de qle "la cerchnica temtipr(ania de Amazl-onfa tienie los fechados mas confiables del Nuevo Mundo" (1995:128). Eni

vista de la deniora eni publicar la evidencia detallada, qiuiero hacer constar que esos sitios son1 preceramnicos Y por tantto los

fechados no apovant las interpretacionies de Roosevelt.

In an article entitled "Early Pottery in the Amazon: Twenty Years of Scholarly Obscurity" included in The Emergence of Potterv, pub-

lished by the Smithsonian Institution Press, Anna Roosevelt alleges that "since the early 1970s, sites in eastern Amazonia have consistently produced numerous radiocarbon dates for pottery that are as old as or older than those from other parts of the Americas," but that "these potentially revolutionary dates were consigned to obscurity without explana- tion" (1995:115-116, 119, 128). Roosevelt's asser- tions are based on excavators' notes on submission forms for samples from shell middens on the coasts of Guyana and Brazil processed on different occa- sions by the Smithsonian Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory. In support of her contention that "the age of pottery began 7,500 years ago, more than 1,500 years earlier than elsewhere in the hemi- sphere" (1995:115), Roosevelt cites 13 dates from shell middens excavated by Mario Sim6es on the coast of Brazil east of the mouth of the Amazon and 18 dates from my excavations at Alaka-phase sites in northwestern Guyana (Figure 1).

Since the excavators' notes on some of the sub- mission forms indicate that the samples were asso-

ciated with pottery, Roosevelt (1995:120) rejects published statements by Sim6es (1981) and Williams (1981) and evaluates the dates as prece- ramic, incorrectly asserting that "preceramic cul- tures have not yet been scientifically documented at these sites." More than this, Roosevelt asserts that none of the excavations was taken to sterile soil and predicts that even earlier dates for pottery can be expected if this were done (1995:120). As similar radiocarbon and thermoluminescence results were obtained on her samples of charcoal, shell, and pottery (1995:122), Roosevelt argues that they must be correct, making "Amazonian early pottery . .. the most securely dated early pot- tery in the New World" (1995:128).

Alaka Phase of the Western Guiana Littoral

Roosevelt did not consult with me concerning the reliability of the associations of the Smithsonian radiocarbon dates with pottery attributions on the relevant sample submission forms, nor does she cite preliminary articles of mine published in 1982 and 1992 that discuss several of them. Therefore, pending publication of a monograph placing all of these dates in context, I consider it essential to

Denis Williams * Walter Roth Museum of Anthropology, P.O. Box 10187, Georgetown, Guyana

American Antiquity, 62(2), 1997, pp. 342-352.

Copyright e by the Society for American Archaeology

342

COMMENTS 343

warn readers that investigations carried out in the three large shell midden complexes of northwest- ern Guyana during the past decade and more do not support Roosevelt's interpretations of data from Guyana.

Our chronology of the Alaka phase', defined in Evans and Meggers (1960), is now based on 37 radiocarbon dates obtained from samples of shell, bone, and peat assayed by Beta Laboratories as well as by the Smithsonian Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory. They derive from 14 of the 30 shell middens on the Western Guiana Littoral. I judge the resulting cultural sequence reliable by virtue of its compatibility with independent evidence for (1) differential tectonic subsidence in the area, (2) two well-defined marine incursions contemporary with a palynologically evidenced arid episode in Amazonia at ca. 4000 B.P., (3) culmination of the eustatic sea level rise around 6000 B.P. and its topographic consequences in swamps lying at about mean sea level, and, (4) pollen and diatom analyses that permit correlating cultural behavior with changes in local vegetation and ambient salinities.

Barabina Hill

Radiocarbon dates cited by Roosevelt are from Barabina, Hosororo Creek, Kabakaburi, and Seba Creek. The first three are shell middens, but of these only Hosororo Creek contains early pottery. Barabina and Kabakaburi are preceramic. Seba Creek is not an archaeological site. Excavator's notes accompanying submission of peat samples from Seba to the Smithsonian Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory, and examined by Anna Roosevelt, read:

Peat deposit believed to have been formed during later stage of sea level rise which termi- nated ca. 6000 B.P.

Importance of dating the sample: Reconstruction of ecological conditions per-

taining to growth of the Barabina shell midden by supplying dates for stages in a pollen profile and column sample of diatoms being analyzed by the Hugo de Vries Laboratorium, University of Amsterdam, under Prof. Th. van der Hammen; and correlation of these results with dates already obtained for the middle and upper levels of the Barabina shell midden. Also con- tribute to a better understanding of the Holo- cene sea level rise on this part of the coast of South America.

I t\\\S t;l~~~\\

.41. Alaka VENEZ P L4j Mb 2.PedraPktada

~. GY 3.Taperinha

. 4. 3.

Figure 1. Sites of the Alaka phase in the lower Aruka Basin.

These shell middens were all excavated previ- ous to my investigations: Barabina by Osgood (1946) and Verrill (1918), Hosororo Creek by Evans and Meggers (1960), and Kabakaburi by Brett (1868:434) and im Thum (1883:413).

Contrary to Roosevelt's assertions (1995:121), all three Barabina excavations were taken to the base of the cultural deposit, which is reached at a depth of 1.4 m. Verrill (1918:13) reports that

Excavations were carried on in the form of deep pits penetrating the shell deposits and reaching the subsoil beneath, and also by long trenches carried to the depth of the shells and extending completely across the mound. Near the surface many fragments of plain and poorly-made pottery were found and these con- tinued to the bottom of the shell deposits.

In the matter of sherd distributions within the shell deposit, the information provided by Verrill is incorrect. The shell midden is overlain by a layer of dark brown humus (Zone i), 5 to 16 cm thick and

344 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 62, No. 2, 1997]

containing refuse of the horticulturist Koriabo and Apostaderan phases. This fact is recorded in my preliminary report, which was cited by Roosevelt (Williams 1981:16, 18, Figure 10). Roosevelt asserts (1995:120), "According to Williams' article and the Smithsonian submission forms, the dated material came from layers and features that con- tained the plain sherds of sand-tempered Alaka pottery." Here, I'm afraid, Roosevelt is thoroughly confused. Barring the "few plain sherds" men- tioned by the late Clifford Evans on my submission forms, there is no pottery of any description in the shell deposit on Barabina Hill (Williams 1981:Figure 10, Zone ii). These plain (Koriabo and Apostadero) sherds had intruded from the overly- ing humus layer (Zone i) by mechanical mixing, a fact that had not yet been published and of which Evans was therefore unaware in writing his cover- ing memo to the laboratory in 1980. The article nowhere mentions "sand-tempered Alaka pottery." Sand-tempered pottery was first manufactured anywhere on the Western Guiana Littoral only with the occupation of Hosororo Creek around 3975 B.P. (Williams 1992:243). Roosevelt is discussing a time span between 6885 and 4115 B.P. for the preceramic Barabina midden, some 4 km distant. The relatively late date for Hosororo Creek and the uniqueness of the refuse, Caribbean oyster, Crassostrea rhizophorae (Guild), accompanying initial manufacture of sand-tempered pottery there suggest that the area had already been abandoned by its traditional shellfishers, whose refuse had comprised predominantly the zebra nerite (Puperita pupa), the common blue crab (Callinectes sapidus), and some estuanrne catfish, e.g., gilbacker (Silurus sciadeichthys) and cuirass (Arius spixi), these latter associated with numerous line-sinkers on amphibole schist, the prevailing rock material of the Aruka Hills.

On the issue of potsherds in the Barabina shell midden, Osgood (1946:49), an incomparably more reliable observer than Verrill, noted:

Excavation was carried on in twenty-five cen- timeter depths. No sherds were found below twenty-five centimeters. Below seventy-five cen- timeters, the trench was narrowed to one meter and then carried down to a depth of two meters. Between one and one and one quarter meters the composition was almost pure shell .... Below one and one half meters . .. we struck pure red- dish yellow clay.

In light of my own and Osgood's reports, both cited by Roosevelt, her assertion (1995:120) that "[b]oth Verrill and Williams found pottery in all levels" of the Barabina excavations could not be further from the truth. While acknowledging Osgood's estimate of the Barabina midden as pre- ceramic, Roosevelt (1995:121) cautions: "He did not use screens when excavating." On the other hand, in our five years of excavation of this mid- den, the recovery of around 100 burials enforced the use of 5- and 10-mm screens throughout for small bones, teeth, etc. As regards ceramic distrib- utions within the mound, our results were the same as Osgood's.

In these very extensive excavations, which involved trenching the midden on its long diame- ter supported by 11 radial channels taken to the feather edge of the deposit (Williams 1981:Figure 2), the base of the shell was encountered at a depth of 1.4 m, though the many burials in the residual clay of the hilltop enforced excavation to a depth of 2.0 m throughout the grid. Like Osgood, I observed potsherds only in the uppermost 35 cm of the deposit (Williams 1981:31). Barabina is unquestionably preceramic, with horticulturist pottery confined to the overlying humus. The inception of the mound has been dated at 6,885? 85 B.P. (SI 5075) and its abandonment shortly after 4115 ? 50 B.P. (SI 4332).

Hosororo Creek

Hosororo Creek is a bicultural deposit 65 cm thick containing potsherds throughout. Very simple, shell- and sand-tempered pottery (as well as a few clay, charcoal, and cariape-tempered specimens) occurs in the lower half, overlying 15 cm of shell sand. This shell sand represents a marine incursion during a period of sustained reduced precipitation and a lowered water table. Its deposition appar- ently was associated with the arid interval evi- denced elsewhere in Amazonia, for example Seba Creek, around 4000 B.P. (Absy 1982, 1985; van der Hammen 1974; Williams 1992) (Figure 2).

Because of difficulties inherent in the use of shell as a nonplastic additive in ceramic manufac- ture (Budak 1991; Goodyear 1971; Shepard 1976; Rye 1981), the earliest pottery at Hosororo Creek, which was tempered with crushed shells of the zebra nerite salvaged from food refuse (Figure 3a), was extremely inefficient. Porous and tending to

COMMENTS 345

cm 0

I20

go 6 0 = ___=- -

1 o 0 1.01 4! CU 2 E-A 0Z^X000Y000R g ~~~~~~~~x 4890.? 55 B.P. 1 [

1-20 - ^20 -- G 20 c .ol I r

MASARUMA ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ : U (EAC.)MSRUA AT RIL

190~~~~tnslTl 1N 50tsr Gr1Zy--1&1111 ,11B11solSl wttrot

Fine watewaoro gray-block soad )83400 cmI coatalaig waerworn pebbles

Diatom "Mvr_ 100-12u cm Commnuted marins shell

6 Diolom sample 100128 12 6bCkwood root

Rock Fine gray silt fmm thick. 30cm beeath seashell laye Coas wIFn Wworn gray-black sand containing waterwrn pebble

Figure 2. Stratigraphic profile of Seba Creek.

melt when washed, this pottery fissured along coil junctions or vertically through bodywalls with dry- ing (Figure 3b). Remedial measures included reducing the grain size of the crushed shell and thus increasing the volume of temper in a given paste, scoring the interior and exterior of the leather-hard vessel walls (Figure 3c), and using slips (Figure 3d).

The recalcitrance of shell as a tempering mater- ial was the cause of continual experimentation with alternative clays and tempering materials at Hosororo Creek. Very soon a sand-tempered paste, referred to as Sand Creek Plain (to which Roosevelt mistakenly refers in discussing the Barabina midden) was developed. However, as with the mica-tempered specimen shown in Figure 3e, results continued to vary until the advent of a new ceramic technology and the abrupt introduc- tion of sophisticated Barrancoid pottery associated with a wide array of new vessel shapes. Evidence of the new technology was the apparent deliberate crushing and sifting of selected rock materials to serve as nonplastic additives in ceramic manufac- ture, including decayed granite exfoliations from the upper Waini River and nodules of decayed

steatite from a remote mine on the upper Barama River. Both sites being highly inaccessible across the swamps, even to its traditional inhabitants, the incorporation of these tempering materials in their diagnostic pottery implies the voluntary absorption of the migrants into the age-old trade network of the swamps. The enhanced elasticity accruing from the new steatite-tempered paste permitted the incorporation of large, modeled decorative motifs in ceramic design, and this trait would characterize the further development of Barrancoid pottery on the lower Orinoco River (see Lathrap 1966:564) as well as on the lower Aruka River. Steatite has been documented as a nonplastic additive in ceramic industries on the lower Orinoco River from the time of its first dated use at Barrancas, around 590 B.C. on to the demise of the Coporito subphase of the Barrancoid tradition, which has been placed (Sanoja 0. 1979:193) at A.D. 1345. On Lathrap's (1966) evidence from the Saladero site, initiation of the implied trade in this rock material may have predated the sixth century B.C.

The inception of the Formative Barrancoid tra- dition at Hosororo Creek predated 3,550 ? 65 B.P. (Beta 20007). The congruence of this date with

346 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY lVol. 62, No. 2, 19971

a b c 1 | | F.u;,g ,. . . _ _

--gEw '-- . ;:.: . ; S . ! | | l i _ t s .W.s. ,.^ *.t .. v. E

I l i | 2 ':A- :- _

__,'''i''__ I _s, . _' w_ _;.

I __g _.

. _{:. ' s_ __as _. s .- . .

I __ _.: . Se ...................................................................... _ t' 1N_

.. l . _ _. I I _1N ;_. _ . _ gfi. _V' i

I _w _

I 10 E _-.*so.Xurs . S . l __lJIlS3>;9-t'ss'x'- _1 l _st$sx^,>X". !:

_ lliSt'- B _W il 1 S |

_-RP_ ,'l_*.;3_X..'t'' - tfg __ .. l ! __>:Ss' t_-

i SS11 S 8 | | !,, . l!!! - 3 -

I 111 1 ?1 ?

_Tl 1 ' - > ' * * ' '@ 5ts;Wq '.; B*V3 X tVleS

vSst Mi}&,%^%HeXc a

_v .t.t-.0<sagsB-i 9< ?e 1 S

-W3FE""04 '; :'" ' ' s e * - '' ; io l i

_aefWxt$e/. . ? . . * ' ' vs * - <' - f t

w1X?,, ., vs, . : w=^1? ,, | Ns'.*e. <@X Sii v; o. -. he-@2;\ e. 3 ; > 't ", 4{

e 4 .. * 1__S_S;__ * - - - | < t

0 I-|---a S | , Xa i J__;a_ >-- | gr.

. t . . 11, '1" . z i ? . - . .

_ _ d e .w __r B

Figure 3. Early pottery at Hosororo Creek showing Nerite shell temper (a), fissuring when dry (b), interior/exterior scoring as a measure to counter porosity (c), use of slips, another measure to counter porosity (d), and fissuring in a sand temrodehfird 'a'

F_ _ a _ \> ,.

Roosevelt's Formative horizon at the Cavema da Pedra Pintada on the left bank of the lower Amazon suggests that the two events may have related to the onset of freshening conditions and a gradually ameliorating environment marking the end of the indicated arid interval. On the evidence from Hosororo Creek, it was a time of falling salin- ity levels in the coastal zone, indicating a return to normal river regimes. The brackish or marine shellfish species that had constituted the dominant protein resources locally during the arid interval now disappeared abruptly. In this situation of envi- ronmental stress, the sudden intrusion of horticul- turists on the lower Aruka is probably attributable to a dispersal down the Orinoco of Proto-Northern Maipuran Arawaks out of a hearth somewhere on the upper Rio Negro during the immediately pre- ceding centuries. Barrancoid pottery exhibiting the distinctive trait of crushed granite temper, occur- ring soon afterwards at Kurupukari Falls on the upper Essequibo River, 2910 ? 80 B.P., Cal B.C.

1315-890 (Beta 76246), may represent the disper- sal of Proto-Eastem Maipuran Arawaks down the Amazon (Rouse 1985).

Kabakaburi Hill

The Kabakaburi midden, located beside Hospital Creek on the upper Pomeroon River, was first excavated by Brett, who reported (1868:439), "Fragments of Indian pottery were found among the layers of shells about four feet from the sur- face." Kabakaburi was again investigated by im Thurn (1883:413) who did not record its contents. These references were both included in the sub- mission forms accompanying charcoal samples assayed by the Smithsonian Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory and examined by Roosevelt, who, while citing the dates (4890 ? 75 B.P. and 4215 ? 70 B.P.), does not acknowledge this record of apparent early pottery, so apposite to her concern with "pottery-age shell middens" in coastal Guyana (Roosevelt 1995:116).

COMMENTS 347

*. :^' :.. .; i,

-;,414 si /? _A*.-S ...

l, ft _' '.

,?. .. ;'.

i.>.S

_i -

SX S i _ i s _ .. '.'.,' ,,'fl, l fl . _

*, . ,, I _ _

t i-

W . iH; Hi ...... ... a s _ .. _

... - s'tt' -_

': . E

__v_P

Figure 4. Excavation of the Waramuri shell midden.

My own excavations at Kabakaburi, the first since im Thum's, revealed Brett to have dug, unaware, into a horticulturist refuse pit, around 1 m deep and 1.5 m wide. Therefore, the "small and few" sherds he encountered there, along with two silver trinkets, were intrusive. Like Barabina, Kabakaburi is unquestionably preceramic, and, like Barabina, its excavation was taken to sterile soil. The two radiocarbon dates cited by Roosevelt derived from 90 cm and 80-100 cm depths, respectively. The site was first occupied around 5340 ? 100 B.P. (Beta 32188) based on a charcoal sample taken at 140-cm depth. A date of 7,230 ? 90 B.P., based on a charcoal sample taken at 130- cm depth (Beta 27055) from the nearby Piraka shell midden represents the earliest known seden- tary occupation of the Western Guiana Littoral. Kabakaburi yielded a wealth of stone tools associ- ated with the rise of the dugout canoe industry. This profoundly important cultural advance

resulted from drastic changes in water level and water quality as run-off cumulatively overcame the marine influence in the southeastern swamp basin in the centuries immediately following on the peak of the eustatic sea level rise. Soon after- ward, parts of the Antilles were colonized. Levisa, on Cuba, dates at 5140 ? 170 B.P. (GD 356).

Seba Creek

Three dates assigned to the Barabina shell midden (Roosevelt 1995:Figure 10.1) are unassociated with any cultural materials. They derived from a noncultural deposit of peat at Seba Creek, around 5 km distant. As shown in the above quotation from the submission forms, sampling this peat was directed to reconstructing ecological conditions pertaining to the growth of the Barabina shell mid- den by providing dates for the associated pollen diagram. For laboratory purposes, these Seba sam- ples were identified by the name "Barabina." This

348 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 62, No. 2, 1997]

was not indicated on the submission forms; all bore the same coordinates.

Mina Phase on the Western Guiana Littoral

Apart from the Hosororo Creek deposit, none of the 14 shell middens excavated so far on the Western Guiana Littoral can by any means be described as pottery-age shell middens. All but one are preceramic. All but the midden at Koriabo Point on the Barima River, life threateningly unsta- ble below 4.0 m due to cascading Nerite shells, were taken to sterile soil. Figure 4 shows the Waramuri profile. In all cases, refuse deriving from the subsistence round was related to environmental change in a highly unstable coastal zone. Seven culturally important oscillations in the swamps commencing a thousand years before the culmina- tion of the sea level rise and ending with recent indications of salinization of the ground water have been identified and dated. Our Alaka chronology is tied to these environmental oscillations.

Culturally and chronologically, middens of the Alaka phase appear to relate to preceramic shell midden complexes located along the old littoral line of northern South America, commencing with Piraka and proceeding via Banwari Trace on Trinidad with progressively diminishing antiquity northwestward along the Venezuelan coast as far as El Heneal (Harris 1976:37-40; Hoffman and Lynch 1990:166; Wilson 1991:149). On the other hand, the characteristics of the pottery from the late Archaic midden at Hosororo Creek unequivocally attest affiliation to the Archaic Mina phase at the mouth of the Amazon, where identical pottery was already being made at least by 3000 B.C. (Simoes 1981).

The south to north time gradient suggested by the relationship between the pottery of the Mina phase and the technologically and typologically similar pottery of Hosororo Creek obviously would have a bearing on the question of the origin and dissemination of tropical forest culture in the lowlands (Steward 1949:762; Meggers and Evans 1957:604), if it could be established by excava- tions at a few intermediate sites. In the persistent absence of such supporting evidence, particularly along the Essequibo corridor, the recency and aberrancy of Hosororo Creek on the Western Guiana Littoral need to be kept in mind when attempting to evaluate Roosevelt's claim (1995:120) that dates of "the Alaka pottery phase

... overlap substantially with the Mina dates but extend back about 400 years earlier." In fact, Roosevelt's "Alaka pottery phase" is unrepre- sented at any site on the Western Guiana Littoral. Further, by virtue of its late date and demonstrable affiliation to the Mina phase, Hosororo Creek's place in the Alaka phase must now be questioned.

That the prehistory of the Western Guiana Littoral is of significant time depth has long been known from the recovery there of certain large, stemmed projectile points thought to represent the early Andean hunting-collecting tradition, i.e., around 7000 B.C. (Willey 1971:60; see also Evans and Meggers 1960:21; Roth 1924:170, Plate 36a). Our continuing excavations have recovered dated evidence of sedentary occupation there (the prece- ramic Piraka shell mound) around 5000 B.C. Notwithstanding these long, sedentary occupa- tions, the earliest pottery to appear anywhere on the Guyana Coast dates only around 2000 B.C. There, this pottery is known from but a single site-Hosororo Creek-and at this site the diag- nostic shell tempering represents only one (the ear- liest) of several kinds of clay body experimented with by shellfishers over a period of perhaps 200 years. Following this, first farmers from the Orinoco River intruded at this unique site and there introduced the incised and modeled ceramics of the Barrancoid tradition. The ceramic inventory of the newcomers included the manioc griddle. At a depth of 20 cm below the surface of the ground, their refuse has been dated at 1600 B.C. (Beta 20007).

Peaceful integration of these Orinocan horticul- turists with the Archaic shellfishers is indicated by the immediate access of the former to the strategic resources of the swamp basin, notably certain dis- tant and valuable traditional clays and tempering materials. In the stressed environment, the benefits of manioc horticulture would appear to have been an adequate economic return on access to the age- old trade network of the swamps. In the ensuing merging of ceramic technologies, Amazonian and Orinocan, the various experimental clay bodies of the Archaic shellfishers were adopted by the horti- culturist newcomers in the production of the dis- tinctive pottery of the Formative Mabaruma phase. Seven of the eight ceramic types that have been characterized as constituting the Mabaruma phase (Evans and Meggers 1960) derived from this mar- riage of convenience on the lower Aruka River.

COMMENTS 349

Table 1. Hosororo Creek (Crassostrea rhizophorae/level).

Level (cm) n Mean (mm) Range (mm)

70-80 36 35.5 15-82 80-90 70 41.4 16-82

90-100 140 37.3 17-87 100-110 141 36.0 11-82 110-120 66 29.7 10-65

Roosevelt (1995:120) states that "many archae- ologists are not aware of the characteristics of the Mina and Alaka phases or of their radiocarbon dates" and goes on to explain: "part of the problem has been that the nature of the complexes was not presented clearly and accurately in the writings of those familiar with the sites, collections and dates." But as Evans and Meggers point out in their report on the Alaka phase, many of the facts simply were not yet known. Of Alaka-phase ceramics, Evans and Meggers (1960:59) write: "It should be emphasized . .. that the evidence is not sufficiently strong or clear-cut for the interpreta- tions suggested here to be considered final" and insisted that the "several interesting tendencies" revealed by the data were presented "as a basis for future investigation." It was therefore many years before the aberrant nature of Hosororo Creek within the Alaka phase and the pivotal role played by its experimental ceramic pastes in the emer- gence of the Formative Mabaruma phase came to be realized.

Thus, presently available facts on the nature and dates of shell-tempered pottery from Hosororo Creek should shed some light on the supposed relationship between the Mina and the Alaka phase already pointed to by Meggers and Evans (1978:551) and Simoes (1981). Our evidence now shows that the relationship between Mina pottery and pottery on the Western Guiana Littoral does not extend to any site of the Alaka phase, all of which are preceramic. The perceived similarities are confined strictly to one of the two dominant pottery types at Hosororo Creek-shell-tempered Wanaina Plain. As Evans and Meggers (1960:53) note of this type: "Pottery with this temper was not found in any other site in the whole of British Guiana." When contrasted with the preceramic cultural level of all other shell- fishing sites on the Western Guiana Littoral, this very similarity of Wanaina Plain to the pottery of the Mina phase would appear to constitute unas- sailably good grounds for eliminating Hosororo

Creek from any future characterization of the Alaka phase.

Apart from the unique similarity of Wanaina Plain to the ceramics of the Mina phase, the Hosororo Creek midden is also aberrant on the Western Guiana Littoral by virtue of its dense accu- mulation of shells of the mangrove oyster, as against the myriad shells of the zebra nerite, crabs, and fish that constitute all the known middens of the Alaka phase. The sole deposit of oyster shells known anywhere outside the home base of the Hosororo Creek group occurs on Wahana Island about 170 km to the southeast, on the upper Waini River. This is the site N-9, in the terminology of Evans and Meggers, who note of it (1960:31): "Whereas the other shell middens contained several species, this site produced only two: Neritina zebra Brugiere and Crassostrea rhizophorae Guilding."

The sudden abundance of C. rhizophorae on the lower Aruka River around 4000 B.P. was a function of the salinization of the rivers during the indicated arid interval. In phase with rising salin- ity levels locally, maximum diameters of these oysters increased progressively with decreasing depth from the surface of the deposit. The largest specimens occurred just before deposition of the uppermost level (Table 1).

On their extended trading journeys to Wahana Island, the group from Hosororo Creek traveled with an adequate supply of these oysters. At Wahana Island (N-9), pebbles and cobbles of amphibole schist, the prevailing rock material of the Aruka Hills, were traded against sand for the distinctive Sand Creek Plain of the shellfishers. These strategic rock materials were relayed to the upper Pomeroon complex to be percussion flaked into preforms of the adzes and axes required in canoe manufacture there. These preforms were then returned to the unique granite outcrops at Wahana Island for grinding.

Significantly, these long-distance trade visits to Wahana Island by the Hosororo Creek group never led to the adoption of ceramic technology by the hosts, whose material culture continued to show no evidence of ceramic use over the centuries. Meanwhile, the diagnostic oyster shells of the vis- itors accumulated in a discrete heap on the edge of the camp site separate from the almost pure crab refuse of their hosts. Their diagnostic potsherds were deposited on the floor of the cave to which

350 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 62, No. 2, 1997]

they were assigned, some distance from the settle- ment on the hilltop. This segregation of the domes- tic activities of the visitors from those of their hosts implies the social marginalization of the former within the Alaka community on the Waini River. Thus, notwithstanding its location in the heart of Alaka territory, Hosororo Creek was an intrusive culture on the Aruka River, demonstrably affiliated to the Mina phase at the mouth of the Amazon and not to the Alaka phase of northwestern Guyana. Had this aberrancy of Hosororo Creek on the Western Guiana Littoral been realized earlier, it may have saved Roosevelt (1995:120) the futility inherent in drawing conclusions from the supposed link between the Mina and Alaka phases. There simply was never any connection between the two. Consequently, there can be no "missing chronolog- ical information" in the Smithsonian archives with regard to the Alaka phase (Roosevelt 1995:12 1). The perceived link was solely with the small group at Hosororo Creek. It was relatively recent. It occurred long after the then-hypersaline lower Aruka River had been deserted by the traditional Alaka-phase group at nearby Barabina Hill. It never therefore overlapped with or, of course, pre- dated early Mina.

Roosevelt (1995:119) claims that "the early shell mounds in Guyana had produced sand-tem- pered plain pottery and shell-tempered plain pot- tery with simple shapes." Although the shell- and sand-tempered pottery cited here originated only at Hosororo Creek, representative sherds are reported at three sites of the upper Waini complex (N-8, N-9, N- 10), as well as at the nearby Akawabi shell mound (N- 16) on the Koriabo River, a tribu- tary of the Aruka River. As stated by their excava- tors (Evans and Meggers 1960:53):

All the pottery fragmenits from Alaka Phase sites were found either on the surface or in the upper levels of the refuse middens. Although there are few sherds, distinctive features of paste, temper, etc., set them apart from pottery types of other archaeological phases in the Northwest District and therefore they have been classified and described as separate pot- tery types [emphasis added].

Evans and Meggers's tabulation (1960:Table A) of sherd frequencies/level of these "few" sherds, characterized by "distinctive features of paste, temper etc.," clearly shows them to have been intrusive at the preceramic sites.

This near-recognition of the uniqueness of Hosororo Creek ceramics on the Western Guiana Littoral was vitiated only by the authors' ambiva- lence regarding the significance of the temporal priority they had perceived for the "crudely made" shell-tempered Wanaina Plain as against sand- tempered Sand Creek Plain, considered by them (1960:59) as "by no means experimental." To the authors, Wanaina Plain appeared to exhibit "slow, experimental" beginnings at Wahana Island (N-9) and Akawabi Creek (N- 16) before "its great increase in frequency at Hosororo Creek (N- I 1). It is now evident that the reverse is what took place the experimental beginnings were in fact at Hosororo Creek. This is the reason that pot- sherds in the upper Waini complex (N-8, N-9, N- 10), as well as at Akawabi Creek (N-16), were found either on the surface or in the uppermost levels. Unfortunately, Roosevelt's statement cited immediately above regarding "the early shell mounds in Guyana" is unreferenced.

Sample Submission Data and Archaeological Fact

Concerning the 18 radiocarbon dates deriving from the four Guyana sites to which she refers, Roosevelt (1995:Table 10) states: "All the dated samples in this list were recorded as having been excavated from soil layers with pottery sherds or from peat layers that the excavator associated with the early pottery-bearing layers." As shown above, this is totally incorrect. Barring Hosororo Creek, the middens that Roosevelt indicates (Barabina, Kabakaburi) are both demonstrably preceramic, and the Seba peat deposit is noncultural. Notwithstanding the assertiveness of her argu- ment, Roosevelt is obviously unaware of exactly what the sample submission forms she is referring to are actually dating. And this relates not only to ceramics ("plain sherds of sand-tempered Alaka pottery" on Barabina Hill), but to archaeological sites as well (noncultural Seba Creek as a pottery- age shell midden) and even to their stratigraphic levels; for example, the Hosororo Creek deposit is overlain by the gravel-and-sand surface of a recent dirt track 40 cm deep, which means subtracting 40 cm in order to extract the archaeological facts from the stratigraphic "depths" derived by Roosevelt (I 995:Table 10. 1) from the radiocarbon sample submission forms.

COMMENTS 351

SHELL MOUNDS. THE WESTERN GUIANA LITTORAL

EASTERN SUBZONE WESTERN SUBZONE

(B3.P.) A B C D E F

3550?65

(Bta 20007)

3975-45 (SI 6638) 4115 +1-50 (SI 4332)

4890-75 (SI 7019)

53 40? 100

6520-160

6885-8 5

(Beta 27055) A. PIRAKA D. KORIABO

B. KABAKABURI E. AKAWABI

C. BARABINA F. HOSORORO

Figure 5. Chronology of some shell middens on the Western Guiana Littoral.

Of the 18 dates from Guyana claimed by Roosevelt (1995:120) to have been left unaccount- ably unpublished since the early 1980s, eight have in fact been published since then (Williams 1982:86, 1992:240, 244) (Figure 5). Contrary to Roosevelt's assertions, delay in publication of other early dates from the Western Guiana Littoral (and other parts of the Guianas) is not based on ide- ological considerations. In every case, the results of samples I submitted were transmitted to me without comment by my Smithsonian colleagues. Those remaining unpublished reflect my concern to conduct sufficient fieldwork to permit their eval- uation within the larger context of the Guiana region as a whole, still definitely a pioneering research area. The potentially misleading conse- quences of basing interpretations on unevaluated

radiocarbon dates, and, worse, of deriving artifact- or site-provenance and even stratification data from radiocarbon sample submission forms, are clearly demonstrated by Roosevelt's article. Far from bridging the wide gap between dates proferred for the Taperinha shell mound on the lower Amazon (Roosevelt et al. 1991) and those for the earliest pottery from Ecuador and Colombia, the dates from the Western Guiana Littoral leave that gap entirely unmodified. Toward the end of Roosevelt's article (1995:130) occurs a caution against self- delusion that is worth committing to memory: "We need the grand theories they are our way of thinking about the causes of things but their rou- tine inaccuracy and ultimate obsolescence warn us to be careful to let the archaeological record inform us even when it does not fit our theories."

352 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 62, No. 2, 1997]

References Cited Absy, M. L.

1982 Quaternary Palynological Studies in the Amazon Basin. In Biological Diversification in the Tropics, edited by G. T. Prance, pp. 67-73. Columbia University Press, New York.

1985 Palynology of Amazonia: The History of the Forests as Revealed by the Palynological Record. In AmaZonia, edited by G. T. Prance and T. E. Lovejoy, pp. 72-82. Pergamon Press, Oxford.

Brett, W. H. 1868 The Indian Tribes of Guiana: Their Condition and

Habits. 2nd ed. Bell and Daldy, New York. Budak, M.

1991 The Function of Shell Temper in Pottery. The Minnesota Archaeologist 50(2):53-59.

Evans, C., and B. J. Meggers 1960 Archaeological Investigations in British Guiana.

United States Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Goodyear, F. H. 1971 Archaeological Site Science. Heinemann Educational

Books, London. Harris, P. O'B.

1976 The Preceramic Period in Trinidad. Proceedings of'the First Puerto Rican Symposium on Archaeology:33-64. Fundacion Arqueologica, Anthropologica, e Historica de Puerto Rico, San Juan.

Hoffman, C. H., and T. F. Lynch. 1990 Current Research. American Antiquity 55:168.

im Thurn, E. 1967 [1883] Among the Indians of Guiana. Dover

Publications, New York. Lathrap, D.

1966 The Mabaruma Phase: A Return to the More Probable Interpretation. American Antiquity 31:558-566.

Meggers, B. J., and C. Evans 1957 Archaeological Investigations at the Mouth of the

Amazon. United States Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

1978 Lowland South America and the Antilles. In Ancient Native Americans, pp. 543-591. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.

Osgood, C. 1946 British Guiana Archaeology, to 1945. Yale University

Press, New Haven, Connecticut. Roosevelt, A. C.

1995 Early Pottery in the Amazon: Twenty Years of Scholarly Obscurity. In The Emergence of Pottery: Technology and Innovation in Ancient Societies, edited

by W. K. Barnett and J. W. Hoopes, pp. 115-131. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Roosevelt, A. C., R. A. Houseley, M. Imazio da Silviera, S. Maranca, R. Johnson

1991 Eighth Millennium Pottery from a Prehistoric Shell Midden in the Brazilian Amazon. Science 254:1621-1624.

Roth, W. E. 1924 An Introductory Study of the Arts, Crafts and Customs

of the Guiana Indians. United States Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Rouse, I. B. 1985 Arawakan Phylogeny, Caribbean Chronology, and

Their Implications for the Study of Population Movement. Antropologica 63/64:9-21.

Rye, 0. 1981 Potterv Technology: Principles anid Reconstruction.

Australian National University, Manuals on Archaeology No. 4. Taraxacum, Washington, D.C.

Sanoja O., M. 1979 Las Culturas Formativos del Oriente de Venezuela:

La Tradicion Barrancas del Bajo Orinoco. Academia Nacional de la Historia, Caracas, Venezuela.

Shepard, A. 0. 1976 Ceramics for the Archaeologist. Carnegie Institution,

New York. Simoes, M.

198 1 Coletores-Pescadores Ceramistas do Litoral do Salgado (Para). Boletim do Museu Paraense Emilio Goeldi. No. 78: 1-32.

Steward, J. 1949 South America Cultures: An Interpretive Summary. In

Handbook of South American Indians, vol. 5, edited by J. Steward, pp. 669-772. United States Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

van der Hammen, T. 1974 The Pleistocene Changes of Vegetation and Climate

in Tropical South America. Journal of Biogeography 1:3-36.

Verrill, A. H. 1918 Prehistoric Mounds and Relics of the North West

District of British Guiana. Timehri 5 (3rd Series): 11-20. Willey, G. R.

1971 An Introduction to American Archaeology. South America. Vol. 2. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.

Williams, D. 1981 Excavation of the Barabina Shell Mound North West

District: An Interim Report. Archaeology and Anthropology 2(2): 125-140.

1982 Some Subsistence Implications of Holocene Climate Change in Northwestern Guyana. Archaeology and Anthropology 5(2):83-93.

1992 El Arcaico en el Noroeste de Guyana y los Comienzos de la Horticultura. Prehistoria Sudamericana, edited by B. J. Meggers, pp. 233-251. Taraxacum, Washington, D.C.

1994 Iwokrama: The Commonwealth and Government of Guyana Rain Forest Programme. Guyana Natural Resources Agency, Georgetown.

Wilson, S. 1991 Current Research. American Antiquity 56:149.

Note 1. The Alaka phase comprises three extensive preceramic shellfishing complexes scattered across 3,600 km2 of swamps on the Western Guiana Littoral and representing around 3,000 years of sedentary living. These shellfishers were adapted to contrasting niches located on the edge of the swamps on the lower Aruka, upper Waini, and upper Pomeroon rivers. Commencing around 3300 B.C., the mutual complementarity of their resources permitted their integration in a vast, kin-based trade network, centered on the manufacture of the dugout canoe, which moved strategic rock materials and expertise across the swamp basin and per- haps as far away as Banwari Trace on Trinidad.

Received March 8, 1996; accepted May 28, 1996; revised

July7 5, 1996.