garden hunting.pdf

8/11/2019 garden hunting.pdf

1/20

"Garden Hunting" in the American TropicsAuthor(s): Olga F. LinaresSource: Human Ecology, Vol. 4, No. 4 (Oct., 1976), pp. 331-349Published by: SpringerStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4602380.

Accessed: 16/05/2014 11:48

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Springeris collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toHuman Ecology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Fri, 16 May 2014 11:48:26 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=springerhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/4602380?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/4602380?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=springer


2/20

Human

Ecology, Vol. 4, No. 4, 1976

"Garden

Hunting"

n the American

Tropics

Olga

F.

Linares1

Using faunal analysis,

this article outlines a coastal mammalian

harvestingpat-

tern

involving

a

few

terrestrialmammals whose

biomass

appears

to have

been

greater when associated with

man

than

under "natural" onditions.

Archeologi-

cal

evidence

suggests

that these animals

fed regularly

on

cultivated

crops

and

were hunted

in

house

gardens

and

cultivated

ields. By

concentrating

he

supply

of both

carbohydrates

and

animal

protein, "gardenhunting" may

have

elimi-

nated

seasonality and schedulingproblems.

And

because

it

artificially

ncreased

the

biomass

of selected

animals,

it

may

have

functioned

as

a

substitute

for

animal

domestication.

KEY

WORDS: hunting;

tropics; faunal collections; coastal

settlements; prehistoric

hunting.

INTRODUCTION

Students

of tropical South

American cultures often draw a

distinction

between

societies located

near important

rivers

and societies

occupying "mar-

ginal" habitats away from

the mainstreams Sauer, 1958;

Cameiro,

1964, 1970;

Lathrap,

1968, 1970; Morey, 1970;

Meggers,1971).

Nonriverinegroupsare con-

sidered to be

agriculturally

mpoverished,as well as

committed, in the absence

of

fishing possibilities, to

the permanent

quest for easily depleted

terrestrial

and

arborealgame. Low

population densities, small

group size, settlement dis-

persal, and

constant

movement are thought to result

from this mode of life

(Carneiro,

1970).

All

nonriverine

peoples were not, however,

necessarilyequally restricted.

NumerousIndiangroups

were encounteredby the first

Europeanexplorersalong

both

American seacoasts,

but

these have

been

discounted or ignored in the

literature, possibly because

these groups were rapidly

decimated (see

Sauer,

1966).

Yet

archeologists

have

repeatedly

shown

that coastal settlements

flou-

Smithsonian

Tropical Research Institute, P.O.

Box 2072, Balboa, Panama Canal

Zone.

331

i

1976

Plenum

Publishing

Corporation,

227

West

17th

Street,

New

York,

N.Y.

10011.

No

part

of

this

publication

may

be

reproduced,

stored

in

a retrieval

system,

or

transmitted,

In

any

form or

by any means, electronic,

mechanical, photocopying, microfilming,

recording,

or

otherwise,

without written

permission

of

the

publisher.

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/20

332

Linares

rished in the tropics from at least 3000 B.C. onward.The subsistencesystem of

these

settlements must have been

very different from those of inland groups. In

fact, terrestrialhunting among these groupstended not toward a broad-spectrum

"many species taken" adaptation

but rather toward greaterspecialization and

selectivity. A prehistoric example of selective hunting by otherwise maritime

groups has been described by Coe and Flannery (1964), while Nietschmann

(1973) has discussed hunting among the present-day turtle-fishing Miskito

Indiansof coastal Nicaragua.

The

garden-hunting attern

I

describe here from a site called CerroBrujo

in Bocas del Toro province,Panama, s also a specialized one and selectivity is

indicated by the archeologicalremains. Rather than resembling ropical forest

hunting, with its particular technology, its belief system, and male-oriented

trekking activities(Siskind, 1973;

Murphyand Murphy,1974), this game-procure-

ment system was more akin to

harvestingvegetable products and maritime re-

sources.

The

contrast

between

animalbiomassunder naturalconditions and biomass

under

gardenhunting

s

marked.

Shiftingcultivation, especially of cultivated root

crops, affects the'biomassof

terrestrialmammals

hat are

behaviorallypreadapted

to

becoming

commensalsof man.

As a kind of mammalian"tending pattern," garden hunting may have

taken the

place of

animal

domestication

n

parts

of the New World

ropics.

Both

patterns

result in the

substitution

of

culturally

created for

naturally existing

mammalian

biomasses.

Even

now, after

the

introduction of bamyard animals

and

cash

crops, garden hunting

remains

a

widespread

and

important practice.

THE

SETTING

Bocas

del

Toro

(hereafter designated

as

Bocas)

is

a

long

and

narrow

prov-

ince located on the northwest

sector of the Isthmus of

Panama, facing

the

CaribbeanSea or Atlantic

Ocean

(Fig. 1). Climatically,

Bocas

is

wet

(The

Af

tropics

in

Koppen's

classification),

with two

very short, relatively dry

seasons.

The mean annual rainfall

averaged

or

5

years

is 3703

mm

(about

148

inches),

with

little seasonal variation and

with most

precipitation falling

at

night,

thus

limiting transpiration.

Topographically,

Bocas

is

characterized

by low, rolling

hills

and

ridges

that extend to

the water's

edge.

There

are neither broad coastal

plains

nor

many

beaches.

The

archeological

site of Cerro

Brujo

is found toward the

tip

of the

small

Aguacate Peninsula,away from majorriversbut accessibleto two lagoons (Fig.

2).

The

"community pattern" represented

is

that

of a

dispersed

hamlet

con-

sisting

of

four

localities marked

by

shell-midden lusters.

Within he

hamlet

unit,

the localities

nearest each other

were 300 m

apart;

the

two

most

distant

were



4/20

"Garden Hunting" in the American Tropics 333

T3

cr

96

z

C4

'S E

'S 0

7 =

E

w

< < M

'IT

Z

3c

C

.C

Cld

U

Cd

CO

QC

CIS

C's

0

-4

...... .

...

..............

.3

co



5/20

334

Linares

Fig.

2.

Looking

into

Almirante

Bay

from a

ridge

on the

Aguacate

Peninsula.

800 m

apart.

We

have calculated

the adult residential

population

at Cerro

Brujo

as

approximately

25

persons

(Linares

and

Ranere, 1971;

Linares,

1970).

The

principal

biotopes

utilized

by

the Cerro

Brujo

and other

Aguacate

inhabitants

an be listed as

follows:

1.

Terrestrial

biotopes: (1) Ridgetops

between the 80

and

140 m

contours

were used for

habitation

and

possibly

for small kitchen

gardens

and

tree

crops.

(b)

The

40 and

80 m

contour was

probably

used for

swidden

fields.

(c)

Streams

flowingthrough

the

base of the

ridgesprovided

the

only sourceof freshwaterand wereprobablyfavoritespots for garden-

ing

and

hunting. (d) Low-lying

swamps

are

used

nowadays

to collect

crabs and to

gatherpalmproducts.

These are difficult

areas o

traverse.

2.

Littoral or marine

biotopes:

(a)

Mangrove tands and mud flats

fringing

the shore were

used for

gathering

wo

species

of

Ostrea,

two

species

of

Arca,

and a

species

of

d7ama.

This

is

also

the

natural

habitatof

the

caiman,

which was

occasionally

hunted.

(b)

From shoreline to

about

2

fathoms,

or

approximately

4

m,

are

coral

outcrops,

barrier

eefs,and

other habitats where most inshore

fishing

took

place.

(c)

Offshore

beyond

2

fathoms

are

found

largerpelagic

fish,

most of

which were

not

taken, suggestingthat the open sea was mostly used for green turtle

fishing

and for

transportation.



6/20

"Garden

Hunting" n the AmericanTropics

335

The bulk of the cultural materials excavated at Cerro Brujo came from

two main

midden clusters

(Fig. 3), representinga brief

occupation.

Five

radio-

carbon

estimates

fall

between A.D.

960 and A.D. 985.

A

20-30

year occupa-

tion accordswell with the time

span

of a

contemporaryGuaymi

hamlet.

Close similaritiesexist between the

oldest of the

CerroBrujoartifacts

and

those

from a number of sites in the

neighboringhighlands

of

Chiriquiprovince

(see Linareset al.,

1975).

I

have suggested

elsewhere

Linares,

n

press)

that the

Cerro Brujo

inhabitantsmigrated to their

peninsular

setting

from landlocked

interiorhabitats.This

hypothesis

is

corroboratedby

the absence of molluscs

in

the

oldest

levels, as

well

as by the close

chronological

and

spatial overlaps.

A thorough surveyof the Aguacate Peninsula n 1973 revealedonly three

additional archeological

sites. These resemble Cerro

Brujo

in

size, layout, and

chronology

(Fig. 4).

Each

site

was made

up

of

several

dwelling ocalities,marked

by shell-midden

efuse

deposits,

found within an area

1.5-2

km in

diameter.

Since

each

loose

cluster

of

localities was separated rom

similar

units

by tractsof un-

inhabited

territory, I am assuming hat

eachcorresponded o a

dispersedhamlet

(what

Young, 1971, calls

a caseri'o

among the modernGuaymi

who inhabit this

area).

These

ancient

hamlets

were

usually located on the highest

ridges of the

Aguacate

Peninsula,at spots with both

lagoons in view. Population

densities over

the

entire

peninsula at

A.D. 900 can

be roughly estimated as no

more than 3

personspersquarekilometer.

Fig. 3.

Aerial

photograph

of

the

principal

Cerro

Brujo

shell-midden cluster in process of

excavation.

(Lower

trench is 10

by

6.5

m.)



7/20

336

Linares

(CA-1,-2, -4).

Except for

a

deforested zone along the only major alluvial areas n

Bocas

(the Changuinola-Sixaola n the west and the Cricamolaon the east), the prov-

ince presentsa mosaic of small clearings n the midst of extensive forested

tracts.

The vegetation

is typically a "dense growth of large, predominantlybroad-leaf

evergreen, rees" (Gordon, 1969: 5) mixed with a few deciduousspecies. Before

proceeding, we must consider in some detail whether the ecology of the

area

today is similar to that of late pre-Columbian imes. (For places referred o in

this discussion,see Fig. 1.)

Scholars have argued quite persuasively that much of the New

World

tropics was heavily populated and extensively cultivated in late prehistoric

times (Gordon, 1957; Sauer, 1966; Dobyns, 1966; Bennett, 1964;

Lathrap,

1970). Some areas, however, were not, and the interfiuvial zone

bordering

AlmiranteBay, including the Aguacate

Peninsula, eems to have been one of the



8/20

"Garden

Hunting"

in the American

Tropics

337

relatively undisturbed regions.2 Given the limitations of the early Spanish des-

criptions of Panama (Howe, 1974:

12-18; Young, 1970), we must

turn

to

archeology for evidence

of

population

distribution and

man-inducedvegeta-

tional changes

at the time of occupation

of

the

Bocas sites.

The shell mounds of Almirante

Bay

and

Chiriqui Lagoon

were first

de-

scribed by

Gordon

(1961),

who

concludes,

in a later

publication,

that the

"shell

collectors must have

been

numerous

.

."

(Gordon,

1969:

67). Although

Gordon'sdescriptionof the Bocas environment

s

invaluable,his archeological

interpretationsmay be misleading.Most of the

shell-middensdescribed

Gordon,

1961: map 2;

1969: map 4, p. 68) are very small. They are not to be taken as

archeological "sites" (i.e., hamlet

clusters

in

this

context),

but

as

dwelling

localities or garbagedumps, to be exact-some of them

associatedwith at most

a

single house. (Thus, while Gordon's

map

indicates nine "sites" in

Aguacate

Peninsula, our

survey shows only four

dispersed hamlets.) Furthermore, hese

localities were

probablyoccupied only for

a

short time. Incidentally, n the

years

between our

excavations

of

Cerro Brujo and

a

systematic survey

of

Aguacate

Peninsula, the

Guaymi Indian family

living

in

the vicinity of our site, much in

the manner of

their ancestors (Linares, 1970),

has

shifted residence

twice,

abandoningan old

house and building two

new

structures.

All

this has

taken

place in 3 years, within a radius of less than 1 km, and is a normalprocedure

in the

developmental cycle of the Guaymi

domestic group (Young, 1971).

There is

little evidence, then, that

in

the

late

prehistoricperiod

Almirante

Bay or its

immediate vicinity was much

more heavily populated or disturbed

by

man than

it

is

now.

This

impression

is

strengthenedby

the

palynological

record.

None of

the

18

samples prepared or

analysis

rom one of the

two cores

collected

from

freshwater

bogs

about

100 m from

the Cerro

Brujo

hamlet con-

tained pollen of

agriculturalplants:

"Pollens

which may indicate

disturbance,

cheno-ams,

composites, Cecropia sp.

and

grasses

are rare in the

samples

ex-

amined ....

With a cursory look such as this it appears that there is

no record

of forest disturbanceby man in the CoreCBII" (West, n.d.: 1), or at least no

record of major

disturbances ver a long period of time.

THE

CERRO

BRUJO

FAUNA: SOMECULTURAL NFERENCES

Over 6000 mammal bones

were

recovered

from

the

shell-containing

(i.e., more recent) of the two occupations

at

the Cerro

Brujo site. These, plus

other

animal

bones,

make

up

15,000

specimens altogether. Grayson

(1973)

has

2A

careful reading of Fernando Colon's

account of

his

father's

fourth

voyage in

1502 (re-

produced

in

Lothrop,

1950: 3-7) conflrms

this point. Although

he mentions

encounter-

ing Indians in

Almirante Bay, the only

places where

he

talks about

towns and many

peoples

are in

Catiba, Zobrare, etc.

These places are

about 200 km to

the

east

of Almirante

Bay,

in

northern

Veraguas province.



9/20

338

Linares

classified the mammals nto 1437 identifiablespecimensbelongingto 14 species

(excluding man) and then calculated

the "minimumnumbers of individuals"of

each species. Keeping in mind that

there are difficulties with this method,3 we

can pi ceed with our analysis.

Table

I

suggests

that the Cerro

Brujo nhabitants

had strong hunting preferences

for

certain species. Agouti (Dasyprocta punc-

tata), paca (Cuniculus paca),

and nine-banded armadillo

(Dasypus

novem-

cintus) together constitute 80.9%

of all

animals aken. Four argespecies-collared

peccary

(Tayassu

tajacu), white-lipped

peccary

(Tayassu

pecari),

white-tailed

deer

(Odocoileus virginianus),

brocket

deer

(Mazama mericana)-are less impor-

tant, amounting o 10.1%of the total. The rats (Sigmodon,Oryzomys,Hoplomys)

and the

opossums (Caluromys,

Marmosa)together add up to only 6.8% of the

total

number

of minimum

individual

mammals.The manatee (Trichechus

man-

atus), an aquaticmammal, s only 1.9%of the total.4

Table

I

may convey

the

impression

that

small

mammalswere

the

only im-

portant components of the Cerro

Brujo diet; however, any such impression s

dispelled

if

we convert

these

values

to

butchered

weights (Table II) and

add up

the

values for

the

samespecies

as

grouped

above.Conversion o butcheredweights

changes

the

percentages

onsiderably,

and

t is

obvious

that in

reckoning

"cultural

importance"both measuresare

needed to drawconclusions.5 The two methods

become more disparatewhen the smaller (or the larger)animalsare compared.

This

is

exaggerated

n

the case

of

agoutisand manatees.

Both of these animals

were

probably equal in importance:

the

caviomorph

rodents

(agouti

and

paca)

were

important

for

regular

consumption

and the manatee for intermittentcon-

sumption.

Whether

heir

combined

presence

is

calculated

in

individual

numbers

'The

minimum

numbers

method

(MNI

for short) determines

the

necessary

number

of

in-

dividuals

of a

species

accounting

for all

identical

bone

elements

found

in a

given

collec-

tion.

Using

the Cerro

Brujo

fauna, Grayson (1973)

demonstrated

that

the

MNIs

vary

significantly

depending

on the

analytic units

used

for

the calculations.

He

compared

MNIs

calculated

on the basis

of single excavation

strata

with

MNIs

calculated

on the

basis

of

the

whole site. Neither of these alternatives is entirely satisfactory. Therefore, White (n.d.),

at my

request,

reanalyzed

the Cerro

Brujo fauna

and calculated

MNIs

on the basis

of

nine

"features"

representing

activity loci

within

a dwelling locality.

As expected,

he came

out

with

more

accurate

values,

halfway

between

those

obtained

by Grayson.

Nonetheless,

since both

methods

yielded

a

similar rank

order

for

the most

important

species,

I

have

used Grayson's

MNI

figures

based

on the

single

strata distinctions

because

these

figures

are

published,

and because

I

consider

them to be the less distorting

of

the alternatives

he

presents.

Skeptics

should keep

in mind

that differential

bone

preservation,

distribution,

and

destruction,

to say

nothing

about differences

in

cultural practices

(hunting

techniques,

taboos,

food

preferences),

necessarily

affect a-ll

faunal analysis-as

indeed they

affect

all

kinds

of prehistoric

reconstructions.

4R. White (n.d.)

recalculated

the

percentages

for

each of these species

clusters

as (a) 7

3.8%;

(b)

16.8%;

(c)

7.4%; (d)

0.9%.

He

is also

of

the

opinion

that, of the two,

only

the collared

peccary was present in the Cerro Brujo fauna. This strengthens the thesis of this article.

5White

(n.d.)

would

rank

the

most important

species

by

butchered

weight in

the

following

order

of

decreasing

mportance:

Tayassu,

Odocoileus,

Cuniculus,

Trichechus,

Dasyprocta,

and Dasypus.

This rank

order strengthens

the argument

that

small mammals

were

not the

only

ones

taken

by

the

Cerro Brujo group.



10/20

"Garden Hunting" in the American Tropics

339

Table I. List

of

Mammals Hunted by

the

Prehistoric Cerro Brujo Inhabitantsa

Number of Minimum

Species English name specimens

numbers Percent

Dasyproctapunctata Agouti

822

204 43.8

Cuniculus aca Paca

224

104 22.3

Dasypusnovemcintus

Nine-banded armadillo

186

69 14.8

Tayassu ajacu Collared peccary

94

27 05.8

Sigmodon Cotton rat

28

16 03.4

Odocoileusvirginianus

White-tailed

deer

20

14

03.0

Oryzomys

Rice rat 16 11 02.4

Tayassu

ecari

White-lipped peccary 15 4 00.9

Hoplomys Armored rat

8

3 00.6

Didelphis narsupialis Opossum

5

1 00.2

Mazama mericana

Brocket deer

3 2

00.4

Caluromys Woolly opossum

2

1

00.2

Marmosa Mouse opossum 1 1 00.2

Trichechusmanatus Manatee 13 9 01.9

Total 1437 466

aAdapted

from

Grayson (1973:

Table

2, p. 436).

Table

II.

Comparison

of the Minimum Number

of

Individualsa

with the Butchered

Weight

of the

Most

Important

Mammals

at Cerro

Brujo

Minimum

Butchered

weights

number

of

Species

individualsb

Kilograms

Pounds

Percent

of

total

Agouti

43.8 556

1224

16.7

Paca 22.3 709 1560 21.3

Nine-banded armadillo

14.8 219 483 06.6

Collared

peccary

5.8 490 1080

14.8

Cotton rat

3.4 4.09 9 0.12

White-tailed

deer 3.0

382 840

11.5

Rice rat

2.4 1

2.4

0.06

White-lipped peccary

0.9 91

200

2.73

Opossum

0.2 9

90 0.27

Woolly opossum

0.2

3.6

8

0.10

Mouse

opossum

0.2


11/20

340

Linares

Table

III.

Comparison

of the Butchered

Weights (i.e., meat

without bones) of the

Terrestrial Fauna

Hunted

by

the Cerro

Brujo

Inhabitantsa with the

Fauna

Hunted

by

the Miskito Indians

of

Nicaraguab

and the

Bayano

Cuna Indians of

PanamaC

Cerro Brujo Miskito area

Bayano Cuna

Species

hunted

(20-year span) (1-year sample) (14-day sample)

Agouti 16.7 Insignificant

Agouti

Nine-banded

armadillo 06.6 Not mentioned

Insignificant

Paca 21.3 Insignificant Paca

Manatee 24.6 1.5%

(Not here)

Collared peccary 14.8 0.61% Collared peccary

White-tailed deer 11.50 45.0% Not important

White-lipped peccary 2.73 50.0%

White-lipped peccary

Brocket deer

1.09

0.30% Brocket deer

Tapir

None

2.0%

Tapir, plus

two kinds

of

monkeys, coati,

tree

squirrels

aValues

expressed

as

percentage

of

total butchered

weights

of

all minimum

number

of

individuals

of

all

species

in

the

collection.

bData

adapted

from Nietschmann

(1973:

Tables

1

and

2).

CData adapted from

Bennett

(1962: Table 6, p. 42).

(1.3%) or in butchered weights (3.9%), deep-forest

species such as the brocket

deer and the

white-lippedpeccary

are seen

to have been

insignificant.

A

further

comparison

can be

made

(Table III)

between the butchered

weights

in the

Cerro

Brujo

mammal

sample

and the

butchered

weights given

for the same

species

hunted

by

the

coastal

Tasbapauni

Miskito

Indiansof eastern

Nicaragua (Nietschmann, 1973;

I

have

extrapolated

the

information from his

Tables 21 and

22).

The

last column

in

Table

III of this

article

simply

lists the

terrestrialmammals

hunted

by

the

mainland,noncoastal,

Bayano

Cuna of

eastern

Panama Bennett, 1962: Table 6, p. 42). Although few hard

and fast

conclusions

can be drawn from Table III, the comparativedata do support the idea that

Cerro

Brujo

inhabitants

harvested a different

proportion

of

a faunal

community

than

did

the other

groups.

The abundant

species

at

Cerro

Brujo

are of

little

im-

portance

to

the

Miskito

Indians.In

turn,

the

Bayano

Cuna

regularly

hunt

a

num-

ber of additionalmammalian

pecies.

To

summarize,hunting among

each

of

these three

peoples,

the

Bayano

Cuna,

the

Miskito

Indians,

and the

prehistoric

Cerro

Brujo group,

differs

greatly.

The

Bayano

Cuna

exploit

the

high canopy,

as well as the

deep forest,

for

game.

On

the

other

hand,

the

coastal

Tasbapauni Miskito are maritime

exploiters,

partly

as a result of

the

commercial

demand

for turtles.

Although they

hunt

a number

of

other

species, they

focus

on

only

two

large

terrestrialmammals

(the white-lipped peccary

and the

white-tailed deer),

which they track inland

during

a

specified

season. In

the

Cerro

Brujo case,

a

considerable

amount of

game

was

provided by

six

species (Table III),

but

only

three

species

were

regu-



12/20

"Garden

Hunting

in the American

Tropics

341

n 4

cn

AO

0

'C

0

u

E

C)

C)

11 ;

E

w

0

00 C>

cn

cn

eq

P',

0

0

z

0

00

oq

0

0

W;

C;

C>

0

U

S v

73

0

0

CA

w

C) CD

C)

4)

(O

C)

-4

C)

C)

E -S

:3 W)

vt

0

C)

Z

0

0

CA

00

C)

C)

C4

M

n

C

W)

cl

W)

0

-0

CA

1.0

W

rl-

CD

cn

E

'-t

-4

"

%D

0

-,

0

I--,

0

-4

tn

-4

%O

tn

00

r

0

0

0 0

."

'O

w

C:

-

q

m

W)

0

0

1-4

oq

00

0

o

0

0

cq C)

>..

ZZ

o

tz-, t cq

-

+.-

ON

0

u

0

o

r-

00

tn

0

0

0

0

ts

w

>

en

00

tn

--I

tn

eq

C)

%C O

%OCD

r

o

o

Z

C

00

C:)

o

00 cq O C) eq C) u ON -

4-4

CD

en

r-

%O

m en

%O

0

-.4

4.4

-0

0

00

eq

%O

4n

oo

4.4

00

en

00 00

00

..4

6.4

C)

ON

IOJ

m

J:,.

=

E0

Cd

w

C,; C;

t,;

r4

0

cd w

Ca

4-4

6-4

0

0

w

ON

r-

404 6-10

I",

C.-4

CA

rA

0

w

0-4

coi

0

4.

O

.2

04

0

4.4

-5

0C-3 Irk)

413

cj ct

w

bo

Cd

p

Zs

8.

,

l:L

t3 lu



13/20

342

Linares

larly caught

(see Table I). An idea of just how

much terrestrialgame was being

taken is provided

by the next comparison.

Faunal

assemblages rom archeological

sites are assumed by faunal ana-

lysts to represent

the products of cultural selection

-

samples that are biased

under human hunting pressures.

Rarely, however, has anyone

attempted to

measure just

how far a cultural faunal assemblage

departs from

"normal" spe-

cies

distributions

n

undisturbedhabitats.

In the

present case,

we

can rearrange

the data on

Table I and calculate

the biomassof the terrestrial

animals in the

Cerro Brujo collection.6 This

procedure may

facilitate comparisonbetween

a

"cultural faunal assemblage"and the same assemblage n two "natural," i.e.,

undisturbed,

habitats(Table IV).

Table

IV

suggests

that

the

biomass

for

every species represented

in the

collection

is

significantlyhigher

in

our site than

is their

biomass in

nature. The

propositionmay be entertained

that the product of 20 years

of casual hunting

is somehow equivalent to having

recovered

a complete sample of

all

the indi-

vidual animals

of a certain species

found in each of two "natural"

habitats at

any one point

in time. This proposition

is

obviously very difficult

to test. None-

theless, Table

IV givesus some relative dea of

"cultural"vs. "natural"biomass:

(1) The percentage biomasses

of

the three

most common species

in our Cerro

Brujo collection (agouti, paca, and armadillo) together amount to 52.9% of

the

total.

In

the

Surinam

situation,

the

figure

for the same

species

is

12.7%.

In

BarroColorado Island (BCI) it

is

19.4%,

assuming hat

the

biomass

for

Dasypus

is

more

or

less

the same as

in

Surinam.

(2)

The

collared

peccary

alone

accounts

for

21.68%

of the Cerro Brujo biomass,

while it

is

only 3.5%

of

the total

in

Surinam and

3.5%

in

BCI. (3)

The

biomass

of white-tailed

deer at Cerro

Brujo

was much higher

than at

BCI

(compare

19.5

5%

with

0.6%).

If

we

now take into consideration

the full data

presented

by Eisenberg

and

Thorington

(1973)

for all

terrestrialand

arborealmammalian

species (the

bats

excepted)

in Surinam

and

BCI,

and

compare

these with those

for our

faunal

collection

of

mammals,

we see that

at those two

localities

not one of

the

most dominant mammals

in

terms

of

biomass) appears

n our

collections.

This

suggests

that

the Cerro

Brujopeople

were

being extremely selective,

or that

they

did not

develop appropriatehunting techniques.

They

seem

to

have been

ignor-

ing many

of tl'e

following

common

animals:

(1)

the two-toed sloth

(Choleopus

sp.)

and

the three-toed

sloth

(Bradypus sp.); (2) monkeys

of

several

genera

(Cebus,Ateles, Alouatta,

etc.); (3) tapir (Tapirus sp.); (4)

the

spiny

rat

(Pro-

echimys sp.),

one

of the most

abundant

of the New World

tropical

rodents

'I have used

Eisenberg

and Thorington's 1973) method for calculatingbiomass. This in-

volved multiplying the numbersof individualanimalsby the live weight of an "average"

adult specimen and

then

calculating he percentage

biomass of each

species

in

the

Cerro

Brujo collection. The difficulties with using average-weights re illustratedby

the

fact

that Eisenbergand Thorington(1973: Table 1, p. 152) and Nietschmann 1973: Table

20, p. 165) presentslightlydifferent ive weightsfor the samespecies.



14/20

"Garden

Hunting"

in

the

American

Tropics

343

Cd

>

CZ

cl

7:$

Cd 0

+.,-

lt

U

-4

>

Cd

cl

ci

4

:

:z

0

Cd

ct

0

C,

Cd

4.1

Cd

4.1

VD

cl

cl

O

Cd

Cd

CZ

0

0

M 0

Ct

z

>

cd

cld

cld

0

m

U

4)

C)

U

(L)

to

+--

-

00

00

lr

$..4

.

z

cti

cri

C6

04

cts

Cd

Cld

Cd

4--j

C13

O

cd

7:1

C)

>

03 Cd

04 cl

C's

0

C--.4

4

r.

=

C6

0

=

=S

-4

C)

C14

0

VI

C)

cn

05

0

CA

C4

w

0

0

0

x

x

cl

CIS

t4-4

W5

w

C13

1-4

0

-4

4-1 cn

0

0

C-)

Q

Cld

Cd

(D 4

'A

0)

Cts

40

bo

40.

0 0

C)

Cd (D

6

C4M

:

V

.2

4'

C's

-t:3

to

0

0

CIS

0

1-4

0

Cd

Cld

0

Cd

C)

Co

Cj

:1

0

41

C's0 0

Cq

Cd

z

z

z

C

z

M

0

P",

C)

cn

t3

-4

Cld

7:1

Cd

cl

4-A

"Cl

(L)

0

4.1

j

...q

U

0

t3

4

u

;3

N

Cd

0

CZ

-11

9L4

L)

1:13

45



15/20

344 Linares

(Gliwicz, 1973); (5)

the

coati (Nasua sp.),

as

well as

squirrels Sciuridae)

and

raccoon (Procyon).

The absence of these

animals n our collection cannot be due

to

simple

deforestation or

game depletion. As

I

have

indicated,

one

must

assume

that the land was at least as

forested

then as it is

now. Furthermore, ome

of

these animals,e.g., coatis, would

have

flourished n

second growth.

By compiling

a

list of

the main

behavioral

traits of terrestrial

mammals

appearing n our

Cerro Brujo collection (Table V), and consideringthe

habits

and

habitats

of

the

mammals

that

do

not

appear n the refuse

of

this site, we

can see two

things.

The most

abundant animals

present

are either smallish

ani-

mals that live in the underbrushor in burrows, often in the vicinity of encamp-

ments or

recently cleared

fields

(the caviomorphrodent and armadillo),or

larger

forms

that

are not too

shy

and live

-

or

can

live

-

in

forest-edgeconditions (the

collared

peccary

and the white-tailed

deer).

The mammals

missingaltogether

or

poorly represented

are

either

those that inhabit

the

high canopy (monkeys,

sloths)

or

those

that

are fast

climbers coatis,

squirrels)

or

those

that

are

veryshy

and

live in forested conditions

away

from man

(the brocket

deer and

the

tapir).

In short, althoughlargeforest tractsmust have existed

in Bocas

at that

time, the

Table

VI.

List

of

Fish, Amphibians, and

Reptiles from Cerro Brujoa

Minimum

Species Colloquial name numbers Percentage

Megalops-Albula Tarpon 6 2.2

Belonidae Needlefish

7 2.6

Centropomus

Snook

53 19.3

Serranidae

Grouper (sea bass)

53 19.3

Carangidae

Jack

21

7.7

Lutjanus

Snapper 38

13.9

Haemulon Grunt

10 3.6

Sparidae Porgies

3

1.1

Sciaenidae Drums (corvina) 1 0.4

Sparus

sp.

Parrotfish

4

1.5

Eleotridae Gobies 3

1.1

Kyphosus

Rudderfish 1

0.4

Sphyraena

Barracuda 6 2.2

Diodontidae

Porcupine

fish

16

5.8

Rays Rays

5

1.8

Sharks Sharks

2

0.7

Anuran

Frogs

7

2.6

Crocodilian Caiman

5

1.8

Geoemyda Forest turtle 1 0.4

Chelonidae

Sea turtle 19

6.9

aAdapted

from a list

by Wing (n.d.).

The minimum number of in-

dividuals

is

given only

for the

most recent of

the

two

occupations.



16/20

"Garden Hunting" in the

American Tropics

345

CerroBrujo inhabitants were concentrating on species that live in forest-edge

conditions

and

readily nvademan-made

learings.

Evidence

supporting he idea

that

this

specializationwas

facilitatedby the

presence of alternativeprotein sources from

the sea

is

given in Table VI.

The

total

minimum

number

of individual

ish, reptiles,

and

amphibians

n Table

VI,

having

been

calculated

on

a

differentbasis from

that of

Grayson

1973), although

on

the same basis as that of

White

(see

footnote

4), appears

o be smaller

han

that

of mammals.But marine

fishing

may

have been

even

more

important

han

terrestrialhunting (White and

Wing, personal

communications).

In

fact, Cerro

Brujo people were capable of

taking

in

large, and sometimes

dangerous,

aquatic

organisms.Themost common ediblespeciesin TableVI (Centropomus, erranid,

carangid,

Lutianus) also grow very

large. Missing

from

the collection are

the

open-water

pelagic

fish that

swim

rapidly,

such

as

the

tuna

and the

mackerel.

The

mostcommon

fish

species

n

the collection occur nshore

and can be

harvested

with traps and

spears. Such harvesting

accords well

with the absence of all fish-

hooks and net

weights

in

the Cerro

Brujo deposits.

If

trapsand

spearswere

the

most

common

fishing gear employed

(WingandRubinoff,

personalcommunica-

tions),

then the

techniquesemployed for

getting

protein

on land and

in

the

sea

were

probably

much the same. It is

also important to note the

scarcity of

birds

in

our

collection (less than

20 bones; Grayson,

personal

communication)and

the

total

absence

of

arboreal

reptiles

such

as

iguanas

and lizards

(Rand, personal

communication).

CONCLUSIONS

For

inferringman-induced

vegetational

changes in the areas

around the

Cerro Brujo encampment, and

reconstructing

huntingpractices,

we

can contrast

mammalian

pairs

ound

in

our collection

(see Fig.

5).

In

the

tropics,

as

elsewhere,

speciesof the samefamily haveevolvedcontrastingmorphologiesand/orbehavior

and

occupy

different ecological

niches.

Comparing

the

popularity

of related

species n the

collections

is

a usefulmethod

for

inferringpast

conditions:

1.

The

white-lipped vs. the collared

peccary:

The

first does not

occur

(White, personal

communication),

or

occurs

in

very

small numbers

(Grayson, 1973),

in our collection.

The reason for this

may be

that

the

white-lipped(although

it travels

in

huge

packs)

is also

more

dangerous,

especially

to

hunters

without

guns,

and

cannot be

caught

in

traps.

Further, a pack

needs a largehome range

andprobablya large

forest.

In

contrast, the

collared peccary

travels

n small

packs,

is more

peaceful,

needs

smaller

territories,

and

is

used to

living

n

disturbedconditions. It

readily

eats

cultivated

crops.

Collared

peccariesalso do well

as semi-

domesticates

of man.



17/20

346

Linares

B

G

Fig.

5. Most

important

mammal

ter-

restrial

species

at

Cerro

Brujo.

(A)

Mazama

americana

(brocket

deer);

(B)

Dasyproctapunctata

agouti);

(C)

Cuniculus

paca

(paca);

(D)

Dasypus

novemcintus

nine-banded

armadillo);

(E)

Tayassu ajacu

collared peccary);

(F)

Tayassu

ecani

(white-lipped

pec-

cary);

(G)

Odocoileus

virginianus

(white-tailed deer).

Drawings

by

M.

H.

Moynihan.

F



18/20

"Garden Hunting" in the

American

Tropics

347

2. White-tailed

deer vs. the brocket deer:

The open brush and grassland

species (Odocoileus)

was almost

seven

timesmore

popular

at CerroBrujo

than the small, crepuscular,

olitary, shy, forest-dwelling

brocket

deer

(Mazama).Because

the white-taileddeer

can withstand

heavy harvesting

by man,

it

was probably

one of the

few

large species

that could

be

hunted

near home,

in

cleared

and

cultivated

fields.

3.

The

agouti and

the paca

were hunted

in CerroBrujo

in

numbers dis-

proportionate

to their natural biomass

(Table IV).

As

N.

Smythehas

observed (personal

communication),

the ratio of one

species

to the

other in our collections (roughlyfour times as many agoutisas pacas)

conforms to their

natural

densities;

he

agouti,

however,

s more diurnal.

Smythe's suggestion that

the Cerro Brujoinhabitantsmust

have been

using snares

and traps, which

are effective

day

or

night,

conformsvery

well to hunting practices

as reconstructed

from

artifactual

evidence.

Furthermore,

hese caviomorph

odentseat all sorts

of cultivatedplants,

including rootcrops

and fruits. They

live

under

tree trunks and

inside

rotten logs (Smythe,

1970).

The

perfect

environment or them

is the

sort found,

for example,

in the slashed and mulched

fields

of the

Guaymi of Bocas;because

of the constant rains,these

fields are burned

but

infrequently.

For

additional inferences on

hunting practices,

we have noted the

total

absence

in

our collection

of

monkeys, sloths,

and climbing species (such as

squirrels

and coatis). The likelihood

that the

Cerro Brujo group did

not use

projectile

weapons (blowguns,

arrows, etc.) with

which

to

fell animals in

the

higher

canopy

is

increasedby

the

fact that these items are missing

in

our

ex-

cavations.

But such

negative

evidence

is

inconclusive, especially

since the hunt-

ing gear

employed today by a tropical

forest

group is normallymade

entirely

of

perishable

materials.

As I have previously suggested,the CerroBrujo people probablyorigi-

nated

inland.

Two

main shifts

in

hunting

were

made

once these groupsmigrated

to

the

coast. Onewas

to

a smallrange

of terrestrial nimals, he other to marine

ani-

mals.

The new terrestrialhunting

adaptation that

was devisedand is represented

at Cerro

Brujo

s

what

I

have called

"garden

hunting" because

in all likelihood

it took

place

in and near cultivated

fields and

house gardens.7In this dual

sys-

tem, animal protein

and carbohydratesare

spatially concentrated and

their

Gardenhunting

s

still the predominant

orm of

huntingamong

many nland South Amer-

ican groups,

including the Guaymi

and Cuna Indians of Panama.The Chiriqui

Guaymi

until recently pole-fencedtheir root crops,and built hutsin theirmaize-bean ields, where

they stayed

overnight

o hunt (J. Bort, personal ommunication).

Among

the islandCuna,

who hunt on the mainland,

guarding rops

is such an important unction

of the hunt that

a man can

freely kill animals n another

man's field (Gonzilez, personal

ommunication),

while he

cannot even touch

the other man's crops

without complying with

elaborate

accessrules(Howe and Sherzer,

1975).



19/20

348

Linares

abundance

vis a vis each

other

is

regulated.By

reducingseasonalityand schedul-

ing problems, gardenhunting

was analogous to,

and

may

have

even

substituted

for, actual animal

domestication.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The Cerro Brujo excavations

were financed by a grant

from the National

Science Foundation (NSF-Gr-2846).

Besides myself as

principal nvestigator,a

number of colleaguesand students participatedin the project. Among them I

should

like

to

mention Dr. Anthony

J.

Ra-nere archeologist),

Dr.

Philip Young

(ethnographer),and MissE. Jane

Rosenthal,Miss reneBorgono, and Mr. M'aximo

Miranda,all graduate students now.

Special thanks

are owed to

Dr.

DonaldK.

Grayson, who

did

the initial

mammalian dentifications, and

to Mr. Richard S.

White, Jr., who reanalyzed the data.

Dr. Elizabeth

Wing identified the fish,

reptiles, and amphibians,

and

Mr. James West analyzedsome of the palyno-

logical cores.

I should like to thank Wing, White, and

West for permission to

refer

to theirunpublishedreports.

This

article

has been

enriched

by

the comments of

my colleagues

at the

Smithsonian TropicalResearch Institute, namely Drs. MartinH. Moynihan,A.

Stanley Rand,Ira Rubinoff,

Neal G. Smith, and most specially

Nicholas Smythe.

Data on the modern Guaymi have

been kindly provided by

Mr. John Bort and

on

the San Blas Cuna

by

the

second

chief

of

Niatuppu-Tikantikki,

Mr.

Gonzalez.

REFERENCES

Bennett, C.

F. (1962). The Bayano Cuna

Indians, Panama: An ecological

study of liveli-

hood

and diet. Annals of

the

Association

of American Geographers

2(1): 32-50.

Bennett, C. F. (1964). Human

Influences

on the

Zoogeography f Panama. bero-Ameri-

cana,

Vol. 51. University of California Press, Berkeley, 112 pp.

Carneiro, R.

L. (1964). Shifting cultivation

among the Amahuaca

of

eastern Peru. Volker-

kundliche

Abhandlungen

Hanover)

1: 9-18.

Carneiro, R. L. (1970).

Hunting

and

hunting magic among

the

Amahuaca

of

the

Peruvian

montala. Ethnology

IX(4):

3

31-34

1.

Coe, M. D., and Flannery, K.

V. (1964).

Microenvironments and Mesoamerican

prehistory.

Science

143:

650-654.

Colon, F.

(1502).

Vida del

Almirante

Don

Cistobal

Col6n,

escrita

por

su

hijo,

Hernando

Colon (see Lothrop,

1950).

Dobyns, H.

F. (1966).

Estimating aboriginal American

population: An appraisal of tech-

niques with a New

Hemispheric

estimate. Current

Anthropology 7(4): 395-416.

Eisenberg, J.

F., and Thorington, R. W.

(1973). A preliminary analysis of a

neotropical

mammal fauna. Biotropica 5(3):

150-161.

Gliwi-ez, J. (1973). Characteristics of a population of

Proechimys semispinosus

(Tomes,

1860)

-

A

rodent

species

of

the

tropical

rainforest.

Bulletin de l'Academie

Polonaise

des Sciences Cl. 1.XXI-6:

413-418.

Goldman, E. A. (1920).

Mammals of Panama. Smithsonian

Miscellaneous

Collections

69(5).



20/20

"Garden

Hunting" in

the

American Tropics

349

Gordon,B.

L. (1957). Human

Geography

nd

Ecology

in

the

Sinu

Countryof Colombia.

Ibero-Americana,

Vol. 39.

University

of

California

Press, Berkeley,

117

pp.

Gordon,

B. L. (1961). Notes

on the

Chiriqui' Lagoon

District and

adjacent

regions

of

Pan-

ama

II.

Mimeographed

report, Department

of

Geography,

University

of

California,

Berkeley,

28

pp.

Gordon,

B. L. (1969).

Anthropogeography

and

rainforest

ecology

in

Bocas

del Toro

pro-

vince,

Panama.

Mimeographed

report,

Department

of

Geography,

University

of

California,

Berkeley,

99

pp.

Grayson, D. K.

(1973). On the

methodology

of faunal

analysis.

American

Antiquity 38(4):

432-438.

Howe, J. (1974).

Village political

organization

among

the

San Blas Cuna.

Ph.D. disserta-

tion,

University

of

Pennsylvania.

Xerox,

University

Microfilms,

Ann

Arbor, Mich.,

442

pp.

Howe, J.,

and Sherzer,

J. (1975).

Take and tell:

A

practical

classification from the San

Blas

Cuna.

American

Ethnologist2(3):

435-460.

Lathrap,

D. W.

(1968). The

"hunting"

economics of

the

tropical

forest zone of

South

America:

An

attempt at

historical

perspective. In

Lee, R. B.,

and De

Vore, I. (eds.),

Man, the

Hunter,

Aldine,

Chicago, pp.

23-29.

Lathrap, D.

W. (1970).

The

UpperAmazon.

Praeger,

New York.

Linares, 0. F.

(1971).

Cerro

Brujo,

a

tiny

Guayml

hamlet of the

past.

Bulletin of the

Uni-

versityof

Pennsylvania

Museum13: 27-35.

Linares, 0.

F. (in

press).

Adaptive strategies

in Western

Panama.

Paper

presented at the

Smith-

sonian

Institution

Conference on

Biogeographic

Approaches to

Archeology, May

1974,

Washington, D.C. World

Archaeology.

Linares, 0.

F., and

Ranere, A.

J. (1971).

Human

adaptations

to the

tropical forest of

wes-

tern

Panama.

Archaeology

24(4): 346-355.

Linares, 0. F.,

Sheets, P.,

and

Rosenthal, E. J.

(1975).

Prehistoric

agriculture

in tropical

highlands.

Science

187:

137-145.

Lothrop, S.

K. (1950).

Archaeology of Southern

Veraguas,

anama.

Memoirs

of

the

Pea-

body Museum

of

Archaeology

and

Ethnology,

Harvard

University, IX(2):

4-7.

Mendez, E.

(1970).

Los

Principales Mamiferos Silvestres de

Panama.

Imprenta

Barcenas,

Panama City.

Meggers, B.

J. (1971). Amazonia: Man

and

Culture

in a

Counterfeit

Paradise.

Aldine, Chicago.

Morey, R. V.

(1970).

Ecology and culture

change among

the

Colombian

Guahibo. Ph.D.

dissertation,

University of

Pittsburgh.

Xerox,

University

Microfilms, Ann

Arbor,

Mich.

1973.

Murphy,

Y.,

and

Murpihy, R.

F. (1974). Women

of

the

Forest.

Columbia

University

Press,

New

York.

Nietschmann,B. (1973).

Between

Land and Water:

The

Subsistence

Ecology of the

Miskito

Indians, Eastern Nicaragua. Seminar Press, New York.

Sauer, C.

0. (1958).

Man in

the ecology

of

tropical

America.

Proceedings

of

the

Ninth Paci-

fic Science

Congress, 1957, 20:

105-110.

Sauer, C.

0.

(1966).

The

Early Spanish

Main.

University

of

California

Press,

Berkeley.

Siskind, J.

(1973). To

Hunt

in the

Morning.

Oxford

University Press,

New

York.

Smythe,

N.

(1970).

Ecology

and behavior of

the

agouti

(Dasyprocta

punctata)

and

related

species

on

Barro Colorado

Island. Ph.D.

dissertation,

University

of

Maryland.

Walker,

E.

P.

(1968).

Mammals

of

the

World, Vols.

I

and II. Johns

Hopkins Press,

Baltimore.

West, J. (n.d.)

Progress report

of pollen

analysis of

core CBII

from Cerro

Brujo, Bocas

del

Toro,

Panama.

Typescript,

3

pp.

White, R.

(n.d.) Notes on a

re-analysis of

the Cerro Brujo

Fauna. Typescript,

20 pp.

Wing,

E.

(n.d.)

Use

of

aquatic

resources at Cerro

Brujo (CA-3).

Typescript,

9 pp.

Young, P. D.

(1970). Notes

on the

ethnohistorical evidence

for

structural

continuity in

Guaymf society. Ethnohistory 17(1-2): 11-29.

Young,

P.

D. (1971).

Ngawbe:

Tradition nd

Change

Among the

Modern

Guaymiof Wes-

tern

Panama.

University of

Illinois

Studies in

Anthropology,

No. 7, Urbana.

garden hunting.pdf

Documents

Transcript of garden hunting.pdf