Tribus y Cacicazgos en América Central

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

http://www.jstor.org

Society for American Archaeology

Tribe versus Chiefdom in Lower Central America Author(s): Winifred Creamer and Jonathan Haas Source: American Antiquity, Vol. 50, No. 4 (Oct., 1985), pp. 738-754Published by: Society for American ArchaeologyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/280164Accessed: 18-08-2015 18:36 UTC

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].

This content downloaded from 201.144.58.243 on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 18:36:31 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sam

http://www.jstor.org/stable/280164

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



TRIBE VERSUS CHIEFDOM IN LOWER CENTRAL AMERICA

Winifred Creamer and Jonathan Haas

It has commonly been argued that chiefdoms were the dominant form of prehispanic political organization in Lower Central America. Reexamination of the data base, however, reveals that tribalforms of organization were also present in Lower Central America at the time of Spanish contact and before. The salient characteristics of both tribes and chiefdoms are discussed, and criteria for identifying tribes and chiefdoms in the archaeological record are outlined. Data from the Central Provinces of Panama and the Gulf of Nicoya are then examined in light of these criteria. We argue that while a chiefdom form of organization prevailed in Panama, the Gulf of Nicoya was occupied by tribal groups immediately prior to contact with the Spanish.

Since the initial contact between Europeans and the native inhabitants of Lower Central America, aboriginal groups in the region have been called chiefdoms (Abel-Vidor 1981; Creamer 1983b; Drolet 1984; Ferrero 1977; Healy 1980:338; Helms 1978:124, 1979; Linares 1977:70, 1979:38; Sauer 1966; Stone 1972). However, a reexamination of both the archaeological and ethnohistoric record brings into question the ubiquity of Central American chiefdoms. It would appear, in fact, that the designation of these systems as "chiefdoms" may be primarily attributed to translation of the word cacique as "chief' in reports of the early chroniclers. But cacique is a term adopted by the Spanish from the Arawak-speaking Caribbean islanders (Sauer 1966:6), and by itself is not a useful indicator of a centralized or "chiefdom" form of organization in aboriginal social groups. In this article we offer criteria for distinguishing tribal and chiefdom forms of social organization, and examine the Lower Central American data base in light of these criteria.

There has been some discontent with the use of "stage" or typological models of evolution in anthropology, and by archaeologists in particular (see Dunnell 1980; Plog and Upham 1983; Yoffee 1979). However, most of the criticism is not directed at the stage models themselves but at the uncritical use of the evolutionary stages or types offered by theorists such as Service (1971) and Fried (1967) (see Haas 1982). The stages themselves are not necessarily invalid, although they may be inadequately formulated by the theorists and improperly applied to the archaeological record. Specifically, archaeologists have tried to use the stage descriptions as magical means of "fleshing out" a comprehensive picture of past societies. They decide, for example, that since a particular prehistoric society has some of the characteristics attributed to "tribes" by Service, the society must have had all the other characteristics of Service's tribal level of social organization. This kind of

argumentation is not only unsound, it is academically sterile. If prehistoric societies can have only the attributes of existing, ethnographically defined evolutionary stages, then there is little reason to

study them. It is far more productive to use the archaeological record to expand and revise our

understanding of different stages or types of social organization. At the same time, while the cultural

anthropologist is usually limited to a synchronic descriptive picture of specific stages, the archae-

ologist can go beyond description to the explanation of how and why social systems evolve from one organizational pattern to another.

Transition from a tribal form of organization to a chiefdom, in particular, represents a critical

stage in the evolution of culture, because it marks the emergence of political centralization and discrete social hierarchies. To examine this transition archaeologically, however, we require an accurate identification of "tribes" and "chiefdoms" in the material record of past societies. The models offered below are derived from ethnographic and archaeological analyses of decentralized,

Winifred Creamer and Jonathan Haas, School of American Research, P.O. Box 2188, Santa Fe, NM 87504.

American Antiquity, 50(4), 1985, pp. 738-754. Copyright ( 1985 by the Society for American Archaeology

738



TRIBE VERSUS CHIEFDOM

non-hierarchical tribal-type societies and centralized, hierarchical chiefdoms. The Central American data are then examined in light of what would be expected if the respective prehistoric societies were at a tribal or chiefdom level. Individual criteria used to distinguish tribes from chiefdoms may be arguable, but taken together, they do serve to define different and distinct evolutionary stages.

TRIBES

Within anthropology, the term "tribe" has been used to refer to bounded groups of culturally similar people (Adams 1975; Barth 1969; Friedman and Rowlands 1978; Lewis 1968; Sahlins 1968, 1972; Service 1971; Stewart 1955). (Fried [1975, 1983] has raised questions about the existence of a pre-state "tribal" form of organization. However, his questions are concerned more with the extent to which tribal-type societies are formally bounded and isolated from surrounding social systems than with the existence of pre-state tribes [see Braun and Plog 1982; Haas 1980, 1983; Sturtevant 1983].) The composite units within a tribe, generally consisting of individual communities or extended kin units, are largely independent of one another economically, but politically and cere- monially interdependent (Braun and Plog 1982; Plog and Braun 1984; Sahlins 1968, 1972; Service 1971). Production within the tribal economy is at a subsistence level, with limited surplus production. Existing surplus within a tribe is not centralized at the tribal level, but is concentrated at the level of the household, community, or extended kin unit. Furthermore, the surplus is not used to support labor specialization or labor projects unrelated to subsistence production. Rather, surplus serves in a number of ways to provide insurance or security for the tribe, community, or kin unit. Specifically, it can serve to support the local population in times of resource shortages or periods of non- production (e.g., the off season in the agricultural cycle). It can also be used for exchange purposes in establishing alliance relationships between communities or tribal systems (Braun and Plog 1982; Plog 1983; Upham 1982; Upham et al. 1981). However, since the composite units of a tribe are relatively independent economically, trade and exchange both within and between tribal systems are limited primarily to status goods and nonbasic resources. Finally, surplus at the tribal level can be generated and used to establish and maintain status hierarchies in emergent "big-man" systems (Oliver 1955; Sahlins 1963). With regard to status, while tribes are non-hierarchical, there may be some social "ranking" (Fried 1967) in tribal societies. Some kin units may have higher status than others, and some individuals may attain higher status due to their position in the kin or ceremonial systems or to their skills in craft production, warfare, curing, or some other activity (Service 1971: 121-123; cf. Upham 1982). The tribal system is nevertheless decentralized, and the higher status individuals are neither placed structurally in leadership roles nor assigned responsibility for making decisions for the group as a whole.

In anthropological models of tribalization, tribal organization is seen as being stimulated and perpetuated by continuous conflict or warfare with neighboring groups (Adams 1975:228; Sahlins 1968:17; Service 1971:101-104; see also Carneiro 1970, 1978; Harner 1970:70). Recently, however, Braun and Plog (1982) have questioned the ubiquity of warfare in tribal societies. They have suggested a more general scenario in which different kinds of environmental stress or "risk," including, but not limited to warfare, stimulate tribal formation, and act to maintain tribal organization. Braun and Plog have also argued that tribal polities need not be strictly bounded in the sense that there is no positive interaction with other groups. In place of such impermeable boundaries, they maintain that tribes are characterized by intensified interactions between member units and de- creased interaction with outside groups. Thus, tribal groups would be culturally distinct from their neighbors, but need not be cut off from interaction with the outside world.

Archaeological work on prehistoric tribes is just in the beginning stages, and there is much debate over how tribal forms of organization will be manifested in the archaeological record (Braun 1983; Braun and Plog 1982; Haas 1980, 1983; Hodder 1979; Kristiansen 1982; Plog and Braun 1983; Saitta 1983). However, the general conception of tribal organization discussed above can be used to generate archaeologically testable correlates of tribes. Specifically, a tribe will be manifested in a number of distinct economic and social patterns, including patterns in: settlement, architecture, centralized labor organization, surplus production, storage, specialization, rank, status goods, trade,

Creamer and Haas] 739



AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

boundaries, and stress. The expectable patterns associated with tribal organization are outlined in the second column of Table 1.

CHIEFDOMS

In sharp contrast to the tribal form of organization, chiefdoms are socially and politically centralized societies composed of economically interdependent communities (Adams 1975; Fried 1967; Sahlins 1968; Service 1971, 1975). They are also characterized by clearly defined social hierarchies exhibiting significant differences in status between the upper and lower levels. These status differences are manifested and indeed maintained by the restricted and conspicuous use of sumptuary goods by chiefs and their kin (Fried 1967; Service 1971). Chiefs may also enhance their status through the systematic exchange or trade of sumptuary goods with chiefs from other areas (Flannery 1968; Upham 1982).

While redistribution of resources has been cited as a primary cause of chiefdom development (see Fried 1967; Service 1971, 1975), recent archaeological research indicates that redistribution may be a correlate of chiefdoms but is not a cause of chiefdom formation. It has been proposed that, rather than arising to redistribute resources between environmentally different zones (as hypothesized by Service [1975], for example), chiefs or leaders emerge as "information processors" in the face of population growth and increased social complexity. They are managers of internal

of foreign affairs (Earle 1977; Friedman and Rowlands 1979; Haas 1981; Kristiansen 1982; Peebles 1974; Peebles and Kus 1977). With continued growth in the system, a decision-making bureaucracy coalesces around the chief, and the entire system comes to be organized in an integrated decision- making hierarchy. At the top of this hierarchy, the chief exercises a form of managerial power based primarily on controlling information coming in from different parts of the system (see Earle 1978; Haas 1982:155-171; Peebles and Kus 1977).

In assuming the mantle of leadership in the political sphere of decision-making, the chief also assumes authority in the realm of religion, warfare, communal labor projects, internal exchange, and external trade (Levy 1979, 1983; Peterson 1982; Service 1971). However, production and procurement of basic subsistence resources remain in the hands of the populace, and there is relatively equal access to those basic resources (Fried 1967; Haas 1981,1982). There is some surplus production of resources in the chiefdom and the surplus is placed in the hands of the chief for redistribution, maintenance of the bureaucracy, and support of a small number of craft specialists, who produce sumptuary goods for the chief and the chiefly kin group. Chiefs may also exercise some degree of economic power through the ownership or stewardship of land or water (Earle 1978; Sahlins 1968). But without control over production and procurement of major subsistence resources, a chief lacks a true economic power base and the means for establishing an independent physical power base (a specialized police force or standing army) (Haas 1982:172-182). Successful leadership in a chiefdom is thus dependent on the continued recognition by the population of the legitimacy of the chiefs authority (Fried 1967; Haas 1982; Peterson 1982; Service 1971 ).

More work has been done on the archaeology of chiefdoms than is the case for tribes, with most studies concentrating on the status hierarchies or settlement/subsistence systems (see, for example, Earle 1977, 1978; Levy 1979; Peebles 1983; Peebles and Kus 1977; Pozorski 1980; Renfrew 1972, 1973; Sanders and Price 1968; Steponaitis 1978). As with tribes, there is a more comprehensive set of attributes that can be expected to occur in the archaeological records of prehistoric chiefdoms, including not just status, settlement, and subsistence patterns, but also patterns in surplus production, storage, ceremonial activities, social boundaries, communal labor projects, local exchange, and long- distance trade. Based on both the evolutionary models and the wide range of archaeological analyses, the expected material manifestations of chiefdoms are summarized in the third column of Table 1.

TRIBES AND CHIEFDOMS IN LOWER CENTRAL AMERICA

Mexico and Peru, the centers of prehispanic state formation, have attracted a disproportionate amount of archaeological research in the New World. The wealth of material remains and the large

740 [Vol. 50, No. 4, 1985




architectural constructions first created, then abandoned by human groups in those areas, are cer- tainly the most highly visible evidence of early settlement in this hemisphere.

Intervening regions such as Central America, however, have most frequently been investigated in their role as peripheral to centers of "high culture." The Central American physiography of narrow coastal plains and mountainous interior regions with some high altitude fertile valleys is an ideal area for the development of controls on north-south traffic. We would expect early development of control mechanisms such as boundaries, leaders, and restricted trade, yet attempts to document early population growth and cultural development have been largely unsuccessful (Lange 1971). Further, where new research pushes chronology back in time (Linares and Ranere 1980; Ranere 1975) evidence of early development of political and social structures is puzzlingly absent. Until recently, interest in Central America focused primarily on the "Olmec presence" (Creamer 1983c; Pohorilenko 1980; Snarskis 1981:29; Stone 1977:41), "Maya influence" (Hoopes 1983; Stone 1977: 32, 57, 58, 70), contacts with Mexico (Day and Abel-Vidor 1980; Smith and Heath-Smith 1980; Snarskis 1981:36; Stone 1977:70, 80, 85) and South America (Paulsen 1977; Stone 1977). Investi- gators sought to show Central American development in terms of diffusion from north and south.

While diffusion of specific architectural and decorative elements and particular artifacts may be traced to Central America from other areas throughout the prehistoric sequence, these appear to be a veneer over the autochthonous patterns in which we are interested here. Central American groups developed local styles of metallurgy, distinctive ceramics, and elaborate funerary customs that cannot be traced to outside sources. In some cases, such as those discussed below, distinctive patterns of tribe and chiefdom levels of social organization may be attributable to factors other than diffusion rates.

A number of regions in Lower Central America can be analyzed in light of the tribal and chiefdom models presented above, and the archaeological expectations outlined in Table 1. Two examples are discussed below, one from the Gulf of Nicoya on the Pacific Coast of Costa Rica, and the other from central Panama. Both regions, along with much of Central America, especially the Pacific coast, are widely perceived as areas of chiefdom development during the late prehistoric period. From western Honduras (Ashmore et al. 1982), to Nicaragua (Healy 1980:328), highland Costa Rica (Ferrero 1981:94; Fonseca 1981:111), and Panama (Cooke 1979; Linares 1977), groups have been assigned the rung of chiefdom on the ladder of cultural evolution.

However, many of these assumptions of chiefdom level social organization throughout Central America are based on reports of large nucleated villages ruled by an individual leader, as they appeared to sixteenth-century Spanish explorers (Cortes in Pagden 1971; Las Casas 1875; Oviedo 1976; Vazquez de Coronado 1964). The accompanying assumption, that nucleated villages and individual headmen always indicate chiefdom level social organization, remains undemonstrated. In the cases presented here, early Spanish explorers report that both areas were characterized by caciques at the time of contact, and both have been described as "chiefdoms" in the anthropological literature (see Cooke 1979; Creamer 1983a; Linares 1977). Reexamination of both the ethnohistoric and archaeological sources, however, indicates that while groups in the Central Provinces of Panama were clearly at a chiefdom level, residents of the Gulf of Nicoya appear to have been at a tribal level.

The Central Provinces of Panama

Because chiefdoms have traditionally been considered to be the dominant form of social organization throughout Lower Central America at the moment of European contact, we turn first to one of the clearer prehistoric cases. The Central Provinces of Panama have attracted the attention of curiosity seekers and of archaeologists for well over 100 years (Lothrop 1937:29). However, prior to about 1950, artifacts were most often recovered from tombs (Lothrop 1937:29-32), and only recently have systematic investigations been undertaken (Cooke 1972, 1979; Linares and Ranere 1980). In fact, systematic archaeological survey of a large portion of this region was begun so recently that published results are not yet available.

The data presented here include materials from survey in the Codcle region and around Nata

741 Creamer and Haas]



Table 1. Characteristics of Tribe and Chiefdom Operationalized and Compared with Archaeological Data from the Gulf of Nicoya, Costa Rica, and the Central Provinces of Panama.

Archaeological Correlates Tribe Chiefdom Gulf of Nicoya (GN) Central Panama (CP)

Settlement Pattern

Architecture

Centralized Labor Organization

Surplus Production

Storage

Specialization

Rank

Sites composed of similar constituent units dispersed over a definable region.

No differentiation in residential architecture.

Communal labor projects carried out only at the community or multicom- munity level.

Little surplus production beyond the household or community level.

No communal storage beyond the community.

Possibly some evidence of religious specialization (shamans) and limited specialized production at the community level.

Limited evidence of status difference in burial goods. Continuous range of statuses.

At least two levels of site hierarchy; structurally distinct central place.

There will be some differences in size and quality of residential architecture reflecting status differences.

Communal labor projects carried out at the regional level but no project will exceed the capacity of the bounded population working for a single "off- season."

Intensification of food production to create surplus.

At least some centralized food storage facilities.

Some specialized production, esp. sumptuary goods. Specialized craft production sites associated with central place and storage.

Rank ordered burials with clear status levels.

Sites vary in size but not in structural components; no functional differentiation within sites.

No architectural remains.

No evidence of any communal labor.

No evidence of intensive agriculture or hunting. Pos- sibly fishing surplus.

No storage areas identified.

Some specialized pottery making (Chira) and lithic production (mainland). No central places or storage areas known.

Variation in status indicated by presence and number of grave goods.

At least two distinct types of habitation site; one is regional central place.

Central places were large sites with mounds; elaborate constructions at burial sites.

Erection of stone pillars, mound construction, large graves.

Intensive corn agriculture, deer hunting.

Storage of corn at least at central places. Preserved meat.

Gold-working, polychrome pottery making.

Three distinct ranks of burials, indicated by position of individual, presence of retain- ers, type and quantity of goods.

m

z

=I

o

g

(0

n



Table 1. Continued.

Archaeological Correlates Tribe Chiefdom Gulf of Nicoya (GN) Central Panama (CP)

Status Goods Valuables will be infrequent. Caches or large graves with Sparse remains of valuables, Rich grave goods, caches of deposits representing all imported from outside ceramics, gold, etc., sumptu- valuables removed from the region. ary goods made locally as circulation. well as imported.

Trade Regional Possible localized exchange Possible extensive exchange Extensive regional trade in Concentration of region's

of some subsistence of subsistence and sump- foodstuffs, ceramics, cloth, products at central place. goods. tuary goods. shell beads.

Interregional Possible importation of a Significant import of valu- A few artifacts of ceramics, Substantial commerce in gold few sumptuary goods ables from outside the gold, jade, obsidian im- with Colombia, and in ce- which will be dispersed area; these will be restrict- ported. Found scattered, ramics with Chiriqui. among the populace, not ed to higher status levels in midden, graves, etc. concentrated in any place. of society.

Boundaries Limits marked by physical Will be similar to those Boundary between GN and Distinct boundaries consisted separation, change in ma- around tribe, but more region to the N clearly of sparsely populated lands terial culture, or by con- clearly defined. marked by change in ce- which had less favorable struction of defensive fea- ramics. conditions for farming, fish- tures. ing, salt-making.

Stress Will be indicators that the Similar to tribe, but warfare Some warfare and environ- Constant raiding among tribal unit was exposed to may be more intense. mental stress (overfishing) groups to destroy crops. warfare and/or severe en- at European contact. No vironmental stress at the information on period in time of its formation. which regional alliances

first formed.

0

U m

0

I

m ro m

m m

In 0n



AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

Atlantic Ocean

Nicoy a

o , , 75Pacific Ocean km

Figure 1. Lower Central America and sites mentioned in the text.

(Cooke 1972), and the results of excavations at El Hatillo, which dates to A.D. 1300-1500 (Period VIIB) (Linares 1977:57). Archaeological data from two other sites, Sitio Conte and El Cano, provide important information on settlement pattern, architectural features, corporate labor efforts, specialization, rank, status goods, ceremonialism, and exchange (see Table 1). Both sites were occupied prior to the A.D. 1200-1550 period, which is the focus of the discussion below. Sitio Conte was occupied from A.D. 200-1300, although the main burial area was used between A.D. 500-900 (Linares 1977:77). El Cano was used as a major burial site from about A.D. 500-900, although it continued to support some occupation until after the time of European contact (Cooke 1976). The data from both sites help place the later occupations in perspective by showing the development of chiefdom characteristics in western Code as early as A.D. 500. The continuity from the period of their greatest use to the time of European contact, as well as the proximity of all sites mentioned, suggests that common traditions are represented at all of them.

A number of early explorers give descriptions of sixteenth-century Panama. The travels of Espinosa in 1515, 1519, and 1520 provide details about the settlement and territory of the leader, Nata (Cooke 1979:929-931; Espinosa 1864, 1873; Lothrop 1937:6-8). "Nata" was also the name given a major settlement at the time of contact. This community of Nata was located in Code, close to the archaeological sites mentioned above (Figure 1). It is the best documented of several large villages that dotted central Panama in the early sixteenth century, all of which are believed to have been the central places of regional chiefdoms (see Helms 1979:52, 56, 57, and Figure 6).

Generally, the sixteenth-century accounts of the Central Provinces describe a densely populated region (Cooke 1979:929). Around Nata, for example, "[T]he bohios [huts, dwellings] were so numerous that everyone was astonished and somewhat afraid at seeing so great a population" (Sauer 1966:261). Nata itself consisted of 45-50 dwellings, and its population was estimated at 1500 (Cooke 1979:929). Two types of structures were described, one a circular multi-family dwelling, the others of unknown function.

Archaeological evidence supports the ethnohistoric accounts of a large population and a settlement

744 [Vol. 50, No. 4, 1985




hierarchy of at least two levels. For the period from A.D. 1100-1550, large village sites, similar to Nata (estimated at 4 km2 in area), and large cemetery sites are contemporaneous with habitation sites that are much smaller, more numerous in habitation, and that lack surface architecture (Cooke 1972, 1979). Nata itself consists of artificially constructed mounds surrounding a large open plaza. These mounds, and similar ones found at El Hatillo, a contemporaneous cemetery site, range from 10-20 m on a side and up to 3 m in height (Ladd 1964:24-33). The construction of substantial mounds, large graves, and the placing of basalt pillars at sites of this period and even earlier (Linares 1980:308; Lothrop 1937:31; Verrill 1927a, 1927b), indicate that a certain degree of centralized organization of labor existed by the Late Period (Period VIIB, A.D. 1300-1500).

Such centralization may have extended into subsistence activities as well, in terms of planned emphasis on maize cultivation and on deer hunting. Intensive cultivation, especially of maize, was reported by the chroniclers (Espinosa 1864, 1873; Sauer 1966:126, 281); in addition, deer hunting is hypothesized to have been restricted to high ranking males (Cooke 1978:14). A long history of agricultural production has been suggested by Bennett (1968), based on the antiquity of grasslands and the destructive potential of humanly set fires along the Pacific coast of Panama. Archaeological evidence for intensified production is limited to the fact that these large sites are located in the most fertile alluvial river bottoms. If surplus production were converted to imperishable valuables as has been observed in other areas (Bettinger 1982:109), it is likely that there was substantial surplus of subsistence goods, since large and spectacular grave offerings are known from sites such as Sitio Conte in the Central Provinces (see below, Lothrop 1937).

Storage of foodstuffs was described as sufficient to maintain the arriving Europeans for months. Sauer reports that, "Espinosa's horde lived at ease for four months on stored maize at Nata" (1966: 272), and 300 preserved deer were also observed at the site (Cooke 1979:930; Linares 1977:73). Unfortunately, little excavation has been carried out on the habitational sectors of these sites, so direct archaeological evidence of storage is unavailable (cf. Linares 1980:306-315). It is possible that food was stored in above ground structures, much like modem corn cribs. At Nata, the rectangular structures of unknown use described by Espinosa (Linares 1977:73) may have been such storage structures. Reports of functional differentiation within sites were limited to the observation of structure shapes.

Craft specialization is seen in gold working and in the fabrication of standardized and well- executed polychrome ceramics, which circulated throughout Panama and were important as grave furniture (Linares 1977:58). Gold artifacts were the predominant indicator of rank as described by the early explorers (Helms 1979:16) and as seen in excavated burials (Lothrop 1937:46). Some gold artifacts were produced in central Panama (Lothrop 1937:74 ff.) while others were acquired from as far away as Colombia to the south (Lothrop 1937:77) and Costa Rica to the north (Bray 1981: 166).

The presence of gold and specialist-produced ceramic artifacts in burials at Sitio Conte (utilized from A.D. 200-1300, Linares 1977:57) are emblematic of a clear status hierarchy in the area as early as A.D. 500. At Sitio Conte, Lothrop recovered numerous burials, which he divided into three classes. The largest graves, more deeply buried than the others (approximately 3 m) and oriented to cardinal points, were the most richly furnished. In Grave 26, for example, the burial pit was 3.7 m by 3.2 m, and 2-3 m below surface. The floor was lined with clay and had a large slab positioned in the center. Twenty-one individuals were arranged in prone position in the pit, while the presumed principal individual was seated in the center. Four hundred seventy-five objects were recovered from the grave (Lothrop 1937:269-277), including over 200 ceramic vessels, ground stone tools, shark teeth, stingray spines, a metal bell, and gold, either alone or in combination with bone, ivory, quartz, and emeralds. Intermediate graves were less deeply buried (1.5-2 m), and held one or two extended individuals, accompanied by an average of 40 vessels per burial (Lothrop 1937:48). Grave 43, for example, held a single prone male in a rectangular pit 1.6 m by 1.2 m, and 2 m deep. The interment was accompanied by 17 ceramic vessels, ground stone tools, shark teeth, 98 gold beads, and a gold disk with a human face (Lothrop 1937:294). Small graves were the most shallow (1-1.5 m), containing a single flexed individual accompanied by very few objects. Grave 8 included a single flexed individual, probably male, interred 1.3 m below the surface. No burial pit was noted. Twelve




AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

vessels and three stone artifacts were recovered with the interment. Other small graves held a single flexed individual without grave goods (e.g., Grave 49).

A three tiered social hierarchy is thus clearly reflected in the size of interments, the position of the individual, or individuals, in the grave, and the numbers and types of grave goods included in each tomb. The grave goods correlated with highest status in these burials were gold, especially molded forms (Helms 1979:86), quartz, emeralds, and carved bone and ivory. The middle rank was distinguished by gold artifacts and ornaments of stone, bone, and teeth. Ceramics and stone tools appear to indicate rank by their numbers rather than by their presence or absence.

Except for the ceramics, which were locally manufactured, all the valuables found in the graves were imported into the area. This large scale importation of luxury goods indicates that a major interregional exchange network was in operation at this time. Furthermore, the concentration of large quantities of these sumptuary goods in certain graves points to the accumulation of wealth and differential participation of some individuals in the exchange system. The burial data from Sitio Conte, therefore, fulfill the expectation that leaders in a chiefdom-type society will be involved in a mutually reinforcing exchange relationship with elites from other areas.

The Central Provinces of Panama engaged in interregional trade with Colombia to the south and Chiriqui to the west to acquire gold and emeralds in exchange for ceramics (Helms 1979:143; Linares 1977:74; Sauer 1966:176-177). In contrast, the exchange of foodstuffs between regions is not apparent in the ethnohistoric or archaeological records; rather, the chroniclers specifically describe chiefly territories as well-stocked with food from local sources (Cooke 1979:939).

Centralization of ritual activities is evident in the Central Provinces in the limited distribution of the large mound and clearing complexes seen at large sites such as Nata and El Hatillo. While this evidence cannot be used to infer the presence of a centralized religion headed by a chief, it does correspond to the expected correlation between the office of the chief and the focus of religious activities.

Evidence of boundary formation among central Panamanian groups is mentioned only peripherally by ethnohistoric accounts in comments on the regular spacing between villages (Helms 1979:53), and in the case that a chiefs name designated geographic features presumed by the chronicler to be part of his dominion, e.g., rivers (Helms 1979:39). Archaeological survey elsewhere in Panama suggests that intergroup boundaries may have commonly formed between contemporaneous groups competing for land (Linares et al. 1975). Competition for control of trade in valuables is likely to have occurred, although ethnohistoric accounts describe only competition for land (Cooke 1979: 931, 934).

By the sixteenth century, boundaries appear to have been firmly drawn around territories such as that dominated by Nata. The borders consisted of sparsely populated or unpopulated stretches marked by less favorable conditions for farming, fishing, and salt-making than adjacent lands. Tension between groups was constantly expressed through raiding of crops and fighting for land (Linares 1977:74). A mass burial of 369 individuals recovered by Lothrop at Venado Beach (1954) may also have been a manifestation of conflict.

As a whole, the precontact occupation of central Panama exhibits attributes expected of chiefdoms. The area was characterized by large settlements, limited corporate labor projects, hierarchically ranked burials, and interregional trade in gold that resulted in the accumulation of gold valued at 4,000 gold drachmas (approximately 500 oz.) at Comogre (Sauer 1966:222), and 10,000 gold crowns (the crown was a coin of greater value than the drachma) from the corpse of the leader Paris (Sauer 1966:276). There was also specialized production of polychrome ceramics, which appear to have played a major role as grave furniture. The articulation of trade and hierarchy, greater mobilization of resources, and concentration of valuables in the hands of a limited elite group, fairly clearly indicate that independent chiefdom level groups had formed in central Panama by the time of European contact.

Archaeological Research in the Gulf of Nicoya

Archaeological remains in the Gulf of Nicoya region were first noticed late in the nineteenth century when curiosity seekers began looting sites to acquire artifacts. The region as a whole has

746 [Vol. 50, No. 4, 1985




been popularly known for having a large prehistoric population since that time. Yet archaeological exploration until recently has been confined either to excavation of individual sites of particular interest to one investigator or another (for example, the work on Chira Island by Balser [n.d.] and Stone [1977] and on Toro Island by Baudez [1 967:501) or to salvage efforts by the National Museum of Costa Rica (for example, Vazquez n.d.).

In 1979 an inventory of archaeological sites in the gulf region was begun (Creamer 1984), and in the two succeeding years excavations were conducted on San Lucas Island and on Chira Island (Figure 1) (Creamer 1983a). The sites excavated both date to the Late Polychrome period (A.D. 1200-1550), based on the existing regional ceramic chronology (Baudez 1967; Baudez and Coe 1962; Healy 1980; Sweeney 1975). These excavations provide the data base used in the present discussion.

Eyewitness accounts of the gulf region during the sixteenth century consist primarily of relatively brief observations by a number of passing explorers and travelers, including Andres de Cereceda, Gil Gonzalez Davila, Pedrarias Davila, Francisco Castaneda (all in Peralta 1883), and Thomas Gage (1958). The account of the sojourn of the chronicler, Gonzalo Fernandez de Oviedo (1959, 1976), in Nicaragua and in the Nicoya region is the most detailed eyewitness report, however, and has been widely repeated and quoted by both contemporary and later writers (Herrera y Tordesillas 1934-1957; Lopez de Gomara 1954; Motolinia in Nicaragua 1976; Remesal 1932; Torquemada 1969; Ximenez 1929-1931). Recent analyses of ethnohistoric accounts in neighboring Nicaragua also have provided invaluable comparative material for assessing the events reported for Costa Rica (Abel-Vidor 1980, 1981; Day and Abel-Vidor 1980).

The Gulf of Nicoya

The first specific reference to the area came in 1519, when Andres de Cereceda, treasurer of the first voyage to enter the Gulf of Nicoya, reported twelve "caciques" occupying the shore of the gulf. Unfortunately, Cereceda simply recorded the number of conversions made in the area and the tribute collected. He did not discuss, even indirectly, the nature of native social organization. Following Cereceda, Fernandez de Oviedo visited the Gulf of Nicoya in 1529 and provided a much more extensive chronicle of the area. Oviedo noted that the islands were all populated and fertile (1976:180-181). Though he did not describe the native villages per se, relevant information is obtainable through archaeology. All known sites dating to this period consist of midden heaps with a predominance of mollusk remains. No architectural features have been recovered other than possible post holes, which may indicate the use of lightweight, perishable structures. There is no archaeological or ethnohistorical evidence of communal labor projects anywhere in the Gulf of Nicoya region, although it is possible that-as in some modern situations-fishing, hunting, and mollusk collecting were carried out collectively. Sixteenth-century references to the inhabitants of Chira Island crossing from the island to the mainland to cultivate their cornfields (Castaneda in Peralta 1883:54) may also be an oblique reference to cooperative cultivation, a practice still known in the region.

The diet of the Nicoya residents appears to have been unusually varied according to the archaeological record and Oviedo's accounts. Faunal remains recovered from middens include deer, tapir, rats, paca, peccary, armadillo, numerous birds, fish, and mollusks (Creamer 1983b). Oviedo observed that the inhabitants ate many deer and pigs, which were present in enormous quantities locally, as well as maize, beans, fish, and a variety of other foods (1976:185). Oviedo also noted, for example, "I have found [toads] tied up in the houses of the Indians, and I have seen them eaten roasted; there is no living thing which they refrain from eating, no matter how nasty it is" (1976:186).

At the same time, there is no evidence of surplus in the form of any kind of storage structures, or even large storage vessels. A vessel filled with corn kernels has been recovered from Chira Island, and another was reported from the site of San Vicente on the Nicoya Peninsula. Both vessels were under 30 cm in diameter, and both appear to represent either temporary storage for a household or offerings prepared to accompany an interment. They were recovered from sites having both burial and habitation components, and at San Vicente the vessel was looted from a burial (see Creamer 1984 for further information on the San Vicente site).




AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

Although sixteenth-century chroniclers reported extensive local ceramic production (Oviedo 1976: 182, 543; Peralta 1883:54), the only archaeological evidence of pottery manufacture is limited to one possible ceramic kiln recovered from one site on Chira Island (Creamer 1983a). Most types of flaked and ground stone tools appear to have been fabricated at sites located on the east shore of the gulf, where suitable raw materials were available. No lithic workshop sites have been located in this area to date, however. Overall, there are few indications of specialized production of sumptuary or household resources in the vicinity of the Gulf of Nicoya.

There is some evidence of status differences in the Nicoya region. Archaeologically, burial remains indicate some variation in rank. Most burials contained a single extended individual accompanied by one to three ceramic vessels and occasionally a ground stone axe or serpentine beads. Some contain single individuals, flexed or extended, without grave goods, , e or with a single ground stone axe. However, a single child burial included five vessels, bone earspools, shell beads, pendants fashioned of human teeth, and a gold pendant in the form of an eagle. (Oviedo noted that in

Nicaragua at least, the status of a child's parents influenced the nature of the child's burial [1976: 464].) While a range of statuses is represented by the burial data, separate, consistent classes of burials cannot be defined in the data presently available.

Few valuables were recovered from sites in the Gulf of Nicoya. Aside from the burial materials mentioned, small fragments of obsidian blades, a few fragments of polychrome pottery, broken beads, and one greenstone pendant have been recovered from midden contexts. Together, these artifacts are the only foreign items imported into the region, suggesting that trade was focused predominantly within the region. Such was the situation observed by Castaneda in 1529, when he described the gulf inhabitants as actively employed in trade with the mainland in foodstuffs, wax, cloth, and in shipment of goods and travelers frome gulf the gulfhe shore (Castaneda in Peralta 1883: 54). At the local level exchange seems to have pivoted around the island dwellers' need for tools of hard stone, which were available only on the mainland and yet are recovered on the islands (Chira Island: 64 mano fragments, 38 metate fragments, 12 hammerstones, 25 axe fragments, 3 adzes, 47 cores, 208 tools; San Lucas Island: 10 mano fragments, 81 metate fragments, 5 hammerstones, 11 axe fragments, 3 adzes, 12 cores, 5 used flakes, 7 tools). Furthermore, it would appear that even the infrequent foreign goods (1 greenstone pendant, 1 gold pendant, 2 obsidian blade fragments, 9 serpentine beads, 58 polychrome sherds) came to the gulf via sporadic or highly indirect

exchange routes (Creamer 1983a). Corresponding to the low levels of economic interaction with other areas, a distinct boundary is

manifested between the Gulf of Nicoya region and Guanacaste to the north in the distribution of polychrome ceramics. Sites in these two adjacent areas are quite similar in terms of general layout and material remains during the period from A.D. 1200-1550. However, distinctive polychrome ceramics are found at all the Guanacaste sites and are virtually absent at Gulf of Nicoya sites.

Applique and incised ceramics found in quantity at Gulf of Nicoya sites, in turn, are found infre-

quently on Guanacaste sites (Creamer 1983a). This pattern of ceramic distribution in the period from A.D. 1200-1550 is in sharp contrast to patterns found in earlier periods, when similar types of polychrome ceramics are found uniformly at gulf sites and elsewhere. Thus, it appears that some sort of social boundary between the gulf region and northwest Costa Rica formed in the thirteenth

century and resulted in a marked decrease in circulation of different types of polychrome ceramics. Because there are both archaeological and ethnohistoric indications of conflict between Gulf of

Nicoya residents and people to the north, the apparent ceramic boundary may be due to warfare between gulf residents and groups living to the north. Immigration from the north has been proposed to have occurred along the Pacific coast of Lower Central America in the period from A.D. 1200- 1550 (Lane 1980:87-88), and readjustment of the population may have resulted in intergroup conflict over land or coastline. It has also been suggested that the lands between the Gulf of Nicoya and

Nicaragua to the north were underpopulated compared to the rest of the region (Abel-Vidor 1981:

90-91). This "empty zone" appears to constitute a geographical boundary between competing groups. The archaeological indications of possible boundaries and conflict or warfare in the general region

are supplemented by the ethnohistoric record. When Bobadilla, a Spanish cleric, interviewed natives of sixteenth-century Nicaragua about warfare, they replied that conflict arose over territorial limits

748 [Vol. 50, No. 4, 1985




(Lothrop 1926:50; Oviedo 1976:346). He was also told that the group leader for combat was always an experienced person who was esteemed for his bravery (Oviedo 1976:346).

This latter evidence for warfare also would seem to indicate that there was no structural position of centralized leadership in the aboriginal social system. Oviedo confirmed this indication when he noted that the natives ruled themselves by a council of elders. This native custom was ended by the Spanish who instituted "caciques" on their arrival, after finding it convenient to deal with a single leader as they had done elsewhere (Lothrop 1926:48). This pattern of imposing, or naming, a leader on formerly leaderless native societies is not uncommon in colonial situations (see, for example, Denton 1968; Fried 1975).

Overall, the Gulf of Nicoya lacked the characteristics of a chiefdom. There was an absence of features that could be associated with group labor, permanent leadership, cooperation, significant use of sumptuary goods, or external exchange in the Gulf of Nicoya region during the period from A.D. 1200-1550. Artifacts that may indicate rank or status differences are present, and these may have served as symbols for temporary leaders, alliances, or have indicated trade partners although the volume of long-distance exchange for valuables appears to have been quite small (Creamer 1983a:245-255).

CONCLUSIONS

Looking at the evidence from Lower Central America, one sees that the area is characterized by societies at different levels of political organization. The later occupations in the Central Provinces of Panama have all the expected hallmarks of chiefdom-type societies, and should be analyzed as such. In contrast, the Gulf of Nicoya is marked by an absence of chiefdom characteristics and at least minimal manifestations of a tribal network of interaction. Thus, it seems that the Gulf of Nicoya societies can be described more accurately as "tribes" than as "chiefdoms." The distinction is not just one of semantics, because a focus on the concept of tribal organization reorients research toward egalitarian interaction and cooperation rather than hierarchical decision making. The evolution from one form of organization (regardless of the label assigned to it) to another represents a valuable line of research for archaeologists. In pursuing this line, however, one cannot use isolated pieces of evidence, such as the use of the term "cacique," to infer the concomitant presence of a wide complex of supposedly related social characteristics.

Beyond the implications for the study of evolution, the variation in cultural development in Central America has specific implications for the prehistory of the region as a whole and for its relationship to other areas. In particular, Lower Central America has traditionally been included as a part of Mesoamerica, largely on the basis of the supposed diffusion of such culture traits as agriculture and sedentary village life down to specific tool types (see Kirchhoff 1943). However, the political diversity demonstrated above calls into question any diffusion-oriented hypothesis that includes Lower Central America in the Mesoamerican political sphere (Creamer 1984). Prehistoric Mesoamerica was characterized by large, highly complex states and empires from the first millennium B.C., and lumping the simpler tribes and chiefdoms of Lower Central America together with such complex polities without careful justification may be seriously misleading.

Rather than continuing to hold on to a static and unproductive Mesoamericanist model for Lower Central America, we should be testing new models of social evolution that offer alternative views of Central American societies (see Helms 1979), or alternative paths for social development (Kris- tiansen 1982).

Acknowledgments. With the usual caveats that the final product is our sole responsibility, we did receive a little help along the way. Tom and Shelia Pozorski not only read and commented on the manuscript, but they also served as a great stimulus in getting us to write it in the first place. John Chance also read the original draft and provided the needed perspective of an ethnohistorian. While Morton Fried and Elman Service did not read the manuscript, their work continues to provide a foundation for the evolution of archaeological research. Fieldwork by Creamer in the Gulf of Nicoya was partially funded by the Organization of American States, the Shell Foundation, and Sigma Xi.




AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

REFERENCES CITED

Abel-Vidor, Suzanne 1980 The Historical Sources for the Greater Nicoya Archaeological Sub-Area. Vinculos 6:155-176. 1981 Ethnohistorical Approaches to the Archaeology of Greater Nicoya. In Precolumbian Art of Costa Rica,

pp. 85-92. Harry N. Abrams, New York. Adams, Richard N.

1975 Energy and Structure: A Theory of Social Power. University of Texas Press, Austin. Ashmore, Wendy, Edward M. Schortman, and Patricia A. Urban

1982 The Classic Maya Fringe: Cultural Boundaries in the Southeast Mesoamerican Periphery. Paper presented at the 81st annual meeting of the American Anthropological Association, Washington, D.C.

Balser, Carlos n.d. Data on Chira. Notes in possession of author.

Barth, Fredrik 1969 Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The Social Organization of Cultural Difference. Little, Brown, Boston.

Baudez, Claude F. 1967 Recherches Archeologiques Dans La Vallee du Tempisque, Guanacaste, Costa Rica. Travaux et Mem-

oires de l'Institut des Hautes Etudes de L'Amerique Latine 18. Baudez, Claude F., and Michael D. Coe

1962 Archaeological Sequences in Northwestern Costa Rica. Acts, XXXIV International Congress of Amer- icanists 1:366-373. Vienna.

Bennett, Charles F. 1968 Human Influences on the Zoogeography of Panama. Iberoamericana 51.

Bettinger, Robert L. 1982. Aboriginal Exchange and Territoriality in Owens Valley, California. In Contexts for Prehistoric Ex-

change, edited by Jonathon E. Ericson and Timothy K. Earle, pp. 103-127. Academic Press, New York. Braun, David P.

1983 Social Evolution, Prehistoric Central Midwestern U.S., 200 B.C.-A.D. 600. Draft proposal submitted to the National Science Foundation.

Braun, David P., and Stephen Plog 1982 Evolution of "Tribal" Social Networks: Theory and Prehistoric North American Evidence. American

Antiquity 47:605-625. Bray, Warwick

1981 Gold Work. In Precolumbian Art of Costa Rica, pp. 153-166. Harry N. Abrams, New York. Carneiro, Robert L.

1970 A Theory of the Origin of the State. Science 169:733-738. 1978 Political Expansion as an Expression of the Principle of Competitive Exclusion. In Origins of the State:

The Anthropology of Political Evolution, edited by Ronald Cohen and Elman R. Service, pp. 205-224. Institute for the Study of Human Issues, Philadelphia.

Cooke, Richard G. 1972 The Archaeology of the Western Cocle Province of Panama. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Institute

of Archaeology, University of London. 1976 Panama, Region Central. Vinculos 2:122-140. 1978 Maximizing a Valuable Resource: The White-tailed Deer in Prehistoric Central Panama. Paper pre-

sented at the 43rd annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Philadelphia. 1979 Los Impactos de las Comunidades Agricolas Precolombinas Sobre los Ambientes del Tropico Esta-

cional: Datos del Panama Prehistorico. Actas del IV Simposio Internacional de Ecologia Tropical, pp. 917- 973.

Creamer, Winifred 1983a Production and Exchange on Two Islands in the Gulf of Nicoya, Costa Rica, A.D. 1200-1550. Un-

published Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Tulane University. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.

1983b Faunal Remains as an Indicator of Territory Size for Prehistoric Communities. Brenesia 21. 1983c Costa Rican Trade in Context. Paper presented at conference on Interregional Ties in Costa Rican

Prehistory, Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh. 1984 Archaeological Reconnaissance in the Gulf of Nicoya, Costa Rica. Steward Journal of Anthropology,

in press. Day, Jane, and Suzanne Abel-Vidor

1980 The Late Polychrome Period: Guanacaste, Costa Rica. Paper presented at the 79th annual meeting of the American Anthropological Association, Washington, D.C.

Denton, Robert K. 1968 The Semai: A Nonviolent People of Malaya. Holt, Rinehart, Winston, New York.

Drolet, Robert P. 1984 Social Grouping and Residential Activities Within a Late Phase Polity Network: Diquis Valley, South-

eastern Costa Rica. Steward Journal of Anthropology, in press.

750 [Vol. 50, No. 4, 1985




Dunnell, Robert C. 1980 Evolutionary Theory and Archaeology. In Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, edited by

Michael B. Schiffer, pp. 35-99. Academic Press, New York. Earle, Timothy K.

1977 A Reappraisal of Redistribution: Complex Hawaiian Chiefdoms. In Exchange Systems in Prehistory, edited by Timothy K. Earle and Jonathon E. Ericson, pp. 213-229. Academic Press, New York.

1978 Economic and Social Organization of a Complex Chiefdom: The Halelea District, Kaua'i, Hawaii. Anthropological Papers 63, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan.

Espinosa, Gaspar de 1864 Relacion Hecha por Gaspar de Espinosa, Alcalde Mayor de Castilla del Oro, dada a Pedrarias de Avila,

Lugar Teniente General de aquellas provincias, de todo lo que sucedio en la entrada que hizo en ellas, de orden de Pedrarias. In Coleccion de Documentos Ineditos .. . del Real Archivo de Indias, edited by Joachin F. Pacheco, tomo II, pp. 467-522. Imprenta Espanola, Madrid.

1873 Relacion e proceso quel Licenciado Gaspar Despinosa, Alcalde Mayor, hizo en viaje ... desde esta Cibdad [sic] de Panama a las provincias de Paris e Nata, e a las otras provincias comarcanas. In Coleccion de Documentos Ineditos ... del Real Archivo de Indias, edited by Joachin F. Pacheco, tomo XX, pp. 5- 119. Imprenta del Hospicio, Madrid.

Fernandez de Oviedo, Gonzalo 1959 Historia General y Natural de las Indias. 5 vols. Edicion y estudio preliminar de Juan Perez de Tudela

Bueso. Biblioteca de Autores Espanoles. Atlas, Madrid. 1976 Nicaragua en los Cronistas Indias: Oviedo. Serie Cronistas 3. Fondo de Promocion Cultural, Banco

de America, Managua. Ferrero A., Luis

1977 Costa Rica Precolombina. 2nd ed. Biblioteca Patria, San Jose. 1981 Ethnohistory and Ethnography in the Central Highlands-Atlantic Watershed and Diquis. In Preco-

lumbian Art of Costa Rica, edited by Elizabaeth P. Benson, pp. 93-103. Harry N. Abrams, New York. Flannery, Kent V.

1968 Archaeological Systems Theory and Early Mesoamerica. In Anthropological Archaeology in the Amer- icas, edited by Betty J. Meggers, pp. 67-87. Anthropological Society of Washington, Washington, D.C.

Fonseca Z., Oscar 1981 Guayabo de Turrialba and its Significance. In Precolumbian Art of Costa Rica, edited by Elizabeth P.

Benson, pp. 93-103. Harry N. Abrams, New York. Fried, Morton H.

1967 The Evolution of Political Society: An Essay in Political Anthropology. Random House, New York. 1975 The Notion of Tribe. Cummings, Menlo Park, CA. 1983 Tribe to State or State to Tribe in Ancient China? In The Origins of Chinese Civilization, edited by

David N. Keightley, pp. 467-493. University of California Press, Berkeley. Friedman, J., and M. J. Rowlands

1978 Notes Toward an Epigenetic Model of the Evolution of "Civilization." In The Evolution of Social Systems, edited by J. Friedman and M. J. Rowlands, pp. 201-276. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh.

Gage, Thomas 1958 Thomas Gage's Travels in the New World. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

Haas, Jonathan 1980 Troubles with Tribes: An Archaeological Approach to an Anthropological Problem. Paper presented

at the 79th annual meeting of the American Anthropological Association, Washington, D.C. 1981 Must the Chief Precede the King? Paper presented at the 80th annual meeting of the American

Anthropological Association, Los Angeles. 1982 The Evolution of the Prehistoric State. Columbia University Press, New York. 1983 Tribalization in the Southwest. Proposal submitted to the National Science Foundation, Washington,

D.C. Hamer, Michael J.

1970 Population Pressure and the Social Evolution of Agriculturalists. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 26:67-86.

Healy, Paul F. 1980 Archaeology of the Rivas Region of Nicaragua. Wilfrid Laurier University Press, Waterloo, Ontario,

Canada. Helms, Mary W.

1978 Coastal Adaptations as Contact Phenomena Among the Miskito and Cuna Indians of Lower Central America. In Prehistoric Coastal Adaptations, edited by Barbara L. Stark and Barbara Voorhies, pp. 121- 150. Academic Press, New York.

1979 Ancient Panama. University of Texas Press, Austin. Herrera y Tordesillas, Antonio de

1934-1957 Historia General de los Hechos de los Castellanos en las Islas y Tierra Firme del Mar Oceano. 17 vols. Edited by A. Ballesteros y Berretta and A. Altolaguirre. Academia Real de Historia, Madrid [1601- 1615].




AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

Hodder, Ian 1979 Economic and Social Stress and Material Culture Patterning. American Antiquity 44:446-454.

Hoopes, John W. 1983 Copador, Babilonia, and Mora: Costa Rican Ceramics and the Southern Maya Periphery. Paper pre-

sented at conference on "Interregional Ties in Costa Rican Prehistory," Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh.

Kirchhoff, Paul 1943 Meosamerica, sus Limites Geograficos, Composicion Etnica y Caracteres Culturales. Acta Americana

1:92-107. Kristiansen, Kristian

1982 The Formation of Tribal Systems in Later European Prehistory: Northern Europe, 4000-55 B.C. In Theory and Explanation in Archaeology, edited by Colin Renfrew, pp. 241-286. Academic Press, New York.

Ladd, John 1964 Archaeological Investigations in the Parita and Santa Maria Zones of Panama. Smithsonian Institution,

Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 193. Lange, Frederick W.

1971 Cultural History of the Sapoa River Valley, Costa Rica. Logan Museum of Anthropology, Occasional Paper, No. 4. Beloit College, Beloit, Wisconsin.

1980 Una Ocupacion del Policromo Tardio en el Sitio Ruiz, Cerca de Bahia Culebra. Vinculos 6:81-96. Las Casas, Bartolome

1875 Historia General de las Indias, edited by Martin Fernandez Navarrete et al. Madrid. Levy, Janet

1979 Evidence of Social Stratification in Bronze Age Denmark. Journal of Field Archaeology 6:49-56. 1983 Rank and Religion in Prehistoric Chiefdoms. Paper presented at the 48th annual meeting of the Society

for American Archaeology, Pittsburgh. Lewis, Herbert S.

1978 Warfare and the Origin of the State: Another Formulation. Paper presented at the Xth International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences, New Delhi.

Linares, Olga F. 1977 Ecology and the Arts in Ancient Panama. Studies in Pre-Columbian Art and Archaeology, 17. 1979 What is Lower Central American Archaeology? Annual Review of Anthropology 8:21-43. 1980 La Pitahaya (IS-3) in the Gulf of Chiriqui: Mapping and Excavations. In Adaptive Radiations in

Prehistoric Panama, edited by Olga F. Linares and Anthony J. Ranere, pp. 306-315. Peabody Museum Monographs 5.

Linares, Olga F., and Anthony J. Ranere (editors) 1980 Adaptive Radiations in Prehistoric Panama. Peabody Museum Monographs 5.

Linares, Olga F., Payson D. Sheets, and E. Jane Rosenthal 1975 Prehistoric Agriculture in Tropical Highlands. Science 187:137-145.

Lopez de Gomara, Francisco 1954 Historia General de las Indias. 2 vols. Barcelona [1552].

Lothrop, Samuel K. 1926 Pottery of Costa Rica and Nicaragua. 2 vols. Contributions from the Museum of the American Indian

Heye Foundation 8. 1937 Cocle, an Archaeological Study of Central Panama: Part I. Memoirs of the Peabody Museum of Ar-

chaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University 7. 1954 Suicide, Sacrifice, and Mutilations in Burials at Venado Beach, Panama. American Antiquity 19:226-

234. Nicaragua en los Cronistas de Indias-Siglo XVI

1976 Serie Cronistas 1. Fondo de promocion cultural, Banco de America, Managua. Oliver, Douglas

1955 A Solomon Island Society. Harvard University Press, Cambridge. Pagden, A. R. (editor and translator)

1971 Hernan Cortes, Letters from Mexico. Grossman, New York. Paulsen, Alison

1977 Patterns of Maritime Trade Between South Coastal Ecuador and Western Mesoamerica, 1500 B.C.- A.D. 600. In The Sea in the Pre-Columbian World, edited by Elizabeth P. Benson, pp. 141-160. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C.

Peebles, Christopher S. 1974 Moundville: The Organization of a Prehistoric Community and Culture. Unpublished Ph.D. disserta-

tion, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara. 1983 Moundville: Late Prehistoric Sociopolitical Organization in the Southeastern United States. In The

Development of Political Organization in Native North America, edited by Elisabeth Tooker, pp. 183-198. American Ethnological Society, Washington, D.C.

752 [Vol. 50, No. 4, 1985




Peebles, Christopher S., and Susan M. Kus 1977 Some Archaeological Correlates of Ranked Societies. American Antiquity 42:421-448.

Peralta, Manuel M. de (editor) 1883 Costa Rica, Nicaragua y Panama en el siglo XVI, su historia y sus limites segun los documentos de

archivo de Indias de Sevilla, del de Simancas etc., recogidos y publicados con notas y aclaraciones historicas y geograficas. Libreria de M. Murillo, Madrid.

Petersen, Glenn 1982 One Man Cannot Rule a Thousand: Fission in a Ponapean Chiefdom. University of Michigan Press,

Ann Arbor. Plog, Fred

1983 Political and Economic Alliances on the Colorado Plateaus, A.D. 400-1450. In Advances in World Archaeology, edited by Fred Wendorf, pp. 289-330. Academic Press, New York.

Plog, Fred, and Steadman Upham 1983 The Analysis of Prehistoric Political Organization. In The Development of Political Organization in

Native North America, edited by Elisabeth Tooker, pp. 199-213. American Ethnological Society, Wash- ington, D.C.

Plog, Stephen, and David P. Braun 1983 Some Issues in the Archaeology of "Tribal" Social Systems. American Antiquity 49:619-625.

Pohorilenko, Anatole 1980 The Olmec Style and Costa Rican Archaeology. In The Olmec and Their Neighbors, edited by Elizabeth

P. Benson, pp. 309-328. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C. Pozorski, Thomas

1980 The Early Horizon Site of Huaca de los Reyes: Societal Implications. American Antiquity 45:100-109. Ranere, Anthony J.

1975 Toolmaking and Tool Use among the Preceramic Peoples of Panama. In Lithic Technology, edited by E. Swanson, pp. 173-209. Mouton, The Hague.

Remesal, Fray Antonio de 1932 Historia General de las Indias Occidentales y Particular de la Gobernacion de Chiapa y Guatemala. 2

vols. Biblioteca "Goathemala" de la Sociedad de Geografia e Historia de Guatemala, Guatemala. Renfrew, Colin

1972 The Emergence of Civilization: The Cyclades and the Aegean in the Third Millennium B.C. Methuen, London.

1973 Monuments, Mobilization and Social Organization in Neolithic Wessex. In The Explanation of Culture Change: Models in Prehistory, edited by Colin Renfrew, pp. 539-558. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh.

Sahlins, Marshall 1963 Poor Man, Rich Man, Big Man, Chief: Political Types in Melanesia and Polynesia. Comparative Studies

in Society and History 5:285-303. 1968 Tribesmen. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs. 1972 Stone Age Economics. Aldine, Chicago.

Saitta, Dean J. 1983 On the Evolution of "Tribal" Social Networks. American Antiquity 48:820-824.

Sanders, William T., and Barbara J. Price 1968 Mesoamerica: The Evolution of a Civilization. Random House, New York.

Sauer, Carl 0. 1966 The Early Spanish Main. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Service, Elman R. 1971 Primitive Social Organization: An Evolutionary Perspective. Random House, New York. 1975 Origins of the State and Civilization: The Process of Cultural Evolution. Norton, New York.

Smith, Michael E., and Cynthia M. Heath-Smith 1980 Waves of Influence in Postclassic Mesoamerica?: A Critique of the Mixteca-Puebla Concept. Anthro-

pology 4:15-50. Snarskis, Michael J.

1981 The Archaeology of Costa Rica. In Precolumbian Art of Costa Rica, edited by Elizabeth P. Benson, pp. 15-84. Harry N. Abrams, New York.

Steponaitis, Vincas P. 1978 Location Theory and Complex Chiefdoms: A Mississippian Example. In Mississippian Settlement

Patterns, edited by Bruce D. Smith, pp. 417-453. Academic Press, New York. Steward, Julian H.

1955 Theory of Culture Change: The Methodology of Multilinear Evolution. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

Stone, Doris 1972 Precolumbian Man Finds Central America. Peabody Museum Press, Cambridge. 1977 Precolumbian Man in Costa Rica. Peabody Museum Press, Cambridge.




AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

Sweeney, Jeanne W. 1975 Guanacaste, Costa Rica: An Analysis of Pre-Columbian Ceramics from the Northwest Coast. Unpub-

lished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Pennsylvania. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.

Sturtevant, William 1983 Tribe and State in the Sixteenth and Twentieth Centuries. In Native North America, edited by Elisabeth

Tooker, pp. 3-16. American Ethnological Society, Washington, D.C. Torquemada, Juan de 0. F. M.

1969 Monarquia Indiana. 3 vols. Editorial Porrua, Mexico [1723]. Upham, Steadman

1982 Polities and Power: An Economic and Political History of the Western Pueblo. Academic Press, New York.

Upham, Steadman, Kent G. Lightfoot, and Gary M. Feinman 1981 Explaining Socially Determined Ceramic Distributions in the Prehistoric Plateau Southwest. American

Antiquity 46:822-833. Vazquez de Coronado, Juan

1964 Cartas de Juan Vazquez de Coronado, Conquistador de Costa Rica, edited by Ricardo Ferandez- Guardia. Academia de Geografia e Historia de Costa Rica, San Jose.

Vazquez L., Ricardo n.d. Report on a visit to sites in the Gulf of Nicoya. Ms. on file, National Museum of Costa Rica.

Verrill, A. Hyatt 1927a Excavations in Code Province, Panama. Indian Notes 4(1):47-61. Museum of the American Indian,

Heye Foundation, New York. 1927b The Pompeii of Ancient America: A Vast Settlement Destroyed Centuries Before Christ. The World's

Work 53(3):279-288. Doubleday, Page, New York. Ximenez, Fr. Francisco 0. P.

1929-1931 Historia de San Vicente de Chiapa y Guatemala. Biblioteca "Goathemala" de la Sociedad de Geografia e Historia 1, Guatemala.

Yoffee, Norman 1979 The Decline and Rise of Mesopotamian Civilization: An Ethnoarchaeological Perspective on the

Evolution of Social Complexity. American Antiquity 44:5-34.

754 [Vol. 50, No. 4, 1985



Tribus y Cacicazgos en América Central

Documents

Transcript of Tribus y Cacicazgos en América Central