Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:57:12.688Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cultivation Intensity and Residential Site Structure: An Ethnoarchaeological Examination of Peasant Agriculture in the Sierra de los Tuxtlas, Veracruz, Mexico

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Thomas W. Killion
Thomas W. Killion*
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Agricultural and residential space were integrated in prehistoric lowland Mesoamerica for productive and domestic activities to produce distinctive patterns of settlement and land use visible in the archaeological record. Ethnoarchaeological studies provide information on the behavioral component of site formation in such contexts. Contemporary residential refuse treatment and the use of infield agricultural land are examined here from a sample of farming households in the Sierra de los Tuxtlas of southern Veracruz, Mexico. A model of site structure (the House-Lot model) relates the maintenance of refuse-free (clear area) and refuse-laden (intermediate area) spaces within the house lot to household farming activities outside of the residential lot. Variation in the intensity of cultivation on infield plots is shown to correlate with variability in the size of areas within house lots. This research suggests that the distribution of prehistoric residential debris might be used to diagnose factors of ancient agriculture and settlement in contexts commonly encountered during archaeological excavation and survey.

Este trabajo presenta un modelo de cómo los campesinos contemporáneos utilizan el espacio residencial y cómo este uso del espacio resulta en un patrón regular del sitio habitacional. El modelo, basado en investigaciones etnoarqueológicas en la Sierra de los Tuxtlas al sur del estado de Veracruz, México, llama la atención sobre las diferencias básicas en el uso del espacio habitacional de los solares campesinos tropicales y permite una expansión en nuestro entendimiento de las consecuencias materiales del uso del espacio habitacional fundamental al desarollo de métodos arqueológicos en contextos residenciales en Mesoamérica. El enfoque de la ponencia es la relación observada entre las actividades agrícolas realizadas afuera de la residencia familiar y la distribución espacial de los elementos estructurales y desechos adentro del solar. El modelo solar está compuesto de áreas de actividades domésticas incluyendo el núcleoestructural (los edificios), el árealibre o limpia de desechos alrededor de los edificios residenciales, y el área intermedia de despedicios (dispersos y concentrados) en la periferia del solar. La muestra de familias estudiadas (N = 40) en la región de los Tuxtlas sugiere que el tamaño de estos componentes cambia, en parte, con la intensidad de cultivo de los campos cercanos y los campos lejanos de las familias campesinas. El estudio tiene importancia para la interpretación material de los comportamientos en contextos domésticos actuales y la interpretación del registro arqueológico en contextos similares de las tierras bajas y húmedas de Mesoamérica antigua.

Type
Articles
Information
Latin American Antiquity , Volume 1 , Issue 3 , September 1990 , pp. 191 - 215
Copyright
Copyright © Society for American Archaeology 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Alcorn, J. B. 1984 Huastec Maya Ethnobotany. University of Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar
Andrle, R. F. 1964 A Biogeographical Investigation of the Sierra de Tuxtla in Veracruz, Mexico. Ph.D. dissertation, Louisiana State University. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Bergman, R. W. 1980 Amazon Economics: The Simplicity of Shipibo Indian Wealth. Dellplain Latin American Studies No. 6. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Bernal, I. 1969 The Olmec World. University of California Press, Berkeley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Binford, L. R. 1979 Nunamiut Ethnoarchaeology. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Binford, L. R. 1983 In Pursuit of the Past. Thames and Hudson, London.Google Scholar
Boserup, E. 1965 The Conditions of Agricultural Growth. Aldine, Chicago.Google Scholar
Brookfield, H. C. 1972 Intensification and Disintensification in Pacific Agriculture. Pacific Viewpoint 13:30–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brookfield, H. C., and Hart, D. 1971 Melanesia: A Geographical Interpretation of an Island World. Methuen, London.Google Scholar
Brown, P., and Podolefsky, L. 1976 Population Density, Agriculture Intensity, Land Tenure, and Group Size in the New Guinea Highlands. Ethnology 15:211–238.Google Scholar
Carr, C. 1984 The Nature of Organization of Intrasite Archaeological Records and Spatial Analytic Approaches to Their Investigation. In Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. 7, edited by M. B. Schiffer, pp. 103-221. Academic Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chase, J. E. 1981 The Sky is Falling: The San Martin Tuxtla Volcanic Eruption and its Effects on the Olmec at Tres Zapotes, Veracruz. Vínculos 7(2):53-69.Google Scholar
Chisholm, M. 1979 Rural Settlement and Land Use. 3rd ed. Hutchison, London.Google Scholar
Clark, J. E. 1986 From Mountains to Molehills: A Critical Review of Teotihuacan’s Obsidian Industry. In Research in Economic Anthropology, Supplement 2, edited by B. L. Issac, pp. 23-74. JAI Press, Greenwich, Connecticut.Google Scholar
Clarke, W. C. 1971 Place and People: An Ecology of a New Guinean Community. University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Conklin, H. 1957 Hanunoo Agriculture: A Report on an Integral System of Shifting Cultivation in the Philippines. FAO Forest Development Paper No. 2. United Nations, Rome.Google Scholar
Denevan, W. M., and Schwerin, K. 1978 Adaptive Strategies in Karinya Subsistence, Venezuelan Llanos. Anthropologica 50:3–91.Google Scholar
Deal, M. 1983 Pottery Ethnoarchaeology Among the Tzeltal Maya. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Archaeology, Simon Frazer University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada.Google Scholar
Deal, M. 1985 Household Pottery Disposal in the Maya Highlands: An Ethnoarchaeological Interpretation. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 4:243–291.Google Scholar
Diehl, R. 1989 Olmec Archaeology: What We Know and What We Wish We Knew. In Regional Perspectives on the Olmec, edited by R. J. Sharer and D. C. Grove, pp. 17-32. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Drennan, R. D. 1988 Household Location and Compact Versus Dispersed Settlement in Prehispanic Mesoamerica. In Household and Community in the Mesoamerican Past, edited by R. R. Wilk and W. Ashmore, pp. 273-293. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Dunnell, R. C., and Dancey, W. S. 1983 The Siteless Survey: A Regional Scale Data Collection Strategy. In Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. 6, edited by M. B. Schiffer, pp. 267-287. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Folan, W. J., Kintz, E. R., and Fletcher, L. A. 1983 Coba: A Classic Maya Metropolis. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Fowler, M. 1969 A Preclassic Water Distribution System in Amalucan, Mexico. Archaeology 22:208–215.Google Scholar
Garcia, E. 1970 Los climas del estado de Veracruz. Annales del Instituto de Biología, Universidad National de México, Serie Botánica 41(1):3-42.Google Scholar
Gómez-Pompa, A. 1973 Ecology of the Vegetation of Veracruz. In Vegetation and Vegetational History of Northern Latin America, edited by A. Graham, pp. 73-148. Elsevier Scientific, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Gould, R. A., and Watson, P. J. 1982 A Dialogue on the Meaning and Use of Analogy in Ethnoarchaeological Reasoning. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 1:355–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gunnerson, C. G. 1973 Accumulation of Debris in Cities. Journal of the Environmental Engineering Division (ASCE) 99:229–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haggett, P., Cliff, A. D., and Frey, A. 1977 Locational Models. 2nd ed. Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Harrison, P. D., and Turner, B. L. II (editors) 1978 Pre-Hispanic Maya Agriculture. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Hayden, B., and Cannon, A. 1983 Where the Garbage Goes: Refuse Disposal in the Maya Highlands. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 2:117–163.Google Scholar
Hayden, B., and Cannon, A. 1984 The Structure of Material Systems: Ethnoarchaeology in the Maya Highlands. SAA Paper No. 3. Society for American Archaeology, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
Hiraoka, M. 1986 Zonation of Mestizo Riverine Farming Systems in Northeast Peru. National Geographic Research 2:354–371.Google Scholar
Johnson, A. W., and Earle, T. 1987 The Evolution of Human Societies: From Foraging Group to Agrarian State. Stanford University Press, Stanford.Google Scholar
Kelsay, R. G., Taschek, J. T., and Ball, J. W. 1987 Intrasettlement Space-Utilization and Residual Soil Phosphate Levels in the Upper Belize Valley, Central America. Paper presented at the 52nd Annual Meeting, Society for American Archaeology, Toronto.Google Scholar
Kent, S. 1984 Analyzing Activity Areas: An Ethnoarchaeological Study of the Use of Space. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Killion, T. W. 1987 Agriculture and Residential Site Structure Among Campesinos in Southern Veracruz, Mexico: Building a Foundation for Archaeological Inference. Ph.D. dissertation, University of New Mexico. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Killion, T. W., Sabloff, J. A., Tourtellot, G., Dunning, N. P. 1989 Intensive Surface Collection of Residential Clusters at Terminal Classic Sayil (A. C. 800–1000), Yucatan, Mexico. Journal of Field Archaeology 16:273–294.Google Scholar
Kneebone, R. R. 1988 An Investigation of Prehispanic Community Structure: Matacapan, Veracruz, Mexico. Paper presented at the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Phoenix.Google Scholar
Kramer, C. (editor) 1976 Ethnoarchaeology: Implications of Ethnography for Archaeology. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Lewarch, D. E., and O’Brien, M. J. 1981 The Expanding Role of Surface Assemblages in Archaeological Research. In Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. 4, edited by M. B. Schiffer, pp. 297–342. Academic Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Little, K. L. 1951 The Mende Rice Farm and Its Cost. Revue Congolaise 5:227–273, 371-389. Zaire.Google Scholar
McAnany, P. A. 1986 Lithic Technology and Exchange Among Wetland Farmers of the Eastern Maya Lowlands. Ph.D. dissertation, University of New Mexico. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
McCourt, D. 1955 Infield and Outfield in Ireland. Economic History Review 7:369–376.Google Scholar
Morgan, W. B. 1967 Farming Practice, Settlement Patterns and Population Density in Southeastern Nigeria. Geographical Journal 121:320–333.Google Scholar
Netting, R. McC. 1977 Maya Subsistence: Mythologies, Analogies, Possibilities. In The Origins of Maya Civilization, edited by R. E. W. Adams, pp. 299-333. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Niemczewski, C. 1977 History of Solid Waste Management. In The Organization and Efficiency of Solid Waste Collection, edited by E. S. Savas, pp. 11-24. D. C. Heath and Co., Lexington.Google Scholar
O’Brien, M. J., Mason, R. D., Lewarch, D. E., and Neely, J. A. 1982 A Late Formative Irrigation Settlement Below Monte Alban: Survey and Excavation on the Xoxocotlan Piedmont, Oaxaca, Mexico. University of Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar
O’Connell, J. F. 1987 Alyawara Site Structure and Its Archaeological Implications. American Antiquity 52:74–108.Google Scholar
Rios Macbeth, F. 1952 Estudio geologico de la región de los Tuxtlas, Veracruz. Boletin Asociacion Mexicana de Geólogos Petroleros 4:324–376.Google Scholar
Sanders, W. T., and Santley, R. S. 1977 A Prehispanic Irrigation System Near Santa Clara Xalostoc in the Basin of Mexico. American Antiquity 42:582–588.Google Scholar
Santley, R. S. 1987 A Consideration of the Olmec Phenomenon in the Tuxtlas: Middle Formative Settlement Pattern, Land Use, and Refuse Disposal at Matacapan, Veracruz, Mexico. Paper presented at the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Toronto.Google Scholar
Santley, R. S. 1988 Craft Specialization, Refuse Disposal, and the Creation of Spatial Archaeological Records in Prehispanic Mesoamerica. Paper presented at the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Phoenix.Google Scholar
Santley, R. S., Ortiz C., P., and Pool, C. A. 1987 Recent Archaeological Research at Matacapan, Veracruz: A Summary of the Results of the 1982 to 1986 Field Seasons. Mexicon IX:41-48.Google Scholar
Santley, R. S., Arnold, P. J. III, and Pool, C. A. 1989 The Ceramic Production System at Matacapan, Veracruz, Mexico. Journal of Field Archaeology 16: 107-132.Google Scholar
Schiffer, M. B. 1972 Archaeological Context and Systemic Context. American Antiquity 37:156–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schiffer, M. B. 1987 Formation Processes of the Archaeological Record. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Scudder, T. 1962 The Ecology of Gwembe Tonga. University of Manchester Press, Manchester, England.Google Scholar
Sharer, R. J., and Grove, D. C., eds. 1989 The Olmec and the Development of Formative Mesoamerican Civilization. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Siemens, A. H., Hebda, R. J., Navarrete Hernandez, M., Piperno, D. R., Stein, J. K., and Zola Baez, M. G. 1988 Evidence for a Cultivar and a Chronology From Patterned Wetlands in Central Veracruz, Mexico. Science 242:105–107.Google Scholar
Simoons, F. J. 1965 Two Ethiopian Gardens, landscape. Spring: 15–20.Google Scholar
Soto Esparza, M. 1976 Algunos aspectos climáticos de la región de las Tuxtlas, Veracruz. In Investigationes sobre la regene-ración de selvas altos en Veracruz, Mexico, edited by A. Gómez-Pompa, C. Vasquez-Yanez, S. del Amo Rodriguez, and A. Butando Cervera, pp. 70-111. Campania Editorial Continental, S.A., México, D.F. Google Scholar
Stark, B. L. 1987 Survey Methods in the Proyecto Arqueológico La Mixtequilla: A Comparative Discussion. Paper presented at a conference entitled, Balance y Perspectivas de la Antropología en Veracruz, Universidad Veracruzana, Jalapa, Mexico.Google Scholar
Tourtellot, G., Sabloff, J. A., Smyth, M. P., Whitley, L. V., Walling, S. L., Gallareta N., T., Perez A., C., G. F. Andrews, and Dunning, N. P. 1988 Mapping and Community Patterns at Sayil, Yucatan, Mexico. Journal of New World Archaeology VII(2/3):1-24.Google Scholar
Turner, B. L. II, Hanham, R. Q., and Portararo, A. V. 1977 Population Pressure and Agricultural Intensity. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 67: 384-396.Google Scholar
Vogt, E. 1969 Zinacantan. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Wandsnider, L., and Ebert, J. L. (editors) 1988 Issues in Archaeological Surface Survey: Meshing Method and Theory. American Archaeology 17(1).Google Scholar
West, R. C. 1947 Cultural Geography of the Modern Tarascan Area. Publication No. 7. Institute of Social Anthropology, Smithsonian Institution. Greenwood Press, Westport, Connecticut.Google Scholar
Wilk, R. R. 1983 Households in Process: Agriculture Change and Domestic Transition among the Kekchi Maya of Belize. In Households: Comparative and Historical Studies of the Domestic Group, edited by R. McC. Netting, R. R. Wilk, and E. J. Arnould, pp. 217-244. University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Wilk, R., and Ashmore, W. (editors) 1988 Household and Community in the Mesoamerican Past. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Wylie, A. 1982 An Analogy by Any Other Name is Just as Analogical: A Commentary on the Gould-Watson Dialogue. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 1:382–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar