Specialized Shell Object Production at Teopantecuanitlan Site, Guerrero, México

Reyna Beatríz SOLÍS CIRIACO & Guadalupe MARTÍNEZ DONJUAN MUNIBE (Suplemento/Gehigarria)Suplemento - Gehigarria nº nºXX 00 XX-XX 000-000 DONOSTIA-SAN DONOSTIA-SAN SEBASTIÁN SEBASTIÁN 2010 2003 D.L. ISSN SS-XXX-201 XXXX-XXX0X

KEY WORDS: Mexico, Teopantecuanitlan, shell, production, manufacture. PALABRAS CLAVES: Mexico, Teopantecuanitlan, shell, production, manufacture. GAKO-HITZAK: Mexico, Teopantecuanitlan, shell, production, manufacture.

Reyna Beatríz SOLÍS CIRIACO(1) & Guadalupe MARTÍNEZ DONJUAN(2)

ABSTRACT In the area of Teopantecuanitlan, located in the east-central region of Guerrero, the most ancient and abundant shell collection corresponding to the Mesoamerican formative period (1200-600 BC) has been recovered. Most of this material derives from the Pacific Ocean shores, and in less quantity from the Mexican Gulf and from rivers on the slope of the Pacific Ocean. Un-modified molluscs, pieces in process of work and finished objects have been identified. Through the use of experimental archaeology and the observation of the various modifications with optical microscopy (OM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM), it was possible to deduce the techniques and tools used for its production, which should have been concentrated in one or in a few workshops controlled by the rulers of the site.

RESUMEN En el sitio de Teopantecuanitlan, ubicado en la región centro-este del estado de Guerrero, se ha recuperado la colección de concha más abun- dante y antigua de Mesoamérica correspondiente al Periodo Formativo (1200-600 a.C.). Dicho material procede en su mayoría de las costas del Océano Pacífico, en menor cantidad del Golfo de México y de ríos de la vertiente del Pacífico. Se identificaron moluscos no modificados, piezas en proceso de trabajo y objetos terminados. Mediante el empleo de la arqueología experimental y la observación de las diversas modificaciones con microscopía estereoscópica (MO) y electrónica de barrido (MEB), fue posible inferir las técnicas y herramientas utilizadas para su producción, la cual debió ser concentrada en uno o pocos talleres controlados por el órgano de poder.

LABURPENA En el sitio de Teopantecuanitlan, ubicado en la región centro-este del estado de Guerrero, se ha recuperado la colección de concha más abun- dante y antigua de Mesoamérica correspondiente al Periodo Formativo (1200-600 a.C.). Dicho material procede en su mayoría de las costas del Océano Pacífico, en menor cantidad del Golfo de México y de ríos de la vertiente del Pacífico. Se identificaron moluscos no modificados, piezas en proceso de trabajo y objetos terminados. Mediante el empleo de la arqueología experimental y la observación de las diversas modificaciones con microscopía estereoscópica (MO) y electrónica de barrido (MEB), fue posible inferir las técnicas y herramientas utilizadas para su producción, la cual debió ser concentrada en uno o pocos talleres controlados por el órgano de poder.

1. INTRODUCTION although they could be products of external trade which worked as status symbols for the elite Since the Mesoamerican formative period (Drucker 1981:31). (1200-600 BC), there was contests between indivi- An example of social stratification can be duals and groups for acquiring and expanding found in one of the most ancient Mesoamerican their prestige and power, the development of a settlements, Teopantecuanitlan, a site with Olmec more centralized government and a less egalita- characteristics, located in the center-fold region of rian social structure were already in place. Such the modern state of Guerrero (fig. 1), inside the aspects were related with the inherited kinship Valley of the Copalillo District and close to where system and social stratification (Clark 1994:192). the Mezcala and Amacuzac rivers converge and A potential power source to display prestige give birth to the Balsas river (Martínez Donjuan and social hierarchy were the prestige goods. 1994:145). According to 14C dating, its occupation Most of those goods are characterized for having extends between 1200 and 600 BC (Martínez been exotic or restricted circulation materials, Donjuan 1995:60).

(1) Address: Av. Morelos # 27. Arcos del Alba. Cuautitlán Izcalli, Estado de México C.P. 54750, México. e-mail: [email protected], and/or rey- [email protected] (2) Adress: Centro INAH-Morelos, Matamoros #14. C.P.62440, Col. Acapatzingo, Cuernavaca, Morelos, México. e-mail: [email protected] 36 REYNA BEATRÍZ SOLÍS CIRIACO & GUADALUPE MARTÍNEZ DONJUAN

Figure 1. Localization of Teopantecuanitlan (a) and Balsas River (b).

It is from this Mesoamerican site where one of the most ancient malacologic collections has been recovered with 785 pieces (140 whole objects and 645 fragments). These specimens were found modified to serve as exotic and restricted access prestige goods.

2. ARCHAEOLOGICAL MATERIAL The malacological material was recovered at different excavation stages. The material is com- posed of unworked shells (fig. 2), specimens corresponding to diverse phases of the production process (fig. 3), and finished objects (Solís 2007) (fig. 4). The molluscs used in this site derive mostly from the Panamic Province, 83% of the total collection; while 1.5% came from the Caribbean

Province, 14% came from fresh water rivers, and Figure 3. Evidence of production. finally there are 1.5% non-identified molluscs. The distribution of the shell materials in the site is interesting, because 97.46% of the objects were

Figure 2. Unworked Pinctada mazatlanica. Figure 4. Finished object of Pinctada mazatlanica

MUNIBE Suplemento - Gehigarria xx, 2010 S.C. Aranzadi. Z.E. Donostia/San Sebastián Specialized Shell Object Production at Teopantecuanitlan Site, Guerrero, México 37 recovered at the main structure of the site, namely the access of the site to the coasts, especially the the Ceremonial Precinct located in the Unit A (fig. Guerrero state beaches. Large amounts of molluscs 5). In the same unit, the rooms located at the south in sites along the Balsas River indicate it served as a of the Ceremonial Precinct, the South Terrace and conduit for trade and communication. the tombs share the most representative molluscs like Pinctada mazatlanica, Strombus galeatus, Spondylus princeps and Chama echinata, as well 3. OBSERVATION TECHNIQUES AND MANUFAC- as Cittarium pica, Pleuroploca gigantea and the TURING PROCESSES Anadara and Mercenaria genders, which were The methodology of the technological analysis found in different stages of production. is based on the results of “Proyecto de arqueolo- In contrast with the concentration of recovered gía experimental en materiales conquiológicos” objects in the Ceremonial Chamber; Unit B and and “Proyecto de técnicas de manufactura del Unit C have fewer shell objects, with the 1.61% México prehispánico”, both under direction of and the 0.95% respectively. Pinctada mazatlanica, Adrián Velázquez (2007). Strombus galeatus, Spondylus princeps, Chama In the first project there is an experimental echinata, Knefastia howelli, Lyropecten subnodo- workshop where more than 600 modifications of sus, Hexaplex erythrostomus, Thais triangularis the archaeological shell objects are reproduced and Patella mexicana came from the Panamic (fig. 6) (abrading, cuts, holes, incisions, polishing Province, whereas four Crucibulum scutellatum and brightening), using tools and techniques refe- specimens, recovered at Structure 6 of Unit B, rred in codexes and historical documents, or data came from the Caribbean. recovered from archaeological contexts. In the The strategic location of Teopantecuanitlan near second project, the traces of manufacture are the Balsas River could enable this community to analyzed comparing them with archaeological control or influence the acquisition of molluscs spe- specimens in three levels: macroscopic, using an cies from the Pacific Ocean at the coasts of West optical microscope at 10x, 30x and 63x and with Mexico to the sites of Central Mexico. The exercise Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) Jeol JSM- of that control is a logical assumption based upon 6460lV, in High Vacuum mode (HV), Secondary Electron Imaging (SEI), 20 kV of energy, and 100X, 300X, 600X and 1000X of magnification. Also, we follow one experimental archaeology postulate that goes: “the different work processes, tools and materials produce prints and characteristics that can be distinguished from each other” (Velázquez & Melgar 2006:4; Velázquez 2007:2), that is why the employment of a particular tool, made of a specific material, used in a specific manner and under certain circumstances will leave uni- que and differentiable features (Velázquez 2007:15).

Figure 5. The site of Teopantecuanitlan. Figure 6. Experimental abrading with andesite.

MUNIBE Suplemento - Gehigarria xx, 2010 S.C. Aranzadi. Z.E. Donostia/San Sebastián 38 REYNA BEATRÍZ SOLÍS CIRIACO & GUADALUPE MARTÍNEZ DONJUAN

4. RESULTS with a soft material similar to the leather employed For the analysis of manufactured objects, both, in the experiments. the Pinctada mazatlanica (29 whole objects and As we can see, a series of choices made in a 418 fragments) and Strombus galeatus (6 comple- systematic manner through the different stages of te and 27 incomplete) pieces were selected. The the operation chains by the craftsmen in charge of choice was based on two criteria, the abundance object production, indicate that tool usage is cons- of this two species within the site in archaeological tant throughout the Teopantecuanitlan site. times (74.48% of the assemblage) and the number It is also important to consider the contextual of modifications on these particular species occu- location of the objects, most of the production evi- rred during the process of manufacture. The results dence can be found concentrated in an specific of the handwork print analysis on the surface of the 100m2 area within the North Square in the specimens obtained through the archaeological Ceremonial Chamber. The objects in production allowed us to identify the homogeneity and stan- and the tools and techniques of the finished dardisation in both techniques and tools. objects were found in tomb contexts and placed in In respect to the abrading of the outer and the architectural structures of the site, as evidence medium layer of the shells, such as the regulariza- of the regulation of the production of shell objects tion of the mollusc surface, at 30X very well defined and the creation of standardized tools occurred lines on the surface were observed (fig. 7), at 100X during production within the site. there are wavy appearance flat bands of 64 µm wide (fig. 8), which correspond to andesite carving Thus so, the tools related to the material, which tools, coinciding with the ones found on by the were located in the vicinity of the shrine, andesite, archaeological pieces; such tool was also used to and obsidian flakes and blades, as well as chert give the objects a specific shape and to regularize nodules, corroborate the analysis results. the edges formed by cutting. The edges observed at 30X show well marked 5. SHELL OBJECT SPECIALIZED PRODUCTION parallel lines (fig. 9), while at 600X they exhibit AT TEOPANTECUANITLAN parallel lines of 0.8 to 1.3µm, coinciding with the Teopantecuanitlan shell objects may be consi- experimental prints produced with obsidian flakes dered as prestige goods. Leaders in the region (fig. 10). At 30X holes are characterized as having control the production and distribution of this smooth surfaces with scarcely visible features (fig. objects to increase or extend their political power 11), however at 1000X they show a rough surface (Brumfiel & Earle 1987:3). with straight lines of 1.3 to 2.0µm, diagnostically characteristic of the employment of chert powder In this way, the elite members consciously and animated with a vegetal reed (fig. 12). Finally, at strategically employed this specialization in order 30X the finishes are characterized by a fine and to promote and maintain social inequity, strengthe- shiny surface (fig. 13), at 600X they exhibit flat and ning and consolidating their political coalitions, as straight bands of 4.0-5.0µm with interior lines of well as founding new control institutions over pres- 0.41µm, features experimentally left by a chert tige goods elaborated by specific producers atta- nodule and a polishing (fig. 14), possibly made ched to the centralized power (ibidem).

Figure 7. Experimental abrading surface of Pinctada mazatlanica (a) and archaeological one(b).

MUNIBE Suplemento - Gehigarria xx, 2010 S.C. Aranzadi. Z.E. Donostia/San Sebastián Specialized Shell Object Production at Teopantecuanitlan Site, Guerrero, México 39

Figure 8. Experimental abrading with andesite (a) and archaeological one (b), both at 100X.

Figure 9. Experimental edge (a) and archaeological one, (b) both with parallel lines at 30X.

Figure 10. Experimental edge with obsidian flakes (a) and archaeological object (b) at 600X.

Figure 11. Experimental hole (a) and archaeological bead (b), both with smooth surface.

MUNIBE Suplemento - Gehigarria xx, 2010 S.C. Aranzadi. Z.E. Donostia/San Sebastián 40 REYNA BEATRÍZ SOLÍS CIRIACO & GUADALUPE MARTÍNEZ DONJUAN

Figure 12. Experimental hole with chert powder (a) and archaeological one (b).

Figure 13. Experimental polishing (a) and archaeological one (b), both with fine lines and shiny surface.

Figure 14. Experimental polishing with chert nodule (a), and archaeological one (b).

The privileged sector controlled not only the Given the evidence, there are diverse archaeo- consumption, but intervened in the acquisition of logical markers which provide data about speciali- raw materials, tools and production. This produc- zation, production and producers, as well as the tion had to be highly concentrated or centralized, work prints on manufactured products, the pieces whether in one or a few workshops within the site, in different phases of production, and also the pro- even possibly within the ceremonial shrine, where bable tools employed, all of them placed in certain craftsmen guilds who elaborated these goods were locations. Namely, the standardisation and homo- under strict supervision of the power core organ, geneity within the processes and tools (abrading therefore casting specific dictated techs formatted with andesite grindstones, cutting with obsidian fla- by tradition or cultural preferences (Brumfiel & Earle kes and blades, drilling with chert powder and 1987:1-5; Clark & Parry 1990:298; Costin 1991:25). polishing with chert nodules); this evidence allows

MUNIBE Suplemento - Gehigarria xx, 2010 S.C. Aranzadi. Z.E. Donostia/San Sebastián Specialized Shell Object Production at Teopantecuanitlan Site, Guerrero, México 41 us to define a centralization of the production units DRUCKER, P. and a stricter control over the distinct stages of the 1981 “On the nature of olmec polity”. In: Benson, E. P. (ed.): The Olmec and Their Neighbors, Essays in Memory of manufacturing process (Velázquez 2007:3). Also, Matthew W. Stirling, Michael D. Coe and David Grove, this pattern of production controlled by the elite Organizers, Benson, E.P (ed.), Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collections, Trustees for Harvard members was identified in Tenochtitlan (Velázquez, University, Washington, D.C.: 29-48. 2007) and Xochicalco (Melgar, 2009), analyzing the manufacturing traces as we did. In contrast, EMERY, K. & AOYAMA, K. there are other studies in elite contexts at Piedras 2007 “Bone, Shell and Lithic Evidence for Crafting in Elite Maya Negras and Aguateca, Guatemala, where the Households at Aguateca, Guatemala”. Ancient Mesoamerica 18: 69-89. authors proposed the same production but by analyzing the use-wear traces of the tools, unfortu- MARTÍNEZ DONJUAN, G. nately, they could not distinguish the tools emplo- 1994 “Los Olmecas en el estado de Guerrero”. In: Clark, J. ed.): yed on shell or bone (Emery & Aoyama, 2007; Los olmecas en Mesoamérica. El equilibrista México, Aoyama, 2007). Turner Libros Madrid, México: 143-163. 1995 “Teopantecuanitlán”. Arqueología Mexicana, II (12): 58-62. In short, these evidences can be considered as a specialized production markers made by depen- MELGAR TÍSOC, E. R. dant craftsmen, under a close and strict govern- 2009 La producción especializada de objetos de concha en ment control, which demands this kind of goods to Xochicalco. Master, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, México. establish and maintain the social inequity inside the Preclassic site of Teopantecuanitlan. SOLÍS CIRIACO, R. B. 2007 Los objetos de concha de Teopantecuanitlan Guerrero: Análisis Taxonómico, tipológico y Tecnológico de un Sitio 6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS del Formativo. Bachelor, Escuela Nacional de Antropología e Historia, México. We give a special thanks to archaeologists Adrián Velázquez Castro, Emiliano Melgar Tísoc, VELÁZQUEZ CASTRO A. & MELGAR TÍSOC E. R. the biologists Norma Valentín and Belem Zuñiga, 2006 “La elaboración de los ehecacozcatl de concha del the engineer Antonio Alva, and finally Ana Laura Templo Mayor de Tenochtitlan”. In: López Luján L., Carrasco D. & Cué, L. (eds.) Arqueología e historia del Solís, Victor Manuel Solís, Victoria Stosel, Bruce Centro de México, Homenaje a Eduardo Matos Bradley, Kim Richter, and Virginia Fields. Moctezuma. Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, México: 525-537.

7. BIBLIOGRAPHY VELÁZQUEZ CASTRO, A. 2007 La producción especializada de los objetos de concha del Templo mayor de Tenochtitlan. Instituto Nacional de AOYAMA, K. Antropología e Historia, México. 2007 “Elite Artists and Craft Producers in Classic Society: Lithic Evidence from Aguateca, Guatemala”. Latin American Antiquity 18 (1): 3-26.

BRUMFIEL, E. M. & EARLE, T. K. 1987 “Specialization, exchange, and complex societies: an introduction”. In: Brumfiel, E. M. & Earle, T. K. (eds.): Specialization, exchange, and complex societies. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 1-9.

CLARK, J. & PARRY, W. 1990 “Craft Specialization and Cultural Complexity”. In: Isaac, B. L. (ed.): Research in Economic Anthropology. Jai Press, Greenwich-Connecticut & London: 289-346.

CLARK, J. E. 1994 “El sistema económico de los primeros Olmecas”. In: Clark, J. ed.): Los olmecas en Mesoamérica. El equilibrista México, Turner Libros Madrid, México: 189-201.

COSTIN, C. L. 1991 “Craft Specialization: Issues in Defining, Documenting and Explaining the Organization of Production”. In: Schiffer, M. B. (ed.): Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. 3. University of Arizona Press, Tucson: 1-56.

MUNIBE Suplemento - Gehigarria xx, 2010 S.C. Aranzadi. Z.E. Donostia/San Sebastián