STUDIES IN THE °SSo

Center for Advanced Study in the Visual Arts

Symposium Papers XXXV

Olmec Art and Archaeology in

Edited by John E. Clark and Mary E. Pye

National Gallery of Art, Washington

Distributed by Press, New Haven and London

CHRISTOPHER A. POOL University of Kentucky

From Olmec to Epi-Olmec at

Tres Zapotes J J

How, why. and when did Olmec culture col­ which to investigate the fate of the . lapse and what do we meon by the concept of Located on the western margin of thc Olmcc a collapse in this context! heartland, the site contains a long archaeo­ Richard A. Diehl, 1989 logical sequence that includes Olmec and Epi­ Olmcc components in addition to later Classic . nothing is 1

1\7 an updated interpretation of site chronology and apply it to a reconstruction of the occu­ pational history of Tres Zapotcs. This recon­ struction provides the basis for the subsequent discussion of continuity from Olmec to Epi­ Olmcc culture and the evolution of political organization at Tres Zapotes. I conclude with a model of political evolution that takes into account the ecological setting of Tres Zapotes, the history of regional political and economic systems, and the development of new forms of political expression.

History of Research Tres Zapotes first attracted scholarly attention in 1869 when Jose Melgar reported the dis­ covery of a colosscll head by a compesino on the Hacienda Hucyapan (fig. i). Seventy years later, in 1939, initiated the first modern exploration of an Olmec site at Tres Zapotes. His discovery of Stela C, and Marion Stirling's reconstruction of a Cycle 7 baktun coefficient for its inscribed Long Count date, provided early support for a Formative placement of Olmec culture [fig. 2) (Stirling 1940). Working with Stirling, Philip Drucker [19431 conducted the first stratigraphic exca­ vations in an Olmec center and worked out a general ceramic chronology, later revised by Michael Coe in 1965 and refined by Ponciano Ortiz in 1975. The stone monuments of Tres Zapotes, which now numher more than forty, have been the subiect of several studies (Porter 1989), including Howell Williams' and Robert Heizer's (196 sllandmark petrographic c1l1alysis, and the obsidian assemhlage of the site was one of the first in Mesoamerica to he characterized hy physicochemical means [Hester et al. Il)71). Although Tres Zapotes figured prominently in the early history of Olmec studies, it was soon eclipsed hy the spectacular finds cit Regional Setting [Stirling 1943,1947; Drucker [9<;2; Drucker et a1. 1959) and San Lorenzo (Stirling 1947; Cae The westernmost of the major Formative I. Tr~s Z"potes Monumcnt 1968; Coe and Diehl i9S0). As these eastern period centers in the O]mec heartland, Tres A, the Caheza Colusal Je HoeyapclI1, Formative periuJ, sites became the paragons of Olmec culture, Zapotes occupies an area of rolling sedimen­ ecological explanations of Olmec evolution tary uplands between the volcanic massif of

came to focus on the peculiarities of their low­ the Sierra de on the east and the 2. Stela C. upper portiun land riverine settings, and Olmec social com­ alluvial plain of the Rio iJapaloapan and its showing Initial Series glyph plexity became the "Gift of the River" (Coe anJ baktun codncicnt of tributaries on the west (fig. 31. This ecologi­ Lung Cuunt date, Formative 1\)81). As a result, scholars have underapprcci­ cally diverse setting provided the people of Tres period, ~tooe ated the significance of variation in the regional Zapotes with most of the resources they settings of heartland Olmec sites. required for their basic livelihood. The lclkes and swamps of the Papaloapan basin teemed

138 POOL with aquatic resources, and the alluvial plain argued that the distribution of major Olmec provided vast expanses of fertile agricultural centers and their association with specific sets land. If, as Drucker (194J: 8) believed, the sedi­ of natural resources reflect a system of coop­ mentary uplands were less intensively culti­ erative exchange based on zonal complemen­ vated, they would have provided diverse forest tarity, which would have been under the resources in addition to underlying deposits of control of chiefs who may have reinforced the high-quality pottery clays. Most significantly, ties between centers through marriage alliances the inhabitants exploited the nearby slopes of [Grove 1994: 228; see also Arnold, this volume). Cerro El Vigfa and the ravines descending from I argue here that the location of Tres Zapotes them for the distinctive porphyritic basalt from vis-a-vis other Gulf Coast centers and natural which they fashioned stone monuments and resource zones is important for understanding grinding implements. The only commonly used the history of its growth and sociopolitical material that was not available nearby was ob­ organization. First, however, I update the pic­ sidian; it does not occur naturally in the Sierra ture of the site's geography as it has been re­ de los Tuxtlas. Chemical analyses indicate that vealed through recent archaeological fieldwork. the people of Tres Zapotes looked westward for sources of obsidian, the bulk of which they Site Layout obtained from the Pico de Orizaba, Guadalupe Victoria, ZanIgoza, and Oyameles sources in The archaeologiccll site of Tres Zapotes covers central Veracruz and Puebla (Hester et al. 1971). about 450 hectares on either side of a large As [1994: 227-228) has empha­ bend in the Arroyo Hueyapan (fig. 4). Alluvial sized, the upland environment of Tres Zapotes terraces hound the floodplain of the arroyo to differs significantly from the riverine and estu­ the east and west. Cerro Rabon and Cerro arine settings of the more intensively studied Nestepe, two hills formed by resistant volcanic eastern heartland sites of San Lorenzo and La ash deposits, or la/a, rise above the phlin on Venta. Taking note of the environmental diver­ the east bank of the arroyo. A broad ravine sity of the Olmec heartland, Grove has recently delimits the northern edge of the site.

). Thc upland landscape of Tres Zaporcs, vicw from Group, toward Cerro EI Vigia Most of the mounds at Tres Zapotes, includ­ ing the three major formal mound groups, arc TRES ZAPOTES located on the Hoodplain and terraces to the west of the Arroyo Hueyapan. The three major mound groups arc separated from one another by distances of.') to 1 kilometer. Stirling (1943) and Drucker (19431 identified these as Group CERRO NESTEPE I, Group 2, and Group 3. Clarence Weiant [1943] identified Group I as the Caheza Group for the colossal head [Mon. A) that was found there, NESTEPE and the other two as the Arroyo Group and the NEW LANDS GROUP North Group for their locations. Group I and Group 2 have several features in common: tTC­ RANCHITO • tangular plazas oriented a few degrees north of GROUP • N east (84' and 80°, respectivelYl, long mounds c on the northern edges of plazas, prominent E , .er-1-~ GROUP 2 0 conical mounds located at either end of plazas, A • B low mounds on center lines within plazas, and GROUP 1 • E F A prominent flanking mounds on the eastern , c.• ends of groups. The pattern of a long mound B and a conical mound framing the north and western edges of a plaza is repeated at a smaller scale to the east of the Arroyo Hueyapan in SURVEY LIMITS the Nestepe Croup. MOUND Group 3 diverges from this characteristic • MOUND> 5 m plan in that its plaza is oriented about an axis running approximately 9 degrees east of true o north, its principal conical mound is located on kilometers the north edge of the plaza, and it lacks a com­ parable long mound. The four tallest mounds 'J '------delimit a small plaza, which measures about IOO meters on a side, seven smaller mounds cluster around the southern and eastern edges of the group, and two broad platforms with Zapotes is not particularly impressive, although .j. Trcs Zaporcs, within thc heavy concentrations of material arc locclted the placement of many mounds on natural ter­ 1995 survcy h()LJnd~rics 1\ILIP hy ,:Vlil.:h:ll.:l ()hlln~()r,L;l'll ,llld on the sou them edge of the terrace. The more races and hills enhances their elevations. The Chn<.;!ophcl'i\ Pool crowded distribution of mounds in Group 3 tallest mounds, Mound A of Croup 2 (known may reflect its location on a narrow spur of the locally as Loma Camila for a previous owner) upper terrace, which drops off sharply to the and Mound A of Group ), both rise about I2 north, east, and south. meters above the curren t ground surface. The Group 3 contains several additional features remaining mounds in the three principcllmound of interest. The lower portion of Stela C was groups cHe all less than 8 meters till!. Other discovered by Stirling directly south of Mound mounds between 5 and 8 meters tall arc located A. It was set on its side next to a circular altar. on the cast-west ridge to the west of Group 3 The upper half of the stela was found nearby and on the upper terrace in the New Lands thirty years later. Two broken basalt columns locality. Smaller formal mound groups occur rest on the summit of Mound I, a small mound to the east of the Arroyo Hueyapan on Cerro on the northern edge of the terrace. Two irregu­ Rabon and on the valley Hoor. lar rows of boulders extend from the columns In addition to formal mound groups, the 1995 down the southern face of the mound. Three RATZ survey detected eighty-five residential other basalt columns arc set in a small projec­ mounds, less thiln 2 meters in height, which tion of the terrace jutting out to the cast of were distributed in two broad zones. The sOLlth­ Mound D. ern zone encompasses the Ranchito, New The scale of mound construction at Tres Lands, and Burnt Mounds groups reported by Drucker (I94Y 5-9) but is more extensive. The recovered from these areas of elevated ceramiC northern zone comprises a series of residen­ densi ties, corroborating their iden tification as tial terraces and platforms scattered along the residential zones. On the alluvial plain, high ridge that extends westward from Group ). ceramic densities tend to occur on house­ The distribution of visible architecture, mounds or in discrete circular concentrations, however, gives only a partial picture of ancient which probably represent mounds flattened by settlement at Tres Zapotes. In 1995 we obtained decades of plowing in sugarcane fields. Low 3, I03 surface collections from 3 meter-square artifact densities on the alluvial plain should units over an area of 320 hectares, using a not be taken as conclusive evidence of less combination of full coverage survey and sys­ intenSIve occupation, however; both Drucker tematic transect interval sampling techniques. (1943: 29- 341 and Ortiz 119751 found deep sherd­ A heavy concentration of ceramic artifacts bearing deposits below sterile alluvium in and stretches along the alluvial terrace from the around the Burnt Mounds Group. Ranchito Group through an area devoid of resi­ In summary, the 1995 survey revealed numer­ dential mounds to Group 3 (fig. 5). Another ous mounds and extensive areas of residen tial heavy concentration of ceramics occurs on occupation extending over more than 300 hec­ Cerro Rabon. Moreover, moderate ceramic den­ tares. The current site pattern, however, is the sities of between TO and TOO sherds per collec­ result of two millennia of occupation. Recon­ tion extend over a broad area of the upper structing the growth of Tres Zapotcs requires terrace between the northern and southern an understanding of the site chronology. zones of residential construction, suggesting that nonmoumled architecture occupied large Chronology i. Isopleth map of t<)til! portions of the site or that plowing has de­ sh~rd fr~lIuencies from l~~i transect collections ilt Tres stroyed residential platforms in this area. The long sequence of essentially continuous Zapotcs Pieces of daub used in house construction were occupation at Tres Zapotes stretches from thc Formative period through the Classic pcriod with a minor intrusive occupation in the Early Postclassic (table I). The inception of the For­ mative period occupation has been the subject TRES ZAPOTES of considerable debate and revision. Drucker (194Y rr8- 120) considered deposits sealed below a bed of volcanic ash on the valley plain to be Late Formative in date, and Coe (I965a: 694-6(6) concurred. Ignacio Bernal (1969), how­ ever, placed the inception of occupation in pre­ Olmec times, and James Chase (1981) suggested that the volcanic ash fell at the end of the 1000.00 Middle Formative period, causing a depopulcl­ tion of Tres Zapotes. These investigators relied on the ceramic analyses conducted by Drucker 100.00 and Weiant in the 1940S and on stylistic seri­ ations of the monuments. My own interpre­ tation of the occupational sequence at Tres 1000 Zapotes is based on more recent excavations by Ortiz (1975) into the subash levels at Tres Zapotes and comparisons with excavated I I .000 ceramic sequences at Matacapan (Ortiz and Santley 1989) and Bezuapan (Pool ct al. 1993) in the central Sierra de los Tuxtlas, and at San Lorenzo in the Rio drainage 1000 1400 1800 2200 2600 3000 (Coe and Diehl 1980), as well as Gareth Lowe's (1989) synthesis of Olmec chronology. SHERD DENSITIES Ortiz (I97Y 1321 recovered a handful of Early Formative ceramics in the lowest subash levels of his stratigraphic exc

TRES ZAPOTES • COLOSSAL HEAD OLMEC OCCUPATION ... OTHER MONUMENTS - BASALT COLUMN ENCLOSURE

o 0 I ~ / ~ b 00 I I 0° ~ 0 : ODJj (It­ \ N &.. 0 1

kilometers in Ortiz' type collection arc large and well pre­ served, suggesting minimal f1uvial transport. Furthermore, auger tests conducted in 1996 encountered the daub-rich remains of a house­ mound below the volcanic ash on the east side of the arroyo, confirming Formative period resi­ dential occup8tion on the alluvial plain.

Occupational History The distribution of diagnostic rim shercls in our systematic transect surface collections reveals significant differences in the organiza­ tion of Olmec and Epi-Olmec occupation at Tres Zapotes. Early to Middle Formative diagnostics at Tres Zapotes include white-rimmed black wares and white wares. Although tecomate rims are also diagnostic of Early to Middle For­ mative occupation, I have not included them in this analysis hecause their functional equiv­ 7. Tres Z,Jpotes J\!\olllJlllcnt alents in the Late Formative period are non­ Q, Fonndtivc period, sron,; diagnostic striateu coarse ware ollas, which continue in large frequencies in the Classic 8. Tres Z,lpotes Monulllent period. I have also not separated Early from H, Forllldtive period, stone Middle Formative phases. The most diagnos­ tic Middle Formative wares are white wares, which are quite rare and occur in association with Black and White ceramics and tecomates in Ortiz' collections; separating them creates a probably erroneous impression of population decline in the Middle Formative. Furthermore, discriminating between Late Formative and Protoclassic occupation is difficult due to the erosion of the diagnostic Polished Orange shercls of the Hueyapan phase in surface collec­ tions. For these reasons the following analysis only distinguishes between Olmec (Early to Middle Formative) and Epi-Olmec (Late For­ mative to Protoclassiel occupations. Surface materials of the Otmec occupation are concentrated on the elevated terrace to the west of the arroyo and on Cerro Rabon to the cast of the arroyo (fig. (,). The 1996 survey also encountered Olmec ceramics on the lower slopes of terrace remnants farther to the east. Concentrations of Olmec ceramics on the val­ ley plain are associated with mounds amI un­ doubtedly represent old deposits incorporated in later mound fill. We do not at present know the extent of Olmec occupation beneath the alluvium of the valley plain. Nevertheless, the distribution of Olmec sherds derived from the shallower deposits of the alluvial terrace re­ veals a pattern of small, discrete communities Though scholars disagree about the tempo­ covering I to 40 hectares separated by zones ral placement of several monuments at Tres with little or no occupation. Zapotes, most accept as Olmec the two colos­ Mound construction does not appear to have sal heads (Mons. A and QI (figs. 1,7), two seated been typical of the Olmec occupation. Of the figures (Mons. I and 11, and the head of a were­ fourteen mounds sectioned by Stirling's proj­ jaguar statue IMon. Hllfig. 8] and assign most ect, none produced assemblages assignable of the remaining monuments to the Late For­ exclusively to the Olmec occupation [Drucker mative period [Lowe 1989: 43i Milbrath I979i I943i Weiant 1943). The only possible excep­ Porter 1989: 97-100). A basalt column cham­ tion is represented by Mound Ein Group I [fig. ber, excavated in 1978 in Group 2, is similar 4). The initial construction stage consisted of to Tomb A at La Venta (Lowe 1989: 60). The ared clay mound about [ to 1.5 meters tall chamber contained a rectangular stone slab with sandstone steps [Weiant 194): 6-71. Un­ pierced by a circular hole in which was placed fortunately, Stirling only excavated a corner an upright serpentine "plug" [Mons. 33 and of this basal mound, and it was apparently 34), a damaged piece of dressed stone (Mon. sterile. A single incised Black ware sherd found 32), and a basalt column with a crude petro­ just above the surface of the red mound prob­ glyph face (Mon. )I). I On the hasis of their con­ ably dates to the Late Formative period. Rather text, these may also be counted among the later than constructing mounds, the Tres Zapotes Olmec monuments of Tres Zapotes. The spa­ Olmecs appear to have taken advantage of nat­ tial distribution of the known Olmcc sculp­ ural eminences, perhaps filling ami leveling ture reinforces the impression of small, discrete them, as may be the case on Cerro Rabon and communities but does not correspond closely on the projecting ridges of the Ranchito Group. to the ceramic distributions (fig. 6). The colos· This method of construction parallels that sal heads, for example, were found in plazas recently reported from San Lorenzo by Ann that do not exhibit high frequencies of diag­ Cyphers (1996: 69-70). nostic Olmec sherds. The most likely expla-

',). Distrihution of Epi-Olmcc jLlte Forll1"tiv~1 occupation and monllm~Jlts in Tres TRES ZAPOTES I STELA • OTHER MONUMENTS Zapotes EPI-OLMEC OCCUPATION

o 1

kilometers 10. Tres Z'lpmes Monument fl), Lite Fort1l

12. TIe" Zal'ore, Monument C. Lne F(llln,nIVe pel'lud, stonL'

AlTer '}nrllllt;. l,q 1 pI III

I I. TIe" Zapurc, Srela A. Line Fnll11artvc pelloJ. slOne nations for this pattern are that the Olmec Stela 0, a magnificent example of Late For­ occupation in these areas is too deeply buried mative sculpture, was found in Group 4, which to be detected on the surface or thclt the Olmec is best considered an outlying settlement to monuments were reset in subsequent occupa­ the northwest of Tres Zapotes (fig. 15). Although tions. Unfortunately, the stratigraphic data many of these monuments may have been necessary to resolve the question do not exist, reset in the Classic period, they correspond and any diagnostic artifacts that may have been more closely to the distributIon of Late Forma­ associated with the monuments were not tive ceramics and certainly reflect 3n expansion recorded. of occupation in the Late Formative (fig. 91. Late Formative diagnostic sherds [Black and Tan ware and Polished Black ware) are much Cultural Continuity and Evolution of more widely distributed than Olmec ceramics Political Organization (fig. 9). Once again, Late Formative sherds clus­ ter along the edge of the alluvial terrace and Incomplete as it is, the evidence from sculp­ on Cerro Rabon, but they are also common in tlne, architecture, and artifact distributions collections from the aJJuvial plain and to the provides clues to the n,lture of Olmec and Epi­ west of the terrace bluff. Late Formative sherds Olmec political organization at Tres Zapotes. are also widely distributed on hills and terraces Leaders of one or more of the small Olmec to the north and east of the 1995 survey limits. communities that existed within the Tres In all, the Late Formative occupation probably Zapotes zone evidently possessed sufficient encompassed an area in excess of )00 hectares. prestige and authority to commission colossal In general, mound construction appears to portraits and have them transported to their have been initiated during the Late Formative seats of power. As compared to their fellow period, although the first construction stage leaders at San Lorenzo and La Venta, however, in Mound E of Group I may be earlier, as noted their portraits were smaller and transported above. Strong evidence for Late Formative con­ shorter distances, their subject communities struction is reported by Weiant [194 j: 13) for were less extensive and provided a smaller the initial stage of construction in the Long labor force, and their construction programs, Mound (Mound C of Group 2) and by Drucker whether consisting of mound construction or (194): 25-27,144-145) for an early construc­ modifications to natural features of the land­ tion stage of Mound A in Group 3 (fig. 4). Both scape, were less impressive. of these construction stages contained abun­ As Tres Zapotes expanded in the Late For­ dant diagnostic pottery and figurines of the mative, its rulers embarked on a program of Late Formative period and lacked Classic period mound construction. Even so, their architec­ diagnostics. Mound B of Group 2, and a U­ tural efforts were not particularly impressive, shaped mound on the eastern Ranchito ridge nor were mounds concentrated in a single cer­ (Weiant's Mound Dl), are also likely Late For­ emonial complex. Groups I, 2, and 3 all appear mative constructions (fig. 4) (Weiant 1(4): 14, to have been active at some point during the map 3; Drucker I94J: Il). Weiant's (194): II­ Late Formative period, and no one group 12) description of a trench placed between appears to have been markedly larger than the Mounds J ,md K outside the Ranchito Group others. Whether the three mound groups were appears to indicate deposits with Late Forma­ occupied sequentially or simultaneously, it tive materials above Classic period deposits. appears that political hierarchy was not strongly This reversed stratigraphy may have resulted developed at Late Formative Tres Zapotes. from the erosion of exclusively Late Forma­ Grove's hypothesis of zondl complemen­ tive fill from these two mounds. tarity provides a possible explanation for the Sculpture of probable Late Formative man­ developmentdl sequence observed at Tres Za­ ufacture has been recovered from Group I potes. Of the four sites frequently identified (Mon. 19) (fig. 10), Group 2 (Stela A and Mon. as major Olmec centers, Tres Zapotes and C) (figs. II, 121, Group 3 [Stela C) (fig. 2), the Laguna de los Cerros are the most similar in Ranchito Group (Mon. G) (fig. 13), the Burnt terms of their ecological settings and their Mounds Group (Mon. FI (fig. 14), and along the access to geological resources (see Gillespie, course of the Arroyo Hueyapan Iseveralmon­ this volume). If Grove is correct, we may ex­ uments, including a bar-and-dot date, Mon. EI. pect that the proximity of Laguna de los Cer­ I). Tres Zapores M()lllllllelli C, Late Forllldtive pet!()J, stone

14 Tre, Zapllte, MU11uI11ent r. Lite FOrl11<'tlve periOd, "tonc

I, Tre, Z,lpotes Stela D, Lite FUfl11,ltlVe penmJ, stone 111H1trl,l.:,r:iph l h:Hlv<" Knight ros to San Lorenzo and La Venta should have also evident in the sculptural corpus of Tres afforded it a preferred position to Tres Zapotes Zapotes. Claims of pervasive Izapan and Mayan in an intraregional exchange system based influence at Tres Zapotes are unconvincing, upon zonal complementarity during the Early except in the case of Monument C, an elabo­ and Middle Formative periods [see Pye and rately carved stone box covered with weapon­ Clark, this volume, fig. II. During Olmec times bearing human figures struggling amidst watery the only clear advantage that Tres Zapotes scrolls lfig. 12). Although James Porter [1989: would have had over Laguna de los Cenos was 84) identifies the cluttered style of this box as its position closer to central Mexican sources typically Mayan, Coe (I96Sb: 773) considered of obsidian, including the Pico de Orizaba the box to be transitional between Olmec and sources. However, alternative sources in Gua­ Izapan styles. I see very little that is Olmec in temala were also used by the inhabitants of the design on the box. Instead I would attrib­ San Lorenzo and La Venta [Cobean et a!. 1971), ute the style of carving (which emphasizes precluding the possibility of a Tres Zapotes incision to indicate detail on surfaces that are monopoly on obsidian trade into the Olmec defined by removing the background), the heartland. In sum, if Olmec chiefly power and scroll-like representation of water, and the prestige were supported by participation in such composition of the scene to contemporaneous an exchange system, we may expect socio­ lzapan influence (see also Smith 1984: 44-45, political hierarchy at Tres Zapotes to have been 47). Nevertheless, lzapan influence does not less fully developed during the Early and extend to other Late Formative monuments at Middle Formative periods (compare Stark, this Tres Zapotes. volume). Thematic and stylistic continuity from In contrast, the Late Formative expansion Olmec times is most strongly represented in of Tres Zapotes coincides with the rise of cen­ the stelae of Tres Zapotes. Stelae A and D each ters such as to the west in depict compositions of three Agures within a La Mixtequilla, the abandonment of the east­ niche. In Stela D the niche is formed by the ern Olmec centers, and the increasing use of gaping mouth of a feline whose face forms central Mexican obsidian sources in the Sierra the upper register of the carving as in La Venta de los Tuxtlas. Recent evidence from the Sierra Stela I [fig. 15). Two standing figures face a de los Tuxtlas and the Mixtequilla as well as kneeling figure, while a fourth, rather indistinct Tres Zapotes indicates a widespread shift in figure floats above them, peering downward. obsidian tool manufacture from a flake core Stela A is even more Olmec in its compo­ technology to a prismatic blade core technol­ sition and execution. The central figure is ogy concurrent with the change in preferred carved in the round, bears a tall headdress, and sources (Barrett 1996; Hester et a!. 1971; Pool faces forward (Ag. II). Two standing Agures in 1997; Stark et al. 1992). Applying Grove's

17- La Venta Stela 3, Middle ForlllMive period, basal! Alter Drucker, Heizer, dnJ S~lIlcr I \) ~ l): pI. ,;'

depicts a leftward-facing head amid curved, its greatest elaboratlOn on the Gulf Coast in upward-radiating lines above the cleft brow of the inscription on La Mojarra Stela I (fig. 191. an abstract were-jaguar mask (fig. lSI (see also Joyce Marcus (1992) has recently argued that Porter [9Rl): pl. sa and my fig. 21 The Olmec early writing and calendrical systems in Meso­ affinity of the mask has been defended by Cae america developed in response to competition (I965b: 756) and Porter [I9R9: 49-50). The upper among chiefly elites who legitimized their sta­ portion of the design, however, was found later tus through propagcmda directed at peers and and has been discussed less frequently. The subordinates. In this context, the historical leftward-facing head in this part of the carving accuracy of an inscription would have been calls to mind figures on celts from Rio Pes­ less important than the relation of elite activ­ quem, and elsewhere, which Reilly (I995: V~­ ities to the mythical past and the prophetic 39) identifies as representcltions of the ruler as future. The Terminal Olmec stelae of La Vema the axis mundi or world tree, thus reinforcing and the Epi-Olmec stelae of Tres Zapotes and the Olmec conception of this celtifonn stela. La Moiarra appear to document the evolution In contrast to the Early Formative colossal of this practice from its nonlitenlte roots to its heads, the Late Formcltive stelae of Tres Zapotes literate climax as rulers sought new modes of and its environs present a pronounced change legitimation in an increasIngly competitive in sculptural themes related to rulership, from poli tical landscape. Indeed, at Tres Zapotes, static representations of rulers to depictions competitors for rulership may have been as of legitimizing acts. This shift docs not repre­ near as the next mound group. sent an abandonment of Olmec themes, how­ ever, but a shift in emphasis already presaged Conclusion in La Venta Stelae 2, 3, cmd 5, for example. The recording and display of such events suggest a Our continuing archaeological survey has greater concern with historicity, a develop­ helped clarify the l1dture of the Olmec OCCll­ ment that is expressed most explicitly in the piltion at Tres Zapotes and has documented Long Count date of Stela C and that reaches the Epi-Olmec growth of the site. As has long been suspected, Tres Zapotes no longer can be considered a major Olmec center on a scale equivalent to La Venta or San Lorenzo. Rather, Olmec occupation at Tres Zapotes was dis­ tributed among several small communities. Nevertheless, at least two chiefs in the Tres Zapotes zone were able to commission colos­ sal head portraits in stone, emulating the rulers of the eastern centers. These chIefs probably extended their control over nearby vi]]ages, and they may have exerted broader influence on their contemporaries in the western periph­ ery of the Olmec heartland. Although further analyses and investigation will be required to isolate the Middle Forma­ tive component at Tres Zapotes, at present the evidence from ceramic complexes and stratig­ raphy provide little support for a significant disjunction in occupation at the end of the Middle Formative. Olmcc villages appear to have expanded and coalesced to form a site extending over more than )00 hectares in the Late FormCltive period. The Epi-Olmec growth of Tres Zapotes coincided with the abandon­ 18. Tres Zaputes Stela C, LIpper fragment, front ment of La Venta, the growth of centers beyond Author rhotUj.~r;.lph the western margin of the Olmec heartland, and a pronounced change in obsidian technol­ 19. La Mojarra Stela I ogy and resource utilization both at Tres Zapotes and in the nearby Sierra de los Tuxtlas. I have suggested in this essay that the underdevelop­ ment of political hierarchy in the Olmec period and the expansion of the site in the Epi-Olmec period are consistent with a hypothesis of zonal complementarity in regional exchange systems of the Formative period. Reinterpretation of earlier mound excaVcl­ tions at Tres Zapotes suggests that the con­ struction of formal mound groups began in the Late Formative period and continued into the Classic period. The principal mound groups are widely disperseo and of similar scale, sug­ gesting a weakly developed political hierarchy. If true, this raises the possibility that rulership may have been negotiated among elites with competing claims to authority. Under the model proposed above, that authority would have extended to control over resource zones, exchange networks, and productivc labor. A prominent feature of mound groups at Tres Zapotes is their association with Late For­ mative stelae that appear to record events, either visually, as in Stelae A ilnd 0, or tcxtu­ "lily, as in Stelel C. Following Marcus' (1992) arguments, these monuments are Interpretable as propagandistic declarations to subordinates B1BLIOGRAPHY and competing elites, which drew their legiti­ Barrett, Thomas P. lTIacy from references to myth, legend, and !l)<)(; Formative Ohsidi'ln on the Culf Coast prophecy. Moreover, they form part of a devel­ of Mexicu: Industry l)evelnpment in the opmental sequence of increasingly explicit Tuxtlas Regiun. Paper presented ,\I the lTIythicohistoricaJ references beginning in the 61st Annual Meeting of the Society for Terminal Olmec phase of La Venta and culmi­ American Archaeolngy, New Orlc'lIls. nating in the Protoclassic La Mojarra stela. Ikrn,t1, Ign'leio In conclusion, the rumors of an Olmec col­ 19(;<) Thc Olmet: World. Ikrkeley. lapse have been greatly exaggerated. Instead, Chase, Jall1es E. the Olmec to Epi-Olmec transition marks a 1<)81 The Sky Is Falling: The San Martin Tuxt]a time when the inhabitants of the western 01­ VOIc'"1ic Eruption and Its Effects on the Olmec at Tres Zapores, Veracruz. mec heartland slIccessfully adapted their Vinculo.\' 7: 53 -(,9. Olmec traditions to the political and economic landscape of the Late Formative Mesoamerican Clcwlow, C. William, II'. 1974 A Stylistic uni/ CIJlol1o/ogicul Stlld)' of world. a/mee Monllmentlll SellljllUre. Berkeley.

Cobean, Robert H., Michael D. Coe, Edward A. Perry Ir., Karl K. Turckian, allll Dinkar P. Kharkar NOTES 1971 Obsidian Trade at 5'1n Lorenzo Tenocb­ titl

19(\~ America's First ell'ilizillion: Discovering I hc Olmel'. New Yorl<.

198[ San Lorenzo TenochtitLm. In Ard1llc, ()IO,~l'. cd. Jeremy SahlnH, [[7-Q(;· Supplement to the H'lIHlhopk pf Middle AmeriGlIl Indi'lI1s, vpl. I. Austill. Coe, Mich'lel D., 'Jilt! Richard A. Diehl 1980 111 fhe Lllnd oj" thc O/Il1<:t:. 2 vllis. Austin. Cyphcrs, Ann [lJ96 Reconstructing Ollllee Life at S;ln Lorenzo. In Olmc( Art of AI/ciellt Mexico. ed. Elizaheth RenSlln and I3earriz de 1<1 Fuente, (,(-7[ lexh. Cit., N;ltinn;ll Callery llf Arrl. Washington. de 1a Fuen te, Re'1triz 197, EsclIllllW 1110lll/mCJ1fill o/mecu: CUllilogo. Mexico City.

1977 LIi' homlne' dc II/cdl'll: E,ClIllL/I'

IlJS2 Lo Vento, Tobliscu: A Siudy of Olma Pool, Christopher, Patty Wright, and Cellimics ond Art. Bureau of American Mudd Britt Ethnology Bulletin 1~1. Washington. 199) Formative House/ot Structure in Ilczua­ pan, Veracruz, Mexico. Report submitted 1')81 On the Nature of Olmec Polity. In The to the H. ). Heinz, III Charitable Trust, Olmec lind Their Neighbors, cd. EJizabeth Pittshu rgh. Benson, 2')-48. Washington. Porter, James 13. Drucker, Philip, Robert F. Heizer, 'Ind Robert J. 1989 The Monuments and Hieroglyphs of Tres Squier Z'lpOtes, Veracruz, Mexico. PhD. disser­ [lJ)l) [xLi/volium ot Lo Vento. Tohoscu, 19\5 tation, University of , Berkeley. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 170. Washington. Reilly, F. I(ent, 111 19l)1 Art, Ritual, and Rulership in the Olmec Grove, David C. World. In The Olmec World: 1~/I[/(I1I//ld IlJl)4 La Isla, Veracruz, IlJl)l: A Preliminary Hulet'shil" 27-46Iexh. cat., The Art Mu­ Report with Comments on the Olmec seum, Princeton UniversitYI. Princeton. Uplands. Ancient Mesoomerico ): 227-22.8. Smith, Virgini'l G. 1984 IZI/I'I/ "elid Cllrvin,~: Form COlJlen/. Hester, Thomas R., Robert N. j'lck, ~nd Robert F. I! Illes lor Design and Role in Mesoomeri­ Heizer can Art Hlstury a/lcl ArcJ1IIeolog)'. 1971 The Obsidi~n of Tres Zapotes, Veracruz, Washington. Mexico. In Poper, on Olmec and Moyo Archoeo]ogy, <::d. John Graham, 6~ -"I. Stark, Barbara L., Lynette Heller, Mlch'lel D. Berkeley. Glascock,]. Michael EI,II11, ~nd Hector Neff 1l)l)2 OhsiJia/l-Artif,lct Source Analysis for the Justeson, John S., and T<::rrence Kaufman Mixtequilla Region, S()uth-Centr~1 Ver~­ llJlJ3 A Decipherment of Epi-Olmec Hienl­ cruz, Mexico. Lali/l Amencan A/lI/l/Ii/l)' glyphic Writing. Science 2~l): 170.,-1711. " 221-2'l). Lowe, CMeth W. Stirling, Matthew W. \lJR9 The Heartland Olmec: Evolution of 1940 An l/liliol Serie" hom Tres Z0I'0leS, M'lteri,,1 Culturc. [n !ies/onol PerSflec­ VeroCl"uz. Mexico. Washington. lives 017 Ihe O]mec. cd. Robert Sharer and D'lvid Grove, J ,-('7- Cambridge. 1941 Stone Monument.' of SoUl hem MexICO. Bureau of Americ'ln Ethnology Bulletin Marcus, Joyce IJK. Washington. [l)l)2 Mesoomericon Wrilins SyslelJJs. I'mflo­ glindo, Myth. ond I-listory in Four Ancienl 1l)47 On the Tr,JiI of La Venta Man. Nillionill CiviliZe/lions. Princeton. Geogrophlc l)1(21: 1'17-172. Melg,1I', Jose M. Weiant, Clarence W. [R69 Antigiiedades mexlcanos. RoletllJ de 194, An Intmduc/ion 10 the Cerllmics of ]0 Sociedod Mexicono ric Ceogllifw y Tres Zilpoies. Vert/cruz. Mexico. Bureau Esteufisticli, 2d series, I: 2lJ2-297. of American Ethnology 13ullctin I'l). W'lsh ington. Milbr~th, Susan 1971) A Study of Olmec Sculpll/Ilil Chronolosy Williams, Howell, and Robert F. Heizer Washington. 1l)65 Source~ of Roch.\ Usecl in O]mec Monumenl.'. Berkeley. Miller, Mary E. 19x6 The Art of MesolllJJenco from Olmec to Aztec. New York.

rOOL IS)