Reconstructing the Past: Paleoethnobotanical Evidence for Ancient Maya Plant Use Practices at the Dos Pilas Site, Guatemala

A thesis submitted to the Division of Graduate Studies and Research

of the University of Cincinnati

in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

in the Department of Biological Sciences

of the McMicken College of Arts and Sciences

2013

Dana A. Cavallaro

B.A., University of Cincinnati 2011

Committee: David L. Lentz, Chair

Susan S. Dunford

Vernon L. Scarborough

Abstract

The focus of this study was to analyze the paleoethnobotanical remains retrieved from the

Late Classic (ranging from approximately A.D. 600-800) Maya polity of Dos Pilas, located in the department of Petén, Guatemala. Paleoethnobotanical macroremains and flotation samples collected during field seasons between 1989 and 1992 were separated using standard paleoethnobotanical field and laboratory methodologies, allowing for analysis and identification of many of the remains. Plant remains recovered from this site include such domesticated cultigens as maize and squash; and an assortment of wood charcoal, including palm, pine, and various dicot woods. Initially unidentified charcoal samples were further analyzed using an FEI

XL30 Environmental Scanning Electron Microscope (ESEM) with associated EDX system in order to obtain cellular structure orientations necessary for identifying such unknowns.

Wood/non-wood ratios, kernel/cupule ratios, Shannon’s Diversity index, absolute counts, absolute weights, and ubiquity were all analytical methods utilized in order to assess the implications of depositional patterns of the remains. These analyses were structured in order to reveal prevailing subsistence strategies, an evaluation of the possible environmental surroundings, and socioeconomic implications across the hierarchical system at Dos Pilas. These implications were based upon differential deposition patterns in regard to the social class of associated structures or households. These results were further compared using analogous measures to the nearby site of Aguateca in order to provide a reference of Dos Pilas’ comparability to other Maya sites. This study has concluded that, while Dos Pilas shares many of the characteristics of other Lowland Maya sites, its unique location and history resulted in a distinctive form of subsistence and existence.

Acknowledgements

In the process of procuring this thesis, I was able to interact with and learn from an exceptional assortment of individuals, both from within the professional realm and without, and many that I would like to formally acknowledge for their contribution to this work. First and foremost, I must thank the University of Cincinnati’s Department of Biological Sciences for affording me this opportunity to pursue my Master’s degree. Coincidingly, I would like to acknowledge David Lentz for accepting me as his student, for his guidance and teachings, and for helping me throughout the entirety of this project. The members of the Petexbatun Regional

Archaeological Project must also be recognized for all of their hard work so many years ago in recovering such an expansive collection of paleoethnobotanical remains and in such a thorough and intensive fashion. Their efforts allowed the paleothnobotanical analysis of Dos Pilas to be detailed and informative.

I would next like to recognizethe other members of my thesis committee: Vernon

Scarborough and Susan Dunford. Both provided advice and guidance that allowed this thesis to become what it has, even when I struggled to see that there was, in fact, an end in sight. I would also like to thank them for their outstanding guidance and teachings throughout both my undergraduate and graduate careers—it was both an honor and privilege to be their student.

Other members of the scientific community that I would like to acknowledge are Susan Allen, whose Archaeobotany class taught me a lot of what I know today regarding the topic, Joel Palka for providing an excessive (and much appreciated) amount of information regarding the social hierarchy at Dos Pilas, and Necati Kaval for teaching me the amazing power of the scanning electron microscope and for being so patient with me as I spent countless hours wrapped up in this machine. I would also like to thank my fellow lab-mates, Kim Thompson and Michael

iii

Hickey. Our discussions on any and every topic possible were a highlight of just about every day spent in the lab.

Outside of the lab, I would like to recognize Kathleen Forste for one too many conversations and debates regarding paleoethnobotany, and for being the other member of the

“Archaeobotanical Tagteam.” I would also like to thank Travis Bowlin, whose encouraging words and patience while I complained were a huge help for my general morale.

Finally, I would like to thank my parents, Michael and Christine Cavallaro, and my brother, Richard Cavallaro. Thanks and appreciations are not nearly powerful enough words to describe how I feel toward these amazing people. Pushing me when I needed it, slacking with me when I needed that, comforting me in my exasperation, congratulating my accomplishments; these but skim the surface of the pool of efforts they provided me throughout this experience.

Without them now, and throughout my entire life, I would not be where I am today. I truly cannot thank you enough.

I am positive that a thousand other thanks could be mentioned here, but at the moment, I would simply like to acknowledge the efforts of any person or group not previously mentioned that had any sort of input to the Dos Pilas project—your efforts are greatly appreciated.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………. ……..i

Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………………iii

Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………………….v

List of Tables…………………………………………………………………………………….vii

List of Figures…………………………………………………………………………………...viii

Chapter 1 - Introduction…………………………………………………………………………..1

The Applicability of Paleoethnobotany…………………………………………………...2

Research Questions and Hypotheses……………………………………………………...5

The Paleoethnobotanical Remains of Dos Pilas…………………………………………..7

Modern and Ancient Environmental Setting……………………………………………...8

The Cultural Setting of Dos Pilas………………………………………………………..12

A Brief History of Aguateca……………………………………………………………..24

Summary…………………………………………………………………………………26

Chapter 2 – Methodology………………………………………………………………………..27

Field Methods: Archaeological Excavation……………………………………………...27

Field Methods: Paleoethnobotanical Sampling………………………………………….28

Flotation………………………………………………………………………………….29

Laboratory Methods……………………………………………………………………...30

Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopy: Preparation, Utilization, and Outcome..33

Statistical Analyses………………………………………………………………………36

Chapter 3 – Results………………………………………………………………………………38

The Collected Plant Remains…………………………………………………………….38

Relative Abundance by Ubiquity………………………………………………………...44

Relative Abundance by Mass…………………………………………………………….45

Environmental Assessment and Changes Through Time………………………………..46

The Cultural Assessment: Dos Pilas Elites versus Commoners…………………………51

The Cultural Assessment: Dos Pilas Elites versus Inhabitants at Aguateca……………..56 Chapter 4 – Discussion…………………………………………………………………………..61 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………61 Identified Plant Taxa……………………………………………………………………..62 Environmental Assessment and Changes Through Time………………………………..82 The Cultural Assessment: Dos Pilas Elites versus Commoners…………………………85 The Cultural Assessment: Dos Pilas versus Inhabitants at Aguateca……………………88 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………90 Chapter 5 – Conclusions…………………………………………………………………………92 Significance………………………………………………………………………………94 Future Research………………………………………………………………………….95 References Cited…………………………………………………………………………………96

List of Tables

Table 1: Plant remains collected during excavation of Dos Pilas………………………………..39

Table 2: Reported diversity indices from the Dos Pilas and Aguateca paleoethnobotanical assemblages………………………………………………………………………………48

Table 3: Presence/absence of all plant taxa recovered at Dos Pilas corresponding to time period to which they were dated………………………………………………………………...49 Table 4: Ubiquity measures comparing wood remains recovered from Late Classic elite contexts and commoner contexts………………………………………………………………….53 Table 5: Ubiquity measures comparing food remains recovered from Late Classic elite contexts and commoner contexts………………………………………………………………….55 Table 6: Kernel:cupule ratios and wood:non-wood ratios suggest that there were both similarities and differences in the paleoethnobotanical assemblages of the elite and commoner classes of society at Dos Pilas (abbreviated DP)………………………………………………...56 Table 7: Ubiquity measures comparing wood remains recovered from Dos Pilas and Aguateca.57 Table 8: Ubiquity measures comparing food remains recovered from Dos Pilas and Aguateca..59

Table 9: Kernel:cupule ratios and wood:non-wood ratios suggest that there were differences in the paleoethnobotanical assemblages at Dos Pilas and Aguateca……………………….60

vii

List of Figures

Figure 1: Ancient Maya Site Map of the Petexbatun……………………………………………...9 Figure 2: This depicts a labeled specimen box, specimen mounts, and displays examples of fully mounted specimens (see mount locations 1-6)…………………………………………..35 Figure 3: (left) ESEM station in the UC Department of Chemistry’s Chemical and Biosensors Laboratory; (right) FEI Philips XL30 ESEM and EDX system…………………………36 Figure 4: Depiction of the ubiquity measurements expressed in the Dos Pilas assemblage…….45 Figure 5: Depiction of the mass percentage measurements expressed in the Dos Pilas assemblage……………………………………………………………………………….46 Figure 6: Wood versus non-wood counts at Dos Pilas reveal that hardwood remains account for 63.17% of all remains whereas non-wood remains only account for 36.83% of the total remains, suggesting that the inhabitants had ample access to wood resources………….47 Figure 7: This figure shows that more of the plant remains found at Dos Pilas were associated with the Late Classic period than either the LC-TC transition, or the Terminal Classic period; it represents the presence/absence data of plant remains at Dos Pilas, in which the label “1” (blue) denotes presence and “0” (red) denotes absence……………………….51 Figure 8: a) A micrograph of a maize kernel; b) A micrograph of squash rind…………………66 Figure 9: (a) The endocarp of cohune palm (Attalea cohune); (b) The pit of a súrtuba palm fruit (Geonoma sp.); (c) The endocarp of coyol (Acrocomia aculeata)……………………....68 Figure 10: (a) The pit of a cordia fruit (Cordia sp.); (b) The seed coat of mamey sapote (Pouteria sapota)……………………………………………………………………………………69 Figure 11: The seed of bulrush (Scirpus sp.)…………………………………………………….71

Figure 12: The hypoxylon fungus………………………………………………………………..72 Figure 13: (a) Transverse section of aguacatillo (Licaria sp.); (b) tangential section of aguacatillo; (c) transverse section of sapodilla (Manilkara zapota); (d) tangential section of sapodilla; (e) transverse section of ramón (Brosimum alicastrum); (f) tangential section of ramón………………………………………………………………………………….76

Figure 14: (a) Transverse section of palo oloroso (Nectandra sp.); (b) tangential section of palo oloroso; (c) transverse section of madroño (Calycophyllum candidissimum); (d) tangential section of madroño; (e) transverse section of matayba (Matayba sp.); (f) tangential section of matayba…………………………………………………………….78 Figure 15: (a) Transverse section of copal (Protium copal); (b) tangential section of copal; (c) transverse section of white ramoon (Trophis racemosa); (d) tangential section of white ramon…………………………………………………………………………………….80

viii

Figure 16: Transverse section of pine (Pinus sp.)………………………………………………..82

Chapter 1

Introduction

Throughout the reign of the ancient Maya, the Pasión River provided the largest inland trade route to a vast area of the western Petén (Demarest 2006). This trade route provided access to resources that allowed a major segment of the Maya civilization to thrive within the midst of the Petexbatun region (Foster 2002). Located in this area were some of the most influential and prominent polities of the Classic Maya (Houston 1993), including Dos Pilas, Aguateca, Altar de

Sacraficios, Itzan, and El Ceibal. Appreciating the the significance of these sites and their history, and with the intention of more completely understanding the underlying factors involved in the collapse of these kingdoms (Demarest 2006), the members of the Petexbatun Regional

Archaeological Project embarked on a project of undeniable magnitude and complexity in order to provide evidence and answers to a great variety of research questions (e.g. Dunning and Beach

2007; Foias and Bishop 2013; O’Mansky 2003.; Wright 2006). A paleoethnobotanical study of the region’s capital center of Dos Pilas was among the many subprojects provided to various researchers. As will be discussed shortly in more detail, paleoethnobotanical studies have earned considerable respect in the disciplines of both archaeology and biology during the past few decades by bringing to light new evidence regarding ancient diet and subsistence activities, ecological assessments and environmental changes through time, as well as socioeconomic relationships between members of ancient societies (Pearsall 2000). Paleoethnobotanical analyses of the study sites of the Petexbatun Regional Archaeological Project are desirable to provide a deeper understanding of the Classic Maya people living within this geographical area

(Demarest 2006). The paleoethnobotanical subproject at Dos Pilas, led by David Lentz, resulted in an assemblage of plant remains from a range of contexts throughout the site, including from

1 both elite and non-elite structures (Palka 1997) that provide ecological and cultural information about the region and people.

The Applicability of Paleoethnobotany

Prior to presenting further information regarding Dos Pilas in the context of this thesis, it is important to discuss the rationale behind paleoethnobotanical research—its definition, its functions, its merits, and its shortcomings. It is within this framework of understanding that will afford further significance to a project such as this.

Paleoethnobotany, as defined by Pearsall (2000) is “…the study of the interrelationships between human populations and the plant world through the archaeological record.” This is a discipline that requires two broadly categorized sets of skills—an anthropological comprehension of the major concepts and intricacies of culture and of the archaeological record, as well as botanical knowledge necessary to identify plant remains and understand human-plant interactions (Pearsall 1989). Throughout the duration of its existence as an archaeological and biological discipline, paleoethnobotany has come to serve a wide variety of purposes. Much can be discerned regarding a past environment or culture through the study of the associated plant remains, the most prominent of which will be discussed below.

Preceding any paleoethnobotanical laboratory research, the remains needed for analysis must first be collected. It is imperative to the legitimacy of the research and the interpretation of results that certain standardized procedures that have proven creditable in the literature are utilized for extraction of the remains (Hastorf and Popper 1988). Procedural variations tend to exist by the regional environment and site location, as well as the condition of the matrix in which the remains are embedded (Pearsall 2000). For example, different collection and

2 processing techniques are used to extract plant remains from a dry, sandy matrix in comparison to a waterlogged medium (Wagner 1988). Whatever the conditions of the study site, appropriate collection procedures must be understood and implemented in order to maintain the highest level of research validity. Once recovery techniques have been agreed upon, consistency in methodology throughout the site must also be maintained. Truly valid interpretation can only be accomplished if these basic guidelines exist and are executed throughout (Hastorf and Popper

1988).

Once the remains have been collected, processed, and identified to the most specific taxonomic classification possible, interpretation of the results may begin. Paleoethnobotanical literature has shown that not only do plant remains reveal information regarding the surrounding environment and the subsistence practices of a people (Smart and Hoffman 1988), but sociocultural assertions can be formulated as well (Johannessen 1988). In regard to subsistence, such things as seeds, nuts, fruit fragments, and corn kernels can impart information about the foods a people were eating as well as how frequently they were being utilized (Hastorf 1988), and wood charcoal can exhibit what was available in the surrounding environment for firewood, construction, tools, and ritual burning (Smart and Hoffman 1988). Site management interpretations can be made by studying the depositional patterns of the remains, allowing assertions regarding such things as food processing versus consumption areas (Hastorf 1988), possible gender roles (Weiss et al. 2008), and elite versus non-elite societal roles and relationships (Lentz 1991). Temporal and spatial changes and variation in resource perception and utilization practices can also be inferred through the comparison of plant remains discovered from one time period to the next or from one site to the next (Johannessen 1988). A

3 comprehensive look at all of these various aspects of paleoethnobotanical interpretations can allow for a possible understanding of the society as a whole (VanDerwarker and Peres 2010).

Despite the benefits of paleoethnobotanical research to the understanding of a culture, the ambiguity with which the archaeological record exists still results in problematic interpretations and conclusions. Plant remains, with some exceptions, have a tendency to decompose through time and confound the archaeological record (Hally 1981). As biological specimens, specific conditions must occur initially for the remains to be preserved: carbonization, waterlogging, desiccation, freezing, mineralization, and/or impression formation must occur in order for retrieval of plant remains to be possible (Pearsall 2000). In addition to these conditions, differences in preservation potential between taxa also become a significant factor in the interpretation of the discovered plant remains. For example, wheat (Triticum spp.) produces more seeds and produces more evidence to be preserved in the archaeological record than something like an apple (Malus spp) fruit. This fact would manifest itself in the archaeological record as a greater abundance and ubiquity of wheat than apple, and without understanding the true implications of the remains, could lead to biases in the research conclusions. Another example of differential preservation exists with regard to pollen preservation. Plant taxa that are wind pollinated (such as conifers and grasses) produce a great number of pollen grains to achieve successful pollination, whereas animal or insect pollinated plants produce far fewer pollen grains

(Kato and Inoue 1994). One might surmise, therefore, that wind pollinated plant pollen would be far more ubiquitous in the archaeological record—a fact that must be taken into account when interpreting the results of a paleoethnobotanical study. Without properly taking these facts into consideration, the implications of such outcomes may be skewed or biased in a fashion that results in a misinterpretation of the information regarding a past culture or site (Wright 2010).

Improper or non-intensive sampling strategies may also result in an incorrect skew in the resulting interpretations, as certain taxa may prove to be more prominent in one area of a site or by one method of extraction than another (Lennstrom and Hastorf 1995). Without incorporating various sampling methods, data collection may be incomplete.

Despite these inadequacies or interpretation bias potentials, paleoethnobotany has contributed substantially to the understanding of past cultures and their relationship to the botanical world (VanDerwarker and Peres 2010). With advances in field, laboratory, and statistical techniques, it can be surmised that the benefits of a paleoethnobotanical research project greatly outweigh the deficits in the comprehension of the lifeways of an ancient culture.

Research Questions and Hypotheses

Upon receiving this assemblage of paleoethnobotanical remains, I proceeded to analyze them to address several pertinent research questions. The first and most basic question to be answered by paleoethnobotanical research at Dos Pilas is that of diet and subsistence: What plants were being utilized by these people and for what were they being used? What information does the assemblage provide regarding the environmental setting and does this assemblage provide evidence for environmental change through time? Does the assemblage provide support for differences in plant use by social class and does it allow for any further conclusive statements regarding the social hierarchy at Dos Pilas? Finally, how do the plant remains recovered from

Dos Pilas compare to those discovered at other sites within the region (i.e. to those remains from nearby Aguateca)? Does this research parallel any other paleoethnobotanical research throughout the Maya realm?

In regard to diet and subsistence, and given the near ubiquity of Zea mays L., (maize),

Phaseolus sp. (beans), and Cucurbita sp.(squash) throughout the Maya realm, I approached this avenue of research with the hypothesis that these remains would be present in the Dos Pilas assemblage and could be observed as dietary staples in domestic contexts (Lentz 1991). Other utilized plants would be extracted from the nearby environs to satisfy the needs of construction, tool-making, firewood, and ritual needs and would be selected based on both cultural resource perceptions and availability. Differences in utilization patterns that would manifest between the social classes should be observable, as throughout history, elites have typically retained preferential access to resources (Dubois and Gerard 2001). I hypothesized that the environmental assessment would reflect vegetation typical of a semi-tropical forest, with variations over time due perhaps to agricultural management practices that the Maya are believed to have employed

(Dunning, Beach, and Rue 1997). The relationship between Aguateca and Dos Pilas should be similar in terms of plant use activities; the close proximity of their geographical locations would provide for similar resource availability and the close relationship between the ruling classes at each site should foster similar resource perception (Lentz 1991; Palka 2008). However, the location of Aguateca in an ecologically preferable zone in comparison to Dos Pilas may have afforded the inhabitants of Aguateca access to more abundant resources—a fact that may become apparent in the comparison of the two assemblages. Additional differences between the two assemblages were hypothesized to occur as the result of two accompanying mechanisms: (1) Dos

Pilas was a large site that housed each level of the social hierarchy, from the ruling elite to the lowest commoner, whereas Aguateca was occupied by primarily the elite class (Lentz et al.

2013). (2) Dos Pilas and Aguateca were sites that experienced different abandonment histories:

Dos Pilas was attacked, but was slowly evacuated through time, whereas Aguateca was attacked

6 and burned (an abandonment method that results in significantly greater preservation of paleoethnobotanical remains (Hally 1981)). Preferential preservation of plant remains was regarded throughout the extent of the analysis, as varying factors lead to preservation or destruction of materials and such biases must not be ignored when establishing cultural and environmental assessments of an ancient people and region (Pearsall 2000).

The Paleoethnobotanical Remains of Dos Pilas

The results of the paleoethnobotanical study conducted for this project provide a significant assessment of the environment and people living at Dos Pilas during the Classic period of Maya occupation. This study verifies that similarities and disparities in plant utilization exist at both inter- and intra-site levels across the Maya realm, and that being able to recognize these aspects and the reasons for their manifestation is a substantial contribution of any paleoethnobotanical research (Pearsall 2000).

The remainder of this first chapter will be devoted to establishing the environmental and cultural setting of Dos Pilas, including any corroborating research previously conducted and any conclusive arguments that may have resulted. Chapter 2 will outline the methodology utilized for archaeological excavation, paleoethnobotanical sampling, and laboratory analysis of the remains recovered from the site. The results of the analysis will be examined in Chapter 3, which will then be discussed and assessed in Chapter 4. This discussion will situate the remains at Dos Pilas as they apply to the site itself, to Aguateca, and to the surrounding environment. The final chapter will provide a brief summary of the research findings, as well as provide suggestions for future paleoethnobotanical research at Dos Pilas that, hopefully, will promote a deeper understanding of paleoethnobotany as a whole, as well as the relationships between plants and

7 people that this type of research provides in the context of the Maya at Dos Pilas and across this ancient realm.

Modern and Ancient Environmental Setting

Geographic Setting

The Late Classic Maya polity of Dos Pilas within the Pasión River drainage area of the department of Petén in Guatemala, and is situated 150 meters above sea level at the western edge of the Petexbatun escarpment (Houston 1993), lies. Presently, the site falls within the municipality of Sayaxché, a town located nearby on the banks of the Pasión (Houston 1993). The kingdom of the Petexbatun that once encompassed an area of approximately 3,885 km² (Foster

2002) is located nearly 8 km east of Mexico, 120 kilometers to the southwest of the ancient

Maya civic-ceremonial center of Tikal, and 10 kilometers west of Aguateca (Houston 1993). The latter site, believed to have been established to control trade routes, is strategically located between the Pasión and Salinas rivers, with nearby Lake Petexbatún and the Pasión River forming a part of the Usumacinta River drainage (Demarest 2006). Elevations at the site vary over 60.22 meters (Houston 1993), resulting in a prominent difference in vegetation between the upper and lower tracts. The geology of the surrounding area is that of bedded limestone in which cave formations are abundantly recurrent (Houston 1993), with a total of 22 caves discovered in association with Dos Pilas.

Figure 1: Ancient Maya Site Map of the Petexbatun Note: Redrawn from Witschey and Brown (2010) Climate

Situated at 16° 26’ 45”N and 90° 17’ 45” W, the location of Dos Pilas corresponds to the

Tropical Moist Forest Life Zone (Houston 1993). This category of life zone is represented by multistratal deciduous or evergreen forest, with average rainfall ranging from approximately

2000-4000 mm annually. Dos Pilas receives on the order of 2500 mm of rainfall each year

(Minjares 2003). This rain, however, occurs mainly during the wet season that spans generally from June to December. Demarest (2006) suggests that more subsistence problems are caused for modern farmers by the seasonality than by the amount of rain received—a problem that the ancient Maya would have had to face as well. The temperature in this region averages approximately 25°C throughout the course of the year, with the highest temperatures occurring toward the end of the dry season (Demarest 2006). The climate in Central America has remained

9 relatively constant over the past 3000 years (Markgraf 1989), indicating that the present climate at Dos Pilas is similar to the climate during the Late Classic Period of occupation.

Vegetation

The flora present in an area tends to vary with soil thickness, quality, and drainage, among various other surface features (Emery 2010). Much of the Petexbatun is covered by lakes, rivers, and swamps (Rice 1993), necessitating strategic settlement of cities in order to maintain access to well-drained soils as well as easy access to resources located in the nearby lowland environment (Demarest 2006). Many of the sites located in this area would have been capable of supporting a wide array of plant and animal resources, year-round farming of levees, and access to potable water, transport, and trade (Dunning and Beach 2007) However, unlike many other major sites in the Petexbatun region, (such as Seibal, Tamarindito, Arroyo de Piedra, and

Aguateca), the site of Dos Pilas was not advantageously situated on a high escarpment crest immediately adjacent to waterways. Dos Pilas was located far removed from the Petexbatun

River and at a lower end of the escarpment in an area that was environmentally unsuited for human existence (Dunning, Beach, and Rue 1997). It has been suggested by Dunning and Beach

(2007) that life at Dos Pilas would have had to have been sustained nearly in its entirety by tribute from other centers.

The area in which Dos Pilas falls is presently found is moist tropical forest, suggestive of a highly developed canopy (in this case, a triple canopy [Emery 2010]) boasting upwards of 100 distinct species of botanical life per hectare (Demarest 2006). According to Standley and

Steyermark (1946), the uppermost canopy stretches to over 60 meters in height and consists primarily of mahoganies (Meliaceae family), Spanish cedars (Meliaceae family) and ceibas

(Bombaceae family). Amongst numerous others, the second canopy layer includes such taxa as strangler fig (Ficus spp.), sapodilla (Manilkara zapota), and zapotes (Pouteria spp.). Finally, the third tier of the canopy includes such species as Brosimum alicastrum Sw. (Moraceae family), zapotes, and fruit and rubber trees (Castilla elastica). Much of the forest today, however, has been destroyed by logging endeavors and the disturbances by swidden agriculturalists. Removal of these extensive canopies has in turn, left the forests surrounding Dos Pilas a mere remnant of its past glory.

Little can be found in the literature regarding any paleoethnobotanical reconstruction of the environs within the Petexbatun region. The majority of paleoethnobotanical remains collected within this region were collected by members of the Petexbatun Regional

Archaeological Project (Demarest 1997). The results of this study will reveal much about the ancient landscape of the Petexbatun, as the remains to be discussed are those that were collected by members of this project. However, a study done by Dunning and Beach (1994) revealed that the forest survival of the Petexbatun during the time of highest human occupation (the ninth century A.D.; Late Classic), was significantly greater than in Central Petén. This discovery was considered during the environmental reconstruction aspect of this project.

Fauna

Zooarchaeological publications regarding the Petexbatun region are available (Emery

1991; Emery 1992; Emery 1993; Emery 1997; Emery 2010; Emery et al. 2000) and allow for comparisons to the modern faunal assemblage. Briefly, the faunal collection recovered from this region includes an extensive range of marine, freshwater, terrestrial, and arboreal gastropods, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. Of the most abundant, the jute (Pachychilus

11 indiorum), apple snail (Pomacea flagellata), dwarf olive (Olivella perplexa), river clam

(Psoronaias sp.), Central American river turtle (Dermatemys mawii), domestic dog (Canus lupus familiaris), and white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) maintain some of the highest percentages in the calculation of Minimum Number of Individuals (MNI). In this case, MNI is a measure used to estimate the number of animals or other organisms present from a cluster of remains (Klein and Cruz-Uribe 1984) in a fashion that exhibits the highest level of parsimony. It is a common measure in zooarchaeology (Domíngues-Rodrigo 2012).

At Dos Pilas, the most highly recovered faunal remains by percent MNI show slightly different trends than those from the entire region. Here, netted olive (Oliva reticularis), snowy dwarf olive (Olivella nivea), marginella shells (Prunum apicinum apicium), river clam

(Psoronaias sp.), domestic dog (Canus lupus familiaris), and white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) represent the highest percent MNI (Emery 1991; Emery 1992; Emery 1993; Emery

1997; Emery 2010; Emery et al. 2000). Differences between site assemblages and regional assemblages can be attributed to the very nature of a tropical environment and resource diversity from site-to-site (Rice 1993).

The Cultural Setting of Dos Pilas

Cultural Significance: Archaeological Discoveries at Dos Pilas

Nearly unparalleled in the ancient Maya realm, the great detail with which the history of

Dos Pilas has been reconstructed is the cause of such relevance and intrigue of the site to authorities and amateurs alike (Martin and Grube 2000). Such comprehensive reconstruction has uncovered a significant glimpse into the political strife and rivalries that the Maya have become

12 known for; the Maya at Dos Pilas were entwined in complex and intimate relationships with such well-known Maya sites as Tikal and Calakmul (Webster 2002).

The history of Dos Pilas was, from the very beginning, violent, militaristic, and predatory

(Martin and Grube 2000). Dos Pilas was established in approximately A.D. 625 by royal elites from Tikal in order to maintain control of the trade network that wound throughout the region

(Dunning, Beach, and Rue 1997). The placement of this establishment was entirely militaristically strategic, as research suggests that Dos Pilas was not located in an ecologically favorable area (Dunning, Beach , and Rue 1997), forcing inhabitants to rely heavily on tribute from nearby sites (Dunning, Beach, and Rue 1997; Webster 2002; Demarest 2006). In fact, no evidence for agriculture was discovered in relation to Dos Pilas whatsoever (Dunning, Beach, and Rue 1997), which, as explained by Demarest (2006), is the result of the “wretched soils and resource-poor environment” in which it existed. Despite this apparent judgmental error in site location, Dos Pilas was able to maintain a considerable population of approximately 2,000-4,000 people (Palka 1997), a feat that could have only been accomplished with imported tribute

(Dunning, Beach, and Rue 1997). This very fact established Dos Pilas as a predator state

(Houston and Mathews 1985; Houston 1993), which expanded its range of control through military exploits against such kingdoms as Itzan, Arroyo de Piedra, and Tamarindito, all the while controlling access to trade through its strategic location at a fork in the Pasión-Usumacinta trade route (Demarest 2006). The particular fork being referenced is one that includes both a riverine route flowing near an extensive number of major and minor centers, as well as a land route enabling trade of highland resources to the Central Petén (Demarest 2006).

Epigraphic evidence from the numerous hieroglyphics discovered at Dos Pilas suggests that this expansionist campaign began with the site’s first king, B’alaj Chan K’awill (Ruler 1),

13 who came to power at Dos Pilas in A.D. 648 under the same emblem glyph forms as Tikal

(Houston and Mathews 1985; Houston 1993; Webster 2002). This suggests that a relationship between the rulers of the two sites existed at least in the primary stages of the establishment of

Dos Pilas (Houston and Mathews 1985; Houston 1993).

Epigraphic evidence further suggests, however, that the initial association of Dos Pilas to

Tikal is believed to have ended in approximately A.D. 648 when Ruler 1 broke away from Tikal to become a vassal state of Calakmul (Houston 1993; Webster 2002). The apparent relationship between Dos Pilas and Calakmul endured for an extensive period of time, as B’alaj Chan K’awiil was twice an honored guest at Calakmul in A.D. 686, and evidence supports a much later presence of Calakmul nobles in the Dos Pilas court (Webster 2002). The importance of such a relationship can be exemplified by assertions made by the Vanderbilt teams responsible for excavating elite architecture. At Dos Pilas, an extensive percentage of the elite architecture was excavated, revealing that these areas were designed for and utilized as ritual platforms involving local and visiting elites (Demarest, Valdés, and Escobedo 1995; Demarest 1997),and that power and control were maintained through such utilization (Houston 1993). Upon Calakmul’s defeat by Tikal in A.D. 695, however, the militaristic regime of Dos Pilas continued. By A.D. 735, Dos

Pilas had conquered Seibal (Foster 2002), the largest city in the Pasión River region (Sharer and

Traxler 2006). Furthermore, the fourth king of Dos Pilas, K’awiil Chan Kinich, successfully expanded the kingdom as far northwest as Yaxchilan (a Maya site located in what is now

Chiapas, Mexico) by capturing the lord of this city in A.D. 745 (Webster 2002). The abandonment of Dos Pilas occurred soon after this military feat, however, and it was a two-fold process. Production of elite architecture halted in A.D. 761 (Demarest 2006), suggesting elite abandonment of the site accompanied by a possible relocation to some of the nearby, more

14 defensible cities such as Aguateca, Cancuen, and Seibal (Webster 2002). Those that remained at

Dos Pilas are believed to have been primarily commoners, who were able to maintain a livelihood for a time by hastily constructing protective walls out of materials scavenged from local architecture around such areas as the western plaza group acropolis and the El Duende pyramid (Palka 1997). This occupation, however, ended soon thereafter, leaving Dos Pilas, the former nucleus of the Petexbatun kingdoms, a desolate city and home only to random squatters

(Foster 2002).

It is important to note that while the history of Dos Pilas was violent and militaristic, the culture and lifestyle of the people occupying the polity during this time period were dynamic and complex (Palka 1997). The Maya are a people of great achievement, having been the only known pre-Columbian civilization with a fully developed writing system, as well as advances in art, architecture, mathematics, calendrics, and astronomical systems (Coe 2005). Some of these cultural aspects of the Maya at Dos Pilas will be discussed further.

One of the most significant questions to be answered on the subject of an ancient culture concerns the social structure or orientation—that is, was society stratified and if so, how did become manifest in the archaeological record? Throughout time, increasing societal complexity has been typified by increasing social inequality (Lavenda and Schultz 1998). The Maya, being a state-level society (typically defined as the most complex form of social organization)(Coe

2005), displayed this inequality at many of their sites. The Maya at Dos Pilas were no different.

Research done by Joel Palka (1995; 1997) suggests that the stratification at Dos Pilas was unusually complex, with a structural hierarchy composed of 10 different levels. This differs from the typical two-class system of nobles and commoners (Thompson 1954; Sanders and Price

1968; Marcus 1992; Sharer 1993), or the three class system of nobles, middle class, and peasants

(Sanders 1992; Palka 1995). Palka’s (1995; 1997) 10-level hierarchy was derived utilizing a multifaceted approach that applied various aspects of social inequality modeling and statistical testing. Some of the class categories that would have been present at Dos Pilas were ruling elite, non-royal nobles, high status commoners, middle status commoners, and low status commoners

(Palka 1995). This research suggests that various other rankings, such as slaves, would have almost certainly been present at Dos Pilas as well but are difficult to expose archaeologically.

According to Palka (1995), “social ranking can be defined as a system of ordering people in a social set according to status and role. Stratification is the hierarchical ordering of these sets in society.” This is an important avenue of research in the reconstruction of an ancient society due to the fact that these different classes typically experienced differential access to various resources. These same societal implications have been observed at a multitude of sites throughout human history.

Among the goods and services produced by any society, botanical resources are inevitably essential to the well-being of the inhabitants (Van der Veen 2007). Utilized for consumption, building materials, and even burials, the presence or absence of certain plants among the artifacts associated with a household can demonstrate social class disparities (Lentz

1991). Observable both contemporaneously and archaeologically, plant utilization offers numerous insights into the social relations between societal members. Studying the archaeological deposition of plant remains and their spatial disbursement patterns allow for insights into prehistoric stratified societies. It enables an understanding of past resource availability within a certain area, neighborhood and class relationships as well as economic practices. With proper analysis, botanical remains provide cues regarding a society as a whole, including its social strata. It is for these reasons that the social hierarchy at Dos Pilas can be

16 understood, as determined by plant use differences between the social classes: a goal I will attempt to elucidate in this thesis.

Other avenues of research have been conducted at Dos Pilas and have revealed some of the elaborate aspects of the Maya culture there. Of the many things for which the Maya are known, elaborate rituals regarding all aspects of life are certainly among them. Research within the Maya realm throughout the years has produced abundant evidence to support the assertion that the ancient Maya had a reverence and appreciation for the spiritual significance of caves, and therefore utilized them for ritualized purposes (Brady 1989; Brady 1997; Chládek 2011;

Kavountzis 2009; Moyes 2006; Peterson 2006). This aspect of Maya culture was explored at Dos

Pilas by James Brady and his group of professional spelunkers (Demarest 2006), suggesting that those inhabiting Dos Pilas shared coinciding beliefs regarding caves. Brady (1997) was able to demonstrate that the site structure at Dos Pilas was more oriented toward caves and a sacred landscape than reported at other sites. A total of 22 caves were found in association with Dos

Pilas (Houston 1993), with the largest and most imposing caves associated with the largest and most eminent architecture, including the El Duende Pyramid, the Bat Pyramid, and possibly the main plaza (Brady 1997). Through the arrangement and combination of caves within their built environment, the “surface architecture becomes an extension of and interwoven into the sacred landscape,” allowing the architecture to share “the supernatural power and importance of the natural feature” (Brady 1997). It seems obvious to suggest that the Maya at Dos Pilas venerated the ritual aspect of life just as has been suggested for the Maya elsewhere in their realm.

In pursuit of and in conjunction with the research described above, it is similarly a goal of this thesis to further explore the ritual nature of the Maya at Dos Pilas. Several plant materials have been ubiquitously associated with the ritualized facet of society in the Maya realm. Not

17 only was it a staple crop, but based on depositional context, one example of these ritualized plants was maize (Zea mays L.). Many burials of all social contexts exhibited the presence of maize, which was often placed in the mouth of the deceased or alongside in containers, metaphorically assuring sustenance for the underworld passage (Coe 2005). Another example is cacao (Theobroma cacao L.). The seeds embedded within the fruits of this tree were the coveted fraction, which the Maya used as a currency system, for ritual, in favorably consumed and desirable drink, and in various other dishes for consumption (Barriga et al. 2000). Chocolate was believed to be a divine gift, a source of power, and, in particular, a food that greatly promoted the health of the consumer (Coe and Coe 1996). In preparation of the chocolate drink (the most popular form of consumption), in Pre-Columbian Maya times and thereafter, seeds from this plant were ground, mixed with such Maya staples as maize, chili, and vanilla, and put into water to create a highly desireable cocoa drink. This drink, initially, was reserved for only the highest elites, as this was considered “the food of the gods” (Coe and Coe 1996), and was used by elites daily, in ritualized ceremonies, and given as gifts to secure political negotiations (Barriga et al.

2000). As its use increased, however, the middle and lower classes gained access to it and eventually the drink was consumed by all classes of society. However, the elites ensured that the distribution of this revered plant was skewed in their favor. Archaeological evidence from the royal Aztecan storehouse of King Montezuma suggests an estimated yearly expenditure of

11,680,000 beans (Coe and Coe 1996), used for his own consumption purposes and to pay attendants. This type of wealth was not universal, as commoners typically only had access to the beans for infrequent consumption and small purchases—not to utilize in excess (Coe 2005).

Furthermore, elite burial tombs have been excavated throughout the Maya realm that contain offerings of this plant, most often stored in pottery covered with images depicting Maya gods

18 fighting over the revered beans and kings being served cacao preparations by slaves (Coe and

Coe 1996).

Pine (Pinus sp.), copal (Protium copal), and balché (Lonchocarpus sp.) also have been associated with ritual in previous Maya research (Morehart 2011; Lentz 2005). Burned for smoke or incense, these plant materials would have played an important role in numerous documented

Maya rituals.

Research conducted at Dos Pilas has been thus far successful in illuminating some of the lifeways of the Late Classic Maya at that site. As a highly important and influential site, the results of such research have significant impacts on the way in which the Maya are viewed and understood.

Cultural Significance: Archaeological Discoveries in the Petexbatun

In the pursuit of understanding the history of the Petexbatun region and the research conducted there, it must first be understood that the Petexbatun region encompasses many sites and extends through several ecological zones, and has been studied as the Classic Maya rulers had themselves defined it (Demarest 2006). This region includes many sites buts its central power was located at Dos Pilas (Houston 1993).

Archaeologically, the major centers of the Petexbatun remained largely unexplored until the 1950s, when a portion of Dos Pilas was uncovered by José María and Lisandro Flores of

Sayaxche (Vinson 1960; Berlin 1960; Navarrete and Luján 1963; Houston 1993; Demarest

2006). This initial discovery prompted several small test excavations by several researchers

(Vinson 1960; Navarrette and Lujan 1963; Ivanoff 1968; Graham 1973), which were largely unfruitful, producing only enough evidence to suggest that site occupation occurred primarily

19 during the Late Classic period (Forsyth 1980). The most productive research at Dos Pilas following its initial discovery was done by Graham (1967). In his research, Graham produced detailed maps and photographs of Dos Pilas, inspiring the first epigraphic research at the site, which was conducted by Mathews (1979). Epigraphic research done by Mathews, and by the later collaboration with Stephen Houston (Houston and Mathews 1985; Houston 1987) produced a detailed dynastic sequence of Dos Pilas as well as its history of warfare with Tikal, thus laying the foundation for future research in this area (Demarest 2006).

The majority of the research done in the Petexbatun (including at its capital center of Dos

Pilas) was conducted by the members of the Petexbatun Regional Archaeological Project of

Vanderbilt University (Demarest 2006) and is described in great detail in the VIMA monograph series (Dunning and Beach 2007.; Emery 2010; Foias and Bishop 2013; O’Mansky 2003; Wright

2006). A brief synopsis of these investigations, which ran from 1989-1997, will be provided later. These investigations included research by over 50 scholars and were initiated to understand the “culture, artifacts, architecture, ecology, economics, ritual, warfare, and history” of both major centers and rural areas within this diverse region (Demarest 2006). Utilizing a standardized methodological approach throughout all of the various avenues of research to ensure comparable data throughout, the members of this project worked with the unanimous goal of elucidating the details of the ambiguous Classic Maya collapse (Demarest 2006).

According to research done at Altar de Sacrificios and Seibal (Willey 1972; Willey 1973;

Willey 1978; Willey and Smith 1969; Willey et al. 1975)—a project run by Gordon Willey beginning in 1958 and the precedent to the Vanderbilt Project—the “fall” of the Maya at the end of the Classic Period was believed to have been the direct result of foreign invasion and conversion to a “Mexicanized Maya” (Demarest 2006). Demarest (2006), however, goes on to

20 suggest that many of the findings of the Vanderbilt Project do not support this assertion; in fact, many contradict this assertion. Of the many contributions of the archaeological project, one of the most important was the discovery that in the Petexbatun region, dynastic rivalries and competition, resulting in shifting political ideology, during the Late Classic period were severe.

These competing factors ultimately led to destructive warfare and the collapse of some of the most important centers (Demarest 1997; Demarest and Escobedo 1998). This theory is supported by much of the research done by the project, including the ceramic analysis done by Foias

(1996).

In her ceramic analysis of the Petexbatun region, Foias (1996) demonstrates that the modes of production and exchange during the Late Classic period were dynamic and extensive.

To assess changes in this economy, she utilized both a standardization study to detect shifts in the production system as well as instrumental neutron-activation analysis (INAA) to assess changes in interregional exchange patterns (Foias and Bishop 1997). The results of this study suggest that rather than changes in ceramic style throughout the Late Classic and into the

Terminal Classic periods, a stylistic continuity was discovered. Foias (1996) suggests that these results indicate that extensive foreign invasion did not occur during these time periods. What is implied by the ceramic evidence, however, is a slight decrease in pottery standardization and interregional exchange (Foias and Bishop 1997). The ceramic economy of the Late and Terminal

Classic periods, disrupted by the warfare among the various cities within the Petexbatun, resulted in greater localization of production methods and designs. Foias and Bishop (1997) continue to assert that the constancy of the ceramic production and exchange systems throughout this period in time suggests that there was a disconnect between the political and economic systems in the

Petexbatun—further evidence that the political instability was one of the foremost causes of the

Classic Maya “collapse” in the Petexbatun region.

The political causes of the collapse gained additional support from the results of the ecology, paleoecology, subsistence, and land use subprojects of the Petexbatun Regional

Archaeological Project (Demarest 2006). It has long been asserted by various researchers, such as Santley et al. (1986), Culbert (1977), and Hodell et al. (1995), that the Classic Maya collapse was a result of overpopulation, environmental exploitation, and/or climate change (Demarest

2006). The subprojects that explored these assertions, however, found evidence that suggests otherwise. Initial occupation of the Petexbatun during the Preclassic period occurred along lakes and streams and resulted in large tracts of forest being cleared for agriculture (Dunning, Beach, and Rue 1997). Following this initial settlement, there is evidence to suggest a contraction in the regional population, thus allowing for extensive forest regrowth and a return to mature species

(Dunning and Beach 2007). The Late Classic period again saw a surge in population growth along with some forest clearance, but evidence collected by Wright (1997) suggests that a significant portion of the forest cover remained, despite the extensive agricultural systems in the region. Dunning, Beach, and Rue (1997) indicate that during the Late Classic Period, as population and agricultural intensity increased in the Petexbatun, so too did the ecological management practices by the ancient Maya. Their research has uncovered several types of terracing employed by these people that would have dramatically decreased the problem of soil erosion, as well as areas that had been barricaded with walls to more directly control agricultural production and management. These management practices would have allowed the Maya to maintain a greater population level, as was seen during the Late Classic period, without heavy exploitation of the surrounding environment. Dunning, Beach, and Rue (1997) concluded that

“…the interplay of environmental factors, such as the existence of agriculturally valuable land along the Petexbatun Escarpment, and social factors, such as prolonged intersite hostilities, probably spurred the development of the distinctive, complex, and divided regional landscape.”

This general trend of an alternative collapse theory was further supported by the bioarchaeological research conducted by Lori Wright (Wright 2006). Wright conducted intensive recovery and analysis methods on sites throughout the Petexbatun and included a reanalysis of the bones discovered previously at Seibal, Altar de Sacrificios, and Itzan, to produce a bioarchaeological assemblage from over 250 individuals (Wright 2006). She examined the remains for maize and meat consumption patterns in addition to searching for evidence of anemia, infectious disease, or dental growth abnormalities that would be suggestive of the previously hypothesized trend of degenerating nutrition as a result of high population density, environmental exploitation, and climate change (Wright 1997). In her conclusions, Wright

(1997) states: “…δ13C trends do not support the assertion that maize reliance increased dramatically or was a key factor leading to a deterioration of health. Likewise, nitrogen isotopic data confirm that animal protein remained available for [elite] human consumption into the

Terminal Classic Period. Moreover…porotic hyperostosis, periostosis, and enamel hypoplasias are no more abundant in the skeletons of Late and Terminal Classic …than they were during earlier periods.” The only dietary change observable after the collapse was a decrease in the inequality of food accessibility—that is, degradation of the hierarchy led to a more uniform social environment and more equal access to resources (Demarest 2006). The accumulation of data indicating a sociopolitical cause for the Late Classic Collapse in the Petexbatun region is becoming abundantly clear.

Perhaps the most convincing evidence for sociopolitical causes of collapse was produced by the regional settlement patterns, defensive systems, and monuments, epigraphy, and history subprojects of the Petexbatun Regional Archaeological Project. As was similarly discovered by

Dunning, Beach, and Rue (1997), Preclassic settlement strategies were based upon local rivers, lakes, and streams that were situated within favorable ecological zones (O’Mansky and Dunning

2004). With its establishment by Tikal during the Late Classic period, however, Dos Pilas altered that settlement pattern. Its location was in an area that could not actively support the population but proved to be militarily strategic, thus modifying the settlement bias toward an economic and politically favored strategy (O’Mansky 1996, O’Mansky and Dunning 2004). In addition to this shift in settlement strategy, major centers “were surrounded by extensive and sometimes massive earthworks, while rural villages were clustered behind crude palisade walls atop steep hills and karst towers” (Demarest 2006). Demarest et al. (1997) were able to conclude through their research of the defensive systems in this region that the walls were constructed with dismantled architecture and displayed various other attributes suggestive of hastily prepared and militaristic- oriented forms of architecture corresponding temporally to the epigraphic evidence for the dissolution of the Petexbatun kingdom. What all of the research described above suggests is that despite the various difficulties and hardships that may have been experienced by the Classic

Maya, the most prominent factor in the downfall of such a complex civilization was themselves—political strife and warfare could not be overcome, contributing to the “fall” of the ancient Maya at Dos Pilas.

A Brief History of Aguateca

Due to the relationship between the sites of Dos Pilas and Aguateca, understanding some of the history of the latter will aid in the interpretation of the comparisons between the two sites conducted below.

Aguateca, unlike Dos Pilas, was far more typical of a Classic Period Lowland Maya site, in that its location took advantage of highly elevated escarpment crests, which provided access to well-drained soils, the resources of the lowland environment, year-round farming of levees, as well as close proximity to lagoons and rivers (Demarest 2006). This suggests that although only located 10 km to the southeast of Dos Pilas (Houston 1993), the inhabitants at Aguateca may have been utilizing a different set of resources than those at Dos Pilas.

Another primary difference between the two sites is the abandonment method that was experienced by each. Whereas Dos Pilas experienced a more gradual decline in population

(quick abandonment by elites in A.D. 761 followed by slower abandonment by commoners and squatters [Demarest 2006; Palka 1997]), the quick abandonment at Aguateca was the result of an attack during which many of its structures were burned (Lentz et al. 2013). The consequence of such burning is that it provided conditions highly favorable for the preservation of plant remains; burning of the structures resulted in a burning of all materials within, leaving many plant remains carbonized and in situ. Paleoethnobotanical analysis of plant remains collected at Aguateca conducted by Lentz et al. (2013), suggests that the assemblage of plant remains from Aguateca

“…parallels discoveries at other Maya sites from the Classic period, but the Aguateca collection is unique because the inventory of plants used is extensive, the plants within the site were left in situ and we have a good understanding of where the various plants were cultivated or collected.”

This study was able to elucidate information regarding food preparation areas, such as the north room of Structure M8-8, in which squash and maize remains were recovered next to a calabash

25 serving vessel; and in the south room, grinding stones were accompanied by nance pits, squash rinds, sapote seeds, and maize kernels (Lentz et al. 2013). Extensive evidence for maize consumption was uncovered, as well as evidence for the possibility of orchards within the walls of the polity, arising due to numerous identifications of tree crops such as avocado, calabash, sapote, nance, guava, annona, and cacao. Evidence for the use of pine was also uncovered at

Aguateca, despite its low probability of native growth in the surrounding environs—once again suggestive of pine being a possible trade commodity, and evidence for its obvious importance throughout all of the Maya realm (Lentz et al. 2013).

Summary

In summary, Dos Pilas was an influential Late Classic Maya center located in the

Petexbatun region near the Pasión River. The site was occupied by a complex social hierarchy of individuals ranging from slave to royal elite and leaving an exceptional archaeological imprint within the boundaries of this location. Paleoethnobotanical remains preserved primarily through carbonization were discovered in each of these social contexts, affording an extensive and largely comprehensive view of the plant resource requirements of this society. This thesis attempts to develop a greater understanding of the implications of these remains as they apply to subsistence, resource procurement, access, and utilization as it applies to social strata, and how these remains compare to those discovered at Aguateca. Understanding these relationships will further clarify details regarding the Maya at this polity as well as the ancient Maya as a whole.

Chapter 2 Methodology

A proper database of collected plant materials from archaeological contexts is critical to any paleoethnobotanical study. The legitimacy of the findings is dependent on rigorous and intensive collection, identification, and analysis of the recovered plant remains (Pearsall 2000).

This suggests that field, laboratory, and statistical methodology must remain consistently rigorous throughout the extent of the project, and, while sometimes difficult to maintain, is essential to the validity of the findings (Pearsall 2000). Both the field and laboratory methods utilized in the collection and analysis of plant remains recovered at Dos Pilas will be discussed here, followed by a brief overview of the statistical testing that was employed to interpret the relevance of such findings.

Field Methods: Archaeological Excavation

Prior to discussing in detail the recovery of paleoethnobotanical remains at Dos Pilas, it is necessary to discuss the techniques of excavation utilized by the archaeologists of the Petexbatun

Regional Archaeological Project. This methodology is outlined in detail in the third volume of the Vanderbilt Institute of Mesoamerican Archaeology monograph, (Inomata 2008), and in the first volume of the Monographs of the Aguateca Archaeological Project First Phase (Inomata and

Triadan 2010). These monographs describe the archaeological excavation procedures undertaken at Aguateca; the same procedures were utilized at Dos Pilas (David Lentz, personal communication 2012) and briefly will be discussed below.

Excavation typically began with 2x2 meter test pits adjacent to the axes of discovered structures and was expanded horizontally as required to expose the entirety of the bordering

27 structure (Inomata 2008). Instruments utilized for excavation included such things as trowels and handpicks for general excavation, and toothpicks, bamboo sticks, and paintbrushes for the more delicate aspects of excavation (Inomata 2008). For the purpose of maintaining the provenience of recovered materials, a hierarchical labeling system consisting of five levels was employed on all samples collected (Inomata and Triadan 2010). The five levels associated with each sample were the site (i.e. Dos Pilas, shortened to DP), operation, suboperation, unit, and lot (Inomata

2008). Based upon discovered cultural or natural features (such as a niche or burial or a thick layer), excavation would be modified to further subdivide the provenience classifications to correspond with and incorporate such divisions (Inomata and Triadan 2010). Furthermore, as archaeological samples were collected, and particularly if there was an excess of visible cultural material, each 2x2 m unit was typically subdivided into 1x1 m lots to provide greater provenience specificity. Each level of classification allowed for greater provenience definition and promoted greater controls in analysis later on.

During excavation, all archaeological sediments were screened with 1/4” or 1/16” mesh in order to collect the maximum number of artifacts in each excavated area. All collected materials then were stored in bags that were clearly labeled with the appropriate provenience information (Inomata and Triadan 2010). Simultaneous collection of flotation samples and visible organic materials occurred throughout the excavation procedures (Inomata 2008) with a specific methodology, as follows.

Field Methods: Paleoethnobotanical Sampling

Samples for flotation were collected in conjunction with archaeological artifact screening

(Inomata 2008). In each excavation level, a two liter soil sample was gathered and stored in a

28 cloth bag that had previously been labeled in order to preserve the proper provenience information (Pearsall 2000). Additional two liter soil samples were collected if an abundance of organic material was visible atop the excavated layer (David Lentz, personal communication

2012). These layers were subdivided into 1x1 m areas from which the samples were collected.

Visible macrobotanical remains were collected as they were encountered and stored in labeled bags for later analysis (Inomata 2008; Inomata and Triadan 2010). Additional samples were taken from such important contexts as middens, room floors, niches, vessels, and burials. Each were properly labeled and stored for further examination (Inomata 2008).

Flotation

Flotation is a technique by which ancient and typically carbonized plant remains are liberated from the surrounding soil matrix through the utilization (by various methods) of water

(Pearsall 2000). This is done to recover small artifacts and bone, seeds, and various other botanical materials that are too small to be captured by the larger mesh screens used to initially process the soils (Struever 1968; Pearsall 2000). Struever (1968) suggests that flotation, while not entirely comprehensive in the collection of ancient plant remains, helps to eliminate two major sources of error in the archaeological record: (1) the tendency to select for larger plant fragments; and (2) the tendency to select for bone as opposed to plant remains. Soil samples collected from Dos Pilas were processed in a modified Apple Creek Flotation system. This flotation technique is described in detail by Struever (1968) and will be outlined below.

Flotation works “on the principle that different substances (e.g. stone, burnt clay, bone, and charred plant remains) have different porosities and therefore settle in water at different rates” (Struever 1968). This principle is applied by submerging a washtub in a body of water

29 that, if possible, is not entirely stagnant (Streuver 1968; Pearsall 2000). After collection and prior to flotation, the gathered soil samples were dried between sheets of newspaper to prevent any further degradation by mold (David L. Lentz, personal communication 2012). The samples were then poured into a washtub whose bottom has been replaced with a 1.5 mm (Schaaf 1981) mesh screen. As the soil was poured into the tub, the tub itself was rotated so as to agitate the matrix, releasing any smaller particles from the medium, which then settled at varying rates (Struever

1968). Then utilizing a tea strainer, the plant materials were scooped off and stored (Pearsall

2000). This process was repeated for all flotation samples until “examination of the tub contents indicate[d] that all bone and carbonized plant materials ha[d] been scooped off with the tea strainer” (Struever 1968). The charred plant remains and bone that were scooped off constitute what has been termed the “light fraction” of flotation samples (Pearsall 2000). The “heavy fraction” is composed of stone, pot sherds, and various other materials that sink to the bottom of the wash tub during flotation (Struever 1968; Pearsall 2000). Following flotation, the samples were dried between sheets of newspaper to halt mold growth and then stored in bags labeled with the proper provenience information. These samples were then sent to the paleoethnobotany lab of the University of Cincinnati for further identification and analyses.

Laboratory Methods

Various techniques were utilized to identify and analyze the collection once the recovery of plant remains from Dos Pilas was complete. The primary task was to sort the macroremain and flotation samples into broad taxonomic categories such as wood charcoal, seeds, rinds, and unidentifiable plant tissue (Pearsall 2000). This undertaking was conducted with the aid of a stereomicroscope with magnification capabilities of 8-50x. Each sample was sorted to isolate each distinct taxon from any others that may have been within the sample. The anatomical

30 features used to categorize each taxonomical grouping are summarized in detail by Pearsall

(2000). Briefly, seeds can be identified by size and shape, surface features (including attachments and hilum or pollination scars), the presence of embryo and endosperm, and the number of cotyledons. Fruits and nuts are identified utilizing a comprehensive set of comparative materials and by observing pericarp thickness, texture, and surface characteristics, the details of the endosperm, the presence of attachments, and morphological features of the exocarp (Pearsall

2000). Finally, wood is identified based on size, quantity, and arrangement of vessels, parenchymal cells, rays, tyloses and resin canals, and the presence or absence of seasonality of the wood (Panshin and de Zeeuw 1980). As with other plant materials, the final phase of identification is to compare the unknowns to reference materials.

Each paleoethnobotanical sample was given an identification number to preserve provenience data and for ease of later analysis (Pearsall 2000). The macrobotanical sample numbers began with 10001 and individual taxa within each sample were assigned their own specific identification number. For example, in sample 10001, if two distinct taxa were present, then 10001-001 and 10001-002 would be assigned as the identification numbers. These numerical assignments were then used throughout the remainder of the study. Upon encountering wood charcoal, this category of plant remains was further sorted into size classes using geological sieves ranging from 6.35 mm to 0.21 mm (Yarnell 1974). Fractions with plant parts greater than 2.00 mm in size were sorted in their entirety, while those in smaller size classes were selectively sorted to remove any other obviously visible plant materials, such as seeds, peduncles, or rind fragments (Pearsall 2000). Initial identifications for wood charcoal included broad taxonomic categories such as palm, pine, or dicot wood (Lentz 1991; Pearsall 2000).

Each sample sorted was also given a confidence rank classification to signify if further analysis and identification were necessary or recommended. This can be exemplified as follows: if, during the course of sorting, the analyst came across what looked like Zea mays (maize) kernels and could state with certainty that this was the correct identification, this was given a confidence ranking of 01 for taxa identification and 01 for plant part identification. Slight uncertainty decreased the ranking to 02 or 03, depending upon the level of uncertainty. This allowed for ease of later analysis of materials, as this was conducted by prioritizing the samples with the lowest certainty (02 and 03 rankings). It is important to note that along with the identifications, each taxon was sketched, counted and/or weighed and recorded for further analysis. This process was repeated until all samples had been identified to base taxonomic classifications.

Preliminary identifications provided in the electronic database that had been compiled for the Dos Pilas assemblage were rudimentary for the most part and further classification was possible for many of the samples. Once the rough sorting and preliminary identification had been accomplished, those remains labeled as “seeds” were further identified. Several samples had yielded seeds, whose size, shape, surface characters, etc. (as described above) were noted and compared to reference material (Lentz and Dickau 2005; Martin and Barkley 1961), as well as the Neotropical reference collection in the lab of David Lentz, for identification. All identifications were confirmed by David Lentz.

Following the identification of the seeds and fruit parts, images of the most exemplary specimens in each taxonomic categorization were produced with the Keyence VHX-S50 Digital

Multi-scan Microscope System available in the University of Cincinnati Department of

Chemistry’s Center for Biosensors and Chemical Sensors Instrumentation Facility. The

32 specimens were oriented on the microscope stage to expose each diagnostic character that aided in identification. Each specimen selected for imaging was oriented with an appropriate scale bar for comparative purposes. Micrographs were then produced by utilizing the software’s capture option and were transferred as digital images for further processing and reference purposes.

The next and most time consuming phase of taxa identification was the wood charcoal.

This process began by identifying the samples that contained wood charcoal of size and quality adequate for further identification. Starting with specimens that included charcoal pieces greater than two millimeters, both transverse (cross-section) and tangential surfaces were exposed, revealing anatomical characteristics of the wood that aided in identification (Panshin and de

Zeeuw 1980). To reveal these surfaces, the wood charcoal pieces were snapped by hand in such a fashion that would allow for clean planes of both the transverse and tangential orientations.

Samples with charcoal pieces less than two millimeters in size were also examined in the hope that one might have contained surfaces clean enough to view more closely. In a few cases

(Western 1970; Pearsall 2000), the wood was either too hard and solid to snap or too brittle to handle without absolute destruction. In these cases, careful cutting with a razor blade was often adequate to produce the required surfaces. Once these surfaces were exposed, any excess debris that might obscure the micrograph was removed by applying a gentle stream of compressed air.

Once unblemished by any debris, the samples then had to be readied for imaging a scanning electron microscope. The particular scanning electron microscope utilized for this purpose was a

FEI Philips XL30 ESEM, available through the University of Cincinnati Department of

Chemistry’s Center for Biosensors and Chemical Sensors Instrumentation Facility. The preparation for and use of the ESEM will be discussed below.

Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopy: Preparation, Utilization, and Outcome

Scanning electron microscopy produces images through the application of a concentrated beam of electrons upon a sample (Wischnitzer 1981). The electrons produce signals that are detected and transmitted to a data collector that will record information regarding minute details of the topography of the scanned surface, thus yielding high quality and highly comprehensive views of the sample in the form of electron micrographs (Newbury 1986). In regard to paleoethnobotanical remains, and wood charcoal in particular, this type of microscopy is vital to the process of identification, as it allows for a depth of view that cannot be reproduced by simple light microscopes (Pearsall 2000).

Of all the reviewed samples in the Dos Pilas assemblage, 106 taxa were appropriate for

ESEM analysis. Transverse and tangential sections had been produced for all, which then had to be mounted onto 1/2” slotted head, 1/8” pin aluminum specimen mounts (Ted Pella, Inc.) This was done by applying a generous layer of PELCO© Colloidal Graphite (Isopropanol Base), (also manufactured by Ted Pella, Inc.) onto the specimen mount. Carefully utilizing forceps to handle wood specimens, both the transverse and tangential sections of wood were situated atop the graphite-coated specimen mount and secured with an additional application of graphite near the base of the sample. Prior to positioning the samples atop the specimen mounts, each mount was assigned a number (1-12) with an associated location in a specimen box (see image below). The sample numbers and their associated specimen box and specimen mount numbers were all recorded to preserve provenience information continutity. Completed specimen boxes were stored in a Bel-Art Automatic Horizontal Desiccator Cabinet prior to imaging with the ESEM to prevent excessive moisture from distorting the samples while awaiting imaging.

Figure 2: This depicts a labeled specimen box, specimen mounts, and displays examples of fully mounted specimens (see mount locations 1-6) Immediately preceding insertion of the mounted specimens into the ESEM, the samples first had to be coated with a 10-20nm thick layer of a gold and palladium alloy (Goldstein et al.

1981) to act as a conducting material and prevent charging of the specimen (Newbury1986).

Charging occurs when there is a buildup of negative charges on a specimen due to poor electrical conductivity, and results in distorted micrographs (Goldstein et al. 1981) and a diminished possibility of identifying the specimen. This was operated by Necati Kaval of the University of

Cincinnati Department of Chemistry’s Chemical Sensors and Biosensors Laboratory utilizing a

Denton Vacuum sputter coater.

Once coated, the specimen mounts were then ready to be inserted into the ESEM for imaging. Initial instruction on the use of the ESEM and the production of appropriate micrographs was given by David Lentz and Necati Kaval, after which the operation of the ESEM was conducted by myself entirely without assistance. Each sample was viewed separately, producing transverse images at 50x and 100x magnification, always insuring to capture an area that revealed the most telling anatomical characteristics (Panshin and de Zeeuw 1980).

Additional magnification was employed if unique characteristics were present on the visible

35 surface that warranted closer examination. Tangential surfaces were imaged at 100x and 500x magnification using the same stipulations as were applied to the transverse surfaces, again producing additional images and magnifications if warranted.

Figure 3: (left) ESEM station in the UC Department of Chemistry’s Chemical and Biosensors Laboratory; (right) FEI Philips XL30 ESEM and EDX system Once the images were produced, identification of specimens could then proceed. The initial process involved becoming familiar with the patterning of the anatomical structures and basic groupings of samples into similar-looking taxa. Measurements were taken that included such things as vessel diameter ranges, vessel density, ray length and cell width, etc. Any diagnostic characteristics (such as parenchymal banding or tyloses) were noted. These anatomical patterns, measurements, and characters were then compared to reference specimens in the lab and published images (Chichignoud et al. 1990; Détienne and Jacquet 1983; Kribs

1959; Mainieri and Chimelo 1978; Uribe 1988) until positive identifications were acquired.

Statistical Analyses

Following identification of all samples to the most specific taxonomic classification possible, analysis of the resulting data commenced. As is typical in paleoethnobotanical analyses, the data were interpreted for absolute counts and weights, ubiquity, ratio measures such as kernel-to-cupule ratios of Zea mays (Arnold 2009) and wood-to-non-wood (Fall and Klinge

2010); diversity measures such as the Shannon-Weaver Index of Diversity, Simpson’s Index of

Diversity, and Pielou’s Measure of Evenness. Statistical significance of results was determined using primarily Mann-Whitney U Test, which is a non-parametric means of comparison

(Atherton 1972) as well as Chi-square tests in order to assess any differences in plant use practices between social classes at Dos Pilas as well as the differences in plant use practices between Dos Pilas and Aguateca.

Chapter 3

Results

The Collected Plant Remains

The collection of plant remains from Dos Pilas during the 1989-1992 field seasons of the

Petexbatun Regional Archaeological Project yielded a total of 353 samples, 154 of which were collected as they were encountered during the excavation of the site—these are described as macroremains, or those preserved archaeological plant remains large enough to be seen with the unaided eye (Table 1). The remaining 199 samples were flotation samples, each extracted from two liters of soil, and were taken from various excavation contexts across Dos Pilas (Table 1).

Through careful paleoethnobotanical analysis, 91.5% of the 353 samples were identified to at least the broad taxonomic class categorization of dicot, monocot, or gymnosperm. Many of these remains were identified further; 63.74% of all plant remains were identified to family, genus, or species level of taxonomic categorization. The remaining 8.5% of the plant remains were too fragmentary or weathered to be identified in any meaningful way, and were thus designated

“unknown spermatophyte tissue.”

Table 1: Plant remains collected during excavation of Dos Pilas

Taxon Common Parts Number Weight of Context Name(s) of Samples Samples (g) Apocynaceae Aspidosperma cruenta malady charcoal 1 0.83 elite floor Woodson

Rauvolfia sp. ték-ta-men charcoal 1 12.29 elite fill

Stemmadenia sp. huevos de charcoal 1 0.06 commoner fill caballo, cojones de burro Araliaceae Oreopanax sp. broad leaf charcoal 1 2.30 commoner balsam, aralia blanca Arecaceae Acrocomia aculeata coyol, grugru endocarps 3 0.17 commoner fill, (Jacq.) Lodd. ex Mart palm, macaúba commoner palm burial, elite midden

Attalea cohune Mart cohune palm, endocarp 1 0.20 commoner corozo palm burial

commoner cf. Bactris sp. pejibaye, endocarps, 3 3.99 burial chontaduro, charchoal pijuayo elite midden, Geonoma sp. súrtuba palm pit 1 0.07 commoner floor

Sabal sp. cabbage palm, charcoal 2 1.96 commoner palmetto midden

elite midden

Bignoniaceae Crescentia sp. calabash, jicara rind 2 0.05 elite midden, commoner Bixaceae Bixa orellana L. achiotl, charcoal 3 2.05 elite burial, aploppas commoner floor Boraginaceae Cordia sp. cordia pit 1 0.77 elite fill Burseraceae Protium copal (Schltdl. & copal, pom charcoal 1 74.01 commoner Cham.) collapse

Table 1 (continued) Taxon Common Parts Number Weight of Context Name(s) of Samples Samples (g) Clusiaceae Garcinia sp. jocomico, charcoal 1 7.93 commoner fill monkey fruit

Symphonia globulifera L.f. chewstick, charcoal 2 14.25 commoner fill árbol de leche maria Combretaceae Bucida buceras L. gregre, Júcaro charcoal 2 0.10 elite midden Convolvulaceae Convolvulus sp. bindweed seed 1 0.01 commoner floor Cyperaceae cf. Cyperus canus J. Presl. sedge fibers 1 4.53 commoner And C. Presl. floor

Scirpus sp. bulrush achene 1 0.01 commoner floor

Scleria sp. nutrush achene 1 0.01 commoner floor Cucurbitaceae Cucurbita sp. calabaza, seed 1 0.01 commoner squash burial Dicot, unknown rind, charcoal, 93 135.25 bench, burial, stem, floral bud, collapse, peduncle hearth, floor, midden, fill, vessel Dilleniaceae Curatella americana L. chaparro charcoal 1 0.13 commoner

Davilla kunthii A. St-Hil. chumico charcoal 1 4.80 commoner Euphorbiaceae Drypetes sp. bullhoof, charcoal 3 4.47 commoner Fabaceae succoutz midden, elite Acacia sp. charcoal 2 0.28 midden, elite acacia, subin floor

Andira inermis (W. Wright) charcoal 1 0.22 commoner DC. cabbage bark, midden almendro macho commoner Bauhinia purpurea L. charcoal 2 1.68 floor palo de orquideas Dalbergia stevensonii L.f. charcoal 1 0.05 elite midden rosewood, nogaed commoner

Table 1 (continued) Taxon Common Parts Number Weight of Context Name(s) of Samples Samples (g) Gliricidia sepium (Jacq.) madre de cacao charcoal 1 0.27 elite floor Kunth ex Walp.

Hymenaea courbaril L. palo colorado, charcoal 1 0.95 elite burial guapinol

Lonchocarpus castilloi machiche, charcoal 1 0.35 elite floor Standl. black cabbage bark

Lonchocarpus sp. charcoal 1 1.80 elite fill

Piscidia piscipula L. (Sarg.) dogwood, charcoal 2 1.99 elite floor habim

Platymiscium sp. macacauba, charcoal 1 8.09 commoner hormigo floor Flacourtiaceae Casearia sp. wild lime charcoal 1 0.11 commoner floor Lauraceae Licaria sp. aguacatillo, charcoal 7 10.51 elite burial, licaria elite floor, elite midden, commoner floor, commoner collapse

Nectandra sp. palo oloroso charcoal 5 19.61 elite midden, commoner fill, commoner floor, commoner midden

Persea americana Mill avocado, charcoal 1 6.09 elite burial, aguacate commoner midden, commoner cache Malpighiaceae Byrsonima crassifolia (L.) nance charcoal 1 0.08 elite Kunth Meliaceae Swietenia macrophylla King big leaf charcoal 2 0.51 commoner mahogany burial Monocot, unknown charcoal, fibers, 5 41.19 fill, burial roots

Table 1(continued) Taxon Common Parts Number Weight of Context Name(s) of Samples Samples (g) Moraceae Brosimum alicastrum Sw. ramón charcoal 6 42.20 elite floor, commoner collapse, commoner floor

commoner Coussapoa sp. mammar, charcoal 1 0.70 floor matapalo elite floor, elite Ficus sp. fig charcoal 3 0.13 midden, commoner floor

elite burial Trophis racemosa (L.) Urb. white ramón charcoal 2 16.04 Pinaceae Pinus sp. pine, pino charcoal, needle 22 12.99 elite bench,elite burial, elite floor elite fill, elite midden, commoner burial, commoner floor, commoner midden Poaceae Zea mays L. maize kernels, cupules, 28 33.68 elite collapse, cob fragments, elite floor, elite glume burial, elite midden, commoner burial, commoner midden, commoner fill, commoner floor Polygonaceae Coccoloba sp. papaturo, uve, seed 1 0.01 commoner monte Rosaceae Rubus sp. blackberry seed 2 0.02 elite midden

Table 1 (continued) Taxon Common Parts Number Weight of Context Name(s) of Samples Samples (g)

Rubiaceae Alseis sp. mamecillo charcoal 1 0.07 elite

Calycophyllum madroño charcoal 4 4.64 elite floor, candidissimum (Vahl) DC. commoner floor

Genipa americana L. genipapo, huito charcoal 1 2.16 elite floor

Morinda sp. noni charcoal 1 0.19 elite fill

Simira sp. chakte kok charcoal 5 12.25 elite floor, commoner, floor, commoner midden Salicaceae Salix sp. treique cheique charcoal 2 2.54 commoner fill, commoner midden Sapindaceae Cupania belizensis Standl. palo carbon charcoal 2 2.46 commoner midden

Matayba sp. matayba charcoal 4 4.92 elite burial, commoner posthole, commoner fill Sapotaceae Chrysophyllum sp. paripiballi charcoal 3 8.8 elite fill, elite midden

Manilkara zapota (L.) P. sapodilla charcoal 2 3.99 elite fill, elite Royen midden, commoner fill, commoner midden

Mastichodendron mastic charcoal 2 1.42 commoner foetidissimum Jacq. burial

Micropholis sp. cafetos charcoal 1 0.23 commoner midden

Pouteria sapota Moore et mamey sapote charcoal, seed 5 2.39 commoner Stearn coat midden, commoner fill, commoner floor Solanaceae Capsicum sp. chile peduncles 1 0.02 commoner fill

Table 1 (continued) Taxon Common Parts Number Weight of Context Name(s) of Samples Samples (g) Sterculiaceae Guazuma ulmifolia Lam. guácima, charcoal 2 3.35 elite midden, tablote elite fill

cf. Theobroma sp. cacao rind fragment 1 1.06 commoner floor unknown tuber 1 0.7 commoner floor

Ulmaceae Celtis sp. granjeno seed 1 0.01 commoner midden unknown spermatophyte 30 32.14 collapse, tissue hearth, floor, midden, vessel fill, fill, burial, collapse Verbenaceae Vitex gaumeri Greenm. yax-nik charcoal 1 0.05 elite floor Vitaceae Vitis sp. wild grape seed 2 0.02 elite, commoner Xylariaceae Hypoxylon sp. red cushion, segments, 21 157.75 elite floor, elite hypoxylon stroma, midden, attachment, rind, commoner fill, fruiting body commoner midden, commoner floor

Table 1 demonstrates that the most abundantly encountered plant remains collected from across the Dos Pilas excavation were various taxa of hardwood charcoal, Pinus sp. charcoal, various fragmentary parts of Zea mays, and various fragments of the fungus Hypoxylon sp.

Relative Abundance by Ubiquity

Ubiquity is a measure commonly utilized in paleoethnobotany that expresses the relative abundance of each taxon based on the number of contexts in which each taxon occurs, which is then converted into a percentage of the total number of contexts to give the ubiquity measure

(Pearsall 2000). In the case of remains recovered from Dos Pilas, the ubiquity measures were

44 determined for only plant remains identified to the generic or species level. Hypoxylon spp. (a sheet fungus) was not included in analysis either, as it was most likely an intrusive, non-cultural item. Four identified taxa dominated the Dos Pilas assemblage (Figure 4). The dicot tree species

(hardwoods) that were identifiable accounted for the most predominant part of the assemblage, making up approximately 48.4% of the total remains. Maize kernels, cupules, and cob fragments were second in terms of ubiquity, comprising 16.5% of the assemblage. Pine ranked third for ubiquity (11.7%), and palm ranked fourth (5.3%).

Ubiquity Measurement of Plant Remains at Dos Pilas 90

Percent Ubiquity Percent 30

0 Hardwood maize pine palm Taxon

Figure 4: Depiction of the ubiquity measurements expressed in the Dos Pilas assemblage. Relative Abundance by Mass Relative abundance by mass is another typical measurement used to quantify paleoethnobotanical remains that expresses the proportional weight of each taxon expressed as a percent (Pearsall 2000). The taxa previously discussed that dominated the ubiquity measures

45 were similarly the dominating taxa in this analysis as well, though the mass percentages do differ from the ubiquity measures (Figure 5). Hardwood charcoal again dominated the assemblage, occupying 84.5% of the recovered remains. Maize ranked second for mass percent, making up

9.9% of the assemblage. Pine charcoal ranked third (3.7%), and palm ranked fourth (1.9%).

Mass Percent Measurements of Plant Remains at Dos Pilas 90

40 Mass Percent Mass 30

0 Hardwood maize pine palm Taxon

Figure 5: Depiction of the mass percentage measurements expressed in the Dos Pilas assemblage. Environmental Assessment and Changes Through Time To determine the relative level wood extracted from the area surrounding Dos Pilas and the most likely utilized fuel source by the ancient inhabitants, a wood:non-wood ratio was calculated (Figure 6). It was determined that there were significantly more wood charcoal

46 remains recovered from hearth and midden contexts than non-wood remains (n=104; X2=6.5; p=<0.0108), indicating that hardwood was the preferred fuel.

Count 30

0 non-wood wood

Figure 6: Wood versus non-wood counts at Dos Pilas reveal that hardwood remains account for 63.17% of all remains whereas non-wood remains only account for 36.83% of the total remains, suggesting that the inhabitants had ample access to wood resources. The wood extraction preferences also were explored. By observing the orientation of the rays on each wood micrograph in the Dos Pilas assemblage, convergent rays versus parallel rays indicate whether the tree was juvenile or adult, respectively, when it was extracted and then used for fuel. In the Dos Pilas assemblage, only 5.3% of the wood samples had convergent rays and were thus, branches or juveniles when utilized. The remaining 94.7% of the hardwood samples were adults (parallel rays), suggesting that the Maya at Dos Pilas preferred large, adult trees for their fuel source.

Another environmental aspect that was explored was the possible diversity of the ancient forest as reflected by the diversity within the paleoethnobotanical assemblage. In order to quantify this, the Shannon (H) Index, Simpson’s Index, Simpson’s Index of Diversity, and

Pielou’s Evenness (J) were calculated and are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2: Reported diversity indices from the Dos Pilas and Aguateca paleoethnobotanical assemblages

Index Value DP Value Aguateca

Shannon Index (H) 3.647 2.88

Simpson’s Index (D) 0.057 0.105

Simpson’s Index of Diversity (1-D) 0.943 0.895

Pielou’s Evenness (J) 0.847 0.832

In addition to summarizing the identified plant remains (Table 1) and assessing the forest conditions during the period of Maya occupation at Dos Pilas (Figure 6), the identified remains were analyzed through time (Table 3) to reveal any time-related changes that may have occurred.

Of the 353 samples, 84.14% were from the Late Classic (LC) period, 13.3% were from the Late

Classic-Terminal Classic Transition (LC-TC), and 2.55% were from the Terminal Classic (TC) period.

Table 3: Presence/absence of all plant taxa recovered at Dos Pilas corresponding to time period to which they were dated

Identification LC LC-TC TC Remains Remains Remains Apocynaceae Aspidosperma cruenta + - - Apocynaceae Rauvolfia sp. + - - Apocynaceae Stemmadenia sp. + - - Araliaceae Oreopanax sp. + - - Arecaceae Acrocomia aculeata + - - Arecaceae Attalea cohune + - - Arecaceae Bactris sp. + + - Arecaceae Geonoma sp. - - + Arecaceae Sabal sp. - - - Bignoniaceae Crescentia sp. + - - Bixaceae Bixa orellana + + + Boraginaceae Cordia sp. + - - Burseraceae Protium copal - + - Clusiaceae Garcinia sp. + - - Clusiaceae Symphonia globulifera + - - Combretaceae Bucida buceras + - - Convolvulaceae Convolvulus sp. + - - Cyperaceae cf. Cyperus canus - + - Cyperaceae Scirpus sp. - + - Cyperaceae Scleria sp. + - - Cucurbitaceae Cucurbita sp. - - - Dilleniaceae Curatella americana + - - Dilleniaceae Davilla kunthii + - - Euphorbiaceae Drypetes sp. + + - Fabaceae Acacia sp. + - + Fabaceae Andira inermis - + - Fabaceae Bauhinia purpurea + - - Fabaceae Dalbergia stevensonii - + - Fabaceae Gliricidia sepium + - - Fabaceae Hymenaea courbaril + - - Fabaceae Lonchocarpus castilloi + - - Fabaceae Piscida piscipula + - - Fabaceae Platymiscium sp. + - - Flacourtiaceae Casearia sp. + - -

Lauraceae Licaria sp. + + - Lauraceae Nectandra sp. + + -

Table 3 (continued) Identification LC LC-TC TC Remains Remains Remains Lauraceae Persea americana + + - Malphigiaceae Byrsonima crassifolia + - - Meliaceae Swietenia macrophylla + - - Moraceae Brosimum alicastrum + + + Moraceae Coussapoa sp. + - - Moraceae Ficus sp. + - - Moraceae Trophis racemosa + - + Pinaceae Pinus sp. + + - Poaceae Zea mays + + - Polygonaceae Coccoloba sp. - - - Rosaceae Couepia sp. + - - Rosaceae Rubus sp. + - - Rubiaceae Alseis sp. + - - Rubiaceae Calycophyllum candidissimum + - - Rubiaceae Genipa americana + - - Rubiaceae Morinda sp. + - - Rubiaceae Simira sp. + + - Salicaceae Salix sp. + - - Sapindaceae Cupania belizensis - + + Sapindaceae Matayba sp. + - - Sapotaceae Chrysophyllum sp. + - - Sapotaceae Manilkara zapota + + - Sapotaceae Mastichodendron foetedissimum + - - Sapotaceae Micropholis sp. - - + Sapotaceae Pouteria sapota + - + Solanaceae Capsicum sp. - + - Sterculiaceae Guazuma ulmifolia + - - Sterculiaceae cf. Theobroma sp. - + - Ulmaceae Celtis sp. - + - Verbenaceae Vitex gaumeri + - - Vitaceae Vitis sp. + - -

Chi-square testing of the above presence/absence data reveals that, at Dos Pilas, there was a significant change in the plant remains recovered from the Late Classic, to the Late-

Terminal Classic transition, and into the Terminal Classic periods (n=252; df=2, X2=88.96; p=<0.0001), as can be more clearly observed below (Figure 7).

Figure 7: This figure shows that more of the plant remains found at Dos Pilas were associated with the Late Classic period than either the LC-TC transition, or the Terminal Classic period; it represents the presence/absence data of plant remains at Dos Pilas, in which the label “1” (blue) denotes presence and “0” (red) denotes absence.

The Cultural Assessment: Dos Pilas Elites versus Commoners Several statistical analyses were utilized to determine differences and similarities in plant utilization practices between the elites and commoners at Dos Pilas as well between the occupants of Dos Pilas versus those at Aguateca to quantify any observable differences. The first comparison to be discussed is between the elites and commoners at Dos Pilas. To compare these two factions of society, the Mann-Whitney U-test, a nonparametric statistic, was employed to

51 assess differences in ubiquity measures of both the recovered remains of woods and foods

(Tables 4 and 5). As Table 4 demonstrates, there is a significant difference in the diversity of wood remains recovered from Dos Pilas elites when compared to Dos Pilas commoners (U=465; z=2.65; p=0.008) as well as a significant difference in the recovered food remains between these two groups (U=88; z=3.87; p=0.0001). Overlaps in resource utilization occurred in several cases, owing to the possibility of multiple uses (i.e. used for both wood and food) of a single taxa.

Table 4: Ubiquity measures comparing wood remains recovered from Late Classic elite contexts and commoner contexts

Family Species Elite Commoner Apocynaceae Aspidosperma cruenta 1 0 Apocynaceae Rauvolfia sp. 1 0 Apocynaceae Stemmadenia sp. 0 1 Araliaceae Oreopanax sp. 0 1 Arecaceae cf. Bactris sp. 2 1 Arecaceae Sabal sp. 2 0 Bixaceae Bixa orellana 1 2 Boraginaceae Cordia sp. 1 0 Burseraceae Protium copal 0 1 Clusiaceae Garcinia sp. 0 1 Clusiaceae Symphonia globulifera 0 2 Combretaceae Bucida buceras 2 0 Dilleniaceae Curatella americana 0 1 Dilleniaceae Davilla kunthii 0 1 Euphorbiaceae Drypetes sp. 2 1 Fabaceae Acacia sp. 0 2 Fabaceae Andira inermis 0 1 Fabaceae Bauhinia purpurea 2 0 Fabaceae Dalbergia stevensonii 0 1 Fabaceae Gliricidia sepium 1 0 Fabaceae Hymenaea courbaril 1 0 Fabaceae Lonchocarpus castilloi 2 0 Fabaceae Piscidia piscipula 1 1 Fabaceae Platymiscium sp. 0 1 Flacourtiaceae Casearia sp. 1 0 Lauraceae Licaria sp. 5 2 Lauraceae Nectandra sp. 1 4 Lauraceae Persea americana 2 2 Malphigiaceae Byrsonima crassifolia 1 0 Meliaceae Swietenia macrophylla 0 2 Moraceae Brosimum alicastrum 3 3 Moraceae Coussapoa sp. 0 1 Moraceae Ficus sp. 2 1 Moraceae Trophis racemosa 2 0 Pinaceae Pinus sp. 12 10 Rosaceae Couepia sp. 1 0

Table 4 (continued) Family Species Elite Commoner Rubiaceae Alseis sp. 1 0 Rubiaceae Calycophyllum candidissimum 2 2 Rubiaceae Genipa americana 1 0 Rubiaceae Morinda sp. 1 0 Rubiaceae Simira sp. 1 4 Salicaceae Salix sp. 0 2 Sapindaceae Cupania belizensis 0 2 Sapindaceae Matayba sp. 1 3 Sapotaceae Chrysophyllum spp. 3 0 Sapotaceae Manilkara zapota 3 5 Sapotaceae Mastichodendron foetedissimum 0 2 Sapotaceae Micropholis venulosa 0 2 Sapotaceae Pouteria sapota 2 3 Sterculiaceae Guazuma ulmifolia 2 0 Verbenaceae Vitex gaumeri 1 0 Total 67 70

Table 5: Ubiquity measures comparing food remains recovered from Late Classic elite contexts and commoner contexts

Family Species Elite Commoner Arecaceae Acrocomia aculeate 1 2 Arecaceae Attalea cohune 0 1 Arecaceae cf. Bactris sp. 2 1 Arecaceae Geonoma sp. 0 1 Bignoniaceae Crescentia sp. 1 1 Bixaceae Bixa orellana 1 2 Boraginaceae Cordia sp. 1 0 Convolvulaceae Convolvulus sp. 0 1 Cucurbitaceae Cucurbita sp. 0 1 Lauraceae Persea americana 2 2 Malphigiaceae Byrsonima crassifolia 1 0 Poaceae Zea mays 8 22 Polygonaceae Coccoloba sp. 0 1 Rosaceae Rubus sp. 2 0 Sapotaceae Chrysophyllum sp. 3 0 Sapotaceae Manilkara zapota 3 5 Sapotaceae Pouteria sapota 2 3 Solanaceae Capsicum sp. 0 1 Sterculiaceae cf. Theobroma sp. 0 1 Ulmaceae Celtis sp. 0 1 Vitaceae Vitis sp. 1 1 Total 28 47

To further assess the differences or similarities between the social classes, maize kernel:cupule and wood:non-wood ratios for each class were determined and are summarized below (Table 6). Kernel:cupule ratios are suggestive of food consumption (kernels) versus processing (cupules) areas. These results suggest that remains from elite contexts contained significantly greater wood diversity than remains from commoner contexts (n=353; X2=7.41; p=0.0088), but no statistical difference in the number of maize kernels versus cupules (n=39;

X2=1.209; p=0.2715).

Table 6: Kernel:cupule ratios and wood:non-wood ratios suggest that there were both similarities and differences in the paleoethnobotanical assemblages of the elite and commoner classes of society at Dos Pilas (abbreviated DP)

Ratio DP Elite DP Commoner Significance

Kernel:Cupule 6 1.75 p = 0.2715

Wood:Non-Wood 2.29 1.16 p = 0.0088

The Cultural Assessment: Dos Pilas Elites versus Inhabitants at Aguateca Applying the same statistical procedures as had been conducted for the intra-site analysis of Dos Pilas elites and commoners, the inter-site analysis between Dos Pilas elites and those at

Aguateca yielded support for the assertion that the inhabitants at both sites were utilizing statistically dissimilar wood resources (U=678; z=3.34; p=0.0008) (Table 7) as well as food resources (U=81; z=3.53; p=0.0004)(Table 9). Only plant remains extracted from elite contexts at Dos Pilas were of concern in this analysis due to the fact that remains from Aguateca were only recovered from elite contexts. Keeping the appropriateness of comparison in mind, the statistical analyses between these two sites were conducted in this fashion by examining ubiquity of plant remains from elite contexts only. Overlaps in resource utilization once again occurred in several cases, owing to the possibility of multiple uses (i.e. used for both wood and food) of a single taxa.

Table 7: Ubiquity measures comparing wood remains recovered from Dos Pilas and Aguateca

Family Species DP Aguateca Elite

Anacardiaceae Anacardium occidentale 0 3 Annonaceae Annona sp. 0 2 Apocynaceae Aspidosperma cruenta 1 0 Apocynaceae Rauvolfia sp. 1 0 Arecaceae Sabal sp. 2 0 Bixaceae Bixa orellana 1 2 Boraginaceae Cordia alliodora 0 2 Boraginaceae Cordia sp. 1 0 Burseraceae Protium copal 0 1 Clusiaceae Clusia sp. 0 1 Combretaceae Bucida buceras 2 0 Euphorbiaceae Drypetes sp. 2 0 Fabaceae Bauhinia purpurea 2 0 Fabaceae Gliricidia sepium 1 0 Fabaceae Haematoxylum campechianum 0 1 Fabaceae Hymenaea courbaril 1 0 Fabaceae Leucaena sp. 0 1 Fabaceae Lonchocarpus castilloi 2 0 Fabaceae Piscidia piscipula 1 0 Flacourtiaceae Casearia sp. 1 0 Lauraceae Licaria sp. 5 2 Lauraceae Nectandra sp. 1 4 Lauraceae Persea americana 2 4 Malphigiaceae Byrsonima crassifolia 1 2 Moraceae Brosimum alicastrum 3 0 Moraceae Ficus sp. 2 1 Moraceae Trophis racemosa 2 0 Pinaceae Pinus sp. 12 6 Rosaceae Couepia sp. 1 0 Rubiaceae Alseis sp. 1 0 Rubiaceae Calycophyllum candidissimum 2 0 Rubiaceae Genipa americana 1 0 Rubiaceae Morinda sp. 1 0 Rubiaceae Simira sp. 1 0 Sapindaceae Matayba sp. 1 0 Sapotaceae Chrysophyllum sp. 3 0

Table 7 (continued) Family Species DP Aguateca Elite

Sapotaceae Manilkara zapota 3 2 Sapotaceae Pouteria sapota 2 1

Sterculiaceae Guazuma ulmifolia 2 0 Ulmaceae Celtis sp. 0 1 Verbenaceae Vitex gaumeri 1 0

Total (N) 65 36

Table 8: Ubiquity measures comparing food remains recovered from Dos Pilas and Aguateca

DP Family Species Elite Aguateca

Agavaceae Agave sp. 0 2 Anacardiaceae Anacardium occidentale 0 3

Annonaceae Annona sp. 0 2 Araceae cf. Syngonium podophyllum 0 1 Arecaceae Attalea cohune 0 5 Arecaceae cf. Bactris sp. 2 1 Bignoniaceae Crescentia sp. 1 2 Bixaceae Bixa orellana 1 2 Boraginaceae Cordia sp. 1 2 Cactaceae family 0 1 Cactaceae Opuntia sp. 0 1 Cucurbitaceae Cucurbita sp. 0 9 Fabaceae Leucaena sp. 0 1 Lauraceae Persea americana 2 4

Malphigiaceae Byrsonima crassifolia 1 2 Moraceae Ficus sp. 2 1 Myrtaceae Psidium guajava 0 4 Poaceae Zea mays 8 27 Portulacaceae Portulaca sp. 0 1 Rosaceae Rubus sp. 2 0 Rubiaceae Genipa americana 1 0

Rubiaceae Morinda sp. 1 0 Sapotaceae Chrysophyllum sp. 3 0 Sapotaceae Manilkara zapota 3 2 Sapotaceae Pouteria sapota 2 4 Solanaceae Capsicum annuum 0 1 Solanaceae Capsicum sp. 0 2 Sterculiaceae Theobroma cacao 0 1 Vitaceae Vitis sp. 1 0

Total (N) 31 81

To further evaluate the differences or similarities between the Dos Pilas and Aguateca, maize kernel:cupule and wood:non-wood ratios for each site were determined and are 59 summarized below (Table 9). These results suggest that though utilizing similar resources overall, remains from Dos Pilas contained significantly more wood charcoal than remains from

Aguateca (n=184; X2=121.59; p=<0.0001) (suggestive more of a preservation bias than any human behavioral implications), but did not contain significantly more maize kernels than cupules (n=34; X2=0.817; p=0.3431). These results are ultimately suggestive of resource perception and utilization practices at each site that will be addressed in the discussion section.

Table 9: Kernel:cupule ratios and wood:non-wood ratios suggest that there were differences in the paleoethnobotanical assemblages at Dos Pilas and Aguateca

Ratio DP Elite Aguateca Significance

Kernel:Cupule 6 2.14 p = 0.3431

Wood:Non-Wood 2.29 0.455 p = <0.0001

Chapter 4 Discussion Introduction To truly understand the paleoethnobotanical implications from remains extracted at Dos

Pilas, it is imperative to place the data in the proper context. This can be accomplished most adequately by first addressing the plant remains discovered at this site and their modern and ancient uses. This establishes a thorough background and foundation for the data that will then be further discussed, and allows for a general understanding of the conditions that would have been present at Dos Pilas during the Late Classic Period. Such an understanding involves environmental implications of the area as a whole, dietary utilizations, and economic uses of the plants. Once this understanding has been accomplished, inter- and intra-site comparisons can then be recognized and discussed. It is important to address that a paleoethobotanical assessment does not only provide environmental, dietary, and economic evidence about a people, but, if properly conducted, provides additional support regarding socioeconomic factors of the society as a whole (van der Veen 2007). In this case, such implications will be examined between the

Dos Pilas and Aguateca assemblages, as well as across the social hierarchy of Dos Pilas itself.

Temporal assessments of plant use will also be addressed for Dos Pilas in order to determine changes in behavioral acquisition of plants as well as environmental availability. This will include any possible constraints or influxes in resource availability during the transition between the Late Classic and Terminal Classic Periods. Information regarding the differential preservation of plant remains as well as possible deposition methods is also addressed and taken into consideration throughout this discussion, as these factors have the potential to influence the outcome of this study, and any possible sources of error must be taken into account (Pearsall

2000). With the foundational outline of this discussion provided, the assessment of plant remains discovered at Dos Pilas will be considered next.

Identified Plant Taxa

The plant taxa identified at Dos Pilas fall into three broad categories that will be considered below: dietary staples from cultivars, gathered foodstuffs, and wood.

Dietary Staples

Agriculture in ancient Mesoamerica is believed to have originated during the Archaic period (8000-2000 B.C.) (Cutler 1968), as a result of the increased cultivation, and ultimately domestication, of wild taxa. Such cultivation is believed to have been initiated in order to acquire surplus food supplies near seasonal camps for times of dietary stress (Smith and Masson 2000).

Ultimately, however, the outcome of such a practice was the realization that such cultivars, supplemented with small game hunting, was both reliable and efficient, producing yields large enough for small bands to grow in size and settle into more permanent living situations (Coe

2005). Over time, the cultivated plants became common domesticates, and human populations began to rely heavily on such resources. In the Mesoamerican realm, it has been commonly contended that maize (Zea mays), beans (Phaseolus sp), squash (Cucurbita sp.), and chilé peppers (Capsicum sp.) were the dominating domesticates (Schlesinger 2001). The paleoethnobotanical assemblage from Dos Pilas provides further support for such assertions, as maize, squash, and chilé were discovered among the collected plant remains.

Maize was recovered in both the macroremains and flotation samples, which had been collected from a variety of social contexts—elite floors and middens, and commoner burials, floors and middens, throughout the entire site. The extensive recovery of these remains is

62 suggestive of the significance that this staple held for the Maya at Dos Pilas; maize remains make up 10.89% of the assemblage by ubiquity and 25.81% by weight. Such obvious prominence further supports the contention that the Maya not only relied on this plant as a dietary staple, but that it was an integral part of their culture and religious ideology (Thompson

1970). According to Iltis (1983), maize was the most important crop in all of Mesoamerica for a multitude of reasons. He suggests that not only can it be stored for long periods of time (3-4 years), but it can be processed in a variety of ways, (including into a food product similar to gruel [Coe 2005]), ground into flour to be made into tamales or tortillas, or processed into a variety of beverages, one of which is known commonly as chicha [a maize beer]). These food products can be easily stored as surplus for later use or in times of dietary strain. Prior to consumption, however, maize had to undergo nixtamalization, a process which requires that the grain is soaked in an alkaline solution, which, for the Maya, was typically a combination of lime and ash, (Coe 1994), and hulled. Nixtamalization was a necessary process for the Maya people, as unprocessed maize is deficient in free niacin (Smith et al. 2004) (one of five vitamins whose deficiency can be associated with a myriad of dietary diseases, including pellagra [Laguna and

Carpenter 1951]). This process frees the bound niacin, allowing absorption and utilization upon consumption. The expansion of maize cultivation throughout the Maya realm was thus accompanied by the implementation of nixtamalization (Wacher 2003). When consumed together, maize and beans provide a reassurable supply of all the 20 essential amino acids necessary for human nutrition (Coe 2007). Such stability and nutritional beneficiality in the agriculturally vulnerable area that the Maya occupied (Thompson 1970) is what allowed maize to become such a significant factor in the lives of the Maya people.

In addition to the subsistence applications of maize, this plant was also culturally and ritually revered. The Popol Vuh, a collection of mythical tales of the Quiché Maya (Christenson

2003), describes the creation of humankind as understood in Maya religion. “…Thus was found the food that would become the flesh of the newly framed and shaped people…The ears of maize entered into their flesh…Thus was created the fatness of their arms…mere food was their flesh”

(Christenson 2003). The Maya believed that maize was a gift from the gods, that maize itself, was a god (Thompson 1970), and that the human race had been created from it (Christenson

2003). They believed that laborious work was done to appease such a god, so that maize would continue to grow as food for the people; rituals were performed to reaffirm this relationship between the people and this god (Taube 2009).

In paleoethnobotanical research throughout the Maya realm, maize remains one of the most prominent taxa, undoubtedly due not only to its ubiquitous use throughout the region, but also due to its durability and identifiability even as a carbonized remain (Goette et al. 1994).

Goette et al. (1994), after subjecting maize kernels to experimental carbonization events, suggested that carbonization of maize preserves identifiable features that allow for accurate identification every experimental incidence (notwithstanding mechanical degradation). Such ancient carbonization events would have most likely occurred as accidental incidents while toasting, popping, and cooking the kernels (Pearsall 2000). In many cases, maize has been associated with burials, both of elite and commoner members of society, the plant was placed in the mouth of the deceased or in a vessel bured alongside the body in order to metaphorically assure sustenance for the passage to the underworld (Coe 2005). At Dos Pilas, 7% of plant remains recovered from burial contexts contained either maize kernels or cupules, lending

64 support to this assertion. It can be surmised, therefore, that maize not only served as a dietary staple, but as a ritualized offering for the Late Classic inhabitants at Dos Pilas.

Another of the commonly identified Maya staples that was discovered at Dos Pilas was squash (Cucurbita sp.). At Dos Pilas, only one specimen was recovered that was identifiable as the genus Cucurbita. This specimen was liberated from the soil matrix of a flotation sample collected from a commoner burial context. Paleoethnobotanical remains of Cucurbita typically cannot be identified to the species level because the majority of the recovered squash remains are merely the rind of the fruit (Lentz 1999). This particular plant part is not remarkably diagnostic; species level identification in squash is typically only feasible with recovered seeds or peduncles.

Though not particularly abundant in the paleoethnobotanical assemblage from Dos Pilas, the presence of squash rind affords further support to the common assertion that it was being produced for food (Goldstein and Hageman 2010), as is suggested by paleoethnobotanical research throughout the Maya realm. This suggests it was been utilized by the Maya at Dos

Pilas. Its underrepresentation within this assemblage is not all that surprising, however.

According to Lentz (1999), “squash seeds are not common at Maya sites…[because]they were probably targeted as a food source; they are a good source of oil and are delicious when dried, so they are unlikely entrants into the trash pile.” Its association at Dos Pilas with a burial, however, is similar to the previously mentioned maize samples in that such association is suggestive of the cultural practices of the living—that is, those outliving the deceased at Dos Pilas may have been providing sustenance for the latter’s journey to the underworld. In this case, those “delicious” seeds would have been sacrificed to the dead in lieu of their nutritional benefits to the living.

Furthermore, the presence of squash in this context reflects what was found at Copan during a different study (Lentz 1991). At Copan, squash seeds were also found in a burial context. The

65 ubiquity of this taxon in similar ritual contexts further supports the assertion that this may have been used in such a manner by the Maya at Dos Pilas.

a) b)

Figure 8: a) A micrograph of a maize kernel; b) A micrograph of squash rind

Archaeological evidence for ancient chilé pepper (Capsicum spp.) use by the Maya has been scant until recently due to the rare occurrence of macroremain preservation (Lentz 1999).

Fruits, seeds, and pollen, however, have been recovered from sites in the Tehuacan Valley dating to approximately 6000 years ago (Eshbaugh 1993; Minnis and Whalen 2010; Perry et al. 2007); at Huaca Prieta in Peru approximately 4000 years ago (Pickersgill 1969); at Cerén, El Salvador by 1400 years ago (Lentz et al. 1996); and in La Tigra Venezuela by approximately 1000 years ago (Eshbaugh 1993; Minnis and Whalen 2010; Perry et al. 2007). Due to the presence of capsaicin (methyl-vanillyl-nonenamide), a chemical capable of producing a burning sensation, within the placental tissue of this fruit, the chilé pepper has uses in areas other than just diet. This extract is often used in topical medications as a circulatory stimulant and analgesic (Tewksbury et al. 2006). As a dietary resource, the ancient Maya often used the fruit as a flavoring for the

66 revered cacao drink, among other preparatory techniques (Coe and Coe 1996). At Dos Pilas, one specimen of chilé was recovered from a context of commoner fill, suggestive of the dietary utilization of this species at the site.

Tree Fruits and Gathered Foodstuffs: The Palms

Since the inclusion of paleoethnobotanical research into the overarching scheme of Maya research, extensive support for ancient palm use has been asserted due to the ubiquitous discovery of these taxa at a multitude of sites (Lentz 1999). The most commonly identified palms in the literature have been coyol (Acrocomia aculeate), huiscoyol (Bactris sp.), and cohune

(Attalea cohune) (Lentz 1990). At Dos Pilas, identification of these three species from among the recovered remains did occur, in addition to one other genus of palm known as the súrtuba or coyolito palm (Geonoma sp.). Utilization of these species is multifaceted—not only can these plants be used as food resources, but for fiber materials and construction as well. The fruits of palms are favored due to their high fat content (a limited nutrient in the ancient Maya diet [Lentz

1999]), their vitamins A, D, E, and K content, their ability to assist the in absorption of vitamin

D and in converting carotene to vitamin A (Dunne 1990). In the case of coyol, its nuts grow in large numbers on each individual tree. The kernel is often consumed and is reportedly similar to coconut in taste (Scariot 1991). The sap of this palm can also be extracted and fermented to yield an alcoholic beverage commonly known as coyol wine (Balick 1990). Similarly, huiscoyol, cohune, and súrtuba palm are utilized for their oils and fruits (Clement and Urpí 1987; Govaerts et al. 2008; Henderson et al. 1995). Additionally, palm leaves have been used for thatching of

Maya housing for over 3000 years (Martínez-Ballesté et al. 2006).

At Dos Pilas, endocarps (the hard inner layer of the pericarp of the fruit) of coyol, huiscoyol, and cohune palm, in addition to the pit of a súrtuba palm fruit, were discovered in both elite and commoner middens and burials. Discovery of these resources in midden contexts is suggestive of their dietary uses, while recovery from burial contexts is indicative of their ritual uses.

Figure 9: (a) The endocarp of cohune palm (Attalea cohune); (b) The pit of a súrtuba palm fruit (Geonoma sp.); (c) The endocarp of coyol (Acrocomia aculeata) Tree Fruits and Other Economic Plants

The study of the ancient Maya’s use of tree resources has been the subject of much attention throughout the years of research in this area (Dahlin 1979; Folan et al. 1979; Gómez-

Pompa et al. 1987, 1990; McKillop 1994; Netting 1977; Peters 1983; Puleston 1968; Turner and

Miksicek 1984; Wilken 1971; Wiseman 1978). Identification of multiple specimens in the Dos

Pilas paleoethnobotanical assemblage has identified a variety of tree resources that would have been utilized by the ancient Maya during the time of occupation. Tree fruits such as wild and cultivated sapote (Pouteria sapota), wild and cultivated cordia (Cordia sp.), cultivated cacao

(Theobroma cacao), and cultivated calabash (Crescentia sp.) have been recovered from such contexts as elite fill and middens, along with commoner floors. Such contexts suggest that these tree fruits would have been utilized primarily for dietary purposes.

Sapote is a tree native to southern Mexico, now cultivated not only in Mexico, but

Central America, the Caribbean, and South Florida for its fruit. The fruit can be eaten raw or processed into a variety of foods, such as marmalades or jellies. The kernels have a rich almond flavor and have a high oil content (Dieffenbacher and Pocklington 1992). Additional uses include construction and medicinal applications such as an anthelminthic and emetic, to remove warts, cure fungal infections, stopping hair loss, and skin tonic, among others (Jamieson and

McKinney 1931).

Laurel blanco is another tree fruit that was consumed in the diets of the ancient Maya.

The edible fruits of this tree are eaten raw or cooked. Alternatively, the pulp of calabash, in addition to its high nutritional value, can be used for its medicinal properties in easing respiratory ailments (Ejelonu et al. 2011) and the hard shell of the fruit can be used as a serving vessel.

Figure 10: (a) The pit of a cordia fruit (Cordia sp.); (b) The seed coat of mamey sapote (Pouteria sapota) Cacao is a tree fruit species that warrants significantly more attention. Its importance spans the social, religious, medical, economical, and gastronomical realms to result in its label as

“the food of the gods” (Coe and Coe 1996). As previously discussed, cacao was used in a highly revered drink, often concocted with maize, chili, vanilla, and honey. It was also used as a

69 currency system and is also referenced in Maya mythology. Its importance to the people of the ancient Maya was so obvious and substantiated that its use spread, quite literally, across the globe (Coe and Coe 1996).

Tree Fruits and Gathered Foodstuffs: Miscellaneous Resources

In addition to the fruits of palm and dicot trees, a variety of other resources were gathered by the ancient Maya for subsistence purposes. Those discovered at Dos Pilas include: sedge

(Cyperus canus), hackberry (Celtis sp.), bulrush (Scirpus sp.), nutrush (Scleria sp.), grape (Vitis sp.), papaturro (Coccoloba sp.), blackberry (Rubus sp.), bindweed (Convolvulus sp.), and hypoxylon (Hypoxylon sp.). The economic uses derived from this combination of resources include dietary resources, medicinal resources, and material resources such as fibers for sleeping mats, baskets, clothing, etc. Research has shown that the Yokot’an Maya of Tabasco, Mexico use the fibers from sedge for weaving what are known locally as petates, or sleeping mats and also consume the tubers (Simpson and Inglis 2001). Hackberry and blackberry would have been utilized primarily for dietary purposes. Bulrush and nutrush, both in the Cyperaceae family, are typically considered weeds, however, these two genera are reported to have been used in herbal medicines. The rhizomes of bulrush are used to reduce pain, stimulate menstrual flow and promote the production of milk (Lee et al. 1995). Nutrush, alternatively, can be utilized for a wide variety of medicinal purposes, some of which include abortifacients, naso-pharyngeal affections, eye treatments, menstrual cycle regulation, and for curing venereal ailments (Burkill

1985). Both grape and seagrape have dietary uses; they can be eaten raw, cooked into jams, jellies, vinegars, etc., and both are fermented into wine (Austin 2004). Finally, bindweed is known today for its invasive properties, but has been reportedly been used to create twine, and for its medicinal and hallucinogenic properties (Standley and Steyermark 1946). It is believed to

70 have been introduced to North America as a contaminant in crop seeds; it is possible that this same contamination occurred in the Dos Pilas paleoethnobotanical assemblage.

Figure 11: The seed of bulrush (Scirpus sp.) Though not regarded as a paleoethnobotanical remain, the dominating presence of the hypoxylon fungus must be addressed. With a ubiquity count of 21 and a total mass of 157.75 g, hypoxylon is one of the most highly represented species in the assemblage of plant remains from

Dos Pilas. This is a fungal species that is commonly found on dead wood; it is typically one of the earliest colonizing species on such woods (Hsieh et al. 2005). Utilization of this fungus by humans is in the cultivation of Tremella fuciformis—a culinary and medicinal fungi that is unable to form a fruiting body without first parasitizing another fungus (Stamets 2000).

Hypoxylon is the preferred host of T. fuciformis (Hsieh et al. 2005). Despite its utilization today, it is more likely that the presence of this species in the Dos Pilas assemblage is intrusive—that is, the organism was probably growing as a saprophyte on the abandoned remains of the site and the

Maya at Dos Pilas were most likely not utilizing it for any purpose. Its overrepresentation is a reminder of the confounding forces that must be reconciled in the interpretation of any set of paleoethnobotanical remains.

Figure 12: The hypoxylon fungus Woods: The Dicots

Wood charcoal is consistently the most frequently recovered plant remain from paleoethnobotanical sampling, yet intensive analysis of these remains is often excluded from the overarching goals of current archaeological projects (Smart and Hoffman 1988). These remains, however, can provide fundamental insights regarding a culture and environment that may not be readily assessed through the analysis of any other type of data set. Not only does charcoal analysis provide evidence for resource perception and utilization at a site—that is, evidence for the tree species used by a people for fuel, construction materials, tools, etc.—but it can also reveal information regarding the environmental conditions and forest composition, as well as any possible agroforestry or foraging behaviors employed by the ancient community (Bohrer 1986;

Smart and Hoffman 1988). According to Smart and Hoffman (1988), there are four factors that work to produce the paleoethnobotanical wood assemblage from a site: “(1) cultural and natural mechanisms that bring woody plants to a site; (2) cultural and physical factors affecting burning and preservation; (3) field techniques used for the recovery and sampling of charred plant remains; and (4) laboratory techniques used for sampling and identifying charred plant remains.”

Thorough understanding of these four factors will clarify the cultural and environmental implications of such research.

An extensive variety of wood charcoal was recovered from all contexts at Dos Pilas, occupying the highest overall proportion of identifiable remains from the site. 32.96% of this assemblage was identified as wood charcoal by ubiquity and 73.12% by weight. Such dominating proportions alone are indicative of the general importance such a resource provides for a community. In the Dos Pilas assemblage, remains were recovered that represent 54 different genera or species, comprising 21 different plant families. These remains were gathered from both elite and commoner residences and were recovered from burials, floors, fill, middens, storage pits, within vessels etc., suggesting an array of utilization methods of these resources by the ancient Maya at the site. The assumption can be made, however, that the majority of the wood charcoal remains were recovered as a result of burning for fuel, whether for cooking, heat, or ritualized purposes.

Dicot (or hardwood) trees were the preferred wood resource by the Maya at this site based on their overwhelming dominance in the wood charcoal assemblage. The most dominant species will be discussed first by ubiquity, then by weight, as these two means of analysis exhibit different results in terms of dominant species.

Aguacatillo (Licaria sp., Lauraceae family) and sapodilla (Manilkara zapota, Sapotaceae family), are the most dominant of the hardwood charcoal remains by count at Dos Pilas, with both being represented by six counts of ubiquity. Maria laurel has been known throughout this realm for the resilience of its wood (especially for use as timber), for its usefulness in construction, and as firewood (Burns et al. 1998). According to Alcorn (2000), “a Licaria leaf roof is said to last for 30 or more years, keep the house cool, and be impervious to rain.” Leaves from this tree species are one of the preferred roofing materials by the modern Huastec Maya

(Alcorn 2000). Sapodilla, on the other hand, has important uses outside of construction. The sap

(known as chicle) extracted from the bark of this tree has for many years been collected, boiled, and molded into blocks that served as chewing gum; the fruits can be eaten raw or made into jams and other products; the fruit and leaves are used in traditional medicine to cure diarrhea, coughs and colds (Jukofsky 2002); and the wood was strong and durable—it was used for lintels and beams in ancient Maya temples (Lentz 2009).

Ramón (Brosimum alicastrum, Moraceae family) was the next most abundant wood charcoal, having been identified in five total samples. The uses of the ramon tree are vast, and there is evidence for such use both contemporaneously and archaeologically. The most common modern use of this plant is as a foodstuff, though there was no evidence for this in the paleoethnobotanical remains from Dos Pilas. The fruit’s pericarp is sweet, and the seeds are similar to chestnuts in their requirements for processing (Pardo-Tejeda and Peters 1982). The seeds, however, have a taste much like potato and can be consumed raw, boiled or roasted

(Jamnadass et al. 2009). These seeds are often reduced to a meal and mixed into maize meal to make tortillas or are baked with green plantains (Puleston 1968). Presently, when maize stocks run low, many contemporary Maya use this seed to make bread as well (Jamnadass et al. 2009).

Furthermore, the bole of the tree can be tapped to extract a milky latex that can be mixed with chicle or drunk like cow’s milk (Pardo-Tejeda and Peters 1982). In addition to being a food source, the leaves and branch tips of the ramon tree are often used as a fodder for cattle, and the fruit is used as pig feed (Jamnadass et al. 2009). Finally, the wood of these organisms is an excellent source of timber. It is dense, hard, and finely grained; preferable characteristics for such things as general construction, staves, parquet flooring, crafts, tool handles, and railway sleepers (Jamnadass et al. 2009). The previously discussed modern uses of the ramon tree have been also been inferred from its discovery in archaeological contexts. Puleston (1968) suggests

74 that the trees may have been planted in Maya kitchen gardens, providing easy access to the plant for all of its various uses. Furthermore, Ford (2008) discusses macro- and micro- remains of the seeds and wood have been discovered at a great number of sites across the Maya realm. Finally,

Spanish Bishop Diego de Landa Calderón, during his expedition to the Yucatán, witnessed its use among the Maya he observed and referred to the fruits as “savory figs” (Puleston 1968).

The utilization of the ramon tree as a resource is even described in the Book of Chilam

Balam of Chumayel, one of the nine books written in the Yucatec Mayan language in which traditional knowledge of the Maya is preserved (Edmonson 1986). The book associates the fruit of the ramon tree with famine. The book verbalizes a Maya prophesy in which the “vultures will enter the houses…the breadnut [ramon] shall be their bread” (Puleston 1968). Puleston argues that a reference such as this signifies the negative connotation typically associated with “famine food,” like the ramon, but should rather be considered a beneficial attribute of that resource. In the case of the ramon, not only is it reportedly quite palatable but is readily available even in times of stress, and is highly nutritious; it is particularly high in fiber, calcium, potassium, folic acid, zinc, protein, B vitamins. It also has a low glycemic index and is high in antioxidants

(Flannery and Puleston 1982). Evidence from Dos Pilas, however, only supports the use of its wood for fuel and construction, not as a food source.

Figure 13: (a) Transverse section of aguacatillo (Licaria sp.); (b) tangential section of aguacatillo; (c) transverse section of sapodilla (Manilkara zapota); (d) tangential section of sapodilla; (e) transverse section of ramón (Brosimum alicastrum); (f) tangential section of ramón

The next most dominant of the woods, all with four counts of ubiquity, are palo oloroso

(Nectandra sp, Lauraceae family), madroño (Calycophyllum candidissimum, Rubiaceae family), and matayba (Matayba sp., Sapindaceae family). Palo oloroso has been discovered to be a beneficial resource for a variety of uses. It has been used in the treatment of several clinical disorders in humans due to its analgesics anti-inflammatory, febrifuge, energetic, and hypotensive activities (Le Quesne et al. 1980). It has also been utilized as a potential anti-tumor and chemotherapeutic agent (Silva-Filho 2004). Alcorn (2000) also suggests its preferred use by the Huastec Maya as a fuel source as well as one of the primary timbers used for house posts. As a fuel source, however, it is not necessarily a high quality and slow-burning wood, but rather it is a fast growing successional species in fallow corn fields (Alcorn 2000). Madroño, on the other hand, has reportedly been utilized for ritual purposes throughout its history. The branches and flowers are burned as incense in religious festivals throughout Central America (Lorence 1999).

Lorence (1999) also suggests that madroño is a good source of wood for construction. Finally, extracts from matayba bark have been reported to contain a mixture of triterpenes that is beneficial in the treatment of neurogenic and inflammatory pain, having a documented activity level several times more active than aspirin and paracetamol (de Souza et al. 2007). The compounds of matayba have also been reportedly used in Central America for toothaches and the wood for general construction (Grandtner 2005).

In addition to the most ubiquitous species, two other species were significantly represented in the Dos Pilas assemblage, not by count, but by weight. These taxa were copal

(Protium copal, Burseraceae family), whose single sample measured 74.01 g, and white ramoon

(Trophis racemosa, Moraceae family), which was represented in two samples, weighing a combined 16.04 g. Copal has been described throughout pre-Columbian Mesoamerica as a source of ceremonially burned incense that was used in ritual offerings to the gods and for spiritual cleansing (Arnason et al. 1980). Copal is also beneficial for use against upper respiratory tract infections and skin conditions (Case et al. 2003). Furthermore, its wood can be used for beams, formwork, and firewood. White ramon has also been discovered to have medicinal properties in addition to its uses for construction and fruit consumption (Foster 2007).

Researchers were able to extract a muscarinic alkaloid with aquaternary nitrogen and incorporate this into aqueous solutions that significantly reduce intra-ocular pressure (Wynter-Adams et al.

1999)—a factor necessary in the management of such eye diseases as glaucoma (Sommer et al.

1991).

Figure 15: (a) Transverse section of copal (Protium copal); (b) tangential section of copal; (c) transverse section of white ramoon (Trophis racemosa); (d) tangential section of white ramon In addition to discussing the dominant species of the Dos Pilas paleoethnobotanical assemblage, it is relevant to discuss the plant family that is the most abundant. In the legume

(Fabaceae) family, 9 different taxonomic identifications were recovered from 10 different samples, all of which represent a large and economically important dicotyledenous family.

Acacia (Acacia sp.), cabbage bark (Andira inermis), palo de orquideas (Bauhinia purpurea), madre de cacao (Gliricidia sepium), guapinol (Hymenaea sp.), machiche (Lonchocarpus castilloi and Lonchocarpus sp.), dogwood (Piscidia piscipula), and granadillo (Platymiscium sp.) were all taxa of identified wood charcoal belonging to the Fabaceae family. This is the third-largest land plant family, boasting 730 genera and over 19, 400 species. Many members of this family form

80 root nodules in which symbiotic rhizobia carry out nitrogen fixation, a characteristic beneficial in maintaining nutrient-rich soils (Yokota and Hayashi 2011). Legumes are also an important source of food worldwide because they are good sources of protein and are closely tied to some of the earliest forms of agriculture.

Woods: Pine

Research throughout the Maya realm has suggested that pine played a significant role in the everyday lives of the ancient Maya. Pine had both ritual and economic importance (Lentz et al. 2005; Morehart et al. 2005). It is also one of the most commonly recovered plant remains from archaeological sites, a fact that is further suggestive of its importance (Morehart et al. 2005) since pine stands are not locally available to many Lowland Maya sites. This relationship between the ubiquitous nature of pine and Maya paleoethnobotanical assemblages throughout this realm is indicative of a possible pine exchange system that would have supplied even those areas most remote from the natural stands (Lentz 1999; Lentz et al. 2003; Morehart 2002b;

Thompson 1970). Dos Pilas, a hub of trade and exchange in the Maya lowlands, would have certainly played a part in such a system. In the paleoethnobotanical assemblage from Dos Pilas, pine was recovered from six different samples, with a combined weight of 11.61 g—one of the most ubiquitous and abundant remains identified in the entire collection. These remains were recovered from only one contextual type, burial contexts, but from both elite and commoner residences. Association of this already ritualized species with burial contexts is further suggestive of its ritual significance to the Maya people.

Figure 16: Transverse section of pine (Pinus sp.)

Summation of Plant Use

As demonstrated above, the Maya at Dos Pilas utilized a wide array of plant resources for a wide array of purposes, including dietary, construction, tool manufacture, fuel, medicinal, ritual and others. Though not all identified species in the paleoethnobotanical assemblage were individually discussed, their uses undoubtedly mirror those that were specifically addressed. By understanding ethnographic accounts for plant use, as well as modern syntheses, one can begin to understand that the needs of the ancient Maya, in many ways, reflect the needs of people today.

Environmental Assessment and Changes Through Time

It is critical to understand the growth requirements for the identified plant species in order to understand what the environmental conditions were like during the Late Classic occupation of

Dos Pilas. Many of the species recovered from this site have similar ecologies and distributions; the combination of the identified species will give a clearer picture of the overall surroundings. It 82 has already been established that Dos Pilas was not located in an area of particularly fertile agricultural soils, being riddled with karstic limestone sinkholes and caves (Dunning, Beach, and

Rue 1997; Houston 1993). The infertile soils of Dos Pilas were tested for phosphate presence

(indicative of agricultural practices), which resulted only in ambiguous results (Dunning, Beach, and Rue 1997). Dunning, Beach, and Rue (1997) suggest that these results could have resulted from several circumstances: (1) gardens did, in fact, exist at Dos Pilas but had been overlooked by the researchers; (2) Dos Pilas was occupied for a significantly shorter amount of time than initially asserted; and/or (3) gardening did not take place at Dos Pilas, and inhabitants were reliant entirely on crops grown outside the urban area to sustain them. In regard to (3), the relatively poor soil quality at Dos Pilas lends support to this latter interpretation (Demarest

2006). This suggests that forest resources would have been more accessible to the inhabitants of this site during its occupation.

A study conducted in the eastern Mediterranean examined the paleoethnobotanical assemblage of wood/non-wood composition ratios in order to more clearly elucidate the possible extent of forest cover in that study areas (Klinge and Fall 2010). Their assertion was that the higher ratios of wood-to-non-wood are representative of a wooded environment, while lower ratios represent an environment with less availability of trees as resources (Klinge and Fall

2010). In spite of not being conducted in the Mesoamerican region, this research still remains applicable. At Dos Pilas, it was determined that wood resources were more highly represented in comparison to non-wood resources. An overall site wood: non-wood ratio of 1.67 suggests that the paleoethnobotanical remains were more likely to contain wood resources than non-wood resources. This further suggests that the area surrounding Dos Pilas would have been more

83 wooded than open, thus providing inhabitants adequate tree resources to be utilized in addition to the domesticates that would have been present.

This is supported by the fact that Dos Pilas is located in a tropical moist forest zone, suggestive of a highly diverse forest of nearly 100 distinct species per hectare (Demarest 2006).

The apparent diversity of the ancient forest should be reflected by the calculable diversity in the paleoethnobotanical assemblage. The Shannon-Weaver diversity index “incorporates the total number of taxa in an assemblage and the relative abundance of each taxon to express the certainty of predicting the identity of a randomly selected plant remain. If there are many taxa evenly distributed in the assemblage, the certainty of predicting the identity of the selected plant is low and the index indicates high diversity” (Popper 1988). It has further been asserted that the diversity within a paleoethnobotanical assemblage is indicative of the diversity of a past plant environment, suggesting that high diversity in a collection of plant remains reflects the ancient environment from which they came (Smart and Hoffman 1988; Lepopsky and Lertzman 2005).

The diversity indices reported in Table 3 indicate that the paleoethnobotanical assemblage from

Dos Pilas, and thus, the ancient landscape at Dos Pilas, had higher levels of diversity than at

Aguateca. Utilizing the Simpson’s Index of Diversity (1-D) measure, in which 1 represents infinite diversity and 0 represents no diversity (Hill 1973), the 1-D at Dos Pilas measured 0.943.

This suggests that the ancient environment was highly diverse, adding further support that the inhabitants at Dos Pilas had access to a wide variety of resources.

Environmental reconstruction by paleoethnobotanists typically follows four types of interpretations: “(1) The identified taxa grew in the area; (2) The identified taxa indicate plant communities that grew in the area; (3) Modern preferred habitats of the identified taxa indicate former environments in the area; (4) Modern distributions of the identified taxa indicate the

84 former locations of these taxa” (Smart and Hoffman 1988). I would postulate that the assemblage of plant remains represented at Dos Pilas can be interpreted as a combination of all four of these interpretations. While there is merit to the fact that species have gone extinct through time and environmental changes have caused gaps in the modern and archaeological records, research has suggested that surveys of modern plant communities are similarly reflected by the associated paleoethnobotanical assemblages (Western 1970), thus, it can be postulated that the assemblage from Dos Pilas is representative of the ancient forest.

Plant remains were also recovered that were associated with different time periods. The majority of the plant remains (84.14%) dated to the Late Classic period, 13.3% dated to the Late

Classic-Terminal Classic transition, and 2.55% dated to the Terminal Classic period. Statistical analysis (Figure 9) across the three time periods is suggestive of differences in the assemblages collected. The assertion that could typically be made in response to this statement was that the

Maya at Dos Pilas experienced social and political change resulting in differences in plant-use practices during the transition from the Late to Terminal Classic periods resulting in variable resource availability and utilization. However, with such differences in sample sizes between the three time categories, such an assertion must remain unsubstantiated.

The Cultural Assessment: Dos Pilas Elites versus Commoners

Social class has imprinted itself upon the archaeological record in many ways. Aside from the obvious and grandiose housing, temples, and pyramids of the Maya elite, boldly proclaiming the status of their inhabitants, more subtle signs of differentiation between the elites and commoners exist, providing a glimpse of ancient societal organization. Among other forms of artifacts, paleoethnobotanical remains can provide indicative clues regarding the social

85 hierarchy of a community. One of the principle visual indicators of social class status in nearly every society is the types of dwellings occupied by societal members. In areas occupied by elites, both in ancient times and presently, preferential access to higher quality and more expensive building materials is flaunted in expansively sized and elaborately fashioned homes, bedecked with anything from limestone pyramids to sizeable and intricate monuments (Houston 1993).

Flaunting such opulence is another method utilized by elites to maintain the status quo; visible domination and intimidation tends to increase the control of the upperclass over the lower (Blake and Clark 1994). Typical commoner households exhibit more humble building materials, including such examples as the wattle-and-daub visible in some societies, fewer ornate decorations, and a significant reduction in size (Heath-Smith et al. 1999). Less access to resources (or funds to purchase such resources) is typically the factor that results in these smaller lowerclass homes. There are many cultural determinants that regulate the construction and orientations of homes within a society. Kinship ties and social and economic norms, to name a few, play a significant role in the structuring of the domicile (Kroll and Price 1991). However, in many cases, social class does regulate the size of the structure and materials used (Coe 2005), as can be observed from a variety of spatial and temporal construction methods throughout history.

This becomes evident in the paleoethnobotanical record in that commoner households were more likely than elite households to be constructed with wood materials, rather than stone or otherwise.

Another illustration of this condition can be seen from the analysis of the spatial deposition of plant remains at the Maya civic ceremonial site of Copan (Lentz 1991). Botanical remains were collected from residences of all status levels. The observations made at this site demonstrate that members of elite households had access to a greater diversity of plant resources

86 for consumption (Lentz 1991). A greater diversity of plant remains has significant implications regarding availability of proper nutrition requirements. This type of diet improves the chances of achieving the proper ratio of nutrients conducive to optimal health, whereas less variety reduces these chances, even if proper caloric requirements are met (Brown and Wing 1979). Conclusions summarized by Lentz (1991) suggest that the Maya site of Copan was one of demographic, social and ecological imbalance. Evidence of famine-foods, such as coyol, among remains excavated from the lower class domiciles and related areas of the site suggest that these individuals were relying on last resorts to increase food-production potential, while elites still maintained a rich and hearty diet.

In addition to obvious differences between building materials and dietary resources for the elite and commoner, more subtle measures of social class are indicated by the paleoethnobotanical record. Kernel-to-cupule ratios are one of these measures. As argued by

VanDerwarker (2006), “before maize can be ground into flour, the kernels must first be removed from the cob, leaving the cobs and cupules as byproducts of the removal process. Because kernels represent the part of the maize plant meant for consumption and cupules represent processing discard, lower ratios of kernel counts to cupule counts would be indicative of elevated levels of maize processing.” VanDerwarker studied the Formative-Classic Olmec site known as

La Joya. Her results show a “dramatic decrease in maize kernels versus cupules through time…suggesting that La Joya residents increasingly processed more maize at the residential locus” (VanDerwarker 2006). With regard to social class, it is commonly asserted that the remains from commoner contexts would show greater evidence of processing (low kernel: cupule ratios), while remains from elite contexts would show greater evidence of consumption

(high kernel: cupule ratios).

Another ratio to be considered in the analysis of social class organization is that of wood: non-wood remains. During this period in Maya history, the only tools to which the inhabitants of

Dos Pilas would have had access to were lithic—that is, stone (Foster 2002). Extraction of tree resources was labor-intensive and costly. Elites, maintaining a preferential access to favored resources, as well as the capability to assemble a formidable labor force, would have been able to order the extraction of more wood resources for their own use than the commoners (Sharer and

Traxler 2006). This suggests that wood: non-wood ratios should be higher in elite contexts of a paleoethnobotanical assemblage.

At Dos Pilas, remains from elite contexts contained significantly more wood than those from commoner contexts (Table 6), which supports the previously mentioned arguments. Kernel:

Cupule ratios, however, do not suggest that the commoners were doing any more of the food processing than the elites. This apparent anomaly can be explained by recent artifact processing research done by Emery and Aoyama (2007) at Aguateca. Their research reveals that bone and shell artifact manufacturing was occurring in elite households, suggestive of part-time processing of raw materials by the nobility—affording a reevaluation of elite-commoner relationships

(Emery and Aoyama 2007). This relationship can be extrapolated to food processing as well; the elites at Dos Pilas were processing maize just as the commoners were.

The Cultural Assessment: Dos Pilas versus Inhabitants at Aguateca

The intimate relationship between Dos Pilas and Aguateca, twin capitals of the

Petexbatun kingdom, is the reason why any similarities and differences between the two sites are so significant. Despite this relationship, however, site location as well as preservation potential of plant remains based on the abandonment method of each site suggest that differences between the two sites should be significant. Only located approximately 10 km apart (Houston 1993), the

88 ecological environments at the two sites would have been fairly comparable. There was evidence, however, of a few plant species recovered from Aguateca that were not recovered from

Dos Pilas; several of these species warrant further discussion. Three samples recovered from

Aguateca contained cashew (Anacardium occidentale L., Anacardiaceae family). This would have been a prominently utilized plant for the Maya, when available, as many parts of the plant are usable (Johnson 1973). The fruit may be eaten raw or preserved, made into a beverage, or fermented into a wine (Johnson 1973). The seeds are consumed whole, oil from the shells can be used as a water-proofing agent, the timber can be used for construction and firewood, the bark can be used for tanning, and the fruit and bark juice and nut oil are both used in herbal remedies to heal calluses, corns, and warts (Lopes 1972).

Another important plant discovered at Aguateca that was not recovered at Dos Pilas was the soursop (Annona sp., Annonaceae family). These plants would have been exploited for their edible and nutritious fruits (Warrington 2003). They have also been reported to have uses in traditional medicines, due to the presence of acetogenins, a class of polyketide natural products

(Li et al. 2008), within their tissues. Ancient use of this plant is supported by paleoethnobotanical evidence, which has dated the cultivation and utilization of this plant to the

Yautepec River region of Mexico at approximately 1000 B.C. (Warrington 2003).

Despite the slight differences in species composition between the two sites, paleoethnobotanical research at Dos Pilas and Aguateca yielded assemblages that were comparable. Cultural resource perception would have been parallel between the two sites, as the ruling elite from both sites were believed to have originated from Tikal (Houston 1993) and many Dos Pilas elite settled at Aguateca after Dos Pilas was abandoned, so any differences in perception would have been minimal (Alcorn 2000). Furthermore, the surrounding ecology

89 would have been similar between the two sites, affording similar availability and extraction practices.

Differences did exist, however, between the two sites. Remains recovered from Dos Pilas contained significantly more wood charcoal as well as maize kernels than remains collected at

Aguateca. This can be traced to the abandonment methods of the sites—a factor in archaeology that can be associated with differential preservation of remains (Cameron and Tomka 1993).

Whereas Dos Pilas was abandoned over a considerable length of time, Aguateca, was rapidly abandoned in response to a hostile attack and subsequent burning, leaving a Pompeii-style assemblage in situ (Emery and Aoyama 2007). This would have resulted in a paleoethnobotanical assemblage comprised of the plant remains that were present at the site at a single instance in time, rather than those preserved over a much greater period of time, as is seen at Dos Pilas. At any single instance in time, more food would be present at a site when compared to fuel. This is demonstrated at Aguateca due to the preservation afforded by the attack and burning event that resulted in the abandonment of the site. However, this is often not demonstrated in the archaeological record because food is scarcely carbonized—it is consumed.

Carbonization of food remains tend to be the result of accidental spilling into a fire source

(Braadbaart and Poole 2008). Wood, however, is much more abundant as it is much more often subjected to carbonization events. This results in more wood remains than non-wood remains in paleoethnobotanical assemblages. This is demonstrated at Dos Pilas. This is the most likely explanation for the differences seen in the plant remains recovered from the two sites.

Summary

The plant remains identified from throughout a variety of elite and commoner contexts at

Dos Pilas are representative of plant taxa commonly discovered in paleoethnobotanical assemblages throughout the Maya realm. Wood charcoal and maize dominate this assemblage, with significant contributions by pine, palm, and a variety of tree fruit remains. The dicot, pine, and palm charcoal resources suggest that Dos Pilas was situated in a primarily forested location that offered a highly diverse array of tree resources for fuel, construction, tools, medicine, and ritual purposes. A paleoethnobotanical assemblage is not a complete catalogue of the plants that would have been used by the ancient civilization, but the result of accidental carbonization and preservation that happened to avoid biological and/or mechanical degradation over time, and it is important in this type of study. Differences between remains extracted from elite and commoner residences are suggestive of socioeconomic and sociocultural differences in resource availability and utilization, while differences between remains recovered from Dos Pilas and Aguateca are more likely the result of preservation bias in the paleoethnobotanical record caused by the differences in the ways the two sites were abandoned. The results of this research provide a supplement to the information already understood regarding ancient Maya plant use and further supports that the Maya were a highly advanced civilization capable of extensive resource extraction while maintaining their livelihood in a seemingly unstable environment.

Chapter 5

Conclusions

This chapter highlights the findings of the paleoethnobotanical analysis conducted on the plant remains collected from Dos Pilas by the Petexbatun Regional Archaeological Project. It focuses on the significance of this study to paleoethnobotanical research of the ancient Maya, and more broadly-ranging applications within the realm of Mesoamerica. Suggestions for future paleoethnobotanical research at Dos Pilas and throughout the Maya realm also will be offered.

There were several research questions addressed in this thesis. The primary goal, however, was to elucidate what plant remains were present in the paleoethnobotanical assemblage from Dos Pilas to determine subsistence practices, including dietary, construction, fuel, and ritual uses of plants, as well as socioeconomic/sociocultural implications as inferred through differences between plant remains recovered from various social class contexts.

Furthermore, Dos Pilas was compared to Aguateca to determine the comparability between the plant use strategies at the two sites. To address these issues, an analysis was conducted on paleoethnobotanical macroremains collected during excavation and from flotation samples.

Based on the results presented in Chapter 3, several conclusions were formulated. The wood remains recovered from Dos Pilas, at least in part, reflect a moist tropical environment. They are species typical of the modern tropical forest. A dominating presence of maize among the plant remains suggests that it was utilized as a dietary staple by the Maya at Dos Pilas, similar to assertions by previous researchers in the area and across the Maya realm. Remains differed between the social classes, suggesting that the elites had access to a greater diversity of both wood and food species. Finally, the differences between the paleoethnobotanical assemblages

92 from Dos Pilas and Aguateca are statistically significant. This suggests that that the plant remains collected at the two sites were different. This result is not entirely surprising, due to differences in environmental surroundings and causes of abandonment. These results suggest that discrepancies and biases in the archaeological record must be accounted for when conducting paleoethnobotanical analyses.

In the Neotropics in particular, discrepancies between the paleoethnobotanical remains and what may have actually been utilized at the sight are caused primarily due to the warm and humid climate throughout this region. Plant processing, utilization, and discarding behaviors that do not subject the plant parts to fire greatly reduce the occasion for carbonization and preservation. In the event of a site-wide burning, as was the case at Aguateca, paleoethnobotanists are afforded the rare opportunity of recovering plant remains that would not otherwise be preserved through carbonization. This allows for unique insights into the daily lives of the people of that site, such as the “snap-shot” you see at Aguateca, compared to that at Dos

Pilas, which is more reflective of use over time.

Biases in the interpretation of human-plant interactions are also introduced by the archaeologists and paleoethnobotanists that are doing the recovering of the remains. Oftentimes, due to limitations in research design or resources, truly extensive sampling is not possible. In many cases, only a single set of contexts are examined, greatly reducing the possibility of an accurate reconstruction of the plant use practices of the population being studied. In order to account for this type of bias, systematic sampling of all contexts across a site should be included in the research goals as often as possible, as it was at Dos Pilas and Aguateca. Both macro- and micro-remains should be collected for analysis, as each type affords different interpretations of past plant activites, and oftentimes, some plant taxa may not be recovered as a macro-remain, but

93 would have been present in flotation samples. Furthermore, flotation samples should be standardized in each collection context so as to provide the greatest level of comparability throughout the site, and both the heavy and light flotation fractions should be examined to produce the most comprehensive assemblage possible. Advanced analyses, such as with SEM, and thoroughly investigated taxa identification should accompany any paleoethnobotanical research to provide the most accurate assessment of the recovered remains. By reducing bias as significantly as possible, the clearest picture of human-plant interactions can be achieved.

Significance

Dos Pilas was a site of great importance with a significant history during the Late Classic period of Maya occupation. Understanding the plant-use practices of the inhabitants allows for a greater understanding of the resources that would have been available for utilization, the ways in which those resources were utilized, and differences in resource availability between the social classes, such as greater access to a higher variety of foods by elites. Plant remains were extensively recovered from every social context. Such broad-ranging analysis allows for a detailed understanding of ancient plant practices of each facet of society. This study affords further significance in the differences observed between two proximally located sites. Dos Pilas and Aguateca have a shared history, but the remains recovered from each are dissimilar due most likely to the cause of abandonment experienced at each. The assemblage from Dos Pilas represents the remains that were preserved over time, whereas those at Aguateca represent what plant materials were present at the site at a single instance in time. Understanding these differences when analyzing the results is an important aspect of paleoethnobotanical research that must be accounted for when doing a comparison such as this. The results of this thesis perpetuate the importance of these paleoethnobotanical practices.

Future Research

Based on the findings of this thesis, future paleoethnobotanical research conducted at Dos

Pilas and other Maya sites should seek ways to answer more concentrated research questions.

Such research should seek to answer questions regarding the plant use of individual social classes or even of individual households, rather than the site as a whole. This thesis provided a broad idea of what plant-use practices were occurring across the site and even across two sites in this region. Examining individual structures or areas more closely and in greater detail will expose the intricacies of the plant use practices of the Maya—an important task in more completely understading a culture as a whole. As the study of plant use continues throughout the

Maya realm, the lifeways of the people will become more fully elucidated, as plants have been intimately tied to the culture and lives of human beings throughout the ages.

References Cited

Alcorn, J.B. 2000 Factors influencing botanical resource perception among the Huastec: Suggestions for future ethnobotanical inquiry. In Ethnobotany: A reader, P.E. Minnis (ed.). University of Oklahoma Press: Norman.

Arnason, T., F. Uck, J. Lambert, and R. Hebda

1980 Maya medicinal plants of Sane Jose Succotz, Belize. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 2(4): 345-364.

Arnold III, P.J. 2009 Settlement and subsistence among the Early Formative Gulf Olmec. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 28: 397-411. Atherton, R.T. 1972 The Mann-Whitney U test. The Mathematical Gazette 56(396): 127-128. Austin, D.F. 2004 Florida ethnobotany. CRC Press: Boca Raton. Balick, M.J. 1990 Production of coyol wine from Acrocomia Mexicana (Arecaceae) in Honduras. Economic Botany 44(1): 84.

Barriga, P., T.L. Dillinger, S. Escárcega, L.E. Grivetti, M. Jimenez, and D.S. Lowe.

2000 Food of the gods: Cure for humanity? A cultural history of the medicinal and ritual use of chocolate. Journal of Nutrition 130: 2057S-2072S.

Berlin, H. 1960 Mas casos del glifo lunar en numerous de distancia. Antropología e Historia de Guatemala 12(2): 25-27. Instituto de Antroplogía e Historia: Guatemala City. Blake, M. and J. Clark 1994 The power of prestice: Competitive generosity and the emergence of rank societies in Mesoamerica. In: Factional competition and political development in the new world. E. Brumfiel and J. Fox (eds.), Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. Bohrer, V.

1986 Guideposts in ethnobotany. Journal of Ethnobiology 6(1): 27-43. Brady, J.E. 1989 An investigation of Maya ritual cave use with special reference to Naj Tunich, Petén, Guatemala. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California: Los Angeles. 1997 Settlement configuration and cosmology: The role of caves at Dos Pilas. American Anthropologist 99(3): 602-618.

Brown, A. and E. Wing 1979 Paleonutrition. Academic Press: New York. Burkill, H.M. 1985 The useful plants of west tropical Africa, vol. 1. Kew Publishing: Surrey, UK. Burns, R.M., M.S. Mosquera, J.L. Whitmore (eds.) 1998 Useful trees of the tropical region of North America. North America Forestry Commission, pub. 3: Washington, DC. Cameron, C.M. and S.A. Tomka 1993 Abandonments of settlements and regions: Ethnoarchaeological and archaological approaches. University of Cambridge Press: New York. Case, R.J., A.O. Tucker, M.J. MacIarello, and K.A. Wheeler 2003 Chemistry and ethnobotany of commercial incense copals, copal blanco, copal oro, and copal negro of North America. Economic Botany 57(2): 189-202. Chichignoud, M., G. Déon, P. Détienne, B. Parant, and P. Vantomme. 1990 Atlas de maderas tropicales de América Latina. Organización Internacional de las Maderas Tropicales:Yokohama, Japan.

Chládek, S. 2011 Exploring Maya ritual caves: Dark secrets from the Maya underworld. AltaMira Press: Plymouth, UK. Christenson, A.J. 2003 Popul Vuh: The sacred book of the Maya. The great classic of Central American spirituality, translated from the original Maya text. University of Oklahoma Press: Norman. Clement, C.R. and J. E. Mora Urpí

1987 Pejibaye palm (Bactris gasipaes, Arecaceae): Multi-use potential for the lowland humid tropics. Economic Botany 41(2): 302-311.

Coe, M.D.

2005 The Maya. 7th ed. Thames and Hudson: New York.

Coe, S.D.

1994 America’s first cuisines. University of Texas Press: Austin.

Coe, M.D. and S.D. Coe.

1996 The true history of chocolate. 2nd ed. Thames and Hudson: New York.

Culbert, T.P.

1977 Maya development and collapse: An economic perspective. In Social process in Maya prehistory, N. Hammond (ed.), pp. 509-530. Academic Press: New York.

Cutler, H.C.

1968 Origins of agriculture in the Americas. Latin American Research Review 3(4): 3- 21.

Dahlin, B.H.

1979 Cropping cash in the Protoclassic: A cultural impact statement. In: Maya Archaeolology and Ethnohistory, N. Hammond and G.R. Willey (eds.), pp. 21-37. University of Texas Press: Austin.

Demarest, A.A.

1997 The Vanderbilt Petexbatun regional archaeological project 1989-1994: Overview, history, and major results of a multidisciplinary study of the Classic Maya collapse. Ancient Mesoamerica 8: 209-227.

2006 The Petexbatun regional archaeological project: A multidisciplinary study of the Maya collapse. VIMA vol.1, Vanderbilt University Press: Nashville, TN.

Demarest, A. A. and H. Escobedo.

1998 Acontecimientos, procesas y movimientos de poblaciones en el Clasico Terminal y el colaspso Maya. In XI Simposio, J.P. Laporte and H. Escobedo (eds): 699-712.

Demarest, A.A. J.A. Valdés, and H. Escobedo.

1995 Projecto arqueológico regional Petexbatun: Informe preliminar #6, sexta temporada. Instituto de Antropología e Historia: Guatemala and Department of Anthropology, Vanderbilt University: Nashville TN.

Demarest, A.A., M. O’Mansky, C. Wolley, D. Van Tuerenhout, T. Inomata, J. Palka, and H. Escobedo.

1997 Classic Maya defensive systems and warfare in the Petexbatun region: Archaeological evidence and interpretations. Ancient Mesoamerica 8: 229-253. de Souza, M.T., F.C. Buzzi, F. V. Cechinel, S. Hess, M.F. Della, and R. Niero

2007 Phytochemical and antinociceptive properties of Matayba elaeagnoides Radlk. Barks. Z Naturforsch C 62(7-8): 550-554.

Détienne, P. and P. Jacquet. 1983 Atlas d’identification des bois de L’amazonie et des régions voisines. Centre Technique Forestier Tropical: Nogent-sur-Marne, France. Dieffenbacher, A. and W.D. Pocklington 1992 Standard methods for the analysis of oils, fats, and derivatives: 1st supplement to the 7th revised and enlarged edition. Blackwell Scientific Publications: Oxford.

Domíngues-Rodrigo, M.

2012 Critical review of the MNI (minimum number of individuals) as a zooarchaeological unit of quantification. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 4(1): 47-59.

Dubois, L. and M. Gerard.

2001 Social position and nutrition: A gradient relationship in Canada and the USA. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 55: 366-373.

Dunne, L.J.

1990 Nutrition almanac, 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill: New York.

Dunning, N.P. and T. Beach.

1994 Soil, erosion, slope management, and ancient terracing in the Maya Lowlands. Latin American Antiquity 5(1): 51-69.

2007 Ecology and agriculture of the Petexbatun Region: An ancient perspective on rainforest adaptation.. VIMA. Vanderbilt University Press: Nashville.

Dunning, N.P., T. Beach, and D. Rue.

1997 The paleoecology and ancient settlement of the Petexbatun region, Guatemala. Ancient Mesoamerica 8(2): 255-266.

Edmonson, M.S. (translator)

1986 Heaven born merida and its destiny: The book of Chilam Balam of Chuyamel. University of Texas Press: Austin.

Ejelonu, B.C., A.A. Lasisi, A.G. Olaremu, and O.C. Ejelonu

2011 The chemical constituents of calabash (Crescentia cujete). African Journal of Biotechnology 10(84): 19631-19636.

Emery, K.F.

1991 Análisis preliminary de los restos óseos de fauna de la región de Petexbatun. In PPetex: Informe Preliminar #3, Tercera Temporada, A. A. Demarest, T. Inomata, H. Escobedo, and J. Palka (eds), pp. 813-828.

1992 Manufactura y uso de artefactos de hueso de animals en la región Petexbatun. In PPetex: Informe Preliminar #4, Cuarta Temporada, A.A. Demarest, T. Inomata, and H. Escobedo (eds), pp. 301-309.

1993 Análisis de los restos de fauna de una residencia elitist de Aguateca. In PPetex: Informe Preliminar #5, Quinta Temporada, J.A. Valdés, A. Foias, T. Inomata, H. Escobedo, and A.A. Demarest (eds.), pp. 161-163.

1997 The Maya collapse: A zooarchaeological investigation. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.

2010 Dietary, environmental, and societal implications of Ancient Maya animal use in the Petexbatun: A zooarchaeological perspective on the collapse. VIMA vol. 5, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.

Emery, K.F. and K. Aoyama

2007 Bone, shell, and lithic evidence for crafting in elite Maya households at Aguateca, Guatemala. Ancient Mesoamerica 18: 69-89.

Emery, K.F., L.E. Wright, and H.P. Schwarcz.

2000 Isotopic analysis of ancient deer bone: Isotopic stability in collapse period Maya land-use. Journal of Archaeological Science 27: 537-550.

100

Eshbaugh, W.H.

1993 Peppers: History and exploitation of a serendipitous new crop discovery. In: New Crops, J. Janick and J.E. Simon (eds), pp. 132-139. Wiley: New York.

Fall, P. and J. Klinge. 2010 Archaeobotanical inference of Bronze Age land use and land cover in the eastern Mediterranean. Journal of Archaeological Science 37: 2622-2629. Flannery, K. and D.E. Puleston. 1982 Maya subsistence: Studies in memory of Dennis E. Puleston. Academic Press: Waltham, MA.

Foias, A.

1996 Changing ceramic production and exchange systems and the Classic Maya collapse in the Petexbatun region, Department of Petén, Guatemala. Unpublished PhD. Dissertation, Vanderbilt University, Department of Anthropology, Nashville, TN.

Foias, A. and R.L. Bishop.

1997 Changing ceramic production and exchange in the Petexbatun region, Guatemala: Reconsidering the Classic Maya collapse. Ancient Mesoamerica 8(2): 275-291.

2013 Ceramics, production, and exchange in the Petexbatun region: The economic parameters of the Classic Maya collapse. VIMA series, vol. 7, Vanderbilt University Press: Nashville.

Folan, W.J.

1991 Sacbes of the Northern Maya. In: Ancient Road Networks and Settlement Hierarchies in the New World, C.D. Trombold (ed.), pp. 222-229. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.

Ford, A.

2008 Dominant plants of the Maya forest and gardens of El Pilar: Implications for paleoenvironmental reconstructions. Journal of Ethnobiology 28(2): 179-199.

Forsyth, D.W.

1980 Report on some ceramics from the Petén, Guatemala. In El Mirador, Petén, Guatemala: An interim report, R.T. Matheny (ed.): 59-82. Papers of the New World Archaeological Foundation, vol. 45. Brigham Young University Press: Provo.

101

Foster, L.V.

2002 Handbook to life in the ancient Maya world. Oxford University Press: New York.

Foster, M.S.

2007 The potential of fruit trees to enhance converted habitats for migrating birds in southern Mexico. Bird Conservation International 17(1): 45-61.

Goette, S., M. Williams, S. Johannessen, C. Hastorf

1994 Toward reconstructing ancient maize: Experiments in processing and charring. Journal of Ethnobiology 14(1): 1-21.

Goldstein, D.J. and J.B. Hageman

2010 Power plants: Paleoethnobotanical evidence of rural feasting in Late Classic Belize. In: Pre-Columbian Foodwasys, J.E. Staller and M. Carrasco (eds.), pp. 421-440. Springer: New York.

Goldstein, G. I., D.E. Newbury, P. Echlin, D.C. Joy, C. Fiori, and E. Lifshin

1981 Scanning electron microscopy and x-ray microanalysis. Plenum Press: New York.

Gómez-Pompa, A., J.S. Flores, and V. Sosa

1987 The “pet kot”: A man-made tropical forest of the Maya. Interciencia 12: 10-15.

Gómez-Pompa, A., J.S. Flores, and A. Fernández

1990 The sacred cacao groves of the Maya. Latin American Antiquity 1: 247-257.

Govaerts, R., J. Dransfield, S.F. Zona, D.R. Hodel, and A. Henderson

2008 Geonoma. In: World Checklist of Arecaceae. Published on the Internet; http://apps.kew.org/wcsp/ Retrieved 3 March 2013.

Graham, I.

1967 Archaeological explorations in El Petén, Guatemala. Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University, Pub. 33, New Orleans.

Graham, J.A.

102

1973 Aspects of non-Classic presences in the inscriptions and sculptural art of Seibal. In The Classic Maya collapse, T. P. Culbert (ed.), pp. 207-219. School of American Research: New Mexico.

Grandtner, M.M.

2005 Elsevier’s dictionary of trees, vol. 1: North America. Elsevier: San Diego.

Hally, D.J.

1981 Plant preservation and the content of paleobotanical samples: A case study. American Antiquity 46(4): 732-742.

Hastorf, C.A.

1988 The use of paleoethnobotanical data in prehistoric studies of crop production, processing, and consumption. In Current paleoethnobotany: Analytical methods and cultural interpretations of archaeological plant remains, C.A. Hastorf and V.S. Popper (eds.), pp.119-144. The University of Chicago Press: Chicago.

Hastorf, C.A. and V.S. Popper (eds.).

1988 Current paleoethnobotany: Analytical methods and cultural interpretations of archaeological plant remains. The University of Chicago Press: Chicago.

Heath-Smith, C., L. Montiel, and M.E. Smith

1999 Excavations of Aztec urban houses at Yautepec, Mexico. Latin American Antiquity 10(2): 133-150

Henderson, A., G. Galeano, and R. Bernal

1995 Field guide to the palms of the Americas. Princeton University Press: Princeton.

Henry, Donald.

1989 From foraging to agriculture: The levant and the end of the ice age. University of Pennsylvania Press: Philadelphia, PA.

Hill, M.O.

1973 Diversity and evenness: A unifying notation and its consequences. Ecology 54: 427-432.

Hodell, D.A., J.H. Curtis, and M. Brenner.

103

1995 Possible role of climate in the collapse of Classic Maya civilization. Nature 75: 391-394.

Houston, S.D.

1987 The inscriptions and monumental art of Dos Pilas, Guatemala: A study of Classic Maya history and politics. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Yale University.

1993 Hieroglyphs and history at Dos Pilas: Dynastic politics of the Classic Maya. University of Texas Press: Austin.

Houston, S.D. and P. Mathews.

1985 The dynastic sequence of Dos Pilas, Guatemala. Pre-Columbian Art Research Institute, Monograph 1: San Francisco.

Hsieh, H., Y. Ju, and J.D. Rogers

2005 Molecular phylogeny of Hypoxylon and closely related genera. Mycologia 97(4): 844-865.

Iltis, H.H.

1983 From teosinte to maize: Catastrophic sexual transmutation. Science 222(4626): 886-894.

Inomata, T. 2008 Warfare and the fall of a fortified center: Archaeological investigations at Aguateca. Vanderbilt Institute of Mesoamerican Archaeology, vol. 3. A. Demarest (ed.). Vanderbilt University Press: Nashville. Inomata, T. and D. Triadan. 2010 Burned palaces and elite residences of Aguateca: Excavations and ceramics. Monographs of the Aguateca Archaeological Project First Phase, vol. 1. The University of Utah Press: Salt Lake City.

Ivanoff, P.

1968 Découvertes ches les Mayas. Robert Laffont: Paris.

Jamieson, G.S. and R.S. McKinney

1931 Sapote (mamey apple) seed and oil. Oil & Fat Industries 8: 255.

104

Jamnadass, R., R. Kindt, A. Mutua, C. Orwa, A. Simons

2009 Brosimum alicastrum. In: Agroforestree database:A tree reference and selection guide. Retrieved from http://www.worldagroforestrycentre.org/sea/products/afdbases/af/asp/SpeciesInfo.asp?Sp ID=377#Ecology, 3 March 2013.

Johannessen, S.

1988 Plant remains and culture change: Are paleoethnobotanical data better than we think? In Current paleoethnobotany: Analytical methods and cultural interpretations of archaeological plant remains, C.A. Hastorf and V.S. Popper (eds.), pp.119-144. The University of Chicago Press: Chicago.

Johnson, D.

1973 Cashew cultivation in Brazil. Agronomia Mocambicana 7(3): 119-129.

Jukofsky, D.

2002 Encyclopedia of rainforests. Oryx Press: Connecticut.

Kato, M. and T. Inoue.

1994 Origin of insect pollination. Nature 368(6468): 195.

Kavountzis, E.G.

2009 Evaluating cave use through spatial analysis of animal remains from Maya caves in Guatemala and Belize. MA thesis, University of Florida: Gainesville.

Klein, R.G. and K. Cruz-Uribe.

1984 The analysis of animal bones from archaeological sites. The University of Chicago Press: Chicago.

Kribs, D.A. 1959 Commercial foreign woods on the American market. Dover Publications: New York. Kroll, E.M. and T.D. Price

1991 The interpretation of archaeological spatial patterning. Plenum Press: New York. Laguna, J. and K.J. Carpenter

105

1951 Raw versus processed corn in niacin-deficient diets. Journal of Nutrition 45(1): 21-28.

Lavenda, R.H. and E.A. Schultz.

1998 Anthropology: A perspective on the human condition. 2nd ed. Mayfield Publishing Company: Mountain View, CA.

Lee, G.I., J.Y. Ha, K.R. Min, H. Nakagawa, S. Tsurufuji, I.M. Chang, and Y. Kim

1995 Inhibitory effects of Oriental herbal medicines on IL-8 induction in lipopolysaccharide-activated rate macrophages. Planta Med 61(1): 26-30.

Lennstrom, H.A. and C.A. Hastorf

1995 Interpretation in context: Sampling and analysis in paleoethnobotany. American Antiquity 60(4): 701-721.

Lentz, D.

1990 Acrocomia Mexicana : Palm of the ancient Mesoamericans. Journal of Ethnobiology 10: 183-194.

1991 Maya diets of the rich and poor: Paleoethnobotanical evidence from Copan. Latin American Antiquity 2(3): 269-287.

1999 Plant resources of the ancient Maya: The paleoethnobotanical evidence. In: Reconstructing Ancient Maya Diet, C.D. White (ed.). The University of Utah Press: Salt Lake City.

Lentz, D.L. and B. Hockaday

2009 Tikal timbers and temples: Ancient Maya agroforestry and the end of time. Journal of Archaeological Science 36: 1342-1353.

Lentz, D.L. and R. Dickau. 2005 Seeds of Central America and Southern Mexico: the economic species. Memoirs of the New York Botanical Garden, Vol. 91. The New York Botanical Garden Press: New York. Lentz, D.L., B. Lane, and K. Thompson 2013 Food, farming and forest management practices of the Late Classic Maya at Aguateca. In: Life and politics at the royal court of Aguateca: Artifacts, analytical data, and synthesis, T. Inomata and D. Triadan (eds), pp. 230-262. Monographs of the

106

Aguateca Archaeological Project First Phase, vol. 3. University of Utah Press: Salt Lake City.

Lentz, D.L., J. Yaeger, and C. Robin 2003 The pine tree trade: Exchange and distribution among Late Classic Maya in the Upper Belize River Valley. Paper presented at the 44th Annual Meeting of the Society for Economic Botany. Tucson, AZ. Lentz, D.L., M. Beaudry-Corbett, M.L. Reyna de Aguilar, and L. Kaplan 1996 Foodstuffs, forests, fields, and shelter: A paleoethnobotanical analysis of vessels contents from the Cerén site, El Salvador. Latin American Antiquity 7: 247-262. Lentz, D.L., J. Yaeger, C. Robin and W. Ashmore 2005 Pine, prestige, and politics of the Late Classic Maya at Xunantunich, Belize. Antiquity 79: 573-585. Lepopsky, D. and K. Lertzman 2005 More on sampling for richness and diversity in archaeobiological assemblages. Journal of Ethnobiology 25(2): 175-188. le Quesne, P.W., J.E. Larrahondo, R.F. Raffaul 1980 Anti-tumor plants: Constituents of Nectandra rigida. Journal of Natural Products 43: 353-359. Li, N., Z. Shi, Y. Tang, J. Chen, and X. Li 2008 Recent progress on the total synthesis of acetogenins from Annonaceae. Beilstein Journal of Organic Chemistry 4(48): 1-62. Lopes, H.C. 1972 Chemical composition and exploitation of the cashew apple in Moazambique. Agronomia Mocambicana 6(2): 119-131. Lorence, D.H. 1999 A gazetteer of Mexican and Central American Rubiaceae. Monographs in Systematic Botany from the Missouri Botanical Gardens 73: 1-177.

Marcus, J.

1992 Royal families, royal texts: Examples from the Zapotec and Maya. In Mesoamerican elites: An archaeological assessment. D.Z. Chase and A.F. Chase (eds.), University of Oklahoma Press: Norman.

Mainieri, C. and J. Peres Chimelo.

107

1978 Fichas de características das madeiras Brasileiras. Instituto de Pesquisas Technológicas. São Paulo: Brazil.

Markgraf, V.

1989 Paleoclimates in Central and South America since 18,000 BP based on pollen and lake level records. Quaternary Science Reviews 8:1-24.

Martin, A.C. and W. D. Barkley. 1961 Seed identification manual. University of California Press: Berkeley and Los Angeles.

Martin, S. and N. Grube.

2000 Chronicle of the Maya kings and queens: Deciphering the Dynasties of the ancient Maya. Thames & Hudson: New York.

Martínez-Ballesté, A., C. Martorell, J. Caballero

2006 Cultural or ecological sustainability? The effect of cultural change on sabal palm management among the Lowland Maya of Mexico. Ecology & Society 11(2): 382-394.

Mathews, P.

1979 The inscription on the back of Stela 8, Dos Pilas, Guatemala. MS on file, Department of Archaeology, University of Calgary: Alberta.

McKillop, H.

1994 Ancient Maya tree cropping: A viable subsistence adaptation for the island Maya. Ancient Mesoamerica 5: 129-140.

Minjares, Jr., A.

2003 Human skeletal remains of the Ancient Maya in the caves of Dos Pilas, Guatemala. Master’s Thesis, Texas A&M University: College Station.

Minnis, P.E. and M.E. Whalen

2010 The first prehispanic chilé (Capsicum) from the U.S. southwest/northwest Mexico and its changing use. American Antiquity 75(2): 245-258.

Morehart, C.T.

108

2002b Ancient Maya ritual cave utilization: A paleoethnobotanical perspective. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Florida State University: Tallahassee.

2011 Food, fire, and fragrance: A paleoethnobotanical perspective on Classic Maya cave rituals. BAR International Series 2186. Archaeopress: Oxford, England.

Morehart, C.T., D.L. Lentz, and K.M. Prufer

2005 Wood of the gods: The ritual use of pine (Pinus sp.) by the ancient Lowland Maya. Latin American Antiquity 16: 255-274.

Moyes, H.

2006 The sacred landscape as a political resource: A case study of ancient Maya cave use at Chechem Ha Cave, Belize, Central America. Ph.D. dissertation, State University of New York: Buffalo.

Navarrete, C. and L.Luján.

1963 Reconocimiento arqueológico del sitio de “Dos Pilas,” Petexbatun, Guatemala. Cuadernos de Antropología 2: Guatemala City: Facultad de Humanidades, Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala.

Netting, R. McC.

1977 Maya subsistence: Mythologies, analogies, possibilities. In: The Origins of Maya Civilization, R.E.W. Adams (ed.), pp. 299-333. University of New Mexico Press: Albuquerque.

Newbury, D. 1986 Advanced scanning electron microscopy and x-ray microanalysis. Plenum Press: New York.

O’Mansky, M.

1996 The Classic Maya collapse in the Petexbatun: Recent investigations in hilltop fortresses. Paper presented at the 19th Midwest Conference on Mesoamerican Archaeology and Ethnohistory. Madison, Wisconsin.

2003 The Petexbatun regional survey: Settlement and land use in a Late Classic Maya kingdom. VIMA. Vanderbilt University Press: Nashville.

O’Mansky, M. and N.P. Dunning.

109

2004 Settlement and Late Classic political disintegration in the Petexbatun region, Guatemala. In The Terminal Classic in the Maya Lowlands: Collapse, transition, and transformation, A.A. Demarest, P.M. Rice, and D.S. Rice (eds.), pp. 83-101. University of Colorado Press: Boulder.

Palka, J.W.

1995 Classic Maya social inequality and the collapse at Dos Pilas, Petén, Guatemala.ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. Ph.D. dissertation, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.

1997 Reconstructing Classic Maya socioeconomic differentiation and the collapse at Dos Pilas, Petén, Guatemala. Ancient Mesoamerica 8(2): 293-306.

2008 Ancient Maya elites at Copán. Current Anthropology 49(1): 158.

Panshin, A.J. and C. de Zeeuw. 1980 Textbook of wood technology: Structure, identification, uses and properties of the commercial woods of the United States and Canada. 4th ed. McGraw-Hill Series in Forest Resources, Vol. 1. McGraw-Hill Companies: New York. Pardo-Tejeda, E. and C.M. Peters 1982 Brosimum alicastrum (Moraceae): uses and potential in mexico. Economic Botany 36(2): 166-175. Pearsall, D.M. 2000 Paleoethnobotany: A handbook of procedures. 2nd ed. Academic Press: San Diego. Perry, L., R. Dickau, S. Zarrillo, I. Holst, D.M. Pearsall, D.R. Piperno, M.J. Berman, R.G. Cooke, K. Rademaker, A.J. Ranere, J.S. Raymond, D.H. Sandweiss, F. Scaramelli, K. Tarble, and J.A. Zeidler 2007 Starch fossils and the domestication and dispersal of chili peppers (Capsicum spp. L.) in the Americas. Science 315(5814): 986-988. Peters, C.M. 1983 Observations on Maya subsistence and the ecology of a tropical tree. American Antiquity 48: 610-615. Peterson, P.A. 2006 Ancient Maya ritual cave use in the Sibun Valley, Belize. Ph.D. dissertation, Boston University: Boston. Pickersgill, B.

110

1969 The archaeological record of chili peppers (Capsicum spp.) and the sequence of plant domestication in Peru. American Antiquity 34: 54-61.

Popper, V.S. 1988 Selecting quantitative measurements in paleoethnobotany. In: Current paleoethnobotany: Analytical methods and cultural interpretations of archaeological plant remains, C.A. Hastorf and V.S. Popper (eds.), pp. 119-114. The University of Chicago Press: Chicago. Puleston, D.E. 1968 Brosimum alicastrum as a subsistence alternative for the Classic Maya of the central souther Lowlands. (Master’s Thesis). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Database. Rice, D.S. 1993 Eighth-century physical geography, environment, and natural resources in the Maya Lowlands. In Lowland Maya civilization in the eighth century A.D., J.A. Sabloff and J.S. Henderson (eds.), pp. 11-64. Dumbarton Oaks: Washington, D.C. Sanders, W.T. 1992 Ranking and stratification in Prehispanic Mesoamerica. In Mesoamerican elites: An archaeological assessment. D.Z. Chase and A.F. Chase (eds.). University of Oklahoma Press: Norman. Sanders, W.T. and B. Price. 1968 Mesoamerica: The evolution of a civilization. Random House: New York.

Santley, R.S., T.W. Killion, and M.T. Lycett.

1986 On the Maya collapse. Journal of Anthropological Research 42(2): 123-159.

Scariot, A.O., E. Lleras, and J.D. Hay

1991 Reproductive biology of the palm Acrocomia aculeata in Central Brazil. Biotropica 23(1): 12-22.

Schaaf, J.M. 1981 A method for reliable and quantifiable subsampling of archaeological features for flotation. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 6(2): 219-248. Schlesinger, V. 2001 Animals and plants of the Ancient Maya: A guide. University of Texas Press: Austin

111

Sharer, R.J. 1993 The social organization of the Late Classic Maya: Problems of definition and approaches. In Lowland Maya civilization in the eighth century A.D., J. Sabloff and J. Henderson (eds.), Dumbarton Oaks: Washington, D.C. Sharer, R.J. and L.P. Traxler. 2006 The ancient Maya, 6th ed. Stanford University Press: Stanford.

Silva-Filho, A.A., M.L. Andrade e Silva, J.C.T. Carvalho, and J.K. Bastos 2004 Evaluation of analgesic and anti-inflammatory activities of Nectandra megapotamica (Lauraceae) in mice and rats. Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology 56: 1179. Simpson, D.A. and C.A. Inglis 2001 Cyperaceae of economic, ethnobotanical, and horticultural importance: A checklist. Kew Bull 56: 295.

Smart, T.L. and E.S. Hoffman.

1988 Environmental interpretation of archaeological charcoal. In Current paleoethnobotany: Analytical methods and cultural interpretations of archaeological plant remains, C.A. Hastorf and V.S. Popper (eds.), pp.119-144. The University of Chicago Press: Chicago.

Smith, C.W., J. Betrán and E.C.A. Runge (eds.)

2004 Corn: Origins, history, technology, and production. Wiley: Hoboken.

Smith, M.E. and M.A. Masson

2000 The ancient civilizations of Mesoamerica: A reader. Blackwell Publishers, Ltd: Malden.

Sommer, A., J.M. Tielsch, J. Katz, H.A. Quigley, J.D. Gottsch, J. Javitt, and K. Singh

1991 Relationship between intraocular pressure and primary open angle glaucoma among white and black Americans: The Baltimore eyes survey. Archives of Opthamology 109(8): 1090-1095.

Stamets, P.

2000 Growing gourmet and medicinal mushrooms, 3rd ed. Ten Speed Press: Berkeley.

Standley, P.C. and J.A. Steyermark.

112

1946 Flora of Guatemala. Chicago Natural History Museum: Chicago.

Struever, S. 1968 Flotation techniques for the recovery of small-scale archaeological remains. American Antiquity 33: 353-362. Taube, K.

2009 The Maya maize god and the mythic origins of dance. In: The Maya and their sacred narratives: Text and context in Maya mythologies, Proceedings of the 12th European Maya conference, Acta Mesoamerica vol. 20, G. Le Fort (ed.). Anton Saurwein Publishing: Markt Schwaben, Germany.

Thompson, J.E.S.

1954 The rise and fall of Maya civilization. University of Oklahoma Press: Norman.

1970 Maya history and religion. University of Oklahoma Press: Norman.

Turner II, B.L. and C.H. Miksicek

1984 Economic plant species associated with prehistoric agriculture in the Maya Lowlands. Economic Botany 38: 179-193.

Uribe, D.C. 1988 La madera estudio anatómico y catálogo de especies Mexicanas. Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia: Mexico City.

Van der Veen, M.

2007a Formation processes of desiccated and carbonized plant remains—the identification of routine practice. Journal of Archaeological Science 34: 968-990.

2007b Luxury food as an instrument of social change: feasting in Iron Age and early Roman Britain. In K Twiss (ed.) The Archaeology of Food and Identity. Carbondale, Southern Illinois University, Center for Archaeological Investigations Occasional Paper No. 34, pp. 112-129.

VanDerwarker, A.M.

2006 Farming, hunting, and fishing in the Olmec world. University of Texas Press: Austin.

VanDerwarker, A.M. and T. Peres (eds).

113

2010 Integrating zooarchaeology and paleoethnobotany: A consideration of issues, methods, and case studies .Springer: New York.

Vinson, G.L.

1960 Las ruinas Mayas de Petexbatun. Antropologia e Historia 12(2): 3-9. Instituto de Antropologia e Historia: Guatemala.

Wacher, C.

2003 Nixtamalization, a Mesoamerican technology to process maize at small-scale with great potential for improving the nutritional quality of maize-based foods. Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Food-Based Approaches for Health Nutrition, pp. 735-744. Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.

Wagner, G.E.

1988 Comparability among recovery techniques. In Current paleoethnobotany: Analytical methods and cultural interpretations of archaeological plant remains, C.A. Hastorf and V.S. Popper (eds.), pp.119-144. The University of Chicago Press: Chicago.

Warrington, I.J.

2003 Annonaceae. In: Apples: Botany, production, and uses, D.C. Ferree and I.J. Warrington (eds). CABI Publishing: Oxfordshire, UK.

Webster, D.

2002 The fall of the Ancient Maya: Solving the mystery of the Maya collapse. Thames & Hudson: New York.

Weiss, E., M.E. Kislev, O. Simchoni, D. Nadel, and H. Tschauner.

2005 Plant-food preparation area on an Upper Paleolithic brush hut floor at Ohalo II, Israel. Journal of Archaeological Science 35: 2400-2414.

Western, A.C. 1970 Wood and charcoal in archaeology. In Science in archaeology: A survey of progress and research, 2nd ed. D. Brothwell and E. Higgs (eds.): 178-187. Praeger: New York. Wilken, Gene 1971 Food-producing systems available to the Ancient Maya. American Antiquity 36:432-448.

114

Willey, G.R.

1972 The artifacts of Altar de Scrificios. Papers of PMAE, vol. 64, no. 1.

1973 The Altar de Sacrificios Excavations: General summary and conclusions. Papers of PMAE, vol. 64, no. 3.

1978 Excavations at Seibal, Department of Petén, Guatemala: Artifacts. Memors of the PMAE, vol. 14, nos. 1-3.

Willey, G.R. and A.L. Smith.

1969 The ruins of Altar de Sacrificios, Department of Petén, Guatemala. Papers of PMAE, vol. 62, no. 1.

Willey, G.R., A.L. Smith, G. Tourtellot, and I. Graham.

1975 Excavations at Seibal, Department of Petén, Guatemala. Introduction: The site and its setting. Memoirs of the PMAE, vol. 13, no. 1.

Wischnitzer, S. 1981 Introduction to electron microscopy, 3rd ed. Pergamon: New York. Wiseman, F.M. 1978 Agricultural and historical ecology of the Maya Lowlands. In: Pre-Hispanic Maya agriculture, P.D. Harrison and B.L. Turner II (eds.), pp. 63-115. University of New Mexico Press: Albuquerque.

Witschey, R.T. and C.T. Brown.

2010 The electronic atlas of the Ancient Maya. http://mayagis.smv.org/maps_of_the_maya_area.htm. Retrieved on 17 February 2013.

Wright, L.E.

1997 Biological perspectives on the collapse of the Pasion Maya. Ancient Mesoamerica 8(2): 267-273.

2006 Diet, health, and status among the Pasion Maya: A reappraisal of the collapse. VIMA, vol. 2. Vanderbilt University Press: Nashville.

Wright, P.J.

115

2010 Methodological issues in paleoethnobotany: A consideration of issues, methods, and cases. In Integrating zooarchaeology and paleoethnobotany: A consideration of issues, methods, and cases, A.M. VanDerwarker and T. Peres (eds.), pp. 37-64.

Wynter-Adams, D.M., O.R. Simon, M.D. Gossell-Williams, and M.E. West.

1999 Isolation of a muscarinic alkaloid with ocular hypotensive action from Trophis racemosa. Phytotherapy Research 13(8): 670-674.

Yarnell, R. A. 1974 Plant food and cultivation of the Salts Caverns. In Archaeology of the Mammoth Cave Area, P. J. Watson (ed.): 113-122. Academic Press: New York.

Yokota, K. and M. Hayashi

2011 Function and evolution of nodulation genes in legumes. Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences 68(8): 1341-1351.

116