INVESTIGATING PLANT MANAGEMENT IN THE MONTE CASTELO (RONDÔNIA- BRAZIL) AND TUCUMÃ (PARÁ- BRAZIL) SHELL MOUNDS USING PHYTOLITHS ANALYSIS Submitted by Lautaro Maximilian Hilbert to the University of Exeter as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Archaeology June 2017 This thesis is available for Library use on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. I certify that all material in this thesis which is not my own work has been identified and that no material has previously been submitted and approved for the award of a degree by this or any other University. Lautaro Maximilian Hilbert 2017 ABSTRACT Shell mound or sambaqui, as commonly named in Brazil, are anthropic intentional mound constructions made by complex hunter-gatherer fishing communities. Typically distributed along shorelines and inland regions of Brazil, these sites are arguably one of the earliest evidence of human presence in South America, with dates ranging from 910-660 to 10,179-9,708 cal. yr. B.P. As archaeobotanical investigations reported the presence of various plant resources in these sites, a debate that has received much attention in recent years is regarding the scale of which the shell mound builders managed these resources. The Monte Castelo (9,495-9,137 cal. yr. B.P - state of Rondônia) and the Tucumã shell mound (4,425-4245 cal. yr. B.P. - state of Pará) will be the case studies of this research. The aim of this thesis is to use phytolith data from archaeological contexts in order to evaluate and discern the extent to which these mound builders managed plant resources. The outcome of this study provides novel evidence revealing the management and consumption of wild and domesticated plants through the mid-Holocene. The data calls for an evaluation on the potential scale of horticulture practices by Amazonian shell mound builders as well as the relative contribution of each domesticated resources to the indigenous diet. i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS It's been four years, four long years since I started my PhD research. Upon realising that after one year of work the initial project I intended to investigate had to be ultimately dismissed, I felt pressured to find a new subject or I would have to give up the PhD altogether. The initial failure led me to the most challenging years of my life. However, as it is mostly the case, opportunities will arrive accompanied by a string of unexpected circumstances. By the time of the abandonment of my initial project, Eduardo Neves and his team got the permits to excavate the Monte Castelo shell mound. Fortunately, my supervisor, José Iriarte got the opportunity to talk to Eduardo asking if they needed someone to investigate the microbotanical remains of this site. Fortunately, again, Eduardo was still on the fieldwork preparations and agreed to collect soil samples for me. If any of these circumstances had unravelled a couple of months sooner or even later, I would have missed this opportunity altogether and probably would not have finished this thesis. Now, it was up to me to make the best of what was given. This new path led me to the most incredible places and people who gave me knowledge and confidence in the area of archaeology. Thus, I am forever grateful to all that helped me on this intellectual journey. Firstly, I would like to thank my sponsors CAPES (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior) for granting me this exceptional opportunity of a full-time international study and financial support. Also, this thesis was conducted within a wider collaborative of the ERC (European Research Council) which was co- ordinated by José Iriarte and Denise Schaan (PAST project). My sincere thank you to my supervisor, José Iriarte. While we may have had a bumpy start, all of that only lead to an honest and true friendship. I do believe that his consistent support, encouragement and constructive criticism shaped me to be the very best researcher I could be and I thank him for that. I would like to thank Eduardo Neves and Francisco Pugliese, and their collaborators. Without their assistance, the first steps of this research would never have happened. Also, thank you to Denise Schaan, as I became further ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS engaged in my research, I had the opportunity to work on a second site and this time with her esteemed collaboration. Fieldwork and soil sampling was made possible with the help of the ArqueoTrop and Inside teams. Thank you, Laura Furquim for helping me in separating the soil samples of the Monte Castelo shell mound. Sincere thank you to my father, Klaus Hilbert. I thank him for the endless support, love, the help in finding bibliographies, listening to my crazy ideas and always being there for me. He played a major role in the construction of this thesis and for that I am thankful. I dedicate this thesis to him. I'd like to thank all colleagues involved in the investigation of wild rice phytoliths for the Monte Castelo shell mound; especially Bronwen S. Whitney, Myrtle Shock, Elizabeth Veasey , Carlos Augusto Zimpel and Mark Robinson. Thank you to Daiana Travassos Alves for always believing in my research, her motivation and passion towards archaeological investigations captivated and stimulated me to try and always do my best, helping me overcome problems even when times seemed so gloom. Special thanks to Yoshi Maezumi for helping me with the wild rice diagrams, to Jennifer Georgina Watling, for teaching me the steps of extraction and phytolith identification, to Jonas Gregorio, for plotting most of the maps used in this thesis and to Jess Collins for proofreading part of this thesis. Thank you all for my intellectual growth. I also like to thank all my friends for moral support- especially, Leonardo Moura, Vítor Saldanha, Vinícius Costa, Luiz Marques, Deivis Gabardo, Felipe Navarro, Paloma Amaya, Anderson Vilhena, Jônatas Batalha, Rômulo Nascimento, Elif Ozsoy, Alana Oliveira and Regina Gonda. Apart from those already listed, I am also grateful to of my friends and colleagues that directly or indirectly helped me in this venture. Finally, I would like to thank my family members - my brother, Yamandú Hilbert and my mother, Liliana Mendiburu, for their love and support. iii TABLE OF CONTENT ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................... i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................. ii TABLE OF CONTENT ...................................................................................... iv LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................... vii LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................. x LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .............................................................................. xi INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 13 CHAPTER 1 ..................................................................................................... 16 1. SUMMARY ON BRAZILIAN SHELL MOUNDS.................................................... 16 1.1.South and Southeastern Brazilian Shell Mound Studies ................................ 19 1.2. Amazoninan Shell Mounds Studies ............................................................... 21 1.3. Differences Between South/Southeastern and Amazonian Shell Mounds ..... 25 1.4. Diet of the Shell-Mound Builders ................................................................... 26 1.4.1. Microremains and phytoliths studies in Brazilian shell mounds .................. 28 2. THE SOUTH-WEST AMAZONIAN LOWLAND STUDY AREA ............................ 30 2.1. The South-West Amazonian Occupation in the Early and Mid-Holocene ...... 31 2.2. The Monte Castelo Shell Mound (RO-08-PN) ............................................... 32 2.2.1. Renewed archaeological research at the Monte Castelo shell mound ........ 37 2.3. Paleoclimate and Past Floral Assemblage of the Study Region .................... 38 3. THE SOUTH-EAST AMAZONIAN LOWLAND STUDY AREA ............................. 40 3.1. Previous Studies in the Marajó Archipelago .................................................. 41 3.2. The Tucumã Shell Mound ............................................................................. 42 3.2.1 Excavation at the Tucumã shell mound ....................................................... 44 3.3. Paleoclimate and Past Floral Assembly of the Study Region ........................ 47 CHAPTER 2 ..................................................................................................... 49 1. SYNTHESIS ON PLANT DOMESTICATION ....................................................... 49 1.1. Domestication Level ...................................................................................... 50 1.2. Domestication Pattern ................................................................................... 51 1.3. Review on Centres of Plant Domestication ................................................... 52 iv TABLE OF CONTENT 2. LOWLAND AMAZONIAN PLANT DOMESTICATION .......................................... 54 2.1. Lowland Domestication Centre ..................................................................... 57 2.1.1. Manihot esculenta Crantz ssp. esculenta ................................................... 58 2.1.2. Bactris gasipaes Kunth ssp.