lable at ScienceDirect

Journal of Archaeological Science 41 (2014) 308e321

Contents lists avai

Journal of Archaeological Science

journal homepage: http: / /www.elsevier .com/locate/ jas

Archaic period settlement and subsistence in the Maya lowlands: newstarch grain and lithic data from Freshwater Creek, Belize

Robert M. Rosenswig a,*, Deborah M. Pearsall b, Marilyn A. Masson a, Brendan J. Culleton c,Douglas J. Kennett c

aDepartment of Anthropology, The University at Albany e SUNY, 1400 Washington Ave., Albany, NY 12222, USAbDepartment of Anthropology, University of Missouri, USAcDepartment of Anthropology, The Pennsylvania State University, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 14 May 2013Received in revised form13 July 2013Accepted 30 July 2013

Keywords:Mesoamerican ArchaicMaizeChili pepperManiocLithicsPreceramicStarch grainsBelize Archaic

*Corresponding author . Tel.: þ1 518 442 4709; faxE-mail address: rrosenswig@albany.edu (R.M. Rose

0305-4403/$ e see front matter � 2013 Elsevier Ltd.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2013.07.034

a b s t r a c t

Excavations and regional reconnaissance survey in Mesoamerica’s tropical Maya lowlands of north-eastern Belize document the association of a distinctive orange soil horizon with patinated stone toolsdating to the Archaic period (8000e3500 cal BP). Archaic period deposits of this type were found alongthe Freshwater Creek drainage and on small islands associated with this riverine system. Stone toolassemblages (n ¼ 778) from these sites indicate a spatial separation of tool use and resharpening atisland versus shore sites at Progresso Lagoon and Laguna de On and expand the range of stone tool typesreported from the Archaic period in the region. Starch grains (n ¼ 81) were recovered from seven of thesestone tools (two unifaces, four bifaces, and a hammer stone) and indicate that preceramic peoples innorthern Belize used these implements to harvest or process maize along with several other domesti-cated plants species. The presence of starch from chili pepper, manioc, and taxa of the bean and squashfamilies is also documented on a number of the same tools. These data are consistent with paleoeco-logical studies in the region suggesting an extended period of horticultural activity in the Maya regionprior to the adoption of ceramics and settled village life that occurred after w3000 cal BP.

� 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Mesoamerica is one of a handful of areas where agriculturearose independently and the regional variation in the trajectory ofhumaneplant interaction is therefore of considerable interest.Maize has received particular attention due to its modern economicimportance as well as the central role it played in Mesoamerica atthe time of Spanish contact. Based on archaeological (Piperno et al.,2009; Ranere et al., 2009) and corroborating genetic evidence(Matsuoka et al., 2002) we know that maize developed from wildBalsas teosinte [Zea mays subsp. parviglumis] in the deciduoustropical forests of western Mexico prior to 8700 years ago (all datesare calibrated unless otherwise noted). As genetic research in-creases, awareness is growing that archaeological evidence isrequired to evaluate the assumption that rapid evolution occurredto economic species in a single region (Purugganan and Fuller,2009:845; Zeder et al., 2006). Using archaeological evidence tocalibrate our understanding of genetic data is similar to the role

: þ1 518 442 5710.nswig).

All rights reserved.

that paleontology has played in opening genetic interpretation tonon-uniformitarian processes (e.g., Eldredge, 1985). Tracking theuse of economically valuable domesticates in the archaeologicalrecord is an essential part of documenting the timing, spread andadaptive context of incipient food production. With maize, this isespecially important as a relatively large proportion (2e4%) ofgenes are associated with domestication (Wright et al., 2005), andmuch of the human induced changes to this grass occurred after itwas transported outside of its natural range.

Fromwestern Mexico, maize eventually spread to most parts ofthe Western Hemisphere (Piperno and Pearsall, 1998; Smith, 1995).However, much of the archaeological evidence for early plantproduction in Mesoamerica is still based on the pioneering exca-vations of Kent Flannery (Flannery, 1986; Piperno and Flannery,2001) and Richard MacNeish (MacNeish et al., 1967; MacNeish,1986; Smith, 2005) in neighboring valleys of the central Mexicanhighlands (see recent reviews by Kennett, 2012; Piperno and Smith,2012; Rosenswig, 2013). Due to poor preservation or visibility ofArchaic period sites, there is scant archaeological evidence of thesocieties responsible for early domestication in Mesoamerica’s hothumid lowlands (Blake, 2006; Piperno and Pearsall, 1998; Voorhiesand Metcalfe, 2007; Zeitlin and Zeitlin, 2000). Early plant

R.M. Rosenswig et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 41 (2014) 308e321 309

cultivators left their imprint on the environment, however. Much ofwhat is currently known of the early lowland spread of maizecomes from paleoenvironmental studies that document forestclearance and cultivation in areas where archaeological evidencehas been elusive, in locations such as Tabasco (Pope et al., 2001;Pohl et al., 2007; Sluyter and Dominguez, 2006) and along thePacific coasts of Mexico and Guatemala (Kennett et al., 2010; Neffet al., 2006). Archaeological evidence of early human occupationand plant production exists from a handful of lowland sites on thePacific coast of Chiapas (Voorhies, 2004) and Guerrero (Kennettet al., 2008). However, one of the most sustained programs of in-vestigations into the Archaic foundations of Mesoamerican societycomes from the Maya lowlands of northern Belize (see reviews inLohse, 2010; Lohse et al., 2006). This paper builds upon this work byproviding archaeological evidence of the Archaic-period occupa-tion and stone tool assemblages from the Freshwater Creekdrainage in northeastern Belize (Fig. 1) and describes maize andother starch grains preserved on stone tools.

2. Northern Belize Archaic

Multiple projects have focused on the Archaic period in north-ern Belize. Following up on his work in the highlands, MacNeish

Fig. 1. Northern Belize with

started the Belize Archaic Archaeological Reconnaissance (BAAR)project in the early 1980s (Zeitlin, 1984). BAAR excavations wereundertaken at a number of sites in the northern half of the country,including Betz Landing (Zeitlin, 1984) on the west shore of Pro-gresso Lagoon (Fig. 1) where a total of 46 m2 was excavated. Nofeatures (e.g., house floors, postmolds, or hearths) were reportedfrom the excavations at Betz Landing but a “reddish-brown soil”located 20e40 cm below the surface produced calibrated dates of3690e3260 cal BP (I-11900) and 3710e3340 cal BP (I-11901; Zeitlin,1984:364; Table 1, Fig. 2). Below this layer they reported a dark graysoil containing stone tools and an associated radiocarbon date of6190e2310 cal BP (UCR-1650; Zeitlin, 1984:364e5). These threedates all fall within what we now know to be the Late Archaicperiod (Table 1). When these data were originally reported, how-ever, ceramic-using villagers were thought to have been present atCuello by the beginning of the fourth millennium BP (Hammond,1977; Marcus, 1983:459), and so, the Betz Landing occupationwas not attributed to the Archaic period.

One of the best-studied preceramic sites in northern Belize isColha. Occupation persisted at this location until the Postclassicperiod due to its position within one of the highest quality chert-bearing zones in Mesoamerica (Hester et al., 1996; Iceland, 1997;Iceland and Hester, 1996; Kelly, 1993; Shafer and Hester, 1983).

sites mentioned in text.

Table 1Radiocarbon dates from Archaic age sites in northeastern Belize.

Lab number Provenience Material Conventional 14C age (BP) 2s cal BP Reference

I-11900 Betz landing, redebrown soil Charcoal 3230 � 85 3690e3660 (0.8%) Zeitlin (1984)3650e3260 (94.6%)

I-11901 Betz landing, redebrown soil Charcoal 3275 � 85 3710e3340 Zeitlin (1984)UCR-1650 Betz landing, dark gray soil Antler 3790 � 800 6190e2310 Zeitlin (1984)Beta-48992 Pulltrouser Swamp, P1/3-211 Wood 3810 � 90 4440e3960 (94.5%) Pohl et al. (1996)

Assc. with Lowe-Ha Point 3950e3920 (0.9%)Beta-59914 Pulltrouser Swamp, P4/4-154 Wood 3030 � 90 3440e3420 (0.8%) Pohl et al. (1996)

Assc. with constricted Uniface 3410e2960 (94.6%)TX-7371 Colha Zone BeC interface Charcoal 2950 � 100 3370e2860 Iceland (1997)TX-8106 Colha Zone B-4, top C Charcoal 2936 � 169 3480e2740 Iceland (1997)CAMS-8398 Colha Zone C, 91e98 cm Charcoal 2940 � 80 3340e2880 Iceland (1997)CAMS-8397 Colha Zone C1, 71 cm Charcoal 2780 � 60 3030e2760 Iceland (1997)UCIAMS-17911 Caye Coco Pit 1 Charcoal 2675 � 15 2790e2740 This studyUCIAMS-17909 Caye Coco Pit 2 Charcoal 5835 � 20 6730e6610 (90.6%) This study

6590e6560 (4.8%)UCIAMS-17908 Caye Coco Pit 2 Charcoal 7415 � 20 8320e8180 This study

R.M. Rosenswig et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 41 (2014) 308e321310

Two formal superimposed lithic production areas were docu-mented at Colha. The deeper aceramic deposits show clear evi-dence of uniface production (debris and refits) and this is buriedbeneath a ceramic-bearing Formative-period surface with burinspall cores and other diagnostic Formative period lithic productiondebris (Hester, 1994:3; Hester et al., 1996:47). The preceramic levelsat Colha contained “... large amounts of patinated lithic materialincluding constricted unifaces, biface and macro-blade fragments,and debitage, but no ceramics.”with associated radiocarbon datesthat range between the fourth and fifth millennia BP (Hester et al.,1996:45). A distinctive lithic assemblage characterizes the pre-ceramic occupation of northern Belize and includes tools madefrom macro-flakes, many of which were unifacially worked(Gibson, 1991; Iceland, 1997:95e113; Kelly, 1988; Lohse et al.,2006). Constricted unifaces are the most well-known of thesetools and use-wear analysis suggest that theywere employed to digsoil and cut wood (Gibson, 1991; Iceland, 1997:227e9).

Pohl et al. (1996) undertook a paleoecological program of coringand excavations at Pulltrouser Swamp and a number of other

Fig. 2. Calibrated radiocarbon distributions for Archaic period sites discussed in text: key Arcand Lowe-Ha point from Pulltrouser Swamp (Pohl et al., 1996); and Caye Coco (present studwith OxCal 4.1 (Bronk Ramsey, 2009) using the IntCal09 curve (Reimer et al., 2009).

nearby wetland areas. This team has compiled over 40 radiocarbondates from their excavations and documented maize and maniocpollen at Cob Swamp by 5000 cal BP as well as lithics from depositsdated to 4000e2000 cal BP. High proportions of tree pollen indicatethat cultigens were grown in an environment dominated by hightropical forestwithminor disturbance (Pohl et al.,1996:362e3). Themid-Holocene was a time of stable, moist climate (Metcalfe et al.,2009) and pollen analysis from northern Belize indicates that itwas only after 3500 cal BP that forest disturbance was extensive, asindicated by an increase in maize and particulate charcoal remains(Jacob, 1995; Jones, 1994). Environmental data are thus consistentwith small-scale horticultural societies planting crops in northernBelize by 5000 cal BP with measurable environmental impactsoccurring 1000 years later. Missing from the Archaic-period recordof northern Belize are multiple contexts with excavated archaeo-logical materials that can provide a comparative foundation forunderstanding the regional systemof human adaptation. This paperconsiders newly reported data from the Freshwater Creek drainagethat starts to establish this interpretive context.

haic strata at Colha (Iceland, 1997) and Betz Landing (Zeitlin, 1984); constricted unifacey). Conventional ages and other data are presented in Table 1. Calibrations were made

R.M. Rosenswig et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 41 (2014) 308e321 311

3. Results from the Freshwater Creek drainage

3.1. Reconnaissance, excavations and AMS dates

Eight preceramic sites from the Freshwater Creek drainage, sixof which are from Progresso Lagoon (Rosenswig, 2004; Rosenswigand Masson, 2001), provide a glimpse of the buried universe ofArchaic period settlement in this area of northern Belize (Fig. 1).Settlement locations include island sites at Laguna de On Island andCaye Coco; shoreline sites at Doubloon Bank Lagoon as well as FredSmith and Betz Landing at Progresso Lagoon, and upland sites at adistance of 1e2 km from rivers including Strath Bogue, Patt WorkSite and Progresso Test Program: Subop 7 (see Fig. 1). At all of thesesites, heavily patinated stone tools were recovered. Patination re-sults from the chemical exchange of calcium carbonate from theunderlying bedrock to form an outer rind on the surface of stonetools. The patina ranges from1 to 5mm in thickness and gives theseArchaic tools a distinctive clean, white appearance that obscuresthe natural color of the chert from which they were made (seeFig. 4G in its color digital version). Where tools exhibit recentbreakage, a high quality Colha chert is almost always visiblebeneath the patina. In contrast, Formative and Classic period stonetools from the area can have a light patina “wash” that does notobscure the character of the raw material.

Fig. 3. Extent of orange soil horizon at Caye Coco (A), photo of Suboperation 26c excavationslevel and posthole under Terminal Classic and Postclasssic occupation (C).

Archaic period deposits around Progresso Lagoon are found in adistinctive buried orange soil that appears to have been formed insitu and not through sedimentary processes. This grainy orange soilis always located directly above limestone bedrock. We do not yetfully understand why this orange soil is associated with Archaicoccupation but when modern construction activities expose it wehave consistently found patinated lithics containedwith this lens inthe absence of ceramics. The Fred Smith and the Patt Work Sitewere discovered in this fortuitous manner, in the latter case RMRand MAM stopped a work crew to collect the patinated Archaicperiod lithic tools and debitage.

3.1.1. Caye CocoAt Caye Coco, the distinctive orange aceramic soil stratum is

approximately 15 cm thick and is located between 60 and 80 cmbelow ground surface over an area of at least 150 m2 (Fig. 3A). PitFeature 1 originated 60 cm below ground surface on the west sideof this aceramic deposit; underlying a Terminal Classic-age artificialterrace. Pit Feature 2 was documented 24 m to the west of PitFeature 1 and right next to a posthole documented within the or-ange soil and exposed in Suboperation 26b (Fig. 3). A patinated,plano-convex chopping tool (Fig. 4B) and numerous patinated lithicflakes were recovered in association with Pit Feature 2 as well as ahammer stone (Fig. 4A) and the remains of flaked oyster shell.

in progress (B) and profile of north wall of Suboperation 26b showing Archaic horizon

Fig. 4. Seven Archaic tools with starch granules documented: hammer stone (A), plano-convex biface (B), formal bifaces (C and D), expedient biface (E), uniface (F), constricteduniface (G). Provenience provided in figure: site and excavated locale in parentheses.

R.M. Rosenswig et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 41 (2014) 308e321312

The profiles of Suboperation 26b document three upper levels(A, B and C) that all contain Postclassic ceramics with TerminalClassic and Archaic deposits found at the base of the unit (Fig. 3C).Level A is a very dark brown (10 YR 2/2) loosely packed, humictopsoil. Level B is a densely packed, dark brown (10 YR 3/2) clayloam with limestone inclusions and large quantities of brokenpottery. Level C is a very dark brown (7.5 YR 3/2) soil horizon thatresembles Level A without the roots. Level D contains TerminalClassic ceramics and is composed of a medium-brown, silty clay.Level E is an orange brown (7.5 YR 4/6), silty clay and containspatinated stone tools and flakes without associatedceramics. Decomposed and soft limestone forms the bedrock belowLevel E. A pit originating from Terminal Classic Level D was dugdown into bedrock and is exposed in the north profile of Sub-operation 26b. This Terminal Classic pit provides an example ofhow later Maya occupants of Caye Coco disturbed preceramicdeposits.

Two carbonized wood samples were AMS radiocarbon datedfrom Pit Feature 2 in Suboperation 26a/c and a third carbonizedwood sample was dated from Pit Feature 1. Samples were hand-floated at the MU Paleoethnobotany lab by DMP, with the flota-tion bucket and sieve carefully cleaned between sample processing.Wood was hand-picked from light fractions using metal forceps.The calibrated two-sigma ranges of the Pit Feature 2 dates are8320e8180 cal BP (UCIAMS-17908) and 6730e6560 cal BP(UCIAMS-17909; Table 1; Fig. 2). The contents of Pit Feature 2 areassociated stratigraphically with aceramic Level E and thereforethese results provide a date range for the Archaic period compo-nent of Caye Coco. These AMS results encompass a very wide rangeof between 8320 and 6560 BP (the outer limits of the two 2-sigmaerror ranges). While this 1700-year span could represent theduration of preceramic occupation at Caye Coco, both dates were

from wood charcoal and there may be an “old wood” effect(Schiffer, 1986; Kennett et al., 2002) in play or the orange soil wasexposed and formed in situ over much of the Middle Holocene.

The two dates from Pit Feature 2 are earlier than those fromother preceramic sites known from the area such as Betz Landing(Zeitlin, 1984), Colha (Iceland, 1997), and Pulltrouser Swamp (Pohlet al., 1996). This is not surprising given the small number of pre-ceramic sites known. A 6700 cal BP occupation of Caye Coco withmaize-use (see below) is roughly contemporaneous with patternsreported from the Gulf Coast (Pope et al., 2001). While bioturbationmay also be responsible for the Gulf Coast dates (Sluyter andDominguez, 2006; but see response by Pohl et al., 2007), maizeuse on the Gulf Coast and in northern Belize during the seventhmillennium BP would not be surprising now that maize use is re-ported in the Balsas by 8700 BP (Piperno et al., 2009), coastalChiapas, Mexico by at least 6500 BP (Kennett et al., 2010), and to thesouth in Ecuador by 6700 BP (estimated cal date: 7800 BP) duringthe late preceramic period (Las Vegas; Piperno and Pearsall, 1998;see Grobman et al., 2012; Haas et al., 2013). Maize use continues incoastal Ecuador during the early Formative Valdivia period, asdocumented at the Loma Alta and Real Alto sites (Pearsall, 1978;Pearsall et al., 2004; Zarrillo et al., 2008). In contrast to the GulfCoast data, evidence of maize use at Caye Coco and other sites in thetropical lowland Freshwater Creek drainage have associated arti-facts, features and a wide use of economic plants that provideinsight into a wider range of Archaic period adaptations.

The calibrated two-sigma range of the Pit Feature 1 date is2790e2740 cal BP (UCIAMS-17911, Table 1; Fig. 2). This date placesit within the first ceramic phase (i.e., Swasey) in northern Belize(Rosenswig and Kennett, 2008: Fig. 5). However, the culturalcontext and rate of adoption of ceramics is poorly understood in theMaya area and it is certainly possible that non-ceramic-using

Fig. 5. Extent of orange horizon at the Fred Smith site (A) and location of preceramic sites in the Freshwater Creek drainage (B).

R.M. Rosenswig et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 41 (2014) 308e321 313

peoples persisted later in some places because the transition wasquite variable across Mesoamerica (Clark and Cheetham, 2002; seeRosenswig, 2010:34e38, 2011). The divergent dates we obtainedmay represent repeated visits to this location throughout theArchaic Period that are expressed horizontally within the orangesoil horizon. Alternatively, this carbonized wood postdates thefeature and was incorporated through post-depositional processes.Caye Coco does not have a Formative period occupation. Each pitoriginates at the same stratigraphic level within a distinctive or-ange soil layer and is covered by a Terminal Classic period stoneterrace and an overlying Postclassic era midden (Masson, 1999;Masson and Rosenswig, 2005; Rosenswig and Masson, 2002).

The identified preceramic component of Caye Coco is likelymuchsmaller than the original extent of the island’s occupation duringthis period. The Postclassic residents of the island removed the soildown to bedrock in many places where earlier deposits are nowabsent. At one location (Suboperation 40f) a pocket of orange soil

was preserved in a small depression into bedrock and ceramic-bearing levels lay directly over it. This example is likely one ofmanysuchpockets of preservedorangepreceramic soil on the islandthat we fortuitously encountered. Disturbed orange soils containingheavilypatinated lithicswerealso found100mwest, next toanotherPostclassic structure. The island of Caye Cocomeasures 400� 600mand, as only 300 m2 (0.125%) has been excavated, additional earlydeposits will likely be encountered with further excavation.

3.1.2. Fred SmithExcavations were also undertaken at the Fred Smith site on the

west shore of Progresso Lagoon, 400 m across the water from CayeCoco and 500 m to the north of Betz Landing (Fig. 5). When weencountered the site during the summer of 2001, an area ofapproximately 800 m2 had recently been stripped of topsoil byheavy machinery in preparation for house construction. The bull-dozing had exposed orange soils identical to those documented at

Fig. 6. Profile of preceramic component of Laguna de On documented through excavation at Suboperation 19 (A) as well as depth below surface of bedrock (B) around this unitdocumenting more extensive preceramic activity at the island.

R.M. Rosenswig et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 41 (2014) 308e321314

Caye Coco (and described from Betz Landing) and heavily patinatedlithic material was abundant in the disturbed area. Systematicsurface collections at the Fred Smith site recovered a total of 358patinated lithic objects, including ten unifacial tools, two expedientbifaces and two formal biface fragments (Fig. 4C and D), as well asnumerous flakes and shatter. Excavations of an undisturbed portionof the site documented more of the orange, aceramic soil horizon inwhich patinated lithics were recovered and ceramics were absent.Unlike Caye Coco, the aceramic orange soil of this site begandirectly below the active topsoil, at w20 cm below current groundsurface and approximately 30e40 cm above bedrock. Projectingfrom test units, we determined that there is an area of at leastanother 400 m2 of undisturbed orange soil containing patinatedlithics directly beneath the surface of this area (Fig. 5A). In theundisturbed zone of the Fred Smith site there is no indication of aburied orange soil visible from the surface.

Without modern land disturbance, we would not have beenaware of the Fred Smith site’s existence. This pattern of buriedaceramic orange soils containing patinated lithics is consistently

observed in the Progresso Lagoon area and at other preceramic sitesthat we have documented in the area as a result of mechanicalearthmoving activities (e.g., Patt Work Site). In other fortuitousinstances, the orange soils and Archaic lithics were located towardsthe bottom of test pits excavated to document later period sites(e.g., Strath Bogue and Progresso Test Program Subop 7).

Orange soils are not an indication of Archaic period sites northand south of Progresso lagoon. The quantity of orange soil increasesas one moves north towards the modern Belizean city of Corozal,but we have not found an Archaic site in this area. North of theinternational border in the southern part of Quintana Roo, Mexicoorange soils are even more abundant and periodic examination ofhighway construction activities by RMR and MAM over the pastdecade have never encountered patinated lithics. Furthermore, tothe south of Progresso lagoon there are no orange soils around theFreshwater Creek and Archaic tools were recovered in white claysat Laguna de On and Doubloon Bank lagoon. The local geology iscomplex and we do not yet understand why orange soils andpatinated lithics co-occur around Progresso lagoon.

R.M. Rosenswig et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 41 (2014) 308e321 315

3.1.3. Laguna de On IslandIn 1997, we encountered an aceramic, white clay level on Laguna

de On Island (locally known as Honey Camp Lagoon) that containedpatinated Archaic lithic tools and debitage (see Fig. 5B). TheseArchaic-period deposits were documented at the base of an initial1 � 1 m unit (Suboperation 19) and contained macroflake tools,including a heavily resharpened uniface that was probably origi-nally constricted (Fig. 4F). We extended the excavation to a 1 � 4 mtrench (Fig. 6) that documented cultural deposits of over 2 m indepth. The profile on the east wall of Suboperation 19 revealed aPostclassic pit that penetrated a preceramic stratum that extendedfurther below into bedrock (Fig. 5A). The first three levels containedPostclassic period materials. The upper deposit, Level A, is a verydark brown (10 YR 3/2) humic topsoil. Level B is a very dark brown(10 YR 2/3) pebbly clay with angular limestone inclusions. Level C isa light gray (10 YR 5/4) silt. Level D is a very dark brown (10 YR 4/3)clay that was difficult to cut with a trowel and contained chertinclusions. Level E is a light gray (10 YR 6/3) claymixed deposit withPostclassic ceramics, burned rocks and patinated lithic flakes. LevelE appears to represent a Postclassic disturbance of earlier, aceramicdeposits. The transition between Levels D and E is difficult todetermine due to cicada and rootlet bioturbation. Level F is amottled light yellowish brown clay (ranging between 10 YR 6/3 and10 YR 6/4) containing in situ burnt rocks and patinated lithics. Thetransition between Level F and bedrock is hard to make out inplaces as the layers are so saturated with water and bedrock isdecomposed into a soft marl and fine clay mixture. Due to timeconstraints, only every third bucket of soil was screened through 1/4 inch mesh for these aceramic levels; so the materials analyzedonly represent a sample of the volume removed.

A program of test auguring around this unit at Laguna de Onrevealed that there were at least two more such Postclassic in-trusions into aceramic clays on the island to the south and east ofSuboperation 19 (Fig. 6B). The depth of these clays in test auger # 15and # 18, which were significantly greater than surrounding testauger locations, indicates that at least two other Postclassic pitsinto bedrock exist on the island. As at Caye Coco, later inhabitants ofLaguna de On Island (Masson, 2000) appear to have disturbedaceramic levels when they dug pits down to bedrock. The exactdepth of the preceramic white clay levels was difficult to determinefrom the 2.5 cm thick auger probes due to similarity in color andconsistency of clay with soft, decomposed limestone bedrock. Forthis reason, auguring primarily determined the depth of the

Fig. 7. A., B. chili pepper, Caye Coco plano-convex biface (SS393 granule 1; B shows side viewSite expedient biface (SS399 granule 15; E shows side view); F., G. Doubloon Bank Lagoon

transition from ceramic to preceramic levels. As discussed above,the preceramic white clay at Laguna de On is distinct from the or-ange soil strata with which Archaic materials are associated at CayeCoco, the Fred Smith site and the other sites around ProgressoLagoon.

3.2. Plant microfossils extracted from stone tools

Starch grains and phytoliths were extracted from seven Archaicperiod stone tools. In this preliminary study we selected a range oftool types from different sites and depositional contexts. Two ofthese tools come from Caye Coco, including a hammer stone(Fig. 4A) found next to Pit Feature 1 and a plano-convex biface(Fig. 4B) that was associated with Pit Feature 2 (see Fig. 3). Theplano-convex biface was heavily patinated and measures 6.7 cmlong, 4.3 cm wide and 1.3 cm thick. It was made from a trimmedmacro-flake that exhibits bifacial retouch. The shape of thisimplement generally resembles unifacial tools of the Belize Archaic,and like other unifaces, it exhibits a steepworking edge angle (43�e39�). Both sides of the working edge of the plano-convex bifaceshow wear and evidence of resharpening.

Two bifaces from machinery-disturbed surface contexts at theFred Smith site were also tested for starch grains and phytoliths.One of these is the distal portion of a biface (Fig. 4C). This objectexhibits a mid-section snap break and it may have originallyresembled a celtiform biface. Further, recent breakage as a result ofheavy machinery was evident. The recent break exposed thedistinctive honey-brown color of fine quality Colha chert. Thesecond tool from the Fred Smith site that was tested for plant mi-crofossils is also the distal end of a biface (Fig. 4D) that had beensnapped before being discarded during the Archaic period.

An expedient biface (Fig. 4E) from the Patt Work Site near Pro-gresso Lagoon (see Fig. 1) was also studied for microfossils. The sitehad been disturbed by bulldozing only a few days before RMR andMAM inspected and collected patinated lithics from this locality in2001. The basal orange soil and associated patinated lithics exposedby heavy machinery alerted us to the presence of this preceramicsite. The surrounding ground surface exhibited no archaeologicalremains of any period.

A heavily-used uniface (Fig. 4F) from the deep Archaic clays atLaguna de On was also studied. This tool was broken by a pickaxeduring excavation, revealing that it was made of Colha chert andthat it had a 3 mm thick white patina. That this uniface was not

); C. chile pepper, Fred Smith biface 1 (SS395 granule 2); D., E. chili pepper, Patt Workconstricted uniface (SS404 granule 6; G shows side view).

R.M. Rosenswig et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 41 (2014) 308e321316

constricted like others from the Archaic may be due to theresharpening history of the tool. It is possible that this artifact wasonce a constricted uniface based on the edge angle, size, length andshape (other than the constriction).

The most typical constricted uniface (Fig. 4G) in our sample wasrecovered from the shore of Doubloon Bank Lagoon in a modernlimestone marl quarry. This tool resembles the constricted unifacestypical of the Late Archaic period in northern Belize (see Lohseet al., 2006; Zeitlin and Zeitlin, 2000). As our microfossil resultsshow, these seven tools were each used for some aspect of har-vesting and/or processing a variety of plant foods.

3.3. Microfossil results

Starch and phytoliths were recovered from the seven toolsdescribed above using procedures outlined in Pearsall et al. (2004,and see Supplemental information). Tools were sampled first bybrushing themwith distilled water, and then by sonication. The twosamples produced (referred to as Sediment 2 and Sediment 3,respectively) were then each processed to extract starch and phy-toliths. All seven tools yielded both kinds of microfossils. Starchwasrarest on the Caye Coco hammer stone and most abundant onBiface #2 from the Fred Smith site (Fig. 5D). Phytoliths were rare onall tools, and identified remains were limited to silica casts of un-dulating transport tissues. This type of transport tissue has beenobserved in comparative seeds and fruits (Chandler-Ezell et al.,2006).

Starch granules of maize (Z. mays) and other economic specieswere documented on each of the seven tools tested (Table 2,Supplementary Table 1). Maize was the most common starchrecorded. There are 57 securely-identified maize granules alongwith an additional 24 granules that resemble maize (labeled as “cf.maize” on Table 2 and Supplementary Table 1). The latter (i.e., thoselabeled cf. maize) could not be rotated to confirm spheroidal shape,but otherwise appeared like maize. Maize starch granules aresimple, with a central, open hilum and a distinct and continuousdouble border (Pearsall et al., 2004; Perry, 2001; Piperno and Holst,1998) (Fig. 9). Maize starch range in size from 4 to 24 microns(Piperno et al., 2000). Shape varies from spherical to polyhedral(edges showing multiple pressure facets), depending on howtightly packed granules are in the kernel. Maize with hard endo-sperm (pop and flint) is characterized bymany starch granules withpressure facets, while soft (flour) endosperm maize has moregranules that are smooth. Both types of granules (faceted andsmooth) are present in both hard and soft endosperm maize, andboth types were present on the tools studied. Starch of manioc(Manihot esculenta) and chili pepper (Capsicum spp.) was alsopresent in small numbers on some tools (Table 2). Capsicum starchwas recovered from four toolse the Caye Coco plano-convex biface,

Table 2Counts of starch grains recovered from seven Archaic tools in the Freshwater Creek drai

Site Tool Starch # Maize cf. Maize

Caye Coco Hammer stone 392 1Plano-convex biface 393 2 2

394 3Fred Smith Biface#1 395 10 5

396 4Biface#2 397 9 11

Patt Work Site Expedient biface 399 14 3400 1

Laguna de On Uniface 401 4 2402 1

Doubloon Bank Lagoon Constricted uniface 403 5 1404 3

Total 57 24

the Fred Smith Biface #1, the Patt Work Site expedient biface, andthe Doubloon Bank Lagoon constricted uniface e suggesting thatchili pepper fruits were commonly processed, as was maize.Domesticated chili peppers produce large, flattened, starch gran-ules that are circular in outline, with a shallow central depressionvisible in the flat view. Granules are lenticular in cross-section, andwhen rotated to the side, a central linear figure (or equatorialfurrow, i.e., a line with sharp edges) is visible (Perry et al., 2007).Four starch granules were recovered that fit these criteria, and canbe identified securely as domesticated Capsicum (Fig. 7). Whilesome grasses in the Triticeae (e.g., Hordeum, Secale, Triticum) pro-duce lenticular grains with small, rounded surface depressions (L.Perry, personal communication 2013) and often an equatorialfurrow visible in the side view (S. Zarillo, personal communication2010), nomembers of this group occur in Belize (Balick et al., 2000).Two manioc starch granules were recovered, both from the CayeCoco plano-convex biface (Fig. 10). Domesticated manioc producescompound starch; granules have an open, centric hilum and usuallyone to three basal facets. Fissures, if present, are stellar or Y-shapedand are sometimes indented (Piperno and Holst, 1998; Piperno,2006). Most individual granules range in size from 5 to 20 mi-crons, with some larger granules (up to 28 microns, MU lab docu-ments). Wild Manihot species occur in Central America, but wildManihot starch tends to have closed and eccentric hila, and someproduce grains with lamellae (Piperno, 2006). The granulesrecovered from the Caye Coco plano-convex biface are on the smallsize (13 microns), but fit the criteria for domesticated manioc.

Several kinds of less diagnostic starches were also recoveredfrom the tools. Four Fabaceae (bean family) granules were recov-ered from Fred Smith Biface #1 (Fig. 8CeG). Starch granules ofdomesticated Phaseolus and Canavalia beans are large (30e40 mi-crons not uncommon; MU lab documents), elliptical to irregular inoutline, and they are somewhat flattened in side view with pro-nounced irregular, linear fissures. The granules recovered in thisstudy were small, but of similar form, suggesting the bean family. Asingle Cucurbitaceae (squash family) starch granule was recoveredfrom the Caye Coco plano-convex biface (Fig. 8A, B). This starchgrain is an oblong hemisphere with a deeply indented base (bell-shaped), which is found in a number of genera in the squash family(Duncan et al., 2009). The Fred Smith site Biface #2 and DoubloonBank Lagoon constricted uniface contained one granule each ofpossible root/tuber starch (Fig. 11). These are small, cylindricalgranules with an eccentric hilum and fine lamellae visible on onegranule. Six of the seven tools studied yielded starch granules thatare circular in outline and lenticular, concave, or straight and thin inside view (or would not rotate). These are interpreted as heat-altered starch granules (D. Piperno, S. Zarillo, personal communi-cation 2010; see also Henry et al., 2009). Many lack extinctioncrosses altogether, or the extinction cross has lost its

nage.

Bean family Squash family Manioc Capsicum Root/tuber Total

11 1 1 11

13 1 241

1 201 19

7

1 111

4 1 2 4 2 94

Fig. 8. A., B. squash family, Caye Coco plano-convex biface (SS 393, granule 3; B shows side view); C. bean family, Fred Smith biface 1 (SS 395, granule 20; D., E. bean family, FredSmith biface 1 (SS 395, granule 28; D is polarized light); F. bean family, Fred Smith biface 1 (SS 395, granule 36); G. bean family, Fred Smith biface 1 (SS 396, granule 1).

R.M. Rosenswig et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 41 (2014) 308e321 317

distinctiveness. Granules appear fragile and may be damaged(centers distorted, edges torn, granule “wavy” in side view).

The starch results presented here provide direct archaeologicalassociation between tools and economic plant use from the low-land Maya Archaic period. Much of the starch remains identifiedfrom the tools was well embedded in tool surfaces and the grainswere recovered by sonication after tools were wet-brushed. It isnoteworthy that all artifacts had been previously scrubbed in thefield with toothbrushes, yet embedded starch remains still adheredto the tools. The tool used to harvest and/or process the greatestdiversity of foods was the plano-convex biface from Caye Coco(Fig. 4B). This plano-convex biface was used to prepare maizekernels, manioc roots, as well as fruits of domesticated chili pepperand the fruit of members of the squash family. Bifaces areacknowledged to be versatile implements suitable for a wide va-riety of activities (e.g., Dial and Collins, 1998; Hayden et al., 1996; R.Kelly, 1988). The presence of various species of economic plantremains indicates that Archaic period bifaces served a range ofagricultural functions.

The tools tested for starch generally exhibit robust morpholog-ical attributes that one expects of heavy-duty cutting and choppingimplements (Eton,1991; Lewenstein,1987). However, starch resultsindicate all tools were used to process plant foods, in particular,

Fig. 9. A. maize, Caye Coco hammer stone (SS392 granule 1); B. maize, Caye Coco plano-convFred Smith biface 1 (SS396 granule 4); E. maize, Patt Work Site expedient biface (SS400 gr

maize, as the grains were most ubiquitous and present on all of thetools. Maize starch found on the tools included 32 granules withsmooth outlines (common in soft endosperm maize), and 45 withpressure facets (common in hard endosperm maize). While bothkinds of starches occur in the samemaize variety, these proportionssuggest that preceramic people were selecting for particularendosperm traits. Further, twenty-eight of the eighty-one (i.e., 34%)maize and cf. maize granules (from each of the seven tools tested)have evidence of damage consistent with milling (seeSupplemental Table 1), suggesting that maize processing wascommon during the Archaic period in northern Belize.

3.4. Overall Lithic Assemblage

A total of 778 patinated lithics were recovered from Caye Coco,the Fred Smith site (from the surface and excavated contexts) andfrom Laguna de On Island (Table 3). Fig. 12 provides a graphicalcomparison of the four lithic assemblages. The proportion ofdifferent lithic classes from the surface and excavated samples atthe Fred Smith site are virtually identical. This overlap suggests thatthe systematically collected surface assemblage unearthed byheavy machinery originated from the same context as the toolsfrom intact deposits sampled by our controlled excavations.

ex biface (SS394 granule 1); C. maize, Fred Smith biface 1 (SS 395 granule 10); D. maize,anule 1); F. maize, Doubloon Bank Lagoon constricted uniface (SS404 granule 1).

Fig. 10. A. manioc, Caye Coco plano-convex biface (SS 393 granule 6); B., C. manioc, Caye Coco plano-convex biface (SS 394 granule 2; two rotations of same granule).

R.M. Rosenswig et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 41 (2014) 308e321318

The lithic assemblages from the Fred Smith site on the shore ofProgresso Lagoon differ from the lithic materials recovered fromthe islands of Caye Coco and Laguna de On. The Fred Smithassemblage contains more cores and more flakes than the islandsettlements, but the numbers of cores in all locations are low. Thesites of Caye Coco and Laguna de On contain more shatter than FredSmith, but shatter is present at all sites in proportions of 14e21% atFred Smith and 32e48% at Caye Coco and Laguna de On (Table 3).Shatter in this study is defined as blocky debris that lacks clear flakeattributes, especially a striking platform. These observations sug-gest that lithic artifacts were being reduced differentially on thetwo islands compared to the Fred Smith site. More tools may havebeen broken ormore expedient production occurred on the islands.The overlap in all tool types, especially materials other than flakesand shatter, is more significant in characterizing the use of the lithicassemblage. Tool patterns link all three sites to a similar Archaictechnological tradition in northeastern Belize.

Sites with systematically different lithic patterns may reflectdiverse activities undertaken, especially when these sites werefrom different locations on the local landscape. Crops such as maizemay have been preferentially planted on large islands like CayeCoco (measuring 400 m by 600 m, 24 ha) or smaller Laguna de On(measuring 25 m by 150 m, 0.38 ha) as they would have beenprotected from grazing animals, such as deer. However, these plotsof island land were relatively small and areas along the shore werelikely also cultivated. The use of islands as protected locales wouldhave been particularly advantageous for mobile peoples who mayhave foraged at distant locations for weeks while their crops grew.Archaic peoples in northern Belize were comfortable in a variety ofhabitats, including aquatic and wetland zones, and the planting ofcrops was one of many subsistence activities. The sample of knownsites remains small, but these preliminary patterns provide aninitial glimpse of regional land use by Archaic peoples.

Fig. 11. A., B. possible root/tuber starch, Fred Smith biface 2 (SS 397 granule 4; A is polarized403 granule 1; C is polarized light); E., F. heat-altered starch, concave in side view, Fred Smithview, Doubloon Bank Lagoon constricted uniface (SS 403, granule 2; H is side view).

Table 4 is a tabulation of primary, secondary and tertiary flakesthat are both utilized and non-utilized. For the purpose of thisassessment, primary flakes are defined as having more than 50% oftheir dorsal surface covered in cortex, secondary flakes have lessthan 50% of their dorsal surface covered in cortex and tertiary flakeshave no cortex. Utilized flakes were determined by visual inspec-tion with an 8� magnification hand lens for edge damage. Lithicflakes comprise well over 50% of the assemblage from Caye Cocoand Fred Smith (n ¼ 496) and utilized flakes are over ten timesmore abundant than any other tool type at each site (Table 3). Onethird of the flake sample of excavated contexts at Caye Coco andFred Smith consisted of utilized tertiary flakes (Table 4). Theabundance of tertiary flakes (58.9e77.8% of the sample), and thelow quantity of primary flakes (5.3e6.7%), indicates that at each ofthese sites tools were used and resharpened but that these werenot locales where significant formal tool-making or core reductionoccurred. The presence of some flake cores and the ubiquity of usedflakes suggest that expedient flake tool removal was among theactivities of localities such as the Fred Smith site.

Identified raw materials of patinated tools, made possible byexamples with recent breaks, were either of the honey-colored ordark coffee brown chert. These materials also had lighter coloredsmall round and/or banded inclusions, which along with their colorand exceptional quality identify them as being from the chert-bearing zone located around the archeological site of Colha. Colhais located approximately 25 km from the southern end of ProgressoLagoon and is well-known as a site where high quality chert toolswere produced (Hester and Shafer, 1984; Iceland, 2005; Shafer andHester, 1983). Traveling down the Freshwater Creek to Laguna deOn by canoe and then walking overland the 10 km to Colha (seeFig. 1) would have made these lithic raw material sources easilyaccessible to mobile peoples. Iceland (1997:230e1) observes thatmost finished constricted unifaces have been found at sites without

light); C., D. possible root/tuber starch, Doubloon Bank Lagoon constructed uniface (SSbiface 2 (SS 397, granule 18; F is side view); G., H. heat-altered starch, lenticular in side

Table 3Lithic types from deposits at Caye Coco, Fred Smith and Laguna de On used to make Fig. 12.

Caye Coco Fred Smith (surface) Fred Smith (excavated) Laguna de On

n ¼ % of total n ¼ % of total n ¼ % of total n ¼ % of total

Formal biface 1 0.59 2 0.56 0 0.00 0 0.00Expedient biface 1 0.59 2 0.56 2 1.05 0 0.00Uniface 4 2.35 12 3.35 6 3.16 2 3.33Core 1 0.59 30 8.38 10 5.26 1 1.67Hammer stone 3 1.76 1 0.28 0 0.00 0 0.00Utilized flake 47 27.65 104 29.05 50 26.32 12 20.00Flake 58 34.12 156 43.58 81 42.63 16 26.67Shatter 55 32.35 51 14.25 41 21.58 29 48.33Total: 170 100 358 100 190 100 60 100

R.M. Rosenswig et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 41 (2014) 308e321 319

evidence of local production, many of which are outside the chert-bearing zone and had no access to local rawmaterial with which tomake the tools. The preceramic stone tools from the FreshwaterCreek drainage conform to Iceland’s observations. Early inhabitantsof northern Belize were familiar with Colha chert and theyexploited it almost exclusively. We have not found a single exampleof coarser non-Colha chert among the Archaic period stoneassemblage in our study collection, despite the fact that coarsechert outcrops at Progresso Lagoon and chalcedony sources sur-round Laguna de On. Evenwhen artifacts are fully patinated and theinternal color is not discernible, it is usually evident by their texturethat they were made of smooth high quality northeastern Belizecherts. One reason for the concentration of discovered Archaic-agesites in northeastern Belize (Lohse et al., 2006; Zeitlin and Zeitlin,2000) may have been the lure of this chert resource for pre-ceramic peoples. Alternatively, the concentration of this raw ma-terial in the area could simply be providing a more easilyidentifiable material record compared to contemporary groupsusing more perishable tools. Evidence from the Freshwater Creekdrainage provides a glimpse of how the tools made of Colha chertwere being used for horticultural activities in the surrounding areasduring the Archaic period.

Comparisons between tools recovered from the FreshwaterCreek drainage and those from Colha shed further light on regionallithic procurement and use patterns. At Colha there are manyunifaces that are distinctly constricted, presumably for hafting(Iceland, 1997). In contrast, at the Freshwater Creek sites there aremany unifacial tools made from macroflakes that are not con-stricted, like the one presented in Fig. 4F from Laguna de On Island.A lack of constriction evident from unifaces at Freshwater Creekmay be due to resharpening that obscured the original form. It issignificant that Iceland (1997:219) documented a high degree ofmorphological variability in constricted unifaces and that 12% of

Fig. 12. Graph of the proportion of Archaic lithic classes from Caye Coco, Fred Smithand Laguna de On (data from Table 3).

the Colha sample (n ¼ 117) were “pear shaped” and thus notactually constricted. Although some of the Progresso and Laguna deOn area unifaces and bifaces may have originally been constricted,our data also reflects a wider range of tools beyond the diagnosticconstricted uniface. Larger samples are needed before such inter-site variation can be fully assessed. Differences in site-based ac-tivities may have been important for the use of constricted adzesover other flaked stone tools. Notably, two of the Archaic periodexamples in Fig. 4B and G from Caye Coco and Doubloon BankLagoon represent more typical constricted adze forms.

4. Summary and discussion

Incipient food production is poorly understood in Mesoamerica,especially in the tropical lowlands, due to the small number andgeographically dispersed archaeological sites dating to the Archaicperiod. This paper provides excavation data from Archaic-age de-posits at the sites of Laguna de On Island, Caye Coco and Fred Smithin the Freshwater Creek drainage of northeastern Belize (Fig. 1).Stratigraphic evidence from the former two sites document intactearly deposits with minor disturbance from later Terminal Classicand Postclassic period occupants of the sites. At Caye Coco, two pitfeatures and a posthole represent the only Archaic-period featuresthat we are aware of from theMaya lowlands. Two dates from thesedeposits span the ninth to seventh millennia cal BP and a third datefalls within the third millennium cal BP. The inhabitants of theFreshwater Creek drainage were obtaining chert from the vicinityof Colha and they produced a lithic assemblage that contained bi-faces but was dominated by retouched unifacial tools and utilizedflakes.

The preceramic sites documented along the Freshwater Creekdrainage add to known Archaic-period site types in northern Belize

Table 4Flake counts based on reduction typology from deposits at Caye Coco and FredSmith.

Caye Coco Fred Smith (surface) Fred Smith (excavated)

# % # % # %

Primary flakesUtilized 3 2.9 6 2.3 0 0Non-utilized 4 3.8 11 4.2 7 5.3Sub-total 7 6.7 17 6.5 7 5.3

Secondary flakesUtilized 7 6.7 51 19.6 10 7.6Non-utilized 13 12.4 39 15.0 12 9.2Sub-total 20 19.1 90 34.6 22 16.8

Tertiary flakesUtilized 37 35.2 47 18.1 40 30.5Non-utilized 41 39.0 106 40.8 62 47.3Sub-total 78 74.2 153 58.9 102 77.8Total 105 100% 260 100% 131 99.9%

R.M. Rosenswig et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 41 (2014) 308e321320

such as the lithic “quarry-production locales” at Colha on the edgeof Cobweb Swamp (Iceland, 1997:94) and the swamp contexts atPulltrouser (Pohl et al., 1996). Lithic materials from various sites inthe Freshwater Creek drainage reflect a range of activities thatoccurred at both island and shore localities. Starch grains recoveredfrom seven stone tools document the use of soft and hard endo-sperm maize as well as squash, bean, manioc and chili pepper andconfirm the horticultural adaptation of these early inhabitants ofnortheastern Belize. This evidence of plant remains also attest tobotanical processing as one function of a variety of Archaic age toolforms. The sites reported in this paper increase the documentedsample of settlements in lacustrine vicinities of northern Belize.

The preceramic use of Caye Coco and Laguna de On was notfollowed by Formative period occupations. However, residents ofthe area resettled these islands during the Terminal Classic andPostclassic periods, when public and elite residential architecturewas built (Masson, 2000; Rosenswig andMasson, 2002). Why werethese islands settled only by peoples during the Archaic, TerminalClassic and Postclassic periods? The abundant aquatic resourcesoffered by the lacustrine and riverine environments of north-eastern Belize were certainly an important factor during these in-tervals. Freshwater resources would have been attractive to bothmobile horticulturalists during the Archaic period as well assedentary agriculturalists in the late Maya periods when droughtswere more frequent and severe (e.g., Kennett et al., 2012). Islandlocalities were also naturally defensible sites. Terminal Classic andPostclassic villagers may have been concerned with defense duringepisodes of political instability. Currently, it is not possible toevaluate whether Archaic period horticulturalists faced threats ofhostility from neighboring groups, although warfare or raiding isoften a concern of semi-sedentary tribal societies cross-culturally(Ember and Ember, 1992).

Archaeologists have long attempted to explain how and whymaize and other economically important plants spread throughMesoamerica prior to the adoption of a sedentary, ceramic-usinglifestyle. Smith (2001) describes a stable and long-lasting periodof low-level food production in the NewWorld during the first halfof the Holocene (see also Richardson et al., 2001). Understandingwhy this horticultural adaptation was so successful in the Mayaarea (as reflected by its persistence for a millennium after villagelife was adopted in neighboring regions) requires determining theimportance of cultigens to Archaic period populations. The datapresented here establish direct archaeological evidence that semi-sedentary forager-farmers in northeastern Belize used maize andother domesticates during the millennia preceding the onset ofsedentary agrarian life in the Maya area. Given the likelihood thatsome of our sites overlap temporally with similar components innorthern Belize dated to the second millennium BC, these pop-ulations retained a semi-sedentary lifestyle with a diverse subsis-tence base while other Mesoamerican peoples were employingceramic containers, living in more permanent villages anddramatically transforming forest environments into agrarianlandscapes (Clark and Cheetham, 2002; Kennett et al., 2010; Neffet al., 2006; Rosenswig, 2006a, 2006b, 2011, 2012). Data fromeight sites in the Freshwater Creek drainage reported in this articleprovide a clear picture of horticultural adaptation in the Mayalowlands during the Archaic period.

Acknowledgments

The investigations reported in this paper were carried out undera series of permits from 1998 to 2001 granted to MAM by the BelizeDepartment of Archaeology. Support for the Archaic period exca-vations were provided by the Albers Fund, Department of Anthro-pology, Yale University and by the University at Albany Department

of Anthropology. RMR and MAM acknowledge the help of Dr.Thomas Stafford during a one week visit to Laguna de On in 1997when Archaic period deposits were first encountered in theFreshwater Creek. DMP thanks Dr. Dolores Piperno and Dr. SoniaZarillo for useful comments on the unknown circular starchrecovered in samples, and Dr. Neil Duncan for reviewing theFabaceae, Cucurbitaceae, and manioc starch granules. DMP furtherthanks Dr. Zarillo and Dr. Linda Perry for double-checking a numberof Capsicum identifications. Any errors or omissions are the re-sponsibility of the authors.

Appendix A. Supplementary data

Supplementary data related to this article can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2013.07.034.

References

Balick, M.J., Nee, M.H., Atha, D.E., 2000. Checklist of the Vascular Plants of Belize,with Common Names and Uses. In: Memoir, vol. 85. New York Botanical Gar-den, pp. 1e217.

Blake, M., 2006. Dating the initial spread of Zea maize. In: Staller, J.E., Tykot, R.H.,Benz, B.F. (Eds.), Histories of Maize: Multidisciplinary Approaches to the Pre-history, Linguistics, Biogeography, Domestication and Evolution of Maize.Elsevier, Amsterdam/Boston, pp. 55e72.

Bronk Ramsey, C., 2009. Bayesian analysis of radiocarbon dates. Radiocarbon 51 (1),337e360.

Chandler-Ezell, K., Pearsall, D.M., Zeidler, J.A., 2006. Root and tuber phytoliths andstarch grains document manioc (Manihot esculenta), arrowroot (Marantaarundinacea), and llerén (Calathea sp.) at the Real Alto site, Ecuador. Econ. Bot.60, 103e120.

Clark, J.E., Cheetham, D., 2002. Mesoamerica’s Tribal Foundations. In: Parkinson, W.(Ed.), The Archaeology of Tribal Societies, International Monographs in Pre-history, pp. 278e339. Ann Arbor.

Dial, S.W., Collins, M.B., 1998. Bifaces, bifacial tools, perforators, burins and spalls.In: Collins, M.B. (Ed.), Wilson Leonard, an 11,000-Year Archaeological Record ofHunteregatherers in Central Texas, Chipped Stone Artifacts, Studies inArchaeology 31, vol. II. Texas Archaeological Research Laboratory, University ofTexas at Austin, Austin, pp. 537e596.

Duncan, N.A., Pearsall, D.M., Benfer, R.A., 2009. Gourd and squash artifacts yieldstarch grains of feasting foods from preceramic Peru. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S.A. 106, 13202e13206.

Eldredge, N., 1985. Time Frames: the Evolution of Punctuated Equilibrium. Prince-ton University Press, Princeton.

Ember, C.R., Ember, M., 1992. Resource unpredictability, mistrust, and war: a cross-cultural study. J. Confl. Resolut. 36, 242e262.

Eton, J.D., 1991. Tools of Maya Builders. In: Hester, T.R., Eaton, J.D. (Eds.), Maya StoneTools: Selected Papers from the Second Maya Lithic Conference, Monographs inWorld Archaeology, vol. 1. Prehistory Press, Madison, pp. 219e228.

Flannery, K.V. (Ed.), 1986. Guila Naquitz: Archaic Foraging and Early Agriculture inOaxaca, Mexico. Academic Press, New York.

Gibson, E.C., 1991. A preliminary functional and contextual study of constrictedadzes from northern Belize. In: Hester, T.R., Shafer, H.J. (Eds.), Maya Stone Tools:Selected Papers from the Second Maya Lithic Conference. Prehistory Press,Madison, pp. 229e237.

Grobman, A., Bonavia, D., Dillehay, T.D., Piperno, D.R., Iriarte, J., Holst, I., 2012.Preceramic maize from Paredones and Huaca Prieta, Peru. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.U. S. A. 109, 1755e1759.

Haas, J., Creamer, W., Huamán Mesía, L., Goldstein, D., Reinhard, K., VergelRodríguez, C., 2013. Evidence for maize (Zea mays) in the late Archaic (3000e1800 B.C.) in the Norte Chico region of Peru. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 110,4945e9494.

Hammond, N., 1977. The earliest Maya. Sci. Am. 236, 116e133.Hayden, B., Franco, N., Spafford, J., 1996. Evaluating lithic strategies and design

criteria. In: Odell, G.H. (Ed.), Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into HumanPrehistory. Plenum Press, New York, pp. 9e45.

Henry, A.G., Hudson, H.F., Piperno, D.R., 2009. Changes in starch grain morphologiesfrom cooking. J. Archaeol. Sci. 36, 915e922.

Hester, T.R., 1994. The archaeological investigations of the Colha project, 1983 and1984. In: Hester, T.R., Shafer, H.J., Eaton, J.D. (Eds.), Continuing Archaeology atColha, Belize. Texas Archaeological Research Laboratory, University of Texas atAustin, Austin, pp. 1e9.

Hester, T.R., Shafer, H.J., 1984. Exploitation of chert resources by the ancient Maya ofnorthern Belize, Central America. World Archaeol. 16, 157e173.

Hester, T.R., Iceland,H.B., Hudler, D.B., Shafer, H.J.,1996. The Colha preceramic project:preliminary results from the 1993e1995 field seasons. Mexicon 18, 45e50.

Iceland, H.B., 1997. The Preceramic Origins of the Maya: Results of the Colha Pre-ceramic Project in Northern Belize. Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation. Depart-ment of Anthropology, University of Texas, Austin.

R.M. Rosenswig et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 41 (2014) 308e321 321

Iceland, H.B., 2005. The preceramic to early middle formative transition in northernBelize: evidence for the ethnic identity of the preceramic inhabitants. In:Powis, T.G. (Ed.), New Perspectives on Formative Mesoamerican Cultures, BARInternational Series 1377, pp. 15e26. Oxford.

Iceland,H.B.,Hester, T.R.,1996. TheearliestMaya?Originsof sedentismandagriculturein the Maya lowlands. In: The Prehistory of the Americas, XIII InternationalCongress of thePrehistoric andProtohistoric Sciences, vol.17, pp.11e17. Forli, Italy.

Jacob, J.S., 1995. Ancient Maya wetland agricultural fields in cobweb swamp, Belize:construction, chronology and function. J. Field Archaeol. 22, 175e190.

Jones, J.G., 1994. Pollen evidence for early settlement and agriculture in northernBelize. Palynology 18, 205e211.

Kelly, T.C., 1993. Preceramic projectile-point typology in Belize. Anc. Mesoam. 4,205e227.

Kelly, R.L., 1988. The three sides of a biface. Am. Antiq. 53, 717e734.Kennett, D.J., 2012. Archaic-period foragers and farmers in Mesoamerica. In:

Nichols, D.L., Pool, C.A. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of MesoamericanArchaeology. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 141e150.

Kennett, D.J., Voorhies, B., Wake, T.A., Martinez, N., 2008. Human impacts on marineecosystems in Guerrero, Mexico. In: Rick, T.C., Erlandson, J.M. (Eds.), HumanImpacts on Ancient Marine Ecosystems: a Global Perspective. University ofCalifornia Press, Berkeley.

Kennett, D.J., Ingram, B.L., Southon, J.R., Wise, K., 2002. Differences in 14C age be-tween stratigraphically associated charcoal and marine shell from the archaicperiod site of kilometer 4, southern Peru: old wood or old water? Radiocarbon44, 53e58.

Kennett, D.J., Piperno, D.R., Jones, J.G., Neff, H., Voorhies, B., Walsh, M.K.,Culleton, B.J., 2010. Pre-pottery farmers on the Pacific coast of southern Mexico.J. Archaeol. Sci. 37, 3401e3411.

Kennett, D.J., Sebastian Breitenbach, F.M., Aquino, V.V., Asmerom, Y., Awe, J.,James, J., Baldini, U.L., Bartlein, P., Culleton, B.J., Ebert, C., Jazwa, C., Macri, M.J.,Marwan, N., Polyak, V., Prufer, K.M., Ridley, H.E., Sodemann, H., Winterhalder, B.,Haug, G.H., 2012. Development and disintegration of Maya political systems inresponse to climate change. Science 338, 788e791.

Lewenstein, S.M., 1987. Stone Tool Use of Cerros. University of Texas Press, Austin.Lohse, J.C., 2010. Archaic origins of the lowland Maya. Lat. Am. Antiq. 21, 312e352.Lohse, J.C., Awe, J., Griffith, C., Rosenswig, R.M., Valdez Jr., F., 2006. Preceramic oc-

cupations in Belize: updating the Paleoindian and Archaic record. Lat. Am.Antiq. 17, 209e226.

MacNeish, R.S., 1986. The preceramic of Middle America. Adv. World Archaeol. 5,93e129.

MacNeish, R.S., Nelken-Terner, A., Weitlaner de Johnson, I., 1967. The Prehistory ofthe Tehuacan Valley. In: The Non-ceramic Artifacts, vol. 2. University of TexasPress, Austin.

Marcus, J.,1983. LowlandMayaarchaeologyat the crossroads. Am.Antiq. 48, 448e454.Masson, M.A., 1999. Postclassic Maya Communities at Progresso Lagoon and Laguna

Seca, northern Belize. J. Field Archaeol. 26, 285e306.Masson, M.A., 2000. In the Realm of Nachan Kan: Postclassic Maya Archaeology at

Laguna de On, Belize. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.Masson, M.A., Rosenswig, R.M., 2005. Production characteristics of postclassic Maya

pottery from Caye Coco, northern Belize. Lat. Am. Antiq. 16, 355e384.Matsuoka, Y., et al., 2002. A single domestication for maize shown by multilocus

microsatellite genotyping. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 99, 6080e6084.Metcalfe, S., Breen, A., Murray, M., Furley, P., Fallick, A., McKenzie, A., 2009. Envi-

ronmental change in northern Belize since the latest Pleistocene. J. Quat. Sci. 24,627e641.

Neff, H., Pearsall, D.M., Jones, J.G., Arroyo, B., Collins, S.K., Freidel, D.E., 2006. EarlyMaya adaptive patterns: mid-late Holocene paleoenvironmental evidence fromPacific Guatemala. Lat. Am. Antiq. 17, 287e315.

Pearsall, D.M., 1978. Phytolith analysis of archeological soils: evidence for maizecultivation in Formative Ecuador. Science 199, 177e178.

Pearsall, D.M., Chandler-Ezell, K., Zeidler, J.A., 2004. Maize in ancient Ecuador: resultsof residue analysis of stone tools from Real Alto site. J. Archaeol. Sci. 31, 423e442.

Perry, L., 2001. Prehispanic Subsistence in the Middle Orinoco Basin: Starch Ana-lyses Yield New Evidence. Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation. Department of An-thropology, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale.

Perry, L., Dickau, R., Zarrillo, S., Holst, I., Pearsall, D.M., Piperno, D.R., Berman, M.J.,Cook, R.G., Rademaker, K., Ranere, A.J., Raymond, J.S., Sandweiss,D.H., Scaramelli, F.,Tarble, K., Zeidler, J.A., 2007. Starch fossils and the domestication and dispersal ofchili peppers (Capsicum spp. L.) in the Americas. Science 315, 986e988.

Piperno, D.R., 2006. Identifying manioc (Manihot esculenta Crantz) and other cropsin pre-Columbian Tropical America through starch grain analysis: a case studyfrom Central Panama. In: Zeder, M.A., Bradley, D.G., Emshwiller, E., Smith, B.D.(Eds.), Documenting Domestication. New Genetic and Archaeological Para-digms. University of California Press, Berkeley, pp. 46e67.

Piperno, D.R., Flannery, K.V., 2001. The earliest archaeological maize (Zea mays L.)from highland Mexico: new accelerator mass spectrometry dates and theirimplications. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 98, 2101e2103.

Piperno, D.R., Holst, I., 1998. The presence of starch grains on prehistoric stone toolsfrom the humid Neotropics: indications of early tuber use and agriculture inPanama. J. Archaeol. Sci. 25, 765e776.

Piperno, D.R., Pearsall, D.M., 1998. The Origins of Agriculture in the Lowland Neo-tropics. Academic Press, San Diego.

Piperno, D.R., Ranere, A.J., Holst, I., Iriarte, J., Dickau, R., 2009. Starch grain andphytolith evidence for early ninth millennium B.P. maize from the CentralBalsas River Valley, Mexico. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 106, 5019e5024.

Piperno, D.R., Ranere, A.J., Holst, I., Hansell, P., 2000. Starch grains reveal early rootcrop horticulture in the Panamanian tropical forest. Nature 407, 894e897.

Piperno, D.R., Smith, B.D., 2012. The origins of food production in Mesoamerica. In:Nichols, D.L., Pool, C.A. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of MesoamericanArchaeology. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 151e164.

Pohl, M.D., Pope, K.O., Jones, J.G., Jacob, J.S., Piperno, D.R., DeFrance, S.D., Lentz, D.L.,Gifford, J.A., Danforth, M.E., Josserand, J.K., 1996. Early agriculture in the Mayalowlands. Lat. Am. Antiq. 7, 355e372.

Pohl, M.D., Piperno, D.R., Pope, K.O., Jones, J.G., 2007. Microfossil evidence for pre-Columbian maize dispersals in the neotropics from San Andres, Tabasco,Mexico. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 104, 6870e6875.

Pope, K.O., Pohl, M.E.D., Jones, J.G., Lentz, D.L., von Nagy, C., Vega, F.J., Quitmyer, I.R.,2001. Origins and environmental setting of ancient agriculture in the lowlandsof Mesoamerica. Science 292, 1370e1373.

Purugganan, M.D., Fuller, D.Q., 2009. The nature of selection during plant domes-tication. Nature 457, 843e848.

Ranere, A.J., Piperno, D.R., Holst, I., Dickau, R., Iriate, J., 2009. The cultural andchronological context of early Holocene maize and squash domestication in theCentral Balsas River Valley, Mexico. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 106, 5014e5018.

Reimer, P.J., Baillie, M.G.L., Bard, E., Bayliss, A., Beck, J.W., Blackwell, P.J., BronkRamsey, C., Buck, C.E., Burr, G.S., Edwards, R.L., Friedrich, M., Grootes, P.M.,Guilderson, T.P., Hajdas, I., Heaton, T.J., Hogg, A.G., Hughen, K.A., Kaiser, K.F.,Kromer, B., McCormac, F.G., Manning, S.W., Reimer, R.W., Richards, D.A.,Southon, J.R., Talamo, S., Turney, C.S.M., van der Plicht, J., Weyhenmeyer, C.E.,2009. IntCal09 and Marine09 Radiocarbon Age Calibration Curves, 0–50,000Years Cal BB. Radiocarbon 51 (4), 1111e1150.

Richardson, P.J., Boyd, R., Bettinger, R.L., 2001. Was agriculture impossible duringthe Pleistocene by mandatory during the Holocene? A climate change hy-pothesis. Am. Antiq. 66, 387e411.

Rosenswig, R.M., 2004. New archaeological excavation data from the late Archaicoccupation of northern Belize. Res. Rep. Belizean Archaeol. 1, 267e277.

Rosenswig, R.M., 2006a. Sedentism and food production in early complex societiesof the Soconusco, Mexico. World Archaeol. 38, 329e354. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00438240600694115.

Rosenswig, R.M., 2006b. Northern Belize and the Soconusco: a comparison of thelate Archaic to formative transition. Res. Rep. Belizean Archaeol. 3, 59e71.

Rosenswig, R.M., 2010. The Beginnings of Mesoamerican Civilization: Inter-regionalInteraction and the Olmec. Cambridge University Press, New York.

Rosenswig, R.M., 2011. An early Mesoamerican Archipelago of complexity. In:Lesure, R.G. (Ed.), Sociopolitical Transformation in Early Mesoamerica: Archaicto Formative in the Soconusco Region. University of California Press, Berkeley,pp. 242e271.

Rosenswig, R.M., 2012. Materialism, mode of production, and a millennium ofchange in southern Mexico. J. Archaeol. Method Theory 19, 1e48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10816-010-9101-0.

Rosenswig, R.M., 2013. Mesoamerica’s Archaic period. In: Miller, R. (Ed.), Encyclo-pedia of Global Archaeology. Springer, New York (in press).

Rosenswig, R.M., Kennett, D.J., 2008. Reassessing San Estevan’s role in the lateformative political geography of northern Belize. Lat. Am. Antiq. 19, 124e146.

Rosenswig, R.M., Masson, M.A., 2001. Seven new preceramic sites documented innorthern Belize. Mexicon 23, 138e140.

Rosenswig, R.M., Masson, M.A., 2002. Transformation of the terminal classic to post-classic architectural landscape at Caye Coco, Belize. Anc. Mesoam. 13, 213e235.http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.albany.edu/10.1017/S0956536102132123.

Shafer, H.J., Hester, T.R., 1983. Ancient Maya chert workshops in northern Belize,Central America. Am. Antiq. 48, 519e543.

Schiffer, M.B., 1986. Radiocarbon dating and the “Old Wood” problem: the case ofthe Hohokam chronology. J. Archaeol. Sci. 13, 13e30.

Sluyter, A., Dominguez, G., 2006. Early maize (Zea mays L.) cultivation in Mexico:dating sedimentary pollen records and its implications. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S. A. 103, 1147e1151.

Smith, B.D., 1995. The Emergence of Agriculture. Scientific America, New York.Smith, B.D., 2001. Low-level food production. J. Archaeol. Res. 9, 1e43.Smith, B.D., 2005. Reassessing Coxcatlan Cave and the early history of domesticated

plants in Mesoamerica. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 102, 9438e9445.Voorhies, B., 2004. Coastal Collectors in the Holocene: the Chantuto People of

Southwest Mexico. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Voorhies, B., Metcalfe, S.E., 2007. Culture and climate in Mesoamerica during the

middle Holocene. In: Anderson, D.G., Maasch, K.A., Sandweiss, D.H. (Eds.),Climate Change and Cultural Dynamics: a Global Perspective on Mid-holoceneTransitions. Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 157e187.

Wright, S.I., Vroh Bi, I., Schroeder, S.G., Yamaski, M., Doebley, J.F., McMullen, M.D.,Gaut, B.S., 2005. The effects of artificial selection on the maize Genome. Science308, 1310e1314.

Zarrillo, S., Pearsall, D.M., Raymond, J.S., Tisdale, M.A., Quon, D.J., 2008. Directlydated starch residues document early formative maize (Zea mays L.) in tropicalEcuador. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 105, 5006e5011.

Zeder, M.A., Emshwiller, E., Smith, B.D., Bradley, D.G., 2006. Documenting domesti-cation: the intersectionof genetics andarchaeology. Trends inGenet. 22,139e155.

Zeitlin, R.N., 1984. A summary report on three seasons of field investigations intothe Archaic period prehistory of lowland Belize. Am. Anthropol. 86, 358e368.

Zeitlin, R.N., Zeitlin, J.F., 2000. The Paleoindian and Archaic cultures of Meso-america. In: Adams, R., Macleod, M. (Eds.), The Cambridge History of NativePeoples of the Americas, Mesoamerica, vol. II. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge.