CERAMIC SEQUENCE, CHRONOLOGY, AND CULTURAL DYNAMICS OF THE UCAREO-ZINAPÉCUARO, MICHOACÁN OBSIDIAN SOURCE AREA

This article presents the ceramic sequence and chronology resulting from a multi-year program of survey, excavation, and analysis of pre-Hispanic settlement and exploitation within the Zinapécuaro-Ucareo (“U-Z”), Michoacan obsidian source area. Pottery analysis and classification aided by seriation analysis identified nine ceramic complexes and seven ceramic phases and sub-phases that both expand and refine the ceramic sequence previously established for the region by Gorenstein's (1985) investigations at nearby Acámbaro, Guanajuato. Initially established by ceramic cross-dating, the U-Z ceramic chronology has been largely confirmed by 30 radiocarbon dates and spans over 2,000 years of pre-Hispanic settlement, which included at least two notable episodes of trait-unit and site-unit intrusion from the eastern El Bajío and central Mexico. One of these episodes involved the appearance of two enclaves settled by individuals from the Acambay valley c. 90 km to the East, most likely from the site of Huamango, which our data indicate would have been occupied during the Middle Postclassic period.

Temporal Inflection Points in Decorated Pottery: A Bayesian Refinement of the Late Formative Chronology in the Southern Lake Titicaca Basin, Bolivia

The Late Formative period immediately precedes the emergence of Tiwanaku, one of the earliest South American states, yet it is one of the most poorly understood periods in the southern Lake Titicaca Basin (Bolivia). In this article, we refine the ceramic chronology of this period with large sets of dates from eight sites, focusing on temporal inflection points in decorated ceramic styles. These points, estimated here by Bayesian models, index specific moments of change: (1) cal AD 120 (60–170, 95% probability): the first deposition of Kalasasaya red-rimmed and zonally incised styles; (2) cal AD 240 (190–340, 95% probability): a tentative estimate of the final deposition of Kalasasaya zonally incised vessels; (3) cal AD 420 (380–470, 95% probability): the final deposition of Kalasasaya red-rimmed vessels; and (4) cal AD 590 (500–660, 95% probability): the first deposition of Tiwanaku Redwares. These four modeled boundaries anchor an updated Late Formative chronology, which includes the Initial Late Formative phase, a newly identified decorative hiatus between the Middle and Late Formative periods. The models place Qeya and transitional vessels between inflection points 3 and 4 based on regionally consistent stratigraphic sequences. This more precise chronology will enable researchers to explore the trajectories of other contemporary shifts during this crucial period in Lake Titicaca Basin's prehistory.

Migration and the Coyotlatelco Ceramic Tradition

This chapter argues that the Late Classic/Epiclassic ceramic style known as Coyotlatelco has roots in the eastern El Bajío of Near West Mexico. Coyotlatelco became a widespread ceramic tradition in Epiclassic Central Mexico. Its chief defining characteristic is its suite of unsupported and tripod-supported vessels decorated with red-painted geometric designs on plain brown or cream slipped pottery. Ceramic data and radiocarbon dating produced from Tulane University’s Ucareo-Zinapecuaro (U-Z) Project (1989-1995) shed additional light on the ongoing debate regarding whether or not the Coyotlatelco style originates with the native population or if it shows evidence of the migration of non-local people into the central highlands of Mexico. The ceramic chronology for the U-Z source area throughout the Late Formative and Classic periods in NE Michoacan begins a discussion about shared decorative modes among red on brown ceramic types that connect Michoacan with societies in both the El Bajio and the Basin of Mexico regions, including Teotihuacan. The conclusions drawn suggest that the Coyotlatelco ceramic style has deep roots in the pottery traditions of the eastern El Bajio and, given the equally long history of various modes of regional and back migration, there seems little need to look beyond Central Mexico for the origins of Coyotlatleco.

Understanding the Socioeconomic Trajectory of Chavín de Huántar: A New Radiocarbon Sequence and Its Wider Implications

This article proposes a new 14C chronology for the three-phase ceramic chronology from the settlement of Chavín de Huántar based on the AMS dating of collagen extracted from faunal remains recovered during my 1975 excavations. The chronometric estimates for the Chavín de Huántar ceramic chronology are as follows: Urabarriu Phase (950–800 cal BC), Chakinani Phase (800–700 cal BC), and Janabarriu Phase (700–400 cal BC). The new measurements confirm the sequence of the ceramic phases and indicate that the site was established around 950 cal BC and was abandoned by 400 cal BC. The results are consistent with the earlier hypothesis that the major developments at Chavín de Huántar largely postdate the Initial Period fluorescence of early coastal civilization during the second millennium BC, but they cast doubt on some current interpretations of the site's founding and cultural apogee.

Caddo Pottery from Eight Sites in the Middle Ouachita River Valley

Documentation and analysis of ceramic vessels in the Joint Educational Consortium's Hodges Collection has focused on reconstructing grave lots based on notes left by amateur archeologist Vere Huddleston in the 1930s and 1940s. Despite problems with the data, we can glean useful information from this collection. Here, l describe Caddo pottery and other artifacts in grave lots from eight sites in Clark and Hot Spring counties of west-central Arkansas. l then order the grave lots in time based on stylistic and technological characteristics (seriation) to re.ftne the ceramic chronology of the Middle Ouachita River valley and compare mortuary assemblages through time and across space.

REVISITING SUN PYRAMID CERAMIC AND RADIOCARBON DATES FROM TEOTIHUACAN: COMMENT ON SLOAD

Sload (2015) disregards stratigraphic data from the Sun Pyramid and misinterprets our radiocarbon dates that re-evaluates Teotihuacan ceramic chronology.

RESPONSE TO SUGIYAMA, SUGIYAMA, AND SARABIA G.

Contrary to Sugiyama et al., radiocarbon dates from the Sun Pyramid do not mean that the Pyramid was constructed later than current estimates, nor that the Teotihuacan ceramic chronology should be changed.