Society for American Archaeology

Archaic Funerary Pattern or Postdepositional Alteration? The Patapatane Burial in the Highlands of South Central Andes Author(s): Calogero M. Santoro, Vivien G. Standen, Bernardo T. Arriaza and Tom D. Dillehay Reviewed work(s): Source: Latin American Antiquity, Vol. 16, No. 3 (Sep., 2005), pp. 329-346 Published by: Society for American Archaeology Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30042497 . Accessed: 22/01/2013 13:49
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Society for American Archaeology is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Latin American Antiquity.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ARCHAIC FUNERARY PATTERN OR POSTDEPOSITIONAL BURIAL IN THE HIGHLANDS OF ALTERATION? THE PATAPATANE SOUTH CENTRAL ANDES
Calogero M. Santoro,Vivien G. Standen,BernardoT. Arriaza,and Tom D. Dillehay

The burialfound at Patapatane Cave in the highlands of Arica, northern Chile, yielded an incompleteskeleton of a 20-to23-year-oldfemale, dating to the end of the MiddleArchaicperiod at 5910 90 B.P. The site is located in a semiarid environmenton the eastern side of Sierra de Huaylillas at 3800 m. in the hinterlandof Arica, northernChile. Weargue that the missing bones, position of the cranium, and breakage of some elements resultedfrom both postdepositional human intervention and taphonomicprocesses. The body was laid to rest in a supine position and after it became skeletonizedhunters revisitedthe inhumationand removedsome bone elements. However,the other bones present in situ were not displaced and remainedin proper anatomicalposition, with the exception of the cranium, which was placed vertically on top of the cervical vertebrae. The observed breakage of vertebrae, long bones, and skull seems to have been the result of taphonomic, nonanthropogenic,postburial actions. In reportingon the Patapatane burial, Archaic period funerary patternsfrom western South America are reviewedto support the notion that early hunters and gatherers systematically manipulatedtheir dead throughperimortem and postmortemalterations. These included several processes: (1) processes of body reduction and transformationby removalof body sections or removalof bone elements, cremation,and humanremainsdiscarded in domestic middens;and (2) processes of artificialpreservationof the dead that included roasting,salting, and artificial mummification.In addition, we recognize the simultaneousexistence of intactprimary burial and that other skeletons werepossibly altered accidentally by postdepositional natural or cultural agents. El enterratorioencontradoen la CuevaPatapataneen las tierrasalias de Arica del norte de Chile, correspondea un esqueleto incompleto,pertenecientea una mujerde 20 a 23 altos de edad, y esta datado haciafinales de Arcaico Medio, con unafecha no radiocarbOnica calibradade 5.910 90 altos A.P. El sitio se ubica en un ambientesemi-deserticoen la Sierra de Huaylillas, a 3.800 m de altura, en el interiorde Arica. Argumentamos los huesos ausentes, la posiciOndel crcineoy las fracque de turasobservadasen algunaspietas Oseas fueron el resultado acciones humanas postdepositacionales procesos tafonOmicos. y El cuerpo, enterradoenforma extendidaen posiciOnsupina, muestrasignos inequivocosde que despues de su inhumaci6ny se una trascurridoun tiemponecesariopara su esqueletizaciOn, removieron serie de elementosOseos.Los huesos remanentes no fueron desplazados y quedaronen posici6n anatOmica, con la excepci6n del crane, quefue colocado en forma vertical sobre las vertebrascervicales, con perdida de la mandibula.Lasfracturas observadasen huesos largos, vertebras,y foramen consecuencia de factores tafonomicospostdepositacionales no humanas.Junto con el entefueron aparentemente magnum rratoriode Patapatane,se revisO literaturaacerca de evidenciasfunerarias arcaicas a lo largo del oeste de Sudamerica, la alteraronpara evaluar la hip6tesis que los antiguos cazadores recolectoresde esta regiondel continente,sistemciticamente de peri y post mortem-la integridadde los muertos.Esto incluia: (1) procesos de transformacion reducciOn los cuerpos a y traves de la remociOn panes del mismo, de la eliminaciOn pietas Oseas,la cremaciOn el descarte de restos humanos de de y de de carbonizadosen depOsitos basuray, (2) procesos artificialesde conservaciOn los cuerpos a tames de quemado,salado de o momificaciOn artificial.Ademcis,reconocemosla existencia simultcinea patrones de enterramiento primarios intactos y de entierrosdisturbadosaccidentalmente la acciOnhumanao agentes naturales. por

de Calogero M. Santoro Centrode Investigacionesdel Hombreen el Desierto, Departamento Antropologia,Universidad de Tarapaca, Casilla 6-D, Arica, Chile (csantoro@uta.cl) Vivien G. Standen Centrode Investigacionesdel Hombreen el Desierto, Departamento Antropologia,Universidadde de Casilla 6-D, Arica, Chile (vstanden@uta.cl) Tarapaca, Bernardo T. Arriaza Centrode Investigacionesdel Hombreen el Desierto, Departamento Antropologia,Universidad de Casilla 6-D, Arica, Chile (barriaza@uta.cl) de Tarapaca, of Tom D. Dillehay Department Anthropology,Vanderbilt University,Nashville, TN 37235, USA (tom.d.dillehay@vanderbilt.edu) LatinAmericanAntiquity,16(3), 2005, pp. 329-346 Copyright2005 by the Society for AmericanArchaeology 329

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

330

LATINAMERICAN ANTIQUITY

[Vol.16, No. 3, 2005]

report examines a mutilatedand dismembered reviewof body withina broader of thefunerary patterns Archaichunter-andin regionsof western gatherer populations different SouthAmerica.Based on a single skeletonexcavatedin Patapatane Cave, datedat 5910 90 B.P., we andon thereviewedliterature, arguethatmanipulationandtransformation deadbodieswas more of common than previouslythoughtin the study of Archaicmortuary rituals.The evidencefromPatapataneCaveandothersitesin westernSouthAmerwas alteration probably ica suggestthatpostmortem related ancientbelief systems(ca. 11,000to 4000 to and We B.P.).1 arguethatbothperimortem postdemodificationswere practicedby Palepositional South and Archaic oindian Early peoplesin westerns is America.The time framefor Paleoindian from 12,500to 10,000 B.P.,butall of the cases reviewed in thispaperfall withinthetransitional periodof the Terminal Pleistocene to early Holocene (ca. 11,000-10,000B.P. . ThetimeframefortheArchaic ) is fromca. 10,000to 4000 B.P.Weuse uncalibrated radiocarbon yearsbeforepresent. The disposal of the dead in domestic sites is a commonfeatureamongArchaichuntersandgatherers of the Andes. A consistent patternamong many sites in the Andes is the deliberatemanipulationof the body in variousways in bothprimary and secondarycontexts.We suggest thattwo primary processes were employed intentionallyto modify the body: (1) processesof body reduction andtransformation removalof body sectionsor by removal of bone elements, and cremation,or, in extreme cases, the discard of fragmented and and charred humanbonesin domesticmiddens; (2) preservingthe body, including roasting, salting, We and artificialmummification. are aware that other types of intermentdid not include visible manipulationof the bodies and that others were or natural alteredaccidentallyby postdepositional culturalagents, which we discuss below. We also burialand recognizethe existenceof intactprimary of otherskeletonsthatmay havebeen alteredaccidentally by postdepositional naturalor cultural agents.Ourintenthere is to focus specificallyon the above-mentioned processes in western South America(Figure1). in data Basedon the archaeological available the 1940s, Bird (1988:116) suggestedthat cremation in "wasthestandard Paleoindians the practice among This

for Americas it mayaccount the scarcity their and of skeletal remains." explanation explain This may why humanremains very few examplesof Paleoindian havebeenfoundin theAmericas(Dillehay1997). In Holocene times in the Andean highlands, humanremainsalso arescarce(Aldenderfer 1989; Distel 1986:428;Julien Dillehay 1997;Fernandez et al. 1981:88;Lacombe1994, quotedby Bricerio and Millones 1999; Lavallee et al. 1982:66-67; Lynch 1980; Munizaga1976; Nunez and Santoro 1988; Rick 1980, 1988:23; Santoro and Nunez 1987). This may be the consequenceof multiple casual factors, modifications, including perimortem or intentional postdepositional alteration, the destructiveeffect of naturalagents,the interment of bodies in domesticareasof highly mobile sites, the absence of permanent places for inhumation, in disposing of the dead, difficultyof variability archeologicalvisibility,and samplingbias (Dillehay 1997; Rick 1988). In contrast,the Pacific coast from Ecuadorto Chile shows a rich variety of post-Pleistocene Archaicfunerary contexts(Arriaza1995a, 1995b; Arriazaet al. 1993; Benfer 1990, 1999; Bonavia and 1982;Bricerio Millones 1999;Chauchat 1988; Chauchat and Lacombe 1984; Dillehay 1995; Engel 1970;Lavalleeet a1.1999;Munizaga1965; Munoz et al. 1993; Quevedo 1976; Quilter1989, and 1991;Schiappacasse Niemeyer 1984;Standen and Nunez 1984; Stothert1985; Tattersall1985; Wise 1995, 1999; Wise et al. 1994). The bestknownexampleis the artificialmummification of whichrepresents mostcomChinchorro the burials, plex funerarytraditions of the Middle Archaic Chile andsouthern periodon the coast of northern Peru (Allison et al. 1984; Arriaza1995a, 1995b; Bittmann 1982; Bittmann and Munizaga 1976; Guillen 1992, 1997; Rivera 1994; Standen1991, 1997; Uhle 1917, 1919; Wise 1995, 1999). of Althoughwe recognizethe importance artificial in mummification the Archaic period,it is a secconcern ondaryconcernin thispaper.Ourprimary is thePatapatane whichis ouras starting case, point for reviewinga wide varietyof Archaicmortuary practicesin westernSouthAmerica. Patapatane Cave Cave is located at 3800 m asl on the Patapatane north side of a narrowand shallow canyon that

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS

331

B 060 Ooo NI

ALERO PA1FATANE

Figure 1. Map of South America showing the location of Paleoindian and Archaic sites with humans remains, and close up showing the location of Patapatane Cave: (1) Sueva, (2) Tequendama, Checua, and Aguazuque, (3) Las Vegas, (4) Zaria, (5) Pampa de los FOsiles,(6) Chicama, (7) Lauricocha, (8) Telarmachay, (9) Panaulauca, (10) Chilca, (11) La Paloma, (12) Tres Ventanas (13) Santo Domingo, (14) Quipa Pucusana. (15) Quebrada Los Burros, (16), Acha, Arica Chinchorro sites, (17) Camarones, and Pisagua, (18) Tiliviche, (19) Patillo, (20) Loa River, (21) La Chimba, (22) Pintoscayoc, (23) Huachichocana, (24) Punta Teatinos, (25) La FundiciOn,(26) Los Vilos Huentalauquen, (27) Punta Curaimilla, (28) Caverna Piuquenes, (29) Cuchipuy, (30) Arroyo Seco, (31) Piedra Azul, (32) Ballo Nuevo, (33) Palli Aike, Cerro Sota, CalladOnLeona, (34) Marassi.

drainseastwardfrom the Sierrade Huaylillasa to chainthatrunsparallel the westlocal mountain ernside of theAndesto theLlutaValleyin northern Chile (Figure 1). Locatedabout60 km from the coast to the west, and 60 km from the high Andeanplateauto the east, the site is on the westernborderof the drypuna,which is characterized conditionsfor human by less-stressfulcordilleran thanthe salt punato the south(Nunez occupation and Santoro1988; SantoroandNunez 1987). is Patapatane a large, open, high roofed cave carvednearthe top of a lipariticcliff of the Patapatanecanyonthatopens towardthe south(Figure of 2). The interment a femalewas placedon top of anexfoliatedlayerin thebackof thecave.Thesheltermeasures33.3 m in width,11.7 m in maximum depth,and seven m in height.It has a surfacearea of about 300 m2. Only the west side of the cave humanactivity of shows accumulation prehistoric withinan areaof 100 m2.The othersectionshows

signs of fluvialerosioncausedby local rainfall. out carried in 1983 and 1990 were Excavations laidoutin trenchesdividedinto 1-x-1-mquadrants (Figure3a, b), with a total of 9 m2and an average about10 percentof of 1 m depth,whichrepresents We remains. siftedapproxtheareawithprehistoric 10 m3,with 2.5 and 1.5 mm mesh screen, imately which allowedus to have strata, following natural an accuratecontrolof the horizontaland vertical as of displacement theburial, well as to recovertiny bone elementsembeddedin the fill of the burial. TheHumanBurial in PatapataneCave towardthe backof the Afterexpanding excavation the cave in mid-1990, we found the firstsign of a humanburialin the southwestprofileof Trench3, whenwe unearthed 4. Quadrant Morespecifically, the Stratum thedeepestin thequadrant, leftpari16, etal regionof the craniumwas exposed at a depth of 110 cm below the datumline in the excavation

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

332

LATINAMERICAN ANTIQUITY

[Vol.16, No. 3, 2005]

Figure 2. View of the Patapatane Cave on the north slope of the liparitic cliff of the Patapatane canyon.

we profile.Consequently, dedicatedthe next 2.5 to openingQuadrant reaching backwall the 5, days of the cave. In Level 2, around50 cm below the datumline, we isolatedthe featurethatwas exca-

area ,prehistoric activity

0 Excavated area 1983 Excavated area 1990

5m

S Trench quad. 3,

Splinte bone Camel tx,nes Redpigment

Redpignent

2 0 30 cm

Figure 3. (a) Plan view of the excavated area in Patapatane Cave; (b) Plan view of the burial with associated features: (1) flakes, (2) Choromytilusshell. The vertebral column was projected 47 degrees toward the northwest.

vated separately.As we fully exposed the bone remainsto dry them, we realizedthatthis was an incompletebut in situ female skeleton,registered as Patapatane-1, cuerpo 1. The layoutof the bones indicatethatthe individualwas lying on her back, stretched over an areaof 58 cm from the verout tex of hercranium the southeast in cornerof Quadrant5 to theendof herpelvis.Thevertebral column was slightlyarchedto the right.It measured cm 64 in lengthandprojected towardthe northwest(Figure 4). The craniumand the sacrumrestedat 102 cm and 112 cm below datum,respectively, the and sacrum-vertex was oriented47 degreesnorthaxis west.Thehuman remains werecovered a grayishby matrix of yellowish composed coarsesand,finegrain sediment of fallen roof material, fragments of camelidand rodentbones, flakesand microflakes, andsmallpieces of charcoal (Stratum 9b). We note that there was sufficientlyexcavated and spaceto examineall horizontal verticaldimensions of the internment, meaningthattherewas no of additional in possibility bodypartsunexcavated and deepercontexts.The contiguousquadrangles the bodyrestedon itsbackslightlyoverlying weatheredbedrockthathaddecayedto a pinkishlayerof fine gravel.Therewas no evidenceof anexcavated burialpit or depression.The poor conservation of materialdid not permit us to determine organic whetherthe body was coveredwith a plantand/or animalfibermat,hide, or othertype of garment or bundle.Six medium-sizedrocks (15 to 50 cm in

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS

333

Figure 4. Plan view of the burial partially covered by stones.

lengthand 10 to 20 cm in width)wereplacedover andaround skeleton.One of the rockscovered the the rightside of the skull, the face, and the upper thorax.As a consequenceof the weight of these werecrushed. Smaller rocks,thecervicalvertebrae stones, broughtfrom outside of the cave, were placed on the left side of the abdominalarea.A largerrock coveredthe lower section of the left coveredby a rockat pelvis.The skullwas partially 115 cm below the datumline (Figure4). Although the rocksdid notforma burialchamber, theywere thereto createa simpleenclointentionally placed sure. Fragmentsof Choromytilus shell from the Pacific coast, threetiny vertebrae an unidentiof fied fish, a polishedbone artifact, possibly a flaktool made out of taruca deer antler,which ing resemblescoastalMiddleArchaicbone artifacts at theRingSite(Sandweiss al. 1989:Figure two et 18), of flakes,anda fragment toba (volcanictuff)were found within the sedimentimmediatelycovering the body (Figure3b). fromribsof theskeletonwas Collagenextracted datedat 5910 90 B.P.(Beta40958). This dateis consistentwithradiocarbon on datingobtained the

lower stratum(Trench 1, Quadrant2; 1.12 cm below datumline), datedat 8160 160 (1-12.837, charcoal),andon upperstratum (Trench2, Quadrant2, 70.0-75.0 cm below datumline) dated at 4890 130 (1-12.839,charcoal). The individualwas estimatedto be a female between20 and23 yearsold. She had a small and gracile head and appearedto have been in good health with excellent dentition(see Standenand The following Santoro1994:170for a full report). were missing:the rightzygomatic body segments arch,partsof the alveolusof the maxillaandteeth, mandiblefrom the head; the scapulas,clavicles, some upperribs, and sternum,cervicalvertebrae, therightcoxa fromthetorso;andthehumeri, ulnas, radii,handbones, the completerightleg, and the left tibia and fibulafromthe long bones. The partialskeletalremainsincludedthethoracicandlumbar vertebrae,sacrum,left coxa, left femur, and some ribs. All bones were found in their correct anatomical position.The pubicsymphysis,the left femur,andcranialsegmentswere broken. What is interestingin this case is thatthe craniumwas not in its properanatomical positionand

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

334

LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

[Vol.16, No. 3, 2005]

cm

Figure 5. Cranium with postburial taphonomic damage of the foramen magnum.

several anatomical elementsweremissing.Thecrato the northwest,was restingon its nium, facing fromthe base,whichsuggeststhatit was separated trunk afterthe corpsehadrottedandskeletonized; thus there was no need for decapitation,which would have implied cutting marksin the bones, which are not present.Afterwardsthe cranium, with its missing elements,was relocatedin a verticalpositionand alignedwith the spine. Inaddition, posterior the sectionof theforamen was cracked(Figure5). This damagecan magnum be explained accidentalpostburial disturbance by of the skull or by direct human interventionto the enlarge orificein orderto extractthebrain.The

absence of clear cut and peck-marksor impact scarsfavorsthe firstview. The malarbone andthe as rightmaxillaregionwere also fractured a conof the weight of the rocksandsediments sequence (Figure4). Thepositionof the cranium its missingeleand ments cannot be explained by taphonomic and processesalone.Therelocationof the cranium the removal of many long bones imply anthroresting pogenicactions.The headsof inhumations on theirbackoftenbecomeseparated fromthetrunk soft as a resultof the decay of the supporting tisandligaments.Subsequently, head the sue,muscle, may roll to the side. But this is not the case here.

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS

335

Figure 6. Left femur with postburial taphonomic damage to proximal and distal ends.

There are not obvious decapitation,cutting and gnawingmarks. The headof the left femurwas badlypreserved butarticulated with the coxal bone.The distalepiwas missing.Thebonehas at least 10 irregphysis ularandtransversal fractures fromthe mediumto the distalend, butthe femoralbrokenpieces were found in situ in correct anatomicalposition as shown in Figure 6. The splintering may have occurredwhen the body was skeletonized.The large stonesthatpartiallycoveredthe inhumation could explainsome of the fractures (Figure4). In this case, the fractures would be the consequence of bothfortuitous eventsandpostinterment actions

by lateroccupantsof the cave. In otherwords,we suggest that missing partsof the left femur were afterthe body becameskeletonized, and separated thatthe fractures were more a taphonomicthana humanaction. The entireareaaroundand below the skeleton wasmeticulously excavated search additional to for and to make sure that we exposed and bones, retrievedthe whole interment.Furthermore, the sedimentsthatwere siftedthrough mm and 1.5 2.5 mm mesh screens did not yield fragmentsof the missingbones, with the exceptionof 10 pieces of teeth and small fragmentsfound in the sediment around head.Based on this evidence,we think the

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

336

LATINAMERICAN ANTIQUITY

[Vol.16, No. 3, 2005]

that the missing bones were not the consequence of archaeological excavationand sampling. Thus,the questionis how to explainthe translocation of the cranium and missing skeletal elements.Onepossibilitycouldbe thatafterthecorpse was buriedandhadrotted,it becameskeletonized; revisited burthe ancienthunters contemporaneous ial and removed some anatomicalelements, particularlythosethatwerenotcoveredwiththe stone of slabs (see Figure4). This interpretation postinis terment by body alteration supported the absence a of cut and peck-marksrelatedto disarticulating to freshbody.In addition,it is interesting note that 10 dentalfragmentswithinthe sedimentcovering The thebody wererecovered. teethmayhavefallen out when the cranium and the mandible were removed from the skeletonized body. This also explains why the skeletonizedsections that were not touched remainedin theircorrectanatomical position. Review of Western South American Paleolindian and Archaic Human Remains of The motivationfor revisitingthe interment Patapataneis unclear,but this was a rathercommon as practiceamongearlyhunter-gatherers, shownin the following review of Paleoindianand Archaic burial patternsin western South America. Also, there are several examples of incompletebodies to reported be the resultof casualor unintentional of as alteration, well as fragments postdepositional contexts.Wehave humanbonesfoundin nonburial two transformational procedistinguished primary dures:(1) actionsintendedto reduceandtransform the integrityof the corpse whose remainsmay be found within a funerary context;these actionsare classified as removalof body sections or removal of bone elements, cremation,and humanremains discardedin domestic middens; and (2) actions of concernedwith the preservation the corpsethat includedroasting,salting,and artificialmummification.We also considerbrieflya thirdcategoryof and burialcontextwith no perimortem alterations, we are awareof burialsthatshow signs similarly, of postdepositional alteration natural by agentsor unrelated by laterculturally occupantsof the sites who apparently modifiedthemby unintentionally the disturbing sediments.2 These patternsmay occur singularlyor collec-

are tivelyin sites.Notconsidered cases of alteration by naturalagents,such as carnivores,diagenesis, crushingdue to roof collapse, and so forth.Table 1 lists the archaeologicalsites reviewed below. Theirdistribution shown in Figure 1. Sites disis cussedin Table1 represent wide varietyof shorta termandlong-term habitation sites, andexamples of the diversityandcomplexityin the treatment of dead.It is not a completelist, however,of all sites containing modified human remains during the period understudy.As mentionedabove, we use uncalibrated radiocarbon yearsbeforepresent. Processes of Body Reductionand Removalof Bone, Transformation: Body Sections, and Cremation Theremovalof body sections(i.e., skull,arms,and and legs) may occurto a corpsebeforeinhumation can be identifiedby cut andpeck-marks impact or scarson the remained bones. The removalof bone elements is a differentalteration,which occurred afterthecorpsehadbecomeskeletonized, leavthus no markson the remainingbones thatmay or ing maynotbe restingin theircorrectanatomical positions. Cremationis a process that requireshigh to the temperatures burn fleshandbones.Inextreme conditionsit reduces corpses to ashes and small fragments,makingit difficultto find evidence of this practice. As a productof these actions,incompletebody sections were left behind. The recoveryof these types of human remains may be confused with casual postdepositional alterations. Althoughthis be truein severalcases, the removalof bones may or body sectionswas also relatedto funerary ceror othersocial purposes.The emonies, medicinal, cases discussed below representthis latter category,wherethe same people evidentlycarriedout the postdepositional of alterations the dead,which were relatedto a multistepfunerary process. of Casesof removal bodysectionswithclearevidence of cut and peck-marksor impactscars can be identifiedin Pampade los FOsilesin the CupisPeru (between the Cupisnique Desert, northern and Chicamavalleys). Severalburial sites nique were associatedwith smallopen temporary camps andworkshopcamps(11,000 to 8000 B.P.).These sites show evidence of alterationand secondary burial with missing heads and the intermentof selectedbones. One of the burialsat Pampade los

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS

337

FOsilesincludeda femurwith a deep cut nearthe proximalend of the coxal (Bricerioand Millones 1999:61, 63-64). Charcoalassociated with one tombwas datedat 10,200 180 B.P. Examplesof the removalof bone elementsare for Las Telardescribed Tequendama, Vegas,Zaria, machay, Lauricocha, HuachichocanaCave, La Chimba, La FundiciOn, and Huentelauquen Canyon,Bario Nuevo, as well as for Patapatane (Figure1, Table 1). which is located on the ColomTequendama, bian savanna,includes 17 primaryand secondary between datedby radiocarbon inhumations analysis 7235 50 and 5805 50 B.P. They exhibitbone fromsectionsof the thoraxand removalprimarily skull (Correaland Van der Hammen 1977:125, 151). At the Las Vegas site on the Santa Elena Peninsula,Ecuador,Stothert(1985) reportedthe of occurrence a secondary packageof disarticulated of selected limb bones, and a cracorpses, piles nium. The latterwas paintedwith red pigmentation, and was dated around8000 to 7000 B.P. In theZanaValleyof northern Peru,a MiddleArchaic and site ceremonial residential datedbetween7000 and5000 B.P. containedan assemblageof femurs andisolatedcranium,buriedwith no otherhuman remains(Rossen and Dillehay2001). At Telarmachay CaveinPeru,threeinhumations locatedin PhaseVI anddated werestratigraphically between7110 and6780 B.P.(Lavalleeet al. 1982; et Lavallee al. 1995).Theheadof Burial1 wasmissTherewas no indicationof secondaryburial, ing. and the authorssuggest thatthis was the resultof postburial perturbation(Julien et al. 1981:88; Lavalleeet al. 1982:66-67). Two of the individuals showed signs of a forcedflexion of the limbs causedby bindingwithropesor a wrapping bag, a also seen in Panaulauca Cavein Peru(Rick pattern 1988:25,Figure1.14)andatAchainArica(Standen to and Santoro2004). It is important note thatthe were sealed by a layer of burialsat Telarmachay to ash from a largehearth,which corresponds the lower stratigraphic section of Phase V, dated between 6780 and 5320 B.P. (Lavallee et al. 1995:45,300). Thisimpliesthattheheadwas intentionallyremovedby people of the PhaseVI occupational level, which may be an indicationthat removal was part of ritualbehavior and not the productof posteriorcasual action (see Kaulicke It 1997:31for a similarinterpretation). is interest-

thereareno marks ing to note,thatas in Patapatane, anddisplacement the remainingbones. in At Lauricocha 9525 (CuevaL-2), datedaround 250 B.P.,a pattern missingbones is common of especiallyamong infants(Cardich1964:102).No or disturbances cultural natural postburial by agents were Withtheexception one of (carnivores) noticed. anatomcase, thesebones were not in theirnatural ical position,whichled Cardich (1964:118)to sugthatthesealterations theresult "funerary were of gest ritesof mutilation." Huachichocana in northAt Cave western a and indiArgentina, secondary incomplete vidualwasmissingtheheadandlimbs.Thevertebrae andcoxalboneswerepartially articulated buried and ata stratigraphic datedat9620 130B.P.(Ferlayer nandezDistel 1986:378-379). Incomplete human remains of the Huentelauquen Culture were found at La Chimba in La in Antofagasta, FundiciOn La Serena,and Los Vilos in HuentelauquenCanyon in Chile. The HuentelauquenCulture geographically encompasses the coastal and inland huntingandfromca. 20 to 32 degrees gatheringenvironments south latitude. Huentelauquenis dated between 10,500 and 9500-8000 B.P. (Castillo and 2001). FragRodriguez1977-78; Costa-Junqueira mentedskullsandthe absenceof facial,pelvic, and limb bones were common in all of these sites 2001). At the site of La Fundi(Costa-Junqueira humanremains, ciOn,incompleteand fragmented which included pieces of skull and long bones, werefoundwithina radiusof less than50 cm. They wererecovered neara hearthsurrounded stones by (Castilloand Rodriguez1977-78). Two radiocarbon samplesfromtheintermediate lowerstrata and fromLa FundiciOn produceddatesof 8730 90 1 B.P. (Beta 108308, charcoal)and9640 150 B.P. (Beta 108307, shell; Llagosteraet al. 2000:465). (2001) showedthattheremainsof Costa-Junqueira La FundiciOn exhibitedno signs of perimortem 1 human intervention,such as fragmentation,cut of marks,andthe elimination spongytissueto supWe portthe idea of cannibalism. believe,however, that the fragmentation eliminationof human and bones at Huentelauquen sites might fit within the Archaiccultural alteration practiceof perimortem of humanbodies. Mena and Reyes (2001) also describedinhumations of five individuals(two adults and three newborns)at BarioNuevo-1 in the pre-cordillera

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

298

LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY

[Vol.16, No. 3, 2005

V, and IV Sota Chicama sites, Loa Leona Teatinos,

B.P.

Cerro Aike, Palli

Patillo, Chinchorro

6000-3000 America South

Sota, Marassi Cerro Chilca, Aguazuque,Telarmachay

Arica Desembocadura CariadOn Pisagua, Panaulauca, Punta Tiliviche,

Western Camarones Cuchipuy, sites, Piedra Deliberate B.P. without and with 8000-6000 Tequendama, Checua Telarmachay Vegas, Patapatane Las VI, Aike Zaria, Palli Pintoscayoc, Azul, Cave, Cuchipuy, Arroyo

Alteration,

Zaria,

Azul,

Aike

Chinchrorro Ventanas Pucusana, Tres Arica Paloma, Paloma Ilo, Quipa Zaria,Seco

La La Palli Tequendama, Piedra

Remains Nuevo? Human Cave Bario Acha, Tres Piquenes Archaic and FundiciOn, B.P. Hsiles Huchichocana La los de Cave, FOsiles, los Piuquenes de Curaimilla _ Domingo, Cave, Caverna Santo Alteration Sueva,Quiqche Pintoscayoc, Ventanas, Perimortem No with

Chimba, Paleoindian 1 11,000-8000 Lauricocha, Caverna Huachichocana Pampa La Tequendama Punta Pampa Transformation Table and Dead the of

deposits Reduction Body actions of removal midden in

Preservation

Contexts mummification Funerary C.

bones removal sections Processes Artificial Artificial Anthropogenic A. Body Bones Cremation Human B. RoastingSalting(?)

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS

339

of Aisen,centralChileanPatagonia (Figure1).The remains of the two adults were well preserved. 2 Bone collagenof individual (a young male) was datedto 8880 50 B.P.and8850 50 B.P.(NSRL 3486 and NSRL 3485 respectively; Mena and Reyes 1998). Charcoalassociatedwith individual 3 (anadultfemale)gavea dateof 8530 160 (Beta 90892). Mena and Reyes concludedthatthe burials at BarioNuevo-1 showed no signs of cremanor tion,secondaryor collectiveinterment, the use of ocher.Missingbonesof the burials,particularly the skull of individual3, is explainedas a consequence of an accidentalpostdepositionalaction to (MenaandReyes 1998).It is important notethat is no indicationof stratigraphic disturbance. there The radiocarbon datesdemonstrated both the that depositsandtheburialswerecontemstratigraphic As we poraneous. in the case of Telarmachay, suggest that this might be another case where the of and removal theheadwasalsointentional notthe of casualalteration the interment. of consequence is Cremation reported Tequendama, at Checua (NemocOn), Aguazuque,and Chia III, and Cerro of Sota,whereburnedbone fragments incomplete skeletonswere foundisolatedor in funerary packages (Figure1,Table1).TheColombiansitesshow unequivocal evidence of deliberately cremated In treatment. Tequencorpsesas partof thefunerary dama,burnedhumanremainsare dated between 11,000 and 10,000 B.P.This practicecontinuedin the second period of occupationat Tequendama, datedbetween9500 and7500 B.P.,andis repeated in Checua(8,200 B.P.) andAguazuque5028 and 2725 B.P. (Correal2001:37-38). At Cerro Sota (Bird 1938, 1988), seven individuals of different ages and sexes (Munizaga burnedaftertheir 1976:23-24) were intentionally simultaneousdisposal in the back of this narrow cave (Bird 1938, 1988). Layers of straw were placed between, around,and over the corpse to facilitatethe combustionof this funeralpile. The and corpsewas not fully cremated, remainsof red and animalskinssuggestthatthe bodies pigments were originally in paintedanimal skin or robes commu(Bird 1988). EugenioAspillaga(personal nication2004), however,who has examinedthese remains,pointed out thatthere is no evidence of actualcremationin these bones, thus the characteristicblackishcolor of the bones was the conseto fires quenceof exposure hightemperature ignited

on topof thealreadysealedbodies.3 Thisburial has been datedto ca. 3500 B.P. (AA-7788, 3645 65; AA-7789, 3755 65, and OxA-2850, 3380 70, Hedgeset al. 1992,see alsoMenaandReyes2001). The laterdatesat CerroSotaindicatethatthispractice continued for several millennia (for ethnographicexamples,see Bridges 1988;Faron1968; see also Note 1).At PalliAike in southern Patagonia, Chile, the incompleteremainsof a cremated individual"layscattered, and disordered, broken" (Bird1988:115),andcoveredby a layerof volcanic ash thatwas datedat 6700 450 B.P. (Munizaga of 1976:20).Charred fragments a tibia,a mandible, andotherburned of bonealsowerefound fragments at differentloci on top of the volcanic ash. These may have been "brought from the lower level up animal"(Bird 1988:116).The by some burrowing of antiquity theseremainsis underscrutiny(Mena and Reyes 2001:22). At Marassi, dated at 5500 B.P., charredand crematedhumanremainswere also found. Anothermannerto dispose of humanremains and amongPaleoindian Archaic peopleswas to discardthem in middendeposits,implyingthe mixtureof humanandanimalbones.' In this category, fragmentsof occasionally charredhuman bones werenotdisposedin a funerary context,as occurred withcremation describedabove.Fragments craof nial andpostcranial bones discoveredin this manner are reportedfor Tequendama, Telarmachay, TierraBlanca sites in the Zalia Valley, HuachichocanaCave,PuntaCuraimilla, PiedraAzul, and CerroSota andPalliAike (Figure1, Table 1). At Tequendama (7235 50 and5805 50 B.P.) the occurrenceof fragmented charred and human bones in the middendepositshas been interpreted as endo-cannibalism (Correal1979:115,119, 123, Photo 11a, Correal and Van der Hammen 1977:125).In the UpperPhaseV (ca. 5700-5000 B.P.)andPhaseIV (ca. 5000/4500-3800 B.P.)levels of TelarmachayCave, several human bones (fragmentsof mandible, vertebra,scapula, phalanges, ribs, and parietalsboth from childrenand adults) were mixed in situ with animal remains (Lavallee et al. 1995:306). The site's excavators viewed this mixtureas a result of naturaldisturbance. In contrast,we think that the disposal of these humanbones in refuse contexts cannot be fully explainedas a consequenceof unintentional postdepositional excavation. Lumbreras(1989)

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

340

LATINAMERICAN ANTIQUITY

[Vol.16, No. 3, 2005]

arrivedat a similarconclusionafterthe findingof charredhumanbones in the domestic context of severalsites datingin the last two millenniaB.C. (Aspero, Los Gavilanes, Huaca Prieta, Huaca Negrade Virti,Asia 1) on the centralcoast of Peru. have Similarfindingsandinterpretations beenpresented for the Nanchoc Tradition(TierraBlanca sites in the ZatiaValley)on the northcoast of Peru (Dillehay 1997; Kaulicke1997). of At Huachichocana Cave,fragments skulland and toothwere crushed,carbonized, disposedon a datedat 9620 130 B.P. hearthlocatedin a stratum Distel 1986:378-379). At Punta (Fernandez a Curaimilla, 2 m deep shell middenlocated25 km south of Valparaiso;several fragmentedhuman bones were foundin EarlyArchaicstrata, suggestA saming no formalburialpatterns. radiocarbon a ple fromthe lowerdepositsrendered dateof 8790 110 B.P. (Beta 22886; Concholepassp. shell, Ramirezet al. 1991). At PiedraAzul, a shell middenin PuertoMontt (Gaete2000), the fragmentof a distalepiphysisof a humanfemurwith a cut sectionwas foundalong context. with otherdomesticdebrisin a nonburial Taphonomicanalysis determinedthat the femur was cut when it was fresh andcoveredby soft tissue (Constantinescu 2000). This type of cut is typfound on guanaco bones (Lamaguanicoe) ically the to butchered obtainthe marrowor to transport carcassto a residentialsite. Anotherexample is the fragmentsof a child's level craniumscatteredin the deeperstratigraphic of PeriodIV at PalliAike (Bird 1988:115),which As 6500 B.P.(Bird1988:35). in Piedra datedaround Bird recognizedthat"no otherbone [were] Azul, level anywhereelse in found at the corresponding the cave" (Bird 1988:115), suggestingpostburial disturbance (either)naturalor culturalagents. by Tattersall(1988) identifiedand describedseveral fragment of humans bones, some of them with signs of cremation,and associatedthemwith guanaco bones. At CerroSota, isolated fragmentsof were frommorethanone individual human remains above the burned found on a stratigraphic layer corpses describedbefore. Some bones exhibited tracesof red paint(Bird 1988:213). ArtificialPreservationof the Dead Proceduresto preserveartificiallythe corpses, as opposed to naturalmummificationtriggeredby

environmental factorswithouthumanintervention, includedmanipulation alterationof the dead and to maintainor reshapetheir whole integrity.We includein thiscategory funerary processesof roastandartificialmummification. ing, salting, is and Roasting a less-destructive procedure consists of exposingthe corpseto dryheatorhot coals or fire.This may have been a widespread practice in South America.It is describedfor sites at the Pampa de los FOsiles, La Paloma, Pintoscayoc Cave, and Palli Aike. Roasting by exposing the bodies over fire or hot coals and by the introduction of hot coals inside the thoraciccavity of evisceratedcorpses was also common amongthe red painted mummy groups of Chinchorroartificial mummification (Allison et al. 1984:157;Arriaza 1). 1995a:Figure At Pampa de los FOsiles in the Cupisnique desert,Chauchat (1988) describedthe corpseof a male that had been placed on "a layer of young embers and partiallycoveredby anotherlayer of charcoaland ashes"(Bricetioand Millones 1999; fromthe lowerlayer Chauchat 1988:60).Charcoal was dated at 10,200 180 B.P. (Chauchatand Lacombe 1984:5). At La Paloma (Benfer 1999:233), the dead were often placed on the embers in fire pits. Consequently,the associated textiles and the skin and bones of the deceased were burned.In one case, an adultwas placedand burnedin the centerof a house withina residential Thissitewas datedat7650 to 4750 B.P. compound. (Benfer 1984; Quilter1989:74).At Chilca, dated between 5600 and 4200 B.P., bodies were also exposedto heatorcoveredwithashes,respectively. The same patternis repeatedat Chicamaburial remains, dated at ca. 4950 B.P. (Bird 1985). In northwestern Argentina, PintoscayocCaveshowed remainsof a calcinedcranium,and a selectionof certain bonesthatwereintentionally burned. These remains weredeposited without human preparation of any funerarystructure. these Stratigraphically, remainsof Pintoscayocare datedto ca. 8000 B.P. (Hernandez2000). At CavernaPiuquenes,small hearths located on top of the feet and thoracic havebeendescribed Rojas regionsof theburials by et al. (2004). The same pattern occurred at et Cuchipuy(Kaltwasser al. 1980). possibleway of preserSaltingmightbe another vation,if the cases describedat the La Palomasite on the centralcoast of Peruare accepted.Accord-

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS

341

ing to Benfer (1999:233), these fisherfolk were of familiarwith the properties salt, and they used it to preservethe bodies as more than half of the burialpits were filled withit. Benferstatesthatthe Palomans "toasted [see above] and salted their dead"(Benfer and Edward1988, quotedby Benfer 1990:313). Along the coast of the Andes, there are clear of indicationsof intentional preservation the dead, This is the mummification. in the formof artificial most frequentpatternof manipulatingthe dead, Culture andit is a commontraitof the Chinchorro of the MiddleandLateArchaicPeriod,fromIlo in Chile southernPeru to the Loa River in northern al. 1984; Arriaza (Table 1, Figure 1; Allison et and 1995a,1995b,Bittmann Munizaga1976;Guillen 1992, 1997; Munizaga 1974, 1980; Nunez 1969; Nunez et al. 1974; Rivera 1994; SchiappacasseandNiemeyer 1984;Standen1991, 1997; Uhle 1917, 1919; Wise 1995, 1999). There were differentproceduresfor artificialmummification: of (a) defleshingandrecomposition the skeletonby adding sticks fastenedwith ropes, which in turn were coveredwith a clay layer coated with black manganesepowder mixed with an oily or greasy and substance; evisceration burningof the tho(b) raciccavityof the corpse,andthe skinpaintedwith a red pigment; (c) skin removed with partial defleshing,the corpsestuffedwith reedsandother elements,the skinsewedbackandcoveredwithred and pigments; (d)bodiessimplycoveredwithblack orredpigments(Arriaza 1995a;Standen1991).At Los Quebrada Burros,on the southcoast of Peru, of Lavalleeet al. (1999) describethe application a thin layer of manganeseto the cranialzone of a humanremains. Theyare groupof badlypreserved laidin a stratigraphic layerdatedat9830 140B.P. treatmentof the These resemble the Chinchorro older"blackmummies" (Arriaza1994), whichare coat covering characterized a brownish-back by et al. 1999:413).5 the cranium (Lavallee fragments FuneraryContextswithNo Perimortem Alteration Thereare severalinstancesof burialswith no perof altered or imortem intervention, instances burials by naturalagents or by later and culturallyunrelatedoccupantsof sites, thatwere simultaneously in by practiced Archaicpopulations westernSouth America.

Sueva, a rock shelter in the eastern Andean cordillera of Colombia (Municipio de Junin), includedanadultfemalewithocherdatedat 10,090 B.P. (Correal2001); the ZaiiaValleyon the north coastof Peru,Panaulauca Cave(ca.5000 B.P.)with of an inhumation an adultmale in the Punaof cenof tralPeru;QuiqcheCave with an inhumation an skeleton in excellent condition, which dated between 9940 200 B.P. and 8030 150 B.P. (BeynonandSiegel 1981:168);andTresVentanas Cave yielded an infantand a juvenile in excellent condition.The child "hasa radiocarpreservation of bon datetakenfromthe burialwrapping 6290 120" (Beynon and Siegel 1981:168; Engel in wereunearthed Cave 1970:56).Twootherburials II of TresVentanas; was datedat 8030 130 one B.P. Both burialswere covered "withstone slabs placed on top of the graves"(Beynon and Siegel 1981:168;Engel 1970:56), as seen in Patapatane. Both caves are located in the highlandsof Chilca is Peru;QuipaPucusana anopen Canyonin central site locatedin the coastalfog oases of cenvillage tralPeru.It has yielded two burialswith variable states of preservation. Tomb 2 has an associated radiocarbon dateof 6970 300 B.P. (Beynonand Siegel 1981:169). At Santo Domingo, an open, largevillage in the drycoast of centralPeru(Paracas), two tombsweredatedat 8830 190 and7740 185 B.P., respectively (Beynon and Siegel 1981:169). Furthersouth, Acha 3, located to the west of Acha 2, is composedof threeindividuals have that no signsof alteration. of theseindividuals Two have been datedat 8380 60 B.P. and 8150 90 B.P. (StandenandSantoro2004). In Tiliviche,Standen and Nunez (1984) reportedon 34 primary burials datingto 3870 B.P.The deadwere buriedin semiextended position,layingon theirsideandwrapped in reed mats.At Pintoscayoc,a small rock shelter in northwestern Argentina,humanremainswere datedat 9080 50 B.P.The mortuary conpattern sisted of a simple pit with two bodies placed in a flexed position and covered with large rocks (Hernandez 2000). At PuntaTeatinoson the centralcoast of Chile, 71 individualsshowed no evidence of perimortemmanipulation.There is no radiocarbon for these humanremains,butthe date site contiguoushabitation is datedby shell samples at4000 96, 4560 95, and4905 100 B.P.(Schiappacasseand Niemeyer 1986:95).At Cuchipuy,

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

342

LATINAMERICAN ANTIQUITY

[Vol.16, No. 3, 2005]

in theTagua basinin central Chile,anossuary Tagua with severalindividuals datedbetween8070 100 B.P. and 5760 90 B.P.Therewas no evidenceof alteration (Kaltwasser et al.1980). At Caverna Piuqueneseast of Santiago,it was recoveredthe remainsof at least six skeletal of young females and males. One of the individualdatedat 8990 40 (Beta 151285), and a charcoalsampleyielded 9700 120 B.P. (Beta 151284;EugenioAspillaga 2004), was altered the by personalcommunication, of the sedimentand modernactivities.At weight an Argentina, opensite ArroyoSeco, on the Pampa for 1,500 years,datedbetween7800 and occupied of 7600 B.P., show the inhumation severalburied adultswith no offerings,and no signs of manipulation.Six childrenhadofferingsandwerecovered with ocher (Politis 1984:14-15). Discussion and Conclusions Cave in the highlandsof The burialof Patapatane at 5910 90 B.P.,showedsigns of the Arica,dated skeletal elements. This removal several of intentional patternwithin the context of severalArchaicand Paleo-Indian cases in westernSouthAmericanof cannotbe explainedsimplyby dead manipulation the actions of taphonomic, nonanthropogenic this processes.We have presented issue as a possirather thana conclusivematter. Archaeologibility involved several cally, these mortuaryalterations steps in a varietyof settings(White 1992), which a that without needto be registered considering priori disturbed humanremains incompleteor apparently of have almostno value for the understanding the of burialprocedures earlyhunter-gatherers. We initially thoughtthat the corpse of Patapbetweenthe and atanewas dismembered mutilated that time of death and before its final inhumation resulted in the loss of several of her anatomical parts. The absence of cut marksto demonstrate bonesledus to search theseactionsin theremaining Thereare no signs of for alternative explanations. animaltoothmarksfrom scavenginganimals,like foxes andpuma. inhuWethinkthatatthemomentof theoriginal of mation,the occupants the caveburiedthecorpse and of this young female andthensurrounded partiallycoveredherwithstonesthatformeda discrete enclosure. Following a period of time, after the body rotted and became skeletonized,the burial

was partiallyreopened.Late occupantsevidently removedseveralbone elementsby the simpleand expedientmethodof takingthem out and leaving no markson the remainingbones. These actions also included the relocation of the skull, which resultedin loss of the mandible.It is interesting to note that the otherbones were not displacedand remainedin their correctanatomicalposition.A similarpattern skullremovalwithno marksand of displacementon the remainingbones was common in adultburialsin Jericho(ca. 11,000-9300 as that B.P.),andhasbeenexplained anintervention occurredafterthe corpsewas rottenandnaturally defleshed(Parker Pearson2000:159-160). Thebreakage observedin the long bonesis betterexplained thepressure rocksandsediments of by that covered the interment.The breakageof the base of the skull, which resultedin the enlarging of the foramenmagnumcompromising occipthe also seems to be the consequenceof the same ital, aftertheskullwas process.Thismayhaveoccurred relocatedandplacedon its base.Afterthe removal of the missing sections,the remainsof the female individualwere covered,andthereareno signs of further in interventions intrusion thestratigraphic or The included layersoverlyingtheburial. sediments some culturalitems. the Consequently, conditionof the incomplete skeletonseems to indicatethatboth humanactivities and taphonomicprocesses were at play.The of missingelementscouldbe theconsequence reuse of the space by lateroccupantswho disturbed the site. One possibility is that they used the grave bonesto maketools, butthis does not havearchaeAnother ologicalsupport. possibilityis thattheburial was revisited for ideological or funerary whichis similarto otherrevisited cases procedures, in western SouthAmerica and other partsof the world (Huntington Metcalf 1992). and It appearsthatthe patternsreviewedrepresent diversefunerary ritualsandprocessesthatincluded different treatment techniquesof thedead,dependon the cause of death,local belief systemsand ing the social context,andthe seasonandenvironment in which they lived. The complexity observedin these recordsshows thata single funerary process was a longjourneythatinvolvedseveralstepsfrom thetimeof deathuntiltheindividual left to rest. was In other words, corpses were not always buried afterdeathbutinsteadweremanipulated transand

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS

343

formedandthen buried.In othercases, they went removalof bone secinto a process of postburial tions, as they were unearthed, manipulated,and left as incomplete skeletons,while certainbones were selected for unknown purposes. Extreme actions ended with fragments of human bones such Other tossedintomiddendeposits. procedures levalso as artificial mummification showdifferent els of intervention, which tend to preserve the of it integrity the deadorby reshaping completely. In this context,it is important note thatthe same to groupcarriedout both interveningand noninter(see Table 1: vening processesof burialtreatment de los FOsiles,Pintoscayoc,Tequendama). Pampa it to Chronologically, is important notethatwith the exceptionof the PalliAike, a Paleoindiansite the of theterminal Pleistocene, restof thedescribed cases correspondto the Archaic period and they We shareda general pattern. think that the early cases describedhere may be consideredfoundathat tionalforlaterburialpractices includedimportant perimortem and postdepositional cultural of alterations dead. Several suggestions can be made for future studies. Although both the modern and ancient indigenousculturesof SouthAmerica dealt with deathin variousceremonialcontexts,it is evident thatdifferent belief systemsled to substantially different funerarycustoms, a fact that undoubtedly to contributes the scarcityof humanskeletalmaterialfromearlier times.Despitethispaucityof information, we should conduct more archeological fieldworkspecifically designed to discover early burial contexts and more ethnoarchaeological researchamong living hunter-gatherer groups in SouthAmericaand elsewhereto learnmoreabout the burialpracticesof mobile peoples to aid our search for earlier remains.The lack of detailed ethnographic description of funerary practices research, poses otherproblemsfor archaeological and becausethecontextual, material, symboliccorrelatesof many laterburialtechniquesare undocumented. In sum, we believe that the entire process of alteration documentedat Patapatane in other and reviewed cases was the result of a well-defined funerary procedure possibly linked with other social interestsand needs (medicine, social ties, etc.). It also might be possible thatthe burialwas affectedby secondaryrites afterits first inhuma-

tion, as describedfor the Dayak in Borneo, who identified threeprogression phasesin a corpsefrom fleshed, to rotted body, to clean bones. This is relatedto the spiritual journeyof the deadperson's in its motherland,followedby limbo, soul, starting andendingin thelandof the ancestral dead(Parker Pearson2000). At this point of the studyin western SouthAmerica,we leave this issue as an open questionto be further exploredfor explanation.
This researchwas sponsoredby Fondecyt Acknowledgments. grants 1010131 190/0451, and 1890012, andthe Universidad We de Tarapaca. thank comments and help from Francisco Rothhammer, Sloan Hart, Ray LeFebvre, and Betty J. Meggers. Thanks to Alvaro Romero, Daniela Valenzuela, and Rossi Alvarez for helping fixing the pictures. Eugenio Aspillaga provided unpublishedradiocarbondata and gave us importantcomments on the issue of cremation.Finally, we appreciatecommentsby RobertBenfer and three anonymous reviewers for Latin American Antiquity, especially those that commented upon forensic and taphonomic matters.

References Cited
MarkS. Aldenderfer, 1989 TheArchaicPeriodin the South-Central Andes.Journal of World Prehistory3:117-158. Vivien Allison,Marvin Guillermo J., Focacci,Bernardo Arriaza, Standen,MarioRivera,andJeroldM. Lowenstein 1984 Chinchorro,momias de preparaciOn complicada: metodosde momificaciOn. Chungara13:155-174. Alvarez,Luis 1969 Un cementerio preceramico con momias de preparaci6n complicada.Rehue2:181-190. T. Arriaza,Bernardo 1994 Tipologiade las momiasChinchorro evoluciOn de y las practicasde momificaciOn. Chungara26:11-24. 1995a BeyondDeath, TheChinchorro Mummies Ancient of Chile. Smithsonian Institution D.C. Press,Washington, 1995b Chinchorro Bioarchaeology: Chronology and 6:35-55. MummySeriation.LatinAmerican Antiquity and Arriaza,Bernardo Arthur T., Aufderheide, IvanMunoz 1993 Analisis antropolOgico fisico de la inhumaciOn de Acha-2.InAcha-2y los origenesdelpoblamiento humano en Arica, editedby IvanMunoz,Bernardo Arriaza, T. and Arthur de Aufderheide, 47-64. EdicionesUniversidad pp. Arica,Chile. Tarapaca, Benfer,RobertA. 1984 The ChallengesandRewardsof Sedentism: The PreceramicVillageof Paloma,Peru.InPaleopathology the at Origins of Agriculture,edited by Mark N. Cohen and George J. Armelagos, pp. 531-558. Academic Press, Orlando. 1990 ThePreceramic PeriodSiteof Paloma,Peru:Bioindicationsof Improving to Latin AmerAdaptation Sedentism. ican Antiquity1:284-318. 1999 Proyectode excavacionesen Paloma,valle de Chilca, Peru.Boletinde ArqueologiaPUCP 3:213-237. Beynon, Diane, andMichaelI. Siegel 1981 AncientHumanRemainsfrom CentralPeru.Ameri-

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

344

LATINAMERICAN ANTIQUITY

[Vol.16, No. 3, 2005]

can Antiquity 46:167-178. Bird, JuniusB. 1938 Antiquityand Migrationsof the EarlyInhabitants of Patagonia.GeographicalReview28:250-275. 1985 The Preceramic Excavationsat the Huaca Prieta, ChicamaValley, Peru.Anthropological PapersVol. 62, Pt 1. AmericanMuseumof NaturalHistory,New York. 1988 Travelsand Archaeologyin South Chile. University of Iowa Press, Iowa. Bittmann,Bente 1982 Revision del problema Chinchorro. Chungara 9:46-79. Bittmann,Bente, and JuanR. Munizaga in 1976 The EarliestArtificialMummification the World? A Study of the Chinchorro Complex in NorthernChile. Folk 18:61-92. Bonavia,Duccio 1982 Precercimico peruano. Los Gavilanes:mar desierto Financiera y oasis en la historiadel hombre. Corporaci6n de Desarrollo,Instituto Aleman,Lima. ArqueolOgico Bricerio,Jesus, and MarioMillones mastempranos nortedel Peru: del 1999 Los restoshumanos balance y proyecciones.Boletin de ArqueologiaPUCP 3:55-67. Bridges,Lucas E. 1988 UttermostPart of the Earth. Indians of Tierradel Fuego. Dover Publications, New York. Cardich, Augusto de Fundamentos 1964 Lauricocha. paraunaprehistoria los Studia Andes centrales.Centrode EstudiosPrehistOricos. PraehistoriaIII. BuenosAires. CastilloG., Gaston,andArturoRodriguez0. en 1977-78 Excavacionespreliminares el sitio "LaFundiuna ciOn": industriatipo Carcamo.BoletinArqueolOgico Museo de La Serena 16:125-144. Claude Chauchat, on 1988 Early Hunter-Gatherers the PeruvianCoast. In PeruvianPrehistory,editedby RichardW. Keatinge,pp. 41-66. Cambridge UniversityPress,Cambridge. Chauchat, Claude,andJeanPaulLacombe 1984 El hombrede Paijan:zel mas antiguoperuano?GaAndina 11:4-6,12. ceta ArqueolOgica Florence Contantinescu, En sitio 10 PM 2000 Sextaparte: Bioantropologia. Salvataje Nacional ConchalPiedraAzul" bahia 014 "Monumento de Chamiza,comunade PuertoMontt, provinciade Llanquihue,X Region de los Lagos. InformeSegundaParte, editedby Nelson Gaete,pp. 12-35. Informe ArqueolOgico Nacionales,BibliotecaNacional, Consejode Monumentos Santiago. Correal,Gonzalo en 1979 Investigaciones arqueolOgicas los abrigosrocosos de NemocOn y Sueva. FundaciOnde Investigaciones NacionalesBancode la Republica, Bogota. ArqueolOgicas 2001 Patronesmortuoriosen cazadoresrecolectores del 33:37-42. Pleistoceno Holocenoen Colombia. Chungara y Correal,Gonzalo,andThomasVander Hammen en 1977 Investigaciones arqueolOgicas los abrigosrocosos Bibliotecadel Banco Popular, del Tequendama. Bogota. MariaAntonieta Costa-Junqueira, de humanosarcaicosen 2001 Modalidades enterramientos el Norte de Chile. Chungara33:55-62. Diamond,JaredM. Nature407:25-26. 2000 Talkof Cannibalism. Dillehay,Tom D. In 1995 Introduction. Tombs the Living:AndeanMorfor tuary Practices, edited by Tom D. Dillehay, pp. 1-26.

Dumbarton and OaksResearchLibrary Collection,WashingtonD.C. 1997 LDOnde estan los restos Oseoshumanosdel periodo Pleistocenico Tardio?Problemas y perspectivas en la hisqueda de los primerosamericanos.Boletinde Arqueologia PUCP 1:55-63. Dongoske, KurtE., DebraL. Martin,andT. J. Ferguson 2000 Critiqueon the Claim of Cannibalismat Cowboy Wash.American 65:179-190. Antiquity Emperaire, Joseph 1963 Los nOmades mar.Traducido Luis Oyarain. del por Edicionesde la Universidad Chile, Santiago. de A. Engel, Frederic 1970 Explorationof the Chilca Canyon, Peru. Current 11:55-58. Anthropology Faron,Louis C. 1968 TheMapuche Indiansof Chile.Waveland Press,Long Grove,Illinois. Fernandez Distel, Alicia 1986 LasCuevasde Huachichocana, posici6ndentro su del preceramico con agricultura incipiente del nor-oeste BeitragezurAllgemeinenand Vergleichenden, argentino. ArchaeologyBand 8:430-533. Gaete,Nelson 2000 Salvataje sitio10 PM014 "Monumento NacionalConchal PiedraAzul"Bahia de Chamiza,Comunade Puerto X Montt,Provinciade Llanquihue, Regionde los Lagos. Informe segunda parte.Informe ArqueolOgico Consejode Monumentos Nacionales,Biblioteca Nacional,Santiago. Guillen,Sonia E. Mummies Craniain the and 1992 TheChinchorro Culture: Reconstruction CoastalAdaptationin the South Cenof tral Andes. UnpublishedPh.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Universityof Michigan,AnnArbor. 1997 Morro1-V (Arica).Momiasy sociedadescomplejas del arcaicode los AndesCentrales. BoletindeArqueologia PUCP 1:65-78. Hedges, R. E. M., R. A. Housley,C. R. Bronk,and G. J. Van Klinken 1992 Radiocarbon Dates from the OxfordAMS System: Datelist 15. Archaeometry 34:337-357. Archaeometry MariaIsabel Hernandez, a 2000 Quebradas altasde Humahuaca travesdel tiempoel caso Pintoscayoc. Estudios Sociales del NOA Ario 4, Numero2:167-224. Richard,andPeterMetcalf Huntington, 1992 Celebrationof Death. CambridgeUniversityPress, New York. Julien,Michele, DanieleLavallee,and M. Dietz de Bul1981 Les SepulturesPrehistoriques Telarmachay. letin de L'Instituto Francais d' Etudes Andines 10(1-2):85-100. Kaltwasser, Jorge,AlbertoMedina,and JuanR. Munizaga del Revista 1980 Cementerio periodoArcaicoen Cuchipuy. Chilenade Antropologia3:109-123. Kaulicke,Peter 1997 La muerteen el antiguoPeru.Contextosy conceptos funerarios: una introducciOn.Boletin de Arqueologia PUCP 1:7-54. Lavallee,Daniele, Michele Julien,andJaneWheeler niveles preceramicosde ocupaciOn. 1982 Telarmachay: Revistadel MuseoNacional 46:55-127. Lima. Lavallee,Daniele,MicheleJulien,JaneWheeler,andClaudine Karlin de 1995 Telarmachay: Cazadores pastoresprehistOricos y TomoI. InstilosAndes,traducido DenisePozzi-Escot. por tutoFrancesde EstudiosAndinos,Lima.

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORTS LavaHee, Daniele, Philippe Bearez, Alexandre Chevalier, MicheleJulien,PierreUsselmann,and Michel Fontugne del 1999 Paleoambientey ocupaciOn prehistOrica litoral en del del extremo-sur Peru:lasocupaciones arcaico la quebradade los Burrosy alrededores (Tacna,Peril).Boletin de ArqueologiaPUCP 3:393-416. GastonCastillo,Miguel Agustin,RodolfoWeisner, Liagostera, Cervellino,and MariaAntonietaCosta-Junqueira 2000 El Complejo Huentelauquen bajo una perspectiva ContribuciOnArqueomacroespacial multidisciplinaria. y lOgica5:461-481. Luis G. Lumbreras, en de 1989 Chavinde Huantar el nacimiento la civilizaciOn andina.EdicionesINDEA,Lima. Lynch,TomasE 1980 Guitarrero Cave,EarlyMan in theAndes.Academic Press,New York. Massone,Mauricio,AlfredoPrieto,andPedroCardenas tehuelche de 1985-86 Contexto arqueolOgico unenterratorio de AnalesInstituto excavadoen la localidad SanGregorio. de la Patagonia,SerieCienciasSociales 16:95-101. Mena,Francisco,and OmarReyes en 1998 Esqueletoshumanosdel arcaicotemprano el mar(CuevaBallo gen occidentalde la estepacentropatag6nica Nuevo, XII Region). Boletin de la Sociedad Chilenade Arqueologia25:19-24. 2001 Monticulos y cuevas funerariasen Patagonia:una vision desde cuevaBan.Nuevo-1, XI Region. Chungara 33:21-30. Munizaga,JuanR. 1965 Skeletal Remains from Sites of Valdivia and Periodof Coastal MachalillaPhases. In EarlyFormative Ecuador:The Valdivia MachalillaPhases, editedby and Evans,andEmilio Estrada, pp. Betty J. Meggers,Clifford 129-234. SmithsonianContributionsto Anthropology, D.C. Washington, en craneal momificaci6n Chile.Anales 1974 DeformaciOn y de AntropologiaVol. XI:329-336. 1976 Paleoindio en Sudamerica(restos humanos de las cuevas Palli Aike y CerroSota, provinciade Magallanes, Chile). In Homenajeal Dr. GustavoLe Paige S.J., edited by Hans Niemeyer, pp. 19-30. Universidaddel Norte, Antofagasta. 1980 Esquemade la AntropologiaFisica Chilena. Chungara 6:124-136. T. Aufderheide and Munoz,Ivan,Bernardo Arriaza, Arthur (editors) 1993 Acha-2 y los origenes del poblamientohumanoen Arica. de Arica. EdicionesUniversidad Tarapaca, Munoz,Ivan,and JuanChacama 1993 Patronde asentamiento cronologia de Acha-2. In y Acha-2y los origenes delpoblamientohumanoen Arica, edited by Ivan Munoz, BernardoT. Arriaza,and Arthur de Aufderheide,pp. 21-46. EdicionesUniversidad Tarapaca,Arica. Nunez, Lautaro Chinchorro Faldas 1969 Sobrelos ComplejosCulturales y del Morrodel Norte de Chile.Rehue2:111-142. Nunez, Lautaro,and CalogeroM. Santoro 1988 Cazadoresde la punaseca y saladadel areaCentro Sur Andina (Norte de Chile). Estudios Atacamelios 9:11-60. and Nunez, Lautaro, VjeraZlatar, PatricioNunez del 1974 CaletaHuelen-42:Una aldea temprana nortede Chile.RevistaHombrey Cultura2(5):67-103. Parker Pearson,Mike 2000 TheArchaeologyof Death and Burial. TexasA&M

345

UniversityPress,College Station,Texas Politis, Gustavo en 1984 Investigaciones arqueolOgicas el areainterserrana bonaerense. Etnia 23:7-52. and Prieto,Alfredo,FlaviaMorello, RodrigoCardenas, MarianneChristensen Leona:A sesentaatiosde su descubrimiento. 1998 Catiadon Anales del Instituto de la Patagonia, Serie Ciencias Sociales 26:83-105. Quevedo,Silvia 1976 Estudiode un cementerioprehistOrico, explotaciOn de sus potencialidades demogrcificas socioculturales. y Tesis de Licenciaturaen Arqueologia y Antropologia, de y Departamento CienciasAntropolOgicas ArqueolOgide cas, Universidad Chile, Santiago. Quilter,Jeffrey Prac1989 LifeandDeathat PalomaSocietyandMortuary tices in a Preceramic PeruvianVillage. Universityof Iowa Press,Iowa City. 1991 Late PreceramicPeru.Journal of WorldPrehistory 5:387-438. JoseM., NuriluzHermosilla, Antonieta and Ramirez, Jerardino, JuanC. Castilla 1991 Analisis bio-arqueolOgico de preliminar un sitio de cazadores recolectores costeros:Punta Curaumilla1,Valparaiso.Actas del XI CongresoNacional de Arqueologia Chilena,Tomo III: 81-93. Museo Nacional de Historia Naturaly SociedadChilenade Arqueologia,Santiago. Rick, JohnW. 1980 Prehistoric Hunters of the High Andes. Academic Press,New York. 1988 The Character Contextof HighlandPreceramic and Society. In Peruvian Prehistory,edited by RichardW. Press, University Cambridge. Keatinge, 3-40. Cambridge pp. Rivera,MarioA. 1994 Comentariossobre el trabajode BernardoArriaza: Tipologiade las momias Chinchorro evoluciOnde las y Chungara26:25-34. practicasde momificaciOn. Rojas, Gloria,Ruben Stehberg,EugenioAspillaga y Alfredo Prieto 2004 Diagrama y correlaciones de hallazgos biOticos, abiOticosy cronolOgicosde CavernaPiuquenes.Chungara Revistade AntropologiaChilenaVolumenEspecial Tomo11:547-550. Rossen, Jack,andTomD. Dillehay 2001 Bone cutting, placement,and cannibalism? Middle Preceramic of Peru. patterns Nanchoc,Northern mortuary Chungara33:63-72. Sandweiss, Daniel. H., James B. Richardson ElizabethJ. III, Reitz, JeffreyT. Hsu, and RobertA. Feldman 1989 EarlyMaritime in Adaptations theAndes:Preliminary Studiesat the Ring Site, Peru.In Ecology,Settlement and Historyin the OsmoreDrainage,Peru,editedby Don S. Rice, Charles Stanish, and Phillip R. Scary,pp. 35-84. BAR International Series 545(i). Oxford. Nunez Santoro,CalogeroM., andLautaro 1987 Huntersof the Dry Puna and the Salt Puna in the Northern Chile.AndeanPast 1:57-109. F., Schiappacasse Virgilio,and HansNiemeyerF. (editors) 1984 DescripciOn analisisinterpretativo unsitioarcaico de y en de PublicaciOn14, temprano la quebrada Camarones. Ocasionaldel Museo Nacional de HistoriaNatural. F, Schiappacasse Virgilio,and HansNiemeyerF. 1986 El Arcaicoen el nortesemiaridde Chile:un comentario.Chungara16/17:95-98. Standen,Vivien G. Morro1: nuevasevidenciasde la tradi1991 El cementerio

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

346

LATINAMERICAN ANTIQUITY

[Vol.16, No. 3, 2005]

cion funeraria Chinchorro(periodo Arcaico, norte de Chile). Tesis de Maestriaen Arqueologia,Universidad de CatOlica Lima, Pent Funeraria la Cultura de 1997 Temprana ChinComplejidad chorro (Norte de Chile). Latin American Antiquity 8:134-156. Nunez StandenR., Vivien, and Lautaro 1984 IndicadoresantropolOgico-fisicos culturales del y cementerio preceramico Tiliviche 2 (Norte de Chile). Chungara12:135-153. Standen,Vivien, and CalogeroM. Santoro 1994 Patapatane-1: tempranaevidencia funerariaen los Andes de Arica (nortede Chile) y sus relaciones.Chungara 26:165-184. ArcaicoTemprano sitio Acha-3 del 2004 Patronfunerario con (costanortede Chile).Latin y su relaciOn Chinchorro AmericanAntiquity15:89-109. Stothert,KarenE. of Ecuador. Las 1985 ThePreceramic VegasCulture Coastal AmericanAntiquity50:613-637. Ian Tattersall, 1985 The HumanSkeletonsfromHuacaPrieta,witha note on Exostoses of the ExternalAuditoryMeatus.In Junius at B. Bird,ThePreceramicExcavations theHuacaPrieta, Chicama Valley,Peru, edited by J. Hyslop, pp. 60-64. Anthropological Papersof theAmericanMuseumof NaturalHistory,New York. In 1988 Classifications. TravelsandArchaeologyin South Chile,editedby JohnHyslop,pp. 116-118. Universityof Iowa Press, Iowa City. Uhle, Max de 1917 Los aborigenes Arica.Publicacionesdel Museode Etnologiay Antropologiade Chile4 y 5:151-176. 1919 La arqueologia de Arica y Tacna. Boletin de la HistOricos Americanos de SociedadEcuatoriana Estudios Vol. III, 7 y 8:1-48. Verano,JohnW. 2000 Paleopathological Analysis of SacrificialVictims at the Pyramidof the Moon, Moche RiverValley,Northern Peru.Chungara32:61-70. White,Tim 1992 Prehistoric Cannibalismat Mancos 5mtumr-2346. PrincetonUniversityPress,New Jersey. Wise, Karen en 1995 La ocupaci6n Chinchorro Villa del Mar. Gaceta ArqueologicaAndina24:135-149. 4 del 1999 KilOmetro y la ocupaciOn PeriodArcaicoen el areade Ilo, al surde Pent Boletinde ArqueologiaPUCP 3:335-363. Wise, Karen,Niki R. Clark,and Sloan R. Williams 1994 A Late Archaic Period Burial from South-Central 5:212-227. AndeanCoast.LatinAmerican Antiquity

Notes
data from west1. There is a wide range of ethnographic ern South America that show certain continuities of the ancientpatterns.During the nineteenthcenturythe Selknam of Tierradel Fuego crematedthe dead when frozen ground prevented them from digging a grave (Bridges 1988:365). The neighboringAlacalufe burned the corpses in a basket loaded with all the dead's belongings, clothes, and [kyakyon] wedge clams (Emperaire1963:254).The Selknambroke and burnedthe bow and arrowsof the dead person. Among the Mapuche corpses were smoked with the ritual idea of pre-

serving the body (Faron 1968:94-95). Evisceration and drainingof body fluidsbefore inhumationwas also practiced among the Mapuche,in southernChile (Faron1968:94-95). 2. Examples of postdepositionalburialalterationby natural agents that create an anomalous archaeologicaldisplay have been describedfor the site of Acha 2, an open campsite located 4.8 km from the coast of northernChile, dated at 8970 255 B.P. (Arriazaet al.1993:48, Figure 1; Munoz and Chacama1993:27).At the CariadOn Leona site in the Chilean Patagonia, two burials composed of seven adults and one baby (possible from a pregnantwoman) were disturbedby fox and puma (Bird 1988:65).Thereis no datingfor this burexcavationshave made it evident ial, but recent stratigraphic thatthe burialexcavatedby Bird corresponds a late cultural to unit (Prietoet al. 1998:104). 3. EugenioAspillaga(personalcommunication, Santiago, Chile,January 2004) is not totallyconvincedthatthesefires 12, were intendto crematethe individuals,and he is morewilling to leave this issue as an open questionfor futureresearch. 4. Humans remainsfound in domestic contexts may be the product of different ideological and social principles regarding death. Several authors have suggested possible practices of cannibalism (Alvarez 1969; Correal 2001; Rossen and Dillehay 2001) or "endo-cannibalism" (Correal andVander Hammen1977; Correal1979) in SouthAmerica. This is a debated issue in the archaeologicalliteratureas it poses a conflict with the morals and ethics of modernsocieties (Diamond2000). Besides, it is not easy to scientifically establishvalid cases of cannibalismwithoutproducingskepticism and rejectionamong scholars (Dongoske et al. 2000; White 1992). Nonetheless,Lumbreras (1989) called attention to the occurrenceof fragmentedand charredhuman bones with cut marks that has been found with other domestic remainsin the middensof late preceramicand early ceramic sites on the centralcoast of Peru. He arguedthat this pattern could not be explained as a result of disturbedburials,but ratherthe consequenceof cannibalism(Lumbreras 1989; see also Verano2000 for late prehispaniccase at Moche). The Archaic cases of Tequendamaand NemocOn,Telarmachay, Punta Curaimilla,Piedra Azul described above, should be considered for furtherstudies in order to test whether this type of practicewas prevalentbefore the second millennium B.C. (cf. Lumbreras1989:211). 5. There are other cases that show externaltreatmentof the dead, resemblingcertainpropertiesof artificialmummification, and cover broadergeographic space and time. The applicationof a layer of red pigment over fleshy bones is described for the Tequendamaand Las Vegas sites. At San Gregorio11, Patagonia,de-fleshedbones of a Tehuelcheburial are deeply embeddedin red pigment;a common practice in northernPatagonia until historic times (Massone et al. Leona, Patagonia, red clay was 1985-1986). At CariadOn underand on top of a pile of seven adultand one child. Bird (1988) recoveredtwo buckets of five gallons each with this sediment. Another Chinchorro like feature is reported at Pampade los FOsilesin the CupisniqueDesert.This is coat of clay mixed with water applied to the skeleton (Lacombe quotedby Bricerioand Millones 1999:62). Submitted March22, 2004; AcceptedNovember24, 2004; RevisedMay 2, 2005.

This content downloaded on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:49:14 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions