Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T08:19:09.061Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Demise of the Alaka Initial Ceramic Phase Has been Greatly Exaggerated: Response to D. Williams

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Anna C. Roosevelt
Anna C. Roosevelt*
Affiliation:
Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, and Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois, 1007 West Harrison Street, Chicago, IL 6060707139
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Denis Williams writes to comment on my article on Archaic shell mound pottery in eastern South America (Roosevelt 1995). He states that he will “correct” my article by putting on record “new facts.” Rather than correct my article, Williams"s comment misstates both the content of my article and that of earlier literature on Guyanese archaeology, and it merely repeats the data included in my article. In addition, Williams's comment presents some interesting but internally contradictory elaborations of his earlier interpretations of Guyanese archaeology but still without supplying the basic data on which his interpretations are based. In essence, contrary to my article, Williams states that there is no such thing as a Guyanese Archaic shell mound pottery occupation, known in earlier literature as the Alaka Incipient Ceramic phase (Evans and Meggers 1960:25-64). Williams presents this conclusion as “fact,” but it contradicts the existing data from stratigraphy, pottery distribution, and radiocarbon dates in the shell mounds, and he furnishes no other specific data that support it. In my comment on his comment, I will document these various aspects of his comment and define the type of data that he needs to present to allow empirical evaluation of his assertions.

Denis Williams comenta mi artículo reciente sobre la cerámica arcaica en los conchales de del este de Sudamérica (Roosevelt 1995). El sostiene que “corregirá” mi artículo demostrando “nuevos hechos.” En lugar de corregir mi artículo, el comentario de Williams tergiversa tanto el contenido de mi artículo como la literatura más temprana sobre arqueologia guyanesa y repite los datos por mí referidos. Además, el comentario de Williams presenta algunas elaboraciones interesantes perio internamenta contradictorias sobre sus previas interpretaciones de la arqueologóa guyanesa, pero aún sin proporcionar los datos en los que éstas se basan. En esencia, Williams sostiene, en contraste con mi artículo, que no existe tal ocupación cerámica de los conchales arcaicos, conocidos en la literatura previa como la Fase Cerámica Incipients Alaka (Evans and Meggers 1960:25-64). Williams presenta esta conclusión como “hecho” pero ésta contradice los datos existentes en la estratigrafía, distribución cerámica, yfechados radiocarbónicos de los conchales, y él no proporciona datos especifícos para sustentarla. En mí comentario sobre su comentario, yo documentaré esos aspectos de sus comentarios y definiré el tipo de datos que él necesita presentar para poder evaluar empiricamente sus proposiciones.

Type
Comments
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 62 , Issue 2 , April 1997 , pp. 353 - 364
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Evans, C, and Meggers, B. J. 1960 Archaeological Excavations in British Guiana. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 177. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
Meggers, B. J., and Evans, C. 1978 Lowland South America and the Antilles. In Ancient Native Americans, edited by Jennings, J. D., pp. 543–591. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Osgood, C. 1946 British Guiana Archaeology in 1945. Publications in Anthropology 36. Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.Google Scholar
Osgood, C. 1980 Parmana: Prehistoric Maize and Manioc Subsistence along the Amazon and Orinoco. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Osgood, C. 1995 Early Pottery in the Amazon: Twenty Years of Scholarly Obscurity. In The Emergence of Pottery: Technology and Innovation in Ancient Societies, edited by Barnett, W. and Hoopes, J., pp. 115–132. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
Osgood, C. 1996 The Excavations at Corozal, Venezuela: Stratigraphy and Ceramic Seriation. Publications in Anthropology 82. Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, in press. Google Scholar
Osgood, C. 1978 Caribbean. In Chronologies in New World Archaeology, edited by Taylor, R. E. and Meighan, C.W. pp. 431–481. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Sanoja, O. M. 1979 Las Culturas Formativos del Oriente de Venezuela: La Tradicion Barrancas del Bajo Orinoco. Academia Nacional de la Historia, Caracas, Venezuela.Google Scholar
Simoes, M. 1981 Coletores-Pescadores Ceramistas do Littoral do Salgado (Para). Boletim do Museu Paraense Emilio Goeldi 78: 1–32.Google Scholar
Verrill, A. H. 1918 Prehistoric mounds and relics of the Northwest District of British Guiana. Timehri 5: 11–17.Google Scholar
Williams, D. 1981 Excavation of the Barambina Shell Mound North West District: An Interim Report. Archaeology and Anthropology 4(1-2): 13–38.Google Scholar
Williams, D. 1982 Some Subsistence Implications of Holocene Climate Change in Northwestern Guyana. Archaeology and Anthropology 5(2): 83–93.Google Scholar
Williams, D. 1992 El arcaico en el noroeste de Guyana y los comienzos de la horticultura. In Prehistoric sudamericana: Nuevas perspectivas, edited by Meggers, B. J., pp. 233–251. Taraxacum, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar