Amanda Tetz

Development of Agriculture in Early Mesoamerican Societies

ABSTRACT The development of agriculture is present in almost every culture in the world. There have been several studies discussing the factors causing these developments and what the resulting effects are. In this paper I will be looking at some of the earliest evidence of flora domestication and agricultural strategies in Mesoamerica. The site that I will be addressing in this study is an Early Archaic site located in the Valley of Oaxacá which is represented by over 10,000 years of human occupation. By studying early agricultural strategies we will gain a better insight into the earliest forms of complex societies that employed this technology and a clearer, more complete history of this culture.

Thomas (1991) states that most research that deals with reconstruction of prehistoric diets address faunal and floral remains separately, however he feels that to fully reconstruct past diets accurately we should take a more holistic approach. Meaning we need to not only look at faunal remains or only at floral remains, instead we should look at faunal and floral remains together, side by side, to gain a complete understanding of the life of prehistoric people. I would like to go one step further and state that we should also analyze current technologies along side the food remains, by doing so we see the broader picture instead of just a piece of it. In this paper I will take a brief look at the development of cultivation and domestication in the Valley of Oaxacá during the Archaic Period.

ECOLOGY OF MESOAMERICA DURING THE ARCHAIC PERIOD (c.8,000~2,000 B.C.) Between 10,000 and 8,000 B.C. Middle America went through a climate shift that changed the environment dramatically. At the time of the shift the climate was colder and dryer than it is today. This climate was conducive to a

plains-like environment that is similar to the North American Plains of Wyoming and Montana. This type of environment supported various megafauna, however because of the climate changes these megafauna, an important food source for Paleo-Indian, became extinct. This extinction and rise in new flora forced the Indians to begin to intensify their subsistence strategy from mainly hunting to foraging more plants foods and hunting smaller game, such as deer and rabbits (Flannery, 1986, Thomas, 1991). The shift from big game hunter to that of a hunter and gatherer marks the beginning of the Archaic Period (c. 8,000~2,000 B.C.). As indigenous people began to forage (harvesting the native flora) for seeds, nuts, roots and fruits that were beginning to become available, they started to also manipulate the distribution of these plants. This manipulation is referred to as cultivation (Flannery, 1973). Due to this shift in subsistence patterns new tools were needed and developed. There was an increase in the production of chipped stone for tools such as cutting knives, drills, axes, scrapers and smaller projectile points as well as ground stone tools like mano and metate. There was also a development and increase of traps,

Tetz-Development of Agriculture

nets and baskets (Daniel, 1962). Once cultivation became deliberate there was a trend toward cooperative seeding and harvesting among the different bands of people, however this is believed to a seasonal cooperation only at this point (Flannery, 1986). As cultivation became more prominent the practice of selecting only the largest seeds and planting them began to emerge.

CULTIVATION AND DOMESTICATION

There have been many debates about the development of domestication, where it developed first to whether it was a delightful accident or a purposeful action. These specific questions, especially the latter, can not be answered with any degree of satisfaction due to lack of hard evidence and numerous combinations in which it could have occurred and since there is no left alive that was witness to this development it is a best guess on our part. However there is an abundance of evidence and information that we do have which helps us put together the puzzle of the past. This being said I think it is reasonable to state that in most areas, especially Mesoamerica and the Middle East, domestication was a combination of experimentation, observation and a personal knowledge of their environment. Because realistically to depend completely on landscape for your survival gives you a knowledge about your surroundings, a knowledge that, if you did not have you would not be able to perpetuate your DNA and since there are modern descendants of these people, it is logically to state that they had an intimate knowledge of their surroundings. As an example of that knowledge and observation is the trifecta

of maize, beans and squash. According to Flannery (1973) this trifecta was a natural occurrence that the Indians used as a model later. Flannery (1973) states that wild runner beans naturally grew in between the wild teosinte (grass believed to be the wild ancestor of modern maize) thus giving rise to the practice of interplanting of maize, beans and squash. As already define cultivation is the manipulation of plant distribution where as domestication is the genetic modification of plants (Flannery, 1973). As previously stated teosinte (Zea mexicana) is the nearest wild relation of modern maize (Zea mays). Both teosinte and maize have the exact same number of chromosomes in addition to other similarities (Flannery, 1973). Teosinte grows semiarid, subtropical areas of Mexico and Guatemala. Teosinte is a native annual grass that does not like anymore than 12 hours of warm sunlight per day. Once the fruit is mature they scatter naturally, spreading across disturbed areas. Because of this wide-range distribution and teosintes’ quick maturation it makes it almost impossible for small bands or individuals to harvest it; instead a large, organized group of people was needed to do the job properly. This early effort of cooperation set the stage for permanent settlements and eventually complex societies (Flannery, 1973, Sanders, 1988). Another wild grass, Tripsacum, was once considered for the possibility of being an ancestor of modern maize; however all of the evidence now suggests that it is at best a cousin to maize and has not played an important role in the evolution of maize in Mesoamerica (Flannery, 1973, 1986; Mangelsdorf, 1967). Other crops that were eventually domesticated and

2

Tetz-Development of Agriculture

harvested in Mesoamerica are mesquite (Prosopis juliflora), bottle gourds (Lagenaria), pumpkin (Cucurbita pepo), beans (four different species) (Phaseolus), avocado (Persia Americana), cacao (Theobroma cacao) and Chili peppers to list just a few (Carmack, 1996:45). The cultivation, domestication and eventually agriculture developed throughout Mesoamerica almost uniformly, but I will only be addressing one area of Mesoamerica – Guilá Naquitz in the Valley of Oaxacá.

HUMAN OCCUPATION AND NEGOTIATION OF THE VALLEY OF OAXACÁ

The Valley of Oaxacá is a large flat valley, approximately 3400 km3 and is 1550 m above sea level (Matheny and Gurr, 1983). The Valley has a high water table, low erosion rate and is a frost-free area, and because of this it has a higher capability for agricultural development (Flannery, 1967). The floor of the Valley has alluvial soils that bring the water table within a few meters of the surface leaving the soil with a higher moisture index than in other areas. Because of this higher moisture index combined with deeper soil levels than elsewhere the Valley of Oaxacá provided the environment for higher productivity of maize cultivation (Sanders and Nichols, 1988). Flannery (1986) has been able to determine that Guilá Naquitz Cave in the Valley of Oaxacá had several periods of human occupation during the Archaic Period. He came to this conclusion after conducting a series of analysis on plant remains and seasonal availability of various food plants. During the Early Archaic phase of the Valley the estimated population was low, believed to vary between 75-150 people at the

most (Marcus and Flannery, 1996). According to Evans (2004) the first human occupation at Guilá Naquitz was around 8,000 B.C. and that was “at least six separate occasions” of occupation between c. 8,000 and 6500 B.C. Guilá Naquitz Cave along with several other caves are believed to be part of the seasonal subsistence trek, settling there sometime during the summer and leaving before February. Food remains and availabilities’ suggest that meals consisted of acorn pulp, maguey, cactus leaves, various fruits, as well as mesquite pods, deer and rabbit meat. There is also evidence suggesting that they had technologies such as fire drills, nets, traps, milling stones and the obvious obsidian knapping (Evans, 2004). This fluctuation of occupation in the Valley continued until the Late Archaic phase when the first permanent villages appear, around 1700 to 1400 B.C. (Flannery, et al, 1967). The sedentary lifestyle seems to be possible due to the increase of agriculture in the Valley (Flannery, 1986). By the beginning of the Initial Formative (c. 2,000~1200 B.C.) organized agriculture had became a way of life in the Valley. The initial farming technology used was pot irrigation. This worked by planting the seed with a stick referred to by the Aztecs as a cao, deep enough for the developing root to access the water table, however supplemental water was given by digging a swallow well and bring water to the individual plants (Evans, 2004). Because of the intensive work involved in this activity it was necessary for a large group of people to cooperate and work together, which in turn created solidarity among the population (Flannery et al, 1967; Evans 2004). Later hillside terracing, canal systems and flood water irrigation was

3

Tetz-Development of Agriculture

developed (Flannery et al, 1967). As agriculture became more important for people, they began to deviate from their earlier patterns of foraging and hunting and started to rely solely on what they could produce. Evans (2004) believes this is due to the lure of sedentism has for humans, no longer have to live hand to month, move all the time, can only posses items that you can carry on your back. Sedentism allows for luxury that they had never had. Unfortunately this shift in subsistence patterns had a negative aspect on the health of the population.

Quality of life with the advancement of agriculture

According to Larsen (1995) the development and adoption of agriculture did not improve the life and health of humans. Instead it allowed for dental and physical health problems; such as malnutrition, dental erosion and increased inactivity. As a result of these changes the human stature began to shrink. The development of agriculture also provided the ability for the population to grow. Eventually it created an overpopulated world.

However agriculture also provided the time for specialties, such as weaving, ceramics, elaborate stone work, to develop. Complex societies also arose as agriculture began to intensify.

CONCLUSION

The development of domestication and agriculture was a necessary step in the process of cultural evolution, without these developments we probably would not have the world in which currently live in. There has been an abundance of research done on the development of agriculture and the

descent of domestication; however I feel that there is much more to learn about this topic so we have a better, more complete understanding to the process of domestication in Early Mesoamerica. By understanding the past process it might allow us to develop different techniques for out current agricultural systems and flora hybridization programs.

RERFENCE CITED:

Carmack, Robert M., Janine Gasco and Gary H. Gossen1996 The Legacy of Mesoamerica: History and Culture of a Native American Civilization. University of Albany: Prentice Hall

Daniel, Glyn, ed.1962 Ancient Peoples and Places, Vol 29: Mexico. Ediciones Lara, Great Britain

Evans, Susan Toby2004 Ancient Mexico and Central America: Archaeology and Culture History. Thames and Hudson, London and New York.

Flannery, Kent V., ed.1986 Guilá Naquitz: Archaic Foraging and Early Agriculture in Oaxacá, Mexico. Orlando, FL: Academic Press

Flannery, Kent V. 1973 The origin of agriculture. Annual Review of Anthropology 2:271-310

Flannery, Kent V., Anne V. T. Kirkby, Michael J. Kirkby and Aubrey W. Williams Jr.1967 Farming Systems and Political Growth in Ancient Oaxacá: Physiographic Features and Water-control Techniques Contributed to the

4

Tetz-Development of Agriculture

rise of Zapotec Indian Civilization. Science 158(3800):445-454

Larsen, Clark Spencer1995 Biological Changes in Human Populations with Agriculture. Annual Review of Anthropology 24:185-213

Mangelsdorf, P.C., R.S. MacNeish and W.C. Galinat1967 Prehistoric Wild and cultivated maize. In Prehistory of the Tehuacán Valley. D.S. Byers, ed. Pp. 178-200. Austin: University of Texas Press

Matheny, Ray T. and Deanne L. Gurr1983 Variation in Prehistoric Agricultural Systems of the New World. Annual Review of Anthropology 12:79-103

Marcus, Joyce and Kent V. Flannery1996 Zapotec Civilization. Thames and Hudson, London and New York

Sanders, William T. and Deborah L. Nichols1988 Ecological Theory and Cultural Evolution in the Valley of Oaxacá. Current Anthropology 29(1):33-80

Thomas, David Hurst1991 Archaeology: Dawn to Earth. United States: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishers.

5