Monserrate Restudied: The 1978 Centro Field Season At Luquillo Beach: Excavation Overview, Lithics and Physical Anthropological Remains

Peter G. Roe, Agamemnon Gus Pantel and Margaret B. Hamilton

Introduction

This paper is a preliminary report of certain aspects of the 1978 excavations at the Luquillo Beach site, Monserrate, on the northeastern coast of Puerto Rico. The fieldwork was undertaken by the Centro de Estudios Avanzados de Puerto Rico y el Caribe as part of its Masters program field methods course. This was the first of a series of sites on the northeast, north central and southern coasts of Puerto Rico which were investigated, under the senior author's supervision, as part of the Centra's on-going research program into the early ceramic-bearing cultures of the island. Other sites investigated in this program, in chronological order, were Hacienda Grande in Loiza Aldea (Roe 1985; Walker 1985), Caracoles in Ponce, Ojo del Buey in Dorado (currently being written up as a Masters thesis by one of the senior author's students, Hernán Ortiz), and Maisabel, the site of current fieldwork, in Vega Baja. The rationale behind the selection of each of these sites was that previous work had indicated the presence of Saladoid and Pre-Taino occupations while raising certain questions about the cultural continuity, or lack of it, between these components. Thus each site provided an ample opportunity for the restudy of a classic locus with a didactic function in mind.

However, these sites will not merely be used as teaching devices, no matter how disturbed they may be, but also as opportunities to discover and disseminate new data about a crucial period in the island's prehistory. Luquillo Beach, a heavily altered site on the northeastern coast of Puerto Rico (Fig. 1), is a case in point. It was the locus of both early work by Rainey, who defined the central "Crab Culture/Shell Culture" dichotomy/continuum which is still a problem focus in Puerto Rico prehistory. It was also the site of one of the island's earliest and most extensive excavations, that of Ricardo Alegría. Since Alegría's findings still remain unpublished, one of the goals of this paper will be to publish some of the data unearthed for as historical background to the present study. Most of the other major figures in Caribbean prehistory within the Virgin Islands-eastern Greater Antillean sphere, such as Irving Rouse, Gary Vescelius and Luis Chanlatte-Baik, have either studied collections from the site or made small test excavations at it. The present study will focus on the 1978 Centro excavation's mapping, lithics and osteological collections with an eye to making comparisons with their work, access

338

Peter G. Roe, Agamemnon Gus Pantel and Margaret B. Hamilton

to much of which was gained by personal interviews or studying fieldnotes and collections, and a similar study of the Centra's Hacienda Grande operations.

History of work at Luquillo Beach

For many years the site of Luquillo Beach was frequent visiting spot for collectors of the islands such as Dr. de Castro. The eminent antiquarians Adolfo de Hostos and Dr. J. L. Montalvo Guenard both excavated at Luquillo (Gonzalez Alberty 1947). The area belonged to the Matienzo family who retained a collection of human bones found at there. The site was named after the finca of which it was a part, "La Monserrate". It is located in barrio Mameyes of the municipality of Luquillo. In vescelius' site designation system, adapted from that of John Rowe, and the one the Centro has used to designate its sites, Monserrate is 12-PHm 9-1 (12=West Indies; P=Puerto Rico; Hm=Humacao, the Senatorial District; 9=Luquillo, the municipality counted alphabetically; 1 =the site number counted chronologically in order of discovery).

The site was first visited by Froelich G. Rainey in 1934 and he returned again in 1935 for short time. He found a superficial scatter of ceramic and shell debris over an area roughly 300 m. long by 200 m. wide near the beach (Rainey 1940:75). Rising gently to a meter or a meter and a half from the sand back from the beach were five small mounds which he designated with the letters: A, B, C, D, and E. At the time he visited the site the surf had already begun to eat away at Mound E, the northernmost one and coconut palms had recently been planted in neat rows in the sandy soil. The mounds formed a rough circle with mound E being closest to the sea and mound C being located furthest inland. The mounds clustered in the middle of the northern coast of a peninsula which juts northward into the Caribbean, but is protected by a fringing barrier reef (Fig.2). The site is halfway between either point at the head of the peninsula. The western terminus of the peninsula is Punta Embarcadero. Below it and to the west is a huge lunate embayment with shallow sandy beaches which forms the neck of the peninsula and the heart of the present Balneario de Luquillo, one of the nicest public bathing beaches on the island. The eastern point of the peninsula is the Punta la Bandera. Below it and to the east is another lunate embayment of lesser extent which forms the other side of the neck of the peninsula and is today a favored location for high rise condominiums. The site is situated immediately to the west of the mouth of a small river (Plate A) which brings freshwater to the site and in its lower brackish mouth supports an extensive mangrove swamp with all the molluscan and other life forms that niche provides.

In short, the site was attractive in both pre-Columbian and modern times, as Rainey, the first archaeologist to visit the site long ago surmised (1940: 83), although modern impact has been considerably greater than what the aboriginal era witnessed. During the 1950s bulldozers were brought in to level the mounds for a public camping area within the park. But the machines were just as canalized by the straight lines of palm trees as had Alegria's earlier excavations. Passing between the rows of palms in two directions, grid-style, the dozers succeeded in "platforming" the trees on little mounds which were all that remained of the original undulating ground surface.

Not as fatal as this barbaric process sounds, some innovative "salvage" techniques proved capable of reconstructing the original, now vanished, mounds and even accurately topographically mapping them! The senior author set up a transit near Mound C and took the

339

Monserrate Restudied: The 1978 Centro Field Season At Luquillo Beach

elevations of each palm platform as they rose to form an outline of the original mound. Thus the form of a vanished mound could be topo-mapped in detail (Fig. 7).

Extensive public bath and barbacue hut constructions has continued to occur even since the Centra's 1978 excavations and today the site is nearly completely destroyed in a textbook example of the local construction, even well-minded as this was, can cause to sites which are not protected by federal funds-entailed impact statement and mitigation rulings.

But at the time of Rainey's work the site was tranquil and off the beaten track indeed. The only "disturbance" that came to the area was the original planting of the coconut groves in regular lines over the site area. Many of these are still producing (see the regularly-aligned tree symbols in Fig. 2). During the summers of 1934 and 1935 Rainey dug at four of the mounds: A, B, D, and E (Rainey 1940,1: 75). He used quite "macro" techniques of big trenches (the one in mound A was 32 meters long!) divided into large 4x4 meter squares with metrical stratigraphy of thick 25 cm. levels being used (1940 : 76). His expedition was sponsored by the Yale Peabody Museum and the American Museum of Natural History as part of the overall scientific program of investigation of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands undertaken by the New York Academy of Science.

This site formed the basis for Rainey's precocious definition of the distinction between cultural phases based on non-artifactual "ecofacts" rather than pottery styles, thus presaging the modern concern in archaeology for environmental and subsistence strategy reconstruction. In one of the mounds he discovered the clear stratification of shell refuse on top of debris rich in crab claws from the blue land crab (1940,1: 80). He correlated this disjunction with differences in material culture to produce a distinction between an earlier "Crab Culture," characterized by fine quality ceramics with white-on-red painted decoration, D-shaped handles, and plano-convex "axes" (actually adzes), and a later overlying "Shell Culture", which utilized shell for artifacts as well as food resources, had lower quality ceramics chiefly characterized by modeled adornos, and petalloid celts (actually axes) (1940, I: 92). The cultural reconstruction which he favored to account for this was a site-unit intrusion, through migration, of a different group of people who supplanted the earlier Crab Culture occupants, rather like the Urnfield people and Beaker Folk successionary migratory models then current in European prehistory.

The next large excavations to be carried out at the site were largely motivated by Rainey's evidence for stratigraphie superposition, those of Ricardo E. Alegría in 1947. By the time of his visit the site had just become a public park, but one still mercifully untouched by "beautification" The site was a wild and isolated sandy plain covered with sparse vegetation and, to judge from his photographs, coconut palms which had only reached an average height of some 4-5 m.

So wooly was the visual aspect of the site that its macabre wealth of burials, erroneously described in the periodical literature of the time as an Indian "cementery" surrounded the site with a ghostly aura and tales of it's supernatural aspects still flourished in the local oral tradition. Two of these stories are reprinted below:

Dicen los vecinos residentes en aquellos alrededores, que en las noches apacibles de plenilunio, cuando la luz lunar riela sobre las tranquilas aguas, irrumpe de entre la maleza adyacente a donde

340

Peter G. Roe, Agamemnon Gus Pantel and Margaret B. Hamilton

estuvo enclavada la aldea igneri, una masa informe de fuego que, seguida de un indio, se precipita aceleradamente al mar, siempre seguida del indio, quien también se arroja al océano (Ramos Llompart 1947).

Muchos de los campesinos que hoy integran la brigada de excavación, sostenían que el lugar habia un entierro indio y que en las noches obscuras, partiendo de un limonero cercano, se veia a un cacique que daba vueltas por la playa, manteniendo también, y en forma contumaz, que a los muertos se les debe dejar tranquilos (Márquez 1947: 8).

Undoubtedly, these beliefs acted to protect the site, at least while they were part of a living belief system, from vandalization. It is hard to imagine such a time now as one witnesses the "Coney Island" festivities of a built-up Luquillo Beach on the weekends.

It is important to know something about the socio-historical context of Puerto Rican archaeology during this time in order to understand how the site was excavated and what became of its findings. During this period of the infancy of archaeology on the island several theoretical disputes about cultural affiliation over space and continuity or discontinuity over time were to inform the excavations. One was the question of diffusionism, either generally from Mexico, or specifically the Venezuelan archaeologist's Gilberto Antolinez's hypothesis about Mayan influence in Taino cranial deformation. Even in its day, this is a position disputed by Joyce and others, yet it is the explanation for the attention paid to cranial deformation in the reporting of the abundant physical anthropological remains retrieved from the site.

In terms of diachronic ordering, there existed a two-dimensional time perspective, a kind "Taino Tyranny", in Puerto Rican culture history. This short chronology was only beginning to be lifted then and still endures on a popular level today. It is the tendency to see the Puerto Rican past as an undifferentiated Taino occupation. Adolfo de Hostos had, of course, already hinted at a settlement before the Taino based on his excavations at Cabo Rojo (1919) in what would be called today Ostionoid contexts. While he did not recognize Saladoid pottery as being even older than this "red ware", the collector Montalvo Guenard later showed the white-on -red pottery he had found at Canas to Rainey before the latter visited Monserrate. Rainey was to find that pottery at Monserrate as well, and it later became the basis of Rouse's "Cuevas" style. It was precisely in hopes of following up on Rainey's discovery of a "Pre-Taino" stratigraphie superposition at Luquillo that Alegría selected the site for excavation (Alegría 1947: 5).

Alegría himself was fresh from his Masters degree at the University of Chicago where he had studied under Tucker and Redfield. His thesis was on the Antillean cacicazgo and his exhaustive reading of the chroniclers led him to pepper his communications about his archaeological findings with ethnographic citations. Those communications about Alegría's new archaeology program went primarily to the popular press, as was the style in those days (much as one has to read the "site reports" of the prominent contemporary Peruvian archaeologist Julio C. Tello in the newspapers of the day).

Alegría set up the Centro de Investigaciones Arqueológicas at the University Museum in Rio Piedras. His ambitious program had several goals: to amass data on Puerto Rican sites with the intention of establishing an island-wide register, to compile a bibliography of works pertinent to the ethnography, ethnohistory, physical anthropology and archaeology of the islands, as well as to conduct an inventory of North American museum holdings on Puerto Rican prehistory,

341

Monserrate Restudied: The 1978 Centro Field Season At Luquillo Beach

such as the Lattimore collection donated to the Smithsonian in 1874, prepatory to drawing upon them for long-term lending and artifact repatriation. The Centro still exists under the vigorous leadership of Luis Chanlatte-Baik, whom Alegría hired when he left the Centro to create and become the first head of the Instituto de Cultura Puertorriqueña. The bibliography has been followed by a revised and updated one published by Jalil Sued-Badillo at the University. However, much of the rest of his program was to fall into disarray, and many of the records and specimens from his excavation campaigns became lost in the hiatus after his departure for the Instituto and before Chanlatte-Baik assumed full control. Today many of these functions have devolved upon the SHPO due to the Museo's more limited role and the Institute's volatile institutional history.

With the limited budget of $3,000 for both the museum and the field investigation program, Alegría made the Monserrate excavations his first project in 1947. The following year Hacienda Grande became the target for similarly large-scale operations (Roe 1985: 162). in both cases the goals were to enrich the collections and displays of the University Museum and to address some of the above-mentioned theoretical questions. In these excavations he was aided by the organizational support of his friend and role model, the Spanish Republican-refugee archaeologist, Sebastian Gonzalez-Garcia, then Decano of the Faculty of Humanities at the University, his friend, Luis Muñoz-Lee, the son of Muñoz Marín, who acted as field assistant, and his fiancee (later wife), the artist Mela Pons de Alegría, in the laboratory. These associations help to explain the humanistic aims of his research, the emphasis on the dissemination of its results through the popular press, and the function of the derived collections for museum display and educational purposes, rather than for immediate scholarly publication of the results. Indeed, a part of this report, with Alegria's support, seeks to partially rectify this oversight. It thereby constitutes one of the longest-deferred site reports (1947-1985) in the Caribbean literature!

Alegría began his excavations in April of 1947. Because it had been twelve years since Rainey's investigations, pot-hunters had hit the site and sea erosion had consumed the northernmost mound, leaving only Mounds B and C intact. Since Mound B appeared to be the largest and richest, Alegría decided to excavate there. The surface of the mound ad been off-limits to Rainey because of the presence on it of the tin-roofed shack of a campesino who had lived there for more than 30 years and had refused to let Rainey excavate beneath or around it (Rainey 1940: 97). Rainey had only been able to put two trenches into the extreme northern end of the mound. Alegría managed to buy the hut from the owner for some $300 and had it moved to another location, thus opening up all of Mound B's surface for excavation.

Twelve men, many of whom had experience from working with Rainey, were used, with pick and shovel, to open 2 meter-wide trenches from north to south which were internally divided into 2 meter squares. The trenches were set by transit and one of the first, if not the first, complete topographic map in the history of Puerto Rican archaeology was made of the vicinity of Mound B. The map was not extended to Mound C. As the coconut palms planted on the site were a valuable resource, Alegría had to canalize his trenches where there was danger that palms and interrupted his trenches where there was danger that palm root systems would be cut. This is one explanation for why some of the mound was left intact for the Centro's 1978 test pit. Each trench was assigned a letter descending alphabetically from west to east and a number increasing sequentially from south to north. The excavations were massive with 143 2x2 m. units

342

Peter G. Roe, Agamemnon Gus Pantel and Margaret B. Hamilton

being opened up on the summit of Mound B alone (Alegría 1947: 6). A variable area 58 meters long and 28 meters wide was opened to between 4 and 8 feet in depth (the mixture of measures dates from the original excavations). In short, during some 12 weeks of excavations 1,330 cubic meters of earth were removed from Mound B! The scale and manner of these excavations were only to be eclipsed by Alegria's works at Hacienda Grande during the next year, 1948 (Roe 1985), and by Chanlatte-Baik's 1970s excavations at Sorce and La Hueca in Vieques.

Additional excavations within an expanded grid took place around Mound B to test its limits while only three short trenches were put into Mound C. The latter excavations were terminated by the arrival of the rainy season in this wettest corner of Puerto Rico, after the deposit there proved to have only an average depth of less than 5 feet. (1947:9). Due to the nature of the mounds Alegría soon discovered that comparable artifacts fluctuated widely in their relative vertical position depending upon whether the summit or the edges of the mound were being investigated. For example, he cites comparable artifacts from 12" to 48" in depth from varying locations (1947: 8).

Normally, two men worked in a single 2x2 m. unit, and at least some of the soil was sifted. As was the case during those times, only a "representative"sample of the food remains and body sherds were saved; the diagnostic materials were carried to the laboratory in their square and level bags while the rest was interred nearby. The excavations proceeded by arbitrary 6" (15 cm.) levels and, on average, reached depths of below 54". To classify the remains Alegría used Rouse's system as it had first appeared in the Prehistory of Haiti (1939).

Alegría noted the same stratification that Rainey had picked up at the site. From the surface to some 36" he encountered a shell deposit composed of Strombus, Chama and Tellina. Many of the gastropodea had a circular hole near the top of the columella where, on analogy with current practice, Alegría hypothesized that the Indians had poured boiling water into the shell to facilitate the removal of the animal (1947: 7). In addition to numerous food remains and carbon, Alegría found a crude ceramic ware which was fragile and adorned by only plastic decoration. This was the pottery of Rainey's "Shell Culture". Below it were the remains of his "Crab Culture", characterized by a great number of Cardisoma guanhumi latreille pincers, and fine ceramics painted in either a red slip or a white-on-red slip paint. The midden appeared to represent living refuse and no traces of a house floor or posts were recovered (1947: 8).

The Skeletons

Sixty-three internments were discovered, of which 44 came from Mound B and 19 from Mound C. Of these 49 were adults and 14 were children. Seven of the child burials were placed in burial urns. All of the burials seem to have been primary ones but in some cases the preservational circumstances were such as to have obscured or altered the original position of the bones. Two of the burials were lacking crania and on several occasions human bones seemed to be mixed in with the living debris. Opposed to these casual instances are several multiple burials, one composed of six adults, and another of an adult female primary internment associated with an infant urn burial, perhaps as a result of deaths during childbearing (1947: 16).

Twenty four of the burials were associated with diverse artifacts. In the majority of instances these were ceramic cook pots which contained the remains of funerary food offerings consisting

343

Monserrate Restudied: The 1978 Centro Field Season At Luquillo Beach

of gastropods, almejas, and fish and jutia bones. In the case of one of the adult skeletons from square E-25, no.20, a large food bowl was placed over the deceased's head like a cap. On five occasions the dead were associated with land snails, cobos, of large size. Next to one skeleton six cylindrical ceramic necklace beads were found while adhering to another an adornment of mother-of-pearl was encountered. The most interesting of the funerary items was what appeared to be a whistle or flute made from carved human bone which was found next to one skeleton (1947:17).

Contrary to the reports from the popular press, there did not appear to be any consistent orientation to the placement of the bodies, which usually were placed in the seated fetal position, resting on their backs, or reclining on their sides. Nevertheless, there was a slight tendency for the faces to be looking to the east (1947: 18), an auspicious direction to judge from South American lowland cosmology, which assigns this region to the rebirth of the new, vigorous sun, a life symbol par excellence (Roe 1982:188).

Like elsewhere, such as with the three skeletons of Mound C reported on in this paper, or at nearby Hacienda Grande (Walker 1985: 194), several of these skeletons (nos. 5, 7, 39) were punched through the midden into the sterile sand below. To judge from the photographs in Alegría's preliminary report, these skeletons were platformed and then an original transport device was used to remove two of the better preserved ones in a block for exhibition at the UPR museum. This consisted of sliding a piece of plywood under the platformed burial while making a concrete casing around the skeleton with iron cast-in handles. A similar technique was later copied by pot-hunters in this site and at nearby Hacienda Grande. For future osteológica! or anthropometric studies, Alegría saved 19 crania and their respective femurs, tibia, fibula, humeri, radii, ulni and pelvi (Alegría 1947: 18). The present whereabouts of many of these skeletons is in doubt.

From the original listings in his preliminary report, it is possible to construct the following chart for just 43 of the original 49 skeletons from Mound B-Mound C is missing-which associates the above contexts with provenience (unfortunately no sex is specified for any of the skeletons in his listings) and age of the remains:

No. Position State Age Square. Depth Orientation Associations

Table 1: Skeletal Remains from Mound B L. site=Luis' site (test pits, vicinity Mound B) M. site=Mela' site (test pits, vicinity Mound B) A= Adult SA=Sub-Adult C= Child or infant

A vast panoply of diverse artifacts were recovered in these excavations, including shell discs-beads (Alegría 1947, Plate 27; atlatl spurs (then unrecognized) (1947, Plate 25g-h); small Strombus three-pointers (1947, Plate 25i-k); Cassis tuberosa cups (1947, Plate 26i); perforated and cut Olivia danglers (1947, Plate 30d,e-g); vomiting spatulas (1947, Plate 31j,l); carved human bone flutes (1947, Plate 32k,o); a dog mandible-minus teeth (1947, Plate 321); the

344

Peter G. Roe, Agamemnon Gus Pantel and Margaret B. Hamilton

Famous manatee-bone carved figurines of a bird (1947, Plate 33a), and a profile seated woman [1947, Plate 33b); stone balls some 8 cm. in diameter (1947, Plate 34b); large tubular marble seads (1947, Plate 36a); spokeshaves (1947, Plate 38h,i); plano-convex adzes (1947, Plate 38f,g); petalloid axes (1947, Plate 41a-c), and other artifacts. The distribution of these artifacts within the mound and their cultural affiliations are properly the topic of another article; we will only consider here some of the recovered ceramics.

At the time Alegría conceived of two occupations: an early "Igneri" one and a later "Taino" one which displaced it Alegría (1948: 1-2), modeled along the lines of Rainey's thinking. Later, he relabeled the Igneri ceramics "Saladoid" and the intermediary wares "Ostionoid" (these particular materials Rouse at various times would consider Monserratean and Elenoid). Indeed, the bulk of the ceramics in the "Crab Culture" levels seem to be Cuevas. Chanlatte-Baik, in some small test excavations he carried out at the site in 1970, discovered some cross-hatchured engraved labial flanges which attest to a limited early Hacienda Grande (his "Huecoid") occupation (Chanlatte-Baik, Personal Communication, 1981). Vescelius, in his reseriation of Rainey's materials stored in the Yale Peabody Museum, early recognized this by postulating a Hacienda Grande phase predating the predominantly Cuevas occupation. He was kind enough to share his notes on these collections with the senior author, who has incorporated his periodization into a modification of Rouse's chronological chart for the "Vieques Sound" culture area presented here as Fig. 3.

His qualitative seriation dealt with only Mounds A, B, and E. The earliest levels of B and E extend from a postulated Hacienda Grande occupation (which thanks to Chanlatte-Baik's findings should be extended down even further in the chronological column to the earliest Hacienda Grande phase since at Maisabel, Hacienda Grande and other sites such materials invariably come from the lowest Hacienda Grande levels) through Cuevas in Rouses' Period II to the entire span of the Pre-Taino period, III, with first what Rouse called originally (and the senior author still believes was the best designation for this "epi-Saladoid" transition) the "Monserratean," then "Collores" and now "Tibes" style or complex, with Mound A postdating the beginnings of Mounds B and E, through to a common "Esperanzan" style of the Taino occupation in all three mounds.

This is a nearly continuous time spread from the earliest ceramic age to the latest, a duration only bested in Puerto Rico by the huge Hacienda Grande site to the west. The Centro îxcavations in what was left of Mound C (really only the last 50 cm. of what was once an over lm. mound) demonstrated unequivocally that that mound could be placed from level 4 on to recent times in Vescelius' seriation, with the bulk of the ceramics being clearly Elenoid in style. Thus it was the most recent of the mounds, an explanation for its shallower depth.

The ceramics of Monserrate provide a perfect illustration of the continua of modes throughout he sequence. In a sense, this makes cutting that sequence at any particular point in time a little irbitrary. Thus for the senior author, whose scale section drawings of a series of early vessels Tom Alegria's excavations now in the university of Puerto Rico museum appear here as Figs. 1-7, there is little to distinguish early Monserratean from Late Cuevas, or Early Cuevas from -¿te Hacienda Grande, save for a continuous "clinal" decline in ceramic technology. To adapt i Boasian technical viewpoint, for the moment, the systematic shifts from late Hacienda Grande o Early Cuevas, as represented here by Fig. 4a, b, can be attributed to a slow but progressive

345

Monserrate Restudied: The 1978 Centro Field Season At Luquillo Beach

loss of the potter's art. The white slip is applied more thickly in the Cuevas piece than to equivalent Hacienda Grande campaniform vessels, to the degree that its relief is perceptible to a finger run over the vessel's exterior. The designs have shifted from gracious curvilinear motifs, very difficult to execute, to wobbly rectilinear motifs which are easier to execute. The vessel wall thickness goes up as a first response to maintain strength in a lower-fired, weaker paste.

The rectangular vessels of Early Monserratean ware retain the elegant shapes of their Cuevas antecedents, but as in Fig. 4c-e, they have long since lost even the decorative rim flange buttons and sub-carination applique perforated lugs of such fine Cuevas pieces like 5a, gradually give way even in that style to nearly vertical ones, as in 5e, f, whose upper rim band presages the later Monserratean norm for open bowls, and the equally taxing annular bases (Roe 1978) begin to widen in a search for greater strength in the face of descending firing temperatures and hence weakening paste, as in the crude little bowl in Fig. 5b.

Concomitant with these problems is the lessening of the fine ware/utilitarian ware distinction as function begins to supersede presentation in the ceramic arts. The cookpots, as in Fig. 6, are the principal forms which remain. They intergrade from fairly sharply carinated, but sloppily executed, Late Cuevas forms, like Fig. 6b, the vertical handles of which edge ever higher above the lip, other Late Cuevas or Early Monserratean pieces (the burial food bowls) whose high handles, weak vertical carinations and rounding slightly convex "flat" bases (Figs. 6a, c) begin to search for the "primitive sphericity" of later round-bottomed forms (round profiles having inherently greater strength than complex forms in a material like ceramics which lacks, save for the late silicious ash-tempered ware of the mainland, tensile strength but possesses compression strength). Just as Hacienda Grande and Early Cuevas concave flat vases are superseded by truly flat bases in Late Cuevas, and convex "flat" bases in Late Cuevas and Early Monserratean, are they replaced by rounded bases in the Elenoid and Esperanzan ceramics of Luquillo.

Systemically related to these progressive alterations is the increasing tendency for rims to thicken near the lip and vessels to assume an ovoid or "boat-shaped" horizontal cross section. Both are reinforcing mechanisms for weak paste and first show up in the slightly ovoid, but still circular shapes of late Cuevas or Early Monserratean pieces like Fig. 6a, b. Ceramic "survivors" of the memories of adaptation to the stoneless alluvium of the mainland tropical forest, like ceramic "topia", or pot-rests (Raymond, DeBoer and Roe 1975), as in Fig. 6d, e, appear for the last time in Late Cuevas and hence will be superseded by the locally more abundant and rational river cobbles for which they were originally a substitute.

The same structural limitations decree a shift from the thin-walled hollow ceramic anthropomor-phic ceramic figurines of the Hacienda Grande style, to the solid and crudely scraped Late Cuevas figurines of Fig. 7a, f. Interestingly enough, sexual themes, which are rare in South Amerindian sculptural art outside of the early Ecuadorian and Peruvian coast, still occur in this late Insular Saladoid manifestation, as in the testicles of figure 6f or the phallic effigy of 6g. Appendages become stubbier, as in 6h-j, and the Monserratean adorno heads cease to represent faithfully the mainland South American naturalistic fauna of the saladoid tradition, and now begin to present heavily modeled fantastic, or "monstrous" generalized theriomorphic (rather than separable anthropomorphic/zoomorphic) depictions, as in Fig. 7k, m. The bulk of the

346

Peter G. Roe, Agamemnon Gus Pantel and Margaret B. Hamilton

ceramic remains from Luquillo have not received the study they deserve since they document so well this crucial shift in technology and style in the prehistory of Puerto Rico.

Aftermath of the 1947 Excavation

After these excavations the skeletons and material cultural items were brought to the University Museum in Rio Piedras where they were placed on exhibit (Alegría 1948). These materials have formed the core of the museum's exhibition on the island's prehistory to this date.

The next visit to the site took place on August 21st, 1936 when Rainey's then graduate student, Irving Rouse, surveyed the site. He later restudied a part of Rainey's collection, chiefly sections A3 of Mound A, A4 of Mound B and B4 of Mound E. Through a stylistic study of the ceramics and other artifacts recovered by Rainey, Rouse ceramics and other artifacts recovered by Rainey, Rouse determined that the mounds had been occupied at different times and by different complexes, or styles. Mound A had a primarily "Ostionoid" and Santa Elena, or "Elenoid" occupation, with some Cuevas "survivals" while Mound B saw the occupations, equally divided. Rouse was able to assign the Cuevas style with Rainey's crab stratum and the Pre-Taino styles with the shell layer. Lastly, Mound E was characterized by a nearly pure Pre-Taino (Period II-later to become Period III in his relative chronology) occupation (Rouse 1952: 419-424). The anomaly of these identifications in the light of Rouse's later (1982) culture area reconstruction is that the Elenoid sherds, in this supposedly eastern Elenoid-dominated area, are consistently outnumbered by Ostionoid sherds of western Puerto Rican culture area affiliation. A good part of this anomaly can now be rectified by the fact that many of the "Ostionoid" sherds actually pertained to the earlier "Monserratean" style.

A long interval intervened between this work at Monserrate and the nest archaeological visit, this time by both Rouse and Alegría, during June and July, 1963. They had received an NSF grant earlier that same year to obtain carbon dates from the West Indies to test their qualitative seriation of the local cultures (Rouse and Alegría 1978: 496). They secured two dates for the Pre-Taino occupation at Mound A: 690 A.D. and 710 A.D. (1978: 499). These, along with the earlier dates from Hacienda Grande, and the later dates from Ostiones and Santa Elena, clearly temporally placed the "Monserratean" phase of the site's occupation.

The last period of archaeological investigation at the site began with a brief test excavation in 1970 by Luis Chanlatte-Baik at one of the Mounds in Luquillo (Chanlatte-Baik, Personal Communication, 1982). There he encountered more of a minority ware which Alegría had discovered in both Luquillo and Hacienda Grande, a ware with cross-hachured designs on wide labial flanges (Alegría 1965). Alegría had defined this pottery as being a part of the pre-Cuevas Hacienda Grande phase of the Saladoid style while later Chanlatte-Baik was to redefine it first as a separate "Huecoid" series, and then as the "La Hueca Cultural Complex" (Chanlatte-Baik 1985: 225).

The former investigator affirms that the two styles are always found mixed together in Saladoid middens (Alegría, Personal Communication, 1984), while the latter, based on his Vieques experience, tends to see them both as being chronologically and spatially segregated (Chanlatte-Baik 1983). Since the exact location of Chanlatte-Baik's excavations at Luquillo cannot be located, the spatial segregation of the cross-hachured ware at Monserrate is a moot point.

347

Monserrate Restudied: The 1978 Centro Field Season At Luquillo Beach

Nevertheless, the senior author of this paper concurs with Rouse's comments during the discussion segment of the 10th congress in Martinique, that the La Hueca material is clearly of Saladoid cultural affiliation, even though it may pertain to an earlier "sub-style" or ethnic group intrusion. This pottery may identify the slight temporal forerunners, the "advance party" of a main Hacienda Grande phase Saladoid expansion. While La Hueca substyle ceramics might be found spatially segregated in Vieques it is not yet documented arealy apart from Hacienda Grande phase occupations in Puerto Rico.

Nevertheless, based on the Centre's 1980, 1982 and 1984 excavations at Hacienda Grande (Roe 1985; Walker 1985) and its 1985 excavations at Maisabel, this ware always appears in the lowest levels of most Hacienda Grande phase occupations. Thus, its presence at Monserrate indicates an early Saladoid occupation there. However, to judge from the sparsity of this ware, that occupation was a fleeting one.

Sometime during the 1970's, Gary Vescelius, restudied and seriated Rainey's collections from Monserrate, and one product of that effort occurs is the revised chronological chart presented here as Fig. 3.

The 1978 Centro Excavations at Monserrate

During June and July of 1978 the Centro de Estudios Avanzados conducted its first field school in archaeological methodology, under the direction of the senior author, using the remains of the Monserrate site as its study location. The site was recommended by Alegría, the Executive Director of the Centro, based on his earlier work there. Our work there was motivated by the problem orientation that some testing could still be done in Mound "C". Mound C was the only one of the remaining mounds which had not been systematically sampled to any great extent. Unfortunately, this brief 6 week field season soon took on the function of a "salvage" operation in view of the carnage the massive earth-moving operations of the 1950's had inflicted on the site.

While all of the mounds had been planed down to the level of the surrounding earth, the bulldozers had had to pass between the valuable coconut palm trees which had been planted on the site in the 1930's, thus effectively "platforming" those palms which happened to have been planted on the mounds (Plate B). Thus, by topographically mapping the heights of the various plan platforms one could reconstruct the outline of the vanished Mound C (Fig. 8). Since that mound had never been accurately topo-mapped, this was one positive contribution of the fieldschool.

The senior author laid out a trench two meters wide, composed of alternating lxlm. pits, each labeled alphabetically from west to east and numerically from north to south (with capital letters designating the units to the east of the datum line and lower-case letters to the west), bisecting the reconstructed mound. It totaled some 11 lxlm. units, the deepest excavated down to a meter using 10cm. metrical stratigraphy. In addition, he put one lxlm. test pit into the remains of another low mound (test pit 1), and placed another lxlm. test pit within the remnants of Mound B as controls.

348

Peter G. Roe, Agamemnon pus Pantel and Margaret B. Hamilton

The fieldschool excavated all levels by trowel (Plate C), and passed the recovered artifacts and ecofacts through a 74

H mesh screen. The team kept a total sample of all lithic, ceramic, malacological, and osteological materials. Roe carried out a study of the ceramics and malacological specimens in 1978 and 1979. In 1980 Pantel analyzed the lithic remains and Hamilton studied the osteological materials. This report is a joint product of that analysis.

Since in all cases the excavations occurred within the truncated base of former mounds, the Centro field team only picked up the last 50-60cm. of the original midden. Nevertheless, the clear distinction between the "Crab Culture" affinities of the lower levels of Mound B and the "Shell Culture" placement of Mound C was confirmed. The bulk of the ceramics of Mound C were Monserratean and Elenoid, while Mound B yielded Cuevas and Monserratean remains. Periodically, the midden sloped to reveal aboriginal pitting in the profiles (Fig. 9a, square Bl; 9c, square Al) which invariably occurred above burials. The margins of the reconstructed mound C, dipped dramatically (Fig. 9a, squares el and El), stratigraphy thus reconfirming topographic reconstruction. A thick dark midden, a sandy loam filled with shellfish remains and ceramics, gave way at 30 cm. to a lighter zone of leaching with fewer artifacts. The burials punched through the midden into the sterile sand below to a depth of lm.

The Osteological Remains

The burials themselves (Fig. 10) were heavily disturbed, with that of one skeleton, No.l, scattered over 5 lxls!. The second skeleton, No.2, was headless, but was associated with a partial mandible and placed in a position similar with Alegna's findings, a primary internment laying on its left side in a fetal position, with a probable eastern orientation. The third burial consisted of just a cranium, the body undoubtedly extending into the eastern balk of the trench (not removed). None of the burials had any grave goods. All in all, this small sample maintained the long and conservative burial patterns in Puerto Rico of later ceramic-bearing cultures. This pattern consisted of the ancient inhabitants interning their dead in the fetal position in contradistinction to the preceramic peoples of Cueva Maria La Cruz, who were buried in an extended position. These burials also show significant cultural continuity with Saladoid and Pre-Taino burials from nearby Hacienda Grande, both as to position, circumstances of internment and orientation (Walker 1985).

The skeletal material excavated at Luquillo Beach is highly fragmentary with the condition of the bone varying from well preserved and slightly mineralized to soft and flakey. Plate D shows the platform of burial 1, in soft, sandy subsoil. The remains are as follows beginning with that specimen:

Skeleton 1

The sex is male. The innominate fragments are complete enough to show a narrow sciatic notch and no preauricular sulcus. Skull features include a large mastoid process, supramastoid crest, moderate nuchal crest development and a very thick (measured superio-inferiorly) malar bone. Using the techniques of Todd (1921) and McKern and Stewart (1957) a single right fragment 3f the pubic symphysis yields an age estimate of 50 years of age at death, plus or minus 5 years. 3ther signs evident of older age present in this skeleton include degenerative changes in the cervical vertebrae and marked wear in the dentition. The pathological condition known as "sabre

349

Monserrate Restudied: The 1978 Centro Field Season At Luquillo Beach

tibia" may be present. Both fragmentary tibial shafts show evidence of diffuse osteitis. This condition is associated with the treponemal diseases (venereal syphilis, endemic syphilis, yaws, and pinta). Degenerative changes in the mouth include marked wear with secondary dentine formation on the crowns of all teeth. There are no caries, but there are heavy tartar deposits with marked alveolar reabsorption. The right upper second premolar (PM4) was chipped in life exposing the pulp cavity. This led to the development of an abscess which was beginning to involve the adjacent first molar at the time of death. Additional evidence of chipping and a very uneven wear pattern strongly suggest that the dentition was employed for cultural activities in addition to eating.

Skeleton 2

This individual was pre-pubertal and the sex can only be guessed at. Sex can be estimated by comparing dental age with skeletal age. The dentition is represented by a right mandibular fragment which includes all adult teeth from right central incisor to first molar. A small wear facet on the distal surface of the lower right first molar indicates that the second adult molar was in place. Some small wear facets on both premolars indicate that the individual was over 13 years of age. Skeletal maturation confirms the immature status of this skeleton. All epiphyses in the humerus are unfused. The acetabulum of the innominate is unfused. The epiphysis of the calcaneus is open. In each of these fusion episodes females begin approximately two years before males, at age 13, while eruption of the second molar occurs in both sexes at approximately 12 years of age with a lesser sex difference. If this individual was a female the dental age would suggest that these epiphyses should show the beginnings of fusion. Since there is no hint of the beginnings of fusion, it is reasonable to conclude that this individual was a male. Other indications of age include an unfused radius head, open epiphyses in the vertebral bodies, and open epiphyses in the femur and tibia.To summarize this argument, Skeleton 2 probably represents a young male between the ages of 13 and 15.

Skeleton 3

This extremely fragmentary and incomplete skeleton is smaller than skeleton 1 but there are a few features of the skull (Plate E) which tip the balance in favor of a male sex identification. The brow ridge is moderately developed. The orbits are squared and have rounded margins. The malar bone is as thick as in Skeleton 1. The mastoid process is large and there is a supramastoid crest. This individual was over 35 years of age and probably closer to 50. Degenerative changes in the cervical vertebrae and lipping of the clavicular facet on a fragment of the acromion of the right scapula indicate an age over 35 to 40. This is the time when these changes begin. Dental wear is severe in some parts of the mouth and all of the upper molars and lower second and third molars have been lost long before death (Plate F). The uneven dental wear pattern seen in skeleton 1 is repeated in this specimen. Wear in the upper teeth is especially pronounced. Tartar deposits are heavy and alveolar reabsorption is marked. There is a well developed abscess around the root of the upper right canine.

In summary, the pathology in these skeletons is somewhat typical of skeletal series analyzed throughout the New World dating from before and after European contact. It is also closely parallel to similar pathological findings from the Dominican Republic (Luna Calderón 1976). The condition "sabre tibia" is well known and apparently reflects the widespread occurrence of

350

Peter G. Roe, Agamemnon Gus Pantel and Margaret B. Hamilton

an endemic infectious organism related to the Treponemataceae family of bacteria (Bullen 1972). Whether or not individuals were affected by the disease may have been determined by their overall state of health and nutrition.

The dentition gives clues about certain elements in the diet. The tartar deposits and extreme alveolar reabsorption observed in the adults indicates the consumption of a soft carbohydrate staple such as manioc. Severe wear patterns, which these skeletons share with similar specimens from Hacienda Grande (Walker 1985: 199), Collores (Rodriguez 1983: 259), and Sorce (Chanlatte-Baik 1983: 83), indicate that certain components of the diet were abrasive or incorporated grit, or shell, through or during preparation. Most likely, this derived from the sandy grit accidentally incorporated in shellfish, which was an important element in the diet. In addition, the uneven wear and chipping suggest that the dentition was used to process certain foods such as crabs. These people may have also used their teeth for other cultural activities such as the manufacture of artifacts (Walker 1985: 200).

Additional Material

The skeletal material also includes a fragmentary artifact made out of human cranial bone-probably the frontal region. The fragment contains a small perforation on upper right corner, and to judge from similar examples in the Centro de Investigaciones Indigenas (ex-Castillo) collections from Hacienda Grande, there would have been a similar perforation in the upper left-hand corner, probably for suspension of the artifact as a pectoral. The side closest to the perforation has been smoothed while the remaining three sides have been broken. It is not possible to determine whether this artifacts was made while the bone was still fresh.

The Malacological Collection

The malacological collection from the midden in Mound C presents a typical picture of the shellfish assemblage from a north coast site. In order of occurrence, the gastropods present are: Strombus gigas, Strombus pugilis, Cittarium pica, Murex ponium, Oliva sp., Fossalaria tulipa, Cassis tuberosa, Charonia variegata, Murex brevifons, Phalium circatricosum, Neritina clenchi, Neritina punctulata, Neritina meleagris, and Conus daucus. Of the limpets Diodora cayenensis is the most common.

Among the bivalvia found in Mound C contexts (ordered in terms of percentage popularity through the strata) are: Anadara notabilis, Antigona listeri, Phacoides pectinatus, Pitar circinata, Chione cancellata, Iphigenia brasiliensis, Chione intapurpurea, Heterodonax bimaculata and Trachycardium muricatum. Puzzling in its scarcity is the common mangrove oyster, Crassostrea rhizophorae. This is anomalous since today there is an extensive mangrove swamp to the immediate east of the site (indicated by the scalloped shaded area surrounding the river in Fig. 2). The paucity of mangrove oyster food remains poses two possibilities: either the mangrove swamp was not present when the sites was inhabited, or there was a food preference or taboo system in operation among the inhabitants of the site which rejected the oyster as a proper food source (rather like what obtains today in Puerto Rico where Crassostrae, though edible, is not consumed edible).

351

Monserrate Restudied: The 1978 Centro Field Season At Luquillo Beach

Two lines of argument support the latter hypothesis: one from ecology and one from site +distributional patterns. In contrast to the mangrove-rich low energy south coast of the island, "(o)n the north shore, where the coastal shelf does not exceed two miles in width and there are few offshore reefs, mangrove zones are limited to lagoons and semi-closed bays" (Vega 1981: 20). There is sufficient geomorphological evidence to indicate that the lunate embayments at Luquillo were the product of wave patterns being diffracted by offshore reefs (1981: 20). Since the reefs produce both the calm embayments, a high density of aquatic life, and the conditions for the formation of mangrove swamps, those mangrove formations must have been in existence when humans selected this area for settlement. The same conditions hold, but now produced by offshore lithified dunes, or eolianitic ridges, in other areas of early Saladoid and Pre-Taino settlements, such as Maisabel in Vega Baja. Thus we might have the co-occurrence of mangrove swamps with these early settlements without the necessity of the populations utilizing the oyster for food.

We have constructed a north-south transect of microniche ecology ala Flannery, to describe local ecology at the site and niche utilization as reflected in the shellfish data (Fig. 11). Exploitation of the surrounding subtropical moist forest, and the more remote very moist subtropical moist forest, and the more remote very moist subtropical forest, very moist low montane forest, low montane rain forest and rain forest proper (Ewell and Whitmore 1973: 20; Roe 1985: 207, Fig. 3), Zone VIII in Fig. 11, was very limited. Only some tree-perching humid forest gastropods, such as Pleurodonte sagemon, point in that direction. Instead, the whole focus seems to have been toward the swamp, river mouth and lagoon.

There are many other life-forms which abounded in of near the mangroves and which served to make them attractive as resource patches. Carnivores like the Murex frequent the swamps as do other perching shellfish species which are found among the mangrove's elevated root systems (Fig. 11, Zone VI). Nerites, though small, are found in vast concentrations throughout these brackish zones and, in some species, continue up the feeding river system (Fig. 11, zone VII). The blue crab abounds in the tidal lagoon mudflats (Fig. 11, Zone V). Parenthetically, they are a major factor of site disturbance and even today one finds little piles of sherds in front of their burrows.

Most of the recovered shellfish remains belong to shallow intertidal species associated with the sandy-bottomed lagoon and its bed of turtle grass, Thallasia. This is also the zone (Fig. 11, Zone IV) of the large carnivorous gastropods, like the Strombus gigas, one of the commonest features of the midden. The next most common species come from the tide pools in the offshore reefs (Fig. 11, Zone III). Lastly, the wave-break and spray regions of the reef faces, where Cittarium pica abounds, represent the outer boundaries of this procurement system. (Fig. 11, Zone II). The open ocean, or pelagic zone (Fig. 11, Zone I), was as under-utilized in site settlement times as the other periphery, that of the forest.

The Lithic Remains

One of Pantel's first impressions upon examining the lithic component from Luquillo, and one which also characterized the Hacienda Grande site (Walker 1985: 182-183), was the overall paucity of lithic remains in respect to the food and ceramic assemblages. Although the sample was a total one, i.e., no selection was done at the site and everything that did not pass through

352

Peter G. Roe, Agamemnon Gus Pantel and Margaret B. Hamilton

the screen was saved, it may have been biased by the large size (74") of the screen. Although this screen size is standard practice locally, experience now suggests that l/8th inch or less screen (of the sort the Centro is currently using in its Maisabel excavations) would be more effective in retaining the micro-flake debitage that could have upped lithic representation at the site. However, no artifacts of any size escaped the screen, and most of what was recovered was debitage, indicating that our picture of local production and on-site napping, attested to by the presence of non-utilized flakes (Fig. 16a,b) off of prepared platforms (Fig. 16c,d), would not have been substantially altered by using a smaller screen size. In short, the paltry lithic assemblage at Luquillo Beach is consonant with other similar-aged sites to indicate a localized, conservative and rudimentary flaked stone working tradition.

That tradition is localized in that all raw materials, principally fine-grained basalt and other igneous river cobbles, can be picked up in the immediate vicinity, representing as they do the outwash from the nearby Cerros de Luquillo in the El Yunque rain forest. This use of inferior but local raw materials, stands in sharp contrast to the cherts, jaspers, and isotropic flints utilized in the majority of the preceramic sites. While this may be attributable to available source materials, it does indicate a local bias which is consonant with the malacological data.

The Monserrate tradition is conservative since its core / utilized flake and ground-stone technology is a direct carry-over from local preceramic styles of stone working, such as that represented at Cueva Maria la Cruz near Hacienda Grande (Alegría et.al 1955). However, one illuminating difference is that the pebble grinders (Walker 1985: 210, Figs. 9-10), which are a characteristic of Cueva Maria la Cruz's assemblage, and are also shared with the early Hacienda Grande phase of the Hacienda Grande occupation (Walker 1985: 186), are absent in all of the Centra's cuts. This absence persists in the pit in Mound B, which has a strong Cuevas component. Neither do they figure in any of Alegría's lithic samples from his much more extensive excavations at Monserrate (Alegría 1947). Thus the hypothesis which Roe and Walker advanced with regard to this artifact class, which overlaps the cultural span between the preceramic and the ceramic ages in Puerto Rico, that the pebble grinders are limited to early ceramic times (Walker 1985: 183, 186), and drop out of the sequence in later times, can now be considerably sharpened. Since the Luquillo Beach Saladoid occupation is principally Cuevas, the pebble grinder can be regarded as a Pre-ceramic and early Hacienda Grande tool type.

The tradition is technologically simple since it employed non-precision technologically simple since it employed non-precision techniques, such direct percussion flake removal to produce unifacial flake tools, for the most part plano-convex in profile (Fig. 12-13; Fig. 14d; Fig. 15a-d). The lack of cores and prepared blades was also notable in the sample.

The Monserrate materials are conservative also in terms of its external affiliations, being equivalent to parts of the lithic assemblages of preceramic sites like those of Levisa in Cuba, Cabaret in Haiti, Barrera-Mordan in the Dominican Republic, and the site of Las Arenas and others in the southwestern series of Puerto Rico.

The functional analysis of these flaked stones artifacts demonstrates a predominance of scraping (Fig. 13, 14, 15a-d) and/or chopping edges (Figs. 17-18); again a trait also attributable to preceramic lithic assemblages.

353

Monserrate Restudied: The 1978 Centro Field Season At Luquillo Beach

Perhaps the one keynote of the lithics from Monserrate is the prevalence of reuse and rejuvenation of already prepared, but exhausted surfaces. The presence of small flakes with heavy bashing along a leading edge (Fig. 15e-g), in association with a predominance of bashing damage to most of the sample (Figs. 19-21), demonstrates the ubiquitousness of ground stone tool retouch. This progressive "using up" of artifacts through continual reuse and concomitant rejuvenation of working surfaces might indeed be one explanation for the statistical "under-representation" of lithics in the artifactual universe of the site's remains. The most impressive case of this curational pattern is present in the oft-considered "ceremonial" or "aesthetic" artifact class of the petaloid celt (axe).

Polished petaloid celts are found exhibiting heavy use damage (Fig. 22a, d; h-m) as well as multiple functions (23a, b) through the trajectory of its use life. Such an artifact appears to have started life as an axe, but upon losing its bit to heavy use damage, and its butt to shaft breakage, both ends of the artifact would end their useful lives acting as a hand chopper/masher. Due to the general Caribbean archaeological ignorance of the lowland South Amerindian tradition of making many so-called utilitarian artifacts beautiful (Kensiger et. al., 1975; Yde, 1965), this might lead us into a misguided discussion of the functional versus ceremonial aspects of this class of artifact. We shall avoid such a discussion here, being content to simply mention that local scarcities or cultural attitudes led to a rough utilitarian reuse of once carefully prepared lithic artifacts in Monserrate Pre-Taino times.

This attrition of work surfaces as a consequence of intentional flake removal is not an unusual practice on chipped cryptocrystalline tools, but it has not been observed as a practice on slow-flow pyroclastic-based ground stone tools. This measure of "economy" (or perhaps "indolence") might help to explain low stone artifact to overall assemblage ratios (usually less than 10%) for Caribbean ceramic sites. The overall picture which emerges from both the Hacienda Grandeand the Monserrate sites is consonant with that recovered from other parts of the world where chipped stone preceramic techniques "degenerate" in later ceramic times as ground-stone is emphasized. While essential continuities remain, the absence of a "blade" technology in these sites may be one consequence of that technical devolution.

With regard to the chronological implications derivable from form, technique and putative function, the Monserrate material suggests the following:

1. The notable absence of a blade industry in ceramic sites may provide a diagnostic variant for chronological purposes. An interesting note is that the absence of blades needs to be examined for its implications of the functional differences of tool kits for different subsistence activities.

2. The techniques used in the production of the flaked stone artifacts of Monserrate do not differ from that of the preceramic sites, in that, the direct percussion technique is present in nearly all the preceramic sites of the Caribbean. With further research perhaps the occurrence of certain techniques will prove to be exclusive to certain periods and therein provide chronological markers for preceramic versus ceramic period lithic workshop sites or activity loci.

3. And finally, the occurrence of some tool types which are similar for ceramic and preceramic sites, illustrates the need to re-examine the "chronological-block" approach, at least as TegaTds lithic technology, in Caribbean archaeology. Despite its typological transference of Old World

354

Peter G. Roe, Agamernnon Gus Pantel and Margaret B. Hamilton

labels to Caribbean realities, the alternate schema of Kozlowski, in which he shows traditions of evolution, might be more appropriate here.

The use of flaked stone tools carries through from the earliest of preceramic times until European contact and the introduction of metal tools. Researchers in the Caribbean often fail to analyze or report the lithic components in their ceramic assemblages, therein perpetuating the misconception that flaked stone artifacts are preceramic tools. Sites like Cayo Cofresi (Veloz Maggiolo et. al., 1975) are instructive in the opposite direction as well, not all ground stone artifacts are ceramic age. The last possibility, that preceramic peoples may have persisted into ceramic times in some sort of cultural exchange with ceramic peoples, a situation hinted at by the pebble grinders of Cueva Maria la Cruz and Hacienda Grande, is an intriguing possibility but one not yet sufficiently documented to further blur the lines of stage 1 phase reconstructions.

Conclusions

The pattern which emerges from this restudy of two of the original five mounds of the Luquillo Beach site is one of a continuous occupation, but of an oscillating pattern between several raised, and hence non-floodable, eminences within a restricted area. This "peripatetic" pattern builds up distinct living-site midden-mounds, each containing only a partial representation of the whole stratigraphic column. Thus site continuity is masked by intra-site locus (i.e., individual mound) discontinuity. It is our opinion that the individual study of a single mound within this developmental history has yielded the mistaken impression of a hiatus between Saladoid and Pre- Taino occupations, and hence has favored cultural reconstructions which focus on the typological differences between their respective material cultural assemblages rather than the considerable modal analytic continuities between them. In turn, this has led to hypotheses about site unit intrusion rather than in situ development. Along with Rouse, we agree that the balance of the evidence leans to the latter interpretation of continuity.

Thus, while there are differences between the occupations of Mounds B and C: Mound B being Cuevas and Elenoid, Mound @ being primarily Elenoid, there is considerable overlap in lithic and ceramic modes between the two mounds. Moreover, the skeletal evidence from Mound C points to a population well adapted to the extraction of protein from molluscan fauna, but not differing materially from the earlier "crab culture" populations of proximate sites like Hacienda Grande.

Luquillo Beach conforms to the emerging general pattern of early ceramic-bearing medium-to- large sites, placed widely along the coastal plane some meters back from the present coastline, which is shared among similar sites in Puerto Rico and Vieques. Like other big sites on the windward northern coast, such as Hacienda Grande and Maisabel, Luquillo owed its permanence to the fringing barrier reef which produced calm lagoons suitable for dugout use and the rich molluscan and fish fauna such reefs and lagoons make possible a fact first recognized by Rouse (1952: 419). This pattern contrasts sharply with later Pre-Taino and Taino site settlement patterns. These latter sites are generally smaller in size, located both on the current shoreline and into the interior, and are simultaneously more numerous and have smaller intervals between them than the earlier sites. These differences, along with the ecological orientation of these past populations inferable from their food debris, argues for a simple model of pioneering settlement

Monserrate Restudied: The 1978 Centro Field Season At Luquillo Beach

replaced by subsequent local adaption, demographic growth, consequent settlement fission and internal colonization.

In broad terms the model begins with an initial rapid colonization by different, and perhaps mutually hostile, Saladoid groups from South America. Still connected to the mainland by both trade and memory, and of apparent tribal-level organization, these groups had a material culture which emphasized small, exquisitely-worked personal-presentation (mostly jewelry and fineware ceramics) items of artistic character made in exotic or dispersed raw materials to high technological standards of workmanship. Their material items were intentionally elaborated into diverse, complex, but internally stereotyped, categories, both in artifact/vessel form and surface decoration. They are clearly the products of an egalitarian society, but one which supported highly-skilled (and therefore both expensive and rare to judge from the curational patterns of artifact reuse and repair) and possibly peripatetic specialists.

The early communities were intrusive pioneers into an alien landscape characterized by an impoverished island terrestrial fauna and a dispersed and possibly hostile preceramic archaic populations. The widely spaced distribution and large size of their communities could have derived as a response to these pressures. The orientations to land resources, such as the land molluscan fauna like Cittarium pica and the nerites, represents, in effect, a lack of local subsistence expertise and a vulnerability to food species demographic collapse as a consequence of over harvesting, as has been argued for some of the islands of the Lesser Antilles.

As time and local, in-situ, development took place the populations grew, perhaps not without some catastrophic reorientation in Sub-Taino times which is mirrored in its apparent material cultural "devolution", and the large sites fissioned to produce myriad smaller sites which begin the internal colonization of the mountainous interior of the island's piedmont and intermontane zones. Coupled with this was a reorientation, visible at such sites as Maisabel, to the current geomorphological coastline and a higher dependency on a wide variety of molluscan and pelagic fish resources demonstrative of an increasingly sophisticated and insular adapted subsistence base.

As a partial byproduct of the productivity of this system was the incipient shift from small-sized, exotic materials, "personal-presentation" artistic goods to locally procured, base material-made, mass-produced "technical" artifacts. To take just the two domains of the ceramic and lapidary arts: the disappearance of a fine ware/utilitarian ware distinction and a concentration on technologically-limited spherical rather than keeled shapes, and plastic rather than painted decoration of both simple and stereotyped expression is related to the shift in stone work from small items of semi-precious stone to large items of local stone. Both are manifestations of a shift from a private "culture" of refinement to public displays of power within a hierarchically differentiating population. The ball-game court and it's associated paraphernalia were the durable symbols of this stage. All of these trends are congruent with the picture of a densely-populated stratified society on a chiefdom level of socio-cultural integration which the chronicles reveal to us at contact times.

356

Peter G. Roe, Agamemnon Gus Pantel and Margaret B. Hamilton

Acknowledgements

The senior author expresses his appreciation to the students of the Centro who served as willing and enthusiastic fieldworkers during the six week field session at Luquillo Beach. They were: Francisco Alegría, Joanne Biaggi, Jesús Figueroa Lugo, Osvaldo García Goyco, Carmen Rodriguez, Ariel Viera, and Rosa Torruellas. He also thanks Dr. Ricardo E. Alegría, Director Ejecutivo of the Centro for his kind support in this and other projects, and for making available to me all his data on his 1947 excavations at Monserrate, and to Dr. Irving Rouse for recommending me to run the Centro fieldschool and sharing uhstintingly with me his experience in lowland South American and Caribbean prehistory. A special thanks goes to the memory of the late Gary Vescelius who generously shared with me his insights on Monserrate and the "Elenoid problem" and allowed me complete access to his field notes on his restudy of Rainey's collections. Luis Chanlatte-Baik, as always, has been extremely helpful in making his collections available to me to study, in this instance materials from his Monserrate test excavations. Lastly, I must thank El Centro de Investigaciones Indígenas for donating writeup time for this report as well as aiding in the photographic preparation of some of the figures.

Reference

Alegría, Ricardo E. 1947 Informe preliminar sobre la primera excavación del Centro de Investigaciones Arqueológicas del UPR en

la finca "La Monserrate\ Typescripts with plates, collection of the author, San Juan. 1948 Arqueología Puertorriqueña. Exhibition catalog. Museo de la Universidad, Río Piedras, Puerto Rico. Anónimo 1947a Encuentran numerosos objetos en las excavaciones de Luquillo que hace Alegría para el museo UPR. La

Torre. Miércoles, 28 de Marzo. Río Piedras. 1947b Nuevos hallazgos en las excavaciones de Luquillo. El Mundo. Sábado, 14 de Junio. San Juan. 1947c Nuevos hallazgos. La Prensa. Sábado, 21 de Junio. New York. Ewel, J. J., and J. L. Whitmore 1973 Ecological Life Zones of Puerto Rico and the United States Virgin Islands. Río Piedras, Puerto Rico:

United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Institute of Tropical Forestry. Fiol, Rose 1947 Center of Archaeological Research. UPR Campus Reporter. Saturday, November 29th. Río Piedras. González Alberty, Fernando 1947 Las excavaciones en la Monserrate. El Imparcial. Domingo, 1 de junio. San Juan. Hernández Aquino, Luis 1947 UPR realiza excavaciones en Luquillo: Se propone enriquecer el museo; comprobar teorías sobre indios.

El Mundo. Domingo, 11 de Mayo. San Juan. Hostos, Adolfo J. de 1919 Prehistoric Porto Rican Ceramics. American Anthropologist, 21: 376-399. Márquez, Juan Luis 1947 Arqueólogo Puertorriqueño realiza con éxito excavaciones en Luquillo. Puerto Rico Ilustrado, p.p. 5-15.

San Juan. ' Paniagua Picazo, Antonio 1947 ¿Pertenecían a una raza india anterior a la Taina los esqueletos desenterrados en Luquillo?. El Imparcial.

Domingo, 10 de Agosto. San Juan. Rainey, Froelich G 1940 Porto Rican Archaeology. Scientific Survey of Porto Rico and the Virgin Islands, vol. 18, Part I. New

York: Academy of Science.

357

Monserrate Restudied: The 1978 Ceniro Field Season At Luquillo Beach

Ramos Llompart, Antonio 1947 Las excavaciones de Luquillo: Los descubrimientos arqueológicos de la Monsertate. El Impartial. 29 de

junio. San Juan. Raymond, J. Scott, Warren R. DeBoer and Peter G. Roe 1975 Cumancaya: A Peruvian Ceramic Tradition. Occasional Papers 2. Calgary, AB: Department of

Archaeology, University of Calgary. Roe, Peter G. 1976 Form and Decoration: Nawpa Pacha. 1982 The Cosmic Zygote: Cosmology in the Amazonian Basin. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press. 1985 A preliminary Report on the 1980 and 1982 Field Seasons at Hacienda Grande (12 PSj 7-5): Overview of

Site History, Mapping and Excavations. Comptes Rendus des Communications du Dixième Congres International D'Etudes des Civilisations Précolombiennes des Petites Antilles. Fort-de-France, Martinique, 1983. P.p. 151-180, 206-224.

Rouse, Irving 1939 Prehistory of Haiti: A Study in Method. Publications in Anthropology 21. New Haven, CT: Yale

University Press. 1952 Porto Rican Prehistory: Introduction; Excavations in the West and North. Scientific Survey of Porto Rico

and the Virgin Islands, vol. 18, Part 3, New York; Academy of Science. Walker, Jeffery B. 1985 A Preliminary Report on the Lithic and Osteological Remains from the 1980, 1981 and 1982 Field Seasons

at Hacienda Grande (12PSJ7-5). Comptes Rendus des Communications du Dixième Congres International D'Etudes des Civilisations Précolombiennes des Petites Antilles. Fort-de-France, Martinique, 1983. p. 181-224.

List of Figures

1. Puerto Rico and the location of the Luquillo Beach site, Monsertate (courtesy of Mela Pons de Alegría). 2. A composite location map of the Monserrate site and the fringing barrier reef developed from road maps

and aerial photographs. The map is drawn in the "archaeographic present", showing the mound locations as of 1934 and the park road construction up to 1978.

3. A composite and site-specific chronological/archaeological culture-geographic area table of the northeastern Puerto Rican region, Rouse's "Vieques Sound", highlighting the temporal context of the Monserrate site (based on Rouse 1973 and Vescelius's collection-study notes, courtesy of Gary Vescelius).

4. Cuevas ceramics from Mound B, Monserrate, from Alegria's 1947 excavations, and now in the UPR museum, Rio Piedras.

a. A vertical cross-section view of a bell-shaped carinated pedestal-based early Cuevas bowl with vertical "D"-shaped handles adorned with applique button. The white-on-red slip painting is more thickly applied than would be the case on a similar Hacienda Grande phase pot to the degree that it is perceptible to the touch as standing in relief. The interior has the same cream-tan color as Fig. 5a, while the red slip is duskier. There is a broken coil juncture along the annular base suggesting it was made at an earlier time and then attached to the lower vessel body wall at differing humidity levels, thus making fot a poor bond. The paste is characterized by the same ashy grey color with sand tempering as the other Cuevas pieces. 18.3 cm. rim diameter (Alegría 1947, Plate 10a, Mound B, C-27/50-60).

h. The design layout roll-out from 4a showing the irregular rectilinear design which contrasts with similar earlier finely-executed Hacienda Grande curvilinear scroll-based design layouts.

c. A vertical cross-section of a boat-shaped late Cuevas or early Monserratean tray. This vessel has a discontinuous internally and externally thickened flange rim and concave oval base. The exterior is finely finished and well smoothed with a yellowish-tan color. No red slip is visible on the upper rim. Luquillo? Not pictured in Alegría 1947 but labeled F4, a Mound B coordinate. No museum catalog number. 17,6 cm. wide, 16.2 long and 7 cm. high.

d. A front view vertical cross-section drawing of Fig. 4c, e. A top view of Fig. 4c and d.

358

Peter G. Roe, Agamemnon Gus Pantel and Margaret B. Hamilton

5. Late Cuevas and early Monserratean ceramics from Mound B, Alegría 1947 Excavations, now in the UPR museum, Rio Piedras.

a. A vertical cross-section of a small carinated Cuevas constricted bowl with direct rim. No catalog number but is labeled Mound B, G-14/50". It has a fine, yellowish-tan paste. 5.3 cm. tall, 15 cm. wide at the carination, a 7 cm. wide concave flat base.

b. A vertical cross-section of a small late Cuevas or early Monserratean pedestal-based bowl with unrestricted direct rim and a deeply and irregularly pebble-polished exterior. The "polishing" approximates grooving since it was done when the paste was still wet. The core reveals a grey ashy interior with sand temper and the same dark brown exterior as Figs. 6a, and c. The interior of the vessel is finished much more carefully than the exterior. 18 cm. rim diameter, 7 cm. tall, 10 cm. basal diameter (Alegría 1947, Plate 18b, I-22/60-66).

c. A top view of a small Cuevas carinated unrestricted flat-based bowl with beveled rim and four equi-distant appliqued rim nubbins and the characteristic single sub-carination appliqued perforated lug. The center of the circular base and the upper segment of the rim are adorned with a red pre-fire slip-paint. This vessel has the same yellowish-tan paste as the other Cuevas vessels from Mound B, but a redder, more oxidized, core. It also appears to have some sherd tempering in addition to the ubiquitous sand tempering. 15 cm. rim diameter, 6.2 cm. tall, and a 5.6 cm. basal diameter. Labeled Luquillo? but does not appear in Alegría 1947.

d. A vertical cross-section drawing of Fig. 5c. e. a vertical cross-section drawing of a late Cuevas carinated pedestal-based bowl with an internally-thickened

everted unrestricted rim. As in the other Cuevas pieces this vessel has less than 1mm. thick sand temper and an ashy grey core. The smooth floated surface has a dull reddish-purple, pre-fire slip-painted exterior rim. Museum catalog no. 87A, but erroneously labeled "collection Montalvo Guenard" when it is pictured in Alegría 1947, Plate 18a as coming from Mound B, Luquillo. 7.5 cm. basal diameter, 8.5 cm. tall, 20 cm. rim diameter.

f. A top, or global, view of Fig. 5e showing the slip-painted longitudinally and transverse-reflected spiral design layout.

6. Monserratean utilitarian ware ceramics from Mound B, Luquillo, the Alegría 1947 excavations, now in the UPR Museum, Rio Piedras.

a. A vertical cross-section drawing of a slightly carinated and slightly oval food bowl from a burial with restricted orifice and direct rim. The vessel has a moderately rounded "flat" base and coarse raised "D"-shaped handles which rise above the rim. It has the same reddish-brow pebble-polished surface as 6c and sand tempering. Museum catalog no. 1505 (Alegría 1947, Plate la). 9 cm. base diameter, 26 cm. rim diameter and 12 cm. tall.

b. A vertical cross-section drawing of an extremely crude little round food bowl with an uneven flat bottom and a restricted orifice direct and markedly undulating and slanting rim. The raised "D"-shaped handles are attached unusually close to the lip. This vessel has the same exterior color and paste characteristics as 6a and c (Alegría 1947, Plate le), I-21/72".

c. A vertical cross-section drawing of a large slightly carinated round food bowl from a burial with raised "D"-shaped handles, which project beyond the restricted direct rim, and a slightly convex "flat" base. The exterior and interior finish is characterized by careful horizontal scrapping which was done with a flat-sided implement like an oval carved gourd scraper. The base plug was coiled first to judge from the juncture marks where it has split. The paste has large sherd temper-up to 2mm. wide-in addition to its sand temper (Alegría 1947, Plate 2). E-21/36-42. Museum catalog erroneously lists depth provenience as E-21/42-44. 32.5 cm. wide at carination, 13 cm. tall and 12 cm. wide basal diameter.

d. A profile view of a small ceramic topia. The surface is cracked and irregularly scraped in a vertical fashion (Alegría 1947, Plate 23e), C-4/0-30. Height 12 cm. and basal diameter 6 cm. wide.

e. A top view of 6d showing its irregular oval horizontal cross-section. Museum catalog no. 1521. 7. Monserratean modeled ceramic figurines and adornos from Mound B, Alegría 1947 excavations, now in

the UPR museum, Rio Piedras. a. A ventral view of a male? anthropomorphic solid modeled figurine with punctate belly button. This piece

has a coarsely scraped brown/tan exterior with fire-clouding and squared-off contours. Museum catalog no. 1511 (Alegría 1947, Plate 24a), "Mela's site" test pit.

b. A dorsal view of Fig. 7a.

359

Monserrate Restudied: The 1978 Centro Field Season At Luquillo Beach

c. A profile view of Fig. 7a. d. A profile view of a Monserratean anthropomorphic male solid figurine with a coarsely-scraped brown

exterior and squared-off contours. Except for the shared sand tempering, these figurines differ from the smooth, hollow Hacienda Grande phase figurines which are their antecedents. Museum catalog no. 1503 (Alegría 1947, Plate 24b), 1-19/24-32.

e. A dorsal view of Fig. 7d's fire-clouded surface. f. A frontal view of Fig. 7d showing the testicles and also the absence of clear fracture marks for the penis. g. A dorsal view of an anthropomorphic phallic effigy with no evidence of attachment to a figurine. Museum

catalog no. 1515 (Alegría 1947, Plate 24c) E-18/48-54. h. Dorsal view of a semi-hollow anthropomorphic figurine right hand. The exterior has a highly burnished

rust-red bath over a tan/brown surface. Museum catalog no. 1505 (Alegría 1947, Plate 24d). i. A Ventral view of Fig. 7h. j . A profile view of Fig. 7h and i. k. A theriomorphic adorno head covered in a plum-colored bath. It would have been attached to the rim of

an open bowl. Museum catalog no. 1506 (Alegría 1947, Plate 24f). 8. The topographic reconstruction of Mound C and the layout of the 1978 Centro trench within it. Test pit

no. 1 in yet another low mound which had hitherto escaped detection, "Mound F," is also located. 9. A reconstructed Mound C based on the palm platform elevations.

a. The north face of Mound C showing the intrusive burial pits. b. The location of the pits in the east-west transect of Mound C. c. The west face profiles of squares A2, Al and A0 in Mound C. The stratigraphy is represented in a key

from "shell and ceramic filled midden", "sterile sand", "garbage pit", and "dark sand with refuse" layers.

Plate Captions

A. A view of the mangrove swamp, tidal flats and river mouth to the east of the site. B. An eastward-looking view of the palm platforms which were used to reconstruct Mound C with the stakes

for the trench set in. C. A westward-looking view of the initial stages of excavation of the trench through the remains of Mound

C. D. A view of the excavation and platforming of burial 1 beneath Mound C, Al/40-50 cm. E. A profile view of the cranium of Skeleton 3 (the ÏÏI refers to lab drawer no.) showing its moderate frontal-

occipital skull deformation. F. A macro-photographic shot of the highly abraded teeth of Skeleton 3's mandible.

360

SAN JÛAN

'qyjllo^each Site

YUNQUEv\ FOQfJST?

Virgin islands

0 5 10 15 20 25

MILES

OCÉANO ATLÁNTICO

/ MONSERRATE

SITIO ARQUEOLÓGICO DE MONSERRATECLuquillô) FIGURE 2

A.D.

HF ilWtmlrfnT 1 Saladoid W%W%% Elenoid Chicoid FIGURE: 3

-N

EXCAVACIONES EN MONTÍCULO "C"

SITIO MONSERRATE

VUMHK Ü

A CARA NORTE

B LOS POZOS DE LA SECCIÓN ESTE-OESTE

FIGURE 9

C CARA OESTE U 3 à=-:u o^c •

LOS PERFILES DE PAREDES DEL MONTÍCULO "C"

ÜSQUELETO I = - . " £ DE PE*0 \E

:= -3TE OE TiB'-l : _I31A • "¿LANGE : =iP.TE OE PE,V1S l =-*TE OE PE-0*;E

r =¿SE OE FE'.- ja

9 FEWUR tO *IBif l 11 BASE DE FEMUR 12 GRAN TROCÁNTER 13. PELVIS 14 RADIO 15 CUBITO Ifc HUMERO

ESQUELETO 2 '8 TIBIA Y PERONE IS TIBIA 20 ROTULA 21 FEMUR 22 MANDÍBULA 23.RAOIO 2«PART£ OE CUBITO 25.0TRA PARTE OE CUBITO

2 € P A R T t OE HUMERO 27 ESCÁPULA 28 C^cEZ i DE HUMERO 29 HUMERO 30 CCÍTiuLñS 31 COLUMNA VERTEBRAL 32O>£lT0 SJí>£tViS

ESQUELETO 3 35 CRÁNEO

£3T" ¡1

*

, A2

%

S4.PAR~£ OE FEMUfl

LOS ENTERRAMIENTOS DE LA SECCIÓN ESTE-OSTE F I

MICRO-NICHO ECOLOGÍA DE UNA SECCIÓN N-S DESDE MONTÍCULO "C'lPR F

FIGURE H FIGURE 17

» * * ; • • :

11_Congress 348.pdf11_Congress 349.pdf11_Congress 350.pdf11_Congress 351.pdf11_Congress 352.pdf11_Congress 353.pdf11_Congress 354.pdf11_Congress 355.pdf11_Congress 356.pdf11_Congress 357.pdf11_Congress 358.pdf11_Congress 359.pdf11_Congress 360.pdf11_Congress 361.pdf11_Congress 362.pdf11_Congress 363.pdf11_Congress 364.pdf11_Congress 365.pdf11_Congress 366.pdf11_Congress 367.pdf11_Congress 368.pdf11_Congress 369.pdf11_Congress 370.pdf11_Congress 371.pdf11_Congress 372.pdf11_Congress 373.pdf11_Congress 374.pdf11_Congress 375.pdf11_Congress 376.pdf11_Congress 377.pdf11_Congress 378.pdf11_Congress 379.pdf