The Nahuange or Neguanje phase of Colombian prehistory lasted from about 250 to 1050 CE, according to Santiago Giraldo and Juana Saenz’s recent estimates based on radiocarbon-dated goldwork and complete dated contexts.
[1]
Nahuange artefacts and sites have mostly been found along Colombia’s Atlantic coast.
[2]
Population and political organization
Most likely, Nahuange communities were organized into numerous small polities. Unfortunately, there is not enough data to determine the exact relationship between these polities (e.g. if some dominated over others), though it is worth noting that individual polities were probably poorly integrated systems, with little centralization.
[3]
Similarly, little is known about Nahuange social hierarchies,
[4]
or, for that matter, about their population numbers.
[5]
[1]
[1]: (Giraldo 2015, personal communication)
[2]: (Bray 2003, 322-3)
[3]: (Langebaek 2005, 87)
[4]: (Langebaek 2005, 117)
[5]: (Langebaek 2005, 27)
| 18 P |
| Neguanje |
| Unknown |
| Nahuange | |
| Nehuange | |
| Early Cinto I | |
| Early Cinto II | |
| Early Period | |
| Integrationist Period | |
| Buritaca |
| unknown [---] |
| Caribbean Colombia | |
| Central America-northern South America interaction sphere |
| CoTairo |
| continuity |
| UNCLEAR: [continuity] | |
| Succeeding: Tairona (co_tairona) [continuity] |
| quasi-polity |
| inferred absent | 250 CE 575 CE |
| present | 576 CE 1050 CE |
| inferred present | 800 CE 1050 CE |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred present |
| absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| inferred absent |
| absent |
| absent |
| Year Range | Neguanje (co_neguanje) was in: |
|---|---|
| (250 CE 1049 CE) | North Colombia |
"The evidence suggests that the Neguanje occupation was focused on Cinto, the most fertile bay, implying at the very least some interest in agriculture. [...] In the regional survey there was no occupation evidence found for the period in the bay where the mound was excavated. This does not imply an abandonment of the bay, but rather, that the capacity of the individuals or special factions did not translate into the ability to attract populations. The leadership of individuals or special factions was not associated with central places or settlement hierarchies, at least in the study area." [1] That is valid only for the zone surveyed by Langebaek, which consists of the Bays of Santa Marta. The Neguanje burial mound, from which a lot of information was extracted, does not correspond to the biggest settlement (Cinto)."Starting in the 6th Century A.D. it is possible to notice changes in the manner in which the bays were occupied. Cinto Bay was no longer as attractive, at the same time that the other bays became proportionately more important. This does not mean agricultural activities diminished in importance after the Neguanje Period. The increasingly more intense occupation on the flanks of the Sierra Nevada, associated with agricultural activity, at the end of the Neguanje Period is worth considering. Nevertheless, this does not mean that the bays were able to sustain fewer people." [2]
[1]: (Langebaek 2005, 117)
[2]: (Langebaek 2005, 117-9)
"In the 1980s, Augusto Oyuela excavated various sites along the coast (principally at Cinto and Gaira) and proposed the following chronology: a period called Early Cinto, divided in two phases. The first was named phase I and included the 2nd through the 6th Centuries A.D.; the second phase, Phase II, occurred between the 6th and 8th Centuries A.D. The latter phase corresponded to the Buritaca phase that Wynn defined, while the former was the same as Bischof’s Neguanje (Oyuela 1985:94, 135). In other publications, the same author talked about three periods for the coast adjacent to Santa Marta’s Sierra Nevada: the Early or Integrationist Period, the Middle or Classic Period, and the Late or Conquest Period (Oyuela 1986: 33). The first one lasts from the 2nd through the 9th Centuries A.D. There was evidence for this period - equivalent to Neguanje and the Buritaca phase, the same as Cinto’s Phases I and II - in the Gaira lowlands and the inlets of Cinto and Neguanje, as well as the lower parts of the Buritaca river (Figure 1). A date of 430 +/-60 A.D. was reported for the Neguanje ceramics that corresponded to the so-called Integrationist Period in Cinto (Oyuela 1986: 26-7)."
[1]
"Based on his own excavations, Wynn defined the Buritaca phase (equivalent Neguanje, in its latter part), a late occupation called Tairona and an intermediate phase between the two."
[2]
Depending on the author, the Buritaca phase can also be seen as a continuity of the previous Nehuange phase:"In 1969 Henning Bischof described a collection of sherds from a pre-Tairona construction fill at Pueblito and linked them with the contents of an exceptional tomb excavated by J. Alden Mason at Nahuange (Bischof 1969a; 1969b). He dated this Nahuange (or Neguanje) phase to approximately A.D. 500-700 on the basis of ceramic cross-ties with Mina de Oro to the west and with the Red-on-Buff wares of the Ranchería to the east. He also recognized that many elements of the Nahuange assemblage were carried over into Classic Tairona. There is now general agreement that Nahuange defines an “early Tairona” or “proto- Tairona” phase. Subsequent excavations by Jack Wynn (n.d.) at Buritaca, Langebaek (1987a) at Papare, and Augusto Oyuela Caycedo (1986; 1987a) at Cinto and Gaira have confirmed the stratigraphic position of the Nahuange phase—later than the incised and modeled Malamboid styles, earlier than Classic Tairona— and placed it between approximately A.D. 300 and 800- 1000. This is in line with the C-14 dates for the earliest “proto-Tairona” goldwork."
[3]
[1]: (Langebaek 2005, 7-11)
[2]: (Langebaek 2005, 7)
[3]: (Bray 2003, 322)
"In the 1980s, Augusto Oyuela excavated various sites along the coast (principally at Cinto and Gaira) and proposed the following chronology: a period called Early Cinto, divided in two phases. The first was named phase I and included the 2nd through the 6th Centuries A.D.; the second phase, Phase II, occurred between the 6th and 8th Centuries A.D. The latter phase corresponded to the Buritaca phase that Wynn defined, while the former was the same as Bischof’s Neguanje (Oyuela 1985:94, 135). In other publications, the same author talked about three periods for the coast adjacent to Santa Marta’s Sierra Nevada: the Early or Integrationist Period, the Middle or Classic Period, and the Late or Conquest Period (Oyuela 1986: 33). The first one lasts from the 2nd through the 9th Centuries A.D. There was evidence for this period - equivalent to Neguanje and the Buritaca phase, the same as Cinto’s Phases I and II - in the Gaira lowlands and the inlets of Cinto and Neguanje, as well as the lower parts of the Buritaca river (Figure 1). A date of 430 +/-60 A.D. was reported for the Neguanje ceramics that corresponded to the so-called Integrationist Period in Cinto (Oyuela 1986: 26-7)."
[1]
"Based on his own excavations, Wynn defined the Buritaca phase (equivalent Neguanje, in its latter part), a late occupation called Tairona and an intermediate phase between the two."
[2]
Depending on the author, the Buritaca phase can also be seen as a continuity of the previous Nehuange phase:"In 1969 Henning Bischof described a collection of sherds from a pre-Tairona construction fill at Pueblito and linked them with the contents of an exceptional tomb excavated by J. Alden Mason at Nahuange (Bischof 1969a; 1969b). He dated this Nahuange (or Neguanje) phase to approximately A.D. 500-700 on the basis of ceramic cross-ties with Mina de Oro to the west and with the Red-on-Buff wares of the Ranchería to the east. He also recognized that many elements of the Nahuange assemblage were carried over into Classic Tairona. There is now general agreement that Nahuange defines an “early Tairona” or “proto- Tairona” phase. Subsequent excavations by Jack Wynn (n.d.) at Buritaca, Langebaek (1987a) at Papare, and Augusto Oyuela Caycedo (1986; 1987a) at Cinto and Gaira have confirmed the stratigraphic position of the Nahuange phase—later than the incised and modeled Malamboid styles, earlier than Classic Tairona— and placed it between approximately A.D. 300 and 800- 1000. This is in line with the C-14 dates for the earliest “proto-Tairona” goldwork."
[3]
[1]: (Langebaek 2005, 7-11)
[2]: (Langebaek 2005, 7)
[3]: (Bray 2003, 322)
"In the 1980s, Augusto Oyuela excavated various sites along the coast (principally at Cinto and Gaira) and proposed the following chronology: a period called Early Cinto, divided in two phases. The first was named phase I and included the 2nd through the 6th Centuries A.D.; the second phase, Phase II, occurred between the 6th and 8th Centuries A.D. The latter phase corresponded to the Buritaca phase that Wynn defined, while the former was the same as Bischof’s Neguanje (Oyuela 1985:94, 135). In other publications, the same author talked about three periods for the coast adjacent to Santa Marta’s Sierra Nevada: the Early or Integrationist Period, the Middle or Classic Period, and the Late or Conquest Period (Oyuela 1986: 33). The first one lasts from the 2nd through the 9th Centuries A.D. There was evidence for this period - equivalent to Neguanje and the Buritaca phase, the same as Cinto’s Phases I and II - in the Gaira lowlands and the inlets of Cinto and Neguanje, as well as the lower parts of the Buritaca river (Figure 1). A date of 430 +/-60 A.D. was reported for the Neguanje ceramics that corresponded to the so-called Integrationist Period in Cinto (Oyuela 1986: 26-7)."
[1]
"Based on his own excavations, Wynn defined the Buritaca phase (equivalent Neguanje, in its latter part), a late occupation called Tairona and an intermediate phase between the two."
[2]
Depending on the author, the Buritaca phase can also be seen as a continuity of the previous Nehuange phase:"In 1969 Henning Bischof described a collection of sherds from a pre-Tairona construction fill at Pueblito and linked them with the contents of an exceptional tomb excavated by J. Alden Mason at Nahuange (Bischof 1969a; 1969b). He dated this Nahuange (or Neguanje) phase to approximately A.D. 500-700 on the basis of ceramic cross-ties with Mina de Oro to the west and with the Red-on-Buff wares of the Ranchería to the east. He also recognized that many elements of the Nahuange assemblage were carried over into Classic Tairona. There is now general agreement that Nahuange defines an “early Tairona” or “proto- Tairona” phase. Subsequent excavations by Jack Wynn (n.d.) at Buritaca, Langebaek (1987a) at Papare, and Augusto Oyuela Caycedo (1986; 1987a) at Cinto and Gaira have confirmed the stratigraphic position of the Nahuange phase—later than the incised and modeled Malamboid styles, earlier than Classic Tairona— and placed it between approximately A.D. 300 and 800- 1000. This is in line with the C-14 dates for the earliest “proto-Tairona” goldwork."
[3]
[1]: (Langebaek 2005, 7-11)
[2]: (Langebaek 2005, 7)
[3]: (Bray 2003, 322)
"In the 1980s, Augusto Oyuela excavated various sites along the coast (principally at Cinto and Gaira) and proposed the following chronology: a period called Early Cinto, divided in two phases. The first was named phase I and included the 2nd through the 6th Centuries A.D.; the second phase, Phase II, occurred between the 6th and 8th Centuries A.D. The latter phase corresponded to the Buritaca phase that Wynn defined, while the former was the same as Bischof’s Neguanje (Oyuela 1985:94, 135). In other publications, the same author talked about three periods for the coast adjacent to Santa Marta’s Sierra Nevada: the Early or Integrationist Period, the Middle or Classic Period, and the Late or Conquest Period (Oyuela 1986: 33). The first one lasts from the 2nd through the 9th Centuries A.D. There was evidence for this period - equivalent to Neguanje and the Buritaca phase, the same as Cinto’s Phases I and II - in the Gaira lowlands and the inlets of Cinto and Neguanje, as well as the lower parts of the Buritaca river (Figure 1). A date of 430 +/-60 A.D. was reported for the Neguanje ceramics that corresponded to the so-called Integrationist Period in Cinto (Oyuela 1986: 26-7)."
[1]
"Based on his own excavations, Wynn defined the Buritaca phase (equivalent Neguanje, in its latter part), a late occupation called Tairona and an intermediate phase between the two."
[2]
Depending on the author, the Buritaca phase can also be seen as a continuity of the previous Nehuange phase:"In 1969 Henning Bischof described a collection of sherds from a pre-Tairona construction fill at Pueblito and linked them with the contents of an exceptional tomb excavated by J. Alden Mason at Nahuange (Bischof 1969a; 1969b). He dated this Nahuange (or Neguanje) phase to approximately A.D. 500-700 on the basis of ceramic cross-ties with Mina de Oro to the west and with the Red-on-Buff wares of the Ranchería to the east. He also recognized that many elements of the Nahuange assemblage were carried over into Classic Tairona. There is now general agreement that Nahuange defines an “early Tairona” or “proto- Tairona” phase. Subsequent excavations by Jack Wynn (n.d.) at Buritaca, Langebaek (1987a) at Papare, and Augusto Oyuela Caycedo (1986; 1987a) at Cinto and Gaira have confirmed the stratigraphic position of the Nahuange phase—later than the incised and modeled Malamboid styles, earlier than Classic Tairona— and placed it between approximately A.D. 300 and 800- 1000. This is in line with the C-14 dates for the earliest “proto-Tairona” goldwork."
[3]
[1]: (Langebaek 2005, 7-11)
[2]: (Langebaek 2005, 7)
[3]: (Bray 2003, 322)
"In the 1980s, Augusto Oyuela excavated various sites along the coast (principally at Cinto and Gaira) and proposed the following chronology: a period called Early Cinto, divided in two phases. The first was named phase I and included the 2nd through the 6th Centuries A.D.; the second phase, Phase II, occurred between the 6th and 8th Centuries A.D. The latter phase corresponded to the Buritaca phase that Wynn defined, while the former was the same as Bischof’s Neguanje (Oyuela 1985:94, 135). In other publications, the same author talked about three periods for the coast adjacent to Santa Marta’s Sierra Nevada: the Early or Integrationist Period, the Middle or Classic Period, and the Late or Conquest Period (Oyuela 1986: 33). The first one lasts from the 2nd through the 9th Centuries A.D. There was evidence for this period - equivalent to Neguanje and the Buritaca phase, the same as Cinto’s Phases I and II - in the Gaira lowlands and the inlets of Cinto and Neguanje, as well as the lower parts of the Buritaca river (Figure 1). A date of 430 +/-60 A.D. was reported for the Neguanje ceramics that corresponded to the so-called Integrationist Period in Cinto (Oyuela 1986: 26-7)."
[1]
"Based on his own excavations, Wynn defined the Buritaca phase (equivalent Neguanje, in its latter part), a late occupation called Tairona and an intermediate phase between the two."
[2]
Depending on the author, the Buritaca phase can also be seen as a continuity of the previous Nehuange phase:"In 1969 Henning Bischof described a collection of sherds from a pre-Tairona construction fill at Pueblito and linked them with the contents of an exceptional tomb excavated by J. Alden Mason at Nahuange (Bischof 1969a; 1969b). He dated this Nahuange (or Neguanje) phase to approximately A.D. 500-700 on the basis of ceramic cross-ties with Mina de Oro to the west and with the Red-on-Buff wares of the Ranchería to the east. He also recognized that many elements of the Nahuange assemblage were carried over into Classic Tairona. There is now general agreement that Nahuange defines an “early Tairona” or “proto- Tairona” phase. Subsequent excavations by Jack Wynn (n.d.) at Buritaca, Langebaek (1987a) at Papare, and Augusto Oyuela Caycedo (1986; 1987a) at Cinto and Gaira have confirmed the stratigraphic position of the Nahuange phase—later than the incised and modeled Malamboid styles, earlier than Classic Tairona— and placed it between approximately A.D. 300 and 800- 1000. This is in line with the C-14 dates for the earliest “proto-Tairona” goldwork."
[3]
[1]: (Langebaek 2005, 7-11)
[2]: (Langebaek 2005, 7)
[3]: (Bray 2003, 322)
"In the 1980s, Augusto Oyuela excavated various sites along the coast (principally at Cinto and Gaira) and proposed the following chronology: a period called Early Cinto, divided in two phases. The first was named phase I and included the 2nd through the 6th Centuries A.D.; the second phase, Phase II, occurred between the 6th and 8th Centuries A.D. The latter phase corresponded to the Buritaca phase that Wynn defined, while the former was the same as Bischof’s Neguanje (Oyuela 1985:94, 135). In other publications, the same author talked about three periods for the coast adjacent to Santa Marta’s Sierra Nevada: the Early or Integrationist Period, the Middle or Classic Period, and the Late or Conquest Period (Oyuela 1986: 33). The first one lasts from the 2nd through the 9th Centuries A.D. There was evidence for this period - equivalent to Neguanje and the Buritaca phase, the same as Cinto’s Phases I and II - in the Gaira lowlands and the inlets of Cinto and Neguanje, as well as the lower parts of the Buritaca river (Figure 1). A date of 430 +/-60 A.D. was reported for the Neguanje ceramics that corresponded to the so-called Integrationist Period in Cinto (Oyuela 1986: 26-7)."
[1]
"Based on his own excavations, Wynn defined the Buritaca phase (equivalent Neguanje, in its latter part), a late occupation called Tairona and an intermediate phase between the two."
[2]
Depending on the author, the Buritaca phase can also be seen as a continuity of the previous Nehuange phase:"In 1969 Henning Bischof described a collection of sherds from a pre-Tairona construction fill at Pueblito and linked them with the contents of an exceptional tomb excavated by J. Alden Mason at Nahuange (Bischof 1969a; 1969b). He dated this Nahuange (or Neguanje) phase to approximately A.D. 500-700 on the basis of ceramic cross-ties with Mina de Oro to the west and with the Red-on-Buff wares of the Ranchería to the east. He also recognized that many elements of the Nahuange assemblage were carried over into Classic Tairona. There is now general agreement that Nahuange defines an “early Tairona” or “proto- Tairona” phase. Subsequent excavations by Jack Wynn (n.d.) at Buritaca, Langebaek (1987a) at Papare, and Augusto Oyuela Caycedo (1986; 1987a) at Cinto and Gaira have confirmed the stratigraphic position of the Nahuange phase—later than the incised and modeled Malamboid styles, earlier than Classic Tairona— and placed it between approximately A.D. 300 and 800- 1000. This is in line with the C-14 dates for the earliest “proto-Tairona” goldwork."
[3]
[1]: (Langebaek 2005, 7-11)
[2]: (Langebaek 2005, 7)
[3]: (Bray 2003, 322)
"In the 1980s, Augusto Oyuela excavated various sites along the coast (principally at Cinto and Gaira) and proposed the following chronology: a period called Early Cinto, divided in two phases. The first was named phase I and included the 2nd through the 6th Centuries A.D.; the second phase, Phase II, occurred between the 6th and 8th Centuries A.D. The latter phase corresponded to the Buritaca phase that Wynn defined, while the former was the same as Bischof’s Neguanje (Oyuela 1985:94, 135). In other publications, the same author talked about three periods for the coast adjacent to Santa Marta’s Sierra Nevada: the Early or Integrationist Period, the Middle or Classic Period, and the Late or Conquest Period (Oyuela 1986: 33). The first one lasts from the 2nd through the 9th Centuries A.D. There was evidence for this period - equivalent to Neguanje and the Buritaca phase, the same as Cinto’s Phases I and II - in the Gaira lowlands and the inlets of Cinto and Neguanje, as well as the lower parts of the Buritaca river (Figure 1). A date of 430 +/-60 A.D. was reported for the Neguanje ceramics that corresponded to the so-called Integrationist Period in Cinto (Oyuela 1986: 26-7)."
[1]
"Based on his own excavations, Wynn defined the Buritaca phase (equivalent Neguanje, in its latter part), a late occupation called Tairona and an intermediate phase between the two."
[2]
Depending on the author, the Buritaca phase can also be seen as a continuity of the previous Nehuange phase:"In 1969 Henning Bischof described a collection of sherds from a pre-Tairona construction fill at Pueblito and linked them with the contents of an exceptional tomb excavated by J. Alden Mason at Nahuange (Bischof 1969a; 1969b). He dated this Nahuange (or Neguanje) phase to approximately A.D. 500-700 on the basis of ceramic cross-ties with Mina de Oro to the west and with the Red-on-Buff wares of the Ranchería to the east. He also recognized that many elements of the Nahuange assemblage were carried over into Classic Tairona. There is now general agreement that Nahuange defines an “early Tairona” or “proto- Tairona” phase. Subsequent excavations by Jack Wynn (n.d.) at Buritaca, Langebaek (1987a) at Papare, and Augusto Oyuela Caycedo (1986; 1987a) at Cinto and Gaira have confirmed the stratigraphic position of the Nahuange phase—later than the incised and modeled Malamboid styles, earlier than Classic Tairona— and placed it between approximately A.D. 300 and 800- 1000. This is in line with the C-14 dates for the earliest “proto-Tairona” goldwork."
[3]
[1]: (Langebaek 2005, 7-11)
[2]: (Langebaek 2005, 7)
[3]: (Bray 2003, 322)
Chronology: Santiago Giraldo and Juana Saenz
[1]
based on radiocarbon dated goldwork (50-1000 CE) and complete dated contexts with stone architecture and pottery (450-1100 CE).
Chronology from the Langebaek 2005 study of the Santa Marta Bays.
[2]
Oyuela-Caycedo:
"Evidence of early occupation in the Buritaca region is from the coast with a site that seems to date from AD 600 until 900 (Wynn 1975). Frontera, another early occupation in the middle Buritaca, with C14 date as early as AD 660, probably suffered destruction by landslide, and subsequent rebuilding. Frontera is located at 500 masl while Ciudad Perdida lies at 1,100 masl (Cardoso 1986)."
[3]
"It is likely that the SNSM had dispersed populations in the highlands, perhaps even hunter-gatherer groups during the last half of the first millennium BC. However, evidence reveals small villages along the bays and coastline that depended on agriculture and fishing. The settlement pattern shifted after a catastrophic environmental crisis around AD 500-550, just before the occupation of the Mamoron archaeological site (AD 550-800) as well as the site of Frontera in the middle Buritaca River. This time period also seems to be related to a dry phase that coincides with the desertification of the Guajira at the end of the El Horno complex (see Reichel-Dolmatoff and Dussan 1951; Bray 1995). There also are data to support a massive uplift of the SNSM around this time, related to the disappear- ance of an estuary located in the lower Gaira area and Rodadero Bay. We know that the shoreline became more volatile as indicated by the history of the estuarine environments (see Oyuela-Caycedo 1996) of the Cienaga de Santa Marta. Furthermore, evidence from bays like Cinto reveal episodes of massive flooding, sealing coastal settlements such as Nahuange, Cinto, Gairaca, and lower Buritaca with heavy colluvial materials, and ending the early occupations. Later the locations were reoccupied but they continue to suffer simi- lar disasters in modern times."
[4]
"Archaeological investigations by Augusto Oyuela-Caycedo and others indi- cate that people began moving from the coast into the sierra sometime between AD 600 and AD 900.71 The human presence is marked by changes in pollen coresas humans moved into the region, cutting down stands of natural forest and plant- ing maize, agave, and avocados. The lower portions of the Sierra Nevada, 360-500 m (1,181-1,650 ft) above sea level, were first occupied in the sixth and seventh centuries and the higher zones several centuries later."
[5]
Warwick Bray:
"In 1969 Henning Bischof described a collection of sherds from a pre-Tairona construction fill at Pueblito and linked them with the contents of an exceptional tomb excavated by J. Alden Mason at Nahuange (Bischof 1969a; 1969b). He dated this Nahuange (or Neguanje) phase to approximately A.D. 500-700 on the basis of ceramic cross-ties with Mina de Oro to the west and with the Red-on-Buff wares of the Ranchería to the east. He also recognized that many elements of the Nahuange assemblage were carried over into Classic Tairona. There is now general agreement that Nahuange defines an “early Tairona” or “proto- Tairona” phase.Subsequent excavations by Jack Wynn (n.d.) at Buritaca, Langebaek (1987a) at Papare, and Augusto Oyuela Caycedo (1986; 1987a) at Cinto and Gaira have confirmed the stratigraphic position of the Nahuange phase—later than the incised and modeled Malamboid styles, earlier than Classic Tairona— and placed it between approximately A.D. 300 and 800- 1000. This is in line with the C-14 dates for the earliest “proto-Tairona” goldwork."
[6]
"The figurine from the Nahuange tomb (Fig. 11) was dated A.D. 310 +/- 70 (OxA-1577), a century or two earlier than Bischof’s proposed date for the grave"
[7]
"By the eighth or tenth century, transitional Nahuange-Tairona pottery had appeared at Buritaca 200, at 900 to 1,300 meters above sea level (Oyuela Cacedo 1986a), and the mature Tairona tradition was becoming established."
[8]
Carl Langebaek:
"In the 1980s, Augusto Oyuela excavated various sites along the coast (principally at Cinto and Gaira) and proposed the following chronology: a period called Early Cinto, divided in two phases. The first was named phase I and included the 2nd through the 6th Centuries A.D.; the second phase, Phase II, occurred between the 6th and 8th Centuries A.D. The latter phase corresponded to the Buritaca phase that Wynn defined, while the former was the same as Bischof’s Neguanje (Oyuela 1985:94, 135). In other publications, the same author talked about three periods for the coast adjacent to Santa Marta’s Sierra Nevada: the Early or Integrationist Period, the Middle or Classic Period, and the Late or Conquest Period (Oyuela 1986: 33). The first one lasts from the 2nd through the 9th Centuries A.D. There was evidence for this period - equivalent to Neguanje and the Buritaca phase, the same as Cinto’s Phases I and II - in the Gaira lowlands and the inlets of Cinto and Neguanje, as well as the lower parts of the Buritaca river (Figure 1). A date of 430 +/-60 A.D. was reported for the Neguanje ceramics that corresponded to the so-called Integrationist Period in Cinto (Oyuela 1986: 26-7)."
[9]
"As such, it will be tentatively assumed that the Neguanje occupation lasts between the 1st and 7th Centuries A.D. This is later followed by the Buritaca occupation, which this project assigns to the period between the 7th and 10th Centuries A.D. (table 12). The upper limit is defined by the earliest Late Period dates available."
[10]
[1]: (Giraldo 2015, personal communication)
[2]: (Langebaek 2005, 68)
[3]: (Oyuela-Caycedo 2008, 423)
[4]: (Oyuela-Caycedo 2008, 418-9)
[5]: (Moore 2014, 395)
[6]: (Bray 2003, 322)
[7]: (Bray 2003, 324)
[8]: (Bray 2003, 323)
[9]: (Langebaek 2005, 7-11)
[10]: (Langebaek 2005, 59)
"Bray (1984: 337) suggests that the complexity of the Neguanje burial found by Mason implies a certain political complexity. Some speak of a tribal society, characterized by great variation, due to "diverse degrees of influence, contact, or both at the same time, with neighboring cultural groups of the Rancheria (Guajira), Bajo Magdalena and southwestern Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta" (Oyuela 1986:34). Nevertheless, knowledge about social organization during the Neguanje period is based almost exclusively on site excavations, which make any proposal about social organization difficult. "Tribes" are mentioned for the ancient phase because it is assumed that the societies that the Spanish found were organized as "chiefdoms". And, as anyone knows, tribes precede chiefdoms." [1]
[1]: (Langebaek 2005, 13)
"As Bischof has demonstrated,the pottery from the tomb looks forward to Classic Tairona, but it also draws on earlier influences from all over Caribbean Colombia. The same is true of the gold and stone artifacts.The tubular rings and nose ornaments, disks, bells, and crescentic plaques are essentially Tairona, but the animal figure from the mound links this assemblage to the early goldwork from the Sinú region and the Caribbean lowlands in general (cf. Falchetti 1995: figs. 55, 59). The human figurine (Fig. 11) also has its roots in the same area, where the spiral ear ornaments and the heads of big-beaked birds occur on early Sinú eagle pendants and face bells (Falchetti 1995: figs. 35-36). In more developed forms, these bird motifs continue into Classic Tairona iconography (Fig. 9). [1] "Recently, Bray (1992) and Falchetti (1987) have suggested that metallurgy in northern South America and Southern Central America included similar styles, among which the Initial Group (between 1 and 500 A.D.) and the International Group (400 to 900 A.D.) may be distinguished. The former corresponds chronologically to Neguanje and the beginning of the Buritaca occupation. Objects, like two-headed eagles, from the Initial Group may be included among Neguanje goldwork. The manufacture of anthropomorphic and zoomorphic objects is shared with the International Group (Bray 1992). Approximately around the year 1000 A.D. these objects, which had wide continental distribution, disappear and more regional styles develop, including the ’Tairona’ style in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta." [2]
[1]: (Bray 2003, 326)
[2]: (Langebaek 2005, 83)
"As Bischof has demonstrated,the pottery from the tomb looks forward to Classic Tairona, but it also draws on earlier influences from all over Caribbean Colombia. The same is true of the gold and stone artifacts.The tubular rings and nose ornaments, disks, bells, and crescentic plaques are essentially Tairona, but the animal figure from the mound links this assemblage to the early goldwork from the Sinú region and the Caribbean lowlands in general (cf. Falchetti 1995: figs. 55, 59). The human figurine (Fig. 11) also has its roots in the same area, where the spiral ear ornaments and the heads of big-beaked birds occur on early Sinú eagle pendants and face bells (Falchetti 1995: figs. 35-36). In more developed forms, these bird motifs continue into Classic Tairona iconography (Fig. 9). [1] "Recently, Bray (1992) and Falchetti (1987) have suggested that metallurgy in northern South America and Southern Central America included similar styles, among which the Initial Group (between 1 and 500 A.D.) and the International Group (400 to 900 A.D.) may be distinguished. The former corresponds chronologically to Neguanje and the beginning of the Buritaca occupation. Objects, like two-headed eagles, from the Initial Group may be included among Neguanje goldwork. The manufacture of anthropomorphic and zoomorphic objects is shared with the International Group (Bray 1992). Approximately around the year 1000 A.D. these objects, which had wide continental distribution, disappear and more regional styles develop, including the ’Tairona’ style in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta." [2]
[1]: (Bray 2003, 326)
[2]: (Langebaek 2005, 83)
"Further research made it possible to identify a period which was probably older than Neguanje, in Papare, along the coast adjacent to Ciénaga. In some of the small test pits there, Malambo ceramics, identical to those excavated by Angulo (1962) in the Malambo site (Departamento del Atlántico), were found. In Papare the following chronology was proposed: first the Malambo occupation, probably taking place between the year 1000 B.C. and the first years A.D.; a second occupation, called Neguanje to maintain Bischof’s nomenclature, which would last until the 10th Century A.D." [1]
[1]: (Langebaek 2005, 11)
(Relationship): "Further research made it possible to identify a period which was probably older than Neguanje, in Papare, along the coast adjacent to Ciénaga. In some of the small test pits there, Malambo ceramics, identical to those excavated by Angulo (1962) in the Malambo site (Departamento del Atlántico), were found. In Papare the following chronology was proposed: first the Malambo occupation, probably taking place between the year 1000 B.C. and the first years A.D.; a second occupation, called Neguanje to maintain Bischof’s nomenclature, which would last until the 10th Century A.D."
[1]
(Entity): "The initial settlement by agriculturists in the region relates to the Lower Magdalena Malambo occupation, before the first century A.D.(Langebaek1987a). Evidence of this first occupation is poor at best,and there is no information about goldwork from this period."
[2]
[1]: (Langebaek 2005, 11)
[2]: (Langebaek 2003, 258)
"Ironically but unsurprisingly, while we were carrying out the architectural and topographic survey of Pueblito near the coast we were able to locate Neguanje period structures buried deep below Tairona terraces and structures on view to visitors and archaeologists alike. They had been, so to speak, underneath our noses all this time but had gone unnoticed by previous projects. Two overlapping Neguanje period dwellings, for example, were found almost 9 feet below the surface of a Tairona period terrace at Pueblito. In subsequent excavations at Teyuna-Ciudad Perdida we found the same pattern: earlier occupations and structures buried below structures that had been on view to everyone. When I discussed these findings in 2010 with Alicia Dussán, she indicated that it was quite clear that they had not been found because of the clean and very thick layers of fill separating the occupation levels. This had led them to assume only sterile layers of fill were to be found below Tairona household floors. This finding has allowed us to better understand the construction sequence of these places in a more nuanced and subtle fashion. Radiocarbon dates from buried occupations at both sites suggest that they were initially settled some time between A.D. 500 and A.D. 700, and grew relatively slowly up until A.D. 1100, reaching a size of about 30 acres. Core area plazas, terracing, and structures were then rapidly built some time between A.D. 1100 and A.D. 1200 and remained unchanged until A.D. 1600. That is, these areas were used and reused continuously but saw no major changes in their architectural layout. Yet both towns continued to expand after this time period, with growth concentrating mainly in residential areas. It is now clear that the Neguanje period peoples were directly related to the Tairona, and that there is a deeper time frame to the inhabitation and transformation of the northern and western side of the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta." [1]
[1]: (Giraldo 2014)
"Bray (1984:337) suggests that the complexity of the Neguanje burial found by Mason implies a certain political complexity. Some speak of a tribal society, characterized by great variation, due to "diverse degrees of influence, contact, or both at the same time, with neighboring cultural groups of the Rancheria (Guajira), Bajo Magdalena and southwestern Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta" (Oyuela 1986:34). Nevertheless, knowledge about social organization during the Neguanje period is based almost exclusively on site excavations, which make any proposal about social organization difficult. "Tribes" are mentioned for the ancient phase because it is assumed that the societies that the Spanish found were organized as "chiefdoms". And, as anyone knows, tribes precede chiefdoms."
[1]
Probably many small-size polities, even if the degree of centralization cannot be confirmed due to the lack of data: "In the study region, the settlements for the three prehispanic periods have a convex deviation from the rule (figure 15). The convex tendency is most notable for the Late Period. This implies that it cannot be said that there were integrated or centralized systems, but rather, that there were poorly integrated systems with little centralization. [...] If the studied region were smaller than what is expected of a polity (or many, one for each bay for example), the results would be very different. [...] Only if the bays constituted one or many political units independent from any larger settlement beyond the study area, could it be said that none of the sites dominated the others. It is not possible to resolve this issue with the information presently available."
[2]
[1]: (Langebaek 2005, 13)
[2]: (Langebaek 2005, 87)
Inhabitants.
Unknown.
[1]
However, a 7 hectare settlement at 100 persons per hectare would provide a very rough estimate of 700 people.
Pueblito was between 6 and 8 ha: "The data recovered through the shovel tests was used to map out the extents of the Neguanje period occupation, indicating the existence of a small village covering 6 to 8 hectares organized along the banks of the permanent streams."
[2]
[1]: (Giraldo 2015, personal communication)
[2]: (Giraldo 2010, 285)
People.
[1]
After an examination of population estimates for the 16th century: "In diachronic terms, the information is rather vague."
[2]
"Nevertheless, it seems clear that there is no evidence of high population density during the Neguanje occupation in the Sierra Nevada, making it likely that the absolute population in the Sierra Nevada and adjacent coastal plains was rather low. This is not to say that the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta was not occupied during the Neguanje Period. For example, Castaño (1981: 178-9) reports Roja sobre superficie ceramics, from the Neguanje period, in Buritaca 200. This must mean that population density during Neguanje was very low in absolute terms, and much more so in relation to the Late Period. The same seems to be true for the Buritaca Period."
[3]
Study of the Santa Marta Bays, a survey area of 90.78 square km: "The population dynamics may be compared in absolute terms, although this is always a risky exercise. If a density of 5 to 10 persons per occupied hectare (Sanders, Parsons and Santley 1979:34-40) were assumed, then there would be between 90 and 179 persons for the Neguanje Period; between 95 and 190 for the Buritaca Period; between 1087 and 2174 for the Late Period; and only between 30 and 59 for the period after the Spanish invasion."
[4]
Ciudad Perdida had 4 ha in the 9th and 10th centuries: "Albeit the abrupt increase in construction, and the social and political transformations in Ciudad Perdida seemed to be even more profound than in Pueblito, since the small, 4 hectare Neguanje village of the 9th and 10th centuries had probably quadrupled in size by the end of the 12th century."
[5]
[1]: (Giraldo 2015, personal communication)
[2]: (Langebaek 2005, 27)
[3]: (Langebaek 2005, 95)
[4]: (Langebaek 2005, 91)
[5]: (Giraldo 2010, 252)
levels. About the Serje and Oyuela settlement pattern analyses for the 16th century: "Finally, in both cases, the information refers to the last period of prehispanic occupation, which leaves open the question of how the observed settlement patterns developed"
[1]
Study of the Concha, Chenge, Gairaca and Neguanje Bays: "The development of settlement hierarchies is a relatively late and less than obvious phenomenon. During the Neguanje and Buritaca Periods it is possible to identify only one hierarchy. All the sites are relatively small and there are no clear breaks in their distribution. During both periods there is a pattern where all sites are relatively small, at the same time that a few are somewhat larger; yet, there are no differences that are significant enough to consider them a separate class."
[2]
All sites surveyed by Langebaek on the bays are between 1 and 3 hectares:1 ha (5 sites), 2 ha (8 sites), 3 ha (1 site). Between the 1st and the 6th century.
[3]
All sites surveyed by Langebaek on the bays are between 1 and 4 hectares: 1 ha (3 sites), 2 ha (6 sites), 3 ha (1 site), 4 ha (1 site). Between the 6th and the 10th century.
[3]
"In comparison to Tairona settlements, the Neguanje period villages are much smaller (1 to 8 hectares), although structures are also round in shape and some already have rough masonry walls similar to those built during the Tairona period (See Chapters 4 and 5)."
[4]
Pueblito was between 6 and 8 ha: "The data recovered through the shovel tests was used to map out the extents of the Neguanje period occupation, indicating the existence of a small village covering 6 to 8 hectares organized along the banks of the permanent streams."
[5]
For the second phase (6th-9th centuries), which corresponds to the beginnings of a ranked society, two types of settlements can be identified: villages without any kind of ’architectural’ work, and villages that are set up as regional centres with megalithic infrastructure. "Para la segunda fase (siglos VI-IX), correspondiente, como dijimos, al comienzo de una sociedad de rangos, se identifican dos tipos de asentamientos: las aldeas sin ninguna clase de trabajo ’ "arquitectónico" y las instaladas a manera de centro de una región con infraestructura megalítica."
[6]
[1]: (Langebaek 2005, 23)
[2]: (Langebaek 2005, 71)
[3]: (Langebaek 2005, 81)
[4]: (Giraldo 2010, 52)
[5]: (Giraldo 2010, 285)
[6]: (Oyuela-Caycedo 1986)
levels. About the Serje and Oyuela settlement pattern analyses for the 16th century: "Finally, in both cases, the information refers to the last period of prehispanic occupation, which leaves open the question of how the observed settlement patterns developed"
[1]
Study of the Concha, Chenge, Gairaca and Neguanje Bays: "The development of settlement hierarchies is a relatively late and less than obvious phenomenon. During the Neguanje and Buritaca Periods it is possible to identify only one hierarchy. All the sites are relatively small and there are no clear breaks in their distribution. During both periods there is a pattern where all sites are relatively small, at the same time that a few are somewhat larger; yet, there are no differences that are significant enough to consider them a separate class."
[2]
All sites surveyed by Langebaek on the bays are between 1 and 3 hectares:1 ha (5 sites), 2 ha (8 sites), 3 ha (1 site). Between the 1st and the 6th century.
[3]
All sites surveyed by Langebaek on the bays are between 1 and 4 hectares: 1 ha (3 sites), 2 ha (6 sites), 3 ha (1 site), 4 ha (1 site). Between the 6th and the 10th century.
[3]
"In comparison to Tairona settlements, the Neguanje period villages are much smaller (1 to 8 hectares), although structures are also round in shape and some already have rough masonry walls similar to those built during the Tairona period (See Chapters 4 and 5)."
[4]
Pueblito was between 6 and 8 ha: "The data recovered through the shovel tests was used to map out the extents of the Neguanje period occupation, indicating the existence of a small village covering 6 to 8 hectares organized along the banks of the permanent streams."
[5]
For the second phase (6th-9th centuries), which corresponds to the beginnings of a ranked society, two types of settlements can be identified: villages without any kind of ’architectural’ work, and villages that are set up as regional centres with megalithic infrastructure. "Para la segunda fase (siglos VI-IX), correspondiente, como dijimos, al comienzo de una sociedad de rangos, se identifican dos tipos de asentamientos: las aldeas sin ninguna clase de trabajo ’ "arquitectónico" y las instaladas a manera de centro de una región con infraestructura megalítica."
[6]
[1]: (Langebaek 2005, 23)
[2]: (Langebaek 2005, 71)
[3]: (Langebaek 2005, 81)
[4]: (Giraldo 2010, 52)
[5]: (Giraldo 2010, 285)
[6]: (Oyuela-Caycedo 1986)
levels. probably unknown? at least one level.
"Not much is known about the Neguanje social hierarchy. [...] Their iconography does not seem to indicate specific individuals. In the regional survey there was no occupation evidence for the period in the bay where the mound was excavated. This does not imply an abandonment of the bay, but rather, that the capacity of the individuals or special factions did not translate into the ability to attract populations. The leadership of individuals or special factions was not associated with central places or settlement hierarchies, at least in the study area."
[1]
[1]: (Langebaek 2005, 117)
"After A.D. 500, drastic shifts began to occur in Costa Rican Precolumbian cultures. Circular houses became the norm and were indicative of a probable shift in cos- mology or “world view.” New ceramic styles including resist painting proliferated; tomb forms and burial customs changed; cobble-paved roads within and between sites appeared; and metallurgy supplanted jade carving as the principal supplier of political and religious badges of power and authority." [1] "Following the catastrophic environmental crisis of the sixth century the SNSM witnessed extremely rapid population growth and colonization in the northern and western drainage. Terrace systems permitted the construction of small towns on sheer mountain slopes that were linked by a network of steep roads." [2]
[1]: (Bray 2003, 327-9)
[2]: (Oyuela-Caycedo 2008, 419)
"After A.D. 500, drastic shifts began to occur in Costa Rican Precolumbian cultures. Circular houses became the norm and were indicative of a probable shift in cos- mology or “world view.” New ceramic styles including resist painting proliferated; tomb forms and burial customs changed; cobble-paved roads within and between sites appeared; and metallurgy supplanted jade carving as the principal supplier of political and religious badges of power and authority." [1] "Following the catastrophic environmental crisis of the sixth century the SNSM witnessed extremely rapid population growth and colonization in the northern and western drainage. Terrace systems permitted the construction of small towns on sheer mountain slopes that were linked by a network of steep roads." [2]
[1]: (Bray 2003, 327-9)
[2]: (Oyuela-Caycedo 2008, 419)
"None of the native peoples developed a system of writing comparable to that of the Mayas, and much less would the Spaniards encounter a native empire such as that of either the Aztecs or Incas. By 1500 A.D., the most advanced of the indigenous peoples were two Chibcha groups: the Taironas and the Muiscas." [1]
[1]: (Hudson 2010, 5)
"None of the native peoples developed a system of writing comparable to that of the Mayas, and much less would the Spaniards encounter a native empire such as that of either the Aztecs or Incas. By 1500 A.D., the most advanced of the indigenous peoples were two Chibcha groups: the Taironas and the Muiscas." [1]
[1]: (Hudson 2010, 5)
"None of the native peoples developed a system of writing comparable to that of the Mayas, and much less would the Spaniards encounter a native empire such as that of either the Aztecs or Incas. By 1500 A.D., the most advanced of the indigenous peoples were two Chibcha groups: the Taironas and the Muiscas." [1]
[1]: (Hudson 2010, 5)
"None of the native peoples developed a system of writing comparable to that of the Mayas, and much less would the Spaniards encounter a native empire such as that of either the Aztecs or Incas. By 1500 A.D., the most advanced of the indigenous peoples were two Chibcha groups: the Taironas and the Muiscas." [1]
[1]: (Hudson 2010, 5)
"None of the native peoples developed a system of writing comparable to that of the Mayas, and much less would the Spaniards encounter a native empire such as that of either the Aztecs or Incas. By 1500 A.D., the most advanced of the indigenous peoples were two Chibcha groups: the Taironas and the Muiscas." [1]
[1]: (Hudson 2010, 5)
"None of the native peoples developed a system of writing comparable to that of the Mayas, and much less would the Spaniards encounter a native empire such as that of either the Aztecs or Incas. By 1500 A.D., the most advanced of the indigenous peoples were two Chibcha groups: the Taironas and the Muiscas." [1]
[1]: (Hudson 2010, 5)
"None of the native peoples developed a system of writing comparable to that of the Mayas, and much less would the Spaniards encounter a native empire such as that of either the Aztecs or Incas. By 1500 A.D., the most advanced of the indigenous peoples were two Chibcha groups: the Taironas and the Muiscas." [1]
[1]: (Hudson 2010, 5)
"None of the native peoples developed a system of writing comparable to that of the Mayas, and much less would the Spaniards encounter a native empire such as that of either the Aztecs or Incas. By 1500 A.D., the most advanced of the indigenous peoples were two Chibcha groups: the Taironas and the Muiscas." [1]
[1]: (Hudson 2010, 5)
"None of the native peoples developed a system of writing comparable to that of the Mayas, and much less would the Spaniards encounter a native empire such as that of either the Aztecs or Incas. By 1500 A.D., the most advanced of the indigenous peoples were two Chibcha groups: the Taironas and the Muiscas." [1]
[1]: (Hudson 2010, 5)
"None of the native peoples developed a system of writing comparable to that of the Mayas, and much less would the Spaniards encounter a native empire such as that of either the Aztecs or Incas. By 1500 A.D., the most advanced of the indigenous peoples were two Chibcha groups: the Taironas and the Muiscas." [1]
[1]: (Hudson 2010, 5)
"None of the native peoples developed a system of writing comparable to that of the Mayas, and much less would the Spaniards encounter a native empire such as that of either the Aztecs or Incas. By 1500 A.D., the most advanced of the indigenous peoples were two Chibcha groups: the Taironas and the Muiscas." [1]
[1]: (Hudson 2010, 5)
"None of the native peoples developed a system of writing comparable to that of the Mayas, and much less would the Spaniards encounter a native empire such as that of either the Aztecs or Incas. By 1500 A.D., the most advanced of the indigenous peoples were two Chibcha groups: the Taironas and the Muiscas." [1]
[1]: (Hudson 2010, 5)
"None of the native peoples developed a system of writing comparable to that of the Mayas, and much less would the Spaniards encounter a native empire such as that of either the Aztecs or Incas. By 1500 A.D., the most advanced of the indigenous peoples were two Chibcha groups: the Taironas and the Muiscas."
[1]
[1]: (Hudson 2010, 5)
"None of the native peoples developed a system of writing comparable to that of the Mayas, and much less would the Spaniards encounter a native empire such as that of either the Aztecs or Incas. By 1500 A.D., the most advanced of the indigenous peoples were two Chibcha groups: the Taironas and the Muiscas." [1]
[1]: (Hudson 2010, 5)
"Since a great majority of the towns are located on hilltops with very steep slopes, this makes them easily defensible without having to add fortifications. Add to this that the only way of reaching these towns is by climbing in single file a narrow staircase emplaced on a 45, 50, or even 60 per cent slope and we begin to understand why the Spanish had such a hard time attacking and dominating these populations." [1] Some of the infrastructure dates from the Neguanje period [2] so we can infer that this would be true for the Neguanje period as well.
[1]: (Giraldo 2009, 25)
[2]: (Giraldo 2015, personal communication)
Langebaek’s intent to understand the appropriation of Spanish weapons and tools, such as helmets, swords, arquebuses and steel axes, as a form of acculturation of Tairona caciques and warriors, is another mode of analysis which reduces the adoption of these goods to utilitarian terms. He supposes that these objects were automatically incorporated by the Taironas because of their inherent technological value, and that the Spaniards controlled the flow of goods. "El intento de Langebaek (1985:80- 84) por entender la apropiación de armas y herramientas españolas, notablemente los yelmos, espadas, arcabuces y hachas de acero, por parte de los guerreros y caciques taironas como una forma de aculturación, es otro modo de análisis que reduce la adopción de estos bienes a términos utilitarios. Se supone entonces que estos objetos fueron automáticamente incorporados por los taironas debido a su eficacia tecnológica inherente, y eran los españoles quienes controlaban el flujo de los bienes." [1] In [Ciudad Perdida], a few foreign elements of European origin were found, especially steel objects like axes, machetes or halberds. "En el sitio se han encontrado algunos elementos foráneos de orígen europeo, especialmente objetos de hierro (hachas, machetes, alabardas, etc.)." [2] No steel before the Conquest.
[1]: (Giraldo 2000, 50)
[2]: (Cadavid Camargo and Groot de Mahecha 1987)
No iron in indigenous South America (bronze was used, and most weapons were of stone).
No discussion in literature of this. In this case it is evidence of absence since this is in line with logical expectations for this late-complexity society.
No discussion in literature of this. In this case it is evidence of absence since this is in line with logical expectations for this late-complexity society.
No discussion in literature of this. In this case it is evidence of absence since this is in line with logical expectations for this late-complexity society.
No discussion in literature of this. In this case it is evidence of absence since this is in line with logical expectations for this late-complexity society.
No discussion in literature of this. In this case it is evidence of absence since this is in line with logical expectations for this late-complexity society.
No discussion in literature of this. In this case it is evidence of absence since this is in line with logical expectations for this late-complexity society.
No discussion in literature of this. In this case it is evidence of absence since this is in line with logical expectations for this late-complexity society.
"Sampling these structures also turned up the initial evidence of place-making practices taking place during terrace rebuilding, since a number of complete cooking and drinking vessels, stone axe-heads, and carnelian and translucent quartz beads were recovered from terrace fill. In this sense, the results overturn and contradict previously held assumptions regarding Neguanje period society, the locations of Neguanje sites, and provide extremely important information on the relationship between the Neguanje and Tairona periods." [1] In the case of the later Tairona, axes were either agricultural tools or ritual implements.
[1]: (Giraldo 2010, 79)
No discussion in literature of this. In this case it is evidence of absence since this is in line with logical expectations for this late-complexity society.
No discussion in literature of this. In this case it is evidence of absence since this is in line with logical expectations for this late-complexity society.
No discussion in literature of this. In this case it is evidence of absence since this is in line with logical expectations for this late-complexity society.
No discussion in literature of this. In this case it is evidence of absence since this is in line with logical expectations for this late-complexity society.
No discussion in literature of this. In this case it is evidence of absence since this is in line with logical expectations for this late-complexity society.
No discussion in literature of this. In this case it is evidence of absence since this is in line with logical expectations for this late-complexity society.