The Ground Stone Tools of Caye Coco, Belize

Antonina M. Delu April 2007

OCCASIONAL PUBLICATION NUMBER 12

INSTITUTE FOR MESOAMERICAN STUDIES The University at Albany

State University of New York Albany, New York 12222

The Ground Stone Tools of Caye Coco, Belize

Antonina M. Delu

April 2007

OCCASIONAL PUBLICATION NUMBER 12

INSTITUTE FOR MESOAMERICAN STUDIES The University at Albany

State University of New York Albany, New York 12222

ABSTRACT

The Ground Stone Tools of Caye Coco, Belize is based upon a master’s thesis presented by

the author to the Faculty of the University at Albany, State University of New York in 2003.

It has been edited for publication by the Institute for Mesoamerican Studies Occasional

Publication series. The paper presents a contextual and descriptive analysis of the ground

stone tools recovered from the surveys and excavations undertaken at the island site of Caye

Coco, Belize. Topics such as the economic practices, the ritual behavior, and the social status

of members of the Postclassic period Caye Coco community are addressed in this work.

The goal of this paper is to demonstrate that ground stone tool studies can go beyond the

reporting of simple metric attributes and the resolving of questions about subsistence

practices. The study of the ground stone assemblage of Caye Coco mirrors the artifact

analysis of other classes of artifacts conducted at the site, lending credence to the concept

that the site was a prospering community of households with a continuum of wealth in the

family groups that once inhabited the island. In addition, the data presented in this paper

offers further evidence for the participation of the site of Caye Coco in the local and long-

distance commerce system of the Postclassic time period.

i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am especially indebted to Dr. Marilyn A. Masson for generously sharing her collections,

her time, energy, and valuable input on every aspect of this project. I am grateful to Dr.

Michael E. Smith for his insightful comments regarding earlier versions of this text. A thank

you goes to Mari Pritchard-Parker, who shared some very difficult to find sources in the

Background section of this paper. I also wish to thank Dr. Joan Schneider for providing

advice and direction on the topic of painted ground stone tools.

Special thanks are given to my colleagues at LSA Associates, Inc., whose generosity and

technical support have greatly benefited the present study. Jan Stanakis contributed her

technical editing skills, and her excellent comments advanced this paper to its current state.

I would like to thank Ryo Braco for her patience and encouragement. I am particularly

thankful to my father, Dahl Delu, an incredible artist who drew the cover art for this

publication. His artwork is based on a Justin Kerr photo of a polychrome plate (Kerr

Number 1272) that shows a woman grinding on a metate with a mano, while a man watches

her while smoking tobacco.

ii

Table of Contents

Abstract…………………………………………………………………………….. i Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………… ii Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………... iii List of Tables………………………………………………………………………. vi List of Figures……………………………………………………………………… xii I. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………. 1 II. BACKGROUND………………………………………………………….……….. 3 Defining Terms…………………………………………………………….. 3 Ethnographic Ground Stone Data………………………………………….. 4 Tool Use Life………………………………………………………………. 5 Raw Material and Grinding Morphology………………………………….. 7 Summary…………………………………………………………………… 8 III. REGIONAL BACKGROUND…………………………………………………….. 9 Setting……………………………………………………………………… 9 Regional Ground Stone Typologies……………………………….……….. 15 Classic Period Sites………………………………………………… 16 Uaxactun…………………………………………………… 16 Piedras Negras…………………………………….……….. 16 Altar de Sacrificios………………………………………… 17 Northern Belize…………………………………………………………….. 19 The Corozal Region……………………………………….……….. 19 Cerros………………………………………………………. 21 Santa Rita Corozal…………………………………………. 23 Laguna de On………………………………………………. 25 Ambergris Caye……………………………………………. 26 San Juan……………………………………………. 27 Chac Balam………………………………………… 28 Southern Belize…………………………………………………………….. 29

iii

The Northern Lowlands……………………………………………………. 30 Yucatan-Campeche Coast………………………………………….. 30 Isla Jaina, Isla Piedras and Isla Uaymil……………………. 31 Emal……………………………………………….……….. 32 El Cuyo South……………………………………………… 32 Paraiso and Champoton-1………………………………….. 32 Isla Piedras…………………………………………………. 33 The Río Bec Region………………………………………………... 33 Becán………………………………………………………..34

Chicanná…………………………………………………… 35 Chichen Itza………………………………………………………... 35 Balankanche………………………………………………………... 37 Mayapan……………………………………………………………. 38 Highland Guatemala……………………………………………………….. 41 Chisalin…………………………………………………………….. 41 Chiapas, Mexico…………………………………………………………… 42 La Libertad…………………………………………………………. 42 Overall Trends in Mesoamerica……………………………………………. 44 Form………………………………………………………………... 44 Raw Material……………………………………………………….. 46 Summary…………………………………………………………………… 48 IV. ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES…………………………………………………… 49 Summary…………………………………………………………………… 57 V. RESULTS………………………………………………………………………….. 58 Form………………………………………………………………………... 58 Manos………………………………………………………………. 58 Metates……………………………………………………………... 62 Recycling…………………………………………………………………... 63 Raw Material……………………………………………………………….. 67 Distribution………………………………………………………………… 71 Burials……………………………………………………………………… 74 Painted Ground Stone……………………………………………………… 78 Background………………………………………………………… 78 The Painted Manos of Caye Coco…………………………………. 80 The Painted Metate………………………………………………… 86 Summary…………………………………………………………………… 86 VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS……………………………………………… 88 Form and Function…………………………………………………………. 88 Use Wear…………………………………………………………… 90 Manos………………………………………………………. 90 Metates……………………………………………………... 91 Raw Material……………………………………………………………….. 91

iv

The Ritual Aspects of Ground Stone……………………………………… 94 Gender……………………………………………………………… 95 Conclusions………………………………………………………………… 97 Caye Coco: The Bigger Picture……………………………………………. 98 VII. REFERENCES CITED…………………………………………………………….. 101 APPENDIX I - MANO AND METATE RAW DATA TABLES………...……………. 112

v

List of Tables Table 1 – Metate forms represented at sites in the Postclassic Maya Region…………….. 45

Table 2 - Percentage of non-local material for metates during the Classic and/or

Postclassic period…………………………………………………………………... 47 Table 3 - Percentage of non-local material for manos during the Classic and/or

Postclassic period ………………………………………………………………….. 47 Table 4 – Variables and attributes used in ground stone analysis……………...………….. 51 Table 5 – Mano transverse cross-section shapes……….………………………………….. 60 Table 6 – Mano longitudinal cross-section shape………………………………………….. 60 Table 7 – Frequency of metate forms……………………………….……………………... 62 Table 8 – Raw material of manos…………...……………………………………………... 68 Table 9 – Raw material of metates and unidentified fragments………………………….... 68 Table 10 – Manos and metates by raw material source………………………………..…... 69 Table 11 – Metate form by raw material source………………….………………………... 71 Table 12 – The distribution of metates and manos: off-mound vs. on-mound….…..……...72 Table 13 – Distribution of raw materials at Caye Coco: off-mound vs. on-mound,

the table does not include unprovenienced surface collections ………………........ 72 Table 14 – Chi-square table for the differences apparent in the raw material found

on-mound versus off-mound, the table does not include unprovenienced surface collections ………………………...…………...…………………………... 73

Table 15 – Summary of the Caye Coco Burial Sample (N=41)

(after Briggs 2002, Appendix 1:190-191)………………………………………... 75 Table 16 – Age at death of skeletal material from Caye Coco

(after Briggs 2002, Appendix 1:190-191)……………………….………………... 76 Table 17 – Estimated age of skeletal material found in association with

grinding implements……………………………………………………………….. 77 Table 18 – Ground stone found in burials (N=16) by closest raw material source………... 78

vi

Table 19 – Painted ground stone provenience information………………………………... 84 Table 20 – Painted ground stone from burials and sex of skeletal remains……………...… 85 Table 21 – Comparison of the metate forms from the Corozal District and the

site of Caye Coco…………………………………………………………………... 99

List of Figures

Cover Art – Drawing of Classic Period polychrome plate of Maya woman grinding with a

mano and metate, while a man watches and smokes (Dahl Delu 2007 after Kerr Number 1272).

Figure 1 – Map of site locations noted in the text………………………………………….. 10 Figure 2 – Map showing the location of Caye Coco in northern Belize

(after Masson 2002:339)…………………………………………………………… 13 Figure 3 - Surface map of Caye Coco featuring the structures that have been

identified by the Belize Postclassic Project (Redrafted from Rosenswig and Masson 2000)………………………………………………………………….. 14

Figure 4 – Cross-sections of the various forms of metates found at Caye Coco:

a) Flat; b) Flat-Legged; c) Concave; d) Trough; e) Mortar; (after Jaeger 1988:99).. 52 Figure 5 – Mano Transverse Cross-Sections at Caye Coco: a) Oval-Symmetrical;

b) Oval-Asymmetrical; c) Round; d) Square; e) Triangular; f) Lenticular (after Clark 1988:98)……………………………………………………..………… 55

Figure 6 –Mano Longitudinal Cross-Sections at Caye Coco: a) Oval; b) Lenticular;

c) Rectangular; d) tapering (after Clark 1988:99)…………………………………. 55 Figure 7 – Metates of all forms, mortars, and unidentified fragments from the

Caye Coco ground stone assemblage………………………………………………. 59 Figure 8 – Manos and Pestles from the Caye Coco ground stone assemblage……………...59 Figure 9 – Drawing of a bifacial mortar with various signs of re-use, found

on the surface of Caye Coco (Drawing by Devon Wilchelt and Antonina Delu)….. 64 Figure 10 – Ground stone axe fragment showing distinguishing attributes:

a) original metate rim surface; b) original basin surface; c) distal impact scars…… 65

vii

Figure 11 – Quartzite flake with visible grinding, from Subop 34g, Lot 1052……………. 66 Figure 12 - Miniature oval metate a) ventral side; b) dorsal side………………………….. 67 Figure 13 –Photo of painted manos………………………………………………………... 79 Figure 14 – Photo of painted metate, ventral side…………………………………………. 79 Figure 15 – Painted rectangular mano from Subop 40a, Lot 1126 showing

a) painted surface; b) unpainted surface …………………………………………... 81 Figure 16 - a) Photo detail of a mano from Burial 30 with black and white paint

clearly visible on the grinding surface. Painted, striped manos refit and are from b) Burial 27 (Drawing by Devon Wilchelt and Antonina Delu); c) Burial 30 (Drawing by Devon Wilchelt and Antonina Delu)………………... 82

Figure 17 - Photo of mano from Burial 27 with paint overlapping onto broken areas

that display no grinding……………………………………………………………. 82

viii

1

I. INTRODUCTION

There are very few archaeological studies specifically about ground stone tools. Kraybill

(1977:497) writes, “The absence of grinding stones, one suspects, is more in the reporting

than in the ground.” At times there is no differentiation made between items such as manos

or metates and other grinding tools, very rarely are metric attributes presented, and few of

these tools are ever illustrated (Schneider 1993:12). Often, grinding implements in artifact

inventories are incorporated into an all-encompassing “other” category (Schneider 1993:12).

Data recorded and presented about this class of artifact are uneven from various sites: form is

reported from some, others discuss raw material, and the majority do not distinguish space or

time. As Schneider (1993:12) notes, the inadequate recording of ground stone assemblages

has made interassemblage comparisons a rarity.

The study of ground stone tools can go beyond resolving questions about subsistence

practices alone; topics such as economic practices, ritual behavior, and social status may be

addressed as well. This paper presents a descriptive and contextual analysis of a total of 85

grinding implements recovered from survey and excavations undertaken by the Belize

Postclassic Project at the archaeological site of Caye Coco, Belize, from 1998 to 2000. The

author conducted this ground stone analysis while working with Dr. Marilyn Masson on the

Belize Postclassic Project in the summer of 2001.

2

The Caye Coco ground stone data were analyzed for the following variables: temporal

context, morphological form, physical dimensions, and general geological source area. The

goal of the analysis was to extract information pertaining specifically to Postclassic Maya

economics, subsistence, and other behavioral topics. This goal differs from more traditional

approaches to ground stone studies in Mesoamerica, which have focused on devising a

superior, standardized typology or discerning traits that are temporally diagnostic (Rovner

and Lewenstein 1997; Clark 1988:83; MacNeish et al. 1967).

On the whole, the Caye Coco ground stone assemblage reflects the domestic nature of the

site. Many of the tools were most likely used in food and pigment processing, and some

tools evince a ritual dimension since they were recovered in association with skeletal

remains. Ground stone tools found as grave goods with sexed skeletal remains reveal

interesting data on the topic of gender and what is typically considered a female-specific tool.

Social status may also be evident with the analysis of ground stone artifacts. Raw material

data of ground stone tools lend credence to the concept that there was a continuum in the

wealth of the family groups that once inhabited the island of Caye Coco (Masson 1999). The

study of the raw materials of ground stone tools also gives a view of the relation of Caye

Coco to the larger region. Based on this information, further evidence for the participation of

Caye Coco in an extensive Postclassic long-distance commerce system is visible in the

archaeological record. Data pertaining to the forms of metates may further broaden our view

of the economic systems of Postclassic Caye Coco.

3

II. BACKGROUND

Defining Terms

The term “ground stone” is a broadly defined category used to describe a wide variety of

stone artifacts that have been modified by a mixture of grinding, polishing, abrading, or

battering. For the sake of clarity, the term ground stone is used here to define a class of

artifacts that is defined by material and form. Ground stone tools are commonly

manufactured by pecking and abrasion and may show wear as the result of use associated

with the processing of plant, animal, and/or mineral resources. This category includes tools

such as manos and metates, mortars, pestles, and palettes.

In antiquity, ground stone tools were likely indispensable implements in any given household

(Clark 1988:83) and were necessary implements for maize-dominated diets (Sidrys and

Andresen 1976:177). Thus, ground stone tools are usually considered domestic in nature and

are commonly considered only in terms of maize subsistence economy. However, they were

used for other purposes: grinding pigments and minerals for ceramic and other craft

production; grinding food, pigments, or minerals destined for public/community ceremonies;

or offerings for private rituals such as burials, for example. As such, form, provenience, and

wear patterns are key in understanding the function of each piece of ground stone.

4

Ethnographic Ground Stone Data

For many modernized regions in Central America, grinding tools have a largely decorative

and symbolic role in the region (Martin Biskowski, personal communication). However, in

more traditional modern communities, ground stone tools may still play an active part in

daily food processing (Clark 1998). Modern households rarely have more than one mano

and metate set (Sheets 2000:225). Clark (1988:93) writes that certain contemporary Mexican

households will have more than one metate, which he believes is sometimes a reflection of

status. Higher-status people are likely to sponsor more fiestas than the average person, and

they need to supply food to the many people who attend. As a result, they need more metates

to keep up with the higher food demands involved with sponsoring a fiesta. The number of

metates in a house may also depend on the number of women residing in that household

(Horsfall 1987). A modern nuclear family will likely have two or more female residents.

For the average modern consumer, the purchase of a mano and metate is a major expenditure

(Clark 1988:86). Buyers perceive, judge, and purchase metates based on the size, the color

and hardness of the stone, and the style and fineness of the finished tool (Cook 1976:147). In

addition, the amount of labor involved in making the tool and the distance a metate is

transported will help to determine its market value (Clark 1988:86-87). Painted metates are

sold in the modern markets of Central Mexico, and the paint consists mostly of design

embellishments that add to their quality and marketability. Thus, larger metates, those that

are decorated, and metates made from harder or nonlocal stone should cost more. Manos

should be cheaper than metates, as they are smaller and more simply made.

5

Hayden (1987:217) notes that in contemporary Maya communities the only systematically

recycled stone tools are the relatively costly manos and metates. The reuse of ground stone

tools as either supports or as hammerstones, plus their long life cycle in comparison to other

artifact classes, makes them problematic artifacts to quantify (Olson 2001:120).

Tool Use-Life

Several factors affect the use-life of a grinding tool: the type of stone from which the tools

are made, how frequently it is used, and what it is being used to grind. Specifically, more

frequent use will cause a ground stone tool to show wear faster. The type of product being

ground also affects the rate of attrition. Grinding spices and condiments has a relatively low

attrition rate, maize has a higher rate, and pottery temper has the greatest rate of all. In a

study of the grinding tools from the Phoenix Basin Hohokam, Tammy Stone (1995:682-683)

discusses how basic constraints involved with processing different types of foods affect the

choice of raw material for tools. She argues that in order to effectively grind various food

items, the material of choice must be suitably dense, hard, and durable; wear slowly; and not

add large amounts of grit to the food being processed. This holds true for studies from the

region of Mesoamerica (see Clark 1988; Hayden 1987).

Grinding tools may be used for many different tasks during their life span. While the

majority of grinding implements are traditionally used for food processing purposes, manos

and metates broken during use may be kept in use as grinding tools, put to some other use

immediately, discarded immediately, or stored for future use (Schlanger 1991:463). Clark

(1988:88) describes modern instances of broken metates used to grind temper, clay, and other

6

pigments, although special grinding stones may also be used for these materials. Greater

attrition results from the grinding of these harder materials, and for this reason, many people

will use heavily worn or broken grinding tools for these tasks rather than causing wear on

their principal maize-grinding tools (Clark 1988:93). It is not unusual to find grinding

implements made of local stones being used for these harsher tasks.

Breakage of grinding tools can occur from dropping them; however, most breakage results

from simply wearing out from excessive use. The basic force required to grind can be

enough to break a tool. Under normal use conditions for the grinding of maize, the modern

life of a metate varies from 15 years for those made of granite (Cook 1970:785) to 15 to 30

years for basalt metates (Hayden 1987:342; Aschmann 1949:685-686). With limited use, a

metate may last for 50 to 100 years (Clark 1988:88). For softer material, such as sandstone,

the use-life is typically shorter (Bartlett 1933:14). Manos typically wear out faster than

metates (Clark 1988:93; Hayden 1987:193). An item can be considered “worn out” when it

is no longer usable for the activity for which it was designed (Adams 2002:25).

Both mano and metate fragments can be misplaced or discarded within or in the vicinity of

the house where they are used, but it would be unusual to find an unbroken, “serviceable”

metate in an abandoned house (Clark 1988:94). Typically owners transfer functional manos

and metates to their new accommodations. Damaged or worn-out grinding tools may have

been moved from “inside” surfaces, such as house floors, to “outside” spaces, such as patios

(Schlanger 1991:463).

7

Raw Material and Grinding Morphology

Stone (1995:682) discusses how both grinding morphology and raw material should reflect

the difference in the seed or grain size being processed. Small, hard seeds should require a

nonvesicular surface, usually in a basin-shaped metate, in order to avoid seed loss; small,

round hand stones are usually found in association with these basin metates. Adams

(2002:100) defines basin-shaped metates as having circular or elliptical basins. Large-

grained seeds, such as maize, should necessitate a vesicular basalt/rhyolite material in order

to facilitate the breakdown of grains (Stone 1995:682). Trough metates, defined as having

intentionally manufactured basins or troughs (Adams 2002:106), are generally associated

with the grinding of large-grained seeds. The grinding surfaces of trough metates often

display pecking to refurbish the vesicular quality of the material.

In his study of the uses of modern Mexican grinding implements, John Clark (1988:93) has

reported that the overall size of the tool relates to its function: larger tools are used for

grinding corn, and smaller tools are used for miscellaneous grinding. Clark also found that

the size of manos is important: heavy brazos (a grinding tool used with two hands) are often

preferred for maize grinding because they allow one to grind better, or faster, while using

less physical force.

For the lowland Maya region, local sedimentary rock varies from soft to hard, with fossilized

coral notably harder than limestone. Harder than these sedimentary rocks is quartzite, which

is granular and crystalline in nature. Quartzite is a nonlocal material for much of the Yucatan

Peninsula, but it is present in river valleys such as the Belize River Valley and in the Maya

8

Mountains. Relative to all of these materials, volcanic rocks found in modern-day

Guatemala and Honduras, including vesicular basalt, andesite, rhyolite, among others, are the

hardest and most desirable materials for grinding implements. Thus, for the lowland Maya

region, nonlocal material (i.e., nonsedimentary materials) exhibits the qualities most

beneficial for the processing of maize since local limestone and fossilized coral are soft

relative to other raw materials (according to Clark 1988; Hayden 1987).

Summary

This chapter was designed to give the reader a general introduction to the terms and concepts

used in the analysis of ground stone tools. Ethnographic literature dealing with ground stone

data has shed much light on topics such as daily food processing, tool use-life, and tool

discard patterns. In addition, experimental studies by Stone (1995), Clark (1988), and

Hayden (1987) have revealed information pertaining to raw material and grinding

morphology. To better understand the regional trends in ground stone for the site of Caye

Coco, the following section is a review of the literature that discusses grinding implements

recovered from various archaeological sites throughout northern Belize, the Yucatan

Peninsula, and other parts of Mesoamerica.

9

III. REGIONAL BACKGROUND

Various archaeological sites throughout northern Belize, the Yucatan Peninsula, and other

regions of Mesoamerica have reported their ground stone assemblages in a manner conducive

to meaningful comparisons to the Caye Coco collection. This section reviews the ground

stone literature from these sites, focusing mainly on Postclassic period occupations. Many of

these sites, however, have only a small amount of published information concerning ground

stone assemblages. What is known about many of the collections, albeit minimal in certain

cases, is summarized below. This review also includes some Formative and Classic period

sites in Mesoamerica in order to make useful temporal comparisons. Locations of sites

discussed in this section can be found in Figure 1.

Setting

The Yucatan Peninsula encompasses modern-day Mexico, Belize, and the northern portions

of Guatemala. Geologically the peninsula is generally a limestone platform, and Belize is a

low-lying strip of sand, coastal alluvium, gravels of marine terrace, and marl (Rice 1993:12-

16). The topography of southern Belize is that of geological thrusting and mountain building

that runs into the Guatemalan Highlands. Carbonate rocks dominate the surface of the

Yucatan platform, and limestone was the basic material mined for ancient construction and

sculpture (Rice 1993:15), as well as for grinding tools. The Maya Mountains are primarily

10

N

Teotihuacan

Cihuatecpan

Tehuacan Province of Soconusco

La Libertad

Chisalin

Chicanna

Altar de Sacrificios

Piedras Negras

Emal El Cuyo South

Dzibilchaltun Mayapán

Chichen Itzá

Balancanche

Champoton-1 Paraiso

Isla Piedras Isla Jaina

Isla Uaymil

Tikal Uaxactun

Barton Ramie Kendall

Pomona

Kaminaljuyu

Becan

Chac Balam

Santa Rita Corozal Cerros

Sarteneja

San Juan Aventura

Colha Laguna de On Caye Coco

Pacific Ocean

Gulf of Mexico

Kilometers

0 100 200

Figure 1 - Map of site locations noted in the text

11

composed of igneous and metamorphic rocks, and these outcroppings also would have been

exploited for the production of grinding tools in prehistory (Rice 1993:16; Graham 1994,

2002). The rivers and streambeds running from these sources in all directions would

have carried boulders and cobbles downstream for varying distances; thus, igneous and

metamorphic rocks were most likely mined from the lower reaches of various waterways

(Graham 1987:754). Graham (1987:754) has noted that this is true for both the Stann Creek

and Toledo Districts of southern Belize, where there exists a relatively short distance

between the mountains and the sea, and materials for grinding tools could have been mined

from the lower Macal and Mopan Rivers.

Three major navigable waterways, the Río Hondo, the New River, and the Freshwater Creek

drainage, exist in northern Belize; Masson (1999:287) points out that a fourth navigable

waterway ran along the Belizean coast. The New River provided the key mode of

transportation to the interior of northeast Belize (Masson 1999:287; Jones 1989), and both

the Río Hondo and the New River are in position to be riverine routes between northern

Belize and the northeast Peten regions. The Freshwater Creek drainage appears to connect a

series of tightly integrated Postclassic communities, including Caye Coco, Caye Muerto, Last

Resort, and Laguna de On (Masson 1999:288). All of these waterways played an important

part in Postclassic commerce, and the region of northeastern Belize was in a prime position

to participate in this trade network since it is close to the Caribbean Sea, with the flourishing

Postclassic center of Santa Rita, located on Corozal Bay, at the mouth of the New River.

12

The positioning of the island site of Caye Coco at the southern end of Progresso Lagoon links

it with the Caribbean Sea (Figure 2) and to the flourishing maritime trade of the Postclassic

time period. The Postclassic occupation of Caye Coco extended from the 11th through the

15th centuries AD, when it was an important regional political center (Masson 1999:288). A

considerable amount of mounded architecture and stone monuments survive as features on

the island (Rosenswig and Masson n.d.), and artifacts encountered at Caye Coco suggest that

it was a prospering, densely inhabited community of households engaged in a varying

number of activities that include local and long-distance trade (Masson 2002).

From 1998 to 2000, a total of 16 mounded structures were mapped on the surface of the

island, and 17 mounded structures have been archaeologically investigated (Figure 3)

(Masson 1999). Numerous off-mound testings have exposed additional domestic structures

and subsurface platforms along the north shore of the island (Masson 2001a). Several

middens have been excavated (Masson 2001a), and three cemeteries have been located and

tested (Rosenswig 2001).

13

Figure 2 - Map showing the location of Caye Coco in northern Belize (after Masson 2002:339)

MEXICO

BELIZE

5 0 5 10 15 20

N

Caye Coco

Chetumal Bay

Kilometers

Progresso

0 800 km

14

Figure 3 - Surface map of Caye Coco featuring the structures that have been identified by the Belize Postclassic Project (Redrafted from Rosenswig and Masson 2000)

15

Regional Ground Stone Typologies

Regional typologies for grinding tools have been proposed for the Maya Lowlands, and the

most commonly used typologies were developed based on assemblages from the sites of

Barton Ramie (Willey et al. 1965) and Altar de Sacrificios (Willey 1972). According to

these typologies, grinding tools from the Maya region consist of 2 basic metate forms and 10

different mano forms. Metate forms can be broken down as either Basin-Shaped, which

includes the sub-shapes Turtleback and Trough, or Thin-Flat (1972:111-113, Figures 94-98),

which incorporates the subtypes Thin-Flat, Thin-Flat with Legs, and Thin-Flat with Legs and

Grooves (Willey 1972:107-113, Figures 90-98). The 10 mano forms range from Thin-

Rectangular, Thick Ovate-Rectangular, Plano-Convex, Triangular, Square, Large-Square,

Pentagonal, Round, Large-Round, and Overhang (Willey 1972:116-124, Figures 99-104).

The following section is a brief introduction to three sites that generally date to the Classic

period (250-900 AD) that either use this type of classification system, or that were conducted

prior to the development of this classification scheme: Uaxactun (Kidder 1947), Piedras

Negras (Coe 1959), and Altar de Sacrificios (Willey 1972). The literature from these sites, in

general, does not discuss the significance of variability within ground stone assemblages.

Ground stone has been recorded at varying levels at different sites, and the brevity of certain

reports may reflect the amount of work on the individual ground stone collections.

16

Classic Period Sites

Uaxactun

In 1947, Alfred Kidder reported on a small collection of grinding tools from the site of

Uaxactun, Guatemala. The majority of the tools were collected as surface finds that Kidder

considered to be of late context, dating to a short time period before the site was abandoned

(Kidder 1947:34-35). He first divided metates into the categories of Small and Large, in

which both Legless and Legged forms were encompassed (1947:33). Kidder (1947:33-34)

divided manos into three categories: Quadrilinear, Flat, and Aberrant (which are mostly

water-worn cobbles). Turtleback metates and Quadrilinear manos are found in the highest

frequency at the site of Uaxactun.

Piedras Negras

During the 1930s, work was conducted at the site of Piedras Negras, located in the Peten

region of northern Guatemala (Coe 1959). Piedras Negras, with a substantial Early Classic

occupation, had its largest occupation during the Classic period (Coe 1959:4). William Coe

(1959:34) has suggested that different types of milling implements would have been used for

different functions, with two metate types, Trough and Flat, used for processing corn. Coe

theorized that larger tools were manufactured locally, and that footed tripod metates were

more valuable as the result of their smaller size and durable igneous raw material. Coe

(1959:34) also postulated that tripod metates were used for what he terms “ceremonial

grinding” or special occasions.

17

Trough metates are generally very blocky with little exterior shaping, and Coe (1959:34)

noted that the Trough types were different from the Turtleback varieties found at Uaxactun.

In pointing out this difference, Coe suggested that the Trough metates were most commonly

found in the northern lowlands, while the Turtleback-metates were more common in the

highlands. Coe recognized a basic continuity in form, but he put forth that there was a

highland-lowland dichotomy between these two forms.

Few manos were collected from the site of Piedras Negras. Those that were recovered were

oval in cross-section and were assumed to have been used within a Trough metate (Coe

1959:34).

Altar de Sacrificios

In 1972, Willey analyzed the grinding tools from the site of Altar de Sacrificios. Metates

from Altar de Sacrificios included all examples of Basin-Shaped and Thin-Flat forms (Willey

1972). The Turtleback metate was found in association with occupations dating from the

Middle Preclassic through the Postclassic period. Counter to what Coe (1959) noted at

Piedras Negras, Trough and Thin-Flat metates were not found in deposits at Altar de

Sacrificios earlier than the Late Classic period. A total of three forms of Thin metates were

identified at the site: Legless, Legged, and Legged-and-Grooved.

According to Willey (1972:116), Legged and Legged-and-Grooved forms are similar to the

forms of metates found at sites in the Guatemalan Highlands. Specimens from Altar de

Sacrificios were smaller than at other sites, and Willey noted that they were not as well suited

18

to corn grinding (1972:105). Rather, he suggested that these smaller artifacts were used for

“ritualistic corn grinding” and not utilitarian purposes.

Manos from the Altar de Sacrificios assemblage are divided into 10 types that are common to

Maya lowland sites and are identified on the basis of the cross-sectional shape (Willey 1972).

All manos, with the exception of the Overhang-shaped mano, could be used in Basin- or

Trough-shaped forms. Willey (1972:105) doubted that many of the mano varieties had a

distributional or chronological significance, although he does not expound on this statement

any further, so it is unclear as to the nature of this statement. He reported evidence that the

Square-shaped mano form dates from the Late Classic period, and that the Overhang mano

may be a form that is “late” (1972:105).

Willey (1972:115) suggested, based on the analysis of the ground stone assemblage from

Altar de Sacrificios, that there are two Legless-metate forms that are predominant in the

lowland Maya region: Turtleback and Trough-shaped. Both of these forms are grouped by

Willey into one general category for Basins, with the difference between the two in the shape

of the base: Turtleback metates are rounded, whereas the Trough metates have a more flat

basal form. Willey (1972:115) postulated that the Turtleback metate was the most frequent

form found in the Peten region from the beginning of the Middle Preclassic period and on

through the Classic period. He also suggested that the Trough-shaped metate has a

distribution to the north and west of the Peten, with an unknown date of arrival in the

lowland region, but most definitely in use by the Late Classic and Postclassic time periods.

19

Lastly, Willey (1972:116) stated that the Legged metate form was not commonly found until

the end of the Terminal Classic period and was still in use during the Postclassic period.

Northern Belize

The Corozal Region

In 1976, Raymond Sidrys and John Andresen published a study in which they reported on

ground stone material collected during the 1974 UCLA Corozal Survey from sites including

Santa Rita,1 Sarteneja, and Aventura. In 1983, Sidrys reported on the survey and limited

excavations in northern Belize where several important Postclassic centers and their

supporting communities were identified for the Corozal district. The analyses of grinding

tools recovered from the Corozal region are some of the most comprehensive volumes on the

topic available for the overall Maya region. The Sidrys and Andresen (1976:178-179)

typological classification is a modification of those previously discussed above from the sites

of Barton Ramie (Willey et al. 1965:453-465) and Altar de Sacrificios (Willey 1972:106-

124), but it was reduced to five metate and eight mano forms. The majority of the ground

stone analyzed was assigned a date that corresponds to the Late Classic to the Early

Postclassic periods (600-1250 AD).

According to Sidrys and Andresen (1976:187), the metate tradition of northern Belize differs

from that of the northern Yucatan region, where Trough-shaped metates and Legged forms

1 It should be noted here that the material from Santa Rita is from the survey of 1974, and thus, the work of Jaeger (1998) discussed below should be considered a more complete and up-to-date sample of ground stone from the site.

20

are common. Rather, the region is similar to that of the Peten region because they both share

the dominant Turtleback form. Sidrys (1983) found that the Turtleback and Thin-Flat

Legless forms are the leading metate types found in the Corozal region, with a combined

total of 86 percent of all metates identified through time and space.

Sidrys and Andresen (1976:188) reported that the most commonly occurring cross-sectional

form of manos from Santa Rita is Rectangular (25 percent); Oval forms are the most

frequently found at both Aventura (39.9 percent of the site total) and Sarteneja (50 percent).

The most commonly occurring cross-sectional mano forms from the survey of the Corozal

Region were Oval (24 percent) and Circular and Rectangular (each 19 percent) (Sidrys

1983). Manos appear to have changed form over time from Rectangular in the Early Classic

to Oval and Circular in the Late Classic-Early Postclassic periods, and back again to

Rectangular in the Postclassic (Sidrys and Andresen 1976). The authors point to the

troublesomeness in identifying the arbitrary shape of cross-section forms; this is a difficulty

that has been noted by several other scholars (see Willey et al. 1965; Spink 1984).

Relative to other regions in the Maya Lowlands, sites in the Corozal region have

approximately 20 percent of the metate assemblages identified as volcanic rock, 20 percent

of the metates most likely emanate from sources in the Maya Mountains, and the remaining

60 percent of the metates appear to be a local sedimentary rock. Sidrys (1983) found similar

percentages for raw materials over time; however, when he looked at the Late Postclassic

assemblage of grinding tools, what he reported was different. Specifically, he recorded that

local sedimentary rocks total 36.8 percent of the assemblage; 21 percent came from the Maya

21

Mountains, and 42.1 percent appeared to be from the volcanic zone of southern Guatemala

and/or northern Honduras (1983:296). While these numbers appear to reflect the trends of

increased importation of nonlocal materials for the Postclassic time period, the total sample is

small (N=19), and thus the breakdown by material type may be problematic.

Sidrys and Andresen (1976:187) reported that there was minimal importation of nonlocal

manos in the Corozal region. Over 90 percent of the manos from this area were made of

local limestone. The Corozal region had the highest frequencies of imported metates, and the

authors theorized that the imported manos were most likely fashioned out of imported and

discarded metates, but they do not explain their reasoning behind this statement.

Sidrys and Andresen (1976:182) found a statistically significant change in material source

use from the Late Classic-Early Postclassic to the Late Postclassic periods consisting of an

increase in the use of material from the Maya Mountains and volcanic sources in the later

period. The Late Postclassic represents the peak, through time, of the import of volcanic

rocks in the Corozal region. Sites with the largest presence of volcanic metates occur at three

sites with known Postclassic occupations: Sarteneja, Aventura, and Santa Rita. All of these

sites are thought by Sidrys to have been centers of various magnitudes in the Early to Late

Postclassic period hierarchy (1983:Table 1).

Cerros

Situated on Corozal Bay, the site of Cerros does not appear to have any construction of

monumental architecture dating to the Postclassic period (Garber 1981:122). However,

22

many artifacts were recovered relating to Late Postclassic domestic activities on numerous

smaller mounds (Garber 1989:98). Garber used the aforementioned Willey (1972) typology

to discuss the Cerros ground stone collection. The assemblage from this site is quite large

(N=675), but only 25 percent of this collection dates from the Postclassic period (Garber

1981:120). For both manos and metates combined at the site of Cerros during the Postclassic

period, Garber (1989) found that 27.7 percent of the raw material came from local sources,

63.3 percent from the Maya Mountains, and 1 percent from the highlands of Guatemala.

The most common metate shape for Postclassic Cerros is the Basin form (also known as

Trough or Turtleback) (N=9), with the Legged-Slab (N=1) as the only other form represented

(Garber 1989). Several metate fragments from the collection may be recycled, as they show

evidence of reuse consisting of “contusions and rounding on a projection or broken corner”

(1986:21). The most common mano transverse cross-sections are Plano-Convex and Oval-

shaped (N=9), followed by Circular (N=4), Rectangular (N=3), and Pentagonal (N=1).

Garber noted that small metates are standard artifacts in Classic period tombs (1986:92). In

addition, he has also found that at Cerros, manos and metates were often recovered from

construction fill (1989:99). He speculates, without further elaboration, that grinding

implements found in this context were votive offerings, possibly placed by workmen in the

fill during the construction of the structure.

23

Santa Rita Corozal

During the Postclassic period, Santa Rita Corozal, Belize, was most likely the provincial

capital of the Chetumal Province, and it had an array of trading partners, many of which were

connected along a marine distribution network (Chase and Chase 1988; 1989). Extraordinary

amounts of nonutilitarian refuse have been recovered from excavations at Santa Rita,

implying that many households had access to luxury materials (Chase and Chase 1989). In

1988, Susan Jaeger studied the grinding tools of Santa Rita, focusing her analysis on the

manos and metates recovered in Corozal Postclassic Project (CPP) excavations from 1979 to

1985. Out of 343 pieces of ground stone studied, only 42 can be reliably dated to the

Postclassic time period, and those that were recovered from mixed temporal contexts were

only used in the spatial analysis of raw material.

For the 207 metates that were recovered (both complete and fragments) at Santa Rita, a total

of 136 are classified as Flat metates, and 41 percent of those Flat metates have concave

grinding surfaces that differentiate them from those with flatter surfaces. Forty-four metates

are classified as Trough-shaped (Jaeger 1988:99). Jaeger (1988) has found that in all periods,

Flat metates are the predominant form found at Santa Rita, followed by Concave and Trough

shape. Through time, Concave and Trough metates increase in frequency to a point where

they are almost as frequent as the Flat metate form.

A total of 33.3 percent of the metates in the CPP collection from all periods are made of

nonlocal material, and most of the material most likely came from the Maya Mountains

24

(1988:107). Jaeger found that the material from the Maya Mountains was used for Flat and

Concave forms and that there was a greater correlation between the Guatemalan material and

Flat metates. She found that the majority of the complete metates were found in use-related

contexts. Similar to Garber’s (1989) observations for Cerros, Jaeger (1988:102) reports that

many pieces of ground stone were reused in construction as wall stones or fill at Santa Rita.

A total of 136 manos from the site of Santa Rita were sorted by shape, with the predominant

cross-section types represented by Oval (46 percent) and Circular (15 percent) categories

(1988:103). A third category was used to lump the remaining 39 percent of the fragments

that were too small to be identified as either Oval or Circular. The study of the raw material

of manos has shown that 91 percent were made of local stone.

The majority of raw material data for both metates and manos reflect the fact that local

sources were overwhelmingly used through time and across space (1988:107). The use of

nonlocal stone increases from the Classic period to the Postclassic period (1988:107). From

the Postclassic period, 80 percent of the raw material from the collection is derived from

local sources, 12 percent comes from the Maya Mountains, and 6 percent is from the

highlands of Guatemala (1998:109). Santa Rita has a comparatively low percentage of

nonlocal material (18 percent) in comparison to sites discussed above such as Cerros (64.3

percent) (Garber 1989), and Sidrys’ (1983) northern Belize survey (62.1 percent). This is

unusual since Santa Rita has been proposed as the political center for the greater region

(Chase and Chase 1982), and the low percentage may be the result of a comparatively small

sample size.

25

Laguna de On

The small, inland lagoon community of Laguna de On, located in northern Belize, has been

detailed in a recent book (Masson 2000). The site is located near the headwaters of the

Freshwater Creek drainage, an aquatic trade route where commercial items were traded in

and out of various inland communities (2000:109). The island has been proposed as the

nucleus of political and religious activities of a larger lagoon community, perhaps also

important in its role as shelter to shore populations during threats of conflicts. Masson

(2000) suggested that the role of Laguna de On in the larger cultural networks of the

Postclassic period was that of a rural settlement area involved in the production of surplus

crafts and consumables; they most likely procured natural resources for both exchange and

the payment of limited tribute to centers such as Caye Coco.

Eleven manos and eight metates in total have been recovered from the Postclassic deposits of

the site of Laguna de On (2000:115-116). Metates vary in form from Concave, Trough, and

Flat, and manos are of both Plano-Convex and Circular varieties. The majority of the tools

were recovered from deposits associated with domestic activities, and three metates were

apparently recycled, as they were recovered (post-usage) from fire pits. Masson (2000:116)

writes, “Their presence at the site indicates that maize processing occurred on the island in a

variety of domestic contexts.”

In an unpublished study conducted in 2001, I analyzed the raw material of the ground stone

assemblage from Laguna de On. The majority (89 percent) of grinding implements

26

recovered from the site are made of local materials that include limestone and sandstone.

Nonlocal material recovered from the site includes one metate made of basalt and one

granitic mano. This does not follow the general Postclassic pattern of increased importation

of raw materials for the larger region (Sidrys 1983; Sidrys and Andresen 1976). Masson

(2000:115) has suggested that the local material used to produce ground stone at Laguna de

On may indicate a limited means for obtaining nonlocal/exotic raw material or finished tools.

After the 13th century, growth trends are reported at this site that includes a significant

increase in importation of long distance commodities, and there are signs in the domestic

artifact assemblage of increased interhousehold status distinctions (2000:7). According to

Masson (2000:7), these trends can be linked with a phase of economic florescence, similar to

that found with the northern Yucatan capital of Mayapan and coastal sites tied to the

maritime trade network around the Yucatan Peninsula. Given these trends, it is puzzling

why there is not more nonlocal ground stone recovered from this site, although the

assemblage is relatively small and may be biased as a result.

Ambergris Caye

Guderjan and Garber (1995) excavated a series of sites on Ambergris Caye, Belize, an island

situated between riverine/bay and coastal systems. This island is located approximately at

the halfway point between the southeast Maya periphery and the northern Yucatan. After

Cozumel, it is the largest island on the Caribbean coast of the peninsula. During the

Postclassic period the deep-water cayes of southern Belize were heavily utilized (Guderjan

and Garber 1995), and Ambergris Caye is located in a strategic position for Maya maritime

27

trade. Two sites from this caye have Postclassic occupations from which grinding

implements have been reported (1995): San Juan and Chac Balam. The Willey (1972)

typology was used to analyze the ground stone collection from the two sites.

San Juan

San Juan has a series of substructural mounds located on top of an agglutinated platform

(Guderjan 1995:19). A total of nine metates have been recovered from the site (Garber

1995:115). The most common form represented is the Basin-Slab, and with the exception of

one larger metate made of basalt, the form is small in size. This form has both a flat grinding

surface and a flat bottom. The raw material from this site includes four metates (44 percent)

that are made from limestone, two (22 percent) from basalt, two (22 percent) from granite,

and one (11 percent) from schist.

Nineteen manos have been recovered from San Juan, the majority (89 percent) of which are

made from local material (only two are granite, one basalt), and the prominent forms are

Oval and Plano-Convex (N=13). Also represented are circular (N=4), trapezoidal (N=1), and

undetermined (N=1) forms. Out of the assemblage, only one mano has been found unbroken,

possibly attributed to the nature of the material: granite.

For both manos and metates for San Juan, 71.4 percent is made from local material, 17.9

percent comes from the Maya Mountains, and 10.7 percent is made out of material most

likely from Highland Guatemala. As reported by Garber (1995:116), the majority of the

28

material in this assemblage represents the Late Classic period; however, there is a Postclassic

component to the site, but it is unclear whether any of the ground stone from this assemblage

dates from this time period.

Chac Balam

Chac Balam consists of a central plaza surrounded by a series of structures (Guderjan

1995:19). Seventeen metates have been recovered from the site, with the majority of them

made out of limestone (N=10); other materials found include basalt (N=6) and schist (N=1)

(Garber 1995). All of the specimens are fragments; nevertheless, Garber (1995:115) has

identified them as Basin-Slabs in form. One fragment shows reuse, as a grinder, after

breakage.

A total of 20 manos are recorded for the site of Chac Balam, with the majority made out of

local material (N=15) and the most common form being Oval and Plano-Convex (N=14).

Other forms found at the site include Circular (N=3), Rectangular (N=2), and Undetermined

(N=1). Three manos were recovered unbroken out of the entire collection.

Overall raw material data for both manos and metates show that 67.8 percent of the

assemblage derives from local materials, 10.8 percent from the Maya Mountains, and 21.6

percent from Highland Guatemala. Once again, Garber (1995:116) finds that the majority of

the material in this assemblage represents the Late Classic period. Similar to the site of San

Juan, there is a Postclassic component to Chac Balam, but it is also unclear whether any of

the ground stone from this assemblage dates from this time period.

29

Southern Belize

Elizabeth Graham (1983:290-293) discussed the ground stone excavated from sites in the

Stann Creek district of Southern Belize. A total of two whole metates (one made of granite,

the other from an unknown material that is possibly limestone) and nine metate fragments

were recorded from the sites of Mullins River, Maintzunun, Mayflower, and Kendal. Of

these fragments six are granite, one is quartzite, and one is sandstone, all of which represent

material that could be obtained locally. The majority of the collection is Basin (Trough) in

shape, and they all display different degrees of use wear. While not all can be dated, those

that can be dated most likely fall between Terminal Classic and Early Postclassic in date.

Four manos and eight mano fragments were recorded from excavations at Pomona,

Maintzunun, Mayflower, and Kendal. The majority of the manos date from Terminal Classic

or Terminal Classic-Early Postclassic deposits, with the exception of one from the Classic

period from Maintzunun. Mano shapes vary, with all varieties present with the exception of

Triangular, Large-Square, and Overhang (Dogbone). Eight manos are crafted out of granite,

one is a metamorphosed siltstone, and one is vesicular basalt. The mano made of vesicular

basalt represents the only material that is nonlocal to the area.

30

The Northern Lowlands

Yucatan-Campeche Coast

Jack Eaton (1978) surveyed the north and west coasts of the Yucatan Peninsula and collected

many different classes of artifacts, including ground stone tools. The following is a

discussion about the tools collected from shore occupations that were analyzed and classified

by Eaton as dating to either the Modified Florescent (1000-1200 AD) or Decadent (1200 to

1500s AD) time periods, or within the time range of either of the two periods (1978:48-51).

Given the way the data are presented by Eaton, it is often difficult to ascertain the exact time

period to which artifacts may date; specifically, it is impossible to know if sites from the

Modified Florescent period represent Terminal Classic or Early Postclassic sites. To further

compound the problem, some sites show evidence of continuous occupation from the Early

period I (250-600 AD) through to the Colonial period in the 1500s, and the majority of the

ground stone artifacts were collected from the surface.

The survey recovered a total of 48 manos dating from all time periods. The majority of them

were whole or nearly whole in nature, and they were mostly cylindrical in longitudinal and

transverse cross-section. Over all time periods, the manos ranged in raw material from flint

(33 percent), limestone (25 percent), and basalt (42 percent). Of the total of 48 manos, 21

may possibly date to the Modified Florescent period, 6 may come from Decadent period

sites, and 3 are possibly from Modified Florescent and/or Decadent period sites.

31

Compared to the number of manos that were recovered from the coast, relatively few metates

were collected (1978:51). The most common metate form found by Eaton was the “pila,” or

trough-shaped metate that was either squared, rectangular, or natural in form. Eaton recorded

that on occasion, large, carefully cut masonry blocks were used to make this type of metate.

Isla Jaina, Isla Piedras, and Isla Uaymil

The site of Isla Jaina was occupied from Early Period I (A.D. 250-600) to the Modified

Florescent period, and four cylindrical manos (three dark gray basalt fragments, one light

gray basalt, and one flint end fragment) and one nearly flat mano (made of light gray basalt)

were recovered (Eaton 1978:50).

Also dating to this time period range is the site of Isla Piedras. Four cylindrical mano

specimens (one whole basalt, one fragmented basalt, one white flint fragment, and one whole

limestone) were collected (Eaton 1978:50).

The site of Isla Uaymil dates to the same time range as that of Isla Jaina and Isla Piedras, and

a total of 11 manos were collected from the site. Four of the manos are cylindrical in shape

(two whole manos of gray to white flint, two whole manos of basalt), and seven are

rectangular (two limestone, one whole and one end fragment, three basalt end fragments, and

two white flint end fragments) (Eaton 1978:50).

32

Emal

The site of Emal has an occupation that spans from the Late Formative (300 B.C.-A.D. 200)

to the Colonial period. A total of three manos were recovered from the site, one rectangular

(whole dark gray basalt) and two cylindrical end fragments (one limestone, one brown flint)

(Eaton 1978:50).

El Cuyo South

El Cuyo South is a site with two separate dates of occupation in the Late Formative and again

in the Modified Florescent. This site had one cylindrical limestone mano fragment recorded

(Eaton 1978:50).

Paraiso and Champoton-1

The site of Paraiso dates from between the Modified Florescent and Colonial periods. One

cylindrical limestone mano was recovered from the site (Eaton 1978:50). Also dating to this

time range is the site of Champoton-1, where five cylindrical manos (one complete limestone

sample, three limestone end fragments, and one basalt end fragment) were recorded (Eaton

1978:50).

33

Isla Piedras

A total of eight limestone Trough-shaped metates and one imported stone (light gray basalt)

metate (or possibly a palette) fragment were encountered. The fragment has a tapering

cylindrical leg and was recovered from the site of Isla Piedras, which Eaton believes dates to

somewhere between A.D. 800-1200 (Eaton 1978:51).

The Río Bec Region

The Río Bec region, located near the center of the Yucatan Peninsula in the Maya

Lowlands, has numerous small centers around the larger sites of Becán and Chicanná. In

general, the Postclassic period ground stone collections reported for the region were few;

Rovner and Lewenstein (1997:134) suggested that this is a pattern that reflects a diminished

population during a period of post-collapse at Classic period sites in the Río Bec. The

ground stone collected from this time period consists of a total of 34 manos and 10 metates.

Two mano fragments, crafted from dark gray vesicular basalt, had oval-rectangular

cross-sections resulting from use-wear on both the top and bottom (1997:57). A total of 10

cylindrical manos (of which 6 are broken) are reported, with the majority made of local

limestone or grayish brown “cherty limestone,” with uniformly round or slightly ovoid cross-

sections (1997:58). This type of cross-section lacks wear facets and, according to the

authors, overlaps with “faceted manos” (1997:58). Seventeen limestone “faced” manos are

also recorded for the region, of which approximately half were broken (1997:58).

34

Ten basalt metates are recorded for the Río Bec region for this time period, only one

of which is not broken. Little descriptive information was recorded in regard to these

artifacts; however, it is interesting to note the high amount of imported material found from

the metates that date to the Postclassic time period. Rovner and Lewenstein write:

Even allowing for collection bias, this represents a sudden appearance in quantity of an import that probably originated in the Maya highlands. The arrival of basalt artifacts…may owe to a significant shift in interregional relations from Late Classic patterns (Rovner and Lewenstein 1997:133).

Some of the tools found within the Río Bec and Dzibilchaltun collections have been chipped

and then ground, while others are pecked and/or polished (1997:55). According to the

authors, some seem to have been chosen for their natural form and then used without any

further notable alteration.

Becán

Rovner and Lewenstein (1997:126) discussed the ground stone tools from the fortressed site

of Becán. Tools dating specifically to the Xcocom period (Terminal Classic to Early

Postclassic) consisted of six manos: one basalt mano, one cylindrical limestone mano, two

“faced” limestone manos, and two rectangular limestone manos. Two basalt metates also

date to this time period. The importation of exotic material as reported by Rovner (1974:130)

and Rovner and Lewenstein (1997:126) may reflect the increasing trade of the Postclassic

time period.

35

Chicanná

Rovner (1974:130) discusses ground stone in association with other artifacts for the Early

Postclassic period at Chicanná. The site of Chicanná is a small center of monumental

architecture, believed to be an elite center in the Río Bec region (Rovner and Lewenstein

1997). A preliminary analysis by Rovner (1974) has revealed that only basalt metates and

bark beaters appear in the assemblage during the Early Postclassic period, a trend that is

similar to many sites on the Yucatan Peninsula for this time period. Rovner and Lewenstein

(1997:125) discuss the grinding tools in more detail: from the Xcocom Period, which

overlaps the Terminal Classic and Early Postclassic time periods, there exists one mano made

of basalt, one faced limestone mano, and three basalt metates.

Chichen Itza

Many northern Yucatan archaeologists now infer that the site of Chichen Itza was established

by the 9th century AD, and then became the most dominant power in the northern Maya

region during the Early Postclassic period (1000 to 1200 AD) (Andrews et al. 2000).

Chichen Itza was in a powerful position to control the burgeoning maritime trade that

connected the Postclassic Yucatan Peninsula of the Maya with lower Central America, the

Mexican Gulf Coast, and both the Mexican and Mayan Highlands (Kepecs et al. 1994;

Kepecs 1998).

36

Isla Cerritos, a nearby island site, seemingly served as a hub for far-reaching merchant

marine exchange. Items traded included foods and condiments (salt, honey, cacao, etc.),

textiles, hides, and ornaments including cotton, feathers, jade, copper, and exotic lapidary

items (Andrews et al. 1988). Nonlocal obsidian and grinding tools, most likely imported

from the Highland Maya area, or from central Mexico and southern Central America, are also

included in the list of items commonly traded (1988).

In the 1930’s, Strömsvik (1931) wrote a descriptive account of the metates of Chichen Itza,

recording shapes, sizes, material types, and weights. Strömsvik (1937:127) found that

limestone trough metates were the most common form found at Chichen Itza. Many of the

limestone metates from Chichen Itza were reused as building stones. According to

Proskouriakoff (1962:340), the manos of Chichen Itza are similar to those from Mayapan,

but with a “more restricted range of cross sections.”

Sidrys and Andresen (1976:184) manipulated the raw material data of the 1962 study by

Tatiana Proskouriakoff regarding the artifacts of Chichen Itza and found that the site

“appears to have had a very significant trade with the volcanic highlands, especially in

consideration of its 700 km source distance.” Sidrys and Andresen (1976:185, Table 2)

report that for the sample of 42 metates from Chichen Itza, 85.7 percent is made out of

locally available materials, and 14.3 percent is volcanic in nature. They stated that there

exists a “marked disparity” between the trade in the volcanic rock of Chichen Itza and that of

Mayapan, although they do not expand on this statement.

37

Balankanche

The site of Balankanche dates to the Classic period. Nearby, the Gruta de Balankanche, a

large cave containing more than a kilometer (km) of explored passageways and at least four

underground pools, was intermittently used from the Formative period until just prior to the

Spanish Conquest (Andrews 1970:8). The cave has numerous domed chambers within that

have individual groups of offerings, of which Andrews (1970) identified a total of six groups

(I-VI). All cave offerings are directly associated with either underground water sources or

stalagmite formations (1970:9).

Out of these offerings, a total of 252 miniature stone manos and metates were found along

with images of the god Tlaloc on large clay censers, various vessel forms, and stone censers

(1970:9). Other vessels without this imagery were also found in the offerings, including

large biconical censers; large cylindrical carved stone censers; miniature dishes and jars;

carved clay spindle whorls; beads made out of bone, shell, and jade; and several mosaics of

jade, shell, and pyrite.

Andrews (1970:11) identified the most extensive group of offerings as “Group III,” which,

along with 15 large censers, had a total of 232 of the miniature metates and manos associated

with it. Most of these miniature grinding tools were piled randomly and deeply in one area

of the floor, along with 17 miniature vessels, a miniature Tlaloc effigy jar, 25 spindle whorls,

and a pot covered with the molded head of a jaguar. The average size of the metates was

13.5 centimeter (cm) in length, 8.5 cm in width, and 1.5 cm in thickness; the average size of

38

the manos was always reported as slightly larger than the metates were wide, ranging from

6.5-17.5 cm long and 2.5-5.0 cm in diameter (1970:32). Most of the metate surfaces were

flat, with one end lower than the other, with approximately 20 percent of them showing a

slight longitudinal cavity. All miniature metates were footed, and the manos varied from

ellipses to cylinders.

Andrews noted variation in the manufacturing of these diminutive tools, with some being

“well-shaped” and others more expedient; none showed evidence of use wear (1970:32).

One of the metates from Group III showed traces of Maya Blue pigment on the legs. One

metate from Group I was painted in a “domino style with five circles in Maya Blue on the

top,” and at least three metates from Group II were also covered in this pigment (1970:32).

Aside from this pigment, no other decoration was found on these small tools. Andrews

(1970:32) states that the miniature metates and manos were most likely made locally, as

offerings in cave ceremonies. Raw material type was not reported for the miniature tools.

Mayapan

Not long after A.D. 1200, the dominant political center of Chichen Itza was succeeded by

Mayapan, which dominated a large portion of the northern Yucatan during the Late

Postclassic period (1200 to 1500 AD). Ethnohistoric documents indicate that the city of

Mayapan took control of a surging system of Postclassic maritime trade around the Yucatan

39

Peninsula (Roys 1962; Tozzer 1941; Freidel and Sabloff 1984). Many of the Maya polities

that allied with Mayapan in this system prospered as everyday items and luxury goods moved

across the Maya Lowlands, as well as through the Guatemalan Highlands and Central

Mexico.

Proskouriakoff (1962) analyzed the artifacts of Mayapan, breaking down the grinding tools

first by raw material, and secondarily by form. She recorded a total of 726 limestone

metates, including fragments, categorizing them as either Legless-Trough metates or Tripod

metates. Proskouriakoff identified the majority of the limestone metates as the Legless-

Trough type, suggesting that this form was most likely manufactured in the city (1962:337).

The overall form of this type of metate varied considerably since many of the metates did not

show evidence of deliberate shaping (1962:338). However, Proskouriakoff did not subdivide

this group. A large number of these metates were either fashioned out of building blocks, or

discarded metates were found reused as building blocks, and at least one was found in a

“sealed cist beneath construction” (1962:338). She believed, based on the complimentary

wear patterns, that these metates were used along with the “Blunt-ended” mano in order to

process corn.

Proskouriakoff (1962:338) also put forth that limestone Tripod metates appear to be more

recent and most likely date to sometime after the Colonial period. This seems unlikely since

the site has almost no Colonial occupation as reflected in the pottery (Smith 1971). “Knob-

ended” manos were most likely used with Tripod metates. Metates fashioned out of

imported stone of volcanic and other igneous materials total 19 in number (1962:347), or 3

40

percent of the total assemblage. It appears that all of these forms are either Flat or Flat-

Legged in shape.

In comparison to metates, Proskouriakoff discussed very few manos (N=41) without

addressing the difference in number. Manos were categorized by their raw material (local

versus imported stone) and shape: Blunt-ended, Cigar-shaped, or Knob-ended (which

corresponds with Dog-Bone). Blunt-ended limestone manos tended to be rounded, but with

considerable variation in cross-section; they are the most common form found at Mayapan.

Eleven manos were recovered from cists and tombs; however, only one mano (and a metate)

was clearly associated with a burial of a male and a female skeleton (1962:340). Cigar-

shaped limestone manos are fewer in frequency (N=3) and tended to be Elliptical or Round

in transverse cross-section. Two Cigar-shaped manos were recovered from the surface, and

one fragment was found in construction fill. Two limestone Knob-ended mano fragments

were recorded. A total of eight manos were recovered that were made of volcanic or igneous

materials (1962:347). The forms varied from Cylindrical to Oval to Square in transverse

cross-section. One fragment was identified as Knob-ended in shape.

More recently, Clifford Brown (1999) mapped several areas of residential settlements at the

site of Mayapan. Brown collected surface artifact samples and excavated three clusters of

house lots, as well as one house lot that contained two house groups. He focused most of his

attention on the analyses of obsidian and ceramics, and very little information on the ground

stone from his study is currently reported.

41

Preliminary results from work done at Mayapan by Masson and Peraza (2002) with

household artifact assemblages reflect the fact that both elites and commoners at this

monumental center were able to obtain most commodities, though in unequal amounts.

While very little has yet been accomplished with the ground stone from the site, some

patterns such as concentrations of metates suggest collective houselot activities of food

production (Masson et al. 2002:5). Raw material and shape/form data for the artifacts have

not been recorded at this stage of their fieldwork.

Highland Guatemala

Chisalin

The Late Postclassic settlement of Chisalin is located in the Quiché Valley of Highland

Guatemala. Using the architectural classification scheme, Weeks (1983:44) found that the

bulk of grinding tools from Chisalin come from “Type Series 2” residential platforms. In

addition, 43 out of 64 grinding tools were found on, or in, palace structures, or “Type Class

21.” These palace structures most likely possessed communal cooking areas for both larger

families and feasting, and thus it is not unusual that there existed a large number of these

grinding implements. Weeks has recovered very few whole grinding tools at this site, and

42

fragments of tools often had secondary wear patterns on them. The wear patterns suggest

reuse of ground stone tools as hammerstones or implements for masons. In general, ground

stone tools from Chisalin were common in both fill and burial contexts (Weeks 1983).

Thirty-three manos have been recovered from the site, all of which were manufactured out of

a dark, igneous stone, either vesicular basalt or andesite (Weeks 1983:212). Manos were

classified based on the configuration of the cross-section, and three forms have been

recognized at the site: Circular (N=10), Ovoid (N=5), Truncated Lenticular (N=3), and many

remain unclassified (N=15). Three pestles have been recorded at the site.

A total of 27 metates were excavated at Chisalin, the majority of which came from secondary

fill deposits (1983:214). Out of this collection, only one variety has been identified: the

Tripod-Leg metate. The raw material of all metates is a slightly to moderately vesicular

andesite or basalt, available regionally but not locally. The majority of these were small

fragments, with the only complete metate found in the context of a burial.

Chiapas, Mexico

La Libertad

In 1988, John Clark conducted an in depth study of the stone tools of La Libertad, a large and

important Middle Preclassic (700-300 BC) site located in Chiapas, Mexico. Clark recorded

43

information dealing with the technique of manufacture, source of raw material, and possible

function. He separated metates into a total of five groups based on the distinguishable shape:

Boulder Basin, Flat Boulder, Shallow Basin, Thin Flat, and Miscellaneous Metate Fragments.

Clark further subdivided these groups by visible characteristics such as size, depth, or the

presence or absence of rims (among other attributes). He separated manos into five groups:

Small Cobble, Small Oval, Two-handed Manos for Restricted Metates, Two-handed Manos

for Flat Metates, and Mano Fragments. He subdivided these groups based on the number of

visible facets, presence or absence of borders, and both longitudinal and transverse cross-

section shape.

Clark analyzed all grinding tools for their geological source, and he found that many were

imported into La Libertad from several procurement areas, one of which being the adjacent

Guatemalan Highlands (1988:129). He identified only one metate and several manos in the

assemblage as local stone. Clark calculated that local stone would have been available

within a 1-hour walk of La Libertad, whereas stone that was available from the region would

have been a 5-6 hour walk (1988:131). He suggested that form is related to raw material

since metates were designed to be efficient for transport reasons; hence, a preponderance of

thin, legless slabs at the site (1988:132).

Clark postulated that the majority of manos and metates were used for grinding corn or seeds

(1988:132). A small number of grinding tools were used for other miscellaneous grinding

tasks, and one was positively identified by residue analysis as used for pigment grinding. It

44

is notable that many tools were reused after they were broken, and only one whole mano

(used for grinding corn) and no whole metates were recovered at La Libertad (1988:133).

Overall Trends in Mesoamerica

Form

Mano form, as exemplified above, is generally reported by categorizing the shape of the

transverse cross-section of the tool, a subjective and inconsistent process. There have been

very few studies where longitudinal form is presented, and when it is, the use of differing

categorization shape terminology can be confusing in tracking trends between sites and

regions. As a result, no overall mano trends are reported herein for Mesoamerica. However,

some regional trends are visible from sites reported on from the Corozal region. As noted

above, Sidrys (1983) found that the most common mano transverse cross-section form in the

Corozal region is Oval, followed by Circular and Rectangular. Similarly, Jaeger (1988)

reported that close to half of the manos from Santa Rita were classified as Oval in transverse

cross-section, followed by Circular (15 percent), and a large number were unidentifiable (39

percent).

Several scholars have reported that by the Late Postclassic period, Flat metates, and

specifically Three-Legged Carved metates, appear to be the most popular form found in

45

Mesoamerica (see MacNeish et al. 1967:121; Sheets 1978:27; Woodbury 1965:166). While

this trend holds true for the highland site of Chisalin, it is not accurate for the Northern

Lowland region as represented by data collected from Mayapan and sites along the Yucatan-

Campeche Coast (see Table 1). Rather, limestone trough metates are the most common form

found in the Northern Lowlands, with Flat metates found in small numbers. Furthermore,

Flat metates are invariably made out of nonlocal materials. Trough forms comprise the

entirety of the assemblage from sites in the Stann Creek District in Belize, although the total

sample number is admittedly small (N=11). Trough metates forms are also the most

common at Postclassic sites from the Corozal district (38 percent), with Flat forms found in

slightly lesser amounts (33 percent).

Table 1 - Metate forms represented at sites in the Postclassic Maya region

Region-Site Concave (%)

Flat (%)

Trough (%)

Unidentified(%)

Corozal District 23 33 38 7

Stann Creek District 0 0 100 0

Yucatan-Campeche Coast 0 11 89 0

Northern Yucatan - Mayapan 0 4.5 95 0.5

Highland Guatemala - Chisalin 0 100 0 0

The great diversity of metate types at both Caye Coco and Northeastern Belize contrasts with

that of the northern Yucatan. This greater diversity may be related to the availability of raw

46

materials available to the region through trade, since certain materials may be used for

specific forms in order to conserve precious materials. An example of this is how trough-

shaped metates, the largest of all metate forms, are not manufactured out of nonlocal material

from any of the aforementioned sites. This may suggest that form is related to raw material

in order to design more efficient metates for transport reasons (Clark 1988:132). Another

possibility is that differing metate forms may reflect the stylistic preferences of the regions

where they were originally manufactured. At the very least, the greater diversity in ground

stone raw materials makes Northeast Belize appear to be more of a trading hub in

comparison to other regions reported on in this study.

Raw Material

The percentage of nonlocal ground stone tool raw material present at sites during the Classic

and/or Postclassic period is shown in Tables 2 and 3. Where data is available across both

time and space, there is a great deal of variation. This is most likely due to factors such as

trading geographic advantages and effects of political centralization, among other things.

While the sample may be biased, Tables 2 and 3 also show a high degree of nonlocal material

for the Peten Classic period sites. In fact, some Classic period sites have more nonlocal

ground stone than some Postclassic sites, which may be a result of sampling bias from central

Classic period cities, where only elite contexts were reported. This observation is contrary to

the greater amount of nonlocal materials present at Postclassic sites that Sidrys (1983) has

reported. These data reported in the tables above appear to refute Marcus’s (1983) attack on

Rathje (1972) that claims that Classic interior sites were largely self-

47

Table 2 - Percentage of non-local material for metates during the Classic and/or Postclassic period

Site Nonlocal Classic

(%)

Nonlocal Postclassic

(%) Citation

Tikal, Uaxactun, Yaxha, San Jose, Barton Ramie 88 --

Sidrys 1983; Sidrys and Andresen 1976

Caye Coco -- 84 Laguna de On -- 13 Delu n.d. Aventura, Caledonia, Chan Chen, Patchchacan, Santa Rita Corozal, Sarteneja 33 63

Sidrys 1983; Sidrys and Andresen 1976

Santa Rita Corozal -- 18 Jaeger 1988 Ambergris Caye - San Juan and Chac Balam 46 -- Guderjan and Garber 1995 Yucatan-Campeche Coast -- 13 Eaton 1978 Chichen Itza 14 -- Sidrys and Andresen 1976 Mayapan -- 3 Proskouriakoff 1962 Río Bec -- 100 Rovner and Lewenstein 1997 La Libertad 98 -- Clark 1988 Chisalin -- 100 Weeks 1983

Table 3 - Percentage of non-local material for manos during the Classic and/or Postclassic period

Site Avg. Nonlocal

Classic (%)

Avg. Nonlocal Postclassic

(%) Citation

Caye Coco -- 59 Laguna de On -- 9 Aventura, Caledonia, Chan Chen, Patchchacan, Santa Rita Corozal, Sarteneja -- 10

Sidrys and Andresen 1976

Santa Rita Corozal -- 9 Jaeger 1988 Ambergris Caye - San Juan and Chac Balam 21 -- Guderjan and Garber 1995 Río Bec -- 18 Rovner and Lewenstein 1997 Mayapan -- 15 Proskouriakoff 1962 La Libertad 74 -- Clark 1988 Chisalin -- 100 Weeks 1983

48

sufficient in terms of basic items available locally such as ground stone. This issue is

discussed in further detail in Section VI of this work.

Low proportions of nonlocal raw materials are found in the northern Yucatan during the

Postclassic time period (Tables 2 and 3). This implies that some sort of distance decay

principle was in place, which is also reported at Mayapan by Masson and Chaya (2002) with

the percentage of obsidian out of the total lithic tools found at Mayapan compared to Caye

Coco and Laguna de On. Households at Mayapan rely on obsidian far less than those of

Belize, despite the greater political standing of Mayapan (Masson and Chaya 2002).

Summary

This section serves to rally disparate sources on ground stone tools into one place. This

literature review demonstrates that there is no uniform approach to analyzing and recording

ground stone tools. Tables 2 and 3 show how unevenly ground stone data are reported for

the Mesoamerica region. At the same time, they do report some basic regional trends in

ground stone tool form and raw material. In addition, this section provides the origin for the

author’s approach to ground stone analysis for the Caye Coco assemblage. This approach,

outlined in Section IV of this paper, picks and chooses the most useful attributes from the

above literature review.

49

IV. ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES

The analysis of the ground stone assemblage from Caye Coco took place during the 2001

field season of the Belize Postclassic Project 2001. An initial report of methods and analysis

can be found in Delu (2002), and the description of methods below is adapted from that

work. The current study focuses solely on grinding tools dating from the Postclassic period.

The Postclassic period, as defined in this work, is an extended period of time from

approximately 1050 to 1500 AD, as defined in chronology research at the sites of Laguna de

On and Caye Coco (Masson 2000:1). Caye Coco is an island with a predominantly

Postclassic occupation, which is reflected in the types of artifacts found on the surface of the

site. Terminal Classic period deposits were also found in a few contexts on the island;

however, they were buried beneath at least 30 cm of Postclassic deposits. As such, I make

the assumption that the grinding tools that were collected during surface surveys of the island

date to the Postclassic period. Provenience was used to help determine the date of the artifact

in question.

Few complete grinding tools have been recovered from Caye Coco, and many of the tools

were too small to accurately and unambiguously identify in terms of morphological form.

However, identification of shape was made whenever enough of the fragment was present.

With this in mind, the morphological form was the weakest attribute recorded for the metates

and manos from this assemblage. In addition, the fragmentary nature of the Caye Coco

50

assemblage did not allow for the calculation of the amount of attrition (the amount of the tool

that has been worn away) for the individual tools.

The grinding tools from Caye Coco were classified into one of three types: metates, manos,

and unidentifiable fragments. Manos and metates were further divided into categories based

on form. Once again, due to the extremely fragmentary nature of the assemblage, this

information was impossible to gather for many pieces of the collection. For unidentifiable

fragments, the attributes recorded were provenience, raw material, and metrics. A full list of

all variables and attributes used in this analysis is available in Table 4.

Metates (milling stones) were broken down into four categories based on distinguishable

shape (Figure 4), derived from categories created by Jaeger (1988:100-102):

Flat Metates: grinding surfaces reach the edge of the artifact, in addition to having a straight edge (see Figures 4a and 4b). A sub-category of the flat metate type is one with legs or feet, understanding that some un-footed fragments might originate in this category. It is also important to note that the number of flat, legged metates may be underestimated and the number of slabs overestimated. A second sub-category of the flat metate type is the palette, defined here as typically made from a more tabular raw material and smaller in both thickness and size than other flat metates.

Concave Metates: grinding surfaces curve inward, like the inside of a bowl, and extend to the edge, not enclosed by a rim (see Figure 4c). This type is also known as the Turtleback metate that is common throughout the Maya Lowlands (Willey 1978).

Trough Metates: also known as Basin metates, vary from shallow to deep, are “U-shaped” when viewed in cross-section, and the grinding surface does not generally extend to the edge (see Figure 4d). A trough metate often slopes from one side to another from use. Trough metates require the most effort to manufacture out of all of these three types and typically last a considerably longer time than the manos that are used with them (Schlanger 1991).

51

Table 4 – Variables and attributes used in ground stone analysis Grinding Tool Type Metates Manos Unidentified Metate Form Category Flat Trough Concave Mortar Mano Form Categories Longitudinal Cross-Section Oval Lenticular Rectangular Tapering Undetermined Transverse Cross-Section Oval-Symmetrical Oval-Asymmetrical Circular Square Triangular Lenticular Undetermined Battering Presence Absence No Data

Geological Identification Local Limestone Sandstone Travertine Maya Mountains Metamorphic Igneous Quartzite Rhyolite Gabbro Granite Quartz Diorite Long Distance Extrusive Volcanic Basalt Other Colha Chert Functional Differences Rotary versus reciprocal grinding Size of mano (one hand/two hand) Open versus restricted shape of grinding surface Patterns in breakage

52

Figure 4 - Cross-sections of the various forms of metates found at Caye Coco: a) Flat; b) Flat-Legged; c) Concave; d) Trough; e) Mortar (after Jaeger 1988:99)

a

b

c

d

e

53

Mortars: shaped stone bowls with a central, and usually approximately circular, concavity of varying depth and diameter (Schneider 1993:6) (see Figure 4e). Materials are pounded, crushed, or ground within a mortar, and pecking or rotary grinding usually marks the grinding surface (Adams 2002:41).

Depending on the classification of the metate and the size of the fragment or whole piece,

measurements were taken differently. In general, length, width, height, and weight in grams

were recorded. A maximum/minimum thickness was recorded when appropriate (i.e., only

when there was a complete, or almost complete, artifact). Height was recorded as the

maximum distance from a metate rim to its ventral surface, and basin thickness referred to

the stone thickness in the middle, or thinnest portion, of the metate basin. Following Clark’s

method of ground stone analysis from La Libertad, Mexico (1998:96), dimensional data

recorded for a Trough/Basin metate were: length, width, height, basin thickness, wall

thickness, border width, length width, width height, and basin thickness depth.

Manos (hand stones) were identified as stones in their natural shape or shaped by pecking, to

be used on, or in, metates in motions moving back and forth, going in circles, or chopping.

Manos may be held in one or two hands and come in a variety of shapes that reflect their use.

The process of rubbing the mano against the metate creates use-wear on the mano, and both

tools are worn at the same instance in a complementary way. However, a mano may, or may

not, show traces of wear depending on whether or not it has been used, and whether

processes of erosion have changed the surface of the tool. Pestles, elongated stone objects

with one or both ends flattened by rotary grinding or by pecking either deliberately or

through use, were grouped into the mano category as a distinct form due to their unique

shape.

54

For manos, both longitudinal and transverse cross-sections were recorded, whenever

possible, by reference to templates (see Figures 5 and 6). Often, a heavily worn mano will

have an odd shape, and its original type is not always apparent. The number and shape of the

grinding surfaces were recorded. Also, if a mano was complete, or an end fragment, the

shape of the ends and borders were all recorded. Rounded and tapered ends are actually a

characteristic of the grinding surface (i.e., it is the surface which does or does not taper).

Metric data for manos were recorded for length, maximum/minimum width,

maximum/minimum thickness, and weight. Here width was defined as greater than the

thickness.

Each piece in the Caye Coco ground stone collection was geologically identified in the field

laboratory by the author. All pieces were observed both macroscopically and by an

examination with a 16x hand lens. The general geological sources were identified for the

Caye Coco assemblage based on the closest “matching” geological region for the raw

material. Sidrys (1983:295-296) recorded three geological source zones for northern Belize:

(1) local sedimentary rock (limestone, sandstone, conglomerates, and shales); (2)

metamorphic and igneous intrusions of the Maya Mountains (gneiss, quartzite, slate, schist,

granite, and porphyry); and (3) extrusive volcanic rocks from southern Guatemala or

northern Honduras (basalt, vesicular lava, pumiceous and andisitic tuff, serpentine, obsidian,

and jade). Sidrys and Andresen write,

…a limestone metate designated to be of local derivation could theoretically have been imported from a distance of several hundred kilometers (of course this is unlikely). Furthermore, all of the metamorphic and igneous rocks found in the Maya Mountains are very likely to also occur near the volcanic highlands. The only certain assignation is in the category of extrusive volcanics. (Sidrys and Andresen 1976:182)

55

Figure 5 - Mano Transverse Cross-Sections at Caye Coco: a) Oval-Symmetrical; b) Oval-Asymmetrical; c) Circular; d) Square; e) Triangular; f) Lenticular (after Clark 1988:98)

Figure 6 - Mano Longitudinal Cross-Sections at Caye Coco: a) Oval; b) Lenticular; c)

Rectangular; d) tapering (after Clark 1988:99)

a

c

e

b

d

f

a

c

b

d

56

As such, the assignation of an artifact to one of these three sources is not incontrovertible,

since it assumes a primary reliance on the nearest available resource (Sidrys and Andresen

1976:182). Local materials herein refer to locally available sedimentary rocks. Nonlocal

materials may refer to materials that are either metamorphic or igneous in nature. The term

“long distance” is specifically used here to refer to the above-mentioned extrusive volcanic

materials.

Ground stone tools, especially those made of soft materials such as limestone, are prone to

erosion that may remove the characteristic polished or ground surface. Exposure to the

elements of wind, rain, water, and fire accelerates the process of decay. This makes the

recognition of ground stone, both in and out of the field, difficult. Whenever present,

erosional factors were recorded for the artifact.

Grinding implements from the Caye Coco collection were considered on the basis of their

major functional differences. Some categories considered here are: (1) rotary (rotation of the

mano) versus reciprocal (back and forth) grinding; (2) size of the mano, and if it is used in

one hand or two hands; (3) open versus restricted shapes of the metate grinding surface; and

(4) patterns in breakage. Grinding surfaces were examined using raking light and a 16x hand

lens in order to flush out these patterns. For example, reciprocal strokes will appear as

striations parallel to the long axis of a metate, whereas rotary grinding will appear as

concentric striations when examined in this manner (Clark 1988).

57

Summary

This section presented the variables and attributes used in the contextual and descriptive

ground stone analysis of the assemblage of Caye Coco. This methodology is built from

studies of similar artifacts from Mesoamerica and beyond. The next section discusses the

results of the ground stone analysis of the tools from Caye Coco.

58

V. RESULTS

Eighty-five pieces of ground stone were excavated and surface collected from the island site

of Caye Coco. Forty-nine metates and metate fragments (Figure 7) have been recovered

from 26 different sub-operations (subops), as well as from surface collections. Thirty-four

manos and mano fragments (Figure 8) have been collected from 26 different subops in

addition to surface collections. Two fragments (shown in Figure 7) from the assemblage

were deemed unidentifiable as either tool type.

The majority of ground stone assemblages in Mesoamerica usually consist of more manos

than metates or of nearly equivalent numbers (Clark 1988:133; Sheets 1978:85). This would

suggest that the assemblage from Caye Coco differs from other assemblages in Mesoamerica

in terms of its 5:3 ratio of metates to manos. The classification and description of the ground

stone assemblage are found in Appendix 1, and only a broad characterization follows in this

section.

Form

Manos

A large proportion of the assemblage has undetermined longitudinal and transverse shape due

to breakage (Table 5). Figures 5 and 6 are templates of clearly defined form categories for

manos, but in reality many forms fell in between these shapes and were not easily

categorized. With this in mind, Circular (18 percent) and Oval-Symmetrical (18 percent) are

the most prevalent transverse shapes (Table 5). Longitudinal form was recorded using the

59

Figure 7 – Metates of all forms, mortars, and unidentified fragments from the Caye Coco ground stone assemblage

Figure 8 - Manos and Pestles from the Caye Coco ground stone assemblage

60

Table 5 - Mano transverse cross-section shapes

Transverse Cross-Section Shape N= %

Circular- Square 2 6 Oval-Asymmetrical 3 9 Oval-Symmetrical 6 18

Circular 6 18 Triangular 1 3 Lenticular 1 3

Undetermined 15 44 Total N= 34

Table 6 - Mano longitudinal cross-section shape

Longitudinal Cross-Section Shape N= %

Oval 6 18 Oval-Rectangular 2 6

Lenticular 1 3 Tapering 1 3

Undetermined 24 71 Total N= 34

Figure 6 template as a general guide, but since forms commonly fell between two categories,

the final categories were used to classify mano longitudinal forms which are mixtures of

shapes from this template: Oval, Oval-Rectangular, Lenticular, Tapering and Unidentified.

Oval (18 percent) is the most common longitudinal shape in the collection (Table 6).

In comparison to the data on mano form from the Corozal region previously described in

Section III, Caye Coco is similar to the larger region in mano transverse form. Both Sidrys

61

(1983) and Jaeger (1988) reported that the most common mano transverse cross-section form

was classified as Oval, followed by Circular forms. Variations on these two forms are the

most frequently reported mano forms at Caye Coco. Similar to the proportions found at Caye

Coco, Jaeger (1988) found that at Santa Rita a large number of manos (39 percent) were

undetermined.

One whole pestle made of vesicular basalt was recovered from Caye Coco with concentric or

spiraling use wear striations, suggesting use in rotary (not rotating) grinding. The pestle is

Tapering in longitudinal form and Circular in transverse cross-section. Excavators noted

(Bradley Russell: Personal Communication 2001) that red pigment was found on the worked

area, although this pigment was no longer present upon analyses. The pestle was found in a

dense domestic midden that also contained five intact tools, including a triangular biface, a

lenticular biface, and a celt (Russell 2001:30). Due to the lack of use-related damage on

these tools, excavators identified this as a possible cache, interred prior to the construction of

the rubble surface. A second pestle fragment, made out of orange-yellow colored limestone

that was most likely burned in prehistory, was found in a deposit just above the Cemetery 3

burials. This tool has two ground facets, with a third worked area that shows both grinding

and battering.

The author assessed all manos (N=34) in the collection for the presence or absence of

battering. Eighteen out of 34 manos could not be scored for battering. Of the 16 manos with

data on the presence or absence of battering, 15 manos (94 percent) show traces of battering.

62

Metates

Table 7 shows the frequencies of metate forms. A large number of metates (N=12) have

forms that are unidentifiable. Flat metates (35 percent) are the most common form found in

the collection. When the Flat form is combined with Flat-Legged (6 percent) and Flat-Palette

(8 percent) forms, they represent a total of 49 percent of the assemblage.

Table 7 – Frequency of metate forms

Metate Form N= %

Flat 17 35 Flat-Legged 3 6 Flat-Palette 4 8

Concave 5 10 Trough 4 8

Mortar/Other 4 8 Unidentified 12 24

Total N= 49

Four Flat metate fragments deserve further discussion due to their unusual nature. These

four metates (Lots 673, 719, 722, and 903) were characterized by unrestricted grinding and

were relatively small in size. All were made from a tabular quartzite with a reddish cortex,

most likely caused by burning. These fragments are from flat grinding palettes, most of

which came from off-mound domestic middens. Two of these palettes (from Lots 673 and

722) may be fragments of the same parent tool, and they were found in relatively close

proximity (Subops 13g and 13i, respectively). The excavator describes the midden that these

63

two palettes came from as “extremely rich in terms of artifact density” with excellent

preservation of the materials (Aguilera 1999:11).

The general size of the middens encountered at Subops 13g, 13h, and 13i in conjunction with

the grinding palettes may be a reflection of some kind of craft specialization activities. One

additional palette from Lot 719 was also recovered from this general vicinity (Subop 13h).

The palette recovered from Lot 903 derives from a different subop, Subop 27b, which was

placed over the east room of Structure 5. The burned tool was found “laying in the northwest

corner of the room not far from the Lot 903 burned marl zone” (Barrett 2000:31). It should

be noted here that excavators have identified Structure 5 as “elite architecture,” and that

artifacts collected from this structure are reflective of this (Barrett 2000:31).

Recycling

Several pieces in the collection stand out as unique in form. They are listed in Table 7 under

the “Mortar/Other” category. These pieces are most likely the result of tool recycling.

An unusual quartzite mortar was collected from the surface of Caye Coco (Figure 9).

The primary grinding surface on this mortar is a large circular area (11.1 cm length x 9.9 cm

width x 1.1 cm thickness) that appears to have been used for one-handed, rotary, and

restricted grinding. On the same side as the primary grinding surface, the mortar appears to

have broken and shows signs of reuse in an area measuring 7.7 cm by 2.5 cm. The opposite

side of the mortar also shows signs of grinding, but was broken post-usage and never reused.

64

Figure 9 - Drawing of a bifacial mortar with various signs of re-use, found on the surface of Caye Coco (Drawing by Devon Wilchelt and Antonina Delu).

cm

Primary grinding surface

Secondary grinding surface

Secondary grinding surface

65

A quartzite metate was recycled into an axe that was found in an excavation conducted on the

North Shore of Caye Coco in 1999 (Figure 10). Excavators report that this area (Subop 13)

was a domestic midden deposit that contained slipped and incised ceramic sherds, a ceramic

figurine arm, a complete lenticular biface, ceramics, and shell beads (Oland 2000:77-78). At

least four surfaces of the axe show grinding, and the bit has several impact scars along the

edge. The axe was most likely a concave metate form, based on the visible attributes.

Figure 10 - Ground stone axe fragment showing distinguishing attributes: a) original metate rim surface; b) original basin surface; c) distal impact scars

b a

c

66

A quartzite flake with visible grinding on it was most likely produced by being knocked off

of the grinding surface of a metate (Figure 11). One edge appears to have been retouched by

pressure flaking. This piece was recovered broken from a domestic area (Subop 34) with

utilitarian debris (Goldman 2001). Since ground stone tools are commonly manufactured by

pecking and their surfaces are commonly refurbished in a similar manner (Adams 2002), this

flake was most likely produced when an already ground metate surface was refurbished by

pecking.

Figure 11 - Quartzite flake with visible grinding, from Subop 34g, Lot 1052 A miniature oval metate made of diorite, measuring 7.9 cm in length, 6.2 cm in width, and

3.2 cm in height, was recovered from Structure 5 (Figure 12). The grinding surface is eroded

but still present in spots. The small size of this metate is unusual, and it may be the result of

the recycling of a tool of nonlocal material. The palettes and this small metate recovered

67

from Caye Coco are reminiscent of the “miniature metates” recovered from the site of

Balankanche, discussed above (Andrews 1970), although the actual metate forms differ.

Many of the diminutive metates recovered from Balankanche showed traces of pigment

(1970), and while no pigment was recovered on the Caye Coco palettes, based on the

similarity of size and form to those recovered from Balankanche, pigment grinding is

inferred as one of the functions of these tools.

a b

Figure 12 - Miniature oval metate a) ventral side; b) dorsal side

Raw Material

A breakdown of the different raw materials of the grinding tools can be found in Tables 8

and 9. Thirty-nine percent of the manos from the assemblage is made from local raw

material sources, 52 percent is made of materials whose closest source to Caye Coco is the

68

Maya Mountains, and very few manos (9 percent) come from farther distances (Table 10).

Not included in Table 10 is a single chert mano, since the raw material is chert from the site

of Colha, Belize, and not from a Maya Mountain source.

Table 8 - Raw material of manos

Material N= % Quartzite 9 26

Limestone 9 26 Travertine 3 9

Vesicular Basalt 3 9 Granite 2 6 Rhyolite 2 6 Gabbro 1 3 Diorite 1 3 Chert 1 3

Milky Quartz 1 3 Sandstone 1 3

Metamorphic 1 3 Total N= 34

Table 9 - Raw material of metates and unidentified fragments

Material N= % Vesicular Basalt 17 40

Quartzite 13 16 Limestone 6 13

Metamorphic 4 11 Granite 3 7 Diorite 2 4 Igneous 1 2 Basalt 1 2

Gabbro 1 2 Sandstone 1 2

Total N= 49

69

Table 10 - Manos and metates by raw material source

Raw Material Source Manos (N=)

Manos (%)

Metates (N=)

Metates (%)

Overall Total (N=)

Overall Total (%)

Local 13 39 7 14 20 24

Maya Mountains 17 52 23 47 40 49

Long Distance 3 9 19 39 22 27

Total N= 33 49 82

Forty-seven percent of all metates come from sources that are most likely in the Maya

Mountain, and more metates are made out of nonlocal raw materials than are manos. Only

14 percent of the metates in the Caye Coco collection are manufactured out of local sources,

in contrast to 39 percent of the manos. When only softer materials such as limestone and

sandstone are available for milling implements, one expects a higher frequency in the

importation of raw material for tools. What is interesting, then, is that according to Sidrys

and Andresen (1976) and Jaeger (1988), many of the collections from the Corozal region

such as Caye Coco also have an extremely high percentage of manos made from local

materials. This may be a reflection of the quicker rate of attrition of manos compared to

metates (Clark 1988:93; Hayden 1987:193) and the desire to not waste more valuable

imported material.

Simplifying the raw material source categories from Table 10 into local versus nonlocal

ground stone reveals interesting patterns. Combining all categories together, two-thirds of

the ground stone assemblage was crafted out of nonlocal raw materials. Thirty-nine percent

70

of manos are made out of local materials, whereas only 14 percent of all metates and

unidentified ground stone are made with local materials. This may reflect the fact that

metates were most likely manufactured at distant location for exchange, whereas manos are

not. In addition, this may also be a result of the desire to not waste more valuable nonlocal

material on manos since manos have a quicker rate of attrition in comparison to metates

(Clark 1988:93; Hayden 1987:193).

Table 11 shows that Trough metates, the largest of the metate forms, are usually fashioned

out of local materials. This is similar to what has been reported for the sites in the Yucatan

Peninsula (see Eaton 1978; Sidrys 1983; Sidrys and Andresen 1976; Proskouriakoff 1962).

Flat and Flat-Legged forms are most commonly formed out of nonlocal materials, and a large

number of them are made of materials imported from a long distance. Concave metates are

equally fashioned out of local material or from material from the Maya Mountains. The

majority of fragments too small to be identified by form are made of nonlocal materials.

This may show the importance of recycling nonlocal materials, as smaller size may reflect

the greater importance placed on exotic material. Mortars and other recycled metate

fragments are exclusively made from nonlocal materials that, once again, show the

importance placed on materials from nonlocal origins.

71

Table 11 - Metate form by raw material source

Metate Form Local (N=)

Local (%)

Maya Mountains

(N=)

Maya Mountains

(%)

Long Distance

(N=)

Long Distance

(%) Flat 1 14 6 25 10 56

Flat/Legged -- -- -- -- 3 17

Palette -- -- 4 17 -- --

Concave 2 29 3 13 -- --

Trough 3 43 -- -- 1 6

Mortar/Other -- -- 4 17 -- --

Unidentified 1 14 7 29 4 22

Total N= 7 24 18

Distribution

Metates were recovered from a total of 26 subops from Caye Coco, and manos were also

found in an equal number of subops. The presence of both manos and metates together

within the same subop occurs only six times in Subops 13L, 14, 15G, 31, 34D, and 38; these

tools were only found within the same lot in two of these subops: Subops 13L and 31. Subop

13L, Lot 873, is identified as a midden deposit within which three pieces of ground stone

were recovered: a recycled quartzite metate fragment that was altered into an axe-shaped

tool, a metamorphic metate fragment of unidentified form, and a mano made of travertine of

an undetermined shape (Oland 2000). Subop 31, Lot 837, is also described as a midden

deposit with a high artifact density that terminates just above bedrock (Roddick 2000). A

Flat vesicular basalt metate fragment and a quartzite mano with Lenticular longitudinal and

Oval-Symmetrical transverse cross-sections were collected from this lot.

72

The distribution of metates and manos at Caye Coco (Table 12) shows that there are a greater

number of grinding tools found off-mound in comparison to on-mound. As Schlanger

(1991:463) noted, damaged or worn-out grinding tools may have been moved to “outside”

spaces such as patios from “inside” surfaces such as house floors. This may help to explain

the distribution pattern found at Caye Coco. There are a larger number of nonlocal materials

found both on-mound and off-mound (Table 13). This reflects the unusually large amount of

nonlocal material recovered overall for the site. However, testing these data with chi-square

shows that there are no significant differences apparent in the raw material found on-mound

versus off-mound (Table 14).

Table 12 - The distribution of metates and manos: off-mound vs. on-mound

Ground Stone Type

Off Mound (N=)

Off-Mound (%)

On-Mound (N=)

On-Mound (%)

Metates 30 58 17 68

Manos 22 42 8 32

Total N= 55 25

Note: table does not include unprovenienced surface collections

Table 13 - Distribution of raw materials at Caye Coco: off-mound vs. on- mound

Origin of Raw Material

Off-Mound (N=)

Off-Mound (%)

On-Mound (N=)

On-Mound (%)

Local 6 20 2 12

Nonlocal 24 80 15 88

Total N= 30 17

Note: table does not include unprovenienced surface collections

73

Table 14 – Chi-square table for the differences apparent in the raw material found on-mound versus off-mound

Category Observed (N=)

Expected (N=) Residual

Off-Mound, Local 6 5.11 0.89

On-Mound, Local 2 2.89 -0.89

Off-Mound, Non-Local 24 24.89 -0.89

On-Mound, Non-Local 15 10.85 4.15

Χ² = 2.05 df=1 p=3.84

Note: table does not include unprovenienced surface collections

The general distribution of nonlocal ground stone materials in large proportions across Caye

Coco is similar to patterns found in other artifact classes from the site. Analysis of obsidian

from Caye Coco (Masson and Chaya 2000) has shown that obsidian is found in large

quantities across the site in comparison to local materials. In addition, work at nearby

Laguna de On (Masson 2000) had similar findings in the analysis of obsidian. The overall

implication for Caye Coco is that households were able to rely on nonlocal utilitarian items

for everyday use irrespective of their social standing, most likely due to open trade

mechanisms.

74

Burials

Field excavators initially assessed the sex of 41 individuals from the Caye Coco sample in

situ (Briggs 2002, personal communication). The skeletons were subsequently cleaned,

reconstructed, and analyzed by Briggs in a laboratory setting (see Table 15). Problematic

cases for Briggs were burials from Cemetery 2, the worst-preserved of the Caye Coco

sample, and remains from Structure 1, a secondary burial. The burials from these areas are

fragmentary in nature, and discriminant analysis did not improve the estimate of biological

sex due to the fragmentary nature of the remains. Briggs (Briggs 2002, Appendix 1:190-191)

established the probable sex of 16 adult individuals (8 females, 6 males, 2 possible males).

From this parent population, at least three males, one possible male, and three females were

interred with grinding tools. The sex of a large number of burials is unknown due to either

poor preservation factors or because the burials were secondary with few, or jumbled,

remains. Ground stone implements were found in three out of eight female burials at Caye

Coco, compared to three out of six males and one out of two possible males (simplified to

four out of eight possible males). The ethnological literature of the Yucatec Maya reports

ground stone tools in association with women’s food production (Patch 1993; Press 1975;

Redfield 1941; Redfield and Villa Rojas 1962; Restall 1997; Roys 1943; Stephens 1841), and

it is interesting to note that at Caye Coco, ground stone tools are more commonly associated

with male burials than female burials. The implications of this finding are discussed further

in Section VI of this work.

75

Table 15 - Summary of the Caye Coco Burial Sample (N=41), (after Briggs 2002, Appendix 1:190-191)

Burial # Location/Cemetery

Interment Type Estimated Sex

Found with Ground Stone

1 Cemetery 1 Primary Female No 2 Cemetery 1 Primary Male No 3 Cemetery 1 Primary Female No 4 Cemetery 1 Primary SubAdult No 5 Cemetery 3 Primary Unable to Determine No 6 Cemetery 3 Primary Female Yes 7 Cemetery 1 Primary Female No 8 Cemetery 1 Primary Female No 9 Structure 1 Secondary Unable to Determine No

10 Cemetery 1 Primary SubAdult No 13 Cemetery 1 Primary Male Yes 14 Cemetery 1 Primary Male No 15 Cemetery 2 Primary Male No 16 Cemetery 2 Primary Unable to Determine No 17 Cemetery 2 Primary Male? No 18 Cemetery 1 Primary Female Yes 19 Cemetery 2 Primary SubAdult No 20 Cemetery 2 Primary Female No 21 Cemetery 2 Primary Unable to Determine Yes 22 Cemetery 2 Primary Unable to Determine No 23 Cemetery 1 Primary SubAdult Yes 24 Cemetery 1 Primary SubAdult No 25 Cemetery 1 Primary SubAdult No 26 Cemetery 1 Primary Male Yes 27 Cemetery 2 Primary Male? Yes 28 Cemetery 2 Primary Unable to Determine Unknown 29 Cemetery 2 Primary Unable to Determine Unknown 30 Cemetery 2 Primary Male Yes 31 Cemetery 2 Primary Unable to Determine No 32a Structure 1 Secondary Unable to Determine Yes 32b Structure 1 Secondary Unable to Determine Yes 32c Structure 1 Secondary Unable to Determine Yes 33 Cemetery 3 Primary Unable to Determine No 34 Structure 19 Primary Female Yes 35 Cemetery 2 Cache Unable to Determine No 36 Structure 1 Secondary Unable to Determine No 37 Cemetery 3 Cache SubAdult No 38 Structure 1 Secondary Unable to Determine No 39 Structure 1 Secondary Unable to Determine No 40 Structure 1 Secondary Unable to Determine No 41 Structure 1 Secondary Unable to Determine No

76

Briggs (2002) estimated the age at death of the skeletal remains for some of the burials at

Caye Coco (Table 16), although a large number could not be classified. The population

consisted of Children (N=7), Young Adults (N=6), Middle Adults (N=4), Old Adults (N=3),

and one Adolescent. The estimated age of skeletal material found in association with

grinding implements (Table 17) reveals that the majority of the remains fall into the middle

adult (35-50 years) category, with the next largest amount associated with young adults (20-

35 years) and unknown adults. One burial found with grinding implements is estimated to be

that of a child (of 4 years), and one is an old adult (50+ years). The great age range of

skeletal remains found in association with ground stone grave goods demonstrates that these

tools were interred with people of all ages, with the exception of adolescents. This is

discussed further in Section VI of this work. Not included in Table 17 is ground stone

recovered from above Burials 27, 28, and 29 since the context of the artifact is unclear. In

addition, ground stone recovered from Burial 32 is also not included since the burial is

secondary in nature.

Table 16 – Age at death of skeletal material from

Caye Coco (after Briggs 2002, Appendix 1:190-191)

Age at Death N= %

Child (3-12) 7 17

Adolescent (12-20) 1 2

Young Adult (20-35) 6 15

Middle Adult (35-50) 4 10

Old Adult (50+) 3 7

Unknown Juvenile 1 2

Unknown Adult 19 46

Total N= 41

77

Table 17 – Estimated age of skeletal material found in association with grinding implements

Age at Death N= %

Child (3-12) 1 11

Adolescent (12-20) -- --

Young Adult (20-35) 3 33

Middle Adult (35-50) 2 22

Old Adult (50+) 1 11

Unknown Child -- --

Unknown Adult 2 22

Total N= 9

Table 18 shows ground stone tools found in burial contexts by their closest raw

material source. Overall, 31 percent of the raw material of ground stone tools by source from

burials are from local sources, whereas 50 percent comes from probable Maya Mountain

sources and 19 percent comes from other long-distance sources. In comparison to the ground

stone tools from the site as a whole (Table 10), there is a slightly greater amount (6 percent)

of local materials recovered in burials than at the larger site. The difference in numbers is

minimal, and may be the result of the smaller size of the burial sample. The raw material of

manos recovered from burials is exclusively fashioned out of the probable Maya Mountain

sources. While the burial sample is small, this may show an inclination to use this particular

material for manos interred with burials.

78

Table 18 – Ground stone found in burials (N=16) by closest raw material source

Raw Material Sources

Metates (N=)

Metates (%)

Manos (N=)

Manos (%)

Local 5 50 0 0

Maya Mountains 2 20 6 100

Long Distance 3 30 0 0

Total N= 10 6

Painted Ground Stone

During the analysis of the Caye Coco assemblage, the author identified paint on six manos

from the collection (Figure 13). One painted metate was identified in the collection (Figure

14). The initial report on the painted ground stone of Caye Coco can be found in Delu

(2002). The following section elaborates on those observations.

Background

Painted ground stone is rare in Mesoamerica. After an exhaustive literature search, the

author has only been able to find two sites with painted grinding tools reported. Both sites

are in the highlands of Mexico: Teotihuacan and the Tehuacan Valley.

79

Figure 13 - Photo of painted manos

Figure 14 - Photo of painted metate, ventral side

80

For the site of Teotihuacan, milling tools were painted after use and were especially abundant

in the Pyramid of Quetzalcoatl collection (Martin Biskowski 2002, personal communication).

These tools had traces of paint, plaster, and other signs that they had previously been used as

parts of walls, floors, and other construction (apparently some buildings were knocked down

to provide fill for the pyramid). Often the evidence of painting and/or plaster on these

artifacts was ephemeral.

MacNeish et al. (1967) also found painted ground stone in the Tehuacan Valley assemblage.

Paint was adhered to the interiors of a number of the Saucer-Shaped form metates

(1967:120). This metate type was found in small numbers, and only in association with

Formative remains.

The Painted Manos of Caye Coco

All of the painted manos from the Caye Coco assemblage show some trace of white paint,

and in addition, four out of six manos show traces of black paint. One fragmented bifacial

mano from Subop 40a, Lot 1126, displays white paint on an entire facet, but lacks any visible

trace of black paint (Figure 15). Two manos show white stripes that are interspersed with

black stripes (Figure 16). Space is left between the stripes so that the gray color of the raw

material forms a third, unpainted, stripe. The painting on these two manos exists not only on

the ground facets of the tool, but also overlaps onto broken areas that display no grinding,

suggesting that they were painted after they broke (Figure 17). The sixth mano was

81

problematic because, while it is of the same parent material as the other painted manos in the

collection, and was, in fact, found in association with another of the painted manos, it has

been washed and showed only one small, faint spot where it was most likely painted.

Figure 15 - Painted rectangular mano from Subop 40a, Lot 1126 showing a) painted surface; b) unpainted surface

a

b

82

Figure 16 - a) Photo detail of a painted mano from Burial 30. Painted, striped manos refit and are from b) Burial 27; c) Burial 30 (Drawings by Devon Wilchelt and Antonina Delu)

Figure 17 - Photo of mano from Burial 27 with paint overlapping onto broken areas that display no grinding

a

c

b

83

Painted manos share a common raw material, quartzite, which is grayish in color. Overall

raw material classifications of the painted tools found in burials reveal that all of the manos

are manufactured out of a similarly colored, nonlocal, quartzite material whose closest source

is in the Maya Mountains.

Table 19 shows the proveniences of the painted ground stone from the Caye Coco

assemblage. Four out of six of the painted manos are associated with burials. The remaining

two were found in two different locations: one was located just east of Structure 2, and the

other approximately 50 meters east of Structure 8, not far from the northern shore of Caye

Coco. Based on the differing form of the mano recovered from Subop 40a, Lot 1126, and

given what has been reported on painted ground stone from other regions in Mesoamerica,

this piece was possibly used as either a plasterer or as a part of a wall, floor, or other

construction.

Of the four that were associated with burials, two fragments of the same mano were

recovered in separate burials (Burials 27 and 30) located less than one meter (m) apart in

Cemetery 2 (O’Hare 2001). The paint overlaps onto the broken surfaces of these two manos

fragments, which means that they were painted post-breakage. The presence of these two

refitting painted manos may suggest that Burials 27 and 30 were interred at approximately

the same time, and/or may have some kinship relation.

Both Burials 27 and 30 are single, adult burials found in primary context and in the seated-

flexed position (Rosenswig 2001). Burial 27 has been identified (Briggs 2002, personal

84

Table 19 - Painted ground stone provenience information

Painted Ground Stone Type

Subop Provenience

Lot Number Context

Metate 37 1254 Looters trench, found in wall construction of Structure 8

Mano 18c 950 East of Structure 8, near north shore, found within a midden

Mano 30h 1082 Grave good found with Burial 27, Cemetery 2, East of Structure 6, Northeast of Structure 2

Mano 30h 1078

Context is unclear, possible fill/possible grave good found above Burials 27, 28, 29, Cemetery 2, East of Structure 6, Northeast of Structure 2

Mano 30j/k 1110 Grave good found with Burial 30, Cemetery 2, East of Structure 6, Northeast of Structure 2

Mano 39b 1194 Grave good found with Burial 34, South of Structure 19

Mano 40a 1126 East of Structure 2, general midden over terrace.

communication) as a possible young male, age 20-35. This burial was found with 36

limestone rocks placed in a circular pile above the individual. The painted mano was

identified as a ground stone tool separate from the rocks and was located next to the burial

(O’Hare 2001:58). O’Hare (2001) describes Burial 30 as a pit interment with a circular

limestone rock formation covering the individual. Offerings associated with this burial

include a large slipped Payil-Red vessel rim on the south end of the pit, a large modified

clam shell, a modified mammalian long bone with several holes notched in the base, and five

obsidian blade fragments. The painted ground stone was included as part of this grave

85

offering. Briggs (2002, personal communication) has positively identified the skeletal

remains as a male of 35-50 years of age.

No females or possible female skeletal remains have been identified in association with

painted ground stone (Table 20). The sexes of two burials are unidentifiable and can

conceivably represent females. The ethnological literature of the Yucatec Maya associates

grinding tools with women’s food production (Patch 1993; Press 1975; Redfield 1941;

Redfield and Villa Rojas 1962; Restall 1997; Roys 1943; Stephens 1841). However, it is

likely that men used ground stone tools for various domestic and craft tasks. It is, therefore,

not unusual to find these painted ground stone tools associated with male burials. The lack

of females found with these items suggests that there is a more complex relationship between

male burials and painted tools.

Table 20- Painted ground stone from burials and sex of skeletal remains

Sex N= %

Male 1 20

Possibly Male 2 40

Female -- --

Possible Female -- --

Unknown 2 40

Total N= 5

86

The Painted Metate

In the 2000 field season, a wall feature (Lot 1254) was uncovered that contained a recycled

and painted limestone, Trough-shaped metate (Russell 2001:29). The metate was positioned

such that the basin formed a niche in a wall. It was erect, and formed one of the vertical

slabs comprising an interior building deep within Structure 8. Similar to what has been

reported at other sites for the larger Maya region (see Garber 1989:99; Jaeger 1988:102;

Proskouriakoff 1962:338; Strömsvik 1937:127; Weeks 1983:214), this metate was recycled

into the context of the outer construction of a building. The majority of the metate is intact,

with only a corner of it broken off, and some of the paint was damaged during the excavation

process (see Figure 14). The metate shows use-wear in the basin since it dramatically slopes

from one side to the other. It is coated with a plaster of various colors ranging from red and

orange to yellow, with the margin/rim of the metate painted black. This paint does not

appear to be the result of grinding pigment, as it is evenly spread throughout the entire

trough, including the vertical sidewalls and rim. This particular find was unique in that no

other painted metates have been discovered at Caye Coco.

Summary

The results of ground stone analysis for Caye Coco have revealed interesting patterns in tool

form, tool recycling, raw material used for tools, distribution of tools at the site, and burial

data. Data pertaining to form suggest that Caye Coco is similar to the larger Corozal region

87

in mano transverse form, as well as in the variety of metate forms found at the site. A greater

percentage of manos from Caye Coco are made of local materials, whereas only a small

number of metates were fashioned out of local materials. This possibly reflects the local

production of manos and the distant manufacture of metates for exchange. The large

proportion of nonlocal ground stone raw materials across Caye Coco is similar to what has

been reported for other artifact classes recovered from the site. This implies that the

households of Caye Coco were able to be dependent on nonlocal utilitarian items for daily

use without regard to their personal social standing.

Ground stone, including both painted and nonpainted tools, have been recovered from the

burials at Caye Coco of both men and women of all ages (see Table 17). Painted manos, a

unique archaeological find for the greater region, were found as grave goods accompanying

male burials (see Table 20). The study of the raw material of tools found in association with

burials shows that, in comparison to the larger site, there is no preferential treatment of the

raw material used for the tools interred with burials, although this is different for the painted

manos that were recovered from burials.

88

VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Form and Function

Both the form and overall size of grinding tools are often used as the standard for making

functional interpretations about milling implements, and often, ethnographic information

does not support these explanations (Schneider 1993:13). An example of this, as given by

Schneider (1993:13), is the common assumption that the larger the size of the grinding tool,

the more likely that it will be interpreted as a tool to process plants; smaller milling tools are

often interpreted as pigment-grinding rather than seed-grinding tools, even when there is an

absence of pigment found with the tool.

It is highly probable that some of the grinding implements used at Caye Coco were utilized

for food preparation activities, and specifically for corn grinding. It is hard to determine this

with certainty, especially when the tools are in such a fragmentary state, several were found

in construction fill, and still others found in burials. Ethnoarchaeological studies (see Clark

1988, Hayden 1987) have reported that grinding implements are multipurpose tools, with

many used for preparing foodstuffs that, like corn, require crushing and grinding. While it is

difficult to single out the use life of many of the grinding implements from Caye Coco,

several of the grinding tools were used for purposes other than corn grinding.

Four metates were identified as flat palettes, a form not commonly associated with the

processing of corn. Three out of four of the palettes were found in larger middens, and the

89

fourth palette was recovered from the floor of a room in what has been identified as an elite

structure (Barrett 2000). With this in mind, palettes may reflect the locus of elite craft

activities, given the unique nature of the palette form, their recovery from larger middens

relative to the greater site, as well as the context of one found on the floor of an elite

structure. The use of palettes is more commonly associated with the grinding of pigment or

for small food items (Andrews 1970:32; Clark 1988:93; Woodbury 1954:112-115), and given

the domestic contexts of the Caye Coco palettes, this was most likely their function. In

addition to the palettes, one miniature metate (see Figure 12) was recovered from the site

that, based on form, was probably not used for grinding corn. The diminutive size of this

artifact is similar to the miniature grinding tools discussed above from Balankanche

(Andrews 1970), but differs from them in showing use-wear on the grinding surface, albeit

eroded, and it is found in a domestic context rather than ritual. As such, this item may have

been used for grinding small foodstuffs (Clark 1988:93), or it is possible that it could have

been used as a child’s toy.

Based on form and macroscopic use-wear found associated with the bifacial mortar and two

pestles that were recovered from the site, these items were most likely used to grind small

foodstuffs and pigment. One of the two pestles was recovered from a domestic midden with

red pigment still intact on the grinding surface, which indicates its last use before discard.

The discovery of tools associated with pigment is further evidence for household crafts at

Caye Coco.

90

Use Wear

Manos

Wear patterns of manos are evocative of the form and size of the metates on which they were

worked (Clark 1988:91), and Circular manos are generally used in conjunction with Flat or

Flat/Legged metates. At Caye Coco, Circular and Oval-Symmetrical manos are the most

prevalent transverse shapes. Wear patterns on Oval-Symmetrical manos in transverse cross-

section show that only 90° to 120° of their circumference on one side, or on two sides, were

rotated in use. Triangular transverse cross-sections were produced when a third side was

worn. In general, the manos that show the most wear on them have curving ends, more than

likely a product of having been worked in a Trough metate.

Due to their size, raw material wear patterns, and battering, the majority of the manos in the

collection appear to have been used for maize grinding, although it would be incorrect to rule

out the grinding of other materials (see Clark 1988:88). Rectangular manos appear to be the

result of grinding rather than crushing activities, since use-wear patterns indicate that the

manos were rubbed on a flat surface with a minor amount of rocking. Rectangular manos

may have been used to grind spices and condiments, such as chili pepper. As previously

discussed, one pestle in the collection was recovered with red pigment still on the grinding

surface, suggesting that this pestle was used for the grinding of pigment and other fine

materials.

91

Metates

The Trough metate is the most common form found at sites along the Yucatan peninsula.

However, this is not found at the site of Caye Coco, where the most common metate form is

Flat. There appears to be a high level of imported material that correlates with this Flat

metate form (Table 23). The Flat form would have reduced the amount of imported material

wasted to make the tool in comparison to the larger Trough shape, which is not only heavier

and harder to transport, but would have wasted more of the exotic materials.

Raw Material

William Rathje (1972) argued that the Maya Caribbean coast was a buffer zone between the

consumers of the interior Peten Maya Lowlands, an area deficient in the basic resources of

obsidian and igneous ground stone materials, the Maya coastal zone and highlands, and other

regions like modern Honduras, a supply zone that contained the resources that the lowlands

lacked (see also Rathje et al. 1978). The coastal zone would have been the route of

transportation between these two areas and a supplier of salt. Buffer zones were either richer

themselves in resources or nearer to locations of resource diversity. In the Rathje model, the

need for organizing the importation of these basic commodities resulted in complex society

developing in the central Maya Lowlands. More recent studies (Marcus 1983) have shown

flaws in this core-buffer model, arguing that the Maya Lowlands were not deficient in the

basic resources; local chert was available for tools, and local limestone was suitable for

milling implements (Ford and Olson 1989; Rovner 1975). However, as Tables 2 and 3 show,

92

the data collected on ground stone from Mesoamerica refutes this notion to some degree.

Despite the potential for autonomy and the use of some local resources, salt and some

nonlocal ground stone, among other items, were imported (Rathje 1972; Andrews and Mock

2002).

Also shown in Tables 2 and 3 is that Postclassic period sites do not consistently exhibit a

greater percentage of nonlocal raw material, as several authors have argued (Sidrys and

Andresen 1976; Sidrys 1983). The amount of nonlocal material appears to be quite variable

among polities, depending on the power and location of the site. In addition, across the

Maya realm, grinding artifacts demonstrate variation in type, quality, and the frequency of

raw material used. Tools made of limestone are common at many lowland sites, and igneous

or metamorphic materials are found in a range of percentages (see Table 1). This

demonstrates that essential utilitarian tools from other regions were not necessarily “needed,”

but were certainly desired at some settlements (Rathje 1972:389). The Caye Coco ground

stone assemblage demonstrates a high percentage of nonlocal raw material. There is not a

universal regional or chronological pattern identifiable for the area.

For the site of Caye Coco, the nearest source of granite, quartzite, and other igneous

materials is the Maya Mountains of Belize, located at a linear distance of approximately 250

km from Caye Coco. The volcanic highlands of southern Guatemala and Honduras are

located at a linear distance of approximately 500 km from Caye Coco. Graham (2002:409)

points out that material that is generally considered “far away” by land routes may be easier

to obtain by sea routes. Water transport lessens this distance in person-travel days, and

93

Sabloff and Rathje (1975) argue that it helped to increase the amount of long-distance bulk

utilitarian trade items.

Finished metates fashioned out of nonlocal material were most likely imported into Caye

Coco since no debitage or tools of manufacture have been recovered during excavations.

This is supported by the fact that metate forms generally correlate with geological sources

(i.e., Trough metates are made of local limestone, Flat and Flat/Legged metates are made of

imported material, etc.). The finished, smaller, and lighter morphological metate forms

would have been the most economically desirable for long-distance transport. Hayden

(1987) proposes that this is also a phenomenon associated with the modern Maya of highland

Guatemala.

The large proportion of nonlocal materials (two-thirds of the overall assemblage) suggests

that these items were not brought in overland, but by coastal trade. The location of Caye

Coco within Progresso Lagoon links it with the Caribbean Sea and to the flourishing

maritime trade of the Postclassic time period. Caye Coco was most likely an important

regional Postclassic political center, and artifacts encountered on the island suggest that it

was a prosperous settlement of households engaged in diverse activities, including local and

long-distance trade (Masson 1999). The analysis of the raw material from Caye Coco

indicates that the use of nonlocal grinding tools was important in the daily economy of the

site. This trend reflects the accessibility of nonlocal ground stone via coastal trade and it

parallels data collected on obsidian from Caye Coco (Masson and Chaya 2000). Obsidian is

found in large quantities across Caye Coco in comparison to local chipped stone tools,

94

implying that households, without regard to their social standings, were able to rely on

imported utilitarian items for everyday use.

The Ritual Aspects of Ground Stone

Thus far, ground stone tools for domestic purposes such as the grinding of foodstuff,

pigments, and for ceramic production have been discussed. Ground stone has been recovered

from burials at Caye Coco, and thus, the ritual dimension of grinding tools is also

represented. Artifacts found in burial contexts may have multiple meanings, and the life

history of an item of material culture can be transformed with mortuary ritual (Arnold and

Wicker 2001:xv). Traci Ardren (2002:69-70) writes that burials are “…illustrations that

reflect how individuals lived their lives as well as how they fit into their larger societies; they

may reflect family as well as occupation, appearance as well as status, personal faith as well

as organized religious participation.”

At several Mesoamerican sites discussed above (see Garber 1986:92; Proskouriakoff

1962:338-340; Weeks 1983), grinding tools are common grave goods. This also holds true

for Caye Coco. In combination with other grave goods, ground stone tools may represent

what a person would need in the afterlife; they may directly exhibit an individual or his/her

kin’s access to those resources, and may indirectly reflect differential social rank (O’Gorman

95

2001:37). Grave offerings recovered thus far from Caye Coco suggest that most individuals

at this site exhibit moderate social differences in mortuary behavior (with a couple of

exceptions), although this observation is preliminary and is based on a small sample (Masson

1999:296). Painted ground stone tools are more often found in burials, and 69 percent are

fashioned out of nonlocal materials. This number is close to the 75 percent of nonlocal

materials found for the site, suggesting that there is no more of a special selection made at

Caye Coco for mortuary rites than for domestic use.

Gender

Gilchrist (1999:xv) defined the term gender as “the cultural interpretation of sexual

difference that results in the categorization of individuals, artifacts, spaces and bodies,” and

the topic of gender is considered to be a part of cognitive archaeology (Renfrew and Bahn

1996:207-10). Since human remains can be sexed, burials can reflect a close association

with gender, with the assumption that gender roles were signaled in the mortuary context

(Crass 2001:105). The corporeal remains of an individual combine with material culture of

gender symbolism in mortuary ritual, and together the interplay between sex and gender can

be signified (Arnold 2001).

Traditionally, archaeologists have assigned certain categories of grave goods to either male

or female sex/gender categories, thus impressing artifact categories with “maleness” or

“femaleness” (Weglian 2001:140). This categorization is typically based on the ethnological

96

literature of the Yucatec Maya, where grinding tools are associated with women’s food

production (Patch 1993; Press 1975; Redfield 1941; Redfield and Villa Rojas 1962; Restall

1997; Roys 1943; Stephens 1841). Archaeologists have thus seen manos and metates as the

material correlates of ancient food production and as indexes of women’s activities. As a

result, the idea that grinding tool implies female economic roles is reinforced, and usually

when these tools are found with a burial, a female identity of the burial is inferred when

sexing of skeletal remains are not possible.

Gender, sex, and grave goods have a complex relationship that should not be assumed. This

issue is relevant for the ground stone in the Caye Coco assemblage, where at least three

males, two other possible males, and one female were buried with grinding tools. In

addition, the majority (60 percent) of painted ground stone from Caye Coco is associated

with male burials and possible male burials. While the significance of the gender

distributions of ground stone at Caye Coco is difficult to assess due to the small sample size

and unsexed skeletal remains, what is important here is the fact that grinding tools are

associated with male burials. This suggests a more complex relationship between these tools,

gender, and the ritual dimensions of burials.

Ground stone tools are recovered in association with children and adults, but not adolescents.

However, ground stone tools are more often found with Young and Middle Adult skeletal

remains than with any other group. This could reflect activities that were pursued in life, as

ethnographic studies of the region (see Patch 1993; Press 1975; Redfield 1941; Redfield and

Villa Rojas 1962; Restall 1997; Roys 1943; Stephens 1841) suggest that food production is

97

generally the role of an adult, Maya woman. What is more likely, given the great age range

of skeletal remains found interred with ground stone tools, is that these tools represent more

symbolic objects than simple grinding implements.

Conclusions

Postclassic Maya society has been described as having a maritime trade economy, with less

hierarchical organization in comparison to the Classic period (Rathje 1975; Sabloff and

Rathje 1975; Friedel 1981; Friedel and Sabloff 1984). Postclassic commercial enterprises

were connected to international markets as well as a maritime trade network. The

opportunity to participate in exchange, according to this model, would have been open to

people of different social ranking. According to Hirth (1988), marketplace exchange is

characterized by the presence of a centralized market on which individual households were

dependent for provisions.

With this in mind, the Mesoamerican household assemblage can be evaluated using a

“distributional model” in which the relative quantities of imported items found in households

of differing social status is a signal of the availability of these materials in an open market

exchange system (Hirth 1998). Evidence of household participation in market exchange can

be observed by a more homogenous distribution of materials regardless of social status (Hirth

98

1998; Blanton et al. 1996), and the variation in the domestic assemblage would be “largely

the result of individual purchasing power” (Hirth 1998:463). However, long-distance trade

of valued items that boost the status of the elite class are an important part of the market

economy (Whitecotton and Pailes 1986:186).

At Caye Coco, Masson (1999) has discussed evidence for active participation in the broad

long-distance commercial spheres, and information from the analysis of ground stone raw

material backs this up. The predominance of imported raw material in the assemblage

suggests that an open market system was in place in which long-distance commodities were

widely available for purchase. As discussed above, this is supported by what Masson and

Chaya (2000) report on from studies of obsidian at Caye Coco. The raw material data from

Caye Coco also suggests that there was a continuum in the wealth of the family groups that

inhabited the island.

Caye Coco: The Bigger Picture

It is apparent that the metate tradition of northeast Belize differs from that of the northern

Yucatan Peninsula, where the predominant forms of metates are Trough-shaped (see Table

1). The most common metate forms for the Corozal region are Trough and Flat forms, with

the Concave form making up just over 20 percent of the overall assemblage. The forms from

99

Caye Coco correspond most closely to those found in the greater Corozal district but are

slightly more diverse (Table 21), and Flat forms comprise approximately half of the metates

from the Caye Coco assemblage. The similarities in form may reflect exchange between

Caye Coco and the sites of the greater Corozal district,2 although predominant Caye Coco

metate forms are notably different from those of nearby Laguna de On, where trough forms

made out of local materials are prevalent. Once again, this may be the result of a low number

of metates reported from Laguna de On. The variability in metate form at Caye Coco is great

in comparison with other Postclassic Maya sites outside of the Corozal region.

Table 21 - Comparison of the metate forms from the Corozal District and the site of Caye Coco

Metate Form Corozal District (N=)

Corozal District (%)

Caye Coco (N=)

Caye Coco (%)

Flat 33 33 24 49

Concave 23 23 5 10

Trough 38 38 4 8

Other 0 0 4 8

Unidentified 7 7 12 24

Total N= 101 49

Overall mano forms from Caye Coco show more variation than metate forms. Three mano

longitudinal cross-sectional forms were identified at Caye Coco, with the majority of the

tools falling into a fourth undetermined category due to their fragmentary nature. Mano

transverse cross-sectional forms were categorized into six different types, with an additional 2 Similarities in artifact styles due to intensified trade in the Late Postclassic period have been proposed by several scholars (see Sabloff and Rathje 1975; Rathje 1975; Rathje et al. 1978; Masson 2001b).

100

category for undetermined mano shapes. Mano variation, particularly transverse cross-

sections, has more variation because it may reflect the idiosyncratic use-wear patterns left by

an individual who used the grinding tool (Sidrys 1983:295).3 Similar to other sites in

Mesoamerica, the variability of mano cross-sections at Caye Coco is great.

It is postulated that the majority of manos and metates were used for grinding corn or seeds,

based on observable wear patterns (consisting of surface polish, striations, and pitting). A

number of grinding tools were used for other grinding tasks, and one pestle was positively

identified as used for pigment grinding. In general, the Caye Coco ground stone assemblage

reflects the predominantly domestic nature of the deposits at the site, including food as well

as craft production. Several tools were recycled after they were initially broken. Beyond

domestic usage, metates and manos as grave offerings were commonly recovered from

burials. Nearly 70 percent of these pieces were made out of nonlocal raw materials, and the

majority of skeletal remains that were found in association with ground stone tools were

those of males. Some manos recovered from burials exhibit paint, an uncommon trait for the

region. No female skeletal remains were positively identified in association with the painted

tools, and only one female overall was identified with ground stone. The fact that grinding

tools are found in association with male burials suggests a more complex relationship

between this category of artifact and the male gender, more than the ethnohistoric and

ethnographic record for this region suggests.

3 Two individuals that both use a similarly shaped mano in longitudinal section may wind up with two different transverse cross-sections at the discard of those same tools.

101

VII. REFERENCES CITED

Adams, Jenny L. 2002 Ground Stone Analysis: A Technological Approach. The University of Utah Press,

Salt Lake City. Aguilera, Miguel A. 1999 Off-Mound Feature Investigations at Suboperations 13 & 22, Caye Coco, Belize. In

Belize Postclassic Project 1998: Investigations at Progresso Lagoon, edited by Marilyn A. Masson and Robert M. Rosenswig, pp. 7-25. Institute of Mesoamerican Studies Occasional Publication No. 3. State University of New York, Albany.

Andrews, Anthony P., and Shirley B. Mock 2002 New Perspectives on the Prehispanic Maya Salt Trade. In Ancient Maya Political

Economies, edited by Marilyn A. Masson and David A. Freidel, pp. 307-334. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek.

Andrews, Anthony P., Frank Asaro, Helen V. Michel, Fred H. Stross, and Pura Cervera Rivero 1998 Isla Cerritos: An Itzá Trading Port on the North Coast of Yucatán, Mexico. National

Geographic Research 4:196-207. Andrews, Anthony P., E. Wyllys Andrews V, and Fernando Robles Castellanos 2000 The Northern Maya Collapse and its Aftermath. Paper presented at the 65th Annual

Meeting for the Society for American Anthropology, Philadelphia. Andrews, E. Wyllys IV 1970 Balankanche, Throne of the Tiger Priest. Middle American Research Institute,

Tulane University, Publication 32, New Orleans. Ardren, Traci 2002 Death Became Her: Images of Female Power from Yaxuna Burials. In Ancient Maya

Women, edited by Traci Ardren, pp. 68-88. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek. Arnold, Bettina 2002 "Sein und Werden:" Gender as Process in Mortuary Ritual. In In Pursuit of Gender:

Worldwide Archaeological Approaches, edited by Sarah Nelson and Myriam Rosen-Ayalon, pp. 239-256. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek.

Arnold, Bettina, and Nancy L. Wicker 2001 Introduction. Gender and the Archaeology of Death, edited by Bettina Arnold and

Nancy L. Wicker, pp. vii-xxi. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek.

102

Aschmann, Homer 1949 A metate maker of Baja California. American Anthropologist, 51:682-686. Ashmore, Wendy 2002 Encountering Maya Women. In Ancient Maya Women, edited by Traci Ardren, pp.

229-246. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek. Barrett, Jason W. 2000 Excavation at Structure 5: Postclassic Elite Architecture at Caye Coco. In Belize

Postclassic Project 1999: Continued Investigations at Progresso Lagoon and Laguna Seca, edited by Robert M. Rosenswig and Marilyn A. Masson, pp. 31-58. Institute of Mesoamerican Studies Occasional Publication No. 5. State University of New York, Albany.

Bartlett, Katherine 1933 Pueblo Milling Stones of the Flagstaff Region and Their Relation to Others in the

Southwest. Museum of Northern Arizona Bulletin 3. Northern Arizona Society of Science and Art, Flagstaff.

Blanton, Richard E., Gary M. Feinman, Stephen A. Kowalewski, and Peter N. Peregrine 1996 A Dual Processual Theory for the Evolution of Mesoamerican Civilization. Current

Anthropology 37:1-31. Briggs, Margaret L. 2002 Terminal Classic to Postclassic Transition in the Maya of Northern Belize: Biological

Continuity and Cultural Change in the Burials of Progresso and Honey Camp Lagoons. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Houston, Houston, TX.

Brown, Clifford T. 1999 Mayapan Society and Ancient Maya Social Organization. Ph.D. Dissertation,

Department of Anthropology, Tulane University. Chase, Diane Z., and Arlen F. Chase 1982 Yucatec Influence in Terminal Classic Northern Belize. American Antiquity 47:596-

614. 1988 A Postclassic Perspective: Excavations at the Maya Site of Santa Rita Corozal,

Belize. Precolumbian Art Research Institute, Monograph 4, San Francisco. 1989 Routes of Trade and Communication and the Integration of Maya Society: the Vista

From Santa Rita Corozal, Belize. In Coastal Maya Trade, edited by Heather McKillop and Paul F. Healy, pp. 19-32. Occasional Papers in Anthropology No. 8. Trent University, Peterborough.

103

Clark, John E. 1988 The Lithic Artifacts of La Libertad, Chiapas, Mexico, an Economic Perspective.

Papers of the New World Archaeological Foundation, No. 52, Brigham Young University, Provo.

1994 The Development of Early Formative Rank Societies in the Soconusco, Chiapas, Mexico. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Coe, William R. 1959 Piedras Negras Archaeology: Artifacts, Caches and Burials. Museum Monographs,

The University Museum, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. Cook, Scott 1970 Price and Output Variability in a Peasant-Artisan Stoneworking Industry in Oaxaca,

Mexico: An Analytical Essay in Economic Anthropology, American Anthropologist, 72 (4): 776-801.

1976 The “Market” as Location and Transaction: Dimensions of Marketing in a Zapotec Stoneworking Industry. In Markets in Oaxaca, edited by Scott Cook and Martin Diskin, pp. 139-168. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Crass, Barbara A. 2001 “Gender and Mortuary Analysis: What can Grave Goods Really Tell us?” In Gender

and the Archaeology of Death, edited by Bettina Arnold and Nancy L. Wicker, pp. 105-118. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek.

Delu, Antonina M. 2002 The Ground Stone Tools of Caye Coco. In Belize Postclassic Project 2001:

Investigations at Caye Coco and the Shore Settlements of Progresso Lagoon, edited by Antonina M. Delu, Bradley W. Russell, and Marilyn A. Masson, pp. 115-124. Institute of Mesoamerican Studies Occasional Publication No. 7. State University of New York, Albany.

Eaton, Jack D. 1978 Archaeological Survey of the Yucatan-Campeche Coast. In Studies in the

Archaeology of Coastal Yucatan and Campeche, Mexico. Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University, Publication 46, New Orleans.

Evans, Susan T. 1988 Cihuatecpan Architecture and Artifacts. In Excavations at Cihuatecpan: an Aztec

Village in the Teotihuacan Valley, pp. 1-49, edited by Susan T. Adams. Vanderbilt University Publications in Anthropology No. 36, Nashville.

Ferdon, Edwin N., Jr. 1953 Tonalá, Mexico. Monographs of the School of American Research No. 15, Santa Fe.

104

Ford, Anabel, and Kirsten Olson 1989 Aspects of Ancient Maya Household Economy: Variation in Chipped Stone

Production and Consumption. In Prehistoric Maya Economies of Belize, edited by Patricia A. McAnany and Barry L. Isaac, pp. 185-214. Research in Economic Anthropology Supplement 4. JAI Press, Greenwich.

Freidel, David A. 1981 Political Economics of Residential Dispersion Among the Lowland Maya. In

Lowland Maya Settlement Patterns, edited by Wendy Ashmore, pp. 371-382. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Freidel, David A., and Jeremy A. Sabloff 1984 Cozumel: Late Maya Settlement Patterns. Academic Press, New York. Garber, James F. 1981 Material Culture and Patterns of Artifact Consumption and Disposal at the Maya Site

of Cerros in Northern Belize. Unpublished dissertation, Southern Methodist University.

1989 Archaeology at Cerros, Belize, Central America: Volume II, the Artifacts. Southern Methodist University Press, Dallas.

1995 The Artifacts. In Maya Maritime Trade, Settlement, and Population on Ambergris Caye, Belize, edited by Thomas H. Guderjan and James F. Garber, pp. 113-138. Labyrinthos Press, Culver City.

Gilchrist, Roberta 1999 Gender and Archaeology: Contesting the Past. Rutledge, New York. Goldman, Aaron M. 2001 Subop 34: Continued Excavations of Cemetery #1 on the Northwest Shore of Caye

Coco. In Belize Postclassic Project 2000: Investigations at Caye Coco and the Shore Settlements of Progresso Lagoon, edited by Robert M. Rosenswig and Marilyn A. Masson, pp. 67-74. Institute of Mesoamerican Studies Occasional Publication No. 6. State University of New York, Albany.

Graham, Elizabeth A. 1994 The Highlands of the Lowlands: Environment and Archaeology in the Stann Creek

District, Belize, Central America. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cambridge, England. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

2002 Perspectives on Economy and Theory. In Ancient Maya Political Economies, edited by Marilyn A. Masson and David A. Freidel, pp. 398-418. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek.

Guderjan, Thomas H. 1995 Settlement Patterns and Survey Data. In Maya Maritime Trade, Settlement, and

Population on Ambergris Caye, Belize, edited by Thomas H. Guderjan and James F. Garber, pp. 9-30. Labyrinthos Press, Culver City.

105

Guderjan, Thomas H., and James F. Garber (editors) 1995 Maya Maritime Trade, Settlement, and Population on Ambergris Caye, Belize.

Labyrinthos Press, Culver City. Hayden, Brian 1987 Traditional Metate Manufacturing in Guatemala Using Chipped Stone Tools. In

Lithic Studies among the Contemporary Highland Maya, edited by Brian Hayden, pp. 8-119. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Hirth, Kenneth 1988 The Distributional Approach. Current Anthropology 39(4): 451-476. Horsfall, Gayell A. 1987 A Design Theory Perspective on Variability in Grinding Stones. In Lithic Studies

among the Contemporary Highland Maya, edited by Brian Hayden, pp. 332-377. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Jaeger, Susan E. 1988 The Manos and Metates of Santa Rita Corozal, Appendix II, In A Postclassic

Perspective: Excavations at the Maya Site of Santa Rita Corozal, Belize, pp. 99-110, edited by Diane Z. Chase and Arlen F. Chase. Precolumbian Art Research Institute, Monograph 4, San Francisco.

Jones, Grant D. 1989 Maya Resistance to Spanish Rule: Time and History on a Colonial Frontier.

University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Kepecs, Susan 1998 Diachronic Ceramic Evidence and its Social Implications in the Chikinchel Region,

Northeast Yucatan, Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 9(1):121-136. Kepecs, Susan, Gary M. Feinman, and Sylviane Boucher 1994 Chichen Itza and Its Hinterland: A World Systems Perspective. Ancient

Mesoamerica 5: 141-158. Kidder, Alfred V. 1947 The Artifacts of Uaxactun, Guatemala. Publication No. 576. Carnegie Institution of

Washington, Washington, D.C. Kraybill, Nancy 1977 Pre-Agricultural Tools for the Preparation of Foods in the Old World. In Origins of

Agriculture, edited by C.A. Reed, pp. 485-521. Mouton Publishers, The Hague.

106

Lowe, Gareth W., Thomas A. Lee, Jr., and Eduardo Martínez Espinoza 1982 Izapa: An Introduction to the Ruins and Monuments. Papers of the New World

Archaeological Foundation, No. 31. Brigham Young University, Provo. MacNeish, Richard S., Antoinette Nelken-Turner, and Irmgard Weitlaner de Johnson 1967 The Non-Ceramic Artifacts. The Prehistory of the Tehuacan Valley, Volume 2.

University at Texas Press, Austin. Marcus, Joyce 1983 Lowland Maya Archaeology at the Crossroads. American Antiquity 48:454-488. Masson, Marilyn A. 1999 Postclassic Maya Communities at Progresso Lagoon and Laguna Seca, Northern

Belize. Journal of Field Archaeology 25:285-306. 2000 In the Realm of Nachan Kan: Postclassic Maya Archaeology at Laguna de On,

Belize. University of Colorado Press, Boulder. 2001a The Belize Postclassic Project 2000 Season at Progresso Lagoon. In Belize

Postclassic Project 2000: Investigations at Caye Coco and the Shore Settlements of Progresso Lagoon, edited by Robert M. Rosenswig and Marilyn A. Masson, pp. 1-4. Institute of Mesoamerican Studies Occasional Publication No. 5. State University of New York, Albany.

2001b Changing Patterns of Ceramic Stylistic Diversity in the Pre-Hispanic Maya Lowlands. Acta Archaeologica 73: 1-30.

2002 Community Economy and the Mercantile Transformation in Postclassic Belize. In Ancient Maya Political Economies, edited by Marilyn A. Masson and David A. Freidel, pp. 335-364. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek.

Masson, Marilyn A., and Henry Chaya 2000 Obsidian Trade Connections at the Postclassic Maya Site of Laguna de On, Belize.

Lithic Technology 25:135-144. Masson, Marilyn A., and Carlos Peraza Lope 2002 Introduction: Objectives and Results of the 2001 Season, In The Economic

Foundations of Mayapan: Proyecto Mayapan – Temporada 2001, edited by Marilyn A. Masson and Carlos Peraza Lope, p. 1-3. Interim Report submitted to the Consejo de Arqueologia, Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Mexico, D.F.

Masson, Marilyn A., Carlos Peraza Lope, and Timothy S. Hare 2002 Surface Evidence of Mayapán’s Political Economy. Paper presented at the Society

for American Archaeology Meetings, March 23, 2002. Denver, Colorado.

107

O’Hare, Brian J. 2000 Subop 30: Continued Excavations of Cemetery #2 on the Northeast Side of Caye

Coco. In Belize Postclassic Project 2000: Investigations at Caye Coco and the Shore Settlements of Progresso Lagoon, edited by Robert M. Rosenswig and Marilyn A. Masson, pp. 67-74. Institute of Mesoamerican Studies Occasional Publication No. 5. State University of New York, Albany.

Oland, Maxine H. 2000 Off Mound Excavations on the North Shore of Caye Coco: Subop 13. In Belize

Postclassic Project 2000: Investigations at Caye Coco and the Shore Settlements of Progresso Lagoon, edited by Robert M. Rosenswig and Marilyn A. Masson, pp. 75-90. Institute of Mesoamerican Studies Occasional Publication No. 5. State University of New York, Albany.

Olson, Jan Marie 2001 Unequal Consumption: a Study of Domestic Wealth Differentials in Three Late

Postclassic Mexican Communities. PhD Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, State University of New York, Albany.

Patch, Robert W. 1993 Maya and Spaniard in Yucatan, 1648-1812. Stanford University Press, Stanford. Press, Irwin 1975 Tradition and Adaptation: Life in a Modern Yucatec Maya Village. Greenwood

Press, Westport. Proskouriakoff, Tatiana 1962 The Artifacts of Mayapán. In Mayapán, Yucatan, Mexico. Carnegie Institution of

Washington, D.C. Publication No. 619, Washington, D.C. Rathje, William L. 1972 Praise the Gods and Pass the Metates: a Hypothesis of the Development of Lowland

Rainforest Civilization in Mesoamerica. In Contemporary Archaeology, edited by M. Leone, pp. 365-392. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.

1975 The Last Tango in Mayapán: a Tentative Trajectory of Production-Distribution Systems. In Ancient Civilization and Trade, edited by J. A. Sabloff and C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, pp. 409-448. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Rathje, William L., David A. Gregory, and Frederick M. Wiseman 1978 Trade Models and Archaeological Problems: Classic Maya Examples. In

Mesoamerican Communication Routes and Culture Contacts, edited by T.A. Lee and C. Navarrete, pp. 147-175. Papers of the New World Archaeological Foundation 40. Brigham Young University, Provo.

108

Redfield, Robert 1941 The Folk Culture of Yucatan. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Redfield, Robert, and Alfonso Villa Rojas 1962 Chan Kom: A Maya Village. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Renfrew, Colin, and Paul Bahn 1996 Archaeology. Thames and Hudson, London. Restall, Matthew 1997 The Maya World: Yucatec Culture and Society 1550-1850. Stanford University

Press, Stanford. Rice, Don S. 1993 Eighth-Century Physical Geography, Environment, and Natural Resources in the

Maya Lowlands. In Lowland Maya Civilization in the Eighth Century A.D., edited by Jeremy Sabloff and John Henderson, pp. 11-63. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington D.C.

Roddick, Andrew 2000 Excavations in the Vicinity of Structure 6, Caye Coco. In Belize Postclassic Project

2000: Investigations at Caye Coco and the Shore Settlements of Progresso Lagoon, edited by Robert M. Rosenswig and Marilyn A. Masson, pp. 59-74. Institute of Mesoamerican Studies Occasional Publication No. 5. State University of New York, Albany.

Rosenswig, Robert M. 2001 Burying the Dead at Caye Coco: Summary of Mortuary Remains from the 1998, 1999

and 2000 Seasons. In Belize Postclassic Project 2000: Investigations at Caye Coco and the Shore Settlements of Progresso Lagoon, edited by Robert M. Rosenswig and Marilyn A. Masson, pp. 153-176. Institute of Mesoamerican Studies Occasional Publication No. 6. State University of New York, Albany.

Rosenswig, Robert M., and Marilyn A. Masson 2002 Postclassic Architecture and Political Power at Caye Coco, Belize. Ancient

Mesoamerica, In Press. Rovner, Irwin 1974 Implications of the Lithic Analysis at Becan. In Preliminary Reports on

Archaeological Investigations in the Rio Bec Area, Campeche, Mexico, edited by Richard E.W. Adams, pp. 128-132. National Geographic Society, Tulane University Program of Research in Campeche, New Orleans.

Rovner, Irwin, and Lewenstein, Suzanne M. 1997 Maya Stone Tools of Dzibilchaltún, Yucatán, and Becán and Chicanná,Campeche.

Middle American Research Institute, Publication 65, Tulane University, New Orleans.

109

Roys, Ralph L. 1943 The Indian Background of Colonial Yucatan. Carnegie Institution of Washington

Publication No. 596, Washington, D.C. 1962 Literary Sources for the History of Mayapán. In Mayapán, Yucatán, Mexico, edited

by Harry E.D. Pollock, Ralph L. Roys, Tatiana Proskouriakoff, and A.L. Smith, pp. 25-86. Carnegie Institute of Washington Publication No. 619, Washington, D.C.

Russell, Bradley W. 2001 Excavations at Structure 13 (Subop 36), Caye Coco, Belize. In Belize Postclassic

Project 2000: Investigations at Caye Coco and the Shore Settlements of Progresso Lagoon, edited by Robert M. Rosenswig and Marilyn A. Masson, pp. 27-40. Institute of Mesoamerican Studies Occasional Publication No. 6. State University of New York, Albany.

Sabloff, Jeremy A., and William L. Rathje 1975 The Rise of a Maya Merchant Class. Scientific American 233:72-82. Schlanger, Sarah H. 1991 On Manos, Metates, and the History of Site Occupations. American Antiquity 56(3):

460-474. Schneider, Joan S. 1993 Milling Implements: Biases and Problems in their Use as Indicators of Prehistoric

Behavior and Paleoenvironment. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly, Volume 29, Number 4, Fall 1993: 5-21.

Sheets, Payson 1978 Part One: Artifacts. In “Artifacts and Figurines,” by Payson D. Sheets and Bruce H.

Dahlin. The Prehistory of Chalchuapa, El Salvador, edited by Robert J. Sharer, Vol. 2. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

2000 Provisioning the Ceren Household: The Vertical Economy, Village Economy, and Household Economy in the Southeast Maya Periphery. Ancient Mesoamerica 11:217-230.

Sidrys, Raymond 1983 Archaeological Investigation in Northern Belize, Central America. Monograph XVII,

Institute of Archaeology. University of California, Los Angeles. Sidrys, Raymond, and John Andresen 1976 Metate Import in Northern Belize. In Maya Lithic Studies: Papers from the 1976

Belize Field Symposium, edited by T. Hester and N. Hammond, pp. 177-190. Special Report No. 4, Center for Archaeological Research, University of Texas, San Antonio.

110

Smith, Robert E. 1971 The Pottery of Mayapan, including Studies of Ceramic Material from Uxmal, Kabah,

and Chichen Itza. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology 66. Harvard University, Cambridge.

Spink, Mary Louise 1984 Metates as Socioeconomic Indicators during the Classic Period at Copan, Honduras.

Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Department of Anthropology, Pennsylvania State University.

Stephens, John L. 1841 Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas and Yucatan, Vol. I. Illustrations by

Frederick Catherwood. Dover Publications, Inc., New York. Stone, Tammy 1994 The Impact of Raw-Material Scarcity on Ground-Stone Manufacture and Use: an

Example from the Phoenix Basin Hohokam. American Antiquity 59(4):680-694. Strömsvik, Gustav 1931 Notes on the Metates of Chichen Itza, Yucatan. Carnegie Institution of Washington,

Publication 403, No. 4. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington D.C. 1937 Notes on the Metates from Calakmul, Campeche, and from the Mercado, Chichen

Itza, Yucatan. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Contributions to American Archaeology 3(16):121-128 Publication 456. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, D.C.

Tozzer, Alfred M. 1941 Landa’s Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatan. A Translation Edited with Notes by A.M.

Tozzer. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology 18. Harvard University, Cambridge.

Weeks, John M. 1983 Chisalin: A Late Postclassic Maya Settlement in Highland Guatemala. BAR

International Series 169. BAR, Oxford. Weglian, Emily 2002 Grave Goods a Gender Make: Case Study from Singen am Hohentweil, Germany. In

Gender and the Archaeology of Death, edited by Bettina Arnold and Nancy L. Wicker, pp. 137-158. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek.

Whitecotton, Joseph W., and Richard A. Pailes 1986 New World Precolumbian World Systems. In Ripples in the Chichimec Sea: New

Considerations of Southwestern-Mesoamerican Interactions, edited by Frances Joan Mathien and Randall H. McGuire, pp. 183-204. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.

111

Willey, Gordon R 1972 The Artifacts of Altar de Sacrificios. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology

and Ethnology, Harvard University, Vol. 64, No. 1. Harvard University, Cambridge. 1978 Excavation at Seibal: Artifacts. Memoirs of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology

and Ethnology, Vol. 14, pp. 1-189, Harvard University, Cambridge. Willey, Gordon R., William R. Bullard, Jr., John B. Glass, and James C. Gifford 1965 Prehistoric Maya Settlements in the Belize Valley. Papers of the Peabody Museum of

Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 54. Harvard University, Cambridge. Woodbury, Richard B. 1954 Prehistoric Stone Implements of Northeastern Arizona. Papers of the Peabody

Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology No. 34. Harvard University, Cambridge.

1965 Artifacts of the Guatemalan Highlands. In “Archaeology of Southern Mesoamerica, Part 1,” edited by Gordon R. Willey, pp. 163-179. Handbook of Middle American Indians, edited by Robert Wauchope, Vol. 2. University of Texas Press, Austin.

112

APPENDIX I –

MANO AND METATE RAW DATA TABLES

113

APPENDIX I – MANOS Y

ear

Col

lect

ed

Subo

p

Lot

Prov

enie

nce

Con

text

Typ

e

Raw

Mat

eria

l

Raw

Mat

eria

l So

urce

Lon

gitu

dina

l X

-Sec

tion

Tra

nsve

rse

X-

Sect

ion

# Fa

cets

Pres

ence

of

Bat

teri

ng

Size

Wei

ght (

g)

Com

men

ts

Phot

o/ D

raw

ing

Ref

eren

ce

1998 1h 699

3 x 1.5m unit, Level 2, On-mound Fill

Mano Frag. Granite MM Oval

Circular-Square 1 P

3.0(I)l x 5.3(I)w x 3.1(I)th 102.8

Glassy polish, ground on all sides

Appendix II – Plate 2

1998 1h 699

3 x 1.5m, Level 2, On-mound Fill

Mano Frag. Limestone L Undet. Undet. NR ND

8.7(I)l x 7.0 max w x 5.4 min w 321.4

Highly eroded, no visible polish

Appendix II – Plate 3

2000 6c 1097

2 x 3m, Level 4, On-mound

Midden or midden fill zone

Mano Frag. Limestone L Undet. Undet. NR ND

6.2(I)l x 4.9(I) w x 5.3 max th 240.4 Highly eroded

Appendix II – Plate 4

2000 6c 1154

2 x 3m, Level 5, On Mound

Associated with Burial #32

Mano Frag. Granite MM Undet.

Circular-Square NR P

8.9(I)l x 7.0 max w x 6.0 th 325.5

Battering on end, most likely resulted in breakage. 4 sides, too eroded to see facets

Appendix II – Plate 5

1998 8b 647 Unknown Unknown

Mano Frag.

Milky Quartz MM Undet.

Oval-Asym. 2 P

4.1(I)l x 5.0 w x 2.9 max th 88.2

Battering on the end

Appendix II – Plate 6, Plate 8,

upper right

1999 13l 854 2 x 2m, Level 2

Beginning of dense midden deposit

Mano Frag. Quartzite MM Oval

Oval-Sym. 2 P

4.9(I)l x 6.9 w x 2.9 max th 123.6

Battering along margin, eroded, bifacial

Appendix II – Plate 7

114

Yea

r C

olle

cted

Subo

p

Lot

Prov

enie

nce

Con

text

Typ

e

Raw

Mat

eria

l

Raw

Mat

eria

l So

urce

Lon

gitu

dina

l X

-Sec

tion

Tra

nsve

rse

X-

Sect

ion

# Fa

cets

Pres

ence

of

Bat

teri

ng

Size

Wei

ght (

g)

Com

men

ts

Phot

o/ D

raw

ing

Ref

eren

ce

1999 13l 873 2 x 2m, Level 3 Midden deposit

Mano Frag. Travertine L Undet. Undet. 1 ND

4.4(I)l x 2.1(I)w x 1.9(I)th 14.7

Slightly flat facet with rounded edge

Appendix II – Plate 23,

left

1999 13p 826

4 x 0.5m, Level 1

High artifact density

Mano Frag. Limestone L Undet. Undet. 2 ND

4.3(I)l x 2.4(I)w x 3.0th 44.1 Bifacial

Appendix II – Plate 23,

middle

1998 14 585

Level 3, On-mound Fill

Mano Frag. Rhyolite MM Undet. Undet. 0 ND

4.4(I)L x 3.5(I)w x 2.4(I)th 39.8 Looks round

Appendix II – Plate 8, lower left

2000 15g 1191 2 x 2m, Level 4

Cemetery #3 – deposits above burials

Pestle Frag.

Limestone burned L Undet. Circular 0 P

5.6(I)l x 4.3 max w x 3.8 min w x 4.1 max th x 3.3 min th 121.5

Ground on 2 sides and end shows battering and grinding

Appendix II – Plate 9

1998 16a 514 1 x 2m, Level 1 Midden

Mano Frag. Limestone L

Oval-Rect.

Oval-Sym. 1 P

6.8(I)l x 5.1 max w x 3.7(I)th 207.4

Ground on all sides, battering on the edge, possibly resulting in end breakage

Appendix II – Plate 24

1998 17a 607 Level 1, topsoil

Low artifact density, not heavily inhabited part of island

Mano Frags.,

N=2, refitColha Chert O Undet. Circular 0 P

5.2(I)l x 6.3 (I) max w x 3.4(I)th 89.4

Ground on all sides, including end. End may exhibit battering although diff. to tell with material type. High polish on 2 surfaces.

Appendix II – Plate 10

115

Yea

r C

olle

cted

Subo

p

Lot

Prov

enie

nce

Con

text

Typ

e

Raw

Mat

eria

l

Raw

Mat

eria

l So

urce

Lon

gitu

dina

l X

-Sec

tion

Tra

nsve

rse

X-

Sect

ion

# Fa

cets

Pres

ence

of

Bat

teri

ng

Size

Wei

ght (

g)

Com

men

ts

Phot

o/ D

raw

ing

Ref

eren

ce

1998 18 610 Level 2

Dense midden, most likely assoc. with Str. 4, and Str. 6

Mano Frag.

Vesicular Basalt LD Oval Undet. 2 P

6.7(I)l x 6.4 mid w x 5.4 end w x 3.8(I)th 187.5 N/C

Appendix II – Plate 11

1998 18a 689 1 x 2 m, Level 2

Dense midden, most likely assoc. with Str. 4, and Str. 6

Mano Frag. Diorite MM Oval

Oval-Asym. 2 P

9.4(I)l x 5.5 max th, 2.5 min th, 6.7 max w x 5.0 min w 347.4

Possible battering on end. Highly polished on two sides, ground on all sides.

Appendix II – Plate 12

1998 18b 717 Level 1

Dense midden, most likely associated with Str. 4, and Str. 6

Mano Frag.

Fossiliferous

Limestone L Undet. Undet. 2 ND

4.0(I)l x 4.7(I)w x 5.6 max th 107.4

Ground on all sides. Possibly bifacial.

Appendix II – Plate 26

1999 18c 950 1 x 2m, Level 4 Midden

Mano Frag. Quartzite MM Oval

Oval-Sym. 2 P

7.3(I)l x 6.5(I)w x 6.2 max th 352.8

Painted, battering on end, traces of white and black paint.

Appendix II – Plate 1b, Plate 13

2000 18e 1182 1 x 2m, Level 3

Dense midden, most likely associated with Str. 4, and Str. 6 due to relative proximity to those structures

Mano Frag. Travertine L Undet. Undet. NR P

4.4(I)l x 6.3 max w x 4.0(I)th 203.7

Battering on end, too eroded to see grinding

Appendix II – Plate 23,

right

1998 20 675

Level 5, On-mound

Midden fill interface zone with underlying cream clay layer. Possible house floor

Mano Frag. Limestone L Undet.

Oval-Sym. NR ND

13.4(I)l x 7.0 max w x 5.7 max th 720 Highly eroded

Appendix II – Plate 25,

right

116

Yea

r C

olle

cted

Subo

p

Lot

Prov

enie

nce

Con

text

Typ

e

Raw

Mat

eria

l

Raw

Mat

eria

l So

urce

Lon

gitu

dina

l X

-Sec

tion

Tra

nsve

rse

X-

Sect

ion

# Fa

cets

Pres

ence

of

Bat

teri

ng

Size

Wei

ght (

g)

Com

men

ts

Phot

o/ D

raw

ing

Ref

eren

ce

1999 26a 898

2 x 3m, Level 2, On-mound

Rich variety of artifacts Mano Limestone L Undet. Circular 3 ND

5.1(I)l x 4.2 max w x 3.4 th 112.9 Highly eroded

Appendix II – Plate 24

1999 29a 843 3 x 1m, Level 3 Unknown

Mano Frags.,

N=2, refit Gabbro MM Oval Oval-Sym. 2 P

10(I)l x 5.2 max w x 3.6 min th x 4.7 max th 396

2 visible facets, battering on the end

Appendix II – Plate 14

1999 29c 897

Level 2, On-mound

Unknown, low artifact densities, with some historical materials in this level

Mano Frag. Rhyolite MM Undet. Undet. 1 ND

6.0(I)l x 4.1(I)w x 2.0(I)th 35.4

Appendix II – Plate 8, upper-left

2000 30h 1082 Feature

Cemetery #2, Burial 27, single adult burial, primary context, 36 limestone rocks placed in circular mound above individual, including 3 ground stone tools

Mano Frag. Quartzite MM Undet. Undet. 2 P

6.4(I)l x 5.2(I)w x 8.0 max th x 4.4 min th 440

Shows battering and breakage at end. It is possibly painted since same material type as others, it was washed.

No Photos or Drawings

117

Yea

r C

olle

cted

Subo

p

Lot

Prov

enie

nce

Con

text

Typ

e

Raw

Mat

eria

l

Raw

Mat

eria

l So

urce

Lon

gitu

dina

l X

-Sec

tion

Tra

nsve

rse

X-

Sect

ion

# Fa

cets

Pres

ence

of

Bat

teri

ng

Size

Wei

ght (

g)

Com

men

ts

Phot

o/ D

raw

ing

Ref

eren

ce

2000 30h 1082 Feature

Cemetery #2, Burial 27, Single Adult burial, primary context, 36 limestone rocks placed in circular mound above individual, including 3 ground stone tools

Mano Frags.,

n=2, refit Quartzite MM Undet. Circular 2 ND 6.8(I)l x 6.5 w x 6.2 th 451.7

Burial 27, painted white and black - alternating stripes. Refits to mano from Burial 30.

Appendix II – Plate 16,

Figure 31b, Figure 32

2000 30h 1078 Level 3

Cemetery #2, found above Burials 27, 28, 29

Mano Frag. Quartzite MM Undet. Undet. 1 ND

14.2(I)l x 8.4 w x 6.4 th 950

Highly eroded, but paint is visible - white, paint on facet.

Appendix II – Plate 15

2000 30j/k 1110 Feature

Cemetery #2, Burial 30, single burial, primary context. Burial pit figure 8 shape. Western-most cavity contained remains of Burial 30. Covered by circular limestone rock formation (including mano)

Mano Frag. Quartzite MM Undet.

Oval-Asym. 2 ND

6.5(I)l x 6.3 w x 5.7(I)th 239.7

Burial 30, painted white and black in stripes, refits to mano from Burial 27.

Figure 31 a and c

118

Yea

r C

olle

cted

Subo

p

Lot

Prov

enie

nce

Con

text

Typ

e

Raw

Mat

eria

l

Raw

Mat

eria

l So

urce

Lon

gitu

dina

l X

-Sec

tion

Tra

nsve

rse

X-

Sect

ion

# Fa

cets

Pres

ence

of

Bat

teri

ng

Size

Wei

ght (

g)

Com

men

ts

Phot

o/ D

raw

ing

Ref

eren

ce

1999 31 837 2 x 1m, Level 7

Final level that ended in bedrock, large # of artifacts

Mano Frag. Quartzite MM Lentic.

Oval-Sym. 4 P

6.8(I)l x 5.5 max w x 3.5 min w x 3.6 max th x 2.1 min th 169.8

Battering on end, resulting in breakage, Ground on all sides, visible polish on one surface, and one side (edge)

Appendix II – Plate 7,

right, Plate 17

2000 34b 1194 Level 6 Associated with Burial 34

Mano Frag. Quartzite MM Undet. Triang. 3 ND

3.2(I)l x 5.0 max w x 4.3 min w 107.9

Painted black on one surface (white paint possibly washed off)

Appendix II – Plate 1, Plate 19

1999 34c/d 948 2 x 2m, Level 1

Area classified as residential in nature by presence of many postholes, utilitarian debris found in levels above bedrock

Mano Frag. Limestone L Undet. Undet. 2 ND

4.6(I)l x 4.6 w x 3.2(I)th 110

Bifacial mano, highly polished on one side

Appendix II – Plate 25,

left

2000 38 1187 2 x 3m, Level 5

Dense midden, 5 intact tools, a possible cache prior to the construction of the rubble surface

Complete pestle

Vesicular basalt LD Taper Circular 1 A

8.2 l x 3.3 end w, ground end w: 4.5 dia 195.3

Worn at end from rotary grinding. When excavated, red pigment was found on the end, which is no longer present.

Appendix II – Plate 20

119

Yea

r C

olle

cted

Subo

p

Lot

Prov

enie

nce

Con

text

Typ

e

Raw

Mat

eria

l

Raw

Mat

eria

l So

urce

Lon

gitu

dina

l X

-Sec

tion

Tra

nsve

rse

X-

Sect

ion

# Fa

cets

Pres

ence

of

Bat

teri

ng

Size

Wei

ght (

g)

Com

men

ts

Phot

o/ D

raw

ing

Ref

eren

ce

2000 38 1243

2 x 3m, Level 10 Midden

Mano Frag. Travertine L Undet. Undet. 2 P

6.5(I)l x 7.2 max w x 5.6 max th 358.5

Battering on end most likely resulted in breakage, one polished surface, bifacial

Appendix II – Plate 21

2000 40a 1126

1 x 3m, Level 1, unscreened

Mano Frag. Quartzite MM

Oval-Rect. Lentic. 2 ND

6.2(I)l x 7.9 max w x 6.8 min w x 4.1 max th x 3.2 min th 292.6

Painted, polish is well-preserved, bifacial, ground on all sides, painted on main surface and on one side.

Appendix II – Plate 22,

Figure 30

MM Recon, 1998 N/A N/A Surface N/A

Mano Frag. Sandstone L Undet. Circular 1 ND

7.6 (I)l x 7.9 max w x 3.9 th 330.4

Appendix II – Plate 26,

left

1998 N/A N/A Surface N/A Undet. Vesicular

Basalt LD Undet. Undet. 2 ND

6.4 (I)l x 4.8 (I)w x 1.5 (I) th 52

Too fragmented to tell shape, 2 ground surfaces, 1 with polish

No photo or drawing

1999 33 924

1x2m, Level 3, not screened, On-mound Undet. MTC MM Undet. Undet. 1 ND

7.5(I)l x 5.1(I)w x 3.6(I)th 145.8

Too fragmented to tell shape, 1 polished surface

Appendix II – Plate 18

120

APPENDIX I – METATES Y

ear

Col

lect

ed

Subo

p #

Lot

Prov

enie

nce

Typ

e

Raw

Mat

eria

l

Raw

Mat

eria

l So

urce

Size

(cm

)

Wei

ght (

g)

Com

men

ts

Phot

o/

Dra

win

g R

efer

ence

1999 3b 719

2 x 2m, Level 1, N wall,

On-Mound

F-P Quartzite MM 2.7 (I)l x 2.3w x 0.8 (I)th 6.2 Polished surface

Appendix III - Plate 1 –

right

1998 13g 673

1 x 3m Topsoil rootmat, S side

F-P Quartzite MM 5.4 (I)l x 3.3 (I)w x 10.2 (I)th 31.8 N/C

Appendix III – Plate 1 -

left

1998 13i 722

Level 1 (10cm),

1.5 x 1m, N side

F 1) Vesicular basalt LD 8.6 (I)l x 3.7 (I)w x

3.8th 96 Ground to edge - one polished surface, 1 ground surface, unrestricted grinding

Appendix III – Plate 2 -

top

1998 13i 722

Level 1 (10cm),

1.5 x 1m, N side

F-P 2) Quartzite MM 6.6 (I)l x 4.4 (I)w x 3.7th 179

Ground to edge - one polished surface, 1 ground surface, unrestricted grinding

Appendix III Plate 2 - bottom

1998 13i 722 Level 1, 1.5 x 1m,

N side F 3) Quartzite MM 7.1 (I)l x 3.9 (I)w x

2.3 (I)th 29 One polished surface. Associated with artifact from Lot 722

Appendix III – Plate 2 – 3rd down from top

1998 13i 722 Topsoil

rootmat, N side

F Quartzite MM 4 pieces refit: 4.5 (I)l x 3.9 (I)w x

3.1th edge 84.8 Polished on both sides, ground

on one

Appendix III – Plate 2 – 2nd down from top

1999 13j 784 Level 2 F Quartzite MM 2.5 (I)l x 1.8 (I)w x 1.3 (I)th 7.5 Polished surface

Appendix III – Plate 4 -

left

121

Yea

r C

olle

cted

Subo

p #

Lot

Prov

enie

nce

Typ

e

Raw

Mat

eria

l

Raw

Mat

eria

l So

urce

Size

(cm

)

Wei

ght (

g)

Com

men

ts

Phot

o/

Dra

win

g R

efer

ence

1999 13l 873 2x2m, Level 3 O Quartzite MM

11.9l x 2.6 min w x 3.6 max w x 4.2

max th, x 1.6 min th 184.3 Recycled metate, axe, impact

scars on edge

Appendix III – Plate 3 -

left

1999 13l 873 2 x 2m, Level 3 U Metamorphic MM 7.8 (I)l x 5.8w x

5.5th 282.5 Reddish cortex, prob. burned, 1 visible ground area

Appendix III – Plate 5

1998 14 531

1 x 4m, sediment

and fill, On Mound.

C Granite MM 14.5 (I)l x 11.2 (I)w

x basin th: 3.4 basin, 2.0 edge

740 Polished surface, ground on dorsal side

Appendix III – Plate 6

1998 14 N/A On Mound T Limestone L 28.6 (I)l x 19.3 (I)w x 11.3th, 8.2 wall

th, 2.6 basin th 4385 Highly eroded, restricted

grinding Appendix III

– Plate 7

1998 15b 538 Level 1, On Mound F Metamorphic MM 6.0 (I)l x 3.8w x 0.8

(I)th 28.6 Mica grains, visible polish on one side, no margin

Appendix III – Plate 8

1998 15f 769 44-80cmbs C Limestone L 10.1 (I)l x 7.4w x 6.6th 600 Highly eroded Appendix III

– Plate 9

1998 15f 769 44-80cmbs U Vesicular Basalt LD 12.7 (I)l x 6.4w x

5.8th 370 1 visible ground surface Appendix III – Plate 10

1998 15f 769 44-80cmbs F-L Vesicular basalt LD 12.9 (I)l x 9.5 (I)w,

3.4 basin th 327 Thin, footed, ground to edge, polished surface is highly eroded, unrestricted grinding

Appendix III – Plate 11

122

Yea

r C

olle

cted

Subo

p #

Lot

Prov

enie

nce

Typ

e

Raw

Mat

eria

l

Raw

Mat

eria

l So

urce

Size

(cm

)

Wei

ght (

g)

Com

men

ts

Phot

o/

Dra

win

g R

efer

ence

2000 15g 1210 Pit in NW corner of

unit T Limestone L

14.5 (I)l x 10.4 (I)w x 8.2 th, 3.4 wall th,

3.2 basin th 675 Burial 23, restricted grinding Appendix III

– Plate 12

2000 18d 1120 1 x 3m, Level 1 F Diorite MM

7.5 (I)l x 3.8 (I)w x 2.1 (edge th), 5.7

basin th 185

Ground to edge, highly polished grinding surface, 2 ground surfaces, unrestricted grinding

Figure 17, and

Appendix III – Plate 13

1998 22 734

1 x 2m, Level 2, possible plastered cobble floor

U Limestone L 10.1 (I)l x 4.1w x 5.3th 268 Shows battering at one end Appendix III

– Plate 14

1999 27a 849 3 x 2m, Level 3,

On Mound O Diorite MM 7.9l x 6.2w x 3.2 th 221.7

Recycling, edges formed in oval shape, grinding is not to the edge, could be erosion.

Appendix III – Plate 15

1999 27b 964

1 x 1m, around

edges of cavity in fill, On Mound

U Metamorphic MM 10.8 (I)l x 8.3 (I)w x 4.7h 337.3

Reddish cortex, burned, 1 visible ground area, highly eroded

Appendix III – Plate 16 – left photo,

bottom drawing

1999 27b 964

1 x 1m, around

edges of cavity in fill, On Mound

U Metamorphic MM 8.0 (I)l x 2.5w x 3.9h 109.7 1 visible ground surface,

unrestricted grinding

Appendix III – Plate 3,

right

123

Yea

r C

olle

cted

Subo

p #

Lot

Prov

enie

nce

Typ

e

Raw

Mat

eria

l

Raw

Mat

eria

l So

urce

Size

(cm

)

Wei

ght (

g)

Com

men

ts

Phot

o/

Dra

win

g R

efer

ence

1999 27b 903 Level 5, On Mound F-P Quartzite MM 15.7l x 8.8 (I)w x

3.2 th 656

Unrestricted grinding, Polished to edge margin. Square or Rectangular in shape. Burned on one side. 4 pieces that refit

Appendix III – Plate 17

1999 28d 885 1 x 2m, Level 2 U Quartzite MM 11.5 (I)l x 7.1 (I)w

x 1.9th 90.6 No margin, looks like a flake Appendix III – Plate 16,

right

1999 29b 851 2 x 3m, Level 1,

On Mound U Vesicular

Basalt LD 10.9 (I)l x 10.4w x 6.2 th 595 no visible grinding surfaces No photo

1999 29d 887 2 x 3m, Level 1 F Quartzite MM 4.5 (I)l x 2.2 (I)w x

2.0 (I)th 31.2 Thin, eroded Appendix III – Plate 19

1999- 2000 30b 993 Burial #21,

S side C Granite MM 13.2 (I)l x 3.4 (I)w x 6.1 (I)th 328

Burial 21. Polished to edge ground on other side. Slight reddish hue. Unrestricted grinding

Appendix III – Plate 21

1999 31 808 2 x 1m, Level 3 F Vesicular

Basalt LD 7.4 (I)l x 6.8 (I) w x 10.6 (basin th) 153

One polished surface, 1 ground surface, Unrestricted grinding

Appendix III – Plate 18

1999 31 837 Level 7 F Vesicular Basalt LD 4.5 (I)l x 3.1 (I)w x

1.1 (I)th 14.4 Ground on both sides. No margin, one side with polish

Appendix III – Plate 19

1999 34 926 Level 2 F Sandstone L 13.6 (I)l x 9.2 (I)w x 1.3 (I)th 207 Planar/Flat, but is a fragment,

unrestricted grinding Appendix III

– Plate 22

1999 34D 976 Burial/Pit

#13 U Gabbro MM 3.7 (I)l x 3.6 (I)w x 3.8 (basin th) 84.7g Ground on one side, polished

on opposite side Appendix III

– Plate 23

1999 34D 976 Burial/Pit

#13 F-L Vesicular Basalt LD

7.9 (I)l x 7.1w x 6.8 (end with foot) x

3.8 basin th - Average th 5.3

327 Thin, straight sided, probably square cornered, one polished surface, unrestricted grinding

Appendix III – Plate 24

124

Yea

r C

olle

cted

Subo

p #

Lot

Prov

enie

nce

Typ

e

Raw

Mat

eria

l

Raw

Mat

eria

l So

urce

Size

(cm

)

Wei

ght (

g)

Com

men

ts

Phot

o/

Dra

win

g R

efer

ence

2000 34E 1061 Burial #26 C Limestone (soft) L

15.4 (I)l x 12.2 (I)w x 5.6 basin th, 2.1

edge th - 543

From Burial #26, adult male. Polished to edge, ground on other side, possible recycling, unrestricted grinding

Appendix III – Plate 25

PR1, 2000

34G 1052 2 x 2m,

Level 2 O Quartzite MM 8.9 (I)l x 5.0w x 1.8th 43.4 Flake, recycling, possibly

associated with Burial 26 Appendix III

– Plate 26

2000 36 NA Surface, 2 x 2m, On Mound

F Vesicular Basalt LD 8.9 (I)l x 7.4 (I)w x

3.6 basin th 388 Fairly uniform thickness, 1 polished surface, 1 ground surface, unrestricted grinding

Appendix III – Plate 27

2000 36 1031 2x2m,

Level 1, On Mound

F Vesicular Basalt LD 5.1 (I)l x 3.1 (I)w x

3.1th 35.3 One flat surface, one ground side, rim fragment

Appendix III – Plate 4, middle

2000 37 1254

1 x 2m, Feature:

stone slab wall

running from E-W

T Limestone L

49.3l x 36.7 max w x 13.1cm un-

ground end, 6.6 ground end, 15.6 th with rim, 5.7 max rim height, 2.1 cm min rim height, 5.9

cm rim th

3000

The outside margin was most likely painted all black. The inside of the rims are both polished. There is high polish visible in the basin. Found upright with unground edge pointed up.

Appendix III – Plate 28

2000 38 1202 Level 6 F Vesicular Basalt LD 5.5 (I)l x 4.1 (I)w x

3.2 basin th 44 Ground on 2 sides to shape, one with heavy polish

Appendix III – Plate 4,

right

2000 38 1202 Level 6 U Quartzite MM 7.9 (I)l x 3.2 (I)w x 2.8 (I)th 44.7 Possibly a flat fragment, one

ground surface Appendix III

– Plate 29

2000 39 NA Surface, S side F Vesicular

Basalt LD 9.2 (I)l x 7.2 (I)w x 2.1th 220 Polished on both sides,

uniform thickness Appendix III

– Plate 30

2000 39 1197 1 x 2m, Level 6 C Granite MM 9.2 (I)l x 6.9 (I) w x

2.9th 216.3 Polished to edge Appendix III – Plate 31

125

Yea

r C

olle

cted

Subo

p #

Lot

Prov

enie

nce

Typ

e

Raw

Mat

eria

l

Raw

Mat

eria

l So

urce

Size

(cm

)

Wei

ght (

g)

Com

men

ts

Phot

o/

Dra

win

g R

efer

ence

1997 9 Surface U Basalt LD 9.6 (I)l x 6.6 (I)w x 4.0 (I)th 438

Visible grinding up to the edge of the fragment, unrestricted grinding. Porous material.

Appendix III – Plate 19

2000 NR NR Surface F-L Vesicular Basalt LD

10.2 (I)l x 10.3 (I) w x 4.8 (end with

foot) th, 2.6 th (end), 10.4 basin

(th), 2.3 max height of foot, 5.7 l of

foot, 3.6 w of foot

510

Thin, straight sided, square-cornered. Ground to edge, ground on all sides, only one polished surface, unrestricted grinding

Appendix III – Plate 35

1998 NA NA Surface, NE Quad F Vesicular

Basalt LD 11.6 (I)l x 5.2 (I)w x 1.7th at edge, 2.9

basin th 236g

Thin, rounded side, ground to edge, 1 polished surface, 1 ground surface, unrestricted grinding.

Appendix III – Plate 33

1998 NA NA Surface F Vesicular Basalt LD 7.7 (I)l x 4.5 (I)w x

4.3 (I)th 159 One polished surface, one ground surface

Appendix III – Plate 20,

left

1998 NA NA Surface U Vesicular Basalt LD 5.9 (I)l x 4.9w x

4.8th 108 Larger vesicles, 1 polished surface, 2 ground surface

Appendix III – Plate 20,

right

1998 NA NA Surface F Vesicular Basalt LD 7.6 (I)l x 6.3 (I) w x

4.3 (basin th) 328 1 polished surface, burned on 1 edge, not a margin fragment

Appendix III – Plate 34

1998 NA NA Surface T Vesicular Basalt LD

9.3 (I)l x 7.9 (I)w x 2.5 possible edge

th, 4.0 basin thickness

200.3 Visible shaping but no visible grinding, heavily weathered

Appendix III – Plate 21,

top

1998 NA NA Surface U Igneous, burned MM 6.6 (I)l x 4.0 (I)w x

2.6th 37.2 1 visible grinding surface, eroded grinding surface

Appendix III – Plate 14

126

Yea

r C

olle

cted

Subo

p #

Lot

Prov

enie

nce

Typ

e

Raw

Mat

eria

l

Raw

Mat

eria

l So

urce

Size

(cm

)

Wei

ght (

g)

Com

men

ts

Phot

o/

Dra

win

g R

efer

ence

1998 NA NA NA M Quartzite MM

15.4l x 14.1w x 2.4 max w, grinding

surfaces: circular: 11.1l x 9.9w x 1.1 deep, secondary

surface on fracture: 7.7l x 2.5w

525

One hand, rotary, restricted grinding, grinding surface is circular, some reuse of grinding surfaces

Appendix III – Plate 32