A PREHISTORIC CERAMIC SEQUENCE FROM THE CENTRAL AMAZON AMP ITS RELATIONSHIP TO THE CARIBBEAN

James 8. Petersen, Michael J. Heckenberger, Eduardo G. Neves

ABSTRACT

Recent archaeological research along the lower Negro and Solimöes rivers in Amazonas state of Brazil has doc­

umented extensive prehistoric occupation dating ca. 300 B.C. to A.D. 1500. Amerindian ceramics are very com­

mon at sites of this period in the central Amazon, including evidence of several sequential and inter-related pot­

tery complexes, or "series." Some of these ceramics, especially those of the earlier "Modeled-Incised" complex,

show distant relationships to contemporaneous Saladoid and Barrancoid series ceramics in the eastern Caribbean

region, including the islands of the Lesser Antilles and Puerto Rico. The later ceramics of the "Amazonian

Polychrome" tradition in the central Amazon are less clearly related to the Caribbean. This paper presents pre­

liminary information about these findings from the central Amazon.

RESUME

De récentes recherches archéologiques menées en aval des fleuves Negro ei Solimöes dans l'état d''Amazonas, au

Brésil, documentent une occupation préhistorique conséquente, datée d'entre 300 B.C. et 1500. A.D. Les

céramiques amérindiennes sont très fréquentes sur les sites de cette période en Amazonie centrale, incluant des

témoins de plusieurs séquences de complexes céramiques présentant des relations les uns avec les autres, appelés

« séries. » Certaines de ces céramiques, en particulier celles du complexe ancien « Modelé-Incise, » montrent

des relations éloignées avec les développements des séries contemporaines Saladoïdes et Barrancoïdes de la

Caraïbe orientale, dont ceux des îles des Petites Antilles et de Puerto Rico. Les céramiques plus tardives de la

tradition « Polychrome Amazonienne » d'Amazonie centrale sont moins clairement apparentées à celles de la

Caraïbe. Cette communication présente les données prâiminaires de ces observations effectuées en Amazonie

centrale.

RESUMEN

Durante las recientes investigaciones en Bajo Río Negro y Río Solimöes, Estado de Amazonas, Brasil, se ha

documentado una extensa ocupación prehistórica con fechas entre 300 A.C. y 1500 D.C. La cerámica amerindia

es muy común en sitios de este periodo en el Amazonas Central, incluyendo evidencia de varias secuencias

cerámicas así como de inter-reiaciones entre ensamblajes cerámicos, en particular aquellos relacionados con el

complejo "Inciso-Modelado" temprano, todos los cuales sugieren relaciones distantes con las series saladoide y

barrancoide que se desplazaron hacia la región del Caribe Oriental, incluyendo las islas de las Antillas Menores

y Puerto Rico. Las cerámicas tardías de la "Tradición Polícroma de Amazonia" en el Amazonas central, sin

embargo, presentan menos relaciones con las del Caribe. Este ensayo presenta información preliminar sobre los

resultados de los estudios en el Amazonas central.

250

INTRODUCTION

Archaeological research all across the lowlands of South American and the Caribbean has long

demonstrated close stylistic and presumed cultural relationships over this large region. These link­

ages apparently stretched from the margins of the Andes all the way to Puerto Rico and beyond in the

Greater Antilles, especially during the time of the Early Ceramic period, or the "Saladoid series," in

the Caribbean. However, researchers who have recognized these relationships have long bemoaned

the fact there are relatively few dated sequences in the Amazonian portion of this large territory.

Recent research near the confluence of the Negro and Solimöes rivers in the state of Amazonas

in northern Brazil has been designed, in part, to provide such detailed chronological data. In addi­

tion, it aims to gather information on prehistoric material culture, subsistence and settlement, among

other issues (e.g., Heckenberger et al. 1998, 1999, 2001; Petersen et al. 2001). This study was initiated

as the Central Amazon Project (CAP) in 1995 and has been carried on intermittently since then by an

international research team first from the Universidade de Sao Paulo, the Carnegie Museum of

Natural History and the University of Maine-Farmington. More recently, still other institutions have

become involved in the CAP such as the University of Florida, the University of Vermont and the State

University of New York-Binghamton. Over 40 prehistoric sites have been identified. Of these, four

sites have been extensively and/or intensively tested thus far, including Açutuba, Hatahara, Lago

Grande and Osvaldo. These sites are situated on the "whitewater" Solimoes River in the case of

Hatahara, the "blackwater" Negro River in the case of Açutuba, and on intermediate waters in the case

of the Lago Grande and Osvaldo sites.

Over 55 radiocarbon dates have been obtained from these four sites within the large CAP

study area, spanning from 6850 B.P. to 510 B.P., or 4900 B.C. to A.D. 1440, uncorrected, as for all dates

cited herein. The better-understood portion of the sequence dates from ca. 2310 to 510 B.P, however,

or 360 B.C. to A.D. 1440 during the Ceramic period. The earlier of the two major CAP ceramic com­

plexes seems to include only relatively small settlements, much like the scale of ethnographic villages

in the Amazon. At least one clearly circular village is represented at the Osvaldo site, only several

hundred meters in maximum extent, much like contemporaneous Saladoid examples in the Caribbean

(Petersen 1996). Osvaldo dates to the earlier of the two CAP Ceramic period subdivisions, at around

the time of Christ and later. Later Ceramic period settlements in the CAP area were sometimes much

larger and they are long and linear in configuration, stretching over three kilometers or more in the

last 5-6 centuries before European contact (see Heckberger et al. 1999:Figure 3). This period is best

understood at the very large Açutuba site, where fortifications were apparently represented, but

smaller, unfortified sites were present during this period as well.

As is expected in the South American lowlands, prehistoric pottery is the most common form

of material culture at all Ceramic period sites within the study area, including diverse forms of deco­

ration, finish and function from several inter-related, sequential ceramic complexes. We are confident

that different sub-divisions are evident in the entire ceramic sequence, but we have broken it down

most usefully so far into two major complexes that show evolutionary relationships. The earlier of

these two complexes is the "Modeled-Incised," or "Incised Rim," ceramic complex, with unequivocal

relationships to the "Barrancoid series," or tradition, first defined in the Orinoco River drainage

251

(Figure 1). The Barrancoid series is also represented elsewhere in lowland South America and obvi­

ously, in the Caribbean islands, but not everyone agrees about this distribution and other interpreta­

tions (e.g., Boomert 2000; Hubert 1968; Lathrap 1970; Meggers and Evans 1983; Roosevelt 1997; Rouse

1992; Sanoja and Vargas 1983; Zucchi et al. 1984).

In the CAP area, the Modeled-Incised, Barrancoid-related ceramic complex consists largely of

unpainted and non-slipped vessels of various forms, but there is some evidence for painting/slipping

in one or more its temporal subdivisions (see Heckenberger et al. 1998:Figures 3a-3d). In the CAP area,

it is dated from at least ca. 2310 B.P. to as late as ca. 1100 B.P., or 360 B.C. to A.D. 850. Locally, the

Modeled-Incised complex may be as old as ca. 2900 B.P., or 950 B.C., however. Small villages, like the

Osvaldo site and the area of Açutuba II, were characteristic during this complex, or so we perceive

them on the basis of available evidence. We do not recognize a local site hierarchy during this period

and one can infer that the societies were egalitarian and non-stratified. This ceramic complex is

known from various single component sites, but it is also occurs at other sites such as Açutuba, where

it is found stratigraphically beneath the second and later ceramic complex.

The second CAP ceramic development is the "Guarita" ceramic complex, or phase, and it

shows continuity with the earlier complex within the study area, as well as close relationships to the

"Amazonian Polychrome" tradition and minority evidence related to the "Araquinoid" series as well

(Figure 2). This late CAP ceramic complex (or complexes) is highly diverse, including both

painted/slipped and unpainted vessels with functional and perhaps social distinctions (see

Heckenberger et al. 1998: Figures 4a-4f). The elaborate, sometimes polychrome vessels may have been

related to high status individuals and activities such as feasting.

The Guarita complex is dated locally in the CAP study area from ca. 1100-1000 B.P. to 510 B.P,

or generally A.D. 850-950 to A.D. 1440 or later. This was a period of presumed social stratification and

regional chief doms. The Guarita complex occurs both at single component sites and others where it

is found stratigraphically above the Modeled-Incised complex. Although it too exhibits widespread

relationships, the Guarita complex and the broader Amazonian Polychrome tradition only has tenta­

tive correlates in the Caribbean region, with some possible relationship to islands off the coast of

Venezuela and perhaps into the southern Lesser Antilles.

PREHISTORIC CERAMIC COMPLEXES IN THE CAP STUDY AREA

Two sequential ceramic complexes have been identified within the CAP study area and these are

inter-related, showing continuities in vessel form, temper, surface finish, decoration techniques and

decorative motif, among others. In particular, the temper is nearly uniform in the near ubiquitous use

of cauixi, or sponge spicule, temper in all vessels over time and in both complexes. However, cariape,

or burned tree bark, is represented as a small minority in the later complex. Likewise, the frequent

use of incised, excised, punctation, modeled ("sculpted") and different degrees of painted/slipped

decoration suggest clear continuities from the Modeled-Incised, or Barrancoid-related, complex to the

later Guarita/Amazonian Polychrome complex. The closeness of fit and stratigraphie distribution

between vessels of the two complexes leaves absolutely no doubt that they are closely and sequential­

ly related, establishing local cultural continuity over time. This is not a new discovery, but rather it

252

represents one of the best available local confirmations of what others such as Hilbert (1968) and

Lathrap (1970:157), among others, tentatively recognized previously.

Modeled-Incised Ceramic Complex

More specifically, the earlier Modeled-Incised ceramics can be likely divided into at least two

subsets. The first of these is labeled here tentatively as complex IA, much like the distinction between

"Barrrancas" Barrancoid and "Los Barrancos" Barrancoid in the Orinoco region (Boomert 2000; Rouse

and Cruxent 1963; Sanoja and Vargas 1983). Complex IA generally includes thin, relatively hard,

painted/slipped ceramics, which were largely open bowls with flanged rims and thicker, softer,

unpainted/slipped typical jars and bowls, with and without flanged rims. Although mostly cauixi

tempered, this complex also includes lesser amounts of crushed up rock and "grog" (sherd) temper

constituents and the texture of the ceramic paste is almost gritty in some cases. Vessel forms typical­

ly include bell-shaped and other bowl and jar forms.

Red on white and other painted decoration is found on the thin/hard bowls, while the

unpainted /slipped vessels include diverse rectilinear and curvilinear motifs made with fine incision,

and in some cases even fine traces of paint /slip occur within the incisions. Fine crosshatched, or

"zoned hachure," incision is sometimes represented within the diverse range of incised decoration.

Much of this pottery is partially eroded, especially the unpainted/slipped varieties when exposed on

the site surface through erosion or some other disturbance. Relatively large tubular ceramic pipes are

associated with this complex. The incision is often relatively fine and sometimes includes double ele­

ments, apparently produced simultaneously by a double-notched incising implement.

As far as can be seen, the Modeled-Incised ceramic complex includes a second, predominant

and more long lasting development, tentatively labeled here as complex IB. It seems to have co-exist­

ed with complex IA before the time of Christ, but it certainly persisted later as well, extending from

the time of the painted/slipped pottery to as late as A.D. 800-900. The temper in complex IB includes

dense amounts of cauixi, to the point of providing a "soapy" feel to the surface. The vessel forms are

more diverse in this case, including various bowl, jar and apparently bottle forms, as well as griddles.

Handles are sometimes represented on the jars. Large burial urns appeared by at least the end of this

complex and these were large jars with necks, typically undecorated.

Overall, complex I decoration includes occasional burnished zones bounded by incision, but

the large part of the pottery was decorated using a dramatic combination of broad and /or fine inci­

sion, excision, punctation and modeling (sculpture). Both rectilinear and curvilinear incised motifs are

common, with and without adornos on the rims. The adornos are often elaborate and very stylized

zoomorphic and/or anthropomorpic representations, often resembling contemporaneous ones in the

Orinoco and Caribbean. Applique nodes are represented in various cases. Again, double toothed

incising tools were employed in some cases. Both bowls and jars were represented and perhaps most

distinctive were the so-called "cut" rims, where the vessel lip was often produced by laterally sculpt­

ing the upper/outer edge of the vessel parallel to its long axis (and across the lip) with a broad-blad-

ed tool.

Both forms of the early Modeled-Incised complex in the CAP area are related most obviously

to the widespread Barrancoid and even the Saladoid series, following Irving Rouse and Jose Cruxent

253

(1963, etc.). Past researchers, including Cruxent, Rouse and others, have inter-related the Barrancoid

and Saladoid series, but typically only in the middle-lower Orinoco region of Venezuela and some­

what in the islands of the Caribbean. Their co-existence in the central Amazon of Brazil may be more

surprising to some researchers, but it is not unexpected. For example, we can roughly relate two of

Meggers and Evans' (1983) separate horizon styles to the earlier CAP ceramics in complex I. These are

what they called the "Zoned Hachure horizon" and the "Incised Rim horizon," although they seem to

co-occur and even intergrade, at least within the CAP area.

Roosevelt (1997:171-174) has recently commented on the close relationships between

Barrancoid and Saladoid, and she has called them one series, the Saladoid-Barrancoid, for this reason.

The temporal and derivative relationships between them remain unknown, however: Is one the pro­

genitor of the other? Did both "descend" from some known or unknown common "ancestor" or pro­

genitor? Or does some other scenario pertain? Regardless of the answer to these questions, the rec­

ognized closeness between the Barrancoid and Saladoid series has been best recognized in the middle

and lower Orinoco River in Venezuela, and much less so in the Amazon proper, beyond Roosevelf s

interpretations. In the Orinoco region, both are represented no later than by the early portion of the

first millenium B.C., that is, by ca. 1000-800 B.C., if not earlier (see Boomert 2000:110-114; Roosevelt

1997:172-173; Sanoja and Vargas 1983:219-226; Zucchi et al. 1984:174-180).

Of course, various researchers have also recognized more distant relationships between the

Barrancoid and Saladoid series ceramics in the islands of the Caribbean. However, from Trinidad to

Puerto Rico, the apparently earlier, more "pure" Saladoid ceramics, dated ca. 500 B.C.-A.D. 200, show

few obvious Barrancoid traits, beyond very broad generalities. In contrast, later Saladoid vessels, after

ca. A.D. 200-300, share many rather specific traits with contemporaneous Classic Barrancoid, or Los

Barrancos phase, ceramics in Venezuela ( Meggers and Evans 1983:305-309; Rouse 1992:84-85; Rouse

and Cruxent 1963:81-90). Thus, this period is sometimes called "Barrancoid-influenced Saladoid" in

the Caribbean. Long after the first Saladoid ceramics were made in the Caribbean islands, an intensi­

fied Barrancoid influence extended northward, altering Saladoid more toward Barrancoid for several

centuries at least. Not all Barrancoid ceramic traits are represented in latest Caribbean Saladoid, how­

ever. Their forms of temper, and some types and motifs of decoration and a few specific vessel forms

all differed, among other distinctions.

In summary, Barrancoid and Saladoid ceramics, and perhaps the cultures that made them,

were variably related over time, with greater and more widespread linkages toward the end of their

long co-existence, specifically ca. A.D. 200-600. Barrancoid ceramics seem to be younger than the ear­

liest Saladoid ceramics in the Orinoco and the Caribbean. Their status in the Amazon is little known,

but the CAP research has pushed them back at least to before A.D. 100 and probably to 300 B.C or ear­

lier. Though the South American lowlands and the Caribbean shared many traits, not all were shared

and the common ones became more precise over time, down to the same adornos and general vessel

forms between these broad areas. This suggests that they were perhaps two or more distinctive devel­

opments that initially were distantly related but they became more closely related later on, in the

early-middle portion of the first millenium A.D.

Guarita Ceramic Complex

254

CAP ceramic data show that the Modeled-Incised ceramics of the Negro-Solimoes area were

replaced by the Guarita complex ceramics of the Amazonian Polychrome tradition after ca. A.D. 800

(Hubert 1968; Lathrap 1970:156-157), or the "Polychrome horizon" (Meggers and Evans 1983:111). We

tentatively label the Guarita ceramics in the CAP area as ceramic complex II. At least two gross wares

are included in complex II and a third, likely separate, complex occurred simultaneously with at least

a portion of complex II. The third complex is here tentatively labeled as complex III and it was cer­

tainly related to the Araquinoid series of Venezuela (e.g., Roosevelt 1997:174-177; Rouse and Cruxent

1963:90-95; Zucchi et al. 1984:173-175), and the "Incised and Punctate horizon (Meggers and Evans

1983:318-319). During this overall period, ceramic temper continued to be largely cauixi in the CAP

study area, but certain fine Guarita vessels exhibit larger and lesser amounts of canape, or burned tree

bark. Other temper constituents are also represented in complexes II and III, but these are generally

rare.

Guarita vessel forms were much more diverse than their Modeled-Incised predecessors,

including both large and small bowls and jars, with and without pronounced thickened rims, body

carinations, and flanges on rim and neck areas. Other forms such as pot stands for griddles and com­

plex asymmetrical forms, including effigy forms, were newly represented and a new incurvate

restricted, or "cazuela," jar was included. Burial urns became more elaborate, often including mod­

eled/sculpted elements forming human and other effigies on jars with and without necks.

Guarita decoration showed continuity with the Modeled-Incised complex in the use of broad

and narrow line incisions and excision, including single and double tipped incisors, but new forms

such as fingertip punctation were developed as well. Painting and slipping became more diverse than

among the earlier examples, often used with one or more type of incision, excision and/or modeling.

Combinations of red, black, gray and/or brown paint on white slips and on non-slipped surfaces were

used, sometimes with or without different types of decoration. Certain vessel forms such as jars and

griddles, among others, often exhibited only one of the "plastic" forms of decoration and apparently

were never painted. For example, jars decorated with finger punctations on the exterior (often on

applique strips) never included any form of painting and many of the broad line incision decorated

jars were not painted /slipped either. Given the differential distribution of the painted/slipped ves­

sels versus those that were not painted/slipped at Açutuba, we strongly suspect that they represent

an "elite" / ceremonial ware and a utilitarian ware, respectively.

The Guarita complex employed very widespread traits across an immense area of lowland

South America, as did its predecessor, but this complex did not extend much beyond the Amazonian

lowlands. However, it was widespread within Amazonia, ranging from Marajo Island at the mouth

of the Amazon to the Ecuadorian and Peruvian Andes. It did not occur in all areas of the Amazon,

however, and was not represented in the uppermost Negro River basin (the "Northwest Amazon") on

the border of Brazil and Columbia, and in the Upper Xingu basin, for example. Its uniformity over a

huge area is remarkable, spilling over into some adjacent areas as well, beyond the boundaries of the

Amazon basin per se.

It is important to note that very distinctive and quite different elements of complex III were

related to (but no longer necessarily isolated from) the "Incised and Punctate horizon," or Araquinoid

255

series. Complex III co-occurred with more internally consistent Guarita ceramics at various late pre­

historic sites within the CAP area. It is unclear if "Incised and Punctate" ceramics were integral to the

Guarita complex itself, or if they represent a minority, introduced ware, perhaps a true "trade ware, "

that is, made somewhere other than within the CAP study area and traded in. Complex III ceramics

include bowl and jar forms with cauixi temper, and incision and punctation decoration, and they are

unpainted/slipped, much like those first defined in late prehistoric contexts within the Orinoco River

basin and adjacent areas. It is possible that the Araquinoid was a late development, but it was at least

partially contemporaneous with Guarita.

Whether through some Guarita and /or Araquinoid linkages, the CAP data suggest that

broad-scale ceramic similarities extend from the Amazonian lowlands all the way northward to the

coast and perhaps into the southernmost Caribbean islands during late prehistory. This was the "Post-

Saladoid," or "Ostionoid," period in the Antilles. For example, the "cazuela" form seemingly

occurred contemporaneously in the Amazon and much of the Caribbean after ca. A.D. 600-800, as is

still made among contemporary Amerindians in South America such as the Waiwai in the Guyana

highlands. Likewise, distinctive effigy burial urns represent a comparable vessel form across at least

a portion of these regions, which occur at least in islands off the northwestern coast of Venezuela, obvi­

ously in the Amazon and some areas in between. Comparable burial urns did not occur in the Lesser

or Greater Antilles, although Ostionoid burials were sometimes placed in ceramic bowls.

More speculatively, the usage of finger tip punctations on straight-rimmed jars also links the

Amazon and the Caribbean during late prehistory, at least in some contexts, as does the use of cana­

pe, tree bark temper best known in the Amazon. Finger-tip punctations occur across much of the

Lesser Antilles during late prehistory in diverse contexts (Suazoid, etc.) and some of these closely

resemble those of the Amazon in common (but admittedly simple) motifs. As in the Amazon and else­

where in the lowlands, canape temper was used during late prehistory a relatively short distance into

the Caribbean islands. Apparently, it is only found in the southern Lesser Antilles, or "Windward"

islands (A. Boomert, personal communication 1999), and it is does not appear farther north and west

in the Lesser and Greater Antilles.

RESEARCH IMPLICATIONS

The implications of this brief comparison of prehistoric ceramics found in the CAP study area with

ceramics found in the Caribbean islands suggests long-term common developments over an immense

region. This should come as no surprise to regional researchers, given insightful recognition of these

connections before, especially on the basis of long-distance trade goods such as semi-precious stones,

and various other materials. In addition, design motifs such as Andean condor ornaments have been

found in Puerto Rico and widespread frog effigy ornaments occurred throughout the Caribbean dur­

ing Saladoid and Post-Saladoid times, for example.

The present research extends recognition of these long-distance connections even farther,

given new evidence from the CAP study area on the Negro-Solimoes confluence in the Amazon of

Brazil. On a broad level, we can more or less recognize Saladoid and Barrancoid manifestations wide­

ly spread from the Orinoco northward to the Caribbean islands and southward into the Amazon at the

256

same time. Some lessening of connections between these regions occurred after a period of peak sim­

ilarity during late Saladoid/Barrancoid times. This peak occurred at the height of Classic Barrancoid

in the Orinoco and elsewhere, or roughly at the time of the Los Barrancos phase, ca. A.D. 200-600.

After ca. A.D. 600-800, the Amazon and the Caribbean went more their own directions, at least in

terms of broad ceramic stylistic traits. There may not have been a complete break between these

regions, however. Some raw materials and broad stylistic traits were still broadly shared and the

Caribbean islands did not exist in a cultural vacuum as far as the South American lowlands were con­

cerned. We need more focused and detailed excavation all across the region, and we also need more

careful comparisons so that we may see the "forest for the trees" and vice versa. Much more could be

said about this, but limited space precludes it here.

REFERENCES CITED

Boomert, Arie, 2000. Trinidad, Tobago and the Lower Orinoco Interaction Sphere: An

Archaeological!ethnohistorical Study. Leiden: University of Leiden.

Heckenberger, Michael J., Eduardo G. Neves, and James B. Petersen, 1998. De onde surgem os mode­

los? As origens e expansöes Tupi na Amazonia Central. Revista de Antropología 41(l):69-96.

Heckenberger, Michael J., James B. Petersen, and Eduardo G. Neves, 1999. Village Size and

Permanence in Amazonia: Two Archaeological Examples from Brazil. Latin American Antiquity

10(4):353-376.

Heckenberger, Michael J., James B. Petersen, and Eduardo G. Neves, 2001. Of Lost Civilizations and

Primitive Tribes, Amazonia; Reply to Meggers. Latin American Antiquity 12(l):328-333.

Hubert, Peter P., 1968. Archdeologische Untersuchungen am Mittleren Amazonas. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer

Verlag.

Lathrap, Donald W., 1970. The Upper Amazon. New York: Praeger.

Meggers, Betty J., and Clifford Evans, 1983. Lowland South America and the Antilles. In: Jesse D.

Jennings (éd.), Ancient South Americans. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman, pp. 287-335.

Petersen, James B., 1996. The Archaeology of Trants, Montserrat. Pt. 3. Chronological and Settlement

Data. Annals of Carnegie Museum 65:323-361.

Petersen, James B., Eduardo G. Neves, and Michael J. Heckenberger, 2001. Gift from the Past: Terra

Prêta and Prehistoric Amerindian Occupation in Amazonia. In: Colin McEwan, Cristiana Barreto, and

Eduardo G. Neves (eds.), Unknown Amazon: Culture in Nature in Ancient Brazil. London: British

Museum Press, pp. 86-105.

257

Roosevelt, Anna C , 1997. The Excavations at Corozal, Venezuela: Stratigraphy and Ceramic Seriation. New

Haven: Department of Anthropology and Peabody Museum.

Rouse, Irving, 1992. The Tainos: Rise and Decline of the People Who Greeted Columbus. New Haven: Yale

University Press.

Rouse, Irving, and Jose M. Cruxent, 1963. Venezuelan Archaeology. New Haven, Yale University Press.

Sanoja, Mario, and Iraida Vargas, 1983. New Light on the Prehistory of Eastern Venezuela. In: Fred

Wendorf and Angela Close (eds.), Advances in World Archaeology, vol 2. New York, Academic Press,

pp. 205-244.

Zucchi, Alberta, Kay Tarble, and J. Eduardo Vaz, 1984. The Ceramic Sequence and New TL and C14

Dates for the Aguerito Site of the Middle Orinoco, Venezuela. Journal of Field Archaeology 11:155-180.

258

íSm

ímjs

jmiM

iim

ftil

t ff

^M

f^ljIf

p^M

^

iisae

ssi

• -.-

íi

Kfs1'

•'st

Sfv

ffG

í'Síit

'

F/g

ure

1. M

odel

ed-I

ncis

ed c

ompl

ex c

eram

ics f

rom

the

area

of t

he C

entr

al A

maz

on P

roje

ct.

Fig

ure

2.

Gua

rita

com

plex

cer

amic

s fr

om th

e ar

ea o

f th

e C

entr

al A

maz

on P

roje

ct.