Archaeometallurgy in Mesoamerica: Current Approaches and New Perspectives
288
Archaeometallurgy in Mesoamerica: Current Approaches and New Perspectives
288eBook
Available on Compatible NOOK devices, the free NOOK App and in My Digital Library.
Related collections and offers
Overview
The chapters are organized following the cyclical nature of metals--beginning with extracting and mining ore, moving to smelting and casting of finished objects, and ending with recycling and deterioration back to the original state once the object is no longer in use. Data obtained from archaeological investigations, ethnohistoric sources, ethnographic studies, along with materials science analyses, are brought to bear on questions related to the integration of metallurgy into local and regional economies, the sacred connotations of copper objects, metallurgy as specialized crafting, and the nature of mining, alloy technology, and metal fabrication.
Product Details
| ISBN-13: | 9781607322108 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | University Press of Colorado |
| Publication date: | 01/15/2013 |
| Sold by: | Barnes & Noble |
| Format: | eBook |
| Pages: | 288 |
| File size: | 24 MB |
| Note: | This product may take a few minutes to download. |
About the Author
Read an Excerpt
Archaeometallurgy in Mesoamerica
Current Approaches and New Perspectives
By Aaron N. Shugar, Scott E. Simmons
University Press of Colorado
Copyright © 2013 University Press of ColoradoAll rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-60732-210-8
CHAPTER 1
Archaeometallurgy in Ancient Mesoamerica
Scott E. Simmons and Aaron N. Shugar
In recent decades there has been much discussion among archaeologists about the transformative roles material objects play in human societies. Various scholars have focused attention on the ways that material culture is an integral part of social and economic systems through time, with considerable discourse centered on the role of specialized crafting in ancient societies (Apel and Knutsson 2006; Arnold and Munns 1994; Brumfiel and Earle 1987; Clark and Parry 1990; Costin 1991, 2001; Earle 2002; Flad and Hruby 2007; Helms 1992, 1993; Henrich and Boyd 2008; Hirth 2009; Peregrine 1991; Roux 2003;Schortman and Urban 2004; Spielmann 2002; Sullivan 2006; Vaughn 2004; Wailes 1996). The investigation of ancient technologies has a long tradition in Mesoamerican archaeology. Stone, bone, ceramic, and a number of other materials have been analyzed by archaeologists and archaeological scientists working in this region of the Americas for many decades, and these studies have yielded valuable information on the myriad ways ancient Mesoamericans adapted to their dynamic physical and social environments. While it appears that metal never fully replaced stone, bone, or shell for utilitarian or other purposes, objects fashioned from this unique material and the technology used to create them had clearly been embraced by some groups as early as Classic times (ca. AD 300–900) and by even greater numbers of Mesoamerican peoples during the Postclassic Period (ca. AD 900–1521) (see Table 1.1).
Throughout many parts of ancient Mesoamerica a wide range of metal objects, most of which were copper-base, were created during the centuries in which metallurgy was a part of the social fabric of ancient Mesoamerican life. Metal objects appear relatively late in this part of the Americas, by AD 600 (Dorothy Hosler 1994, 2009, and her Chapter 9 of this volume). The technology is believed to have been introduced to Mesoamericans by seagoing peoples from South America (Bray 1977; Hosler 2009; Lechtman, in press; Mountjoy 1969; Pendergast 1962; Strong 1935). Recent work in the Andes suggests that gold was the first metal to be manipulated by ancient South Americans (Aldenderfer et al. 2008). Specifically, nine cold-hammered native gold beads were found accompanying a roughly four-thousand-year-old burial in the southwest part of the Lake Titicaca basin at the site of Jiskairumoko in Peru (Aldenderfer et al. 2008, 5004). Such cold-hammered gold objects continued to be produced into the Early Horizon (1000–400 BC), and it was during this time that Andean peoples began to smelt gold and other nonferrous ores (Bruhns 1994; Cooke, Abbott, and Wolfe 2009; Ponce 1970). Later, Andean metallurgical traditions grew to become much more sophisticated, with smelting, hammering, and alloying of mostly status and ritual objects by highly skilled smiths, particularly in groups such as the Moche.
Although it is still not entirely clear why the diffusion of metallurgy from South America to Mesoamerica was "delayed" for some time (Bruhns 1989), it appears that the technology was introduced to West Mexicans living in coastal port towns by seagoing peoples from Ecuador by approximately AD 600 (Hosler 2009, 188–189). This belief is based on several lines of evidence, including comparative data derived from chemical compositional analyses as well as specific fabrication techniques and design characteristics of Central and South American metal artifacts. Also, recent experimental studies of the kinds of Ecuadorian balsa-wood sailing vessels reported by Spanish explorers suggest that such vessels were capable of making several round-trip voyages between coastal Ecuador and the West Mexican states of Guerrero and Michoacán before they were no longer serviceable (Dewan and Hosler 2008). The transmission of metallurgical technology between South and Central America probably took place over the course of several centuries, and would have required extended layovers in West Mexican communities by South American mariners (West 1961, 1994). It is likely that some of these travelers from the South were skilled metalsmiths who passed on their knowledge of metallurgy to some West Mexican peoples eager to learn this new technology. During these contacts West Mexican peoples would have acquired essential knowledge of the "transformative craft" of metallurgy, including identification of ores, mold production, smelting, casting, and a variety of other related activities (Miller 2007).
The first metal objects produced in Mesoamerica are found at archaeological sites located in the West Mexican states of Michoacán, Guerrero, Jalisco, Colima, and Nayarit. West Mexico is one of only a few areas in Mesoamerica where copper and other metallic minerals are present in appreciable quantities (Figure 1.1). A distinctive metallurgical tradition flourished there for nearly a millennium before Spanish Contact (Hosler 1994, 2009). Copper artifacts, and later copper-base artifacts — mainly those made of copper alloyed with tin and arsenic — are found throughout much of Mesoamerica by Early Postclassic times, having been distributed via a well-developed trade network that was part of a larger "Mesoamerican world system" (Smith and Berdan 2003, 4).
The other principal metalworking tradition that is presently known in this part of the Americas is represented by artifacts having distinctive design elements and chemical signatures that are part of what has been called a "southeastern Mesoamerican" metalworking tradition (Hosler 1994, 208). Metallurgy in this region of Mesoamerica, which likely emerged by the end of the Classic Period, is not as well understood as its West Mexican counterpart, however, since much less research has been carried out in the Southeast. Nevertheless, it appears likely that ore sources in Chiapas, Mexico; southern Guatemala; and western Honduras provided the copper, tin, and arsenic from which bronze objects were created and then distributed throughout much of the Maya area and beyond (as suggested by Bray 1977). In certain places, including West Mexico and the Maya area, once metal objects appeared their production and use continued through the Postclassic Period and, in a few cases at least, up to and probably beyond the time of initial Spanish Contact. This may have been the case in other parts of Mesoamerica as well, such as in the valley of Oaxaca or along the gulf coast. Unfortunately, little research on mining, metals, or metallurgical technologies has been undertaken in these and certain other areas of Mesoamerica as yet, so our understanding of the ways metal objects were used in some areas of the region is at this time limited.
With their unique aural and visual qualities, objects made of metal seem to have been highly regarded by a great number of Mesoamerican peoples, serving a variety of social, religious, and economic needs. But in contrast to their counterparts in the Old World, the peoples of ancient Mesoamerica were not as interested in the utilitarian functions of metal objects as they were in their more esoteric properties, particularly those of sound and color (Hosler 1994,2009). This inclination is reflected in the assemblages of metal artifacts recovered archaeologically at Mesoamerican sites, where weaponry and armor are not found and comparatively small numbers of utilitarian objects — such as needles, pins, axes, and fishhooks — are present (Figures 1.2 and 1.7, p. 16). As mentioned, most metal objects made in ancient Mesoamerica were primarily copper-base, with far fewer numbers of gold or silver objects found. Ferrous-base metal technologies were never developed by the pre-Columbian peoples of the region. These findings also stand in contrast somewhat to the Old World, where gold and silver objects were more common and ironworking was later an important metallurgical tradition (see Tylecote 1992 for a historical approach to metal development in the Old World).
The value metal objects held in this part of the Americas was firmly grounded in certain social realities that had been part of ancient Mesoamerican life for many centuries. In Classic times one of the ways Mesoamerican rulers, nobles, and other elites communicated their wealth, power, and social status was by means of a variety of symbolically charged, highly valued materials, especially jade, quetzal feathers, Spondylus shell, and jaguar pelts, among others. It is also clear that Mesoamerican elites, particularly rulers but also religious specialists, sometimes created and often manipulated a range of complex symbols that functioned as material expressions of group ideology (Evans 2008). Public displays of bells, tweezers, finger rings, and elaborate clothing ornaments (Figure 1.3) — with their shimmering metallic colors and, in the case of bells, their utterly unique sounds — were meant to impress those who saw and heard them. Such displays, which probably included some kinds of public performances, likely helped to reinforce the elevated power and social status of Postclassic Mesoamerican elites in much the same ways that jade, Spondylus, and other high-value materials had for their Classic Period predecessors.
Objects made of metal had powerful sacred connotations for Mesoamerican peoples; often they were associated with the creation of human-kind, certain deity cults, or distant, exotic realms (Hosler 1994). For example, the Aztecs considered one of their most powerful deities, Xochiquetzal, to be the patroness of metalsmiths and other luxury arts and crafts (Holmer 2005, 66). Among the Maya, the strong connection of metal with the gleaming rays of the sun, represented by a deity known as K'inich Ajaw or God G (Miller and Taube 1993), suggests they believed metal possessed animate characteristics and had divine associations.
Plain-walled bells, as well as more elaborately crafted ones, were perhaps the most ubiquitous metal artifacts produced in ancient Mesoamerica (Figure 1.4). Only copper axes — used throughout Mesoamerica for cutting purposes and in certain areas, such as West Mexico, as money (Hosler 2003; Hosler, Lechtman, and Olaf Holm 1990) — may have been more common. In terms of their sacred associations copper and bronze bells, with their unique sonority, tones and resonance, were used extensively by religious practitioners in a variety of ritual performances, many involving dance. Pohl notes that "the value of wealth acquired from distant lands was amplified through artistic transformation" (2003, 176). The ability to transform rock into beautifully crafted metal objects, with their unique sounds, lustrous colors, and divine associations, was very likely considered by ancient Mesoamericans to be quite a remarkable, perhaps even magical, transformation. The value of such objects was amplified in part by the sometimes great distances involved in their acquisition and the technical challenges required of their production. As the sources for metals were restricted to only certain parts of Mesoamerica and the materials themselves had such unique colors, sounds, and divine associations, Postclassic Mesoamerican elites and religious functionaries who possessed such highly valued objects were able to effectively manipulate them as potent material expressions of ideology and social power, thereby demonstrating connectedness to distant physical and spiritual realms and continuing the legacy of their Classic Period predecessors.
Metal objects also were an important economic commodity during Postclassic times and, at least in several parts of Mesoamerica, their value in this regard continued into the Spanish Colonial Period. In the seventeenth century the Spanish friar Diego López de Cogolludo provided explicit information regarding how copper bells were used and perceived by the Maya in Yucatán. He noted that "the money that they used was little bells, and bells of copper that had value, according to their size" (López de Cogolludo 1688, 181). The writings of Diego Quijada, a sixteenth-century alcalde mayor, also include references to the value ascribed to copper bells during the Spanish Colonial Period. In discussing fines levied on Mayas convicted of idolatry, Quijada noted that cacao, red stones and beads, and "small bells and bells of copper that they had from the time of their infidelity" were required for payment to Spanish authorities (Scholes and Adams 1938, 214). Indeed, by Postclassic times copper objects were regarded as some of the most highly valued "key commodities" throughout this region of the ancient Americas (Smith 2003).
ARCHAEOMETALLURGY AS A FIELD OF INQUIRY
Today the study of such key commodities is quite often carried out as part of a burgeoning field of inquiry that combines traditional archaeological research with materials science applied to the study of metals. The field of archaeometallurgy has a relatively long and rich history, yet only in recent years has it truly extended itself into Mesoamerica. Its establishment can be found in the advancement of microscopy and the resulting metallurgical analysis that quickly followed, allowing for early publications of the analysis of archaeological metal artifacts (see Smith 1988 for details on this progress). The earliest reports of the analysis of metallurgical artifacts from archaeological sites date to the late eighteenth century, when interested metallurgists, such as Pearson (1796), published the results of his research on ancient metallic arms and utensils (see Caley 1951 and Pollard and Heron 2008 for reviews of and more details on early archaeological chemists). By the mid-nineteenth century, Percy had published his accounts of metallurgical investigations of artifacts from Nineveh and Babylon as an appendix to a related archaeological publication (Layard 1853, appendix 3: 670–672). Similar appendices continued to appear for three-quarters of a century, while the research undertaken slowly incorporated new experimental models and scientific methodologies. Research tended to focus on the technology behind the metal artifacts in question, in particular their manufacturing techniques based on the understood principles of "modern" metallurgy. This research into archaeological metal production broadened to include the investigation of furnace design, furnace efficiency, and the raw products from the smelt.
While all these early works fall under the purview of "metallurgical analysis of archaeological finds," which are today considered archaeometallurgical studies, the term archaeometallurgy is said to have been coined by Beno Rothenberg in the early 1970s (Goodway 1991). Rothenberg wanted to shift the focus of study away from strictly describing and assessing artifact formation and from the extractive metallurgical process of ancient cultures. Rather, he hoped to provide more relevant information to archaeologists by investigating what these processes left in the archaeological record. Rothenberg's approach was a clear shift in thinking, moving from the metallurgist-investigating technology and processes involved in the manufacture of individual artifacts (which were separated from their archaeological context) toward working in conjunction with archaeologists and in tandem with archaeological excavations. The ultimate goal was to gain a more holistic vision of the level and development pyrotechnology held during a specific culture or time period (Tylecote [1992] follows this path, and his book is broken down into a chronological view of the advancement of metallurgy).
The realization that the value of archaeometallurgy lay in the larger global perspective of archaeological theory can be considered a paradigm shift by some, and it has prompted archaeometallurgical studies to develop into a valuable tool for the archaeologist who wishes to better understand the complex position that metals held in human societies (Chirikure 2007; Ehrhardt 2009). Even with this shift in thinking, the field of archaeometallurgy had to develop further in order to grow into a more substantial, accepted field that could fit into modern archaeological theory. Ehrenreich (1991a) recognized this divide between archaeological theory and the descriptive nature of early archaeometallurgical research. He noted that "[t]he objectives of archaeometallurgy should be to augment our understanding of the rise of craft specialization, the organization and importance of prehistoric industries, the effects of new technologies on societies, the extent and limits of cultural contacts, and the impetus and alterations required to change rudiments of societal infrastructure" (1991a, 55).
This integration has been one of the more difficult tasks for the archaeometallurgist — extrapolating social and cultural information from scientific technical studies of material culture. Archaeometallurgical investigations still tend to focus on the technical aspects of object production and use. The relationship between the production, fabrication, and handling aspects and how the artifacts themselves fit into a larger cultural schema is sometimes difficult to ascertain. This can be witnessed in many archaeological site reports that still include archaeometallurgical data and reports as appendices, hardly incorporating the results into the broader construct of the archaeological interpretations.
(Continues...)
Excerpted from Archaeometallurgy in Mesoamerica by Aaron N. Shugar, Scott E. Simmons. Copyright © 2013 University Press of Colorado. Excerpted by permission of University Press of Colorado.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.