Dan M. Healan

This article presents the ceramic sequence and chronology resulting from a multi-year program of survey, excavation, and analysis of pre-Hispanic settlement and exploitation within the Zinapécuaro-Ucareo (“U-Z”), Michoacan obsidian source area. Pottery analysis and classification aided by seriation analysis identified nine ceramic complexes and seven ceramic phases and sub-phases that both expand and refine the ceramic sequence previously established for the region by Gorenstein's (1985) investigations at nearby Acámbaro, Guanajuato. Initially established by ceramic cross-dating, the U-Z ceramic chronology has been largely confirmed by 30 radiocarbon dates and spans over 2,000 years of pre-Hispanic settlement, which included at least two notable episodes of trait-unit and site-unit intrusion from the eastern El Bajío and central Mexico. One of these episodes involved the appearance of two enclaves settled by individuals from the Acambay valley c. 90 km to the East, most likely f...

This article presents the results of seven archaeological salvage and rescue projects that resulted in new information on settlement at Tula, Hidalgo that includes materials and evidence of activities rarely or never before encountered at Tula. Several localities exhibited evidence of craft activities that included the production of basalt megaliths, human and animal figurines, and the processing of human skulls. One locality was the scene of elaborate ritual involving the mass sacrifice of children, and another was the scene of elaborate ritual destruction and offerings involving some of the most sumptuous objects yet found at Tula. One of the most remarkable aspects of the wealth of information and material culture obtained was that these were salvage and rescue operations undertaken with limited time and resources in localities determined by factors in which previous archaeological knowledge played no guiding role. These investigations indicate that despite the extensive damage s...

This article presents the results of an integrative program of salvage archaeology in response to two comprehensive modern construction projects within the limits of the Early Postclassic city of Tula, Hidalgo. Exploratory excavation at eleven different localities encountered remains of residential compounds and other prehispanic structures in all localities, collectively spanning the Epiclassic through Late Postclassic periods and yielding extensive ceramic, lithic, and faunal remains from domestic and ritual contexts including over 250 human and animal burials that included evidence of contact with other areas of Mesoamerica. Some 36 radiocarbon dates were obtained from ceramically dated contexts that span c. 1,000 years of occupation and support the current ceramic phase chronology for Tula.

Systematic surveys in the Tula region in southern Hidalgo has revealed a long and diverse history of settlement that included at least three different episodes of migration. Each was quite different in terms of scale and mode of execution, including what appears to have been 1) well-orchestrated mass migrations or colonization of the region by Teotihuacan, 2) small scale migrations involving the appearance of a foreign enclave of possibly mixed Teotihuacan/Zapotec whose members comprised an entire settlement, and 3) uncoordinated multiple migrations of Coyotlatelco traditional peoples, each probably involving small groups from varying areas of origin within a larger region of the same general destination. All three appear to have involved relatively short-distance migration, which we believe was a common practice in Mesoamerica, where knowledge of the destination was a likely "pull" factor that facilitated both multiple and return migration events.

Recent excavations at Tula Chico, the monumental center for Tula's earliest settlement, revealed a long and complex history of occupation, beginning with its initial settlement in the Middle Classic period by Coyotlatelco peoples, when much of the region was under Teotihuacan's direct control. During the Epiclassic period, a program of monumental construction began that developed the monumental complex seen today over a period of about 200 years. Although Tula Chico was superseded by Tula Grande, the monumental center for the Early Postclassic city, it continued to be occupied and maintained until its destruction by fire. Tula Chico and Tula Grande show evidence of clear cultural continuity in ceramics, architecture, and sculpture, including “Toltec style” sculpture characteristic of Tula Grande that is present in temporally early contexts at Tula Chico.

Antecedentes Durante el periodo Epiclasico aparecieron en el Mexico central muchos elementos culturales nuevos asociados con la tradicion llamada “Coyotlatelco”. Fuera del complejo ceramico que la caracteriza, la tradicion Coyotlatelco comprende elementos de asentamiento, arquitectura, y otros aspectos tan distintos de sus antecedentes como para sugerir un origen no local. Recientemente, algunos investigadores han notado vinculos fuertes entre la tradicion Coyotlatelco y las culturas contempo...

cess, the date of art styles and monuments, the meaning and function of these symbols, etc. Clearly, the need for continued research is tremendous. In the next two chapters, Lowe discusses the evolution of material culture, and Coe addresses the issue of Olmec ideology (principally religion and the proposed pantheon). Lowe's argument for the dating of heartland monuments should be read as a counterargument to Graham's iconoclastic critique of Coe's San Lorenzo sculptural chronology. Coe's "continuity hypothesis" of Olmec religion and deities forms an interesting counterpoint to Marcus's innovative reconstruction of Early Formative religion. For Oaxaca, Marcus envisions an animistic belief system focused on natural forces. Both interpretations concern some of the same motifs. In the section on "external regions," Lee and Sharer document the Olmec presence in two broad areas, Chiapas and southeast Mesoamerica. The principal difficulty evident in these summaries is the dating of carved stone monuments. Tolstoy discusses the sites of Coapexco and Tlatilco for the Basin ofMexico. His analysis of the Tlatilco burials is particularly helpful; he found pots with Olmec motifs to be statistically associated with females. In contrast, mortuary vessels with Olmec motifs in Oaxaca are significantly associated with males. In his discussion of Chalcatzingo, Grove focuses principally on the carved stone monuments; he also summarizes the exciting new finds at Teopantecuanitlan, Guerrero. Marcus relies on linguistic data from Otomanguean languages to reconstruct Early Formative religion, and she evaluates her reconstruction with archaeological data from Early and Middle Formative San Jose Mogote. Particularly noteworthy is her interpretation of "Olmec" designs on local pots as representations of two local lineages (sky/lightning and earth/earthquake) rather than Olmec deities. Paraphrasing Leslie White, she concludes that the general trends in the Valley of Oaxaca "would have been the same. . . had the Olmec 'been but a sack of sawdust'" (p. 194). In one of the concluding chapters, Tolstoy argues the TLC view and attempts to counter Marcus's arguments against Olmec influence. Graham argues the tenuous thesis that the Olmec sculptural style originated in coastal Guatemala. His arguments are based upon a seriation of stone monuments at Abaj Takalik. He also critically evaluates and systematically eliminates the meager radiocarbon evidence for the early dating of monuments at San Lorenzo. Those who bleed Maya Blue will likely enjoy this piece, as it appears to make the Olmec climax phase younger and more in line with Maya developments. But such a scenario is highly improbable. In the summary chapters, Tolstoy and Demarest argue the traditional (TLC) versus the neo-orthodox views (MGDS). Tolstoy discusses western Mesoamerica and focuses on the San Lorenzo Olmec (SLO) complex. His arguments for the significant impact of the heartland Olmec on external regions are particularly persuasive; the "mother-culture" idea still has much to recommend it. Demarest presents the case for the opposition (MGDS), with a focus on Chiapas, Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador. Contrary to Lowe and Lee, he finds scant evidence of the SLO horizon in the greater isthmian area and suggests, instead, that the evident ceramic similarities do not indicate Olmec influence but rather an earlier substrate of shared culture—what Grove calls a "shared ideological system" (p. 13). Such an "explanation," however, only begs the question. Demarest's discussion of the Early Formative evinces unfamiliarity with the primary data and is ultimately unsatisfying; he is on firmer ground with his reasoned evaluation of the Middle Formative. He proposes a "lattice model" of interaction to account for the coevolutionary developments, coeval with the La Venta Olmec, so apparent in eastern Mesoamerica at this time. Overall, the volume deserves high marks and broad readership. It successfully demonstrates the nascent state of Olmec studies and the imbalance between the data base and its speculative load, while at the same time setting the agenda for future research. Olmec studies have clearly reached an epistemological crisis point with fundamental disagreements over such things as style, symbols, communication, exchange, emulation, social discourse, political propaganda, religion, social structure, ecological constraints, sculptural narratives, chronology, and so forth. Regional Perspectives reopens debate on all fronts and provides a comprehensive synthesis of extant data upon which to pursue pending issues in the future.

This chapter argues that the Late Classic/Epiclassic ceramic style known as Coyotlatelco has roots in the eastern El Bajío of Near West Mexico. Coyotlatelco became a widespread ceramic tradition in Epiclassic Central Mexico. Its chief defining characteristic is its suite of unsupported and tripod-supported vessels decorated with red-painted geometric designs on plain brown or cream slipped pottery. Ceramic data and radiocarbon dating produced from Tulane University’s Ucareo-Zinapecuaro (U-Z) Project (1989-1995) shed additional light on the ongoing debate regarding whether or not the Coyotlatelco style originates with the native population or if it shows evidence of the migration of non-local people into the central highlands of Mexico. The ceramic chronology for the U-Z source area throughout the Late Formative and Classic periods in NE Michoacan begins a discussion about shared decorative modes among red on brown ceramic types that connect Michoacan with societies in both the El Ba...

This article offers a revision of the chronology and settlement history of Tula, Hidalgo, synthesizing information obtained from numerous investigations and 68 radiocarbon and seven archaeomagnetic dates. Tula Chico's earliest settlement appeared while the region was under the control of Teotihuacan as one of many hilltop Coyotlatelco settlements in the region. The monumental center at Tula Grande did not appear until after Tula grew to power, presumably with the consolidation of the other Coyotlatelco polities. Extensive exposure of residential structures in numerous localities have revealed a widespread pattern of barrios containing households exhibiting a wide range of social status that enjoyed access to a wide variety of luxury items including the first reported objects of gold. Tula Grande and the Tollan phase city appear to have already been abandoned and in ruins prior to the arrival of Aztec II peoples. The Late Aztec period occupation shows a preoccupation with Tula&#3...

Survey and excavation conducted by Stoner and Nichols (2019) at Altica, located in the Basin of Mexico, recovered nearly 29,000 pieces of obsidian, most of which apparently came from the nearby Otumba source. Formal classification followed by attribute analysis revealed a number of distinct lithic industries represented in the collection, although most are represented by finished objects that do not appear to have been produced on site. Most of the material consists of flakes probably used as unmodified, informal tools and produced on expedient cores consisting of some nodules but mostly percussion blades, spent cores, and other artifacts recycled as secondary cores. I propose that Altica acquired its obsidian from workshops possibly located in an area where they apparently existed in later times and may have during the Early–Middle Formative, as well. Virtually all of the obsidian in the collection appears to have been used for domestic or subsistence activities and was not involve...

... Isla Cerritos, Yucatan 11. Chichen Itza, Yucatan 12. ... Late Classic Late Classic Late Classic/Terminal Classic Late Classic Terminal Classic Terminal Classic Early Postclassic Terminal Classic/ Early Postclassic? Early Postclassic Chavez etal. 1990 Hirth 1989 Smith et ...

Recent archaeological investigations at Tollán, Hidalgo, Mexico have produced evidence of a type of residential compound referred to as a house group. Two of these house groups are described architecturally, and inferences based upon the architectural data are made concerning the nature of the human groups that occupied them. The house groups are clearly domestic in nature and each housed

Moholy-Nagy"s (1990) discussion of the confusion of lithic-reduction sites (workshops) and workshop refuse dumps included criticism of a statement by Healan et al. (1983) as an example of such confusion. In reality no confusion is implied in the statement. Instead, Moholy-Nagy's criticism and the manner in which she defines her basic units reflect an overly narrow and simplistic conception of workshop and workshop dump.

Obsidian artifact sourcing studies performed over the last 25 years have identified obsidian from outcrops around the communities of Zinapecuaro and Ucareo, Michoacan, at sites widely distributed in time and space. Recent data indicate that Zinapecuaro and Ucareo constitute distinct obsidian sources, although their proximity to each other and their similar chemical compositions merit their consideration as collectively comprising part of an obsidian source area. Sourcing studies that used Ucareo as well as Zinapecuaro source reference samples provide strong evidence of considerably greater pre-Hispanic utilization of the Ucareo source, and raise the possibility that at least some artifacts attributed to Zinapecuaro in studies that did not use Ucareo reference samples may be from the Ucareo source. These findings are supported by recent archaeological evidence of considerably greater exploitation of the Ucareo source, including what is probably one of the largest known pre-Hispanic q...

... 17, 25-32; Alejandro Pas-trana Cruz, "Produccion de Instrumentos en Obsidiana-Division del ... detailed summaries of his field seasons at Tula, which are listed in the bibliography of Supplement to the Handbook of Middle American Indians, Volume 2, Victoria Bricker and Jeremy ...

For much of their history, prismatic blades were a relatively scarce item whose restricted occurrence suggested they functioned as prestige or luxury items. Some time prior to the Postclassic period, however, they became a widespread, ubiquitous, and mundane commodity in Mesoamerica, as indicated by ethnohistorical accounts as well as archaeological evidence. This occurred around the same time that blademakers began to prepare core platforms by pecking and grinding, a labor intensive process whose advantages are presumed to have played the primary role. The specific causal relationships involved, however, appear to pertain less to factors of increased productivity on the part of individual blademakers than to those of skill, as suggested by comparisons between core/blade technology used in areas close to obsidian sources and those used at sites further removed from the sources.

For much of their history, prismatic blades were a relatively scarce item whose restricted occurrence suggested they functioned as prestige or luxury items. Some time prior to the Postclassic period, however, they became a widespread, ubiquitous, and mundane commodity in Mesoamerica, as indicated by ethnohistorical accounts as well as archaeological evidence. This occurred around the same time that blademakers began to prepare core platforms by pecking and grinding, a labor intensive process whose advantages are presumed to have played the primary role. The specific causal relationships involved, however, appear to pertain less to factors of increased productivity on the part of individual blademakers than to those of skill, as suggested by comparisons between core/blade technology used in areas close to obsidian sources and those used at sites further removed from the sources.

This paper presents a method of identifying lithic reduction loci based on size-sorted debitage in the macroscopic size range. Multivariate analysis of decremental size classes of debitage derived from the use of nested screening provides a means of investigating the differential operation of size sorting at various size levels, so that size thresholds for distinguishing deposits of probable primary and secondary refuse can be identified on empirical grounds. The method is used to distinguish refuse dumps from what appear to be lithic reduction loci within an obsidian core/blade workshop excavated at the Early Postclassic city of Tula, Hidalgo, Mexico.

This paper presents a method of identifying lithic reduction loci based on size-sorted debitage in the macroscopic size range. Multivariate analysis of decremental size classes of debitage derived from the use of nested screening provides a means of investigating the differential operation of size sorting at various size levels, so that size thresholds for distinguishing deposits of probable primary and secondary refuse can be identified on empirical grounds. The method is used to distinguish refuse dumps from what appear to be lithic reduction loci within an obsidian core/blade workshop excavated at the Early Postclassic city of Tula, Hidalgo, Mexico.