ol' man river

Ol'man river

25-11-2009

09:33

Pagina 1

OL’ MAN RIVER GEO-ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF RIVERS AND RIVER PLAINS (ARGU 5) MORGAN DE DAPPER, FRANK VERMEULEN, SARAH DEPREZ & DEVI TAELMAN (EDS.)

Rivers and river plains are elements of the landscape where the presence of man throughout history is the most visible. It is, therefore, evident that the plains and deltas of rivers are excellent meeting grounds for a confrontation and for multidisciplinary collaboration between history and ecology. On 22-24 September 2006 an international colloquium was organised in Gent (Belgium), which stimulated looking at landscape evolution from the times of early human involvement in nature to much more recent historical developments. Its aim was also to further strengthen the mutual interests of both Geography and Archaeology. The colloquium attracted the active participation of researchers from some 30 countries, bringing more than 70 presentations and case studies. The geographical variety and methodological diversity of the papers and posters presented in Gent was a guarantee for a broad approach to the evolution of humanized river landscapes and for meaningful multi-disciplinarity and synergy. With the present publication of the proceedings of the Gent meeting the organizers are pleased to be able to contribute to the debate on the role of man in a river plain environment through time, within a wide array of geographic and cultural environments in Europe and beyond.

2009 • ISBN 9789038214047 • 627 p. • € 85,00

Ol'man river

25-11-2009

09:33

Pagina 2

Archaeological Reports Ghent University (ARGU) The Argu-series collects contributions by scholars affiliated with the ‘Pre- and Protohistory’ and ‘Provincial Roman archaeology’ research units in the Department of Archaeology and Ancient History of Europe at Ghent University, and by researchers who closely co-operate with this research unit. Have been published in this series:

Excavations in Pessinus: the so-called Acropolis. From Hellenistic and Roman cemetery to Byzantine castle (ARGU 1) Hugo Thoen, Frank Vermeulen & John Devreker (eds.) ISBN 9789038204499 2003 416 p. € 45,00 Archaeology in confrontation. Aspects of Roman military presence in the northwest (ARGU 2) Frank Vermeulen, Kathy Sas & Wouter Dhaeze (eds.) ISBN 9789038205786 2004 459 p. € 45,00 The last hunter-gatherer-fishermen in sandy Flanders (NW Belgium) (ARGU 3) Phillippe Crombé (ed.) ISBN 9789038206790 2005 334 p. € 45,00 Aerial photography and archaeology. A century of information (ARGU 4) Jean Bourgeois & Marc Meganck (eds.) ISBN 9789038207827 2005 412 p. € 55,00 Forthcoming:

4

ways to order

Fax your order to (+32) 9 233 14 09

La noria, l’aubergine et le fellah. Archéologie des espaces irrigués dans l’Occident musulman médiéval (9e-15e siècles) (ARGU 6) André Bazzana & Johnny De Meulemeester ISBN 9789038214702 2009 498 p. ca. € 60,00

Call (+32) 9 233 80 88

O

r

d

e

r

f

o

r

m

Name ................................................................................................................. Address ............................................................................................................. Postal Code ................... Town/City .....................................................................

Send an e-mail to [email protected]

Country ............................................................................................................... Phone Number .......................................... Fax Number ...................................... E-mail ................................................................................................................. VAT Number ........................................................................................................ Please supply ................ copies of ARGU ............. Date ............................. Signature ....................................................................

Send your order to ACADEMIA PRESS Eekhout 2 9000 GHENT - Belgium

SITE FORMATION PROCESSES AT LA CIENEGA VALLEY (Tafí del Valle dep. – Tucumán, Argentina)

M.M. Sampietro Vattuone, L. Neder & M. A. Vattuone

ABSTRACT La Ciénega is an intermontane valley located on the pre-Andean region of northwest Argentina. Located between 2500 and 2800 masl, it covers the upper part of two river basins known as La Ciénega and La Puerta. The purpose of this paper is to determine, from a geoarchaeological perspective, the archaeological site formation processes of the formative archaeological structures present in the region, and their relations with the identified landscape units. A GIS was made with the thematic maps obtained by photo interpretation. After the systematic survey, we made pedological descriptions under different contextual situations. We conclude that prehispanic settlements were established over a young paleosoil. The use of each specific place conditioned the development of this paleosoil. Simple structures, used as corrals, favoured the destruction of the substrate and its enrichment with organic matter. On residential structures the walls favoured the infiltration, allowing the water to penetrate and to develop a soil with stronger horizons.

KEY WORDS Geoarchaeology, Northwestern Argentina, Tafí culture.

ARGU-5.indb 581

18/06/09 11:02

582 |

Ol’M an R iver. Geo-A rchaeological A spects of R ivers and R iver Plains

INTRODUCTION La Ciénega valley is located in the pre-Andean region of northwest Argentina, between 26º 45’ and 26º 50’ S, and between 65º 38’ and 65º 41’ W. It is an elongated valley (28 km 2) formed by two river basins, known as La Ciénega and La Puerta river. La Ciénega river flows to the north and east until the Tucumán plains while La Puerta River, flows to the south and finished on the Tafí river basin, at the Tafí valley. The bottom of La Ciénega valley is located between 2500 and 2900 masl. It has a semi-arid climate, but no precise data on rain and temperature average are available (Figure 1). Archaeologically it is a rich area and it has a long Formative occupational period dated between 100 CE and 700 CE. The purpose of this research is to determine, from a geoarchaeological perspective, the archaeological site formation process of the Formative archaeological structures present in the region, and its relation with the identified landscape units.

Figure 1 Study area.

ARGU-5.indb 582

18/06/09 11:02

Site Formation Processes at L a Cienega Valley

|

583

ANTECEDENTS The study area contains some of the earliest sedentary settlements in northwest Argentina. These archaeological sites are particularly important because they represent the transition between hunter-gatherer and agricultural economies. However, little is known about them, especially about the relationship between environmental conditions and cultural responses. During the final decades of the 19th century, circular stone structures were described at La Ciénega. It was also established that they were similar to those present on Tafí valley, an intermontane valley close to the study area (Quiroga 1899). Both valleys share the same archaeological culture: Tafí Culture. This culture in Tafí valley was defined in 1960 by González and Núñez Regueiro, as agricultural people with advanced knowledge on irrigation and terracing (González and Núñez Regueiro 1960). They also raised llamas. According to the extension of their structures, they probably had an elevated population density, which are chronologically located between 360 BCE and 810 CE (González 1961-1964; 1980). Typical households are composed of stone circles of different sizes. They are formed by central circular patios (15 to 20 meters diameter) and rounded by other smaller circular rooms of 6 to 2 meter in diameter. These households are also named composed units (Figure 2). Isolated or simple units, and complex units formed by a big number of circular structures without a particular arrangement are also observed.

Figure 2 Typical household, composed unit.

ARGU-5.indb 583

18/06/09 11:02

584 |


Based on macroscopic artifacts recovered in a residential unit from Tafí valley, González and Núñez Regueiro (1960) established that the big central circles were places of daily domestic activities, such as milling, but also the place where dead were buried. The small circles were bedrooms and storage depots. Excavations done at La Ciénega valley showed that, according to settlement pattern and recovered materials, this valley also belonged to the Tafí Culture and had relationships with the Candelaria Culture, which was located in the Tucumán plain (Bernasconi de García & Baraza de Fonts 1981-82). Finally, Cremonte (1996) made a distribution map of the archaeological structures by a visual interpretation of some aerial photographs. By a classification of the standing structures, she established that the archaeological units are not randomly distributed on the valley surface, they tend to be located on areas with deep soils, on the south and central parts of the valley.

MATERIALS AND METHODS For the study of landscape appropriation, we started by the systematic photointerpretation of geomorphology, hydrology, and archaeology. Aerial photographs at 1:50000 and 1:10000 scales were used. All maps were controlled by surveying the area. Geomorphological studies of areas with archaeological settlements are important to understand the natural processes that took place on the settlement surface generation. Furthermore, they give evidence about the natural resources potentially available for the past populations, which could condition settlement pattern. Finally, they provide paleoenvironmental information that is fundamental to understand the dynamic of archaeological formation processes. In this project, geomorphological analysis was performed following the methodology proposed by van Zuidam and van Zuidam-Cancelado (1978). Archaeological structures were categorized according to their constructive characteristics and shape, following Sampietro Vattuone (2002). A distinction was made between simple units (one single circle), double units (two circles with the same shape and size build together), composed units (one big circle surrounded by other smaller), and complex units (many circles with different sizes without order). Then, archaeological maps were associated with geomorphological maps trough the construction of a GIS, using ILWIS 3.1 software. Each geomorphological unit with pre-Hispanic structures was dug, following the natural deposition criteria; in total we described ten soil profiles, considering also different archaeological settings (especially in order to compare inside and outside structures).

ARGU-5.indb 584

18/06/09 11:02


|

585

Soil profile descriptions were made according to Soil Taxonomy criteria (Soil Survey Staff 1999). Samples from all horizons were taken for pH-analysis.

RESULTS As the area is covered by highland grasses, the visibility of surface traits is optimal for photointerpretation. The archaeological structures identified are both composed and complex residential units, and simple units. Most of them are lying over denudational slopes, terraced surface, erosion and covered glacis (Figure 3).

Figure 3 Geomorphological map of La Cienega Valley.

ARGU-5.indb 585

18/06/09 11:02

586 |


Geomorphologically, La Ciénega is characterized by the presence of structural denudational, denudational, and fluvial-alluvial forms (Figure 3). Structural-denudational forms are represented by denudational slopes developed over igneous and metamorphic basement. In some places, they have a thin loessic cover. Slopes have a gradient higher than 20%. We found erosion glacis, covered glacis, erosion scarps, and terraced surfaces among the denudational forms. Erosion glacis are a piedmont geoform developed over loess. It presents an ondulating surface cut by gullies and ravines. The covered glacis is lying in the Mala Mala Ranges piedmont. It is composed of rock fragments and blocks formed by weathering and mass remotion processes from the slopes. Those fragments are included in a sandy matrix with clastic dominance. Its thickness is variable. Erosion scarps are developed over the upper part of piedmonts and the lower part of mountain slopes. The terraced surface was a plane surface formed on the bottom valley and incised by the river. It is composed of edaphized loessic layers. Among fluvial-alluvial forms we distinguished alluvial fans, fluvial terraces, and the actual river bed and fluvial plain. Alluvial fans are present over the piedmont of Calchaquíes Summits in the central part of the study area. They are formed by loams, sands, and clays. Fluvial terraces are elevated old river beds; they are located on the northern part of the study area. The actual river bed and floodplain is the river area over which the water flows all year. The flood plain only carries water when the river increases its volume of running water. They are developed over the two principal rivers of the study area: La Ciénega and La Puerta rivers. To compare different geomorphological and archaeological contextual situations, we choose those geomophological units that have most of the archaeological structures (denudational slope, erosion glacis, and covered glacis). We obtain ten soil profile descriptions. On each case, we dug inside and outside the archaeological structure (Table 1). All profiles showed the same pedological tendencies on their development. Profiles are composed of at least two cycles: the actual soil and a paleosoil (Table 1). Archaeological material, when found, is more abundant in the contact between soil and paleosoil. This observation allowed us to infer that this paleosoil was the ancient occupational surface. And the potsherds overlying this layer are a product of the burial process. The typical soil profile succession of horizons is A1; A2; 2ACb; 2Cb, with some differences between inside and outside archaeological units. In the case of the profiles described inside simple units, they looked less developed (A1; A2; 2Cb; R) probably due to its functionality as corrals. The soil profiles described outside these enclosures are deeper and have the best development (A1; A2; 2ACb; 2Cb) (Table 1).

ARGU-5.indb 586

18/06/09 11:02

|


587

Horizont

Deepness (cm)

Texture

Structure

Color (wet)

pH

Profile 1 Inside simple Structure

A1 A2 2Cb R

0-8 8-21 21-32 32-50+

Sandy loam Loam Loamy sand Sandy

Subangular blocks Prismatic Granular Granular

10YR3/3 10YR4/4 10YR3/4/ 10YR5/2

7 7.6 7.6 4.7

Profile 2 Outside simple structure

A1 A2 2ACb 2Cb

0-9 9-21/38 38-57 57-73+

Sandy clay loam Loam Sandy loam Sandy

Granular Prismatic Subangular blocks Massive

10YR4/2 10YR4/3 10YR2/2 10YR5/2

5.7 6.3 6.5 6.6

Profile 3 Inside complex structure

A1 A2 2ACb 2Cb

0-28 28-57 57-73 73-90+

Silt loam Silty clay loam Sandy loam Silt loam

Granular Subangular blocks Subangular blocks Too wet

10YR2/2 10YR2/2 10YR2/2 10YR2/2

6.9 6.2 6.2 6

* * **

Profile 4 Outside complex structure

A1 A2 2ACb 2Cb

0-9 9-21/38 21/38-57 57-73+

Sandy loam Loam Sandy loam Sandy

Granular Prismatic Subangula blocks Massive

10YR4/2 10YR3/3 10YR2/2 10YR5/2

5.7 6.3 6.5 6.6

* * **

Profile 5 Iinside simple structure

A1 A2 2Cb R

0-11 11-28 28-42 42-56+

Sandy loam Sandy loam Loam Sandy

Subangular blocks Prismatic Subangular blocks Massive

10YR3/4 7.5YR3/2 10YR3/3 10YR5/2

5.8 5.5 5.9

Profile 6 Outside simple Structure

A1 A2 2ACb 2Cb

0-9 9-36 36-61 61-68+

Sandy loam Sandy loam Sandy loam Sandy

Granular Prismatic Subangular blocks Massive

10YR3/4 10YR3/2 10YR2/2 10YR5/2

6 6.3 6.3

Profile 7 Inside Ccomplex Structure

A1 A2 2ACb 2Cb

0-11 11-20/28 20/28-48 48-88+

Sandy loam Silt loam Silt loam Loam

Granular Prismatic Subangular blocks Subangular blocks

10YR2/4 10YR2/2 10YR2/2 10YR5/6

6.1 6.4 6.2 6.3

* * **

Profile 8 Outside Complex Structure

A1 A2 2ACb 2Cb

0-6 6-17 17-37 37-63+

Silt loam Silt loam Silt loam Loam

Granular Prismatic Subangular blocks Subangular blocks

10YR3/3 10YR3/2 10YR3/2 7.5YR4/2

6.2 6.5 6.7 6.7

* * **

Profile 9 Inside complex Structure

A1 AB 2Bb 2Cb 3Bb

0-28 28-49 49-74 74-110 110-+

Silt loam Silt clay loam Silt loam Silty clay Sandy silt

Granular Prismatic Prismatic Prismatic Prismatic

10YR2/1 10YR2/2 10YR3/3 10YR2/2 7.5YR4/2

5 5.5 7 6.9 7

* * * **

Profile 10 Outside complex Structure

Terraced surface

Covered glacis

Erosion glacis

Denudational slope

Finally, profiles described over the terraced surface, close to the main river (profiles 9 and 10) are more complex, showing differences in available water and parent material. The typical sequence of horizons is A1; A2; AB; 2Bb; 2BCb and 3Bb (Table 1). Archaeological materials

A1 A2 AB 2BCb 3Cb

0-24 24-38 38-57 57-65/68 65/68-105+

Silt loam Sandy clay loam Sandy clay loam Clay loam Clay loam

Granular Prismatic Prismatic Prismatic Prismatic

10YR3/3 10YR3/3 10YR2/2 10YR4/4 7.5YR4/4

6.2 7 7.5 7.8 7.8

* * * **

* * **

Table 1 Soil profile descriptions.

ARGU-5.indb 587

18/06/09 11:02

588 |


CONCLUSIONS We conclude that the two cycles represented in all profiles reflect the regional paleoenvironmental fluctuations of the last 3000 years. As in Tafí valley (Sampietro Vattuone 2001), this region had a more humid period contemporary to the settlements. Paleosoil surface was the ancient occupation surface over which all structures were settled. The archaeological material recovered (potsherds and animal bones) is laying over the contact between soil and paleosoil, and is mixed in very little pieces in the sediment of the actual soil. Some characteristics of the formation processes are related to the distinctive use of each kind of archaeological structure. In the case of simple structures the profiles are less developed than those outside them. These observations suggest that these enclosures were used for llama flocks and that trampling deeply affected the original soil. The other profiles described inside archaeological structures showed more development than those described outside the structures, especially those on the bottom valley over the terraced surface.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AMBROSETTI J. (1897), «Los monumentos megalíticos de Tafí del Valle», Boletín del Instituto Geográfico Argentino, 18, pp. 1-3. BERBERIÁN E., NIELSEN A., ARGÜELLO DE DORSCH E., BIXIO B., SPALLETTI L., SALAZAR J. & PILLADO E. (1988), Sistemas de asentamiento prehispánicos en el Valle de Tafí, Comechingonia, Córdoba, Argentina Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. BERNASCONI DE GARCIA M. & BARAZA DE FONTS A. (1981-1982), «Estudio arqueológico del Valle de la Ciénega (Depto. Tafí, Prov. de Tucumán)», Anales de Arqueología y Etnología, 15, Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Argentina, pp. 321-335. BOLSI A., MADARIAGA M. & BATISTA A. (1992), «Sociedad y naturaleza en el borde andino: El caso de Tafí del Valle», Estudios Geográficos, 53, pp. 383-417 BRUCH C. (1913), «Exploraciones arqueológicas en la provincia de Tucumán y Catamarca», Revista del Museo de La Plata, 5, pp. 1-19. CANALS FRAU S. (1953), Las poblaciones indígenas de la Argentina. Su origen—su pasado—su presente. Buenos Aires, Argentina, Editorial Sudamericana COLLANTES M. (2002), Paleogeomorfología y geología del Cuaternario de la cuenca del río Tafí,Departamento Tafí del Valle, Provincia de Tucumán, PhD dissertation, Universidad Nacional de Salta, Salta, Argentina. CREMONTE M. (1996), Investigaciones arqueológicas en la quebrada de La Ciénega (Dto Tafí. Tucumán), PhD dissertation, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, La Plata, Argentina. GONZALEZ A. (1961-1964), «Nuevas fechas de la cronología argentina obtenidas por el método del radiocarbón (V)», Revista del Instituto de Antropología, II-III, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, pp. 289-297.

ARGU-5.indb 588

18/06/09 11:02


|

589

GONZÁLEZ A. (1962), «Nuevas fechas de la cronología arqueológica argentina obtenidas por el método de radiocarbón (IV). Resumen y perspectivas», Revista del Instituto de Antropología, 5, Buenos Aires, Argentina, pp. 303-331. GONZÁLEZ A. (1980), Arte precolombino de la Argentina, Buenos Aires, Filmediciones Valero. GONZÁLEZ A. & NÚÑEZ REGUEIRO V. (1960) «Preliminary report on archaeological research in Tafí delValle N.W. Argentina», in 34 Congreso Internacional de Americanistas, Alemania, Wien, pp. 485-496. ITC (2001), Ilwis 3.0. User’s guide, International Institute for Aerospace Survey and Earth Sciences, Eschede, Netherlands, ITC. QUIROGA A. (1899), «La ruinas de Anfama, el pueblo pre-histórico de La Ciénega», Boletín del Instituto Geográfico Argentino, 17, Buenos Aires, Argentina, pp. 4-6. SAMPIETRO VATTUONE M. (2001), «Propuestas para un modelo climático del Formativo en el valle de Tafí», in BERBERIÁN E. (Ed.), XIII Congreso Nacional de Arqueología Argentina, Córdoba, Argentina pp. 173-180. SAMPIETRO VATTUONE M. (2002), «Geoambientes y sitios arqueológicos formativos en el valle de Tafí (Noroeste–República Argentina)», Cuadernos del Instituto de Antropología y Pensamiento Latinoamericano, 19, Buenos Aires, Argentina, pp. 599-611. SAMPIETRO M. & SAYAGO J. (1998), «Aproximación geoarqueológica al conocimiento del sitio arqueológico “Río Blanco,” Valle de Tafí, Tucumán (Argentina)», Cuadernos del Instituto de Antropología y Pensamiento Latinoamericano, 17, Buenos Aires, Argentina, pp. 257-274. SAYAGO J. & COLLANTES M. (1991), «Evolución paleogeomorfológica del valle de Tafí (Tucumán,Argentina) durante el Cuaternario Superior», Bamberger Geographische Schriften, 11, Germany, pp. 109-124. SESMA J. (1987), Geología del Cuaternario y geomorfología aplicada en el Valle de Tafí, Unpublished master’s thesis, Universidad Nacional de Tucumán, Tucumán, Argentina. SOIL SURVEY STAFF. 1999. Keys to Soil Taxonomy, 10th ed. USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service, Washington, DC. VAN ZUIDAM R. & VAN ZUIDAM-CANCELADO F. (1978), Terrain analysis and classification using aerial photograph: A geomorphological approach, International Institute for Aerial Survey and Earth Sciences (ITC), Text Book VII, Enschede, Netherlands, ITC.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We are very grateful to geologist José Busnelli who helped us during the field trip, to Dr. José Luis Peña Monné for his unconditional support, and to Dr. Sayago director of our Institute (INGEMA). National University of Tucumán, CONICET and CIUNT provided the economical support for this research.

AUTHORS M.M. Sampietro Vattuone CONICET - INGEMA – UNT, España 2903 – 4000 – San Miguel de Tucumán; [email protected] L. Neder INGEMA – UNT, España 2903 – 4000 – San Miguel de Tucumán. Argentina. [email protected] M. A. Vattuone Instituto de Estudios Vegetales, UNT

ARGU-5.indb 589

18/06/09 11:02