2004
DOI: 10.1016/j.jas.2003.08.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Biosilicate analysis of residue in Maya dedicatory cache vessels from Blue Creek, Belize

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0
3

Year Published

2007
2007
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
16
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…49, a Late Preclassic dedicatory cache including lip-tolip and nested Sierra Red bowls, a single Jute shell, 3 "hamburger" stones, and 5 jade bead fragments marked the initiation of the occupation. Bozarth and Guderjan (2004) also reported sponges from such caches at Blue Creek and that this arrangement represents a symbolic model of the Maya cosmos at creation.…”
Section: Archeological Synthesis Of Chan Cahalmentioning
confidence: 79%
“…49, a Late Preclassic dedicatory cache including lip-tolip and nested Sierra Red bowls, a single Jute shell, 3 "hamburger" stones, and 5 jade bead fragments marked the initiation of the occupation. Bozarth and Guderjan (2004) also reported sponges from such caches at Blue Creek and that this arrangement represents a symbolic model of the Maya cosmos at creation.…”
Section: Archeological Synthesis Of Chan Cahalmentioning
confidence: 79%
“…Following the literature from the early days of phytolith activity in paleoethnobotany to the present, it can be seen how identifrcation criteria have developed and evolved•from Pearsall's (1978) original use of broad size categories (e.g., small, large, extralarge) to identify maize leaves with cross-shaped phjrtoliths; to the development of more precise size and shape criteria for these cross-body forms (Pipemo 1984;Pearsall and Piperno 1990); to use of robust statistical approaches in cross-shaped phytolith identification (e.g., friarte MulhoUand 2003;Pipemo 1988; to the widespread recognition of maize cob phytoliths (e.g., Bozarth 1993a, Bozarth andGuderjan 2004;friarte 2003bMulhoUand 2003), and finally, incorporation of starch grain data. The latter allows the generation of two independent lines of empirical data, providing evidence-often from the same plant processing stone tools or ceramic cooking vessels• for the presence of two different parts of the same, consumed structure of the plant, its kernels and chaff (glumes/cupules) (see Dickau et al, 2007;Iriarte et al 2004;Perry et al 2006Perry et al , 2007Pearsall et al 2003, Pipemo et al 2000.…”
Section: Archaeological Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…MuhoUand (1993), Bozarth (1993a,b), Bozarth and Guderjan (2004), Iriarte (2003a, b ;, Pearsall (1978;, the author (Pipemo 1988(Pipemo ,2006a Pearsall 1993,1998a), and others have studied maize leaf and cob phytoliths and compared them against phytoliths from large collections of wild grasses. As near as the author can count, over 500 wild species that could conceivably contribute phytolith types used to identify maize and more than 40 races of maize have been analyzed.…”
Section: Maizementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Los fitolitos y otros biosilicatos preservados en el residuo orgánico de las vasijas pueden permitir identificar maíz, calabaza, mate, palma, etc. mediante el microscopio óptico y el microscopio electrónico de barrido (Staller & Thompson, 2002;Bozarth & Guderjan, 2004). Finalmente, el análisis químico de los residuos orgánicos es también prometedor (Cackette et al, 1987;Regert et al, 2003), aunque ha sido considerado incierto para elementos como el fósforo (Dunnell & Hunt, 1990).…”
Section: La Contribución Arqueométrica Al Análisis Cerámicounclassified