Radiocarbon dates from the site of Caral in the Supe Valley of Peru indicate that monumental corporate architecture, urban settlement, and irrigation agriculture began in the Americas by 4090 years before the present (2627 calibrated years B.C.) to 3640 years before the present (1977 calibrated years B.C.). Caral is located 23 kilometers inland from the Pacific coast and contains a central zone of monumental, residential, and nonresidential architecture covering an area of 65 hectares. Caral is one of 18 large preceramic sites in the Supe Valley.

For more than 40 y, there has been an active discussion over the presence and economic importance of maize ( Zea mays ) during the Late Archaic period (3000–1800 B.C.) in ancient Peru. The evidence for Late Archaic maize has been limited, leading to the interpretation that it was present but used primarily for ceremonial purposes. Archaeological testing at a number of sites in the Norte Chico region of the north central coast provides a broad range of empirical data on the production, processing, and consumption of maize. New data drawn from coprolites, pollen records, and stone tool residues, combined with 126 radiocarbon dates, demonstrate that maize was widely grown, intensively processed, and constituted a primary component of the diet throughout the period from 3000 to 1800 B.C.

The Norte Chico region on the coast of Peru north of Lima consists of four adjacent river valleys--Huaura, Supe, Pativilca and Fortaleza--in which archaeologists have been aware of a number of apparently early sites for more than 40 years (refs 1- 3). To clarify the early chronology in this region, we undertook fieldwork in 2002 and 2003 to determine the dates of occupation of sites in the Fortaleza and Pativilca valleys. Here we present 95 new radiocarbon dates from a sample of 13 of more than 20 large, early sites. These sites share certain basic characteristics, including large-scale monumental architecture, extensive residential architecture and a lack of ceramics. The 95 new dates confirm the emergence and development of a major cultural complex in this region during the Late Archaic period between 3000 and 1800 calibrated calendar years bc. The results help to redefine a broader understanding of the respective roles of agricultural and fishing economies in the beginnings of civilization in South America.

gan. Basically, it is argued that by focusing on certain "essential" elements in defining a tribal form of organization, the anthropologist winds up lumping wildly disparate cultures into one evolutionary type and avoids rich diversity for the sake of evolutionary uniformity (Leonard & Jones, 1987;Dunnell, 1980; Plog & Upham, 1983; Upham, n.d.; Braun, 1991). Leonard and Jones (1987), in particular, blanket all the evolutionary stage models with the same criticism:Invariably, applications of the model are conceived at a scale much too inclusive and indiscriminating for culture change to be monitored, and, in fact, the model serves to obscure change at the scale at which it primarily occurs (i.e., consider the material variation and culture change that goes unnoted with the punctuated stages of evolution and that the model demands). (1987:200) This type of generic argument against evolutionary stages such as "tribe" or "chiefdom" are really arguments against cultural typologies. By placing societies in broad stages or types, it is argued, the unilineal evolutionists miss the continuous range of variability found in the ethnographic and archaeological record. Ultimately, however, this boils down to a classic debate between "lumpers" and "splitters" and constitutes a spurious argument against the evolutionary models and the different specific stages. While it is true that such models and stages gloss over a great deal of cultural diversity, they were never developed to account for diversity. They were developed to account for certain broad patterns of similarity that can be observed crossculturally in the record of human societies. Any typology, be it for ceramics, house forms, or politics, is developed to answer certain questions about the phenomenon under study. Anthropology, fortunately, has moved beyond the point of trying to "discover" certain true, immutable types that are applicable in all circumstances and for all purposes.The initial survey data of Dean et al. (1978) from Long House Valley offered tantalizing but inconclusive insights into tribal organization and development in a prehistoric context. Substantial questions remained to be answered through examination of the sites and new, problem-oriented field research.

No abstract