вход по аккаунту


Dental relatedness corresponding to mortuary patterning at Huaca Loro Peru.

код для вставкиСкачать
Dental Relatedness Corresponding to Mortuary
Patterning at Huaca Loro, Peru
Robert S. Corruccini* and Izumi Shimada
Department of Anthropology, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Illinois 62901-4502
odontology; intracemetery; multivariate; bootstrap
Within and between tombs at the 1,000year-old site of Huaca Loro on north coastal Peru, interment characteristics vary to an intriguing degree. Following and elaborating upon prior intracemetery studies,
biological relatedness among associated burial groupings
was assessed using 23 dental characters (assuming familial allele segregation) for 29 individuals. Biological patterning was based on multivariate distance between individuals using all traits, rather than the previously
widespread reliance upon univariate comparison of each
Huaca Loro is a truncated pyramidal mound with
elite shaft tombs located in the Poma National Historical Sanctuary, Batán Grande, northern coastal
Peru. The tombs pertain to the Middle Sicán culture,
circa AD 1000, a period of fluorescence and expansion of a theocratic, hierarchical society. It was ultimately overcome around AD 1400 by the Chimú, a
coastal rival of the Incas. The Sicán Archaeological
Project has worked in the Batán Grande region continuously for over 23 years (Shimada, 1981, 1990,
1995, 2000). Since 1990, excavations have included
recovery of five individuals from the East Tomb (3 ⫻
3 ⫻ 11 m deep: Shimada, 1995; Shimada and Merkel, 1993), and more recently of 24 burials from the
deep and elaborate West Tomb (10 ⫻ 6 ⫻ 15 m deep),
as well as five burials from the external North
Trench (Shimada et al., 1998, 2000) (see Fig. 1).
The tomb excavations relate to Shimada’s longterm effort at social reconstruction (and more recently demographic reconstruction) through multidisciplinary analysis of mortuary contexts and
contents, and he continues to collaborate with others
in comparative osteological and mitochondrial DNA
analyses (Shimada et al., 2001). This will increment
previous work describing skeleto-dental aspects of
geographically related (Peruvian-Andean) populations, including Stewart (1943), Goaz and Miller
(1966), Devoto and Arias (1967), Rothhammer and
Silva (1989, 1990, 1992), Nelson (1997), and Verano
(1997a–c, 1999).
A single, inferred elite male was at the bottom of
the West Tomb in its central chamber (Fig. 2), accompanied by much material wealth and adjacent to
niches containing inferred sacrificial young women.
DOI 10.1002/ajpa.10020
trait separately within samples. This multivariate approach did seem more informative. Statistically significant variation of biological similarities and dissimilarities
corresponded to spatial groupings and also to various specific archaeological indications of the cohesiveness, or lack
thereof, of interment pattern. The partition of biological
distances among tombs at Huaca Loro supports the archaeological evidence that the tombs represent a planned
elite cemetery. Am J Phys Anthropol 117:113–121, 2002.
2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Three meters higher in an antechamber, a juvenile,
possibly male, who seemed to be arranged to “look
at” the principal interment, plus 18 females (two
opposing groups of nine; Farnum et al., 1998) were
found in a condition suggesting that these were remains brought in and redeposited from burial elsewhere (Shimada et al., 1998). Many of the undisturbed burials on this antechamber floor were
missing extremities such as phalanges, and were
accompanied by broken and incomplete ceramic vessels. Some skeletons were disarticulated to a degree
difficult to reconcile with any natural postdepositional shifting. These lines of evidence suggest that
many of the antechamber females were reburials or
already mummified rather than sacrificed at the
time of interment of the principal personage.
Earlier, the East Tomb had yielded a central male
deposited with 1.2 tons of diverse grave goods, a
juvenile and a child atop this, and two adult females
placed in positions suggesting a symbolic birth-giving scene (Shimada, 1995; Shimada et al., 1998).
A variety of questions arise which biology might
better answer than archaeology, regarding the relationships among the individuals in these tombs.
Were the West Tomb elite male and the overlying
Grant sponsor: Shibusawa Ethnological Foundation; Grant sponsor: Southern Illinois University-Carbondale.
*Correspondence to: R.S. Corruccini, Department of Anthropology,
Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901-4502.
Received 15 February 2000; accepted 30 August 2001.
Fig. 1.
Location of Huaca Loro and its excavation areas.
nonsacrificial remains relatives, implying a sort of
family mausoleum? Were any of these biological kin
with the external (north trench) or the East Tomb
individuals? Do the males evince higher relatedness
than females overall, as would be consistent with
patrilocality (or would the opposite happen, suggesting matrilocality)? Do all individuals evince subequal similarity, suggesting (depending upon comparison with some outgroup) either random accumulation or that burials represent nuclear family
members but excluded collateral relatives? If this
comparison can be based on strong markers of biological relatedness, patterns of relatedness can be
uncovered, as prior work suggests.
Prior studies
Lane and Sublett (1972) influenced subsequent
studies by demonstrating probable residence-pattern information in Seneca skeletal biological traits.
Increased similarity among males compared to females was thought to indicate social change from
prior matrilocal toward patrilocal habits (contra
Corruccini, 1998). Supporting evidence would show
more similarity preserved across generations within
males, while females would have had more disparate origins. Ortner and Corruccini (1976), using
skeletal and dental measurements and qualitative
traits, found greater internal female relatedness in
one inferred matrilocal Iroquoian group and the opposite in two other non-Iroquoian groups of prehistoric Virginia Indians. Owsley and Jantz (1978)
traced intracemetery patterning in the Arikara. Corruccini et al. (1982) approached the spatial patterning of interments at a burial ground of African
slaves in Barbados. In concordance with some accounts of African family burial practices, they found
three spatial clusters involving 102 interments to
have a significant partition of between-group to
within-group variance. Bondioli et al. (1986) based a
larger-scale study on the Iron Age necropolis of Alfedena, Italy, which entailed examining the distribution of 196 different biological traits over 89 people found in three areas. Both males and females
showed more similarity within areas and more difference between areas than expected at random, but
males showed this pattern more significantly. One
possible explanation, albeit one that could not be
confirmed, was that for patrilocal extended family
burial areas, some female consanguineous relatives
were also included. Bondioli et al. (1986) reviewed
other case studies of nonrandom grouping of skeletal
variants by cemetery area, suggesting family burial
Fig. 2. Map of West Tomb, which contained most of the burials.
plots or genetic segregation between social strata.
Rubini (1996) reconfirmed aspects of genetic endogamy within the Alfedena tomb circles, using cranial
discrete traits. Konigsberg (1988) modeled and
tested genetic patterning of postmarital residence in
prehistoric Illinois sites. More recently, Prowse and
Lovell (1996) demonstrated probable endogamous
kin patterning between high- and low-status predynastic Egyptian cemeteries.
Howell and Kintigh (1996) argued for a nonrandom pattern of genetic relatedness across the cemeteries at the Southwestern US site of Hawikku, and
then went a step further and argued that elite individuals, i.e., “leaders,” were probably related, which
suggests inherited status. Alternate conclusions
slightly at variance with Howell and Kintigh (1996)
concerning biological and social patterning according to sex were suggested by Corruccini (1998). Earlier, Corruccini (1972) had analyzed three Pueblo
Indian skeletal collections from different villages,
and had found significantly higher osteometrical
levels of similarity among females in two villages
known from ethnohistorical accounts to be matrilo-
cal (including Hawikku). This indicated a local continuity of female lineages. A third village of unknown residence pattern reversed that trend, and
had females that were relatively discordant.
Present objectives
Dental characteristics are clearly an informative
source of data for establishing genetic segregation
within lineages and differences between populations
(e.g., Kelley and Larson, 1991; Scott and Turner,
1997; Corruccini and Sharma, 1985; Corruccini et
al., 1988), comparing very favorably to other skeletal
features (Sjøvold, 1984; Falk and Corruccini, 1982).
As the Huaca Loro sample preserved many teeth
without inordinate attrition problems (owing to the
rather narrow range of age-at-death variation, as
most individuals were 25–35 years old), we thought
a dental comparison according to burial complex
location would be illuminating. We undertook this
study to look for possible familial clusters or other
biological patterning that might correspond to archaeological patterning.
Indications of biological lineage were sought
within and between burial groupings. The total sample was subdivided into the following nine groups:
the principal West Tomb central burial (1), the juvenile male “looking” at him (2), the two adequately
preserved accompanying (possibly sacrificial) females in the south and north niches (3, 5), eight
scorable females to the south (4), eight scorable females from the grouping to the north (6), five extraneous inferred “commoners” from the north trench
(7), and the principal interment (8) and three other
individuals (9) from the East Tomb (see Fig. 2). To
partition variation, these comparisons would entail
69 within-group pairwise similarities and 337 between-group interindividual differences, if this were
done on the basis of the individual rather than the
Dental variables
Silicon molds were taken by R. Benfer and I.S. of
maxillary and mandibular arches in Peru, and dental stone casts were made by W. Duncan at Southern
Illinois University-Carbondale (SIUC). The dental
traits yielding dissimilarities were taken largely
from Corruccini and Potter (1981) and Turner et al.
(1991). The ranked states of the latter were frequently modified by R.S.C., after a pass through the
material, to magnify the sometimes-limited variation seen within this group. The best-preserved side
was scored. Several traits were scored and measured
from the molds rather than casts because there was
a clearer delimitation in the negative in molds. The
following traits were scored as shown below:
1. Maxillary central incisor labial convexity, scored
in five phases spanning states 1–3 of Turner et al.
(1991), i.e., as 1, 1⫹, 2, 2⫹, and 3;
2. Maxillary incisor shovel shape, scored in five
ranked phases corresponding directly to states
2– 6 of Turner et al. (1991);
3. Maxillary double shoveling, labial marginal ridging graded into five expressions corresponding
roughly to intermediate scores between the six
states 0 –5 in Turner et al. (1991), i.e., 1⫺, 2⫺,
3⫺, 4⫺, and 5⫺;
4. Mandibular incisor shoveling, in nine ordinal
states spanning states 0 –5 of Turner et al. (1991).
These divide zero (no expression), 1 (moderate),
and 2 (strong) into quarters for scoring purposes;
5. Canine accessory ridge and basal tubercle, an
impression gained jointly from maxillary and
mandibular canines of lingual cervical swelling,
in six ranked states of development corresponding directly to states 0 –5 in Turner et al. (1991);
6. Maxillary distal premolar buccal cusp (paracone)
diameter, the most variable of four maxillary premolar crown components. As with trait 7, this
was measured directly on the molds (internally)
rather than casts (externally) for greater accu-
racy in locating the maximum mesiodistal cusp
7. Mandibular distal premolar lingual component
mesiodistal diameter, essentially the metaconid
plus any entoconid;
8. Hypocone development on maxillary M1, four
stages corresponding only to states 4 –5 in Turner
et al. (1991), i.e., 4, 4⫹, 5⫺, and 5;
9. Hypocone development on maxillary M2, four
states scored as in Dahlberg’s older 3⫹/31/2/4⫺/4
system, which corresponds to states 3– 4 in
Turner et al. (1991);
10. Maxillary M3 metacone, five stages corresponding somewhat to intermediates of states 0 –5 (as
with trait 3 above) in Turner et al. (1991);
11–13. Cusp number for mandibular M1–3, with
seven gradations (6, 5⫹, 5, 5⫺, 4⫹, 4, and
4⫺) ranging over states 0 – 4 of Turner et al.
14 –15. Chord from mesial fovea to central fovea for
mandibular M1–2;
16 –17. Chord from central fovea to distal fovea (or
distal marginal ridge) for mandibular M1–2;
18 –19. Chord from central to distal fovea on maxillary M1–2. All of 14 –19 were measured with
needle-pointed Mitutoyo calipers calibrated
to 0.02 mm on the molds, because the features were easier to pinpoint as convex
rather than concave;
20. M1 bilaterally missing in the presence of M2;
21. M2 bilaterally missing in the presence of M1;
22. Central incisor winging, whether in upper or
lower dentition, scored present/absent conforming to states 1 or 3 in Turner et al. (1991); and
23. Third cusp development on the distal mandibular premolar.
Before undertaking tests to determine whether
the distribution of individuals in the tomb was nonrandom, we assessed the replicability of the scoring
of dental traits. The distribution of individuals in
the tomb can be assessed with univariate as well as
multivariate data sets, and we chose to do both. The
assessment of the distribution of univariate and
multivariate measurements involved analyses of
variance (ANOVA). These steps in our analyses are
described in greater detail below.
Replicability of dental measurements. R.S.C.
recorded very small chords and Cartesian coordinate-based measures such as traits 6 –7 and 14 –19
on tooth crowns in similar sorts of studies (Corruccini, 1977a–c, 1978, 1988; Corruccini and Potter,
1981), where the information content was much
greater than for traditional maximum diameters of
teeth, but the relative magnitude of measurement
error was higher. Therefore, multivariate replicability of scoring was examined by comparison of first
and second passes through the material (in the same
order according to new numbers given the speci-
mens, but blind to their identity), and discrepancies
⬎0.1 mm or more than one character state were
entered. Confidence was assessed by the tendency of
the same cases to cluster together in weighted pair
group method (WPGM) dendrograms based on multivariate distance.
The advantage of multivariate contrast of individuals (across all traits) as opposed to long lists of
sample-bound univariate comparisons seems obvious in looking at the cumbersome analyses of Bondioli et al. (1986) and Howell and Kintigh (1996),
which have to be subject to large amounts of Bonferroni redundancy error of type I. Multivariate
comparison was approachable in the present study
due to common preservation and scorability of most
of the traits in each individual, especially mandibular teeth. Thus the three varieties of multivariate
dissimilarity coefficients below were calculated between each specimen, and patterns were sought according to the sample partitions above.
Euclidian distance coefficients were calculated between individuals using three sets of data as noted
below. Euclidian distances provide a nonparametric
approach to pattern recognition that is appropriate
for mixed continuous and multistate ordinal data
such as these. The distance is the square root of
average squared difference, based on the normalized
scores and measures. Therefore it is a sort of average amount of standard deviation units by which
two cases’ scores differ. Analyses were based on 1)
raw (but normalized) data, 2) the c-scores of Howells
(1989) (normalized by row and column), and 3) geometric shape vectors (each individual divided
through by the geometric mean) to equalize robusticity (average character state magnitude) prior to
normalization. For the last method, a value of 10
was added to each variable, so that small and zero
scores did not skew the shape variables.
Shape vectors ostensibly lessen sex difference in
robusticity, development, and size, which could not
be accomplished by ordinary separate-sex or sexnormalized means because males and females were
so unevenly distributed over the small samples.
Males have larger teeth, and larger teeth are more
complex and tend toward more cusps (Garn et al.,
1966), tubercles, and ridges (Scott and Turner,
1997). The finding by Harris (1980) of greater female
development of incisor ridging seems to be the exception that proves the rule.
These linear dental phenotypic distances should
reflect genetic distance, but are not necessarily directly proportional to inverse genetic covariance (refer to the many studies cited in Chapter 4 of Scott
and Turner, 1997). They will, however, be directly
proportional to the square root of the generalized
phenotypic distance and to the extent that the latter
quantity reflects genetic distance and variance/covariance, so the linear distances should be directly
proportional to the square roots thereof. Doi et al.
(1986) assert that odontometric similarity is reflective of actual genetic kinship, down to the level of
cousins. They also promote the value of multivariate
assessment of similarity among individuals. Shinoda et al. (1998) also rely on odontometric proportionality to reflect kinship in Jomon remains, finding that the cases of highest dental similarity share
the same mtDNA haplotypes.
Analyses of distribution of univariate and multivariate data sets. Standard one-way ANOVA
was first applied to all original variables individually, according to the nine-way division of subsamples. The univariate analysis of all 23 traits
using ANOVA based on n ⫽ 29 divided into nine
partitions is, of course, very awkward because of
multiple tests based on very small and unequal samples, but is provided to contrast with the multivariate approach. Also, although ANOVA is reputedly
very robust, its use with the ordinal variables (especially those with few states) might be questionable.
The interindividual multivariate distances, by
contrast, are quite continuous ratio-interval variables, and ANOVA was also applied to those partitioned according to individuals making up the subsamples. The considerable redundancy of total
degrees of freedom incurred by the latter approach
(growing from the univariate 28, to 58 ⫻ 57/2 ⫺ 1 ⫽
1,623 pairwise replicate distances) could be corrected clumsily by using an estimated reduction in
degrees of freedom. The multivariate statistical significance of variance in distances was better estimated by bootstrap resampling to simulate the standard deviation of the partitioned distances,
according to a theoretical distribution representing
the null hypothesis (that all are sampled randomly
from the observed total distribution).
In this situation, the bootstrap solution (e.g.,
Mooney and Duval, 1993; Bruce et al., 1995) was
especially valuable because it can resample empirical distributions of a variable according to how the
variable is generated, and answer a question that
classic inferential statistics cannot, without considerable theoretical computational effort. The present
problem looked at variation both within and between samples according to the pairwise distances of
their members (e.g., t-tests of means of within and
between group distances), and was interested in
nonrandom distributions of both, while ANOVA
usually compares between-sample variance to see if
it is significantly larger than within samples.
Our partition by tomb context created 40 categories of within- and between-group variation: two
consisted of 28 pairwise comparisons (8 ⫻ 7/2)
within each group of eight females, there were 10
comparisons within the five trench “commoners”
(5 ⫻ 4/2), etc., plus 64 distances in the 8 ⫻ 8 comparison between the two large female groups, plus
40 (8 ⫻ 5) between each female group with the five
trench individuals, and so on. The total came out to
69 distances in four within-group samplings of distances, and 337 distances in 36 between-group combinations. Did the heterogeneities and similarities
TABLE 1. Average linear dental shape-vector distance within and between components of the Huaca Loro sample
1. West Tomb principal
2. Juvenile “attendant”
3. South “sacrifice”
4. South females
5. North “sacrifice”
6. North females
7. North trench
8. East Tomb principal
9. Other East Tomb
both between and within the sample subdivisions
follow a random distribution? The 1,624 total distances (magnified by a factor of 4 because of sampling each individual twice for the remeasurement
phase) were used for extracting 500 independent
random resampling bouts of 406 (nonredundant)
distances in the 40 groupings described above, and
the standard deviations and their confidence limits
across groupings were calculated.
Measurement error effects are a first item of concern. Looked at on a univariate basis, some of the
intraobserver repeatabilities seem unimpressive.
For instance, mandibular incisor shoveling shows an
average 6% error (with 13% standard deviation),
which seems high, but the contribution of this variable to variance patterns might nevertheless be relatively strong. The multivariate cluster analysis assesses intraobserver repeatability on the level of
identifying individual specimens. The two time-successive readings on 29 individuals yield 58 individuals to be clustered according to increasing distance
(dissimilarity), and 28 of 29 times the first two specimens to form a cluster are the separate readings for
the same individual. The one exception involves the
juvenile specimen from the East Tomb, which, owing
to maxillary breakage and exfoliating teeth, was
missing more variables (12 of the 23) than any other
case, and the second scoring for that individual joins
as the very next step with its correct complement.
Therefore, the cluster analysis yields a very high
level of confidence in terms of individual identity
overcoming measurement error. Another way of
looking at the situation is the following: there is a
mean distance of 0.18 between pairs of assessments
of single individuals, while the overall mean distance between different pairs of individuals is 1.41
(with a minimum observation of 0.71, which was
between two occupants of the North Trench). Whatever the percent error is in remeasuring individuals,
it pales by comparison with the variability between
Multivariate approaches
The sharpest multivariate partition of distance
variance among the nine sample subdivisions is according to shape vectors, giving F ⫽ 16.78. The raw
data and c-score data produce F ratios 2–3 points
lower, and we assume the shape vectors are both the
best expression of morphological difference between
lineages and the most apt to lessen sex differences.
Therefore, consideration henceforward is limited to
those results for the sake of simplicity (however, all
three methods yielded very highly correlated distances: r ⫽ ⫹0.94).
Table 1 gives average Euclidian distances among
all the sample partitions in this study.
Distribution of univariate and multivariate data
In univariate analysis, only 1 trait of 23 reaches a
Bonferroni level of significantly low probability
(0.05/23 ⫽ 0.0022), which is the maxillary M1 hypocone: it is most strongly developed among the two
(north and south) groups of eight females. The univariate approach yields some indication of difference
but scant interpretation in this situation.
That the multivariate Euclidian distances are
partitioned nonrandomly can be tested by ANOVA
of the within-group and between-group distances.
This yields the F statistic of 16.78, but including
both measured and remeasured individuals exaggerates the pairwise distance sample by a factor of
2 ⫻ 2 or 4. Correcting for that would yield F ⫽ 4.19,
with 35 and 370 degrees of freedom (P ⬍ 0.0001).
Overcorrecting to the minimal univariate availability of 8 and 20 degrees of freedom yields P ⬎ 0.50,
however, with an unknown (but substantial) type II
The average standard deviation for individual distances from random resampling is found to be
0.0903 for the null hypothesis, and the upper 95%
confidence limit of that is 0.1158 from bootstrapping. The observed actual standard deviation (s.d.)
is 0.1308. The random resampling s.d. reaches the
high observed level of variability only P ⫽ 0.006 of
the time. A conventional F-ratio of 0.13082/
0.09032 ⫽ 2.098 is also indicated if we can trust the
parametric quality of the distribution, which would
Fig. 3. Depiction of odontological shape separation between groupings or individuals, the numbers showing how much the
Euclidian distance exceeds the smallest observed interindividual difference (0.71). Only relatively small residual distances of 0.60 or
less are shown (by arrows) to indicate major linkages according to similarity. Numbers in parentheses are average residual distances
within individuals of the grouping.
indicate P ⬍ 0.02. Thus there is significant heterogeneity of distances across and within the sample
Significant variance among the biological relations of these groupings is indicated. There does
seem to be (probably genetic) nonrandom patterning
to dental variation over Huaca Loro’s interments.
However, interestingly, no interindividual distance
between pairs of samples reaches post hoc significance, whether by the F-ratio of within-group variance or the t-test of mean difference of betweengroup distance. The overall pattern is significant,
but no individual component confidently registers
greater input to that pattern than others. Neverthe-
less, the following general tendencies probably contribute the most to overall heterogeneity (see Fig. 3).
Among large contributors to the nonrandom pattern of variation is the relatively small intrasample
variance within the eight south females and within
the five north trench individuals. This could indicate
biological homogeneity such as would result from
their having been affected by endogamy or from
their representing some sort of kin lineages. Other
factors contributing to the significant result are relatively high similarity between those two groups
above, and larger distances to all other groups. The
propinquity of south females to north trench individuals owes largely to shared strong development
of maxillary shoveling, canine tubercles, maxillary
distal premolar paracone expansion, and large me-
sial to central fovea maxillary M1 chords. A second
principal variance factor was the large distance
shown by the eight north females from all other
groupings. Furthermore, the north females are relatively (and quite consistently) very heterogeneous
among themselves as well, which could suggest, for
example, that they might be unrelated marital immigrants into a patrilocal context (among possible
The niche “sacrificial” females are consistent with
the pattern shown by the adjacent groupings of females. The south niche female is very close to the
other eight south females, who in turn are relatively
closely related among themselves, while the occupant of the north niche is well-removed from all
other individuals, as are also the north females
among themselves and to all others.
That the West Tomb principal interment and the
East Tomb principal interment share a mutually
closer relation than with any of the other individuals
and groupings surely is “meaningful,” although no
statistical significance can be claimed for this single
observation. The similarity resides in similar scores
for lengthened lingual aspect and extra cuspidation
of the mandibular distal premolar, and identical
mandibular M1 mesial to central fovea chords. The
similarity among the two principal interments
might have been greater but for their missing different teeth. Given some of the even lesser distances
among south females and north trench occupants, it
might be idly speculated that if this represents family relationship, it is more likely a second-degree
biological relationship (e.g., uncle-nephew) rather
than first-degree (e.g., siblings, parent-offspring).
Each distance between pairs of subgroups, however, is not significant by itself in a post hoc statistical context; only the overall pattern is significant.
The north/south females’ within-group variance ratio comes closest to being a significant pairwise comparison but is not formally significant at P ⬍ 0.05,
even in an a priori context.
Results are highly similar in pattern when comparing the other raw and c-score distances with
these shape-vector distances. One notable discrepancy arises in the raw distance between the West
Tomb principal and the juvenile, which is relatively
reduced, initially suggesting to us some special degree of relationship. Failing to see this clearly expressed in other coefficients, and noting the missing
variables for the juvenile, we have reservations
about emphasizing this point. At any rate, it does
not appear that the west juvenile shares any unique
or derived mtDNA pattern with the west principal,
whereas the East and West Tomb principal interments may share one such haplotype (Shimada et
al., 2001).
Social relationships suggested by various archaeological data may indicate possible kinship relations
among burials. The juvenile in the West Tomb antechamber was positioned to be looking directly at
the principal interment, and varied offerings were
placed along the line of sight. The young individual
in the East Tomb also appeared to be directly looking at that tomb’s principal personage. A social linkage between the antechamber women in the south
part of the West Tomb and the principal personage
is suggested by long cloth strips that physically
linked them. One woven strip descended from the
southwest sector of the antechamber floor to the
central chamber, and partially wrapped the upper
torso of the principal personage. Another strip covered part of the south antechamber floor and extended to and covered part of the central chamber.
No comparable connecting cloth strips were found in
the northern half of the central chamber, where
biological differences increased. Additionally, ceramics and painted textiles affiliated with the earlier Moche style and iconography are concentrated
on the north side, while typical Sicán-style ceramics
predominate on the south side.
This study traces intracemetery biological patterning, using multivariate interindividual distance
comparisons. This contrasts with the sample-dependent univariate and multivariate approaches seen in
previous intracemetery studies.
The partition of biological distances among burials at Huaca Loro independently supports the archaeological evidence that the tombs represent a
planned elite cemetery. The spatial distances and
social indicators within and between tombs are indicative of probable family relatedness, or lack
thereof, and probable inherited elite status for some.
The correspondence of spatial and social relations
with dentally based biological distances almost certainly represents some sort of biokinship within the
inferred social groupings. However, it is impossible
to specify the exact nature of those relationships.
Excavations at Huaca Loro and related laboratory
analyses between 1990 –1997 by members of the
Sicán Archaeological Project were supported by two
grants generously provided to I.S. by the Shibusawa
Ethnological Foundation, Tokyo. R.S.C. received a
Summer Research Fellowship from Southern Illinois University-Carbondale for this analysis. Dr.
Kazuhiro Mine and Julie Farnum are conducting a
complementary osteological study of this material.
Dr. Ken-ichi Shinoda recently completed his mtDNA
analysis of some 50 individuals, including all those
discussed in this paper.
Bondioli L, Corruccini RS, Macchiarelli R. 1986. Familial segregation in the Iron-Age community of Alfedena, Abruzzo, Italy,
based on osteo-dental trait analysis. Am J Phys Anthropol
71:393– 400.
Bruce P, Simon J, Oswald T. 1995. Resampling Stats user’s guide.
Arlington, VA: Resampling Stats, Inc.
Corruccini RS. 1972. The biological relationships of some prehistoric and historic Pueblo populations. Am J Phys Anthropol
Corruccini RS. 1977a. Crown component variation in hominoid
lower third molars. Z Morphol Anthropol 68:14 –25.
Corruccini RS. 1977b. Cartesian coordinate analysis of the hominoid second lower deciduous molar. J Dent Res 56:699.
Corruccini RS. 1977c. Crown component variation in the hominoid lower second premolar. J Dent Res 56:1093–1096.
Corruccini RS. 1978. Crown component analysis of the hominoid
upper first premolar. Arch Oral Biol 23:491– 494.
Corruccini RS. 1988. Morphometric replicability using chords and
Cartesian coordinates of the same landmarks. J Zool 215:389 –
Corruccini RS. 1998. On cemetery kin groupings at Hawikku. Am
Antiq 63:161–163.
Corruccini RS, Potter RHY. 1981. Developmental correlates of
crown component asymmetry and occlusal discrepancy. Am J
Phys Anthropol 55:21–31.
Corruccini RS, Sharma K. 1985. Within- and between-zygosity
variance in oral traits among US and Punjabi twins. Hum
Hered 35:314 –318.
Corruccini RS, Handler JS, Mutaw RJ, Lange FW. 1982. Osteology of a slave burial population from Barbados, West Indies.
Am J Phys Anthropol 59:443– 459.
Corruccini RS, Sharma K, Potter RHY. 1988. Comparative genetic variance of dental size and asymmetry in U.S. and Punjabi twins. Paris: Mem Mus Natl Hist Nat [C] 53:47–53.
Devoto FCH, Arias NH. 1967. Shovel-shaped incisors in early
Atacama Indians. J Dent Res 46:1478.
Doi N, Tanaka Y, Funakoshi K. 1986. A method for estimation of
kinship based on the tooth measurements and its application to
the ancient human skeletal remains. J Anthropol Soc Nippon
Falk D, Corruccini RS. 1982. Efficacy of cranial versus dental
measurements for separating human populations. Am J Phys
Anthropol 57:123–127.
Farnum J, Corruccini R, Mine K, Shimada I, Vega-Centeno R,
Curay V. 1998. Sicán funerary customs: an interdisciplinary
perspective. Paper presented at the 26th Annual Midwest Conference on Andean and Amazonian Archaeology, Anthropology
and Ethnohistory, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Garn SM, Lewis AB, Kerewsky RS. 1966. Groove pattern, cusp
number, and tooth size. J Dent Res 45:970.
Goaz PW, Miller MC. 1966. A preliminary description of the
dental morphology of the Peruvian Indian. J Dent Res 45:106 –
Harris EF. 1980. Sex differences in lingual marginal ridging on
the human maxillary central incisor. Am J Phys Anthropol
Howell TL, Kintigh KW. 1996. Archaeological identification of kin
groups using mortuary and biological data: an example from
the American Southwest. Am Antiq 61:537–554.
Howells WW. 1989. Skull shapes and the map. Pap Peabody Mus
Kelley MA, Larsen CS, editors. 1991. Advances in dental anthropology. New York: Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Konigsberg LW. 1988. Migration models of prehistoric postmarital residence. Am J Phys Anthropol 77:471– 482.
Lane RA, Sublett AJ. 1972. Osteology of social organization:
residence pattern. Am Antiq 37:186 –201.
Mooney CZ, Duval RD. 1993. Bootstrapping: a nonparametric
approach to statistical inference. Newbury Park, NJ: Sage.
Nelson GA. 1997. Dental analysis and determination of occupational activities in a Peruvian formative population. Dent Anthropol 12:10 –14.
Ortner DJ, Corruccini RS. 1976. The skeletal biology of the Virginia Indians. Am J Phys Anthropol 45:717–722.
Owsley DW, Jantz RL. 1978. Intracemetery morphological variation in Arikara crania from the Sully site (39SL4), Sully
County, South Dakota. Plains Anthropol 23:139 –147.
Prowse TL, Lovell NC. 1996. Concordance of cranial and dental
morphological traits and evidence for endogamy in ancient
Egypt. Am J Phys Anthropol 101:237–246.
Rothhammer F, Silva C. 1989. Peopling of Andean South America. Am J Phys Anthropol 78:403– 410.
Rothhammer F, Silva C. 1990. Craniometric variation among
South American prehistoric populations: climatic, altitudinal,
chronological, and geographic contributions. Am J Phys Anthropol 82:9 –17.
Rothhammer F, Silva C. 1992. Gene geography of South America:
testing models of population displacement based on archeological evidence. Am J Phys Anthropol 89:441– 446.
Rubini M. 1996. Biological homogeneity and familial segregation
in the Iron Age population of Alfedena (Abruzzo, Italy), based
on cranial discrete traits analysis. Int J Osteoarchaeol 6:454 –
Scott GR, Turner CG. 1997. The anthropology of modern human
teeth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shimada I. 1981. The Batán Grande—La Leche Archaeological
Project: the first two seasons. J Field Archaeol 8:405– 446.
Shimada I. 1990. Cultural continuities and discontinuities on the
northern North Coast, Middle-Late Horizons. In: Moseley ME,
Cordy-Collins A, editors. The northern dynasties: kingship and
statecraft in Chimor. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks. p
Shimada I. 1995. Cultura Sicán: dios, riqueza y poder en la costa
norte del Perú. Lima: Banco Continental.
Shimada I. 2000. Late Prehispanic coastal states. In: Minelli LL,
editor. Pre-Inka states and the Inka world. Norman: University
of Oklahoma. p 49 –110.
Shimada I, Merkel J. 1993. A Sicán tomb in Peru. Minerva
4:18 –25.
Shimada I, Corruccini R, Farnum J, Mine K, Vega-Centeno R,
Curay V. 1998. Sicán population and mortuary practice: a
multi-dimensional perspective. Paper presented at the 63rd
Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Seattle.
Shimada I, Gordus A, Griffin JA. 2000. Technology, iconography,
and significance of metals: a multi-dimensional analysis of
Middle Sicán objects. In: McEwan C, editor. Pre-Columbian
gold: technology, iconography, and style. London: British Museum Press. p 28 – 61.
Shimada I, Shinoda K, Corruccini R, Farnum J. 2001. Biological
and social dimensions of Sicán burials: integrating artifact,
DNA, dental, and dietary analyses. Paper presented at the 66th
Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, New
Shinoda K, Matsumura H, Nishimoto T. 1998. Genetical and
morphological analysis on kinship of the Nakazuma Jomon
people using mitochondrial DNA and tooth crown measurement. Zooarchaeology 11:1–21.
Sjøvold T. 1984. A report on the heritability of some cranial
measurements and non-metric traits. In: van Vark GN, Howells WW, editors. Multivariate statistical methods in physical
anthropology. Dordrecht: Reidel. p 223–246.
Stewart TD. 1943. Skeletal remains with cultural associations
from the Chicama, Moche, and Veru valleys, Peru. Proc US Nat
Mus 93:153–185.
Turner CG, Nichol CR, Scott GR. 1991. Scoring procedures for
key morphological traits of the permanent dentition: the Arizona State University dental anthropology system. In: Kelley
MA, Larsen CS, editors. Advances in dental anthropology. New
York: Wiley-Liss, Inc. p 13–31.
Verano J. 1997a. Physical characteristics and skeletal biology of
the Moche population at Pacatnamu. In: Donnan CB, Cock GA,
editors. The Pacatnamu papers, volume 2: the Moche occupation. Los Angeles: Fowler Museum of Cultural History. p 189 –
Verano J. 1997b. Advances in the paleopathology of Andean
South America. J World Prehist 11:237–268.
Verano J. 1997c. Human skeletal remains from Tomb 1, Sipán
(Lambayecque river valley, Peru); and their social implications.
Antiquity 71:670 – 682.
Verano JW. 1999. Modified human skulls from the urban sector of
the pyramids of Moche, northern Peru. Latin Am Antiq 10:59 –
Без категории
Размер файла
168 Кб
loro, peru, mortuary, dental, patterning, huaca, corresponding, relatedness
Пожаловаться на содержимое документа