At this point a brief note on periodization (macro-temporal identities) is merited. Many periodizations have been suggested for Amazonia based on different field sites and viewpoints. These are usually based on ceramic remains, hence Zoned-Hachure, Incised Rim, Polychrome, and Incised-Punctate (Meggers and Evans 1961). Following Lathrap, Incised-rim becomes “modeled-incised” or “Amazonian Barrancoid” and Incised-Punctate is related to the specific ceramic traditions of the lower-middle Amazon, namely Konduri (linked to Carib groups in the Guiana plateau) and the hybrid tradition generically called Santarem, after the city of that name. As Roosevelt (1997) notes, this logic is inappropriate in the context of “sloping horizons,” and she prefers a more general cultural historical view: Paleo-Indian tropical foragers, shell-midden peoples, TFC horticulturalists, and complex riverine societies in late prehistoric times.
My own preferred periodization is: (1) archaic (pre-3000 BP); (2) early diaspora (begins 3000 to 2500 BP); (3) regional development and diversification (begins 2000 to
Figure 47.4. Major concentrations of Arawak and Arawak-related population aggregates in southern Amazon in 1500-1750, including: Xingu (X); Pareci (P); Pareci/Kobashi (including Saluma and Enauene naue; P/K); Baure (B); Mojos (M); Apurina/Piro (A/P); Apurina (A); Chane (C); and Guana (including Terena; G). (Note: varzea area along Amazon main branch).
1500 BP); (4) late prehistoric “classic” (begins ca. 1500 to 1000 BP); and (5) European world-system (begins AD 1500-1600). Rather than tightly defined periods per se, these periods are a recognition of novel changes in the social worlds of the people: in archaic times, there were no major linguistic diaspora; prior to diaspora, regional societies of different language groups were uncommon; prior to the classic period, supra-regional integration into native world systems was little developed, although regional systems were ubiquitous; and 1492, like elsewhere, marks a unique historical benchmark. During the later periods (3, 4 and 5 above), cultural hybridity was typical of virtually all Amazonian people, whereas before ca. 2000 to 1500 BP, trade and exchange did not commonly (or at least necessarily) involve ethnogenesis. Once again, as the story emerges, we see that dynamic change, hybridity, and regional integration were the hallmarks of prehistory, at least the latter part (beginning 1500 to 500 BP).
The remainder of the discussion focuses on the two major Amazonian macro-cultural traditions, the Amazonian Polychrome Tradition (APT) of the varzea and the southern Amazonian periphery (Figure 47.4).
World History
