Teorias del poblamiento de america ebook

Date published 


las 3 teorias del poblamiento de america pdf. Quote. Postby Just» Sat Mar 2, am. Looking for las 3 teorias del poblamiento de america pdf. Will be . En ellos aún se habla de “teorías”, mencionándose incluso algunas que se ha C., desde diversas zonas. el poblamiento americano, es el ruso Slobodin Es . Archeology in Latin America Gustavo aracer.mobis and Benjamin aracer.mobi ( ) 'Reflexões sobre a mais recente teoria arqueológica', Revista de Prieto , A. () 'Evolución y formas de poblamiento precolonizador en la zona centro .

Language:English, Spanish, Portuguese
Published (Last):23.08.2016
Distribution:Free* [*Registration needed]
Uploaded by: JOHNETTA

48520 downloads 105560 Views 14.42MB ePub Size Report

Teorias Del Poblamiento De America Ebook

Los Primeros Pobladores de América. Teoría del Poblamiento de América (ruta genética). Autor: Douglas C. Wallace; Estudio del ADN. de letras compitiendo en tiempo real! Resuelve en linea esta sopa: http:// aracer.mobi poblamiento, en las cuales se radicaba el grueso de la población rural, la teoría “de la dependencia” en América Latina y la del “world system” que surgió.

Chapter Thirteen Figures 2. Map showing the rock art traditions in eastern Brazil. Map of Palmares settlements in the State of Alagoas. View from south to north of the Street of the Dead. The Pyramid of the Sun, facing west. The Temple of the Feathered Serpent. The Yayahuala compound. An aerial view of the Oztoyahualco 15B:N6W3 compound. Theatre-type censer found dismantled around a burial in Oztoyahualco 15B:N6W3. Use of Ekko IV ground penetrating radar. Cueva de las Varillas main chamber before exploration. Female seated burial Burial 2 in the funerary chamber of the Cueva de las Varillas. Two complete dog skeletons near two infant burials, as guides in the underworld, in the Cueva del Pirul. Burial 26 near a newborn baby burial inside a jar bottom in the Cueva del Pirul.

A typical case is provided by Brazil, where complaints about the lack of theory and of the suitability of contemporary methods are an urgent plea shared by a young generation of archaeologists Funari, chapter 2; Goes Neves, chapter 11 , one of whom has recently made a very clear and strong statement to that effect: Ironically, the strong influence of foreign schools both French and North American while producing many advances, has also left Brazilian archaeology in a theoretical vacuum and a methodological straitjacket.

Barreto 1998:574 Secondly, Latin American archaeology is basically culture-history orientated. Latin American archaeology followed this trend, especially after World War II, when North America consolidated its hegemony in the area which came within its political and economic sphere of influence.

Political and economic involvement was accompanied by an increased cultural influence on Latin America, and within this general socio-political background culture-history became the dominant theoretical framework for archaeological research. Most local archaeologists followed the trend established by the introduction of North American culturehistory, although the influence of British culture-history, mainly through the work of Gordon Childe, was felt in some areas.

However, none of these theoretical trends have been able to challenge the overwhelming influence that North American culture-history has had on Latin American archaeologists.

This publication had as its goal the summary and interpretation, from a marked culturehistorical perspective, of the indigenous past of Latin America. The editors clearly expressed their objectives in the prologue: Whether the interpretation survives the test of time is less important than the fact that archaeologists from nine countries have been able to collaborate in the solution of the problem that is our common goal—the reconstruction of cultural development in the New World.

Meggers and Evans 1963:vi There are two important points to be stressed. Firstly, cultural diffusion plays a key role in the book on an explanatory level. Secondly, of the fourteen authors, half are Latin Americans—a more balanced proportion than in The Handbook of South American Indians, although it should be pointed out that these Latin American authors were strongly influenced by the culture-history approach. Due to its empirical roots and culture-historical focus, it is not strange to note the existence of a very modest post-processual debate in Latin American archaeology, where current change is actually more towards processualism.

However, it is important to recognise that processualism and post-processualism or interpretavism are labels whose contents have been the subjects of debate see, among many others, Shanks and Hodder 1995; Whitley 1998 , and although they undoubtedly represent different theoretical positions, there are overlaps Kosso 1991 and the internal differentiation of each approach makes a binary distinction an over-simplification.

This is probably the major direction in which contemporary Latin American archaeology will move when it decides to leave its culturehistory framework, as is becoming clear through the numerous research projects which are orientated towards adaptative studies, site formation, taphonomy, and other derivatives of a processual approach. The exploration of a post-processual alternative is more diffuse and less firmly rooted. Some aspects of post-processual archaeology have been present for a long time in many archaeological studies by Latin American archaeologists but have not been formally developed as such, and are usually tied to nationalist programmes e.

Lumbreras 1974. The explicit political and social involvement of academia in some countries e. Peru, Mexico and Cuba produced the kind of critique of a politically responsible archaeology that has occurred relatively more recently in North America and Great Britain. Moreover, because of the existence of large indigenous populations and popular social movements in several Latin American countries, some aspects of a post-processual critique—for example issues concerned with ethnicity, indigenous rights or multivocality—appear to be much more immediately relevant than other issues, such as gender.

Gender archaeology is poorly developed in Latin America when compared with North America or Western Europe; of the little work accomplished, the majority has been carried out by foreigners e. Gero 1991, 1992; Joyce 1996. Nonetheless, it would be unfair to see Latin American archaeology as a passive reflection of foreign, essentially North American, influence.

There have most certainly been local archaeologists who have developed original methods, although obviously their contributions have been fed by foreign theories and methods since, as with any researcher in the world, Latin American archaeologists practise within open scientific communities and are exposed to intellectual movements generated in other countries.

A few examples will suffice to illustrate these specific processes in several different Latin American countries. Amongst the examples from the nineteenth century, Florentino Ameghino is notable in the case of Argentina. Ameghino represented the typical nineteenth-century naturalist who worked simultaneously from several different disciplines: archaeology, bio-anthropology, palaeontology and geology.

After his death in 1911, the image of Ameghino was appropriated by political sectors of society, especially the Socialist Party, who made him appear to be a secular saint Podgorny 1997. As early as 1878, the Archaeological Society of Santiago had been formed in Chile and, two years later, it published the one and only edition of its journal of archaeology. A principal objective of these local scholars was the summary of archaeological information— until that moment fairly diffuse— which existed in their respective countries, and to explain that material using various methods, ranging from direct historical analogy to natural evolutionary approaches.

Tello has been glorified not only for his scientific achievements but also for his active participation in the Latin American indigenous political movement. Libraries, streets, plazas and schools have since been named after him. In Mexico, the prominent local figure in the first half of the twentieth century was Manuel Gamio, who graduated from the Universidad de Columbia and can be considered a disciple of Franz Boas Bernal 1979 , who was also decisive in the emergence of Mexican archaeology.

Gamio made original theoreticomethodological contributions to American archaeology: he was a pioneer of the stratigraphic method and he developed an archaeological investigation which was intimately linked to an anthropological perspective.

For some, Gamio, along with N. Nelson, was responsible for this innovation Willey and Sabloff 1980 , while for others his significance was secondary Lyman et al. It must be pointed out that Gamio completed a multi-disciplinary study of Teotihuacan from its pre-Hispanic origins up to the present day, as well as conducting an analysis of the colonial period. The situation of Teotihuacan as the axis of Mexican archaeological research interest continues Manzanilla, chapter 6 due to its position as the first vast urban centre in Mesoamerica.

Gamio was a product of the Mexican revolution which had promoted nationalism and the reaffirmation of everything Mexican, and as such he played a pronounced political role alongside the contributions he made to archaeology.

He was a promoter of the Latin American indigenous movement and, along with other social scientists, attempted to revitalise and revalorise the indigenous and peasant aspects of Mexican society.

In order to dignify the present-day indigenous and peasant communities, Gamio considered it necessary to study their current situation, their origins and their past Lorenzo 1976. Archaeology was an instrument of social change for Gamio, and its practice was highly intertwined with the interests of the exploited peasantry. His influence on contemporary Argentinian archaeology is outstanding, especially in the northwest where his regional model is still central to contemporary debate.

He pointed out the basic difference in position of the two scientific communities: while the North Americans practised an archaeology of an intellectual and academic character, the Mexicans added a social and historical dimension Lorenzo 1976.

Lorenzo was influenced by V.

las 3 teorias del poblamiento de america pdf

Gordon Childe, with whom he spent a short period in London. It is important to mention that Mexican archaeology had been strongly shaped by the Spanish Republicans—Angel Palerm and Pedro Armillas—who spent almost their entire careers in Mexico, and paved the way for Lorenzo to develop his particular approach.

Gerardo Reichel-Dolmatoff, who was born in Austria, arrived in the late 1930s in Colombia, where he established his scientific career Chavez Chamorro 1986 and went on to become the founder of the first department of archaeology in the country at the Universidad de los Andes. For better or worse, the influence of Reichel-Dolmatoff continues to be significant in Colombian archaeology.

Luis Lumbreras 1974 explored the social dimension of the practice of archaeological research—following the tradition initiated by Tello—and became one of the founders of Latin American social archaeology Vargas Arenas and Sanoja, chapter 8.

Gordon Childe as their principal inspiration Vargas Arenas and Sanoja, chapter 4. One of their fundamental aims is to insert the discipline within the social sciences in order to achieve the reformulation of the epistemological basis for education and the teaching of history—what we consider to be the fundamental part of the national consciousness of a society formed and informed by its history and its destiny as a sovereign community within the integrated context of a new Latin America in the making.

Vargas Arena and Sanoja, this volume: 60 Few would doubt the originality of this school, but their importance in the context of Latin America and the coherence of their techniques, methods employed, and their theoretical-conceptual approach have been the subject of recent debate. Outside Latin America the theoretical production of Latin American social archaeology has been largely ignored; only recently has it been discussed in Spain, Portugal and, to a much lesser extent, Great Britain.

However, for the North American Marxist archaeologists the development of social archaeology has been an impressive achievement of the last twenty years and they attribute an important role to this school of thought in the recent history of the archaeology of Latin America e.

McGuire 1992; Patterson 1994. The practising social archaeologists Bate, Lumbreras, Sanoja, Vargas have not created a single school of thought, with the exception of Venezuela… Oyuela-Caycedo et al. More moderately, doubts have been expressed about the viability of the objectives of social archaeologists within a Marxist perspective in relation to the methodology employed in the handling of the archaeological record Lanata and Borrero, chapter 5; Gnecco 1995; Politis 1995.

The work of the social archaeologists on food-producing and state-level societies has been stronger e. Again, this need not mean that these are unique social phenomena obviously the increase in social complexity and the formation of state-level societies or the domestication of camelids are, for example, phenomena which one can recognise in various parts of the world , but even so, in the case of Latin America, there are particular contexts brought about through distinctive social processes.

This book analyses some of those processes which have been the subject of recent debate. Few animals were domesticated by the indigenous Americans basically, the llama, alpaca, guinea pigs and the muscovy duck , and in general terms, with the exception of camelids, such domesticates did not have the importance afforded to their counterparts in the Old World.

Nonetheless, the camelids, and especially the llama, were not only a source of meat but also of wool, dung for fertiliser and fuel an important resource in an environment such as that of the high Andes where firewood is always scarce , as well as acting as beasts of burden.


Camelids were vitally important to the subsistence of the pre-Hispanic Andean societies, and also played an important role in their cosmological beliefs see Bonavia, chapter 7. After discussing the various sources of evidence and different hypotheses associated with camelid domestication Bonavia this volume: 142 concludes that all the information indicates to us that llamas and alpacas were domesticated in the high Andes between 4,000 and 4,900 m above sea-level, approximately in the fourth millennium before our era.

However, as Bonavia states, the ancestral form of camelids from which the llama and alpaca were domesticated, and the fundamental reasons for domestication, are as yet unknown.

The involvement of camelids in Andean social processes is also a subject currently under debate. The emergence of a complex urban society at Teotihuacan Manzanilla, chapter 6 in central Mexico reveals a quite different pattern of urban development to that in the Old World. Urbanism in both Mesoamerica and the Andes was the result of particular historical processes which can be traced back to the Formative Period. The rapid expansion of the Inca Empire is a case unique in the world Raffino and Stehberg, chapter 9.

It is one of the few known examples of conquest by foot, with the use of llamas for cargo but not for transporting people Bonavia, chapter 7 , achieving in such a short time the domination of such a mountainous, expansive and environmentally diverse area.

The Amazon Basin has been a favourite area for discussions of the dominant role of the environment in the stability and change of human societies, and is one of the places in Latin America where North American cultural ecology has had a marked influence Steward 1948; Lowie 1948; Meggers and Evans 1963. Goes Neves chapter 11 shows how archaeological research in the Amazon Basin is changing, and he critically discusses the theoretical frameworks used to reconstruct the Amazonian past.

Meggers and Evans have been extremely active in developing training programmes and workshops both in the United States and in various South American countries and, as such, they have not only created a close-knit group of South American collaborators, but have facilitated the acquisition of research grants. Furthermore, it is fair to say that in the countries where their influence has not been as significant, such as Argentina and Chile, Betty Meggers has nonetheless had tribute paid to her by the local archaeological communities in recent years.

The pre-Columbian metallurgy of Latin America has always been an attractive subject for archaeology, although its profound and actual symbolic meaning has not been intensively analysed Letchman 1979.

In very few cases were metal artifacts used as tools in Latin America, and almost all their development was within the social and symbolic domains.

Langebaek chapter 12 analyses and discusses, from a novel perspective, two assumptions usually made by archaeologists: that metallurgy has had an important role in the development of social complexity; and that the elaboration of impressive gold objects can be used as a measure of social complexity.

The examples from Colombia prove to be an interesting case study in which both assumptions are put to the test.


Empiricism and culture-history have left deeply embedded imprints on contemporary archaeological research, but new developments, like some of those presented in this book, strongly indicate the vitality and diversity of the archaeology of the region, as well as some original approaches. Nonetheless, it is important to note that in spite of the cultural bonds—of a certain common idiosyncrasy —and of the idiomatic affinity between Latin America and Spain and Portugal, the influence of these European countries on the archaeology of the region is minimal, if present at all.

There are several reasons for this: on one side there is the lack of theoretical and methodological development in Spain and Portugal until recently, while on another side, when archaeology became a scientific discipline in Latin America the region was no longer under Spanish and Portuguese political or economic control. Some aspects of twentieth-century Spanish intellectual thought, such as literature and philosophy, certainly influenced Latin American societies, but the impact of these has generally been confined to the arts and humanities, and has not made itself felt within archaeology or anthropology Funari, chapter 2; Politis 1995.

As is shown in several chapters in the current volume, however, Latin America has, during its indigenous past, had a number of singular social processes. Moreover, the region has undergone socio-political developments in the twentieth century that have shaped specific national archaeological practices.

teorias del poblamiento de america pdf writer

Some of these developments, such as the Cuban revolution or the proliferation of military governments, have no counterparts in North America or the European countries, and have served to increase the intrinsic differences in archaeology within Latin America. Furthermore, the situation of indigenous communities is significantly different depending upon the country: in some for example Cuba and Uruguay the community is almost non-existent, while in others Peru, Bolivia it is in the majority The indigenous communities are a further factor shaping archaeological practice in each country, and in some cases generate a demand on investigation which promotes the use of a culturehistorical approach.

The research themes associated with processual archaeology seem to be further from their own interests, and the post-processual discourse which would constitute intellectual support for the recuperation of lost rights appears extremely weighed down by theory and difficult to bring to bear on real-life situations. All these factors ensure that Latin American archaeology has significant internal variations. Until now the importance of differences in national archaeological developments has been seriously overlooked, while at the same time, the foreign perspectives on Latin American archaeology have produced a partial and distorted vision of Latin American archaeology.

The chapters included in this book, although in no way covering all the approaches that exist in the region, aim to capture the diversity, to reflect on the origin and development, and to explore new areas of research and theoretical-methodological approaches in the archaeology of Latin America. I am grateful to both colleagues for their collaboration.

Julio C. Ameghino, F. Barreto, C. Bennett, W.

Agent-based Modeling and Simulation in Archaeology

Bernal, I. A single and early migration for the peopling of the Americas... The study of the first settlement and the later human populations structuring, from the.... Type of document: periodical issue... An error occurred while loading the PDF. Home ; Poblamiento de America... Author: [email protected] 7 downloads 36 Views 648KB Size. Estimada, estimado estudiante del Telebachillerato Comunitario , este libro....

Banco de Preguntas: Poblamiento Americano - Carpetapedagogica. Norte, igual.... PDF [acceso en: 2009]. El autoctonismo, se vio favorecido por los estudios de Darwin sobre el origen del hombre. Teorias del poblamiento americano guest5c0214. Instituto Panamericano de Geografia e Historia.