Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-s22k5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T09:14:00.343Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

REDUCING RISK: MAYA LITHIC PRODUCTION AND ECONOMIC DIVERSIFICATION AT CALLAR CREEK QUARRY, BELIZE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 May 2021

Rachel A. Horowitz*
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, Washington State University, PO Box 644910, Pullman, Washington 99164
*
E-mail correspondence to: rachel.horowitz@wsu.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The role of craft producers in past economies provides information that helps contextualize the role of economies in broader sociopolitical systems. Through this examination of lowland Maya lithic producers in the Late to Terminal Classic period (a.d. 600–890), this article explores the centrality of economic activities in integrating craft producers into larger regional political communities and simultaneously buffering them against regional political conflicts. Through a study of lithic extraction and production at Callar Creek Quarry, Belize, this article examines the relevance of crafting activities in the minimization of economic uncertainty. These data indicate that lithic reduction served to diversify economic activities for lithic producers, and thus minimized economic risk. The use of economic activity to minimize risk provides evidence for the continuity of small-scale householders. This illustrates the independence of economic activities from political frameworks, and suggests that economic diversification serves as a critical stabilizing force for rural Classic-period Maya residents.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

INTRODUCTION

Studies of craft production in past economies can highlight the impact of those activities on sociopolitical organization. By examining lithic production among the Late to Terminal Classic period (a.d. 600–890) lowland Maya, this article examines the role of small-scale craft production as a mechanism for reducing economic risk. The data presented in this article illustrate that for small-scale craft producers, part-time lithic extraction and production helped create long-term stability. Studies of economic activity are used to examine the role economies and economic diversification play in creating stability for small-scale householders. This research demonstrates the importance of crafting activities for householders and the impacts they can have on sociopolitical dynamics. While the focus here is on lithic production, other types of crafting may have operated in similar ways. Lithics are particularly helpful, however, for analyzing economic activities, as lithics preserve well archaeologically and are reductive, making it easier to identify production areas. Part-time craft production activities provided a mechanism of risk reduction for small-scale craft producers which helped them maintain their economic activities during periods of stress or conflict. This argument is evaluated through the analysis of lithic production at a chert extraction and production area, Callar Creek Quarry, Belize.

Although traditional archaeological studies of economies focused on top-down and bottom-up frameworks, based on substantivist and formalist economic studies (Polanyi Reference Polanyi, Polanyi, Arensberg and Pearson1957, Reference Polanyi2001[Reference Polanyi1944]; see discussions from Halperin [Reference Halperin1994] and Isaac [Reference Isaac and Carrier2005] and Wilk and Cliggett [Reference Wilk and Cligget2007] for an overview), more recent approaches for examining past economies which build on these theories (Demps and Winterhalder Reference Demps and Winterhalder2019; Kovacevich and Callaghan Reference Kovacevich and Callaghan2014; Masson and Freidel Reference Masson and Freidel2012; Morehart and De Lucia Reference Morehart, De Lucia, Morehart and Lucia2015; Smith Reference Smith2017) are utilized here to create analytical frameworks through which to consider the dynamic nature of past economic systems and emphasize their changing nature (Golitko and Feinman Reference Golitko and Feinman2015; Hirth Reference Hirth, Garraty and Stark2010). This research draws from Masson and Friedel's (Reference Masson and Freidel2012) model of articulated economies where goods are distributed through a variety of systems depending on their value. The model emphasizes market exchange while acknowledging the presence of other types of exchange, such as redistribution and gift-giving. Thus, Masson and Friedel (Reference Masson and Freidel2012) point out that the economy is a set of varying activities in which different resources circulate through various mechanisms such as barter, market exchange, reciprocity, and redistribution. Masson and Freidel's (Reference Masson and Freidel2012) emphasis on changing values across exchange systems draws on anthropological concepts of value and their change through time (Appadurai Reference Appadurai and Appadurai1986; Graeber Reference Graeber2001; Helms Reference Helms1993; see also Matthews and Guderjan [Reference Mathews, Guderjan, Mathews and Guderjan2017] for further archaeological discussion).

This approach, and other recent frameworks for the study of past economies, acknowledges the embedded nature of economies within other institutions and their overlap with social processes, such as political and ideological institutions. It should be noted, however, that the embeddedness of economies does not discount the operation of individuals in self-interested ways; the use of self-interest in economic activities occurs despite other social and political pressures. Additional factors, such as cultural expectations, influenced economic activity (Hirth Reference Hirth, Garraty and Stark2010; Hirth and Cyphers Reference Hirth and Cyphers2020). Furthermore, although embedded economies have traditionally been a marker of substantivist economic theory, that is not the approach taken here, as this analysis integrates ideas from multiple perspectives.

By examining the ways in which goods were produced and circulated, the role of small-scale producers in broader economic activities and the advantages that the involvement in these activities provided to these producers can be better understood. Some individuals may have increased social or political benefits from certain economic activities than others (Bourdieu Reference Bourdieu and Richardson1986). Furthermore, economic activities can be simultaneously, but not exclusively, sources of legitimation of authority for leaders, sources of ritual and ideology, mechanisms of integration or fragmentation, and tasks performed by all households. The goals of economic activities vary, including participating in them for economic gain or as a result of a requirement such as taxation or tribute. This article focuses on the role of economies as mechanisms for risk reduction, for small-scale craft producers who may be susceptible to economic uncertainty.

Risk Reduction

Economies are important sources of risk, but aspects of economies can also provide opportunities for risk reduction. Risk is “unpredictable physical peril or uncertain economic returns” (Bousman Reference Bousman2005:194). This article focuses on the later part of the definition. Risk reduction then, is the minimization of economic uncertainty through the mediation of activities that may cause more stress or resource shortages to individuals or households. Risk reduction can refer to specific activities that are performed or relationships that are created to serve as “fallback” options for individuals or groups.

Risk reduction is often studied in terms of mechanisms to acquire raw materials in resource-poor areas, particularly in mobile hunter-gatherer societies (Bousman Reference Bousman2005; Faulkner Reference Faulkner, Marwick and Mackay2011; Gould Reference Gould1980; Hiscock Reference Hiscock1994; Weissner Reference Wiessner, Leacock and Lee1980). Ethnographic studies of risk reduction illustrated that social networks are a main avenue with which to mediate risk (Cashdan Reference Cashdan1985; Gould Reference Gould1980; Weissner Reference Wiessner, Leacock and Lee1980). For instance, in the Kalahari, reciprocal exchange networks of prestige goods, Hxaro networks, provide individuals with connections to groups living in other areas so that in times of resource stress they may travel to these areas to obtain necessary resources (Weissner Reference Wiessner, Leacock and Lee1980). Hxaro networks create social ties through repeated gift-giving (Weissner Reference Wiessner, Leacock and Lee1980).

In sedentary societies, like in mobile contexts, economies and their associated social relationships are a means of mediating resource scarcity (Hirth Reference Hirth2009a, Reference Hirth2009b; Marston Reference Marston2011; Masson and Friedel Reference Masson and Freidel2012). As economies inherently require social interactions (Fleisher Reference Fleisher, Garraty and Stark2010; Garraty Reference Garraty, Garraty and Stark2010; Granovetter Reference Granovetter1985; Hirth Reference Hirth, Garraty and Stark2010; Hirth and Cyphers Reference Hirth and Cyphers2020; Polanyi Reference Polanyi, Polanyi, Arensberg and Pearson1957, Reference Polanyi2001[Reference Polanyi1944]; Sahlins Reference Sahlins1972), they are excellent situations through which to develop relationships which may provide fallbacks in times of stress. These relationships are a type of social capital which require effort to create and maintain (Bourdieu Reference Bourdieu and Richardson1986). The interaction between individuals and the trust required to operate economic transactions is particularly important for reciprocal and redistributive exchanges. Increasing social distance is possible in market exchange (due to the rules of market exchange), but in contexts without currency or set units of exchange, these activities still require trust (Abbott Reference Abbott, Garraty and Stark2010; Fleisher Reference Fleisher, Garraty and Stark2010; Garraty Reference Garraty, Garraty and Stark2010; Golden et al. Reference Golden, Scherer, Schroder, Vella, Recinos, Masson, Freidel and Demarest2020; Granovetter Reference Granovetter1985; Halperin Reference Halperin1994; Hirth Reference Hirth, Garraty and Stark2010; Smith Reference Smith1974; but see Baron Reference Baron2018a, Reference Baron2018b; Freidel et al. Reference Freidel, Masson and Rich2017; see Tokovinine [Reference Tokovinine, Masson, Freidel and Demarest2020] for discussions of units of exchange among the Classic-period Maya). Governance of market systems, market exchange mechanisms, and marketplaces (Blanton and Fargher Reference Blanton, Fargher, Garraty and Stark2010; Cap Reference Cap2015a; Garraty Reference Garraty, Garraty and Stark2010; Isaac Reference Isaac, Hirth and Pillsbury2013; King Reference King, Masson, Freidel and Demarest2020; Mann Reference Mann1986; Sahlins Reference Sahlins1972) do not negate the social relationships that can be maintained through these activities, and provides opportunities for leaders to tax exchanges or to benefit through the prestige produced by providing the marketplace location (Hirth Reference Hirth, Garraty and Stark2010; Masson and Freidel 2013; Polayni Reference Polanyi, Polanyi, Arensberg and Pearson1957; see Cap [Reference Cap2015a] for an overview). It is essential to consider that market exchange, defined as exchange which presupposes a shared valued system but not a price fixed system (Garraty Reference Garraty, Garraty and Stark2010), can occur within a marketplace or in other contexts. Markets, on the other hand, are “institutions predicated on the principles of market exchange of alienable commodities” (Garraty Reference Garraty, Garraty and Stark2010:5). This definition allows for the consideration of interpersonal relations in markets and market exchange.

The social aspects of economic activities, particularly trust, allow the development of social relationships through economic exchange, which in turn leads to risk reduction. By creating a relationship with individuals with whom reciprocal, redistributive, or market activities are performed, one may reduce risk by relying on those individuals in times of economic stress or other types of upheavals. In addition to generalized manners of reducing risk, it can occur through the operation of political entities, such as the organization of resource storage by leaders/governments to mediate against famine. Thus, risk reduction takes many forms, but it relies on the social connections present within economic activities. Economic activities mediate resource scarcity by integrating communities and providing avenues for exchange.

Economic diversification, such as part-time craft production, is a resourceful way of reducing economic risk which draws on social relationships through economic activity (Blanton and Fargher Reference Blanton, Fargher, Garraty and Stark2010; Hirth Reference Hirth2009a, Reference Hirth2009b, Reference Hirth, Manzanilla and Hirth2011a) and can help restructure social relationships (Everhart and Ruby Reference Everhart and Ruby2020). Craft production has been the subject of much discussion in anthropological literature, particularly focused on the degree of independence of the producers (Clark Reference Clark and Hirth2003, Reference Clark2007; Clark and Bryant Reference Clark, Bryant, Hester and Shafer1991; Costin Reference Costin1991, Reference Costin, Feinman and Price2001, Reference Costin, Feinman and Nichols2004, Reference Costin, Morehart and Lucia2015; Costin and Hagstrum Reference Costin and Hagstrum1995; Flad and Hruby Reference Flad and Hruby2007; Hirth Reference Hirth2009b, Reference Hirth, Manzanilla and Hirth2011b; Janusek Reference Janusek1999; Moffett et al. Reference Moffett, Hall and Chirikure2020; Pastrana and Hirth Reference Pastrana, Hirth and Hirth2003; Torrence Reference Torrence1986) and the amount of time spent on craft production activities (Brumfiel and Earle Reference Brumfiel, Earle, Brumfiel and Earle1987; Clark Reference Clark1995, Reference Clark2007; Costin Reference Costin1991, Reference Costin, Feinman and Price2001; Hirth Reference Hirth2009b; Shimada Reference Shimada2007). Examinations of the association of craft production with households and other structures, as well as the scale of crafting provide the opportunity to further examine the role of these activities in economic organization and how the economic role of these materials was managed (Chirikure Reference Chirikure2020; Moffett et al. Reference Moffett, Hall and Chirikure2020). This article focuses on part-time, seasonal, or intermittent crafting that was neither the only or the full-time occupation of the producers (Costin Reference Costin1991, Reference Costin, Feinman and Price2001) nor the main source of household income (Hirth Reference Hirth2009b). The part-time nature of these activities informs us about production management and organization (Costin Reference Costin1991; Hirth Reference Hirth2009b), providing a productive avenue through which to examine the centrality of crafting for economic and risk reduction activities.

Intermittent crafting serves as a common method of risk reduction as it is a manner of integrating craft production into the household economy without disrupting other household economic activities (Hirth Reference Hirth2009a, Reference Hirth2009b, Reference Hirth, Manzanilla and Hirth2011b; Healan Reference Healan2009). It provides fewer disruptions as a seasonal or periodic activity which can be scheduled around agricultural activities or is performed by individuals in a household who are not involved in other aspects of domestic economies (Hirth Reference Hirth2009a, Reference Hirth2009b, Reference Hirth, Manzanilla and Hirth2011b). As craft production is generally a skilled occupation, it is not something that would be picked up in times of resource stress, but rather an activity which occurred over long periods of time as a mechanism of economic diversification (Hirth Reference Hirth2009a, Reference Hirth2009b).

Some part-time craft producers occupy marginal agricultural land, which limits their acquisition of agricultural goods through farming. Instead, they rely on craft production to mediate resource stress by exchanging craft goods to obtain agricultural products (Brumfiel and Nichols Reference Brumfiel and Nichols2009; Hirth Reference Hirth2009a, Reference Hirth2009b). Furthermore, having multiple sources of income minimizes risk by diversifying economic activity, thus increasing the utility of these activities for households (Hirth Reference Hirth2009a). In particular, lithic extraction and production are not susceptible to environmental challenges, as opposed to agricultural activities, so lithic production provides insurance against the vagaries of agricultural production. Many exchanges by part-time craft producers rely on social relationships, combining these two aspects of risk reduction.

The focus in this article on the role of crafting in risk reduction for the domestic economy complements studies of the role of crafting on political power and prestige, which have concentrated on the utility of crafting for elite individuals (Carballo Reference Carballo2007; Costin Reference Costin and Costin2016; Foias Reference Foias, Masson and Freidel2002; Graeber Reference Graeber2001; Helms Reference Helms1993; Inomata and Triadan Reference Inomata and Triadan2000; McAnany Reference McAnany2010, Reference McAnany, Hirth and Pillsbury2013; Schortman and Urban Reference Schortman and Urban2004). The approach utilized here draws on these previous studies and provides an avenue to look at the multiple ways in which economic activity influenced people's lifeways.

Mesoamerica and Economic Risk

In Mesoamerica, craft production and economic diversification have been viewed as a way of providing connections between households. At the well-preserved site of Joya de Cerén in the southern Maya lowlands, each household specialized in some form of craft or agricultural product which created economic interdependencies between the households (Sheets Reference Sheets2000, Reference Sheets2006, Reference Sheets and Smith2017, Reference Sheets, Masson, Freidel and Demarest2020; Sheets et al. Reference Sheets, Lentz, Piperno, Jones, Dixon, Maloof and Hood2012, Reference Sheets, Dixon, Lentz, Egan, Halmbacher, Slotten, Herrera and Lamb2015). These connections enabled the residents to fall back on their social relationships during times of particular resource shortages, much as the social connections were used in similar ways in the mobile societies discussed above (see also King [2012] for a different example).

Similarly, in other areas of Mesoamerica, part-time household craft production was an additional economic activity to agricultural production, and was meant to reduce the risk due to access to agricultural lands or the vagaries of agricultural production (Brumfiel and Nichols Reference Brumfiel and Nichols2009; Feinman and Nicholas Reference Feinman, Nicholas and Shimada2007, Reference Feinman, Nicholas, Manzanilla and Hirth2011; Hirth Reference Hirth2009a, Reference Hirth2009b, Reference Hirth, Manzanilla and Hirth2011b; Hirth and Cyphers Reference Hirth and Cyphers2020; Lewis Reference Lewis, Scarborough, Valdez and Dunning2003; McKillop Reference McKillop2019). Furthermore, part-time craft production and the production of surplus have been used as ways of meeting demand arising from community-based social ties (De Lucia and Morehart Reference De Lucia, Morehart, Morehart and Lucia2015:76; Kovacevich Reference Kovacevich, Marken and Fitzsimmons2015). Such circumstances arose as a result of relationships between craft producers and those living near raw material sources (Manzanilla Reference Manzilla, Manzanilla and Chapoelaine2009:37), and created cooperative areas of resource specialization (Kunen and Hughbanks Reference Kunen, Hughbanks, Scarborough, Valdez and Dunning2003). Thus, studies throughout Mesoamerica illustrate that craft production activities create and maintain social and economic ties between groups of individuals, usually within communities. The creation and maintenance of social ties can help provide networks of risk reduction through economic diversification and social interactions which may help craft producers mediate risk.

The focus on small-scale household producers is an informative approach in Mesoamerica where most craft production was seasonal or intermittent (Feinman Reference Feinman2018; Feinman and Nichols Reference Feinman, Nicholas, Rosenswig and Cunningham2017; Hirth Reference Hirth2009a, Reference Hirth2009b, Reference Hirth, Manzanilla and Hirth2011a, Reference Hirth, Manzanilla and Hirth2011b; Healan Reference Healan2009). There are a few well-known exceptions, including the sites of Colha and Teotihuacan. Colha represents site-level craft production, with multiple production areas throughout the site (Hester and Shafer Reference Hester and Shafer1984, Reference Hester and Shafer1992; King Reference King2000, Reference King2012; Roemer Reference Roemer, Hester and Shafer1991). At Teotihuacan, production workshops varied in size and scale and some may have represented full-time craft production (see Carballo Reference Carballo2005, Reference Carballo2007, Reference Carballo, Hirth and Pillsbury2013; but see Clark [Reference Clark and Isaac1986]). Full-time craft producers may have produced goods for elites as part of tax/tribute activities at workshops such as those near the Pyramid of the Moon (Carballo Reference Carballo2005, Reference Carballo2007; Andrews Reference Andrews1999). The prominence of part-time production increases the importance of considering its role as a mechanism of economic diversification and impact on the daily lives of the producers.

Lithic Production in the Maya Lowlands

Studies of lithic production in the Maya lowlands focus on chert and limestone, as they are locally available. Nonlocal obsidian is present throughout the area, although there is little evidence of intensive production within the lowland region (but see Ford and Olsen [Reference Ford, Olson, McAnany and Isaac1989] for a discussion of Laton). Chert is common throughout much of the Maya lowlands, and thus is the most commonly utilized stone tool raw material (Andrieu Reference Andrieu, Sternke, Eigeland and Costa2009). As such, its production and use are instrumental for understanding economic organization since it was utilized by all segments of the population. Studies of chert use in the Maya lowlands focus more on production than extraction of lithic materials, although there are known quarry contexts (Ausel Reference Ausel2012; Aoyama Reference Aoyama, Hruby, Braswell and Mazariegos2011; Barrett Reference Barrett2004, Reference Barrett and Lohse2006, Reference Barrett, Hruby, Braswell and Mazariegos2011; Black and Suhler Reference Black, Suhler and Adams1986; Foias et al. Reference Foias, Halperin, Moriarty, Castellanos, Foias and Emery2012; Ford Reference Ford1984; King and Shaw Reference King, Shaw and Valdez2006; Meadows Reference Meadows and Houk2000; Paris Reference Paris2012). Examinations of these contexts illustrate that management of raw material resource access and extraction vary between sites, with evidence supporting management by elite leaders in some cases (Barrett Reference Barrett2004), but not in all instances.

In terms of production activities, as mentioned above, Colha is the best-known lithic production area in the Maya lowlands (Hester and Shafer Reference Hester and Shafer1984, Reference Hester and Shafer1992; King Reference King2000, Reference King2012; Roemer Reference Roemer, Hester and Shafer1991). Colha illustrates site-level production activities, where most occupants produced lithic materials (King Reference King2000). The site-level production at Colha is unique to the site and is not the norm for the organization of lithic production in the Maya lowlands.

Most lithic production in the Maya lowlands is organized on a household level. Many households produced at least some of their own lithic material (for Upper Belize River Valley (UBRV) examples see Connell [2000], Kurnick [2013], Peuramaki-Brown [2012], Robin [1999], VandenBosch [1999], and Yaeger [2000]). Bifaces and other specialized tools, however, were produced in household workshops (Hearth Reference Hearth and Robin2012; VandenBosch Reference VandenBosch1999). These bifaces were then distributed to other households within the settlement (see Sheets [2000] for a description of the ways in which such exchange mechanisms functioned).

Studies of lithic production throughout the Maya lowlands point to variation in the organization and structure of lithic extraction and production activities and management. For instance, lithics of ritual importance, such as eccentrics, were produced by specialists associated with the royal rulers (Hruby Reference Hruby2006). On the other hand, small household workshops produced utilitarian objects with little evidence of the involvement of royal elites (VandenBosch Reference VandenBosch1999; VandenBosch et al. Reference VandenBosch, LeCount, Yaeger, LeCount and Yaeger2010). Likewise, production occurred within site cores (Whittaker et al. Reference Whittaker, Kamp, Ford, Guerra, Brands, Guerra, McLean, Woods, Badillo, Thornton and Eiley2009), sometimes associated with marketplaces (Cap Reference Cap2015a, Reference Cap2019, Reference Cap, Masson, Freidel and Demarest2020). Given the diversity of lithic production areas, the significance of these activities for producers merits further study.

Here two lithic producing households, which were part-time, probably intermittent, lithic producers living adjacent to a raw material source, are examined to study the use of craft production as a manner of reducing risk through economic diversification. This case study examines the impacts of economic diversification on the integration of small-scale householders into regional political systems and the effects of these regional political systems on individuals. Specifically, this article examines these issues through the lens of the Late to Terminal Classic-period (a.d. 600–890) lowland Maya from the viewpoint of Callar Creek Quarry, a chert production area surrounded by two household groups. Callar Creek Quarry residents show evidence of involvement in regional economic activities and integration within local political communities. The economic activities at the site continue during a time of political upheaval and change in the region. I argue that the part-time craft production activities at the quarry provide a mechanism of risk reduction for the quarry residents, which helps them maintain their economic activities during politically turbulent times.

REGIONAL BACKGROUND: UBRV

The lowland Maya of western Belize provide an apt area for a case study of the role of economic activity in providing avenues for risk reduction as extensive previous research has been performed on the regional political and economic organization. There is a detailed political history and a broad understanding of the variety of economic activities which took place in the Upper Belize River Valley (UBRV; Figure 1; see Chase and Garber [Reference Chase, Garber and Garber2004], Houk [Reference Houk2015], and Willey [Reference Willey and Garber2004] for overviews of research).

Figure 1. Map showing locations discussed in the text. Map by Bernadette Cap used with permission of Mopan Valley Archaeological Project/Mopan Valley Preclassic Project (MVAP/MVPP).

The Late to Terminal Classic period (a.d. 600–890) in the UBRV was a period of regional political change. Power shifted between the major centers of Buenavista del Cayo (hereafter Buenavista) and Xunantunich, due to the influence of the site of Naranjo and their involvement in broader lowland Maya political activities (Brown and Yaeger Reference Brown, Yaeger, Houk, Arroyo and Powis2020; LeCount and Yaeger Reference LeCount and Yaeger2010; Martin and Grube Reference Martin and Grube2008; Yaeger and Brown Reference Yaeger and Brown2019; Yaeger et al. Reference Yaeger, Kathryn Brown, Helmke, Zender, Cap, Rodriquez and Batty2015). Thus, the occupation and use of Callar Creek Quarry during the Late to Terminal Classic period allows the opportunity to address the impact of political shifts between major centers in the region on the economic activity of small-scale, rural, craft producers. Specifically, use of Callar Creek Quarry continued unchanged during the Late Classic II period, when power shifted from Buenavista to Xunantunich, providing an opportunity to address the role of economic activity in that stability.

UBRV Economic Activities

Research in the UBRV indicates diverse economic activities occurred including market exchange, reciprocity, gift-giving, and taxation/tribute, as well as household and specialized production activities. Evidence for marketplace exchange in the UBRV is strong and marketplaces were identified at Xunantunich (Cap Reference Cap2019; Keller Reference Keller2006) and Buenavista (Cap Reference Cap2015a, Reference Cap and King2015b, Reference Cap, Masson, Freidel and Demarest2020) through architectural evidence, microartifact analysis, and soil chemistry. These marketplaces were centers for the exchange of chert and limestone bifaces, obsidian blades, shell, and cloth (Cap Reference Cap2015a, Reference Cap and King2015b, Reference Cap2019; Cap et al. Reference Cap, Peuramaki-Brown and Yaeger2015; Heindel Reference Heindel2010; Heindel et al. Reference Heindel, Cap and Yaeger2012; Keller Reference Keller2006). The marketplaces indicate that producers and consumers in the UBRV had a close relationship (Yaeger Reference Yaeger, Bevan and Wengrow2010a). That is, producers and consumers probably interacted frequently, whether through a marketplace setting or other exchange venues. Further investigation of the number and location of additional marketplaces in the UBRV would help elucidate their role in economic activity and the involvement of elite individuals in marketplace activity (LeCount Reference LeCount, Fargher and Heredia Espinoza2016). Furthermore, market exchange and market systems can operate outside marketplaces (Garraty Reference Garraty, Garraty and Stark2010). While there is clear evidence for marketplace exchange, market exchange outside of such places also may have occurred.

In addition to marketplace exchange, previous research indicates the concurrent operation of exchange mechanisms such as gift-giving and taxation or tribute. Items which were probably exchanged through gifting include certain types of polychrome ceramics (Ball and Tascheck Reference Ball, Taschek and Garber2004; Reents-Bundet Reference Reents-Budet, Bishop, Tashchek and Ball2000; Reents-Bundet et al. Reference Reents-Budet, Bishop, Macleod and Reents-Budet1994, Reference Reents-Budet, Bishop, Tashchek and Ball2000; Tascheck and Ball Reference Taschek, Ball and Kerr1992). Polychromes, often produced by elites, were distributed between elites during feasting and other ceremonies as a way of creating and maintaining elite social networks (Neff Reference Neff, LeCount and Yaeger2010; Reents-Bundet Reference Reents-Budet1998, Reference Reents-Budet and Kerr2000).

Craft production in the UBRV included production in household workshops and generalized household production activities. Goods produced include chert preforms, bifaces and drills, manos and metates, cloth, shell, limestone blocks, and agricultural items (Chapman et al. Reference Chapman, Sword and Brown2015; Devio Reference Devio2016; Hearth Reference Hearth and Robin2012; Horowitz Reference Horowitz2017, Reference Horowitz2018a, Reference Horowitz, Horowitz and McCall2019; Kestle Reference Kestle and Robin2012; Robin Reference Robin2013; Robin et al. Reference Robin, Meierhoff, Kestle, Blackmore, Kosakowsky, Novotny and Robin2012; VandenBosch Reference VandenBosch1999; VandenBosch et al. Reference VandenBosch, LeCount, Yaeger, LeCount and Yaeger2010; Yaeger Reference Yaeger2000). Studies at Chan illustrate that households produced one or more items in larger quantities than necessary for their own consumption to exchange within, and possibly outside, the community (Robin Reference Robin2013).

The best-studied cases of household production in the UBRV are of formal lithic tools such as bifaces. Households at Chan (Hearth Reference Hearth and Robin2012), Chaa Creek (Connell Reference Connell2000), and Succotz (VandenBosch Reference VandenBosch1999; VandenBosch et al. Reference VandenBosch, LeCount, Yaeger, LeCount and Yaeger2010) produced chert bifaces in amounts that indicate exchange within the community (Horowitz et al. Reference Horowitz, Cap, Yaeger, Peuramaki-Brown and Eli2019). In each case, only one household in each community produced bifaces. Informal lithic production occurred at most households within the UBRV, although at San Lorenzo, one household did perform more chert reduction activities than others, probably due to that household's proximity to the San Lorenzo chert source (Yaeger Reference Yaeger2000).

Investigations throughout the UBRV point to part-time craft production where producers participated in multiple types of economic activities (Yaeger Reference Yaeger, Bevan and Wengrow2010a). Evidence for part-time production comes from the low densities of craft production remains in households, which suggests the ability to produce diverse types of goods. For example, at Chan, limestone quarries for limestone blocks and lime plaster production were found adjacent to households (Kestle Reference Kestle and Robin2012). These households quarried limestone, as well as participating in agricultural activities, and in some cases, other types of crafting such as lithic (Hearth Reference Hearth and Robin2012) or shell production (Keller Reference Keller and Robin2012). Furthermore, the presence of some chert debitage in most households in the UBRV suggests households produced some of their own tools that then would have been used for subsistence activities including farming and food preparation (Kurnick Reference Kurnick2013; Peuramaki-Brown Reference Peuramaki-Brown2012; Robin Reference Robin1999; VandenBosch Reference VandenBosch1999; Yaeger Reference Yaeger, Bevan and Wengrow2010a, Reference Yaeger, LeCount and Yaeger2010b). More instances of craft production in the UBRV probably occurred but would have utilized perishable materials that are not archaeologically preserved, such as basketry or cloth production (see Cap [Reference Cap2019] for a discussion of spindle whorls). Thus, craft production activities were probably more common in the region than the available archaeological evidence suggests.

Archaeological evidence points to diverse economic activities in the UBRV. The variety of exchange mechanisms and production activities in the region points to multiple exchange mechanisms operating concurrently. The prevalence of small-scale craft producers indicates that this type of production was economically beneficial to the craft producers. Through examinations of Callar Creek Quarry, we gain a useful vantage point into the role of economies as arenas for risk reduction, particularly of small-scale, part-time craft production.

CALLAR CREEK QUARRY

Callar Creek Quarry (CCQ) is a chert quarry west of Buenavista on the east bank of the Mopan River. Excavations at the quarry and adjacent habitation areas were conducted under the auspices of the Mopan Valley Archaeological Project, directed by Jason Yaeger. The quarry, which spans approximately 80 × 100 m, is located between two household groups, a patio group to the northeast (CCQ-1) and an L-shaped group to the southwest (CCQ-2; Figure 2). The construction and occupation of the household groups are contemporaneous with the most intensive period of use and extraction of the quarry area, the Late to Terminal Classic period (a.d. 600–890), although evidence for use of the quarry spans the Archaic to Historic periods.

Figure 2. Map of Callar Creek Quarry and surrounding households. Base image by B. Cap courtesy of MVAP/MVPP, map by the author.

While evidence indicates use of the quarry during a longer time span, the discussion here focuses only on the Late to Terminal Classic period as that was the period of most intensive use of the quarry and the period to which a sample of quarry debitage could be firmly dated, with no evidence of intermixing. Dating of the use of the quarry was determined through the presence of diagnostic ceramics found within the quarry debitage (Horowitz Reference Horowitz2017; dating based on phases in LeCount et al. [Reference LeCount, Yaeger, Leventhal and Ashmore2002]).

While the overall quantity of temporally diagnostic ceramics (Table 1) was small (only 5.3 percent of the total sherds recovered from the quarry), they permitted the identification of 16 Late to Terminal Classic-period quarry contexts which were not intermixed with debitage from other time periods. It should be noted that Late to Terminal Classic diagnostic ceramics are well-defined and easily recognized, which facilitated the identification of these contexts. Examples identified in the quarry include Belize Valley Ash Tempered Wares, Mount Maloney Black, and Uaxactun Unslipped Wares (Gifford Reference Gifford1976; LeCount Reference LeCount1996, Reference LeCount, LeCount and Yaeger2010; LeCount et al. Reference LeCount, Yaeger, Leventhal and Ashmore2002). This is particularly notable in comparison with Early Classic contexts, which have fewer diagnostic ceramic forms. In fact, more Middle to Late Preclassic-period contexts were identified than Early Classic contexts, in part due to the easy identification of some Preclassic-period ceramics, such as Mars Orange Wares.

Table 1. Ceramic sherds associated with quarry contexts.

Furthermore, despite Late to Terminal Classic diagnostics that distinguish between the Late Classic I and II (a.d. 600–780) and Terminal Classic (a.d. 780–890) periods (Le Count et al. Reference LeCount, Yaeger, Leventhal and Ashmore2002), such diagnostics were not present in large enough quantities to distinguish specific contexts associated with these time periods. Thus, the Late to Terminal Classic periods (a.d. 600–890) are discussed together. While not the focus of this article there is little difference in the reduction sequence between deposits of different time periods (see Horowitz [Reference Horowitz2017] for more information).

The associated household groups were constructed contemporaneously with use of the quarry. Construction of CCQ 1, the patio group, began in the Early Classic period (a.d. 200–600) with a second construction phase in the Late Classic II period (a.d. 670–780). Ceramic evidence illustrates abundant Middle Preclassic occupation, although there is no evidence of construction (Horowitz Reference Horowitz2017). Radiocarbon samples from Structure 4 of CCQ 1 support the presence of a Late to Terminal Classic period construction stage, dating to cal a.d. 770–900 or 925–945 (1180 ± 30 BP), and an Early Classic terminus post quem for the earlier construction phase, dating to cal CE 405–550 (1580 ± 30 BP; radiocarbon dates were run and calibrated by Beta Analytic). These samples support the data obtained from the ceramic materials from construction fill; that the structures at CCQ-1, particularly Structure 4, were constructed in two construction episodes, the first in the Early Classic, or slightly earlier, and the second in the Late to Terminal Classic.

CCQ 2, the L-shaped group, was constructed in a single construction phase in the Late Classic II to Terminal Classic period (a.d. 670–890). Dating of the structures was based on diagnostic sherds identified in construction fill as well as radiocarbon dates from the same context (Horowitz Reference Horowitz2017). Diagnostic ceramics in the fill provide a terminus ante quem of the Late Classic II to Terminal Classic (a.d. 780–890), based on the presence of diagnostic ceramics such as Cayo Unslipped: Cayo Variety Jar with a piecrust rim (LeCount et al. Reference LeCount, Yaeger, Leventhal and Ashmore2002). Thus, while the quarry was utilized for a long time, the occupation at the quarry with associated architecture seems to have begun in the Early Classic, with expansion of the construction, including construction of a new residential group, during the Late to Terminal Classic period. Earlier architecture may be present but was not identified in the excavations conducted.

The exact timing of the end of occupation and use of the quarry is unclear. While evidence from the residential structures suggests that occupation in those groups stopped after the Terminal Classic period, the presence of a few pieces of knapped glass in the quarry (Horowitz Reference Horowitz2017) suggest continued visitation through the Historic period. That is, even after people were no longer living at the quarry, they were probably visiting the area. Due to the uncertainties in establishing the exact timing of the abandonment of the CCQ households, this article contains no further discussion of the causes of their abandonment or its relationship to the economic activities discussed here.

Quarry Deposits and Reduction Activity

The chert deposits at CCQ consist of materials from two chert formation episodes, in situ bedded chert in buried deposits and large nodules on the surface which eroded out of the parent bedrock. The chert quality varies greatly from high-quality cherts with small grain size and minimal inclusions to lower quality cherts with larger grains and inclusions, including fossils (Figures 3 and 4). The bedded chert has higher quantities of fossil inclusions and is generally poorer quality. The chert cobbles frequently contain lithic materials of varying quality; thus, high- and low-quality cherts co-occur in single nodules (Horowitz Reference Horowitz2017). The raw material is all chert, following the conventions in Luedtke (Reference Luedtke1992) for referring to chert and related raw materials.

Figure 3. Chert quality at Callar Creek Quarry. (a) Bedded chert with fossil inclusions. (b) Cobble chert showing varying quality. Photographs by the author.

Figure 4. Debitage from Callar Creek Quarry. Photograph by the author.

Lithic extraction occurred throughout the quarry. Evidence for extraction includes the presence of a quarry cut, use of visible cobbles, and the removal of buried deposits (Horowitz Reference Horowitz2017, Reference Horowitz2018a, Reference Horowitz2018b). Debitage from lithic production was identified throughout the quarry in surface and buried deposits. A debitage mound was associated with the quarry cut, suggesting reduction of lithic materials associated with extraction activities (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Buried deposits of lithic materials at Callar Creek Quarry. Photograph by the author.

Lithic production at CCQ consisted of generalized core reduction to create core blanks and flake tools (Figures 4 and 6). Although these materials may have been further reduced elsewhere, no evidence of formal tool production was identified at the quarry (Horowitz Reference Horowitz2017, Reference Horowitz2018a, Reference Horowitz2018b, Reference Horowitz, Horowitz and McCall2019).

Figure 6. Reduction sequence of materials from Callar Creek Quarry. Image by the author.

Attribute analyses of lithics (n = 35,652) support the presence of generalized production and early stage reduction. The assemblage consists of debitage (99.2 percent, n = 31,165) with a small number of cores and tools. The tools present, predominately bifaces (n = 9) and unifaces (n = 36), were probably used for quarrying activities rather than resulting from production activities.

Production of generalized cores and flake tools is illustrated by the ubiquity of hard hammer percussion, with little evidence of bifacial thinning or other types of reduction (Table 2). Hard hammer and soft hammer flakes were identified based on their distinguishing characteristics following Whittaker (Reference Whittaker1994) and Andrefsky (Reference Andrefsky2005), such as form, thickness, and platform characteristics. Furthermore, the presence of low numbers of dorsal flake scars (average = 1.67) and average numbers of platform facets (average = 1.04) indicate generalized production and early stage reduction. The average size of materials (Table 3) indicates early stage reduction, with predominately larger materials often associated with initial reduction. The large size of materials may be related to raw material availability as well.

Table 2. Flake production technique of whole flakes.

Table 3. Descriptive statistics of quarry debitage.

While supporting the presence of generalized production, the amount of cortex presents a more complex picture. While lithics representative of early stage reduction, cobble testing, and quarrying generally have large amounts of cortex, this is not the case at CCQ as over half of the materials lacked cortex (Table 4). The unexpected trend in cortex can, however, be explained due to the relationship between cobble size and cortex. The size and shape of raw material changes the possible amounts of cortex; the ratio of the surface area to volume varies according to both of these factors, and hence the maximum possible amount of cortex present also varies (Dibble et al. Reference Dibble, Schurmasn, Iovita and McLaughlin2005; Douglass et al. Reference Douglass, Holdaway, Fanning and Shiner2008; Lin et al. Reference Lin, Douglass, Holdaway and Floyd2010). Large cobbles, like those found at CCQ, have lower average cortex/volume ratios than small nodules (Dibble et al. Reference Dibble, Schurmasn, Iovita and McLaughlin2005). The lack of cortex at CCQ should not be taken as an indicator of a lack of early stage reduction but can be explained by the large size and form of the raw materials.

Table 4. Cortex percentage of quarry debitage.

The number and makeup of cores indicate generalized and early stage reduction (Table 5). Multidirectional cores (Table 5), are indicative of generalized reduction. The unidirectional cores are predominately tested cobbles, with only a few flakes removed to test raw material quality. Tested cobbles were common due to the variable nature of the raw material which led to frequent core discard. The cores support the early stage and generalized nature of reduction, but their numbers likewise indicate the transport of materials away from the quarry (Horowitz Reference Horowitz2017, Reference Horowitz, Horowitz and McCall2019). With such a low number of total cores, compared to the amount of debitage produced, it is clear these materials were transported away from the quarry, presumably for exchange. Core transport is reflected in the quarry reduction sequence (Figure 6) as an essential part of the reduction activities.

Table 5. Core forms.

The density of the lithic materials at Callar Creek Quarry indicates that, for CCQ residents, lithic production was a part-time activity and not the only one in which they participated. The density of debitage (3,181.4 lithics/m3 in the quarry debitage mound) is in no way comparable to areas considered full-time workshops, such as Colha (5 million flakes/m3; Roemer Reference Roemer, Hester and Shafer1991) or the Succotz Lithic Workshop (2 million flakes/m3; VandenBosch et al. Reference VandenBosch, LeCount, Yaeger, LeCount and Yaeger2010), an example of part-time production. The density of lithic debitage indicates the part-time, periodic nature of production activities. Other activities performed by CCQ residents included farming and other household tasks, such as weaving and food preparation, as exemplified by finds of spindle whorls, chert tools, and mano and metate fragments within the residential complexes (Horowitz Reference Horowitz2017). Thus, while the residents of the households were lithic producers, they were not full-time lithic producers and participated in other economic activities. As mentioned above, most lithic production in the Maya area was a part-time activity (Barrett Reference Barrett, Hruby, Braswell and Mazariegos2011; Hearth Reference Hearth and Robin2012; Hirth Reference Hirth, Manzanilla and Hirth2011a, Reference Hirth, Manzanilla and Hirth2011b; VandenBosch Reference VandenBosch1999; VandenBosch et al. Reference VandenBosch, LeCount, Yaeger, LeCount and Yaeger2010). For the residents, lithic production served to diversify their economic activities and meant they depended less on any single activity for their economic stability and continuance.

Chert Distribution and Regional Connections

The reduction sequence of the CCQ materials indicates that segmented lithic production occurred in the region. CCQ residents tested raw materials and created chert preforms (Figure 6), which were further reduced by lithic producers elsewhere in the valley. In addition to early stage production within the quarry, lithic production has been identified at workshops throughout the valley, such as the Succotz Lithic Workshop, a biface production area (VandenBosch Reference VandenBosch1999; VandenBosch et al. Reference VandenBosch, LeCount, Yaeger, LeCount and Yaeger2010), in households throughout the region (Connell Reference Connell2000; Peuramaki-Brown Reference Peuramaki-Brown2012; Robin Reference Robin1999; Yaeger Reference Yaeger2000), and at the Buenavista and Xunantunich marketplaces (Cap Reference Cap2015a, Reference Cap2019). These production areas indicate widespread chert production in different areas in the UBRV. For instance, in the Buenavista and Xunantunich marketplaces, Cap (Reference Cap2015a, Reference Cap2019) identified only final stage finishing of bifaces, while the Succotz Lithic Workshop contains all stages of the biface production process, as materials were quarried from a nearby chert source (VandenBosch Reference VandenBosch1999).

Thus, CCQ products, such as tested cobbles and prepared cores, were exchanged away from the quarry. Due to difficulties in geochemically sourcing this type of chert and the intrasource variability in color and quality which makes visual identification of regional sources difficult, the exact nature of the distribution of these materials is difficult to determine. However, some speculation on their distribution mechanism can be performed.

Multiple types of exchanges could have been used to distribute the lithic raw material which may have involved exchange with nearby settlements, either through peoples’ visits to the quarry or their transport of raw material to other locations. These locations may have included specialized production areas, like biface production areas, or regional marketplaces, like the one at Buenavista. Raw material exchange in the marketplace would not leave a distinctive signature if reduction did not occur at the market, thus making its distribution hard to trace. As the lithic material from the Buenavista marketplace indicates only final stage biface production (Cap Reference Cap2015a), if CCQ materials were distributed through a marketplace, reduction activities did not occur there. Thus, materials from CCQ could have been exchanged through market exchange or through reciprocal exchanges with neighboring households. Hopefully future technological advances in lithic sourcing will allow further clarification of exchange mechanisms. Even without the specific exchange mechanisms involved in chert distribution, however, analysis of nonlithic materials from CCQ can shed light on the integration of the quarry residents with regional economic and political communities.

Artifactual evidence from CCQ indicates it was affiliated with the political community at the nearby site of Buenavista, the regional power from the Early Classic through the early Late Classic period (Brown and Yaeger Reference Brown, Yaeger, Houk, Arroyo and Powis2020; LeCount and Yaeger Reference LeCount and Yaeger2010; Martin and Grube Reference Martin and Grube2008; Yaeger and Brown Reference Yaeger and Brown2019; Yaeger et al. Reference Yaeger, Kathryn Brown, Helmke, Zender, Cap, Rodriquez and Batty2015). Material evidence from CCQ suggesting affiliation with Buenavista includes polychrome ceramics in the Buenavista style (cream polychromes), a sherd featuring a possible fragment of the Buenavista device, and several other polychrome fragments, including one with glyphs and several with pseudoglyphs (Figure 7; Ball and Tascheck Reference Ball, Taschek and Garber2004). Polychrome ceramics in the Buenavista style are believed to have been produced at Buenavista (Ball and Tascheck Reference Ball, Taschek and Garber2004) and indicate interactions between the site's rulers and the surrounding region. The presence of different types of ceramics has been used in the UBRV to discuss political affiliations with various sites during the Late Classic period (Connell Reference Connell2000).

Figure 7. Ceramics from Callar Creek Quarry illustrating connections with the political community of Buenavista. Photograph by the author.

CCQ's affiliation with Buenavista may have been a result of interactions with the proximate minor center of Callar Creek, which illustrates political connections to Buenavista through ceramic and architectural affiliations (Kurnick Reference Kurnick2013, Reference Kurnick2016). The minor center of Callar Creek and CCQ were both named for the modern-day aldea of Calla Creek in which Callar Creek is located; the quarry is located within the bounds of the modern-day aldea of Santa Rosa, but was also named for the modern settlement of Calla Creek (Kurnick and Salgado-Flores Reference Kurnik, Salgado-Flores and Yaeger2009). Both the minor center and the quarry exhibit connections with the Buenavista political community and are located on the west bank of the Mopan River, about one kilometer apart. Any relationship between the two cannot be confirmed based on current evidence from excavations of the two areas, other than that they were both part of the Buenavista political community, but given the close proximity of the areas, it is possible that CCQ residents connected with the Buenavista community through interactions with the rural elites at Callar Creek.

The most visible evidence of continuity in the face of regional change at CCQ is the construction of a second household group during a time when the UBRV was in political turmoil. The regional power switched from Buenavista to Xunantunich in the Late Classic II (a.d. 670–780; Figure 1; Brown and Yaeger Reference Brown, Yaeger, Houk, Arroyo and Powis2020; LeCount and Yaeger Reference LeCount and Yaeger2010; Martin and Grube Reference Martin and Grube2008; Yaeger and Brown Reference Yaeger and Brown2019; Yaeger et al. Reference Yaeger, Kathryn Brown, Helmke, Zender, Cap, Rodriquez and Batty2015), yet it was the time when CCQ residents expanded (CCQ 2). Despite this regional political instability, occupation and economic activity at CCQ continued unchanged. These circumstances suggest that they were insulated from regional political shifts in a way that allowed them to continue their economic activity, despite political changes that would have shifted elite-managed economic networks (including possibly market exchange). Of note is that occupation at CCQ occurred before and after the powerful elites ruled from Buenavista.

The connection of CCQ with the Buenavista political community may have influenced the ways in which lithic materials from the quarry were exchanged. While we cannot draw an exact correlation between economic exchange networks and political communities (LeCount Reference LeCount, Fargher and Heredia Espinoza2016), the economic activities that the quarry residents were involved in would have brought them into contact with different individuals within the region, which may have increased the utility of having a political affiliation with a regional political power. In the following section, I discuss the role of small-scale craft production as an economically beneficial activity and how that may have contributed to the stability of the CCQ residents and their economic condition.

DISCUSSION

CCQ illustrates continuity in occupation and use of the quarry for a relatively long time, including during a time of political turmoil in the surrounding region. As discussed above, there is evidence of CCQ's connection with the political community at Buenavista. Despite this connection, and its position between Buenavista and Xunantunich (Figure 1), occupation and use of the quarry remains stable throughout the Late to Terminal Classic period when political conflict occurred between these major centers.

CCQ was used and occupied continuously during the transition of political power between Buenavista and Xunantunich in the Late Classic II period (a.d. 670–780). The construction of a household group and the continued occupation at the site suggests that the residents of CCQ were not greatly impacted by the political conflict between the major centers in the region, despite their affiliation with the political community of Buenavista. This situation contrasts with the evidence from the site of Callar Creek which was affiliated with the site of Buenavista. The site itself was abandoned and faded from power around the same time that Buenavista lost power to Xunantunich (Kurnick Reference Kurnick2013, Reference Kurnick2016).

The continuity at CCQ despite regional political instability may be associated with the economic diversification by quarry residents made possible by their position literally on top of a chert raw material resource. By managing access to this asset, residents were not only chert producers but had access to the raw material itself. Ethnographically, lithic producers had fewer economic resources than other residents and such literature suggests that lithic tool producers were generally the last settlers in a region and thus had less access to high-quality agricultural lands, forcing a reliance on lithic production (Arnold Reference Arnold1985; Deal Reference Deal1998). This pattern holds true for other craft producers (Shott Reference Shott2018). CCQ's continuity, however, points to the economic advantage of raw material resource management and production activities. Access to the chert source was a foundational component of the economic activities at CCQ and thus a factor in the risk reduction benefits of economic diversification. Like other part-time periodic lithic producers in Mesoamerica (Hirth Reference Hirth2009a, Reference Hirth2009b; Healan Reference Healan2009), CCQ residents’ involvement in lithic production provided an opportunity for economic diversification that reduced economic risk.

While the continuity and success of CCQ residents point to economic diversification as a mechanism for reducing risk associated with regional political instability, they are by no means the only peoples in the region to do so. Throughout the UBRV, occupants of small settlements showed their affiliations to local political powers while simultaneously maintaining subsistence economies that insulated residents from shifting political alliances (Leventhal and Ashmore Reference Leventhal, Ashmore and Garber2004; Yaeger Reference Yaeger, LeCount and Yaeger2010b), which were illustrated through ceramic affiliations and structure orientation (Connell Reference Connell2000, Reference Connell, LeCount and Yaeger2010; Kurnick Reference Kurnick2013, Reference Kurnick2016; Yaeger Reference Yaeger2000, Reference Yaeger, LeCount and Yaeger2010b). Economic exchange networks, however, were stable despite the changing political landscape (Meierhoff et al. Reference Meierhoff, Golitko, Morris and Robin2012; Robin Reference Robin and Robin2012a, Reference Robin and Robin2012b, Reference Robin2013; Robin et al Reference Robin, Kosakowsky, Keller and Meierhoff2014, Reference Robin, Wyatt, Meierhoff, Kestle, Marken and Fitzsimmons2015; Yaeger and Brown Reference Yaeger and Brown2019). Thus, CCQ is an example of how small sites maintained economic independence and regional political connections. The economic diversification from small-scale craft production enabled the maintenance of their activities, due to the social connections they created, which operate outside the bounds of formal economic networks.

CONCLUSIONS

While the lives of CCQ residents were in many ways shaped by their relationship with the lithic raw material to which they had access, their lives were in no way monolithic. They participated in day-to-day activities like other rural Maya farmers, interacted with other occupants of the hinterland, and maintained connections to and identified with larger regional polities. Their lithic production activities aided in this integration and residents’ economic security by providing additional sources of economic activity.

The lithic economy served to connect CCQ residents, and presumably other regional producers, to the regional political community and served as a source of wealth and social status for those individuals. Thus, for CCQ residents, economies were a source of political integration and independence. Residents had political affiliations to Buenavista, which they showed through ceramic styles, and used their economic activities to maintain their household during times of instability. By serving as mechanisms of integration and independence, economies can be seen as both embedded in and separated from political and social processes for the Late to Terminal Classic-period Maya. That is, the CCQ residents’ economic activities both provided them with opportunities to work within economic frameworks associated with regional political structures and to work outside of these frameworks.

The evidence from CCQ illustrates the importance of small-scale economic activity for rural householders in the Late to Terminal Classic period for the lowland Maya. These small-scale economic activities provided lithic producers with economic wealth that was in turn a mechanism for regional sociopolitical integration and served as a mechanism for reducing risk through the continuity of lithic extraction activities during periods of regional shifts. The diversification of economic activities through part-time lithic production permitted broader stability in the settlement, probably in part because of the multiple economic activities in which the quarry residents were involved. At least some of the distribution networks through which chert was exchanged were unaffected by broader political disruptions, highlighting the consequences of multiple distribution networks and the significance of studying articulated economies (Masson and Freidel Reference Masson and Freidel2012). This evidence from CCQ supports the proposals put forth by other scholars (Hirth Reference Hirth2009a, Reference Hirth2009b, Reference Hirth, Manzanilla and Hirth2011a, Reference Hirth, Manzanilla and Hirth2011b; Hirth and Cyphers Reference Hirth and Cyphers2020; Marston Reference Marston2011; Masson and Freidel Reference Masson and Freidel2012) that diverse economies and the social connections created by these economic activities are a means of mediating resource scarcity. The evidence of production and continuity of occupation at CCQ indicates that part-time craft production can have lasting impacts on the lives of hinterland residents and helps explain the continuity in occupation as economic activities served to provide a safety net for the quarry residents.

Given this evidence, we can return to the discussion of the social aspects of economic activities and the value of those activities for creating risk reduction networks (Bourdieu Reference Bourdieu and Richardson1986; Blanton and Fargher Reference Blanton, Fargher, Garraty and Stark2010; Hirth Reference Hirth2009a, Reference Hirth2009b, Reference Hirth, Garraty and Stark2010). The economic diversification of CCQ residents contributed to their success and allowed them to both affiliate with and maintain some independence from regional political powers. The continuity of CCQ during times when shifting political dynamics in the region suggest their involvement in economic networks was not managed by political elites. In these exchanges, social connections would be more advantageous to continue operating outside of regional political structures.

Evidence from CCQ suggests that small-scale craft economies had some independence from regional political leaders. Were this not the case, the political instability in the region would have led to the dismantling of these economic networks. Those networks that remained strong are the small ones operating between individuals of different households and small-scale producers. Thus, for the Classic-period Maya, small-scale economic activity was vital for small-scale producers/householders and served as a manner of risk reduction by diversifying their economic activities and creating opportunities for developing and maintaining social relationships which served to reduce economic risk. These networks operated partially independently from overarching political structures.

RESUMEN

El papel de la producción artesanal en las economías antiguas puede proveer información para contextualizar el papel de las economías en sistemas sociales y políticos. Este artículo se enfoca en la producción lítica del mundo Maya en el periodo clásico tardío y terminal (670–890 d.C.). El objetivo es examinar la importancia de las actividades económicas en la integración de productores artesanales en comunidades políticas regionales y explorar su importancia en tiempos de conflicto político. Utilizando un estudio de la extracción y producción de materiales líticos en una cantera de pedernal en Callar Creek Quarry, Belice, este articulo examina la importancia de la producción artesanal en la reducción de riesgo económico. Este estudio ilustra que la producción lítica era una manera de diversificación de actividades económicas que redujo el riesgo económico y problemas con actividades políticas en la región. Los productores líticos de Callar Creek Quarry eran productores de medio tiempo que participaron en otras actividades económicas. La participación en la producción lítica era una manera de diversificación económica que proveyó estabilidad económica y una oportunidad de minimizar su involucramiento en la inestabilidad política en la región. La utilización de diversificación económica como una manera de reducción de riesgo económico provee evidencia para la continuidad de los residentes rurales durante tiempos de inestabilidad política. En Mesoamérica, la diversificación económica de productores artesanales era una manera de reducir el riesgo económico. Por esta razón muchos productores artesanales participaron en actividades de producción. Callar Creek Quarry muestra que la producción artesanal de medio tiempo era una actividad importante de productores de pequeña escala y provee oportunidades para la integración regional y protección de inestabilidad política.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Research at Callar Creek Quarry, Belize was conducted under the auspices of the Mopan Valley Archaeological Project directed by Jason Yaeger, with the permission of the Belize Institute of Archaeology. Funding was provided by a National Science Foundation Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grant (BCS Grant #1416212), a National Geographic Young Explorer Grant (Grant #9089-12), and the School of Liberal Arts at Tulane University. Thanks to Marcello Canuto, Dan Healan, Tatsuya Murakami, Jason Yaeger, Kat Brown, and Bernadette Cap for their comments on earlier materials that improved the quality of this article and to Erlend Johnson and Sarah Kurnick for comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript. Jocelyn Ponce edited the Spanish abstract. Detailed comments from three anonymous reviewers improved the quality of the manuscript.

References

REFERENCES

Abbott, David R. 2010 The Rise and Demise of Marketplace Exchange among the Prehistoric Hohokam of Arizona. In Archaeological Approaches to Market Exchange in Ancient Societies, edited by Garraty, Christopher P. and Stark, Barbara L., pp. 6183. University of Colorado Press, Boulder.Google Scholar
Andrefsky, William Jr. 2005 Lithics: Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews, Bradford 1999 Craftsman Skill and Specialization: Investigating the Craft Production of Prehispanic Obsidian Blades at Xochicalco and Teotihuacan. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Pennsylvania State University, State College.Google Scholar
Andrieu, Chloe 2009 Irreplaceable? Or Just Not Indispensable…Subsistence and Complications in Lithic Raw Material Management in the Maya Lowlands. In Non Flint Raw Material Use in Prehistory: Old Prejudices and New Directions, edited by Sternke, Fanna, Eigeland, Lotte, and Costa, Laurent-Jacques, pp. 241248. BAR International Series 1939. Archaeopress, Oxford.Google Scholar
Aoyama, Kazuo 2011 Socioeconomic and Political Implications of Regional Studies of Maya Lithic Artifacts: Two Case Studies of the Copan Region, Honduras and the Aguateca Region Guatemala. In The Technology of Maya Civilization: Political Economy and Beyond in Lithic Studies, edited by Hruby, Zachary X., Braswell, Geoffrey E., and Mazariegos, Oswaldo Chinchilla, pp. 3754. Equinox, Sheffield.Google Scholar
Appadurai, Arjun 1986 Introduction: Commodities and the Politics of Value. In The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspectives, edited by Appadurai, Arjun, pp. 363. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, Dean E. 1985 Ceramic Theory and Cultural Process. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Ausel, Erica L. 2012 Lithic Analysis of Chau Hiix, Belize: Raw Material Consumption and Artifact Types. Lithic Technology 37:141154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ball, Joseph W., and Taschek, Jennifer T. 2004 Buenavista del Cayo: A Short Outline of Occupational and Cultural History of an Upper Belize Valley Regal Ritual Center. In Ancient Maya of the Belize Valley: Half a Century of Archaeological Research, edited by Garber, James F., pp. 149167. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Baron, Joanne P. 2018a Making Money in Mesoamerica: Currency Production and Procurement in the Classic Maya Financial System. Economic Anthropology 5:210223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baron, Joanne P. 2018b Ancient Monetization: The Case of Classic Maya Textiles. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 49:100113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrett, Jason W. 2004 Constructing Hierarchy through Entitlement: Inequality in Lithic Resource Access among the Ancient Maya of Blue Creek Belize. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Texas A&M, College Station.Google Scholar
Barrett, Jason W. 2006 Upper Northwestern Belize Lithic Resource Investigations: 2001–2005 Excavations. In Final Season Summaries of the Blue Creek Regional Political Ecology Project: 2005 Investigations in Upper Northwestern Belize, edited by Lohse, Jon C., pp. 4075. Report submitted to the Institute of Archaeology, National Institute of Culture and History, Belmopan.Google Scholar
Barrett, Jason W. 2011 Ancient Maya Exploitation of Non-Renewable Resources in the Eastern Maya Lowlands. In The Technology of Maya Civilization: Political Economy and Beyond in Lithic Studies, edited by Hruby, Zachary X., Braswell, Geoffrey E., and Mazariegos, Oswaldo Chinchilla, pp. 5768. Equinox, Sheffield.Google Scholar
Black, Stephen L., and Suhler, Charles K. 1986 The 1984 Rio Azul Settlement Survey. In Rio Azul Reports No 2. The 1984 Season, edited by Adams, R.E.W., pp. 162192. Center for Archaeological Research, University of Texas, San Antonio.Google Scholar
Blanton, Richard E., and Fargher, Lane F. 2010 Evaluating Causal Factors in Market Development in Premodern States: A Comparative Study with Critical Comments on the History of Ideas about Markets. In Archaeological Approaches to Market Exchange in Ancient Societies, edited by Garraty, Christopher P. and Stark, Barbara L., pp. 207226. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre 1986 The Forms of Capital. In Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, edited by Richardson, John, pp. 241258. Greenwood Press, New York.Google Scholar
Bousman, C. Britt. 2005 Coping with Risk: Later Stone Age Technological Strategies at Blydefontein Rock Shelter, South Africa. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 24:193226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, M. Kathryn, and Yaeger, Jason 2020 Monumental Landscapes, Changing Ideologies, and Political Histories in the Mopan Valley. In Approaches to Monumental Landscapes of the Ancient Maya, edited by Houk, Brett A., Arroyo, Barbara, and Powis, Terry G., pp. 290312. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brumfiel, Elizabeth M., and Nichols, Deborah L. 2009 Bitumen, Blades, and Beads: Prehispanic Craft Production and the Domestic Economy. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association 19:239251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brumfiel, Elizabeth M., and Earle, Timothy K. 1987 Specialization, Exchange, and Complex Societies: An Introduction. In Specialization, Exchange, and Complex Societies, edited by Brumfiel, Elizabeth M. and Earle, Timothy K., pp. 19. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Cap, Bernadette 2015a Classic Maya Economies: Identification of a Marketplace at Buenavista del Cayo, Belize. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin, Madison.Google Scholar
Cap, Bernadette 2015b How to Know it When We See It: Marketplace Identification at the Classic Maya Site of Buenavista del Cayo, Belize. In The Ancient Maya Marketplace: The Archaeology of Transient Space, edited by King, Eleanor M., pp. 111137. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Cap, Bernadette 2019 A Classic Maya Marketplace at Xunantunich, Belize. Research Reports in Belizean Archaeology 16:111122.Google Scholar
Cap, Bernadette 2020 The Difference a Marketplace Makes: A View of Maya Market Exchange from the Late Classic Buenavista del Cayo Marketplace. In The Real Business of Ancient Maya Economies: From Farmers’ Fields to Rulers’ Realms, edited by Masson, Marylin, Freidel, David A. and Demarest, Arthur, pp. 387402. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Cap, Bernadette, Peuramaki-Brown, Meaghan, and Yaeger, Jason 2015 Shopping for Household Goods at the Buenavista del Cayo Marketplace. Research Reports in Belizean Archaeology 12:2536.Google Scholar
Carballo, David M. 2005 State Political Authority and Obsidian Craft Production at the Moon Pyramid, Teotihuacan, Mexico. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Carballo, David M. 2007 Implements of State Power: Weaponry and Martially Themed Obsidian Production near the Moon Pyramid, Teotihuacan. Ancient Mesoamerica 18:173190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carballo, David M. 2013 The Social Organization of Craft Production and Interregional Exchange at Teotihuacan. In Merchants, Markets, and Exchange in the Pre-Columbian World, edited by Hirth, Kenneth G. and Pillsbury, Joanne, pp. 113140. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Cashdan, Elizabeth A. 1985 Coping with Risk: Reciprocity among the Basarwa of Northern Botswana. Man 20:454474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, Thomas, Sword, Catherine, and Brown, M. Kathryn 2015 Late to Terminal Classic Household Production at Xunantunich's Group E. Research Reports in Belizean Archaeology 12:3743.Google Scholar
Chase, Arlene F., and Garber, James F.. 2004 The Archaeology of the Belize Valley in Historical Perspectives. In Ancient Maya of the Belize Valley: Half a Century of Archaeological Research, edited by Garber, James F., pp. 114. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Chirikure, Shadreck 2020 New Perspectives on the Political Economy of Great Zimbabwe. Journal of Archaeological Research 28:139186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, John E. 1986 From Mountains to Molehills: A Critical Review of Teotihuacan's Obsidian Industry. In Economic Aspects of Prehispanic Highland Mexico, edited by Isaac, Barry L., pp. 2374. Research in Economic Anthropology Supplement 2. JAI Press, Greenwich.Google Scholar
Clark, John E. 1995 Craft Specialization as an Archaeological Category. Research in Economic Anthropology 16:267294.Google Scholar
Clark, John E. 2003 A Review of Twentieth-Century Mesoamerican Obsidian Studies. In Mesoamerican Lithic Technology: Experimentation and Interpretation, edited by Hirth, Kenneth G., pp. 1554. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Clark, John E. 2007 In Craft Specialization's Penumbra: Things, Persons, Action, Value, and Surplus. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association 17:2035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, John E., and Bryant, Douglas Donne 1991 The Production of Chert Projectile Points at Yerba Buena, Chiapas, Mexico. In Maya Stone Tools: Selected Papers from the Second Maya Lithic Conference, edited by Hester, Thomas R. and Shafer, Harry J., pp. 85102. Prehistory Press, Madison.Google Scholar
Connell, Samuel V. 2000 Were They Well Connected? An Exploration of Ancient Maya Regional Integration from the Middle Level Perspective of Chaa Creek, Belize. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Connell, Samuel V. 2010 A Community to be Counted: Chaa Creek and the Emerging Xunantunich Polity. In Classic Maya Provincial Polities: Xunantunich and its Hinterlands, edited by LeCount, Lisa J. and Yaeger, Jason, pp. 295314. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Costin, Cathy Lynne 1991 Craft Specialization: Issues in Defining, Documenting, and Explaining the Organization of Production. Archaeological Method and Theory 3:156.Google Scholar
Costin, Cathy Lynne 2001 Craft Production Systems. In Archaeology at the Millennium: A Sourcebook, edited by Feinman, Gary M. and Price, T. Douglas, pp. 273314. Plenum Publishers, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costin, Cathy Lynne 2004 Craft Economies of Ancient Andean States. In Archaeological Perspectives on Political Economy, edited by Feinman, Gary M. and Nichols, Linda M., pp. 189221. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Costin, Cathy Lynne 2015 The Cost of Conquest: Assessing the Impact of Inka Tribute Demands on the Wanka of Highland Peru. In Surplus: The Politics of Production and the Strategies of Everyday Life, edited by Morehart, Christopher T. and Lucia, Kristin De, pp. 4572. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costin, Cathy Lynne 2016 Introduction: Making Meaning, Making Value, Techne in the Pre-Columbian World. In Making Value, Making Meaning: Techne in the Pre-Columbian World, edited by Costin, Cathy Lynne, pp. 130. Harvard University Press, Boston.Google Scholar
Costin, Cathy Lynne and Hagstrum, Melissa B. 1995 Standardization, Labor Investment, Skill and the Organization of Ceramic Production in Late Prehispanic Highland Peru. American Antiquity 60:619639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deal, Michael 1998 Pottery Ethnoarchaeology in the Central Maya Highlands. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
De Lucia, Kristin, and Morehart, Christopher T. 2015 Surplus and Social Change: The Production of Household and Field in Pre-Aztec Central Mexico. In Surplus: The Politics of Production and the Strategies of Everyday Life, edited by Morehart, Christopher T. and Lucia, Kristin De, pp. 7396. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demps, Kathryn, and Winterhalder, Bruce. 2019 ‘Every Tradesman Must Also Be a Merchant’: Behavioral Ecology and Household-Level Production for Barter and Trade in Premodern Economies. Journal of Archaeological Research 27:4990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devio, Jessica 2016 Reconstructing Late Classic Food Preparation at Xunantunich, Belize, Using Starch Grain Analysis. Unpublished master's thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Texas, San Antonio.Google Scholar
Dibble, Harold L, Schurmasn, Utsav A., Iovita, Radu P., and McLaughlin, Michael V. 2005 The Measurement and Interpretation of Cortex in Lithic Assemblages. American Antiquity 70:545560.Google Scholar
Douglass, Matthew J., Holdaway, Simon J., Fanning, Patricia C., and Shiner, Justin I. 2008 An Assessment and Archaeological Application of Cortex Measurement in Lithic Assemblages. American Antiquity 73:513526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Everhart, Timothy D., and Ruby, Bret J. 2020 Ritual Economy and the Organization of Scioto Hopewell Craft Production: Insights from the Outskirts of the Mound City Group. American Antiquity 85:279304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faulkner, Patrick 2011 Stone Artefact Technology in Willandra National Park: Reduction, Risk, and Mobility. In Keeping your Edge: Recent Approaches to the Organization of Stone Artefact Technology, edited by Marwick, Ben and Mackay, Alex, pp. 520. BAR International Series 2273. Archaeopress, Oxford.Google Scholar
Feinman, Gary M. 2018 The Governance and Leadership of Prehispanic Mesoamerican Polities: New Perspectives and Comparative Implication. Cliodynamics 9:139.Google Scholar
Feinman, Gary M., and Nicholas, Linda M. 2007 Craft Production in Classic Period Oaxaca: Implications for Monte Alban's Political Economy. In Craft Production in Complex Societies: Multicraft and Producer Perspectives, edited by Shimada, Izumi, pp. 97119. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Feinman, Gary M., and Nicholas, Linda M. 2011 Domestic Craft Production and the Classic Period Economy of Oaxaca. In Producción artesanal y especialización en Mesoamerica: Áreas de actividad y procesos productivos, edited by Manzanilla, Linda R. and Hirth, Kenneth G., pp. 2958. Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico City.Google Scholar
Feinman, Gary M., and Nicholas, Linda M. 2017 Re-envisioning Prehispanic Mesoamerican Economies: Modes of Production, Fiscal Foundations of Collective Action, and Conceptual Legacies. In Modes of Production and Archaeology, edited by Rosenswig, Robert M. and Cunningham, Jerimy J., pp. 253284. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flad, Rowan K., and Hruby, Zachary X. 2007 “Specialized” Production in Archaeological Contexts: Rethinking Specialization, the Social Value of Products, and the Practice of Production. Archaeological Paper of the American Anthropological Association 17:1119.Google Scholar
Fleisher, Jeffrey B. 2010 Housing the Market: Swahili Merchants and Regional Marketing on the East African Coast 7th–16th Century AD. In Archaeological Approaches to Market Exchange in Ancient Societies, edited by Garraty, Christopher P. and Stark, Barbara L., pp. 141159. University Press Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
Foias, Antonia, Halperin, Christina T., Moriarty, Ellen Spensley, and Castellanos, Jeanette 2012 Architecture, Volumetrics, and Social Stratification at Motul de San José during the Late and Terminal Classic. In Motul de San José: Politics, History, and Economy in a Classic Maya Polity, edited by Foias, Antonia E. and Emery, Kitty F., pp. 94138. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foias, Antonia E. 2002 At the Crossroads: The Economic Basis of Political Power in the Petexbatun Region. In Ancient Maya Political Economies, edited by Masson, Marilyn A. and Freidel, David A., pp. 223248. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek.Google Scholar
Ford, Anabel 1984 The Belize River Archaeological Settlement Survey Phase 1983–84: Regional Survey and Test Excavations in the Upper Belize River Area. Manuscript on file with the Institute of Archaeology, Belmopan.Google Scholar
Ford, Anabel, and Olson, Kirsten 1989 Aspects of Ancient Maya Household Economy: Variation in Chipped Stone Production and Consumption. In Research in Economic Anthropology: Prehistoric Maya Economies of Belize, edited by McAnany, Patricia A. and Isaac, Barry L., pp. 185211. Supplement 4. JAI Press, Greenwich.Google Scholar
Freidel, David A., Masson, Marilyn A., and Rich, Michelle 2017 Imagining a Complex Maya Political Economy: Counting Tokens and Currencies in Image, Text and the Archaeological Record. Cambridge Archaeology Journal 27:2954.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garraty, Christopher P. 2010 Investigating Market Exchange in Ancient Societies: A Theoretical Review. In Archaeological Approaches to Market Exchange in Ancient Societies, edited by Garraty, Christopher P. and Stark, Barbara L., pp. 332. University of Colorado Press, Boulder.Google Scholar
Gifford, James C. 1976 Prehistoric Pottery Analysis and the Ceramics of Barton Ramie, Belize. Memoirs of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 18. Harvard University, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Golden, Charles, Scherer, Andrew, Schroder, Whittaker, Vella, Clive, and Recinos, Alejandra Roche 2020 Decentralizing the Economies of the Maya West. In The Real Business of Ancient Maya Economies: From Farmers’ Fields to Rulers’ Realms, edited by Masson, Marylin, Freidel, David A., and Demarest, Arthur, pp. 403417. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golitko, Mark, and Feinman, Gary M. 2015 Procurement and Distribution of Pre-Hispanic Mesoamerican Obsidian 900 BC–AD 1520: A Social Network Analysis. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 22:206247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, Richard A. 1980 Living Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Graeber, David 2001 Toward an Anthropological Theory of Value: The False Coin of our Own Dreams. Palgrave, New York.Google Scholar
Granovetter, Mark 1985 Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology 91:481510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halperin, Rhoda H. 1994 Cultural Economies Past and Present. University of Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar
Healan, Dan M. 2009 Ground Platform Preparation and the ‘Banalization’ of the Prismatic Blade in Western Mesoamerica. Ancient Mesoamerica 20:103111.Google Scholar
Hearth, Nicholas F. 2012 Organization of Chert Tool Economy during Late and Terminal Classic Periods at Chan: Preliminary Thoughts Based upon Debitage Analyses. In Chan: An Ancient Maya Farming Community, edited by Robin, Cynthia, pp. 192206. University of Florida Press, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Heindel, Theresa 2010 A Lithic Deposit found in the East Plaza of the Late Classic Maya Site of Buenavista, Belize and its Effect on Stone Tool Production in Ancient Maya Marketplaces. Undergraduate senior thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin, Madison.Google Scholar
Heindel, Theresa, Cap, Bernadette, and Yaeger, Jason 2012 Knapping in the Marketplace: Lithic Production and Marketplace Exchange at Buenavista del Cayo, Belize. Research Reports in Belizean Archaeology 9:2938.Google Scholar
Helms, Mary W. 1993 Craft and the Kingly Ideal: Art, Trade, and Power. University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
Hester, Thomas R., and Shafer, Harry J.. 1984 Exploitation of Chert Resources by the Ancient Maya of Northern Belize, Central America. World Archaeology 16:157173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hester, Thomas R., and Shafer, Harry J. 1992 Lithic Workshops Revisited: Comments on Moholy-Nagy. Latin American Antiquity 3:243248.Google Scholar
Hirth, Kenneth G. 2009a Intermittent Crafting and Multicrafting at Xochicalco. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association 19:7591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirth, Kenneth G. 2009b Craft Production, Household Diversification, and Domestic Economy in Prehispanic Mesoamerica. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association 19:1332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirth, Kenneth G. 2010 Finding the Mark in the Marketplace: The Organization, Development, and Archaeological Identification of Market Systems. In Archaeological Approaches to Market Exchange in Ancient Societies, edited by Garraty, Christopher P. and Stark, Barbara L., pp. 227247. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
Hirth, Kenneth G. 2011a Introducción: La naturaleza e importancia de la producción artesanal. In Producción artesanal y especialización en Mesoamerica: Áreas de actividad y procesos productivos, edited by Manzanilla, Linda R. and Hirth, Kenneth G., pp. 1327. Insituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico City.Google Scholar
Hirth, Kenneth G. 2011b The Organization of Domestic Obsidian Craft Production. In Producción artesanal y especialización en Mesoamerica: Áreas de actividad y procesos productivos, edited by Manzanilla, Linda R. and Hirth, Kenneth G., pp. 177203. Insituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico City.Google Scholar
Hirth, Kenneth G., and Cyphers, Ann 2020 Olmec Lithic Economy at San Lorenzo. University of Colorado Press, Boulder.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiscock, Peter 1994 Technological Response to Risk in Holocene Australia. Journal of World Prehistory 8:267292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, Rachel A. 2017 Understanding Ancient Maya Economic Variability: Lithic Technological Organization in the Mopan Valley, Belize. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Tulane University, New Orleans.Google Scholar
Horowitz, Rachel A. 2018a Uneven Lithic Landscapes: Raw Material Procurement and Economic Organization among the Late/Terminal Classic Maya in Western Belize. Journal of Archaeological Sciences: Reports 19:949–947.Google Scholar
Horowitz, Rachel A. 2018b Technological Choice and Raw Material Availability: Lithic Production Implements in Western Belize. Lithic Technology 43:172185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, Rachel A. 2019 The Organization and Economic Activity Related to the Extraction and Production of Utilitarian Tools in the Mopan Valley, Belize. In Global Perspectives on Lithic Technologies in Complex Societies, edited by Horowitz, Rachel A. and McCall, Grant S., pp. 139163. University of Colorado Press, Boulder.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, Rachel A. Cap, Bernadette, Yaeger, Jason, Peuramaki-Brown, Meaghan, and Eli, Mark C. 2019 Raw Material Selection and Stone Tool Production: Limestone Bifaces in the Mopan Valley, Belize. Latin American Antiquity 30:198204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houk, Brett A. 2015 Ancient Maya Cities of the Eastern Lowlands. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Hruby, Zachary X. 2006 The Organization of Chipped Stone Economies at Piedras Negras, Guatemala. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Riverside.Google Scholar
Inomata, Takeshi, and Triadan, Daniela 2000 Craft Production by Classic Maya Elites in Domestic Settings: Data from Rapidly Abandoned Structures at Aguateca, Guatemala. Mayab 13:5766.Google Scholar
Isaac, Barry L. 2005 Karl Polyani. In A Handbook of Economic Anthropology, edited by Carrier, James G., pp. 1425. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.Google Scholar
Isaac, Barry L. 2013 Discussion. In Merchants, Markets, and Exchange in the Pre-Columbian World, edited by Hirth, Kenneth G. and Pillsbury, Joanne, pp. 435448. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Janusek, John W. 1999 Craft and Local Power: Embedded Specialization in Tiwanaku Cities. Latin American Antiquity 10:107131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, Angela H. 2006 Roads to the Center: The Design, Use, and Meaning of the Roads of Xunantunich, Belize. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Keller, Angela H. 2012 Creating Community with Shell. In Chan: An Ancient Maya Farming Community, edited by Robin, Cynthia, pp. 253270. University of Florida Press, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Kestle, Caleb 2012 Limestone Quarrying and Household Organization at Chan. In Chan: An Ancient Maya Farming Community, edited by Robin, Cynthia, pp. 207227. University of Florida Press, Gainesville.Google Scholar
King, Eleanor M. 2000 The Organization of Late Classic Lithic Production at the Prehistoric Maya Site of Colha, Belize: A Study in Complexity and Heterarchy. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
King, Eleanor M. 2012 The Social Dimensions of Production and Consumption within Late Classic Colha, Belize. Lithic Technology 37:7794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Eleanor M. 2020 Modeling Maya Markets. In The Real Business of Ancient Maya Economies: From Farmers’ Fields to Rulers’ Realms, edited by Masson, Marylin, Freidel, David A., and Demarest, Arthur, pp. 1427. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Eleanor M., and Shaw, Leslie 2006 Preliminary Report of Fieldwork at Maax Na, Belize, 2005. In Programme for Belize Archaeological Project: Report of Activities from the 2005 Field Season, edited by Valdez, Fred, pp. 8998. Occasional Paper No. 6, Mesoamerican Archaeological Research Laboratory. University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
Kovacevich, Brigitte 2015 From the Ground Up: Household Craft Specialization and Classic Maya Polity Integration. In Classic Maya Polities of the Southern Lowlands, edited by Marken, Damien B. and Fitzsimmons, James L., pp. 3974. University of Colorado Press, Boulder.Google Scholar
Kovacevich, Brigitte, and Callaghan, Michael G. 2014 Introduction: Inalienability, Value, and the Construction of Social Difference. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association 23:113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunen, Julie L., and Hughbanks, Paul J. 2003 Bajo Communities as Resource Specialists: A Hierarchical Approach to Maya Socioeconomic Organization. In Heterarchy, Political Economy, and the Ancient Maya: The Three Rivers Region of the East Central Yucatan Peninsula, edited by Scarborough, Vernon L., Valdez, Fred Jr., and Dunning, Nicholas, pp. 92108. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Kurnick, Sarah J. 2013 Negotiating the Contradictions of Political Authority: An Archaeological Case Study from Callar Creek, Belize. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Kurnick, Sarah J. 2016 Competition and Conflict in the Upper Belize River Valley: Insights from the Ancient Maya Minor Center of Callar Creek, Belize. Journal of Field Archaeology 41:297311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurnik, Sarah J., and Salgado-Flores, Sebastian 2009 Opportunistic Survey of the Area North of the Callar Creek Settlement Zone. In Mopan Valley Archaeological Project: Results of the 2009 Season, edited by Yaeger, Jason. Manuscript on file with the Institute of Archaeology, Belmopan.Google Scholar
LeCount, Lisa J. 1996 Pottery and Power: Feasting, Gifting and Displaying Wealth among the Late and Terminal Classic Lowland Maya. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
LeCount, Lisa J. 2010 Mount Maloney People? Domestic Pots, Everyday Practice and the Social Formation of the Xunantunich Polity. In Classic Maya Provincial Polities: Xunantunich and its Hinterlands, edited by LeCount, Lisa J. and Yaeger, Jason, pp. 209231. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
LeCount, Lisa J. 2016 Classic Maya Marketplaces and Exchanges: Examining Market Competition as a Factor for Understanding Commodity Distributions. In Alternative Pathways to Complexity: A Collection of Essays on Architecture, Economics, Power, and Cross-Cultural Analysis in Honor of Richard E. Blanton, edited by Fargher, Lane F. and Heredia Espinoza, Vernice Y., pp. 155173. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
LeCount, Lisa J., and Yaeger, Jason (editors) 2010 Classic Maya Provincial Polities: Xunantunich and its Hinterlands. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
LeCount, Lisa J., Yaeger, Jason, Leventhal, Richard M., and Ashmore, Wendy 2002 Dating the Rise and Fall of Xunantunich: Belize: A Late and Terminal Classic Lowland Maya Regional Center. Ancient Mesoamerica 13:4163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leventhal, Richard M., and Ashmore, Wendy 2004 Xunantunich in a Belize Valley Context. In The Ancient Maya of the Belize Valley: Half a Century of Archaeological Research, edited by Garber, James F., pp. 168179. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Lewis, Brandon S. 2003 Environmental Heterogeneity and Occupational Specialization: An Examination of Lithic Tool Production in the Three Rivers Region of Northeastern Peten. In Heterarchy, Political Economy, and the Ancient Maya: The Three Rivers Region of the East Central Yucatan Peninsula, edited by Scarborough, Vernon L., Valdez, Fred Jr, and Dunning, Nicholas, pp. 122135. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Lin, Sam C. H., Douglass, Matthew J., Holdaway, Simon J., and Floyd, Bruce 2010 The Application of 3D Laser Scanning Technology to the Assessment of Ordinal and Mechanical Cortex Quantification in Lithic Analysis. Journal of Archaeological Science 37:694702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luedtke, Barbara E. 1992 An Archaeologist's Guide to Chert and Flint. Archaeological Research Tools 7. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Mann, Michael 1986 The Sources of Social Power, Volume 1: A History of Power from the Beginning to AD 1760. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manzilla, Linda R. 2009 Corporate Life in Apartment and Barrio Companies at Teotihuacan, Central Mexico: Craft Specialization, Hierarchy, and Ethnicity. In Domestic Life in Prehispanic Capitals: A Study of Specialization, Hierarchy, and Ethnicity, edited by Manzanilla, Linda R. and Chapoelaine, Claude, pp. 2142. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan No. 46. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marston, John M. 2011 Archaeological Markers of Agricultural Risk Management. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 30:190205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, Simon, and Grube, Nikolai 2008 Chronicle of the Maya Kings and Queens. 2nd ed. Thames and Hudson, New York.Google Scholar
Masson, Marilyn A., and Freidel, David A.. 2012 An Argument for Classic Era Maya Market Exchange. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 31:455484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathews, Jennifer P., and Guderjan, Thomas H. 2017 Introduction: The Value of Things. In The Value of Things: Prehistoric to Contemporary Commodities in the Maya Region, edited by Mathews, Jennifer P. and Guderjan, Thomas H., pp. 316. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
McAnany, Patricia A. 2010 Ancestral Maya Economies in Archaeological Perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAnany, Patricia A. 2013 Artisans, Ikutz, and Statecraft: Provisioning Classic Maya Royal Courts. In Merchants, Markets, and Exchange in the Pre-Columbian World, edited by Hirth, Kenneth G. and Pillsbury, Joanne, pp. 229253. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
McKillop, Heather 2019 Maya Salt Works. University of Florida Press, Gainesville.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meadows, Richard K. 2000 Archaeological investigations at Group H: Investigating Craft Production and Domestic architecture at Chan Chich, Belize. In The 1998 and 1999 Seasons of the Chan Chich Archaeological Project, edited by Houk, Brett A., pp. 1540. Papers of the Chan Chich Archaeological Project, No. 4. Mesoamerican Archaeological Research Laboratory, University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
Meierhoff, James, Golitko, Mark, and Morris, James D. 2012 Obsidian Acquisition, Trade, and Regional Interaction at Chan. In Chan: An Ancient Maya Farming Community, edited by Robin, Cynthia, pp. 271288. University of Florida Press, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Moffett, Abigail J., Hall, Simon, and Chirikure, Shadreck 2020 Crafting Power: New Perspectives on the Political Economy of Southern Africa, AD 900–1300. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 59:101180.Google Scholar
Morehart, Christopher T., and De Lucia, Kristin 2015 Surplus: The Politics of Production and the Strategies of Everyday Life: An Introduction. In Surplus: The Politics of Production and the Strategies of Everyday Life, edited by Morehart, Christopher T. and Lucia, Kristin De, pp. 343. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neff, L. Theodore 2010 Population, Intensive Agriculture, Labor Value, and Elite Commoner Political Power Relations in the Xunantunich Hinterlands. In Classic Maya Provincial Polities: Xunantunich and its Hinterlands, edited by LeCount, Lisa J. and Yaeger, Jason, pp. 250271. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Paris, Elizabeth H. 2012 Cohesion and Diversity in Formative Period Maya Lithic Tools and Techniques: A View from San Estevan, Belize. Lithic Technology 37:111140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pastrana, Alejandro, and Hirth, Kenneth G. 2003 Biface Production and Craft Specialization: A View from Sierra de Las Navajas, Hidalgo. In Mesoamerican Lithic Technology: Experimentation and Interpretation, edited by Hirth, Kenneth G., pp. 197207. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Peuramaki-Brown, Meaghan M. 2012 The Integration and Disintegration of Ancient Maya Urban Centers: Charting Households and Community at Buenavista del Cayo, Belize. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology. University of Calgary, Calgary.Google Scholar
Polanyi, Karl 1957 The Economy as Instituted Process. In Trade and Market in the Early Empires: Economies in History and Theory, edited by Polanyi, Karl, Arensberg, Conrad M., and Pearson, Harry W., pp. 243270. The Free Press, Glencoe.Google Scholar
Polanyi, Karl 2001[1944] The Great Transformation. Beacon Press, Boston.Google Scholar
Reents-Budet, Dorie 1998 Elite Maya Pottery and Artisans as Social Indicators. Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association 8:7189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reents-Budet, Dorie 2000 Feasting Among the Classic Maya: Evidence from Pictorial Ceramics. In The Maya Vase Book, Vol. VI, edited by Kerr, Justin, pp. 10221038. Kerr Associates, New York.Google Scholar
Reents-Budet, Dorie, Bishop, Ronald L., and Macleod, Barbara 1994 Painting Styles, Workshop Locations, and Pottery Production. In Painting the Maya Universe: Royal Ceramics of the Classic Period, edited by Reents-Budet, Dorie, pp. 164233. Duke University Press, Durham.Google Scholar
Reents-Budet, Dorie, Bishop, Ronald L., Tashchek, Jennifer T., and Ball, Joseph W. 2000 Out of the Palace Dumps: Ceramic Production and Use at Buenavista del Cayo. Ancient Mesoamerica 11:99121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robin, Cynthia 1999 Towards an Archaeology of Everyday Life: Maya Farmers of Chan Noohol and Dos Chambitos Cik'in, Belize. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Robin, Cynthia 2012a Introducing the Chan Site: Farmers in Complex Societies. In Chan: An Ancient Maya Farming Community, edited by Robin, Cynthia, pp. 16. University of Florida Press, Gainesville.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robin, Cynthia 2012b Learning from an Ancient Maya Farming Community. In Chan: An Ancient Maya Farming Community, edited by Robin, Cynthia, pp. 311342. University of Florida Press, Gainesville.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robin, Cynthia 2013 Everyday Life Matters: Maya Farmers at Chan. University of Florida Press, Gainesville.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robin, Cynthia, Wyatt, Andrew, Meierhoff, James, and Kestle, Caleb 2015 Political Interaction: A View from the 2,000 Year History of the Farming Community of Chan. In Classic Maya Polities of the Southern Lowlands, edited by Marken, Damien B. and Fitzsimmons, James L., pp. 99122. University of Colorado Press, Boulder.Google Scholar
Robin, Cynthia, Meierhoff, James, Kestle, Caleb, Blackmore, Chelsea, Kosakowsky, Laura J., and Novotny, Anna C. 2012 Ritual in a Farming Community. In Chan: An Ancient Maya Farming Community, edited by Robin, Cynthia, pp. 113132. University of Florida Press, Gainesville.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robin, Cynthia, Kosakowsky, Laura, Keller, Angela, and Meierhoff, James 2014 Leaders, Farmers, and Crafters: The Relationship Between Leading Households and Households Across the Chan Community. Ancient Mesoamerica 25:371387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roemer, Erwin 1991 A Late Classic Workshop at Colha, Belize. In Maya Stone Tools: Selected Papers from the Second Maya Lithic Conference, edited by Hester, Thomas R. and Shafer, Harry J., pp. 5566. Prehistory Press, Madison.Google Scholar
Sahlins, Marshall 1972 Stone Age Economics. Aldine Publishing Company, New York.Google Scholar
Schortman, Edward M., and Urban, Patricia A. 2004 Modeling the Roles of Craft Production in Ancient Political Economies. Journal of Archaeological Research 12:185226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheets, Payson 2000 Provisioning the Cerén Household: The Vertical Economy, Village Economy, and Household Economy in the Southeastern Maya Periphery. Ancient Mesoamerica 11:217230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheets, Payson 2006 The Cerén Site: An Ancient Village Buried by Volcanic Ash in Central America. 2nd ed. Wadsworth, Australia.Google Scholar
Sheets, Payson 2017 Abundance in the Ancient Maya Village of Cerén? In Abundance: The Archaeology of Plenitude, edited by Smith, Monica L., pp. 85116. University of Colorado Press, Boulder.Google Scholar
Sheets, Payson 2020 Service Relationships within the Broader Economy of Cerén, a Young Maya Village. In The Real Business of Ancient Maya Economies: From Farmers’ Fields to Rulers’ Realms, edited by Masson, Marylin, Freidel, David A. and Demarest, Arthur, pp. 238258. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheets, Payson, Dixon, Christine, Lentz, David, Egan, Rachel, Halmbacher, Alexandria, Slotten, Venicia, Herrera, Rocio, and Lamb, Celine 2015 The Sociopolitical Economy of an Ancient Maya Village: Cerén and its Sacbe. Latin American Antiquity 26:341361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheets, Payson, Lentz, David, Piperno, Dolores, Jones, John, Dixon, Christine, Maloof, George and Hood, Angela 2012 Ancient Manioc Agriculture South of the Cerén Village, El Salvador. Latin American Antiquity 23:259281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shimada, Izumi 2007 Introduction. In Craft Production in Complex Societies: Multicraft and Producer Perspectives, edited by Izumi Shimada, pp. 125. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Shott, Michael 2018 Pottery Ethnoarchaeology in the Michoacán Sierra. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Smith, Carol A. 1974 Economics of Marketing Systems: Models from Economic Geography. Annual Review of Anthropology 3:167201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Monica L. (editor) 2017 Abundance: The Archaeology of Plentitude. University of Colorado Press, Boulder.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taschek, Jennifer T., and Ball, Joseph W. 1992 Lord Smoke-Squirrel's Cacao Cup: The Archaeological Context and Socio-Historical Significance of the Buenavista ‘Jauncy Vase.’ In The Maya Vase Book. Vol. III, edited by Kerr, Justin, pp. 490498. Kerr Associates, New York.Google Scholar
Tokovinine, Alexandre 2020 Bundling the Sticks: A Case for Classic Maya Tallies. In The Real Business of Ancient Maya Economies: From Farmers’ Fields to Rulers’ Realms, edited by Masson, Marylin, Freidel, David A., and Demarest, Arthur, pp. 276295. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Torrence, Robin 1986 Production and Exchange of Stone tools: Prehistoric Obsidian in the Aegean. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
VandenBosch, Jon C. 1999 Lithic Economy and Household Interdependence among the Late Classic Maya of Belize. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
VandenBosch, Jon C., LeCount, Lisa J., and Yaeger, Jason 2010 Integration and Interdependence: The Domestic Chipped Stone Economy of the Xunantunich Polity. In Classic Maya Provincial Polities: Xunantunich and its Hinterlands, edited by LeCount, Lisa J. and Yaeger, Jason, pp. 272294. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Whittaker, John C. 1994 Flintknapping: Making and Understanding Stone Tools. University of Texas Press, Austin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittaker, John C., Kamp, Kathryn A., Ford, Anabel, Guerra, Rafael, Brands, Peter, Guerra, Jose, McLean, Kim, Woods, Alex, Badillo, Melissa, Thornton, Jennifer, and Eiley, Zerifeh 2009 Lithic Industry in a Maya Center: An Axe Workshop at El Pilar, Belize. Latin American Antiquity 20:134156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiessner, Polly 1980 Risk, Reciprocity, and Social Influences on !Kung San Economies. In Politics and History in Band Societies, edited by Leacock, Eleanor and Lee, Richard, pp. 6184. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Wilk, Richard R., and Cligget, Lisa C. 2007 Economies and Cultures: Foundations of Economic Anthropology. Westview Press, Boulder.Google Scholar
Willey, Gordon R. 2004 Retrospective. In Ancient Maya of the Belize Valley: Half a Century of Archaeological Research, edited by Garber, James F., pp. 1524. University of Florida Press, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Yaeger, Jason 2000 Changing Patterns of Social Organization: The Late and Terminal Classic Communities at San Lorenzo, Cayo District, Belize. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Yaeger, Jason 2010a Commodities, Brands, and Village Economies in the Classic Maya Lowlands. In Cultures of Commodity Branding, edited by Bevan, Andrew and Wengrow, David, pp. 167195. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek.Google Scholar
Yaeger, Jason 2010b Landscapes of the Xunantunich Hinterlands. In Classic Maya Provincial Polities: Xunantunich and its Hinterlands, edited by LeCount, Lisa J. and Yaeger, Jason, pp. 233249. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Yaeger, Jason, and Brown, M. Kathryn 2019 Political Landscapes of the Upper Belize River Valley. Research Reports in Belizean Archaeology 16:2130.Google Scholar
Yaeger, Jason, Kathryn Brown, M., Helmke, Christophe, Zender, Marc, Cap, Bernadette, Rodriquez, Christie Kokel, and Batty, Sylvia 2015 Two Early Classic Elite Burials from Buenavista del Cayo, Belize. Research Reports in Belizean Archaeology 12:181191.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Figure 1. Map showing locations discussed in the text. Map by Bernadette Cap used with permission of Mopan Valley Archaeological Project/Mopan Valley Preclassic Project (MVAP/MVPP).

Figure 1

Figure 2. Map of Callar Creek Quarry and surrounding households. Base image by B. Cap courtesy of MVAP/MVPP, map by the author.

Figure 2

Table 1. Ceramic sherds associated with quarry contexts.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Chert quality at Callar Creek Quarry. (a) Bedded chert with fossil inclusions. (b) Cobble chert showing varying quality. Photographs by the author.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Debitage from Callar Creek Quarry. Photograph by the author.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Buried deposits of lithic materials at Callar Creek Quarry. Photograph by the author.

Figure 6

Figure 6. Reduction sequence of materials from Callar Creek Quarry. Image by the author.

Figure 7

Table 2. Flake production technique of whole flakes.

Figure 8

Table 3. Descriptive statistics of quarry debitage.

Figure 9

Table 4. Cortex percentage of quarry debitage.

Figure 10

Table 5. Core forms.

Figure 11

Figure 7. Ceramics from Callar Creek Quarry illustrating connections with the political community of Buenavista. Photograph by the author.