El Gigante Rock Shelter: Archaic Mesoamerica and Transitions to Settled Life

Excavations at the Site of El Gigante

In 2000, two adjacent 1x1 meter test units were dug, units 1 and 2. The second season of excavations was carried out between October and December of 2001 and was far more extensive, adding another 17 units and bringing the total to 19 (see Figure 2).

The original units were placed in an area with as little apparent surface disturbance as possible and as near a 1994 unit (Lara-Hasemann, 2000; Hasemann, 1996) as possible. This placement gave us some idea as to the general stratigraphy we were to encounter, allowing us to dig non-arbitrary stratigraphic levels, and maintain strict control on provenience. Within each lithostratigraphic stratum, arbitrary 5 cm archaeostratigraphic levels were dug. All sediments were dry screened in the field with 1/8 in. hardware cloth to recover all possible macro remains. The attempt was made in the excavations to never excavate a level from more than one stratum. The complexity of the stratigraphy made this a challenge, but I believe we were largely successful. We proceeded with the excavations in much in the same way as described by Flannery in his description of the excavation of Guila Naquitz (1986). This method was crucial, as the stratigraphy of the site was composed of a complex palimpsest of natural and anthropogenic sediments (as with many rock shelters, see Strauss, 1990). The method is summarized as follows:

The units were not dug simultaneously. For example, unit 1 was brought to depth first, exposing what would be the south wall unit 2. Levels from unit 2 were then "peeled back" in an attempt to keep all levels within discrete strata. Unit 2 therefore has somewhat better control of stratigraphic provenience. Unit 1 is the only unit in which not at least one wall was exposed upon excavation. All further units in the main block were excavated in this sequential manner with at least one wall exposed to guide the excavator. Two units (18 and 19) were excavated with three walls initially exposed and thus, have the best archaeological control.

The main block of one-by-one meter excavation squares was dug extending off of the previous years pilot units (units 1 and 2). This main block now consists of 12 square meters of excavated floor area (units 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 13, 16, 17, 18, and 19) (see Figure 2).

Two other areas of the rock shelter were investigated as well, the first near the rear wall, in the deepest portion of the shelter, where looting had been noted (units 5, 8, 10, and 14). The second area was a sample of the large natural pot-hole depressions in the Northern portion of the cave (units 11 and 12). These seemed like likely places for the focus of human action. Both of these areas turned out to have been highly disturbed. Extensive reworking and mixing of these sediments left no discernable stratigraphy intact, all the way down to bedrock.

Another consideration in the placement of the units was the attempt to transect the shelter perpendicular to the orientation of the mouth. This was done because the stratigraphy in this dimension can show best the physical evolution of the geologic structure.

Lastly, to follow-up on previous investigators claims of very early human settlement, it was decided to enlarge our sample of what we believed to be non-cultural strata. We did this by excavating an additional single 1.5 by 2 meter unit (unit 15) all the way down to bedrock. This did not produce any cultural material. The claim of very early occupation is discussed below.

Previous Page  |  Table of Contents  |  Next Page

Return to top of page