Late Greater Coclé

inhabitants. When the Spanish arrived in Central Panama (1515 CE), [Haller 2004], [Cooke_et_al 2013, p. 480] they found a 'series of competing chiefdoms', the most powerful of which was located around the former cemetery of Sitio Conte and under the control of Chief Natá. [Hearne_Hearne_Sharer 1992, p. 17] Fernández de Oviedo, who arrived in Central America in 1514, reported that the community in which Chief Natá resided (also called Natá in some of the sources) included 45 to 50 houses. [Drennan_Earle 1991, p. 275], [Myers 2007, p. 139] Archaeological work has shown that it covered c. 400 ha, leading Drennan to estimate a population of at least 2000. [Drennan_Earle 1991, p. 275] However, Creamer and Haas refer to Cooke's lower estimate of 1500 inhabitants. [Creamer_Haas 1985, p. 744]

'Unfortunately, much of the settlement data for Coclé and adjacent regions is inadequate to the task of reconstructing chiefly territories, largely because of a lack of site histories detailing phase-by-phase changes in site size, population, and relative status differences.' [Menzies_Haller 2012, p. 459]

Unfortunately, much of the settlement data for Coclé and adjacent regions is inadequate to the task of reconstructing chiefly territories, largely because of a lack of site histories detailing phase-by-phase changes in site size, population, and relative status differences.' [Menzies_Haller 2012, p. 459] Berrey notes that 'systematic, full-coverage regional survey[s]' have now been carried out in two valleys of Central Panama: Río Tonosí (home to the Guaniquito Abajo site) and Río Paritá (home to El Hatillo). [Berrey 2015, p. 200] Densities of ceramic sherds have been used to produce demographic estimates for these two river valleys for the later 1st millennium BCE, [Berrey 2015, p. 200] but I have not found an estimate of the population of one of the Central Panamanian chiefdoms between 1100 CE and Spanish contact.

km within each small chiefdom (though the figure for the entire quasipolity would be higher). 'In her study of Panamanian chiefdoms, Helms found that regional paramount centers were located about one day's travel apart ... thus, the edges of each territory could have been reached from its center in about a half day of travel'. [Spencer_Drennan_Uribe 1987, p. 375] In Helms' own words, 'The dwelling compounds of the quevis of coastal societies through which [the major land trail in western Panama] passed were situated along the route at rather constant intervals, approximately six to eight leagues (about sixteen to twenty-two miles) apart, while one or two other major villages or border points were spaced approximately four leagues (about eleven miles) one from the other ... The regularity of this spacing of chiefly bohíos or major settlements is intriguing, especially since these same figures appear when records of distance are given in the Spanish documents relating to eastern Panama'. [Helms 1979, p. 51] I have worked out the range by halving Helms' figures for the distance between quevis' compounds and converting miles to kilometres.

levels. Both archaeological evidence and contact-period Spanish accounts suggest that the central Panamanian societies in this period had 'a settlement hierarchy of at least two levels. For the period from A.D. 1100-1550, large village sites, similar to Nata (estimated at 4 km2 in area), and large cemetery sites are contemporaneous with habitation sites that are much smaller, more numerous in habitation, and that lack surface architecture'. [Creamer_Haas 1985, pp. 744-45] Menzies and Haller write that 'At the height of the Coclé chiefdom during the Conte phase [700-900 CE], a three-tiered settlement hierarchy in the Río Parita valley indicates the existence of a local chiefdom with the large community of He-4 [El Hatillo] situated at its apex'. [Menzies_Haller 2012, p. 455] They extend this three-tiered hierarchy into the Macaracas phase (900-1100 CE), after the decline of the Coclé chiefdom, [Menzies_Haller 2012, p. 457] and even up to 1522 CE. [Menzies_Haller 2012, p. 457] 1. Large villages, e.g. Natá (1500-2000 inhabitants in the early 16th century) [Creamer_Haas 1985, p. 744], [Drennan_Earle 1991, p. 275] and El Hatillo. [Menzies_Haller 2012, p. 455] According to Creamer and Haas, these are 'believed to have been the central places of regional chiefdoms'. [Creamer_Haas 1985, p. 744] 2. Small villages. [Creamer_Haas 1985, pp. 744-45] 3. Smaller villages.

Spanish accounts provide evidence of 'tequinas (seers) and shaman-curers' in Panamanian societies in the early 16th century. [Spencer_Drennan_Uribe 1987, p. 372]

levels. Mary W. Helms uses the contact-period Spanish written accounts to delineate three levels of elite office, perhaps corresponding to control over differing amounts of territory: [Helms_Brumfiel_Fox 1994, p. 55] 1. Quevi (high chief). [Helms_Brumfiel_Fox 1994, p. 55] 2. Saco (lesser chief). 'Those termed sacos are described as principal personages who had vassals but were inferior in rank to quevis; they could be brothers of quevis or lords subordinated to quevis by defeat in warfare.' [Helms_Brumfiel_Fox 1994, p. 55] 3. Cabra (honoured warrior). 'The lowest level of elite status was held by honored warriors of commoner status who achieved a rank, called cabra, by virtue of outstanding bravery in battle'. [Helms_Brumfiel_Fox 1994, p. 55]

Spanish accounts refer to two longhouses, 'each 220 paces by 50 paces, built to shelter warriors' at the chiefly centre (bohío) of chief Tubanama (or Tumanama). [Helms_Brumfiel_Fox 1994, p. 9] If these sources are accurate and if these large structures were permanent, this might indicate the presence of professional military officers and/or soldiers. According to Helms, 'warriors' of commoner status in Precolumbian Panama could achieve the elite rank of cabra by demonstrating 'outstanding bravery in battle'. [Helms_Brumfiel_Fox 1994, p. 55] However, she also tells us that commoners were expected to fight for their chiefs whenever necessary, in addition to providing labour for house-building and other tasks. [Helms_Brumfiel_Fox 1994, p. 57] This seems to point towards a system in which warriors were called up by the chiefs only when hostilities broke out rather than constituting a standing army of professionals. More information is needed to be able to code this variable.

For the Late Chibcha tradition in general: 'There is [...] a great deal of artwork with representations of figures that appear to be shamans in the midst of performances with masks, rattles, and flutes. Shamans made regular use of expressive performances.' [Hoopes_Peregrine_Ember 2001, p. 243] Spanish accounts provide evidence of 'tequinas (seers) and shaman-curers' in Panamanian societies in the early 16th century. [Spencer_Drennan_Uribe 1987, p. 372] Were these full-time specialists, or did they also take on political leadership roles, as suggested by Hoopes for the Early Chibcha tradition? [Hoopes_Peregrine_Ember 2001, p. 104]

Spanish accounts refer to two longhouses, 'each 220 paces by 50 paces, built to shelter warriors' at the chiefly centre (bohío) of chief Tubanama (or Tumanama). [Helms_Brumfiel_Fox 1994, p. 9] If these sources are accurate and if these large structures were permanent, this might indicate the presence of professional military officers and/or soldiers. According to Helms, 'warriors' of commoner status in Precolumbian Panama could achieve the elite rank of cabra by demonstrating 'outstanding bravery in battle'. [Helms_Brumfiel_Fox 1994, p. 55] More information is needed to be able to code this variable.

Helms argues that 'Although the ethnohistoric data are very scanty, some degree of "internal" administrative associations and responsibilities surely existed between the commoner population of a given territory or "province" and the elite cabras, sacos and/or quevis of that territory, who at the very least accepted generalized stewardship of the overall well-being, socially and ideologically, of the population of a given ancestral territory'. [Helms_Brumfiel_Fox 1994, p. 56] She believes cabras, the lowest-ranked elites, would have served as 'local administrators', [Helms_Brumfiel_Fox 1994, p. 56] but does not speculate on whether they were full-time. The evidence does not seem strong enough to justify coding full-time specialist bureaucrats present.

The high quality and stylistic uniformity of Greater Coclé material culture has been interpreted as pointing to the presence of (full-time?) craft specialists. 'Craft specialization is seen in gold working and in the fabrication of standardized and well-executed polychrome ceramics, which circulated throughout Panama and were important as grave furniture'. [Creamer_Haas 1985, p. 745]

Isaza Aizpurúa notes that most of the European accounts of Panamanian societies at the time of contact 'come from the Pacific coast, where the chroniclers encountered small villages with scattered houses on hilltops in the middle of forested areas as well as large nucleated settlements situated along the rich alluvial valleys. Although not much else is offered about site hierarchies or community organization, there is a constant reference to the bohío del queví, which could be interpreted as the place where the chief and his entourage happened to be when the Europeans arrived, the mortuary house where ancestors were kept, or the structures where chiefs would have presided [over] communal events.' [Isaza_Aizpurúa 2013, p. 116] It seems that we do not have a complete enough understanding of the uses of buildings in the Panamanian chiefdoms of this period to discern whether there were specialized buildings set aside for administrative purposes (separate from chiefly residences).

Helms argues that 'Although the ethnohistoric data are very scanty, some degree of "internal" administrative associations and responsibilities surely existed between the commoner population of a given territory or "province" and the elite cabras, sacos and/or quevis of that territory, who at the very least accepted generalized stewardship of the overall well-being, socially and ideologically, of the population of a given ancestral territory'. [Helms_Brumfiel_Fox 1994, p. 56] She believes cabras, the lowest-ranked elites, would have served as 'local administrators', [Helms_Brumfiel_Fox 1994, p. 56] but does not speculate on whether they were full-time. The evidence does not seem strong enough to justify coding full-time specialist bureaucrats present.

Helms argues that 'Although the ethnohistoric data are very scanty, some degree of "internal" administrative associations and responsibilities surely existed between the commoner population of a given territory or "province" and the elite cabras, sacos and/or quevis of that territory, who at the very least accepted generalized stewardship of the overall well-being, socially and ideologically, of the population of a given ancestral territory'. [Helms_Brumfiel_Fox 1994, p. 56] She believes cabras, the lowest-ranked elites, would have served as 'local administrators', [Helms_Brumfiel_Fox 1994, p. 56] but does not speculate on whether they were full-time. The evidence does not seem strong enough to justify coding full-time specialist bureaucrats present.

Helms argues that 'Although the ethnohistoric data are very scanty, some degree of "internal" administrative associations and responsibilities surely existed between the commoner population of a given territory or "province" and the elite cabras, sacos and/or quevis of that territory, who at the very least accepted generalized stewardship of the overall well-being, socially and ideologically, of the population of a given ancestral territory'. [Helms_Brumfiel_Fox 1994, p. 56] She believes cabras, the lowest-ranked elites, would have served as 'local administrators', [Helms_Brumfiel_Fox 1994, p. 56] but does not speculate on whether they were full-time. The evidence does not seem strong enough to justify coding full-time specialist bureaucrats present.

'We are told [...] that quevis [high chiefs] were responsible for settling quarrels and disputes, and could administer capital punishment for perjury'. [Helms_Brumfiel_Fox 1994, p. 56] If these judicial responsibilities were assumed by high chiefs themselves, it seems unlikely that professional judges also existed.

'In some parts of the world [agricultural risk-minimization] was accomplished through infrastructure such as dams and large-scale irrigation canals [...] but there is no evidence for such features among the regions of Central Panama.' [Berrey 2015, p. 207]

Creamer and Haas note that Central Panamanian societies stored corn, 'at least at central places', and that 300 preserved deer were observed by Spanish chroniclers at Natá. [Creamer_Haas 1985] 'Storage of foodstuffs was described as sufficient to maintain the arriving Europeans for months'. [Creamer_Haas 1985, p. 745] Several rectangular structures seen by Gaspar de Espinosa in the early 16th century may have been built for the storage of grain or meat. [Creamer_Haas 1985, p. 745]

Spanish accounts refer to bohíos del quevi, large houses that served as elite residences, sites for the performance of administrative duties, and focal points for communal activities presided over by chiefs. [Isaza_Aizpurúa 2013, p. 116], [Helms 1979, p. 9] However, it is unclear whether structures separate from the chiefly residence (coded below under 'special purpose house') were dedicated to communal activities.

Creamer and Haas note that Central Panamanian societies stored corn, 'at least at central places', and that 300 preserved deer were observed by Spanish chroniclers at Natá. [Creamer_Haas 1985] 'Storage of foodstuffs was described as sufficient to maintain the arriving Europeans for months'. [Creamer_Haas 1985, p. 745] Several rectangular structures seen by Gaspar de Espinosa in the early 16th century may have been built for the storage of grain or meat. [Creamer_Haas 1985, p. 745]

In 1979, Helms wrote: 'Panama gives little evidence so far of distinctly ceremonial structures, such as temples or pyramids, that would also have served this purpose, although sacred shrines in interior mountains may have existed'. [Helms 1979, p. 9] However, subsequent archaeological work has changed this. For the Conte Phase, 700-900 CE: 'The presence of modest monumental architecture at sites in the vicinity of Sitio Conte provides further evidence for a regional ranking of communities. Located less than 2 km to the north, the site of El Caño featured lines of carved basalt columns, cobble pavements, low burial mounds, a large ceremonial structure, and recently discovered Conte phase burials with grave offerings on the same scale as Sitio Conte (Mayo et al. 2010; Mojica et al. 2007; Williams 2012). Although this monumental architecture was modest by the standards of other early chiefdoms (Drennan et al. 2010:70), El Caño was clearly the focal point of ceremonial activity for this chiefdom'. [Menzies_Haller 2012, p. 454] Mortuary activity continued at El Caño until the colonial period, [Haller 2004, p. 85] so presumably these carved columns continued to serve symbolic purposes after 900 CE.

Spanish accounts refer to bohíos del quevi, large houses that served as elite residences, sites for the performance of administrative duties, and focal points for communal activities presided over by chiefs. [Isaza_Aizpurúa 2013, p. 116], [Helms 1979, p. 9] There is archaeological support for the presence of comparable structures before the 16th century: excavations at the site of El Hatillo revealed a high-status household, dating to the Cubitá (550-700 CE) and Conte (700-950 CE) phases, with evidence of an unusually large building that Locascio argues 'probably served a more communal role' than other elite residences. [Locascio_et_al 2013, p. 147], [Isaza_Aizpurúa_et_al 2013, p. 27] More generally, Locascio writes of '[c]ommunal activities associated with elite households' throughout the long occupation period at El Hatillo, from c. 500 CE to the Spanish contact period. [Locascio_et_al 2013, pp. 127-29]

Gold deposits in streams were exploited: 'We can surmise from 16th-century observations that the principal method for obtaining gold was collecting it in baskets or bowls from stream deposits'. [Hoopes_Peregrine_Ember 2001, p. 103] Do these count as 'mines'?

Most trade appears to have taken place at chiefly centres such as Natá, under the control of the chief, rather than at peripheral or short-lived emporia. 'Sixteenth century accounts of Natá state that it served as an exchange center, where coastal inhabitants would trade fish and crabs for maize (Espinosa 1994a:49; Linares 1977:73) and cotton mantles were traded across the cordillera for gold ores (Oviedo 1944:VII:7). Oviedo (1944:VIII:23 in Linares 1977:73) remarked that the main items traded at Natá were salt, maize, salted fish, spun and unspun cotton, blankets, hammocks, and gold. Based on Espinosa's descriptions of extensive salt production facilities, abundant fisheries, and hunting grounds in Natá's territory, Linares (1977:73) proposes that Chief Natá "controlled or had access to several micro-environments yielding products," which would be exploited by traders who then would exchange these products at Natá — a redistributive center (Espinosa 1994a:49). Trading outside of the chiefly territory might have been regulated through the chief himself (Linares 1977:73).' [Haller 2004, p. 14]

Burial sites. [Locascio_et_al 2013, p. 127], [Isaza_Aizpurúa_et_al 2013, p. 23], [Locascio_et_al 2013, p. 147], [Cooke_et_al 2000, pp. 168-69] Sites not associated with residential areas.

Helms noted in 1979 that 'The significance of the bohío as a visible symbol of the chiefly estate may be all the more noteworthy since Panama gives little evidence so far of distinctly ceremonial structures, such as temples or pyramids, that would also have served this purpose, although sacred shrines in interior mountains may have existed'. [Helms 1979, p. 9] However, subsequent archaeological work has uncovered evidence of man-made structures, such as plazas and pavements, that probably had ceremonial purposes. 'El Caño (Figure 4.28), one of few sites in Panama with rows of sculpted and unsculpted stone columns and a cobble pavement, is considered a ceremonial center by Cooke, et al. (2000:172; 2003a:126-127, 2003b:9). Similarly, the burial mounds at He-4 [a.k.a. El Hatillo] are the only formal cemetery within the survey zone [Mikael Haller's survey zone, in the Río Parita valley]. These mounds were arranged around a plaza (Bull 1965; Ladd 1964:25), which suggests that ritual, at least which focused on mortuary activity (Espinosa 1994b:64), was centered at this first-order site.' [Haller 2004, p. 177] According to Haller, the burial mounds associated with probable ceremonial activity at El Hatillo 'date to the later phases of the Late Occupation Sequence, i.e., Macaracas, Parita, and El Hatillo': 900-1522 CE in the chronology used in his dissertation. [Haller 2004, p. 177]

Beginning in the Macaracas phase (900-1100 CE) and peaking in the Parita phase (1100-1300 CE), large burial mounds were constructed around the settlement of El Hatillo. [Locascio_et_al 2013, p. 127], [Isaza_Aizpurúa_et_al 2013, p. 23] The village also had a 'formal cemetery'. [Locascio_et_al 2013, p. 147] Construction and use of burial sites separate from residential areas continued until Spanish contact, as shown by burial urns containing both European and indigenous Central American artefacts, excavated from mounds at El Caño. [Cooke_et_al 2000, p. 168] Cooke, Sánchez Herrera and Udagawa believe these urns would have been deposited 'between late 1502 and 1516-22'. [Cooke_et_al 2000, p. 169]

Panamanian societies were non-literate before Spanish contact. [Mendizábal_Archibold 2004, p. 14]

Panamanian societies were non-literate before Spanish contact. [Mendizábal_Archibold 2004, p. 14]

Panamanian societies were non-literate before Spanish contact. [Mendizábal_Archibold 2004, p. 14]

Panamanian societies were non-literate before Spanish contact. [Mendizábal_Archibold 2004, p. 14]

Panamanian societies were non-literate before Spanish contact. [Mendizábal_Archibold 2004, p. 14]

Panamanian societies were non-literate before Spanish contact. [Mendizábal_Archibold 2004, p. 14]

Panamanian societies were non-literate before Spanish contact. [Mendizábal_Archibold 2004, p. 14]

Panamanian societies were non-literate before Spanish contact. [Mendizábal_Archibold 2004, p. 14]

Panamanian societies were non-literate before Spanish contact. [Mendizábal_Archibold 2004, p. 14]

Panamanian societies were non-literate before Spanish contact. [Mendizábal_Archibold 2004, p. 14]

Panamanian societies were non-literate before Spanish contact. [Mendizábal_Archibold 2004, p. 14]

Panamanian societies were non-literate before Spanish contact. [Mendizábal_Archibold 2004, p. 14]

Panamanian societies were non-literate before Spanish contact. [Mendizábal_Archibold 2004, p. 14]

Precious metals (gold and tumbaga, an alloy of copper and gold) were used to create elaborate ornaments, but did these objects serve as a medium of exchange? [Hoopes_Peregrine_Ember 2001, p. 242] I have left this variable uncoded for now.

The sources I have consulted do not mention paper currency in Precolumbian Panama.

The sources I have consulted do not mention any form of coinage (either indigenous or foreign) in Precolumbian Panama.

The sources I have consulted do not mention any form of coinage (either indigenous or foreign) in Precolumbian Panama.

Panamanian societies were non-literate before Spanish contact. [Mendizábal_Archibold 2004, p. 14] Because this variable is concerned only with the presence of written (rather than verbal) debt and credit agreements, I have coded absent.

The sources I have consulted do not mention a postal service, and Precolumbian Panamanian societies were non-literate. [Mendizábal_Archibold 2004, p. 14]

The sources I have consulted do not mention a postal service, and Precolumbian Panamanian societies were non-literate. [Mendizábal_Archibold 2004, p. 14]

The sources I have consulted do not mention a postal service, and Precolumbian Panamanian societies were non-literate. [Mendizábal_Archibold 2004, p. 14]

The 16th-century Spanish historian Francisco López de Gómara (who did not visit the Americas personally) 'mentioned that among the Chibcha on the coast of Cartagena some system of weighing was employed'. [Guerra 1960, p. 343] Cartagena is in Colombia but Chibcha-speaking populations were very likely also present in Central Panama in this period. [Hoopes_et_al 2003, p. 56], [Hoopes_Peregrine_Ember 2001, p. 100] Besides this statement, I have been unable to find examples in the literature of good evidence for standardized weights in Precolumbian Panama. More information is needed to be able to code this variable.

According to Francisco Guerra, '[a] system of standards for volume and length can be established in Nuclear America prior to the arrival of the Spaniards, and, although these standards are not as detailed as those of the Roman system, they seem to have been fairly widespread in their application'. [Guerra 1960, p. 343] ('Nuclear America' refers to the region between central Mexico and the Andes. [Willey 1955, p. 571] ) However, Guerra does not specifically mention the populations of Precolumbian Panama, referring only to the Aztec, Maya, Mixtec, Zapotec, Tarascan and Otomi. [Guerra 1960, p. 344] Moreover, even for the literate and more politically centralized cultures of Mesoamerica to the north, Freidel and Reilly note in a more recent publication that '[t]here is little evidence that the Pre-Columbian Mesoamericans used standardized weights and measures beyond the "vara" of cotton cloth'. [Freidel_et_al 2010] Some types of ceramics from Central Panama, especially after 550 CE, conform to a standardized range of shapes, but their precise dimensions (and therefore volumes) vary. [Haller 2004], [Mayo 2015, pp. 17-22] In all, I have been unable to find examples in the literature of good evidence for standardized measures of volume in Precolumbian Central Panama, so have coded 'inferred absent'.

According to Francisco Guerra, '[a] system of standards for volume and length can be established in Nuclear America prior to the arrival of the Spaniards, and, although these standards are not as detailed as those of the Roman system, they seem to have been fairly widespread in their application'. [Guerra 1960, p. 343] ('Nuclear America' refers to the region between central Mexico and the Andes. [Willey 1955, p. 571] ) However, Guerra does not specifically mention the populations of Precolumbian Panama, referring only to the Aztec, Maya, Mixtec, Zapotec, Tarascan and Otomi. [Guerra 1960, p. 344] Moreover, even for the literate and more politically centralized cultures of Mesoamerica to the north, Freidel and Reilly note in a more recent publication that '[t]here is little evidence that the Pre-Columbian Mesoamericans used standardized weights and measures beyond the "vara" of cotton cloth'. [Freidel_et_al 2010] Some types of ceramics from Central Panama, especially after 550 CE, conform to a standardized range of shapes, but their precise dimensions vary. [Haller 2004], [Mayo 2015, pp. 17-22] In all, I have been unable to find examples in the literature of good evidence for standardized measures of length in Precolumbian Central Panama, so have coded 'inferred absent'.