International Journal of Osteoarchaeology

Int. J. Osteoarchaeol. 11: 163 – 171 (2001)

Fishing in Peru Between 10000 and 3750

BP
ELIZABETH J. REITZ*
Georgia Museum of Natural History, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA

ABSTRACT Archaeozoological data for the period of 10000– 5000 BP were rare for the southeastern Pacific
coast, until recent work provided data from eight sites in Peru and Ecuador. These sites span the
early to mid-Holocene period, during which time modern climatic conditions became estab-
lished. Vertebrate faunal data from these sites provide an opportunity to explore the influence of
mid-Holocene environmental changes on fishing in Peru during this time. With two exceptions,
most faunal collections are dominated by marine animals, with virtually no terrestrial vertebrates.
Many of the marine organisms are catholic species, tolerant of a wide variety of water conditions,
rather than ones which clearly prefer warm– tropical or warm– temperate ones. Warm– tropical
species are more common in the northern assemblages, as would be expected. There is a
temporal pattern as well. Within three subdivisions of this area, warm– tropical animals diminish in
abundance, and warm–temperate animals increase. These differences probably reflect cultural
responses to mid-Holocene environmental change, in which coastal waters from southern Peru
into Ecuador became cooler. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Key words: Peru; early and mid-Holocene; pre-ceramic period; coastal resources; environmen-
tal change

Introduction original resource base. They also reflect human

A dynamic relationship exists between humans
as biological and cultural organisms, the envi-
ronments in which they live, and archaeological
deposits. This complicates studies of environ-
mental change. However, the environment is
not stable, and people have responded to
many environmental changes during the post-
Pleistocene. Faunal assemblages, therefore, do
contain evidence of changes in Holocene
environments that is highly relevant to histori-
cal ecology and studies of global climate
change.
Studies of environmental change are difficult
because faunal remains reflect human and non-
human responses to many variables (Grayson,
1981; Reitz, 1994). People are not passive in the
face of environmental change, and archaeologi-
cal sites are not faithful mirrors of environmen-
tal conditions. Archaeological sites reflect the
* Correspondence to: Georgia Museum of Natural History, Uni-
versity of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602-1882, USA. Tel.: + 1 706
542 1663; fax: + 1 706 542 3920; e-mail: ereitz@arches.uga.edu
Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
cultural behaviour, as people select which re-
sources to use or ignore, determine where to
live and when, schedule resource use in terms of
daily, seasonal and annual cycles, develop the
technologies to acquire and process resources,
distribute resources, consume them, and dispose
of the unwanted residue. People seldom make
use of animals in direct proportion to their
availability. Animal remains are subject, also, to
a number of post-depositional, excavation and
analytical processes. These variables obscure the
relationships among the original resource base,
human use of those resources, and the recovered
faunal assemblage.
However, foodways are also highly conserva-
tive. The following paper is based on the hy-
pothesis that subsistence strategies do reflect
the environment in which they occur. When
evidence for substantial subsistence change is
found, it is probably associated with significant
changes in the cultural or natural environments.
Looked at another way, alterations in economi-
cally important species should be reflected in
164
human behaviour and, therefore, in archaeologi-
cal assemblages. In the absence of domestication
or trade in exotic species, animals found at sites
outside their modern range indicate that natural
conditions near the site were once able to sup-
port those species, though they may be rare or
absent there today. Specifically, a shift from
animals preferring warm waters to ones prefer-
ring cooler waters could indicate such a change,
especially if the pattern is found in groups of
animals, rather than in a single taxon, as well as
at sites occupied at different times and in differ-
ent zoogeographical provinces.
Such a change is found in a series of coastal
Peruvian sites occupied between 10575 and
3750 BP and located between 17°S and 2°S. The
marine vertebrates reflect a steady change from
animals associated with warm –tropical waters to
those preferring warm –temperate conditions.
One explanation is that these collections reflect
cultural responses to gradually cooling coastal
waters in the early and mid-Holocene. In the
following paper, the modern distribution of
temperate and tropical vertebrates will be sum-
marized. Then archaeofaunal collections with a
tropical complex will be contrasted with those
containing temperate animals. Finally, this
premise will be considered in terms of cultural
and environmental explanations.
Resource area
Today, the Peruvian coast is a cool, barren
desert as far north as 5°S (Guillén, 1980; San-
tander, 1980; Handler, 1984). It seldom rains on
the coast, except during southern oscillations of
the equatorial counter current known as El
Niño. The desert is virtually devoid of plants
and animals, except where seasonal fog oases
(lomas) form during the austral winter, and in
coastal river valleys. Most coastal rivers flow
only when there is rain in the upper valley.
Freshwater fishes and terrestrial vertebrates are
scarce (Eigenmann, 1921; Grimwood, 1969).
Terrestrial vertebrates are primarily rodents,
foxes (Pseudalopex sechurae), and lizards, with oc-
casional New World camelids and deer (Cervi-
dae). Estuaries are rare, except in the Ecuadorian
part of the study area. In contrast, an abundant
Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
E.J. Reitz
and characteristic group of marine organisms are
supported by nutrients brought to the ocean
surface when cold benthic waters rise from the
ocean floor in response to prevailing winds and
currents (Briggs, 1974, p. 137; Santander, 1980).
Today this coast (Figure 1) is divided into the
warm –temperate Peru –Chilean Province and
the warm –tropical Panamanian Province, at 3°S
or 4°S (Briggs, 1974, p. 42). Others divide the
provinces at 6°S (Ekman, 1953, p. 38). The
boundary is formed where the cold, north-flow-
ing Peru current meets south-flowing warm –
tropical waters, deflecting the Peru current
westward, away from the South American conti-
nent. The Peru –Chilean Province is character-
ized by warm –temperate waters, with localized
nutrient upwellings. The Panamanian Province
is characterized by tropical waters, mangrove
swamps and extensive estuaries. As with any
such biogeographical boundary, this one is not
a firm line, and animals typical of one province
are, nonetheless, found in the other (Chi-
richigno, 1982).
Classification of animals
Based on a number of sources (Fowler, 1945;
Hildebrand, 1945; Schweigger, 1964; Chi-
richigno, 1974, 1982), vertebrates found in
these archaeological assemblages are classified
as pertaining to warm –temperate water condi-
tions, warm –tropical water conditions, mixed,
unclassified water conditions, or terrestrial set-
tings (Table 1; Reitz, 1994). At most coastal
sites, marine vertebrates dominate the collec-
tion. The most abundant warm –temperate
forms are penguins (Spheniscus humboldti ), boobies
(Sula spp.), herrings (Clupeidae), anchovies (En-
graulidae), and some species of grouper (Parala-
brax spp.), grunt (Anisotremus scapularis, Isacia
conceptionis) and drum (Paralonchurus peruanus,
Sciaena deliciosa, S. gilberti ), as well as mackerel
(Scombridae). These contrast with the most
common warm –tropical fishes, such as bone-
fishes (Albula vulpes), sea catfishes (Ariidae),
other species of grouper (Epinephelus spp.), grunt
(Conodon spp., Haemulon spp., Orthopristis spp.)
and drum (Larimus spp., Umbrina cf. xanti ), as
well as lisas (Mugil sp.), and puffers (Spheroides
Int. J. Osteoarchaeol. 11: 163 –171 (2001)
Fishing in Peru
Figure 1. Location of the study area and sites.
sp.). Several other taxa are typical of warm –
temperate waters, but may also be found in
warm – tropical settings. These variable species
are unclassified, and referred to as mixed. Ter-
restrial animals are often rare, and will be dis-
cussed in more detail below. None of these
species is confined to the condition in which it
is classified here.
For many reasons, only a broad distinction
will be made between warm –temperate species
and warm – tropical ones. First, most vertebrate
identifications are to the level of genus at
best, though most organisms show preferences
for specific habitats only at the species level.
Even with identifications at the level of spe-
cies, the lack of life history data for most of
Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
165
these animals precludes drawing precise
boundaries.
More importantly, people generally prefer
vertebrates found in a wide variety of habitats,
rather than ones found in only one place. Many
of the species common in archaeological sam-
ples are found in several different water types.
Many members of the warm –tropical group,
such as lisa, move in and out of estuaries as part
of their life cycle, and, consequently, might be
found in both cooler offshore waters, as well as
warmer estuarine settings. Some members of the
warm –tropical complex, such as bonefish and
sea catfish, manage to live as far south as the
Chilean border, where the coastal waters are
cold, but bays provide warmer conditions.
Int. J. Osteoarchaeol. 11: 163 –171 (2001)
166 E.J. Reitz
Table 1. Classification by habitat type of species represented in archaeological assemblages

Warm–tropical/estuarine taxa
Bonefish (Albula vulpes )
Ladyfish (Elops affinis )
Sea catfishes (Ariidae)
Snook (Centropomus spp.)
Grouper and sea perch (Epinephelus spp., Hemanthias peruanus )
Jack (Caranx spp., Oligoplites spp.)
Mojarra (Gerridae, Eucinostomus spp.)
Snapper (Lutjanidae, Lutjanus spp.)
Grunt (Conodon spp., Haemulon spp., Orthopristis spp.)
Porgy (Sparidae, Calamus brachysomus )
Drum (Bairdiella spp., Cynoscion cf. analis, Larimus effulgens, L. cf. gulosus, Micropogonias spp., Odontoscion spp.,
Umbrina cf. xanti )
Lisa (Mugil spp.)
Pococho (Nicholsina (Xenoscarus ) denticulatus )
Puffer (Spheroides annulatus )
Warm–temperate/Peru current taxa
Sea otter (Lutra felina )
Penguin (Spheniscus humboldti )
Great grebe (Podiceps major )
Shearwaters (Procellariidae, Macronectes giganteus )
Diving petrals (Pelecanoididae, Pelecanoides garnotii )
Booby (Sula spp.)
Black-created buzzard eagle (Geranoaetus melanoleucas )
Inca tern (Larosterna inca )
Eagle ray (Myliobatidae, Myliobatis spp.)
Herring (Clupeidae)
Anchovy (Engraulidae, Anchoa spp.)
Merluza (Merluccius spp.)
Cusk eel (Genypterus maculatus )
Cabrilla (Paralabrax spp.)
Jurel (Trachurus murphyi )
Sargo (Anisotremus scapularis )
Cabinza (Isacia conceptionis )
Drum (Paralonchurus spp., Sciaena deliciosa, S. gilberti )
Pintadilla (Cheilodactylus spp.)
Wrasses (Labridae, Pimelometopon spp.)
Rollizo (Mugiloides chilensis )
Vieja (Bodianus spp., Labrisomus philippi )
Mixed habitats (terrestrial and unclassified water conditions)
Mackerels (Scombridae, Euthynnus spp., Sarda spp., Scomber spp., Scomberomorus spp., Thunnus spp.)
Palmera (Seriolella (Neptomenus ) violacea )
Spider monkey (Ateles spp.)
South American fox (Pseudalopex sechurae )
Raccoons (Procyonidae)
Weasels (Mustela sp.)
Puma (Felis concolor )
Sea lions (Pinnipedia, Otariidae, Otaria byronia )
Whales and dolphins (Mysticeti, Delphinidae)
New World camelids (Camelidae)
Deer (Cervidae, Odocoileus virginianus, Mazama sp.)
New World rats and mice (Sigmodontinae, Akodon sp., Oryzomys spp., Phyllotis sp., Sigmodon sp.)
Viscacha (Lagidium peruanum )
Rabbits (Sylvilagus cf. brasiliensis )
Sooty shearwater (Puffinus cf. griseus )
Pelican (Pelecanus spp.)
Cormorant (Phalacrocorax spp.)
Herons (Ardea cocoi )
Rails (Rallidae)
Sandpipers (Scolopacidae)
Gulls (Laridae, Larus spp.)
Pigeons and doves (Columbidae)
Macaws and parrots (Psittacidae)

Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Osteoarchaeol. 11: 163 –171 (2001)
Fishing in Peru 167
Table 1. (Continued )

Song birds (Mimidae)

Sea turtles (Chelonidae)
Lizards (Iguanidae, Tropidurus sp., Teiidae, Dicrodon sp., Callopistes flavipunctatus, Gekkonidae)
Snakes (Colubridae, Constrictor constrictor, Drymarchon corais, Viperidae, Bothrops sp.)
Frogs and toads (Anura, Bufonidae, Ranidae)
Most sharks and rays
Eels (Anguilliformes, Muraenidae)
Sea bass (Serranidae)
Jacks (Carangidae, Seriola spp., Trachinotus paitensis )
Grunt (Haemulidae)
Sea chub (Kyphosus spp.)
Spadefish (Chaetodipterus zonatus )
Flounder (Bothidae, Paralichthys spp.)

Description of sites Sitio Siches (PV7-19) and (OGSE80) Las

Vegas are located in what is now the warm –
All but two of the pre-ceramic sites reviewed tropical Panamanian Province. Sitio Siches lies
here are located in what is now the warm – just at, or just above, the current boundary
temperate Peru –Chilean Province (Figure 1; between the Panamanian and Peru –Chilean
Table 2). The Ring site is a shell midden in Provinces (Sandweiss et al., 1996; Reitz, 1999).
southern Peru, in a region with small intermit- OGSE80 is on the Gulf of Guayaquil, Ecuador
tent streams (Sandweiss et al., 1989). Paloma is a (Byrd, 1976, 1996; Stothert, 1988).
village site in the Chilca River valley (Benfer,
1984; Reitz, 1988a,b), and Almejas is a shell
midden in the Casma valley (Pozorski and Po-
zorski, 1984; Reitz, 1995). Ostra base camp, Archaeofaunal evidence for
another shell midden, is in the Santa valley, environmental change
formed by one of the largest permanent Peru-
vian rivers (Sandweiss et al., 1983, 1996; Reitz, Six of these eight sites are located on what is
1994). Alto Salaverry is a shell midden in the today a warm –temperate coast, and two are in a
Moche valley (Pozorski and Pozorski, 1979). A warm –tropical region. The coastal waters at all
group of sites in the Chicama valley are associ- of these locations may once have been warmer
ated with what is thought to be an early hunt- than today. The evidence for this premise will
ing complex (Wing, 1986; Chauchat, 1988, first be explored geographically, and then
1992). These Paiján Complex sites are 14–36 chronologically. This survey will be based on
km from the present coastline. the percentage of minimum number of individu-
als (MNI).
Table 2. Sites reviewed Warm –temperate vertebrates are common in
half of these collections. Warm –temperate taxa
Site Excavator Date, BP comprise between 68 and 86% of the individu-
Ring site D. Sandweiss and 10 575–5060 als from the Ring site, Paloma, and Alto
J. Richardson Salaverry (Table 3). These collections contain a
Paloma R. Benfer 7735–4780 distinct and characteristic group of animals,
Almejas T. Pozorski and 7000
S. Pozorski dominated by herrings, anchovies and drums,
Ostra base camp D. Sandweiss 6250–5450 typical of temperate waters. This southern com-
Alto Salaverry S. Pozorski and 4450–3750 plex contrasts sharply with the two sites in the
T. Pozorski
Paiján complex C. Chauchat 10 380–8260 Panamanian Province. Tropical organisms com-
Sitio Siches D. Sandweiss and 7563–4550 prise 83% of the individuals at Sitio Siches.
J. Richardson Most of these are weakfish (Cynoscion cf. analis),
OGSE80 K. Stothert 10 000–6600
(Las Vegas) largemouth drum (Larimus cf. gulosus) and yel-
lowtail croaker (Umbrina cf. xanti ). At OGSE80,

Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Osteoarchaeol. 11: 163 –171 (2001)
168 E.J. Reitz

Table 3. Warm–tropical, warm–temperate and mixed habitat vertebrates as a percentage of MNI, organized from south to northa

Site Tropical Temperate Mixed Terrestrial MNI Date, BP

% % % %

Southern Peru
Ring site (17°40%S) 2.5 68.1 28.4 0.9 436 10 575–5060
Paloma, probability samples (12°30%S) 1.5 83.3 12.9 2.3 132 7735–4780
Northern Peru
Almejas, 1/4-inch samples (ca. 9°) 40.3 35.1 17.5 7.0 114 7000
Ostra base camp (8°55%S) 53.5 30.0 16.7 – 144 6250–5450
Alto Salaverry (8°15%S) 6.3 85.9 7.8 – 64 4450–3750
Paiján complex (8°30%S) 14.3 0.5 1.3 83.8 761 10 380–8260
Panamanian Province
Sitio Siches (4°20%S) 82.8 10.2 6.5 0.5 635 7563–4550
Las Vegas, OGSE80 (2°15%S) 37.5 3.6 10.7 48.2 56 10 000–6600
a
Mixed includes marine mammals, birds, sharks, rays and bony fishes with varied habitat preferences.
Faunal data from Byrd (1976), Pozorski and Pozorski (1979), Wing (1986), Reitz (1988a, 1994, 1995, 1999), and Sandweiss et
al. (1989).
No 14C dates are available for Alto Salaverry; dated by association with similar sites and artifacts. The date for Las Vegas does
not include earlier, pre-Vegas deposits, which are not included in the faunal samples. Dates from these sources and Benfer
(1984), Chauchat (1988, 1992), Stothert (1988), and Sandweiss et al. (1989, 1996). Age ranges are based on the uncalibrated
means of earliest and latest radiocarbon dates for each site or on excavator’s estimates when no 14C dates are available,
discounting outliers rejected by the excavators. The sources cited provide lists of dates and standard deviations. Estimates of
human MNI are omitted.

warm – tropical vertebrates are primarily sea cat-
fishes and lisas. At both sites, tropical fishes,
such as bonefish and croaker (Odontoscion sp.,
Micropogonias spp.), are much more common
than warm – temperate herrings, anchovies and
drums, such as lorna (S. deliciosa) or coco (P.
peruvianus).
At two sites, terrestrial vertebrates contribute
more than 50% of the individuals. It has been
presumed that the earliest occupants of the
Peruvian coastal plain were hunters, who even-
tually learned to take advantage of marine re-
sources. The terrestrial animals in these
assemblages suggest otherwise. In the Paiján
assemblage, 74% of the individuals are cañan
lizards (Dicrodon sp.) and snakes, 3% are birds,
and 16% are fishes. Mammals (7%) are primar-
ily rodents (Sigmodontinae), but also include
fox (Pseudalopex sechurae) and viscacha (Lagidium
peruanum). Less than 1% of the individuals are
deer (Cervidae). The terrestrial animals at
OGSE80 are primarily mice (25% of the MNI),
fox (Pseudalopex sechurae, 7%), snakes and turtles
(5%), and amphibians (4%). Birds contribute
2% of the individuals, and deer (Mazama sp.)
less than 2%. Sea turtles and fishes contribute
52% of the individuals. At OGSE80, marine
resources were clearly an important part of the
economy, and it could be argued that they were
in the Paiján area as well. A change in water
conditions at these two early sites would have
consequences for cultural patterns, as much as at
other sites even more strongly tied to the sea.
To highlight the change in marine resource
use, the terrestrial and mixed animals are omit-
ted, and the percentages recalculated, based
only on individuals classified as tropical or tem-
perate marine animals (Table 4). The geograph-
ical pattern appears to be one of increasing use
of tropical vertebrates as one approaches the
equator. There are two exceptions to this geo-
graphical pattern: Paiján and Ostra. Although
fishes constitute only 16% of the Paiján assem-
blage, 96% of these fish are warm –tropical
animals, primarily sea catfish and lisa. Two-
thirds of the individuals in the Ostra collection
are warm –tropical animals, primarily bonefish,
sea catfish, lisa and puffer (Spheroides annulatus).
These are estuarine fishes, which are usually
very minor components of Peruvian faunal as-
semblages, though members of these families
are often abundant at sites where warm estuaries
occur (Wing & Reitz, 1982; Cooke, 1992).
When these data are considered chronologi-
cally, a temporal trend is evident (Table 4).
Although tropical animals are exceedingly rare

Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Osteoarchaeol. 11: 163 –171 (2001)
Fishing in Peru
Table 4. Warm–tropical and warm–temperate taxa, as a percentage of MNI, classified to one or
the other of these groups, organized chronologically within geographical groups, from south to
north
Tropical %
Southern Peru
Ring site 3.6
Paloma, probability samples 1.8
Northern Peru
Paiján complex 96.5
Almejas, 14-inch samples 53.5
Ostra base camp 64.2
Alto Salaverry 6.8
Panamanian province
Las Vegas, OGSE80 91.3
Sitio Siches 89.0
in assemblages from southern Peru, they decline
in frequency from the earlier Ring site to the
later Paloma site. In the northern Peru sequence,
the percentage of tropical animals also steadily
decreases. In the Panamanian Province, the per-
centage of tropical species is higher in the
OGSE80 assemblage than in the one from Sitio
Siches. In all three subdivisions, tropical species
are less common at recent sites compared with
early ones.
Discussion
Several explanations offer themselves for this
pattern. One of these is recovery technique. It is
highly probable that the low numbers of her-
rings and anchovies in some collections are
resulting entirely from a misguided assumption
by archaeologists that they can see specimens of
these small fishes in the field. However, much
of this pattern is a result of changes in the types
of large animals, such as bonefishes, sea cat-
fishes, drums and lisas, which would be recov-
ered using 1/4-inch screen. Nonetheless, tests of
the hypothesis proposed here should be con-
structed with much better control of recovery
technique than was possible in this survey.
Among the cultural explanations is the possi-
bility that people along this stretch of the
southeastern Pacific coast chose to reduce their
use of warm – temperate fish. Changes in sea-
Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
169
Temperate % MNI Date, BP
96.4 308 10 575–5060
98.2 112 7735–4780
3.5 113 10 380–8260
46.5 86 7000
35.8 120 6250–5450
93.2 59 4450–3750
8.7 23 10 000–6600
11.0 591 7563–4550
sonal periodicity, settlement patterns and tech-
nology would produce a change like the one
reported here. For example, fishes, such as sea
catfish and lisa, were probably captured in shal-
low waters with mass capture techniques, such
as trot-lines, nets, or basketry scoops. Many of
the warm –temperate taxa were more likely
taken in deeper waters with more substantial
gear. If a change in technology occurred, as well
as companion changes in social organization
and division of labour, this would explain the
shift from tropical to temperate animals found
in these collections. Supporting evidence from
lithic and botanical remains are needed.
An equally valid possibility is that warm –
tropical animals increasingly became so rare in
the Peru –Chilean Province after about 5000 BP
that exploiting them was not energetically
worth-while in the Peru –Chilean Province. It is
clear that conditions once existed in northern
Peru, such that estuarine species, such as bone-
fish, sea catfish and lisa, could be taken in large
numbers, a condition which did not prevail by
the time Alto Salaverry was occupied. Perhaps
this indicates over-exploitation of the resource
base, which impacted not just a single species,
but an entire complex of animals over a wide
area. Alternatively, this shift could indicate that
over a 5000-year period, coastal waters gradu-
ally cooled and then stabilized with modern
conditions.
Int. J. Osteoarchaeol. 11: 163 –171 (2001)
170
Conclusions
Fishing was a major part of the subsistence
strategy in Peru in the early and mid-Holocene.
Over time, there was a change in that strategy
from southern Peru to the Gulf of Guayaquil.
This shift probably reflects cultural responses to
mid-Holocene environmental change, in which
coastal waters from southern Peru to Ecuador
became cooler, and warm –tropical species de-
clined in abundance between 10000 and 5000
BP. Even if this premise is not true, these data
clearly document a substantial change in re-
source use during the pre-ceramic period, which
set the stage for later cultural developments in
this region.
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to Robert A. Benfer, Thomas and
Sheila Pozorski, Daniel H. Sandweiss, and
James B. Richardson III for the opportunity to
examine faunal materials excavated under their
direction, and to Elizabeth S. Wing for access
to the comparative skeletal collection at the
Florida Museum of Natural History. I also am
grateful to Joel Dukes, Alana Lynch, and Daniel
C. Weinand for their assistance with these col-
lections. Funds were provided by the H. John
Heinz III Charitable Trust; the Faculty Research
Council of the University of Texas-Pan Ameri-
can; the M. Graham Netting and Edward O’Neil
Funds of the Carnegie Museum of Natural His-
tory; the University of Pittsburgh’s Central Re-
search Development Fund, Provost Devel-
opment Fund, and Center for Latin American
Studies; and the National Science Foundation
(BNF 76-12316, BNS 78-07727a/b, BNS 81-
053940, BNS 82-03452).
References
Benfer RA. 1984. The challanges and rewards of
sedentism: the pre-ceramic village of Paloma, Peru.
In Paleopathology and the Origin of Agriculture, Cohen
MN, Armelagos GJ (eds). Academic Press: New
York; 531 –558.
Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
E.J. Reitz
Briggs J. 1974. Marine Zoogeography. McGraw-Hill:
New York.
Byrd KM. 1976. Changing animal utilization patterns and
their implications: southwest Ecuador (6500 BC – AD
1400), PhD Dissertation. University of Florida.
Ann Arbor, University Microfilms.
Byrd KM. 1996. Subsistence strategies in coastal
Ecuador. In Case Studies in Environmental Archaeology,
Reitz EJ, Newsom LA, Scudder SJ (eds). Plenum
Press: New York; 87–101.
Chauchat C. 1988. Early hunter-gatherers on the
Peruvian coast. In Peruvian Prehistory, Keatinge R
(ed.). University of Cambridge Press: Cambridge;
41–66.
Chauchat C. 1992. Préhistoire de la Côte Nord du Pérou Le
Paijanien de Cupisnique. Cahiers du Quaternaire 18.
CNRS-Éditions: Paris.
Chirichigno FN. 1974. Clave para Identificar los Peces
Marinos del Perú. Instituto del Mar del Perú, In-
forme: Callao, Peru; 44.
Chirichigno FN. 1982. Catálogo de Especies Marinas de
Interés Económico Actualo Potencial para America Latina:
Parte II, Pacı́fico Centro y Suroriental. FAO: Rome.
Cooke R. 1992. Prehistoric nearshore and littoral
fishing in the Eastern Tropical Pacific: an ichthy-
ological evaluation. Journal of World Prehistory 6(1):
1–49.
Eigenmann CH. 1921. The nature and organization
of the fishes of the Pacific slope of Ecuador, Peru,
and Chile. Proceedings of the American Philosophical
Society 60(4): 503 –523.
Ekman S. 1953. Zoogeography of the Sea. Sidgwick and
Jackson: London.
Fowler HW. 1945. Los Peces del Peru: Catálogo Sistem-
ático de los Peces que Habitan en Aguas Peruanas. Museo
de Historia Natural ‘Javier Prado’, Universidad
Nacional Mayor de San Marcos: Lima, Peru.
Grayson DK. 1981. A critical view of the use of
archaeological vertebrates in paleoenvironmental
reconstruction. Journal of Ethnobiology 1(1): 28–38.
Grimwood IR. 1969. Notes on the distribution and
status of some Peruvian mammals. In American
Committee for International Wildlife Protection Special Pub-
lication 21.
Guillén GO. 1980. The Peru Current system. 1:
Physical aspects. In Proceedings of the Workshop on the
Phenomenon Known as ‘El Niño’. UNESCO: Paris;
185 –216.
Handler P. 1984. Possible association of strato-
spheric aerosols and El Niño type events. Geophys-
ical Research Letters 11: 1121 –1124.
Hildebrand SF. 1945. A Descriptive Catalog of the Shore
Fishes of Peru. US National Museum Bulletin.
Smithsonian Institution: Washington, DC; 189.
Int. J. Osteoarchaeol. 11: 163 –171 (2001)
Fishing in Peru
Pozorski S, Pozorski T. 1979. Alto Salaverry: a
Peruvian coastal pre-ceramic site. Annals of Carnegie
Museum 48: 337 – 375.
Pozorski T, Pozorski S. 1984. Almejas: Early ex-
ploitation of warm-water shellfish on the north
central coast of Peru. Final report submitted to the
National Science Foundation, grant BNS 82-
03452. University of Texas, Pan-American, Edin-
burg, TX, USA.
Reitz EJ. 1988a. Faunal remains from Paloma, an
archaic site in Peru. American Anthropologist 90(2):
310 –322.
Reitz EJ. 1988b. Pre-ceramic animal use on the
central coast. In Economic Prehistory of the Central
Andes, International Series 427. Oxford British Ar-
chaeological Reports, Wing ES, Wheeler JC (eds).
BAR: Oxford; 31 – 55.
Reitz EJ. 1994. Environmental change at Ostra base
camp: a Peruvian pre-ceramic site. Manuscript on
file, Zooarchaeology Laboratory, Georgia Museum
of Natural History, University of Georgia, Athens,
GA, USA.
Reitz EJ. 1995. Environmental change at Almejas,
Peru. Manuscript on file, Zooarchaeology Labora-
tory, Georgia Museum of Natural History, Univer-
sity of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA.
Reitz EJ. 1999. Vertebrate remains from Sitio Siches
(PV7-19), Peru. Manuscript on file, Zooarchaeol-
ogy Laboratory, Georgia Museum of Natural His-
tory, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA.
Sandweiss DH, Richardson III JB, Reitz EJ, Hsu JT,
Feldman RA. 1989. Early maritime adaptations in
Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
171
the Andes: preliminary studies at the Ring site,
Peru. In Ecology, Settlement and History in the Osmore
Drainage, Peru, International Series 545. Oxford
British Archaeological Reports, I, Rice DS, Stanish
C, Scarr PR (eds). BAR: Oxford; 35–84.
Sandweiss DH, Richardson III JB, Reitz EJ, Rollins
HB, Maasch KA. 1996. Geoarchaeological evi-
dence from Peru from a 5000 years BP onset of El
Niño. Science 273: 1531 –1533.
Sandweiss DH, Rollins HB, Richardson III JB. 1983.
Landscape alteration and prehistoric human occu-
pation on the north coast of Peru. Annals of Carnegie
Museum 52: 277 –298.
Santander H. 1980. The Peru Current system. 2:
Biological aspects. In Proceedings of the Workshop on
the Phenomenon Known as ‘El Niño’. UNESCO: Paris;
217 –227.
Schweigger E. 1964. El Litoral Peruano. Universidad
Nacional ‘Frederico Villarreal’: Lima, Peru.
Stothert KE. 1988. La Prehistoria Temprana de la
Peninsula de Santa Elena, Ecuador: Cultura Las
Vegas. Museos del Banco Central del Ecuador,
Guayaquil, Miscelánea Antropológica Ecuatoriana
Serie Monográfica; 10.
Wing ES. 1986. Methods employed in the identifica-
tion and analysis of the vertebrate remains associ-
ated with sites of the Paiján culture. Manuscript on
file, Florida Museum of Natural History, Univer-
sity of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Wing ES, Reitz EJ. 1982. Prehistoric fishing
economies of the Caribbean. Journal of New World
Archaeology 5(2): 13–33.
Int. J. Osteoarchaeol. 11: 163 –171 (2001)