Comment on reinterpreting the pollen data from Dos Cabezas Academic Article uri icon

abstract

  • The published pollen analysis of the Dos Cabezas giants, Geyer et al. (2003), lists a variety of purported dietary pollen types. The paper also hypothesises that the giants were poisoned with plant toxins. We have severe reservations about the pollen evidence of diet and poisoning. We suggest that the analysts made several errors in their interpretation. Firstly, some of the discovered pollen types are not prehistoric endemics to the Dos Cabezas region of coastal Peru. These include the pollen of fava beans (cultivated in the Old World), and specified species of agave and sage. We believe that some or all of the identifications of pollen from arracacha, maca, yuca, oca, potato, peanut, ciruela and tarwi are in error based on the distance they grow from Dos Cabezas and/or their ecological/pollination requirements. We think that it is unlikely that the giants were poisoned because the poisons made from six poisonous plants are not made from the flowers and five of them grow on the opposite side of the Andes from Dos Cabezas. We present an alternative dietary interpretation of the Dos Cabezas giants and suggest methods by which palynological analysis could be improved. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

author list (cited authors)

  • Reinhard, K. J., Bryant, V. M., & Vinton, S. D.

citation count

  • 10

publication date

  • September 2007

publisher