Navigating the Past in the Aftermath of Dramatic Social Transformations

Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 53 (2019) 51–65

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Anthropological Archaeology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jaa

Navigating the past in the aftermath of dramatic social transformations: Postclassic engagement with the Classic period past in the northeast Yucatan peninsula

Sarah Kurnick

University of Colorado Boulder, Department of Anthropology, Hale Science Building, 1350 Pleasant Street, 233 UCB, Boulder, CO 80309-0233, United States

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Dramatic social transformations are common events in world history and raise several questions. How, for ex- The past ample, do individuals navigate the past during these critical times? Do they emphasize their ties to the past, Temporal constellations distance themselves from the past, alter the past, or eschew the past? An analysis of modifications to existing Relational space built environments – and particularly whether existing features are venerated, destroyed, re-contextualized, or Postclassic ignored – offers one means to answer this question. Using Henri Lefebvre’s notion of relational space and Walter Maya Benjamin’s notion of temporal constellations, this article examines Postclassic period (1100–1500 CE) engagement with the Classic period (250–1100 CE), and in some instances Late Preclassic period (400 BCE – 250 CE), past in the northeast Yucatan Peninsula. Specifically, it uses data from a variety of sources to compare Postclassic modifications to existing features at eight sites: El Meco, Xcaret, Xelha, Muyil, T’isil, El Naranjal, Punta Laguna, and Cobá. Data from these sites suggest, among other insights, that the past was indeed a critical resource at each of these communities, but that Postclassic peoples navigated the past in heterogeneous ways: They engaged in a variety of practices, each with a multiplicity of meanings. This article concludes by suggesting that the Postclassic, like other time periods, is usefully understood as a temporal constellation.

1. Introduction considered sacred, leading individuals to emulate the actions of their predecessors (Pocock, 1971). Further, the past is critical to creating, History is replete with periods of dramatic social change. Societies changing, and negating identities (Liu and Hilton, 2005). Because in- often remake and renew themselves after natural disasters, in the wake dividuals define themselves in part by their place in history, modifying of wars and political realignments, and in the aftermath of colonialism. the past can change how individuals think about themselves and their Such reconstitutions of societies – be they in ancient times, the more relationships to others. For these reasons, as Benjamin (1974:pt. VI) recent past, or the present – raise and encourage reflection on a series of reminds us, to “articulate what is past does not mean to recognize ‘how issues. How, for example, do individuals navigate the past during times it really was.’ It means to take control of a memory, as it flashes in a of drastic social change? Do they emphasize their ties to, distance moment of danger.” themselves from, alter, or ignore the past? Groups engage with the past in many ways, including by modifying As many scholars (e.g. Lowenthal, 1985) have noted, the past is a preexisting structures and monuments. Such modifications are common powerful resource often used to justify and question contemporary so- cross-culturally (Davies, 2014; Gosden and Lock, 1998; Van Dyke and cial relationships. But, why is the past so potent? Knowledge of the past, Alcock, 2003b) and take many forms (Crawford, 2007). In some in- be it history or memories, is social (Connerton, 1989; Van Dyke and stances, individuals purposefully destroy existing features, thereby Alcock, 2003a), continually changing (Mills and Walker, 2008; Shackel, rupturing their ties to the past. In ancient Urartu, for example, political 2001), and the product of unequal power relations (Rutz, 1992). Con- practices often “centered on obliterating the built environments of prior sequently, the past can be manipulated – within limits (Appadurai, political communities” to remove all traces of the past and any doubts 1981) – to make the present appear as the inevitable outcome of ev- about alternatives to current practices (Smith, 2003:166, 1999). In erything that has preceded it (Van Dyke and Alcock, 2003b). The past other instances, individuals venerate existing features, thereby expres- also carries the force of tradition (Hobsbawm, 1983). Because of their sing continuity with the past. The ancient Maya, for instance, drew assumed indefinite continuity, traditions are often idealized or power from the past by visiting and modifying – though not necessarily

E-mail address: [email protected]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaa.2018.11.003 Received 24 June 2018; Received in revised form 22 October 2018 Available online 16 November 2018 0278-4165/ © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. S. Kurnick Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 53 (2019) 51–65

Fig. 1. Map of the Yucatan Peninsula showing the location of all sites mentioned in the text. re-inhabiting – abandoned sites, transforming them into places of pil- by social relationships, and should be understood as it mediates those grimage by resetting monuments (Hammond and Bobo, 1994) and relationships. As Lefebvre (1991:26) succinctly wrote, “(social) space is erecting altars (Brown, 2011). And, in still other instances, individuals a (social) product.” Importantly, to make such a statement “is not to re-contextualize existing features, modifying their form, function, or argue that the globe, the continent, the mountain, or the ocean do not context, and thereby altering their use and meaning (Crawford, 2007; exist, merely that they are unintelligible except through the social, Johansen, 2011). The collection of war booty, such as the removal of a through the ties that link subjects to objects” (Smith, 2003:70). Ac- stele of Akkadian ruler Naram-Sin from the conquered city of Sippur to cording to this relational view, space is not an empty container existing the Elamite city of Susa, offers one example (Crawford, 2007). independently of human action. Rather, space is the product and pro- Within the Maya world, the transition from the Late Classic ducer of social relationships, and thus a critical component of human (600–900 CE), through the Terminal Classic (900–1100 CE), to the practices. Postclassic period (1100–1500 CE) can usefully be understood as a Further, like other recent anthropological and archaeological works, dramatic social transformation. This transformation was complex and (e.g. Gordillo, 2014; Halperin, 2017; Olivier, 2004), this article adopts variable, and “cultural distinctions once drawn between the [Classic Walter Benjamin’s concept of temporal constellations. Many have and Postclassic] eras are not as clear-cut as once thought” (Chase and conceived of time as linear, directional, and easily divisible into dis- Chase, 2004:12, 2006; Pendergast, 1981, 1990). Nevertheless, several crete units, such as the Stone, Bronze, and Iron ages, or Preclassic, changes can be discerned. There was, for example, a decreased em- Classic, and Postclassic periods. Benjamin (1974) critiqued such con- phasis on monumental architecture; fewer overt dynastic representa- ventional understandings and argued that various time periods exist tions such as political statements carved in stone; and a series of new concurrently, rather than progress sequentially. For him, temporal seats of power (Chase and Chase, 2006:181, 184, 177). Some scholars moments are comprised of variable impositions and erasures of physical suggest that governance changed as well, and that Postclassic com- remnants of different time periods. Put differently, “the physical en- munities were ruled by a council or multepal system (Chase and Chase, vironment[s] of human societies” – the spaces that produce and are 2006; Masson, 2000; Masson et al., 2006; Schele and Freidel, 1990), or produced by social relationships – have “always been a composite … by a combination of a council and a king (Masson and Peraza Lope, made up of elements originating in the past but continuing to exist in 2014; Ringle, 2004; Ringle and Bey, 2001; but see Ardren, 2015; and the present” (Olivier, 2004:205). Benjamin thus understood time as a Cobos, 2007 for alternative understandings). For these reasons, the palimpsest and human history as a montage. As he wrote, “it’s not that Classic to Postclassic transition has been described as an “episode of what is past casts light on what is present, or what is present its light on profound cultural reinvention and reorganization” (Ardren, 2015:75). what is past; rather, image is that wherein what has been comes to- To understand Postclassic communities’ engagement with the past, gether in a flash with the now to form a constellation” (Benjamin, and thus the complex interplay between spaces, temporalities, and 1999:462). practices in the Yucatan Peninsula, this article adopts a relational By adopting the notion of temporal constellations, this article un- spatial ontology. Following Lefebvre (1991) and others (e.g. Harvey, derstands time periods, including the Postclassic, not as singular, dis- 1989, 1996; Smith, 2003; Soja, 1996), space produces and is produced tinctive points in historical trajectories, but as montages comprised of

52 S. Kurnick Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 53 (2019) 51–65 the variable aggregation, elimination, and modification of various civic-ceremonial core; and the reuse of Classic period building material temporalities. Time is understood not as linear but as dialectical, not as in Postclassic constructions. Using this data, he argued that the Post- “the ‘empty and homogenous,’ time of historicism – the time of dates, classic inhabitants of the Yalahau region chose to reoccupy Classic chronologies and periods – but … as the full and heterogenous time of period communities to express continuity with, and gain legitimacy the fusion between the present and the past” (Olivier, 2004:204). from, the Classic period past. For Lorenzen (1999:101), “recycling Nevertheless, for clarity, and to articulate with existing literature, this abandoned sites and monuments worked to establish site title, de- article retains the term “Late Preclassic period” to refer to events that monstrate a shared cultural patrimony with once-powerful ancient city- occurred in the northeast Yucatan peninsula between 400 BCE and 250 state cultures, and project an image of regional authority.” CE; “Classic period” to refer to events that occurred in the region be- Further west, Ardren (2015:51–81) has analyzed Postclassic mod- tween 250 and 1100 CE; and “Postclassic period” to refer to events that ifications at Yaxuna. Yaxuna reached its zenith during the Late Classic occurred in the region between 1100 and 1500 CE. period and continued to be visited and modified during the Postclassic This article will first consider previous interpretations of Postclassic period. Postclassic peoples constructed several small ceremonial struc- engagement with Classic period features in the Yucatan peninsula. It tures and left offerings across the site. There is little evidence, however, will then compare Postclassic modifications to existing built environ- for Postclassic domestic occupation. Ardren (2015:51) argues that ments at eight sites in the northeast part of the peninsula: El Meco, Postclassic Yaxuneros did not reoccupy the site, but did conduct cere- Xcaret, Xelha, Muyil, T’isil, El Naranjal, Punta Laguna, and Cobá monial performances there to invent a “new social imaginary” that (Fig. 1). Data from these sites suggest, among other insights, that the connected their present lives to a “selective vision of the past.” They past was indeed a critical resource at each community, but that Post- thus made a “deliberate choice to reinterpret some of the cultural va- classic engagement with the past was highly variable. As other studies lues from previous periods within the constraints and concerns of the (Hutson et al., 2016; Schwarz, 2013) have suggested, Postclassic in- Postclassic” (Ardren, 2015:51–52). Put differently, Postclassic Yax- dividuals navigated the past in heterogeneous ways. The article will uneros made traditional practices seem novel by reinterpreting some, conclude by returning to Benjamin’s notion of temporal constellations but not all, aspects of the past. Indeed, communities often purposefully and suggesting the utility of the concept for understanding the Post- remember some aspects of the past while purposefully forgetting others classic period throughout the Maya area. (Connerton, 1989; Van Dyke and Alcock, 2003a). Finally, Hutson et al. (2016) have documented and interpreted the 2. Previous research Postclassic reuse of the Classic period central plaza at Kancab, approximately 85 km northwest of Yaxuna. Ceramics suggest that Kancab Archaeologists have documented Postclassic alterations to existing was occupied throughout the Classic to Postclassic transition, and ex- built environments throughout the Maya area and, within the Yucatan cavations in the central plaza demonstrate both continuity and change peninsula, at Aké (Roys and Shook, 1966), Cobá (Thompson et al., during this transitional period. Postclassic occupants reused the city’s 1932; Folan et al., 1983), Chacchoben (Romero, 2000; Harrison, 1976), Classic period center, but did so for novel purposes. The Postclassic Dzibilchaltun (Andrews IV, 1968), El Meco (Andrews, 1986; Ortega “ceremonies practiced in Kancab’s Classic period plaza … were unique Munoz, 2007); El Naranjal (Lorenzen, 1993, 1999, 2003), Muyil to the Postclassic. Thus, the reuse of the Classic period plaza was … a (Witschey, 1988, 1989, 1993, 2005), Punta Laguna (Benavides Castillo strategic attempt to authorize and make understandable a new form of and Zapata Peraza, 1991; Kurnick and Rogoff, 2014), San Angel authority by locating it in a deeply traditional landscape” (Hutson et al., (Gallareta Negrón and Taube, 2005), T’isil (Gallareta Negrón and 2016:142). In other words, the Postclassic residents of Kancab used the Taube, 2005; Hoover, 2003; Fedick et al., 2012), and Yaxuna (Ardren, Classic period built environment to ground novel practices in past 2015), among other sites (Fig. 1). Mayanists have offered a variety of traditions. interpretations for such alterations. Those working within the Yucatan Archaeologists working in the Yucatan peninsula have thus sug- peninsula specifically have suggested four distinct frameworks to ex- gested that Postclassic peoples destroyed existing architecture to rup- plain Postclassic interaction with Classic period features. ture their ties to the past; built on top of existing architecture to express While conducting fieldwork in the southern interior of Quintana continuity with and gain legitimacy from the past; reinterpreted certain Roo, including at the site of Chacchoben, Harrison (1976, 1981, 2005) past practices to make the traditional seem novel; and reused past documented numerous Late Postclassic Lobil phase platforms built over places to make the novel seem traditional. Are there, however, any the remains of purposefully-destroyed Classic period architecture (but patterns in how Postclassic peoples engaged with the Classic period see Villamil, 2007:196 for an alternative interpretation). The platforms past? Were, for example, some practices more common than others? and the destroyed architecture they covered differed in layout, or- Did the destruction, veneration, alteration, or neglect of existing ientation, and style. This lack of architectural continuity and the “zeal structures correlate with variables such as site size, location, or occu- with which the Lobil phase people destroyed decorative facades on pation history? Or, did each community engage with the past in a un- Classic period structures,” led Harrison (2005:225; 1976:200) to sug- ique way? And, how can such patterns, or lack thereof, best be inter- gest that the reoccupation was associated with “religious outrage or preted? revolution.” Fry (1985:126) subsequently interpreted the Lobil phase platforms as evidence for a Postclassic Maya revitalization movement 3. Postclassic modifications to existing built environments aiming to create a “more satisfying culture.” Harrison and Fry thus both understood Postclassic peoples to have invested substantial time and To answer these and other questions, this article compares data energy in purposefully destroying existing, Classic period architectural from eight sites located in the northeast Yucatan peninsula: El Meco, features and thereby actively rupturing their ties to the Classic period Xcaret, Xelha, Muyil, T’isil, El Naranjal, Punta Laguna, and Cobá past. (Fig. 1). These sites, located in a limited geographic area, were occupied As part of the Yalahau Regional Human Ecology Project (Fedick and during both the Postclassic and either the Classic or Late Preclassic Mathews, 2005), Lorenzen (1993, 1999, 2003, 2005) examined the periods, and archaeologists have mapped, excavated, and published Postclassic reoccupation of El Naranjal which, like other sites in the data associated with each. But, these sites differ in their size, location region, was occupied during the Early Classic period, abandoned, and on the coast or inland, and occupation history: Some were inhabited then reoccupied during the Postclassic period. As discussed in more continuously during the Terminal Classic to Postclassic transition while detail below, Lorenzen recorded the Postclassic construction of minia- others were abandoned and reoccupied after a hiatus. Data from these ture masonry shrines on top of unconsolidated Classic period archi- sites thus allow a useful comparison of the ways Postclassic individuals tecture; the Postclassic residential reoccupation of the Classic period engaged with existing built environments in one specific region.

53 S. Kurnick Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 53 (2019) 51–65

Ceramic data suggest that El Meco was ﬁrst settled in the Early Classic period, abandoned for several hundred years, and reoccupied and reached its zenith during the Postclassic period. At its height, the site comprised a civic-ceremonial core – including a 12.5 m tall central pyramidal structure – additional smaller architectural groups to the north and south, and extensive residential zones (Fig. 2). All visible architecture at the site dates to the Postclassic period, including six miniature masonry shrines – single room structures, built in the East Coast architectural style, that measure no more than a few meters in length, width, and height. Two of these shrines are located in the northern group, and one in the southern group. The remaining three are located around and face the central plaza of the main group, including one adjoined to the southeast side of the central pyramidal structure.

3.2. Xcaret

Xcaret is also located on the coast of the peninsula, approximately 75 km southwest of El Meco. The Mason-Spinden excavation (Mason, 1927) visited and described the site in 1926 and, in the mid to late twentieth century, E. Wyllys Andrews IV and Anthony Andrews explored and documented Xcaret in detail (Andrews, 1972; Andrews IV and Andrews, 1975). Between the mid-1980s and the mid-2000s, Con (1991), Con (1998), Con and Jordan (1992) conducted investigations at, and published information about, the site. Ceramic and architectural data suggest that Xcaret was occupied continuously from the Late Preclassic period through the early Colonial era, and that it reached its greatest population and extent during the Postclassic period. The site includes several architectural groups with masonry buildings and many small platforms that would have supported perishable, likely domestic, structures (Fig. 3) (Andrews IV and Andrews, 1975; Con, 1991, 1998). Groups B, E, and F were constructed in the Classic period and modified during the Postclassic period, while groups A, C, and D date entirely to the Postclassic. The Postclassic inhabits of Xcaret thus modified all existing architectural groups and constructed new ones – something not surprising given the site’s in- crease in population. Some architectural groups constructed during the Classic period continued to be used for similar purposes in the Postclassic. The inhabits of Xcaret placed human burials in group B, for example, during both the Classic and Postclassic periods. One tomb, which included multiple individuals, along with a jadeite bead, a clay bead, an obsidian arrowhead, an obsidian knife, and a “bib-and-helmet” style face carved in greenstone (Proskouriakoff, 1974:96–97), was constructed during the Classic period and reused during the Postclassic (Con, 2004). Fur- ther, the site’s Postclassic inhabitants erected 17 miniature masonry shrines. Five are located around the plaza in group A, and one to the side of the plaza near a small cenote. One is located in the center of the group B plaza, and another is adjoined to the largest structure in that

group. Two are located in group D – one on the summit of the tallest Fig. 2. Map of El Meco. Miniature masonry shrines are indicated by MMS. structure and the other at its base. Five are located in group E and two Redrawn after Andrews and Robles Castellanos, 1986: Fig. 2. are located in group F. The only group that lacks miniature masonry shrines – group C – contains a series of human burials dating entirely to 3.1. El Meco the Postclassic period.

El Meco lies on the coast of the Yucatan peninsula, at the northern 3.3. Xelha end of the contemporary city of Cancun. In the late nineteenth century, Augustus Le Plongeon and Teobert Maler visited the site (Andrews, Xelha lies on the coast of the peninsula, approximately 25 km 1986) and in the early twentieth century the Carnegie Institution ex- southwest of Xcaret. The Carnegie Institution documented the site in plored and described the site in detail (Lothrop, 1924). In the late the early twentieth century (Lothrop, 1924) and, in the mid twentieth twentieth century, Sanders (1955, 1960) conducted limited excavations century, Sanders (1955, 1960) and the Andrews family (Andrews IV and ceramic analyses, and several archaeologists cleared, excavated, and Andrews, 1975) visited and oﬀered additional descriptions. Xelha and consolidated the site’s most prominent archaeological features was excavated during salvage and reconsolidation eﬀorts in the 1970s (Andrews and Robles Castellanos, 1986). More recently, scholars (Benavides, 1976; Robles Castellanos, 1981) and was restored in the (Ortega Munoz, 2007) have conducted osteological studies of human 1980s (Toscano Hernandez, 1994). remains found at the site. Ceramic and architectural data suggest Xelha was occupied continuously from the Late Preclassic period to the early Colonial era and

54 S. Kurnick Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 53 (2019) 51–65

Fig. 3. Map of Xcaret. Miniature masonry shrines are indicated by MMS. Redrawn after Andrews and Andrews, 1975: Figures 4, 9, 22, 25, 28, 34. reached its zenith during the Late Classic period. The site includes four Ceramic and architectural data suggest that the site was settled in architectural groups and extensive residential settlement. During the the Middle Preclassic period and occupied continuously until the arrival Late Preclassic, group B (Fig. 4a), the largest group, was founded. of the Spanish in the 16th century, reaching its greatest population and During the Late Classic, that group reached its greatest extent, and extent during the Postclassic period. The site includes temples, shrines, group D, a smaller outlying group to the west was constructed. At ap- residential platforms, house mounds, ﬁeld walls, and intra-site sacbeob, proximately 1000 CE, inhabitants of Xelha abandoned group D, pur- all situated west of a large lagoon (Fig. 5). It also includes a small ar- posefully destroyed several of the buildings in group B, and built new chitectural group approximately 2 km to the northeast, near a cenote. structures on their remains – structures that resemble the Lobil phase Almost all of the surface architecture at Muyil dates to the Postclassic platforms described by Harrison – and constructed group A. During the period, including eight miniature masonry shrines (Witschey, 1993). Postclassic period, Xelha’s inhabitants built 9 miniature masonry Two of these shrines sit back-to-back on a shared platform in the ar- shrines in group B and also constructed group C (Fig. 4b), which con- chitectural group near the cenote. Three shrines are located at the bases sists of ﬁve miniature masonry shrines in close proximity to a cenote of large pyramids – one in the Entrance Plaza group, one in the Great (Lothrop, 1924; Toscano Hernandez, 1994). Platform group, and one in the Temple 8 Precinct group. The remaining three shrines are located around and face a plaza west of the Temple Eight Precinct group. 3.4. Muyil

Muyil is located approximately 50 km southwest of Xelha and, al- 3.5. T’isil though it lies 15 km inland, canals and lagoons provide access to the coast. In 1926, the Mason Spinden expedition (Mason, 1927) explored T’isil is located in the Yalahau region, a zone in northern Quintana and documented parts of the site, and in the 1980s and 1990s Witschey Roo dominated by wetlands. Members of the Yalahau Regional Human (1988, 1989, 1993, 2005) surveyed, mapped, excavated, and analyzed Ecology Project (Hoover, 2003; Fedick and Mathews, 2005; Fedick Muyil in detail. et al., 2012) have documented the site and examined its Postclassic

55 S. Kurnick Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 53 (2019) 51–65

Fig. 4a. Map of Xelha Group B. Miniature masonry shrines are indicated by MMS. Redrawn after Lothrop, 1924 Plate 26. reoccupation. Likely founded in the Middle Preclassic period, T’isil was then reoccupied during the Postclassic (Fedick and Mathews, a densely settled, primarily residential community during the Late 2005:47–49; Lorenzen, 1993, 1999; Lorenzen, 2003; Taube, 1995). The Preclassic and Early Classic periods. It was then abandoned for several site includes twenty-one structures and two sacbeob, all located south hundred years and resettled during the Postclassic. The site includes an of a 500 ha wetland area (Fig. 7) (Fedick and Taube, 1995). estimated 1852 structures arranged around a large, seasonally flooded As noted above, the Postclassic occupants of El Naranjal modified cenote (Fig. 6) (Fedick and Mathews, 2005:39). Some of these struc- the site in many ways. They constructed only one new structure, and tures are temple-pyramids, but the majority are foundations and plat- otherwise reused existing features. They constructed additions – in- forms that would have supported perishable domestic structures. cluding stairways, altars, and ten miniature masonry shrines – on ap- Hoover (2003) documented the Postclassic reuse of 28 structures proximately half of the existing structures. Often, they reused existing originally constructed in the Late Preclassic or Early Classic period. building materials and placed the additions directly on top of the col- Each of these reused structures included deposits of Postclassic cera- lapsed, unconsolidated masonry. The Postclassic occupants of El mics – including various combinations of ritual-related censers, Naranjal also placed a cache in the fill between two, superimposed common domestic wares, and elite domestic wares – suggesting that the stucco floors of one of the miniature masonry shrines (Pacheco Benítez site was both a residential and a religious locale during the Postclassic. and Parrilla Albuerne, 2004). The cache included 7 ceramic figurines, 6 Five of the reused structures also exhibit Postclassic architectural complete but fragmented Huachinango bi-chrome incised plates, and 4 modifications. The collapsed remains of miniature masonry shrines small “bib-and-helmet” style faces carved in greenstone were found on the summits of two of the largest structures at the site, (Proskouriakoff, 1974:96–97). Each of these objects was likely created both located near the cenote. The Postclassic inhabitants thus chose to in the Late Preclassic or Early Classic periods. build exclusively on top of preexisting architecture: No structures at T’isil date entirely to the Postclassic period. 3.7. Punta Laguna

3.6. El Naranjal Punta Laguna is located approximately 25 km southwest of El Naranjal. In the early 1980s, Brasdefer (1988) visited and described the El Naranjal is also located in the Yalahau region, approximately site, and Benavides Castillo and Zapata Peraza (1991) mapped part of 40 km west of T’isil. Karl Taube and Tomás Gallareta Negrón visited El the site and conducted a series of shovel test pits. In the early 2000s, Naranjal in 1983 and Lorenzen (1993, 1999, 2003) conducted four Rojas Sandoval (2007, 2008), Sandoval et al. (2008), Martos López seasons of excavation at the site between 1993 and 2001. Pacheco (2008) excavated the site’s cenote and, since 2014, the Punta Laguna Benítez and Parrilla Albuerne (2004) conducted additional excavations Archaeology Project – directed by Sarah Kurnick, David Rogoff, and and reconsolidated part of the site between 2000 and 2001. Ceramic members of the Punta Laguna community – has conducted fieldwork at and architectural data suggest that El Naranjal – like T’isil and other the site (Kurnick and Rogoff, 2014, 2016, 2017). sites in the Yalahau region – was occupied during the Late Preclassic Much like T’isil and El Naranjal, Punta Laguna was likely occupied and Early Classic periods, abandoned for several hundred years, and in the Late Preclassic or Early Classic period, depopulated for several

56 S. Kurnick Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 53 (2019) 51–65

Fig. 4b. Map of Xelha Group C. Miniature masonry shrines are indicated by MMS. Redrawn after Benavides, 1976: Page 92. hundred years, and then reoccupied during the Postclassic. Shovel test approximately 120 cm in height, were found in group D. pits produced ceramics dating primarily to the Early Classic and Postclassic periods (Benavides Castillo and Zapata Peraza, 1991), and 3.8. Cobá much of the site’s architecture was built in either the Megalithic style, which dates to the Late Preclassic and Early Classic periods (Mathews, Among the largest Maya cities ever built, Cobá is located approxi- 2001), or in the East Coast style, which dates to the Postclassic period mately 20 km southwest of Punta Laguna. Stephens (1962) noted the (Andrews IV and Andrews, 1975; Lothrop, 1924; Toscano Hernandez, site in 1842 and Maler (1932) and Gann (1926) visited and published 1994). Punta Laguna consists of over 200 structures located around a brief descriptions of the site in 1891 and 1926 respectively (Fettweis- lagoon (Fig. 8), including seven miniature masonry shrines (Kurnick Vienot, 1980; Thompson et al., 1932:1932). The Carnegie Institution of and Rogoff, 2014, 2016); a cenote that was the final resting place of at Washington systematically studied Cobá in the 1930s (Thompson et al., least 120 individuals after extended funerary treatments (Rojas 1932) and, since the 1970s, several archaeologists (Con Uribe, 2000; Sandoval, 2007, 2008; Sandoval et al., 2008; Martos López, 2008); and Con Uribe and Gómez Cobá, 2008; Coronel et al., 2015; Fettweis- two Postclassic stelae. Vienot, 1980; Folan et al., 1982; Folan et al., 1983; Folan et al., 2009; Architectural and survey data suggest that, during the Late Leyden et al., 1998; Peniche Rivero and Folan, 1978) have conducted a Preclassic or Early Classic period, Punta Laguna had four groups of variety of excavations and analyses. monumental architecture, each located along the east side of the lagoon Cobá was occupied continuously from the Middle Preclassic period – A, B, C, and D. Postclassic inhabitants appear to have largely ignored to the arrival of the Spanish in the 16th century, reaching its zenith the structures in groups A and C, but modified those in groups B and D. during the Late and Terminal Classic periods (Coronel et al., 2015; In group B, located approximately 100 m from a cenote, Postclassic Peniche Rivero and Folan, 1978). The site’s civic ceremonial center – an peoples constructed a miniature masonry shrine on the summit of an artificially leveled area located among five lakes – is divided into a approximately 6 m tall mound likely constructed in the Late Preclassic series of architectural groups that contain temples, shrines, ballcourts, or Early Classic period. In group D, Postclassic peoples constructed six plazas, and other structures; 20 intra-site and 2 inter-site scabeob; and additional miniature masonry shrines. Three were located on the 32 stelae (Fig. 9) (Coronel et al., 2015; Peniche Rivero and Folan, summit of mounds likely built during the Late Preclassic or Early 1978). In addition to building new structures and architectural groups, Classic. The other three shines were constructed on Postclassic period the Postclassic inhabitants of Cobá constructed miniature masonry platforms. Additionally, two small stelae, each measuring shrines on top of Classic period architecture; reset Classic period stelae

57 S. Kurnick Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 53 (2019) 51–65

Fig. 5. Map of Muyil. Miniature masonry shrines are indicated by MMS. Redrawn after Witschey, 1993: Map 11. in new locations; and conducted novel rituals in long-established First, data suggest that the past was indeed a critical resource at places. each community. At none of the sites did Postclassic inhabitants ignore Cobá includes five documented miniature masonry shrines. One is existing features. In some places, such as El Meco and Muyil, larger located on the summit of the tallest structure in the Cobá group. Two Postclassic settlements were forged on top of smaller, earlier sites. At are located near a cave in the southwest part of the Cobá group near the other places, such as Cobá, Punta Laguna, El Naranjal, and Xelha, ex- terminus of a sacbe. And, two are located north of the Pinturas group isting structures were modified and new structures were built. And, at (Thompson, Pollock, and Charlot, 1932). In addition to constructing T’isil, Postclassic structures were erected solely on top of existing ar- these shrines, the Postclassic inhabitants also moved stelae in the Cobá chitecture. Further, at no site that reached its greatest population and Macanxoc groups – stelae that had been carved and erected during during the Postclassic period were any existing architectural groups left the Classic period – to new locations. They frequently re-erected the unmodified. At Xcaret, for example, Postclassic individuals modified stelae within newly-built stelae shrines – small platforms with “U” each existing cluster of architecture, including group F, located over shaped, East Coast style masonry walls of variable height – and occa- 200 m away from the nearest group (Fig. 3). Postclassic peoples thus sionally left simple offerings of censer fragments, shell, and obsidian merged their contemporary spaces and practices with those of their (Con Uribe and Gómez Cobá, 2008; Thompson et al., 1932). Finally, the predecessors, fusing the past and present, and creating a dialectical Postclassic inhabits reused some Classic period spaces, but for different “relation of what-has-been to the now” (Benjamin, 1999:462). purposes. The presence of Postclassic period ceramics within the Cobá Although Postclassic residents of each community engaged with group ballcourt, for example, suggests that, even though the ballgame existing, built environments, they did so in diverse ways. Even within was no longer played, the ballcourt was used (Con Uribe, 2000:31). the limited geographic area of this study, Postclassic modifications to existing features were highly variable. At Xelha, Postclassic inhabitants 4. Postclassic engagement with the past distanced themselves from the past by purposefully destroying Classic period architecture and establishing and occupying new architectural The above comparison of Postclassic modifications to existing built groups – even though the site’s population decreased during the Classic environments is necessarily imperfect. Differences in the types of data to Postclassic transition. At Xcaret and El Naranjal, Postclassic in- recorded, the quantity and placement of excavation units, and the habitants expressed continuity with the past by caching heirlooms and number and kinds of resulting publications render direct comparisons continuing to use prominent spaces for similar purposes. And, at T’isil difficult. And, because most archaeological work in the region has fo- and Cobá, Postclassic individuals transformed the past by using old cused on site centers and monumental architecture, information about spaces for new purposes and – at Cobá – by relocating Classic period domestic structures, non-elite architecture, and overall site size and stelae to new contexts. Notably, a site’s occupation history did not affect population is often lacking. Nevertheless, an examination of the avail- how its inhabitants engaged with the past. Residents of Xcaret and El able data from these eight sites offers several insights. Naranjal, for instance, adopted similar strategies even though one site

58 S. Kurnick Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 53 (2019) 51–65

Fig. 6. Map of T’isil. Miniature masonry shrines are indicated by MMS. Redrawn after Fedick and Mathews, 2005: Figure 2.3. was occupied continuously through the Classic to Postclassic transition example, Johansen (2011:192), among others, has noted that, during and the other was abandoned and reoccupied after a substantial hiatus. the Colonial era, the Spanish “emplot[ted] narratives of power on set- Such diverse uses of the past support the notion that that Classic to tlement landscapes” through the “construction of churches and cathe- Postclassic transition should be viewed “not as a single moment when drals on the demolished remains of pre-Columbian ritual places.” Classic Maya polities collapse, but as a varied and complex process Consequently, constructing miniature masonry shrines on Classic experienced unevenly during different moments and by different peo- period mounds could emphasize the continuing importance of parti- ples across the Maya area” (Halperin, 2017:515–516; see also Schwarz, cular spaces and also the ascendency of a novel social order. 2013). Such diverse uses of the past also suggest that scholars should – Further, in instances when individuals emphasize their connections as Olivier (2004:208) has cautioned – avoid temporal specificity, the to the past, it is often unclear whether they are tying themselves to notion that “each period has its distinctive colouration and each one specific people or events, or to something more generic (Stanton and can be told apart from the others due to a temporal identity which is Magnoni, 2008). In some instances, and perhaps in Postclassic Yucatan, unique to it.” The more scholars learn about particular historical per- “social groups would have appreciated the importance and meaning of iods, the less unique they become. certain symbols (such as stelae) without being able to recall the parti- The Postclassic Maya thus engaged with existing built environments cular historical contingencies that resulted in their construction and in diverse ways. But, even seemingly similar practices – such as con- maintenance” (Canuto and Andrews, 2008:270). At two of the eight structing a new structure on top of an existing one – can convey a sites considered in this study – Xcaret and El Naranjal – Postclassic multiplicity of meanings and may even serve contradictory functions peoples cached heirlooms, and specifically “bib-and-helmet” style faces simultaneously (Kurnick, 2016). At several sites, for example, Post- carved in greenstone (Proskouriakoff, 1974:96–97). The Maya pro- classic peoples constructed miniature masonry shrines on Classic period duced these objects primarily during the Early Classic period, when mounds. Such an act could demonstrate the continuing importance of they served as royal jewels and symbolized royal authority (Freidel and particular places over time. But, as suggested by a relational spatial Schele, 1988; Guderjan, 2009; Houk et al., 2010; Reilly and Garber, ontology, such superimpositions can also produce and be produced by 2003). The Postclassic caching of objects produced in the Early Classic new social relationships (Kosiba, 2012; Smith, 2003). To take one period is notable. But, it remains unclear whether these objects retained

59 S. Kurnick Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 53 (2019) 51–65

Fig. 7. Map of El Naranjal. Miniature masonry shrines are indicated by MMS. Redrawn after Lorenzen, 2003: Figure 3.1. their original meaning hundreds of years later. By caching bib-and- Coast style of architecture prevalent during the Postclassic period, but helmet style greenstone carvings, Postclassic individuals could have their function and use remains debated. Some suggest they were asso- been emphasizing their ties to divine kings or to divine kingship. Or, ciated with either fertility or water rituals, while others suggest they they could have been referring to a celebrated but nonspecific past. As were locations for ancestor or deity worship (Andrews IV and Andrews, Manahan (2004:184) has argued, objects from the past are often best 1975; Lorenzen, 1993, 1999, 2003, 2005; Sletteland, 1985). This article understood as “generic sources of ideological and political capital with categorizes all one-room structures that measure less than 4 m in fluid significance that could be transformed to serve new needs.” length, width, and height as miniature masonry shrines. One of the few true patterns to emerge from the data concerns the Within the study region, these shrines are ubiquitous: Postclassic placement of a novel Postclassic architectural form – miniature ma- peoples constructed them in each of the eight communities, regardless sonry shrines. These shrines are single room structures that span only a of site size, location, or occupation history. The shrines’ number and few meters in length, width, and height. They form part of the East placement, however, vary substantially. Each site includes at least two

60 S. Kurnick Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 53 (2019) 51–65

Fig. 8. Map of Punta Laguna. Miniature masonry shrines are indicated by MMS. Map by David Rogoﬀ and Sarah Kurnick. and as many as seventeen miniature masonry shrines. They are located miniature masonry shrines. individually and in groups; at the bases and tops of pyramidal struc- Several possible factors may explain the association between min- tures; and in association with preexisting architecture and con- iature masonry shrines and cenotes. Because cenotes are vital sources of temporaneous Postclassic features. Nor is there an obvious correlation water, shrines erected near them may have been associated with water between site size and number of shrines. But, one consistent practice related rituals. Indeed, such placement of shrines near cenotes ﬁts a emerges. In each instance that Postclassic individuals occupied a site larger pattern of evidence suggesting that the miniature masonry with a cenote, they constructed at least one, and often several miniature shrines were associated with water. Rissolo et al. (2017), for instance, masonry shrines in close proximity. When Classic period structures al- have documented the practice of erecting such shines directly within ready existed near the cenote, as at T’isil and Punta Laguna, Postclassic watery caves. And, Lorenzen (2003:60–90) has documented the pla- individuals constructed miniature masonry shrines on top of existing cement of objects from watery caves – such as speleothems – in shrine mounds. When the area near the cenote lacked pre-existing features, as contexts. Miniature masonry shrines were thus placed near and within at Xcaret, Xelha, and Muyil, Postclassic individuals constructed entirely watery caves, and fragments of watery caves were placed in and near new architectural groups that included at least two and as many as six the shrines.

61 S. Kurnick Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 53 (2019) 51–65

Fig. 9. Map of Cobá. Miniature masonry shrines are indicated by MMS. Redrawn after Con Uribe, 2000: Figs. 1 and 2; Con Uribe and Gómez Cobá, 2008 Page 130.

Cenotes, however, are more than water sources. They were, and in Punta Laguna – to take one example – includes the remains of at least some instances still are, associated with group identities. Because the 120 individuals deposited after extended funerary treatments. Maya often understood cenotes as “places of political and communal foundation,” they were “likely the focus of territorial organization and control” (Vogt and Stuart, 2005:163; Rissolo, 2005:358). The large 5. Conclusion: The postclassic period number of contemporary communities that have cenote – or “dzonot” in Yucatec Mayan – in their names suggests this practice continued into To understand better how individuals navigate the past during modern times. Dzonotchel, Dzonot Aké, and Yodzonot, provide just dramatic social transformations, this article has compared Postclassic three examples. modiﬁcations to existing built environments at eight sites in the Further, cenotes were often understood as access points to the un- northeast Yucatan Peninsula: El Meco, Xcaret, Xelha, Muyil, T’isil, El derworld (Brady, 1997:603; Rissolo, 2005:356). Associated shrines may Naranjal, Punta Laguna, and Cobá. Speciﬁcally, it has considered thus have been locales where humans could communicate with deities whether Postclassic inhabitants of these sites emphasized their ties to and secure the wellbeing of deceased ancestors. On the one hand, the past by caching objects or venerating existing features; distanced miniature masonry shrines were often placed on top of existing themselves from the past by destroying existing features; altered the mounds. This juxtaposition of mounds and cenotes, of hills and caves, past by moving preexisting features or using established places for new recalls Mesoamerican creation mythology and may have formed a purposes; or eschewed the past by ignoring existing built environments. cosmological axis mundi (Lucero et al., 2017; Rice and Pugh, 2017; Available data suggest that members of each community did modify Vogt and Stuart, 2005). Indeed, the Maya generally understood cenotes existing built environments, but that they did so in myriad ways. At to symbolize the “opening moment of cosmogenesis – a ‘Big Bang’ – the Xelha, Postclassic individuals purposefully destroyed existing struc- division of primordial formlessness into ordered time-space” (Rice and tures. At Xcaret and El Naranjal, they cached Classic period objects and Pugh, 2017:14). On the other hand, the Maya often threw human re- continued to use Classic period locales for similar purposes. And, at mains into cenotes “not with the intention of using … cenote[s] as … Cobá, they moved Classic period monuments to new locations and used cemeter[ies], but as a ritual act to return the remains of forebears to the existing spaces for novel purposes. Even the number and placement of a very waters of creation, in order to guarantee rebirth and existence on relatively standardized architectural form, the miniature masonry another plane” (Martos López, 2008:106). As noted above, the cenote at shrine, varied considerably. Only one consistent practice emerges. In each instance that Postclassic individuals occupied a site with a cenote,

62 S. Kurnick Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 53 (2019) 51–65 they constructed at least one, and often several miniature masonry References shrines in close proximity. These findings speak more broadly to the nature of the Postclassic Andrews, Anthony P., 1972. A preliminary study of the ruins of xcaret and a re- period. Traditionally described as decadent, the Postclassic, “down to connaissance of other archaeological sites on the central coast of Quintana Roo, Mexico. In: XL Congresso Internazionale Degli Americanisti. Tilgher, Genova, pp. its very name, has suffered from its traditional definition primarily in 473–477. terms of the era that preceded it” (Masson, 2000:1). Indeed, the Post- Andrews, Anthony P., 1986. Historia de Las Exploraciones Arqueologicas En El Meco, classic is too often understood as the aftermath of, and a decline from, Quintana Roo. In: Andrews, Anthony P., Robles Castellanos, Fernando (Eds.), the Classic period. Over the last several decades, scholars have char- Excavaciones Arqueologicas En El Meco, Quintana Roo, 1977. Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico, D.F., pp. 13–16. acterized the Postclassic less as a period of decline, and more as a Andrews, Anthony P., Robles Castellanos, Fernando (Eds.), 1986. Excavaciones period of reorganization, and have noted that the Classic to Postclassic Arqueologicas En El Meco, Quintana Roo, 1977. Serie Arqueologia. Instituto Nacional transition involves not only change, but also continuity. At the same de Antropología e Historia, Mexico, D.F.. Andrews IV, E. Wyllys, 1968. Dzibilchaltun: a northern maya metropolis. Archaeology 21 time, scholars have expressed dissatisfaction with the conventional (1), 36–47. understanding of time as linear and directional: Such an understanding Andrews IV, E. Wyllys, Andrews, Anthony P., 1975. A Preliminary study of the Ruins of encourages scholars to associate the passage of time with either pro- Xcaret, Quintana Roo, Mexico: with notes on other archaeological remains on the central east coast of the Yucatan Peninsula., Publication 40. Middle American gress or decline (Lucas, 2005:9–15). Every temporal epoch is under- Research Institute, New Orleans. stood as a rise or fall, an ascent or descent. Time is thus robbed of its Appadurai, Arjun, 1981. The past as a scarce resource. Man 16 (2), 201–219. efficacy and reduced to a milieu in which events occur. In such un- Ardren, Traci, 2015. Social Identities in the Classic Maya Northern Lowlands: Gender, Age, Memory, and Place. University of Texas Press, Austin. derstandings, time is “emptied of its substance, of its possibility to act, Benavides, Antonio, 1976. Xelha, Quintana Roo, Informe de Actividades, 1975. 27. by this quaintly old-fashioned perception of the past, which sees history Investigaciones Arqueológicas En El Sureste. Instituto Nacional de Antropología e as a succession of scenes” (Olivier, 2004:208). Just as conventional, Historia, Dirección de Centros Regionales, Centro Regional del Sureste. Benavides Castillo, Antonio, Zapata Peraza, Renee Lorelei, 1991. Punta Laguna: Un Sitio absolute notions of space suggest that space exists prior to and in- Prehispanico de Quintana Roo. Estudios de Cultural Maya XVIII, pp. 23–64. dependently of human action, conventional, historic notions of time Benjamin, Walter, 1974. On the Concept of History. Dennis Redmond, tran. Gesammelte suggest that time is irrelevant to, and independent from, human prac- Schriften, I:2. Suhrkamp Verlag, Frankfurt am Main. tices. Benjamin, Walter, 1999. The arcades project. Howard Eiland and Kevin McLaughlin, trans. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge. Critically, traditional understandings of the Postclassic period as an Brady, James E., 1997. Settlement configuration and cosmology: the role of caves at dos era of decline and of time as linear and directional are intimately in- pilas. Am. Anthropol. 99 (3), 602–618. tertwined: Understandings of time influence understandings of history. Brasdefer, F.C., 1988. Archaeological notes from Quintana Roo. Mexicon 10 (6), 107–108. Brown, M. Kathryn, 2011. Postclassic Veneration at Xunantunich, Belize. Mexicon 33 (5), As Benjamin (1974:pt. XIII) notes, the “concept of the progress of the 126–132. human race in history is not to be separated from the concept of its Canuto, Marcello A., Andrews, Anthony P., 2008. Memories, meanings, and historical progression through a homogeneous and empty time.” And, “over- awareness: post-abandonment behaviors among the lowland maya. In: Stanton, Travis W., Magnoni, Aline (Eds.), Ruins of the Past: The Use and Perception of coming the concept of ‘progress’ and overcoming the concept of ‘period Abandoned Structures in the Maya Lowlands. University Press of Colorado, Boulder, of decline’ are two sides of one and the same thing” (Benjamin, pp. 257–273. 1999:460). Different conceptualizations of time – including the notion Chase, Diane Z., Chase, Arlen F., 2004. Hermeneutics, transitions, and transformations in classic to postclassic maya society. In: Demarest, Arthur A., Rice, Prudence M., Rice, of temporal constellations – can thus facilitate different con- Don S. (Eds.), The Terminal Classic in the Maya Lowlands: Collapse, Transition, and ceptualizations of history – a process Benjamin (1974) refers to as ex- Transformation. University Press of Colorado, Boulder, pp. 12–27. ploding the continuum of history. Consequently, by adopting the notion Chase, Diane Z., Chase, Arlen F., 2006. Framing the maya collapse: continuity, dis- continuity, method, and practice in the classic to postclassic southern maya lowlands. of temporal constellations, Maya scholars can facilitate novel con- In: Schwartz, Glenn M., Nichols, John J. (Eds.), After Collapse: The Regeneration of ceptualizations of the Postclassic and move beyond conventional un- Complex Societies. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 168–187. derstands of this period as an era of decline. As suggested in this article, Cobos, Rafael, 2007. Multepal or centralized kingship?: New evidence on governmental the Postclassic can usefully be understood dialectically, as a montage organization at Chichen Itza. In: Karl Kowalski, Jeff, Kristan-Graham, Cynthia (Eds.), Twin Tollans: Chichen Itza, Tula, and the Epiclassic to Early Postclassic comprised of the variable aggregation, elimination, and modification of Mesoamerican World. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, various other temporalities. To take but one example, the practice of Washington, D.C., pp. 315–343. constructing a miniature masonry shrine on an existing mound near a Con, Maria Jose, 1991. Trabajos Recientes En Xcaret, Quintana Roo. Estudios de Cultural Maya XVIII, 65–129. cenote involves more than just events that occurred between 1100 and Con, Maria Jose, 1998. Xcaret Prehispanico y Colonial. In: Memorias Del Tercer Congreso 1500 CE. It involves the sequential existence of the shrine, built in the Internacional de Mayistas. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico, D.F, Postclassic period; the mound, built in the Classic period; the area pp. 377–389. Con, Maria Jose, 2004. Costumbres Funerarias En Xcaret, Quintana Roo. In: Benavides, where the mound and shrine are located, which may have been first Antonio, Manzanilla, Linda, Mirambell, Lorena (Eds.), Homenaje a Jaime Litvak. occupied and imbued with meaning in the Preclassic period; and the Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico, D.F., pp. 379–408. cenote, which contains the original waters of creation. The Postclassic is Con, Maria Jose, Jordan D., Eric, 1992. Pole: Notas Sobre Un Puerto Maya. In: Memorias Del Primer Congreso Internacional de Maysitas. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de thus best understood not as an era of decline directly following, and México, Mexico, D.F, pp. 497–511. serving as a foil to, the Classic period, but as a constellation comprised Con Uribe, Maria Jose, 2000. El Juego de Pelota En Cobá, Quintan Roo. Arqueología 23, of many different, overlapping temporalities. 27–50. Con Uribe, Maria Jose, Gómez Cobá, Maria Jose, 2008. La Asociación Estela-Altar En El Grupo Macanxoc de Cobá. Expedicion: Historia y Antropologia 2 (2), 118–130. Acknowledgements Connerton, Paul, 1989. How Societies Remember. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. I would like to thank the Gerda Henkel Foundation (Grant AZ 07/V/ Coronel, Eric G., Hutson, Scott, Magnoni, Aline, et al., 2015. Geochemical Analysis of Late Classic and Post Classic Maya Marketplace Activities at the Plazas of Cobá, Mexico. J. 14), the National Geographic Society (Committee for Research and Field Archaeol. 40 (1), 89–109. Exploration Grant 9693-15), and the University of Colorado, Boulder Crawford, Catherine Lyon, 2007. Collecting, defacing, reinscribing (and otherwise per- for funding archaeological fieldwork at Punta Laguna. I would also like forming) memory in the ancient world. In: Yoffee, Norman (Ed.), Negotiating the Past in the Past: Identity, Memory, and Landscape in Archaeological Research. The to thank David Rogoff, co-director of the Punta Laguna Archaeology University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 10–42. Project, and members of the Punta Laguna community, including Davies, Diane, 2014. Reuse of the past: a case study from the Ancient Maya. The Historian Serapio Canul Tep and Mariano Canul Aban, for their help and support. 123, 32–36. Fedick, Scott L., Mathews, Jennifer P., 2005. The Yalahau regional human ecology pro- Finally, I’d like to thank my fellow archaeologists in the Department of ject: an introduction and summary of recent research. In: Shaw, Justine M., Mathews, Anthropology at the University of Colorado Boulder, including Arthur Jennifer P. (Eds.), Quintana Roo Archaeology. The University of Arizona Press, A. Joyce, for their comments and suggestions on earlier versions of this Tucson, pp. 33–50. Fedick, Scott L., Mathews, Jennifer P., Sorensen, Kathryn, 2012. Cenotes as conceptual article. Any errors are my own.

63 S. Kurnick Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 53 (2019) 51–65

boundary markers at the ancient maya site of T’isil, Quintana Roo, México. Mexicon Leyden, Barbara W., Brenner, Mark, Dahlin, Bruce H., 1998. Cultural and Climatic History 34 (5), 118–123. of Cobá, a Lowland Maya City in Quintana Roo, Mexico. Quat. Res. 49 (1), 111–122. Fedick, Scott L., Taube, Karl, 1995. The Yalahau regional human ecology project: research Liu, James H., Hilton, Denis J., 2005. How the past weighs on the present: social re- orientation and overview of 1993 investigations. In: Fedick, Scott L., Taube, Karl presentations of history and their role in identity politics. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 44 (4), (Eds.), The View from Yalahau: 1993 Archaeological Investigations in Northern 537–556. Quintana Roo, Mexico. Latin American Studies Field Report Series, 2. University of Lorenzen, Karl J., 1993. Late postclassic reuse of early classic monumental architecture at California Riverside, pp. 1–21. naranjal. In: Scott L. Fedick, Taube, Karl (Eds.), The View from Yalahau: 1993 Fettweis-Vienot, Martine, 1980. Las Pinturas Murales de Coba: Periodo Postclasico. Archaeological Investigations in Northern Quintana Roo, Mexico. Latin American Boletin E.C.A.U.D.Y. 7 (40), 2–50. Studies Field Report Series, 2. University of California Riverside. Folan, William J., Hernandez, Armando Anaya, Kintz, Ellen R., et al., 2009. Coba, Lorenzen, Karl J., 1999. New Discoveries at Tumben-Naranjál: Late Postclassic Reuse and Quintana Roo, Mexico: a recent analysis of the social, economic, and political orga- the Ritual Recycling of Cultural Geograpy. Mexicon XXI, 98–107. nization of a Major Maya Urban Center. Ancient Mesoamerica 20 (1), 59–70. Lorenzen, Karl J., 2003. Miniature Masonry Shrines of the Yucatan Peninsula: Ancestor Folan, William J., Kintz, Ellen R., Fletcher, Laraine A., 1983. Coba: A Classic Maya Deification in Late Postclassic Maya Ritual and Religion. Ph.D. Dissertation, Metropolis. Academic Press, New York. Department of Anthropology, University of California, Riverside. Folan, William J., Kintz, Ellen R., Fletcher, Laraine A., Hyde, Burma H., 1982. An ex- Lorenzen, Karl J., 2005. Ancestor deification in ancient maya ritual and religion: late amination of settlement patterns at Coba, Quintana Roo, Mexico, and Tikal, postclassic community shrines and family oratories. J. Wash. Acad. Sci. 91 (4), Guatemala: A Reply to Arnold and Ford. Am. Antiq. 47 (2), 430–436. 25–52. Freidel, David, Schele, Linda, 1988. Kingship in the late preclassic maya lowlands: the Lothrop, S.K., 1924. Tulum: An Archaeological Study of the East Coast of Yucatan. instruments and places of ritual power. Am. Anthropol. 90 (3), 547–567. Carnegie Instituion of Washington Publication, No. Carnegie Institution of Fry, Robert E., 1985. Revitalization movements among the postclassic lowland maya. In: Washington, Washington, D.C, pp. 335. Chase, Arlen F., Rice, Prudence M. (Eds.), The Lowland Maya Postclassic. University Lowenthal, David, 1985. The Past Is a Foreign Country. Cambridge University Press. of Texas Press, Austin, pp. 126–141. Lucas, Gavin, 2005. The Archaeology of Time. Routledge, London. Gallareta Negrón, Tomás, Taube, Karl, 2005. Late postclassic occupation in the Ruinas de Lucero, Lisa J., Harrison, Jessica, Larmon, Jean, Nissen, Zachary, Benson, Erin, 2017. San Angel Region. In: Shaw, Justine M., Mathews, Jennifer P. (Eds.), Quintana Roo Prolonged droughts, short-term responses, and diaspora: the power of water and Archaeology. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 87–111. pilgrimage at the sacred cenotes of Cara Blanca, Belize. Wiley Interdisciplinary Rev.: Gann, Thomas, 1926. Ancient Cities and Modern Tribes. Maya Lands, London. Water 4 (4), 1–13. Gordillo, Gastón R., 2014. Rubble: The Afterlife of Destruction. Duke University Press Maler, Teobert, 1932. Cobá and Chichén Itzá. Bonn. Books, Durham. Manahan, T. Kam, 2004. The way things fall apart: social organization and the classic Gosden, Chris, Lock, Gary, 1998. Prehistoric histories. World Archaeol. 30 (1), 2–12. maya collapse of copan. Ancient Mesoamerica 15 (01), 107–125. Guderjan, Thomas H., 2009. Power and authority in an ancient Maya City. In: Morris, Martos López, Luis Alberto, 2008. Underwater archaeological exploration of the Mayan John, Jones, Sherilyne, Thompson, George, Helmke, Christophe (Eds.), Research Cenotes. Museum Int. 60 (4), 100–110. Reports in Belizean Archaeology: Papers of the 2008 Belize Archaeology Symposium. Mason, Gregory, 1927. Silver Cities of Yucatan. G.P. Putnam’s Sons, New York. Masson, Institute of Archaeology, NICH, Belmopan, pp. 119–136. Marilyn, 2000. In the Realm of Nachan Kan. University Press of Colorado. Masson, Halperin, Christina T., 2017. Temporalities of Late Classic to Postclassic (ca. AD Marilyn A., Hare, Timothy S., Lope, Carlos Peraza, 2006. Postclassic maya so- 600–1521) Maya Figurines from Centeral Petén, Guatemala. Latin Am. Antiquity 28 ciety regenerated at Mayapán. In: Schwartz, Glenn M., Nichols, John J. (Eds.), After (4), 515–540. Collapse: The Regeneration of Complex Societies. University of Arizona Press, Hammond, Norman, Bobo, Matthew R., 1994. Pilgrimage’s Last Mile: Late Maya Tucson, pp. 188–207. Monument Veneration at La Milpa, Belize. World Archaeol. 26 (1), 19–34. Masson, Marilyn, Peraza Lope, Carlos, 2014. Kukulkan’s Realm: Urban Life at Ancient Harrison, Peter, 1976. The Lobil Postclassic Phase in the Southern Interior of the Yucatan Mayapán. University Press of Colorado. Peninsula. In: Hammond, Norman, Willey, Gordon R. (Eds.), Maya Archaeology and Mathews, Jennifer P., 2001. Radiocarbon dating of architectural mortar: a case study in Ethnohistory. University of Texas Press, Austin, pp. 189–207. the Maya Region, Quintana Roo, Mexico. J. Field Archaeol. 28 (3–4), 395–400. Harrison, Peter, 1981. Some aspects of preconquest settlement in Southern Quintana Mills, Barbara J., Walker, William H., 2008. Memory, materiality, and depositional Roos, Mexico. In: Ashmore, Wendy (Ed.), Lowland Maya Settlement Patterns. practice. In: Mills, Barbara J., Walker, William H. (Eds.), Memory Work: University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 259–286. Archaeologies of Material Practices. School for Advanced Research Press, Santa Fe, Harrison, Peter, 2005. Some ancient maya monuments from Southern Quintana Roo: pp. 3–23. Defining the “Triad-Pill” Monument Type. In: Shaw, Justine M., Mathews, Jennifer P. Olivier, Laurent, 2004. The past of the present. Archaeological memory and time. (Eds.), Quintana Roo Archaeology. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. Archaeol Dialogues 10 (2), 204–213. 214–246. Ortega Munoz, Allan, 2007. Los Mayas Prehispánicos de El Meco: La Vida, La Muerte y La Harvey, David, 1989. The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Salud En La Costa Oriental de La Península de Yucatán. Serie Arqueología. Instituto Cultural Change. Basil Blackwell, Oxford. Nacional de Antropología e Historia, México, D.F. Harvey, David, 1996. Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference. Blackwell Pacheco Benítez, Adán, Parrilla Albuerne, Ana María, 2004. El Naranjal, Quintana Roo Publishing, Cambridge. (México): un sitio megalítico en las Tierras Bajas del Norte. Mayab 17, 5–19. Hobsbawm, Eric, 1983. Introduction: Inventing Traditions. In: The Invention of Tradition. Pendergast, David M., 1981. Lamanai, Belize: Summary of Excavation Results, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 1–14. 1974–1980. J. Field Archaeol. 8 (1), 29–53. Hoover, Anna Marie, 2003. The Ritual and the Domestic: The Late Postclassic Pendergast, David M., 1990. Up from the dust: the central lowlands postclassic as seen Reoccupation of T’isil. M.S. Thesis. Department of Anthropology, University of from Lamanai and Marco Gonzalez, Belize. In: Clancy, Flora S., Harrison, Peter (Eds.), California, Riverside. Vision and Revision in Maya Studies. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, Houk, Brett A., Robichaux, Hubert R., Valdez, Fred, 2010. An Early Royal Maya Tomb pp. 169–177. from Chan Chich, Belize. Ancient Mesoamerica; Cambridge 21 (2), 229–248. Peniche Rivero, Piedad, Folan, William J., 1978. Coba, Quintana Roo: Reporte Sobre Una Hutson, Scott R., Aragon, Iliana Ancona, Reyna, Miguel Covarrubias, et al., 2016. A Metropolis Maya Del Noreste. Boletín de La Escuela de Ciencias Antropológicas de La historical processual approach to continuity and change in classic and postclassic Universidad de Yucatan 30, 48–74. Yucatan. In: Faulseit, Ronald K. (Ed.), Beyond Collapse: Archaeological Perspectives Pocock, J.G.A., 1971. Time, Institutions and Action; An Essay on Traditions and Their on Resilience, Revitalization, and Transformation in Complex Societies. Center for Understanding. In: Politics, Language and Time: Essays on Political Thought and Archaeological Investigations Occasional Paper, No. 42. Southern Illinois University History. Atheneum, New York, pp. 233–272. Press, Carbondale, pp. 124–146. Proskouriakoff, Tatiana, 1974. Jades from the Cenote of Sacrifice: Chichen Itza, Yucatan. Johansen, Peter G., 2011. Practicing social difference, producing social space: the poli- Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, tical architectonics of iron age settlement places. In: Johansen, Peter G., Bauer, Cambridge. Andrew M. (Eds.), The Archaeology of Politics: The Materiality of Political Practice Reilly III, F. Kent, Garber, James F., 2003. The symbolic representation of warfare in and Action in the Past. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle upon Tyne, pp. formative period mesoamerica. In: Kathryn Brown, M., Stanton, Travis W. (Eds.), The 186–220. Symbolic Representation of Warfare in Formative Period Mesoamerica. AltaMira Kosiba, Steve, 2012. Emplacing value, cultivating order: places of conversion and prac- Press, Walnut Creek, pp. 127–148. tices of subordination throughout early inka state formation (Cuzco, Peru). In: Rice, Prudence M., Pugh, Timothy W., 2017. Water, centering, and the beginning of time Papadopoulos, John K., Urton, Gary (Eds.), The Construction of Value in the Ancient at middle preclassic Nixtun-Ch’ich’, Petén, Guatemala. J. Anthropol. Archaeol. 48, World. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, Los Angeles, pp. 97–127. 1–16. Kurnick, Sarah, 2016. Paradoxical politics: negotiating the contradictions of political Ringle, William M., 2004. On the political organization of Chichen Itza. Ancient authority. In: Kurnick, Sarah, Baron, Joanne (Eds.), Political Strategies in Pre- Mesoamerica 15 (02), 167–218. Columbian Mesoamerica. University Press of Colorado, Boulder. Ringle, William M., Bey III, George J., 2001. Post-classic and terminal classic courts of the Kurnick, Sarah, Rogoff, David, 2014. Final Report of the 2014 Field Season of the Punta Northern Maya Lowlands. In: Inomata, Takeshi, Houston, Stephen D. (Eds.), Royal Laguna Archaeology Project. Report submitted to the Gerda Henkel Foundation. Kurnick, Courts of the Ancient Maya Volume 2: Data and Case Studies. Westview Press, Sarah, Rogoff, David, 2016. Final Report on the 2015-2016 Season of the Punta Boulder, pp. 266–307. Laguna Archaeology Project. Report submitted to the National Geographic Society. Rissolo, D., Lo, E., Hess, M.R., Meyer, D.E., Amador, F.E., 2017. Digital preservation of Kurnick, Sarah, Rogoff, David, 2017. Informe Parcial de La Temporada 2017 Del Proyecto ancient maya cave architecture: recent field efforts in Quintana Roo, Mexico. Int. Arqueológico Punta Laguna. Report submitted to the Consejo Nacional de Archives Photogramm., Remote Sens., Spatial Inform. Sci. XLII-2/W5, 613–616. Arqueología de México. Rissolo, Dominique, 2005. Beneath the Yalahau: Emerging Patterns of Ancient Maya Lefebvre, Henri, 1991. The Production of Space. Donald Nicholson-Smith, tran. Blackwell Ritual Cave Use from Northern Quintana Roo, Mexico. In: Brady, James E., Prufer, Publishing, Malden. Keith (Eds.), In the Maw of the Earth Monster: Mesoamerican Ritual Cave Use.

64 S. Kurnick Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 53 (2019) 51–65

University of Texas Press, Austin, pp. 342–372. Stanton, Travis W., Magnoni, Aline (Eds.), 2008. Ruins of the Past: The Use and Robles Castellanos, Fernando, 1981. Xelha: Un Proyecto de Investigación. In: Memoria Perception of Abandoned Structures in the Maya Lowlands. University Press of Del Congreso Interno, 1979. México, D.F.: Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Colorado. Historia, pp. 101–121. Stephens, John Lloyd, 1962. Incidents of Travel in Yucatan. Victor von Hagen, ed. Rojas Sandoval, Carmen, 2007. Cementerios Acuáticos Mayas. Arqueología Mexicana 14 University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. (83), 58–63. Taube, Karl, 1995 The Monumental Architecture of the Yalahau Region and the Rojas Sandoval, Carmen, 2008. Prácticas Mortuorias En Los Cenotes. Revista de Megalithic Style of the Northern Maya Lowlands. In: Fedick, Scott L., Taube, Karl, Arqueología Americana 26, 197–222. The View from Yalahau: 1993 Archaeological Investigations in Northern Quintana Rojas Sandoval, Carmen, Gonzales Gonzales, Arturo H., Terrazas Mata, Alejandro, San Roo, Mexico. Latin American Studies Field Report Series, 2. University of California Vicente, Martha Benavente, 2008. Mayan mortuary deposits in the Cenotes of Riverside, pp. 23–58. Yucatan and Quintana Roo, Mexico. In: Leshikar-Denton, Margaret E., Erreguerena, Thompson, J. Eric S., Pollock, Harry E.D., Charlot, Jean, 1932. A Preliminary Study of the Pilar Luna, Underwater and Maritime Archaeology in Latin America and the Ruins of Cobá, Quintana Roo, Mexico. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Caribbean. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press, pp. 143–153. Washington, D.C. Romero, Maria Eugenia, 2000. Chacchoben: Un Sitio Del Clásico Temprano En La Región Toscano Hernandez, Maria de Lourdes, 1994. Secuencia Arqueologica de La Arquitectura de Los Lagos. In: Adriana Velázquez, Morlet (ED.), Guardianes Del Tiempo. Publica de Xelha. Licenciado en Anthropologia, Universidad Veracruzana, Quintana Universidad de Quintana Roo, Chetumal, pp. 73–87. Roo. Roys, Lawrence, Shook, Edwin M., 1966. Preliminary Report on the Ruins of Ake, Van Dyke, Ruth M., Alcock, Susan E., Eds., 2003a. Archaeologies of Memory. Wiley. Yucatan. Mem. Soc. Am. Archaeol. 20, 1–54. Van Dyke, Ruth M., Alcock, Susan E., Eds., 2003b. Archaeologies of memory: an in- Rutz, Henry J. (Ed.), 1992. The Politics of Time. American Ethnological Society troduction. In: Van Dyke, Ruth M., Alcock, Susan E. (Eds.), Archaeologies of Memory. Monograph Series, 4. American Anthropological Association, Washington, D.C.. Sanders, Blackwell Publishing, Malden, pp. 1–13. William T., 1955. An Archaeological Reconnaissance of Northern Quintana Roo. Villamil, Laura P., 2007. Creating, transforming, rejecting, and reinterpreting ancient 24. Current Reports. Carnegie Institution of Washington. Maya urban landscapes: insights from Lagartera and Margarita. In: Yoﬀee, Norman Sanders, William T., 1960. Prehistoric Ceramics and Settlement Patterns in Quintana Roo, (Ed.), Negotiating the Past in the Past: Identity, Memory, and Landscape in Mexico. Contributions to American Anthropology and History, pp. 60. Archaeological Research. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 183–214. Schele, Linda, Freidel, David, 1990. A Forest of Kings: The Untold Story of the Ancient Vogt, Evon Z., Stuart, David, 2005. Some notes on ritual caves among the ancient and Maya. William Morrow, New York. modern Maya. In: Brady, James, Prufer, Keith M. (Eds.), In the Maw of the Earth Schwarz, Kevin R., 2013. Through the rearview mirror: rethinking the classic Maya col- Monster: Mesoamerican Ritual Cave Use. University of Texas Press, Austin, pp. lapse in the light of postclassic rural social transformation. J. Soc. Archaeol. 13 (2), 155–185. 242–265. Witschey, Walter R.T., 1988. Recent Investigations at the Maya Inland Port City of Muyil Shackel, Paul A., 2001. Public memory and the search for power in American historical (Chunyaxche), Quintana Roo, Mexico. Mexicon 10 (6), 111–117. archaeology. Am. Anthropol. 103 (3), 655–670. Witschey, Walter R.T., 1989. An Architectural Seriation of the Prehispanic Structures at Sletteland, Trygve, 1985. The Late Postclassic East Coast Maya and the Moon: A Test of Muyil, Quintana Roo, Mexico. M.A Thesis. Department of Anthropology, Tulane the Lunar Standstill Orientation Hypothesis. Master’s Thesis, Department of University. Anthropology. California State University, Sacramento. Witschey, Walter R.T., 1993. The Archaeology of Muyil, Quintana Roo, Mexico: A Maya Smith, Adam T., 1999. The making of an Urartian landscape in southern transcaucasia: a Site on the East Coast of the Yucatan Peninsula. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of study of political architectonics. Am. J. Archaeol. 103 (1), 45–71. Anthropology, Tulane University. Smith, Adam T., 2003. The Political Landscape: Constellations of Authority in Early Witschey, Walter R.T., 2005. Muyil: an early start and late ﬁnish in east coast settlement. Complex Polities. University of California Press, Berkeley. In: Shaw, Justine M., Mathews, Jennifer P. (Eds.), Quintana Roo Archaeology. The Soja, Edward W., 1996. Thirdspace: Journeys to Los Angeles and Other Real-and- University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 127–143. Imagined Places. Blackwell, Malden.