2

SouthernLowland Maya Archaeologyand Human SkeletalRemains: Interpretations from (),Santa Rita Corozal (Belize),and Diane Z. Chase Tayasal()

One classof data that is crucial to archaeologi- oretical difficulties involved in making intersite cal interpretations of prehistoric populations, comparisons. 1 their health, status,and demographicpatterns, is that derived from human burials. These are recoveredin what, at first glance,appear to be Caracol, Santa Rita Corozal, sizeablequantities in most excavationsat most and Tayasal: Temporal and Maya sites (Chase1994; Saul and Saul 1991, Skeletal Samples Tourtellot 1990a;Welsh 1988). Yet. how much Caracol, the largestof the three sites,is located do we know about the actual remains of the in the Vaca Plateauof Belizein the foothills of ancient Maya and how can excavatedsamples beused to defineancient populations? . the Maya Mountains at an elevation of over' 500 m. Long-term large-scaleexcavation was The sitesof Caracol,Santa Rita Cocozal,and started at Caracci in 1985 and hastaken place Tayasal are all Maya sites '° the southern every year since then (Chaseand Chase1987; lowlands. Each of these sites, however, is lo- D. Chase and A. Chase 1994). The earliest cated within a distinctive geographicarea and maintains a different history of human occu-

pation. Investigationsat each site have.added I The author acknowledgesthe problems in comparing important information to our views of the health among archaeological populations as identified ancient Maya and, when taken together, pro- by Wood et al. (1992}. This discussion, however, will vide greater insight into both a broader in- place greater emphasis on an equally important phe- nomenon: determination of sampling problems through terpretation of the nature of ancient Maya correlation of osteological remains with other archaeo- populations and the methodological and the- logical information.

15

~ settlement at the site epicenter dates to approx- oats are represented in these burials. At tbe turn , of the present century, Thomas Gann (1900, ~', imately 300 B.C. and occupation continued 1911, 1914, 1918}recovered an additional26 ' until about A.D. 1100. However, the primacy occupation of Caracol was during the Classic burials representirig 28 individuals at Santa ~ Rita Corozal (Chase 1982). ' period, or from A.D. 250 to 900, with a popu- lation peak occurring at approximately 650. Tayasalis located in the heart of the Maya y Population estimates based on housemound lowlands on the tip of a peninsulathat juts into f counts indicate that minimally 115,000, and Lake Petenltza in the northern part of modern- f more probably almost 150,00O,.people lived at day Guatemala. Tayasal and its surrounding t: the sire in 650 (A. Chase and D. Chase 1994a). region were occupied continuously from the ,; The total burial samplerecovered rhus far at Middle Prcclassicthrough the Classicand Post- ,;' Caracol consists of 183 recorded interments classicperiods. Excavationand reconnaissance t (171 with data retrieved by means of excava- were undertaken by the University of Pennsyl- }~ tion) representing more than 300 individuals.: vania in 1971 and 1979 (A. Chase1983, 1985, ;( More than 80 of Caracol's investigated inter- 1990). This work recovered51 burials repre-1' ments are located in formally constructed tombs. scnting 56 individuals. This total also includes i Half a country away to the north in Belize two tombs. Eight additional burials represent- J; is Santa Rita CorozaJ. Encompassed by, and ing eight individuals were excavatedat the or largely buried under, modern Corozal Town site early in this century by Carl Guthe (1921'J~ and its suburbs, this site is located directly on 1922). l Cbetumal Bay between the New River and the :1 RIo Hondo. Santa Rita has a vecy long and , 't Populati~nand Bunal SamplesHistory: Settlement -'' f'" , continuous history of occupation beginning at about 1200 B.C. Irs peak settlement, however, dates to the Late Postclassic period (A.D. 1200- It is common for reconstructionsof prehistoric ,'

1530) when population is estimated to have population to be basedon excavationdata, ex- , ~, elusive of skeletal or burial remains (d. Ash. " . reached betwee~ approximately 7000 and 11,000 people (D. Chase 1990). The Corozal more 1981; Culbertand Rice 1990). Generally ; Postclassic Project (Chase 1982; Chase and speaking, population estimates in the Maya 1 area are basedon counts of numbers of struc- " Chase 1988) excavated 134 interments, includ- I : tures at anyone site, with consideration being - . ing tWO formal combs, at Santa Rita Corozal from 1980 through 1985. Some 164 individ- given.t.o the possibility that not all .struccuresi are vIsible basedupon surfaceremams and tot. the likelihood that early occupation has not '

been adequately sampled at mu!tiphase sites. 'I :. 7Thc buri41 toulsrcflecud in this paper and in Table 2.3 are current through the 1994 season at Caracol, The structure counts, usually derived from re- .' Belize. Additional data gathered as a result of the 1995 and 1996 field seasons do not change the conclusions connaissanceand survey,are Euerhermodified presented here or significantly alter any percentages rel. to account for nonresidentialbuildings and for ative to Caracol burial practices. As of the end of the limited use-spansfor individual constructions. 1996 field seuon some 113 formal interments, repre- Excavation data are then utilized to estimate senting almost 400 individuals, are known from the site; 31 of these interments were distUrbed by loote£$; the total number of structures in use at any 7 empty tombs, presumably ooce used for burial, are given time. The resultant figuresare then multi- not included in this burial total. Addition41l1y, a budal plied by a standard number of individuals be- dating to approximately 600 B.C. is now known from the outlying Caracol core seuJemenr. lieved to havelived in any single Maya house-

16 Diane Z. Chase

t

. . '.".:, :',, ">,:",,,/;:.:\ .":':'>/, ;::~,:'{;,,:,:,:: :',:>/ :',', . I

~ Table 2.1 SantaRita Corozal: RelativePopulation Basedon Burials and Settlement (Approximately 5 km 2)

Percent Total Population Percent Basedon Basedon of Population Time Period Structures Structures n. Seenin Burials

hold (usually 5 or 5.6 people) to arrive at the sites were occupied, however, revealsthe fact total projectedpopulation foc varioustime peri- that only an extremely small percentageof the ods and an overallpopulation trajectory. While total population alive at anyone time is repre- there are problemswith this method of popula- sented in a given skeletal population. Num- tion reconstruction, its general use and appli- bers of interments recoveredarchaeologically, cation in the Maya area provide a relatively though, maycarrdate proportionately withrela.- standardmethod for comparingexcavated sites. tive numbers of excavatedstructures per time Although not typically employed,a compar- period. Alternatively, they may not, thus indi- ison of relative population derived from skel- cating a greater possibility of sampling error. etal individuals, as opposed to structural dat- At Santa Rita Corozal (Table 2.1) when the ing, may be instructive in identifying places burials per time period are adjustedto indicate where skeletalsampling is inadequateor where maximum individuallifespans (likely overesti- problems exist in population estimates that mated at 50 years), the representativepopula- have beenmade using nonskeletaldata. Burial tion, as recovered in skeletal remains; is ex- samplesrecovered from the sites of Caracci, tremely small. For late facet Late. Postclassic SantaRita Cecoza!,and Tayasalcompare favor- Santa Rita, the time period for which we have ably in size with those collected at other low- the largest skeletal sampleas well as ethnohis- land Maya sites(see Welsh 1988). Any consid- torie information that can be correlated with eration of the total length of rime that given this estimatedpopulation peak, only .002% of

SOUTHERN LOWLAND MAYA ARCHAEOLOGY 17

I ~ Table2.2 Tayasal-PaxcamanZone: RelativePopulation Basedon Burials and Settlement (Approximately 90 kmz)

Percent Percent Total Population Percent Basedon Basedon Basedon of Population Time Period Structures Burials Structures n a Seenin Burials

Middle Preclassic 4 .00 878 0 .000000 750-250 B.C. Late Preclassic 56 2.50 12,293 1 .000008 250 B.C.-A.D. 250 Early Early Classic 71 41.67 15,585 5 .000032 A.D. 250-400 Late Early Classic 85 83.33 18.658 10 .000179 A.D. 400-550 Early Late.Classic . 95 50.00 20,853 6 .000096 A.D. 550-700 Gte Late Classic 100 100.00 21,951 . 20 .000182

A.D. 700-950 Early Postdassic 37 45.00 8122 9 .000222

A.D. 950-1200 Middle Postdassic 76 35.00 16,683 7 .000084 A.D. 1200-1450 Late Postclassic 16 5.00 3512 1 .000057 A.D. 1450-1700

an ~ number of skelelaJindividuals-

any contemporaneouspopulation was recov- A secondproblem in characterizingskeletal ered archaeologically.For Classicperiod Taya- populations derived archaeologicallybecomes sal (Table2.2) tbe figuresare evenmore dismal, evident when one looks at population trajecto- with only .000182% of the coeval population ries over time. Comparisons between popula- that existedat that area'spopulation peak being tion numbersderived from settlementresearch recovered.:for Caracol (Table2.3) eventhough and numbers of recoveredindividuals for spe- the burial sample of individuals dated to the cific temporal periods reveal severepoints of Late Classicis over ten times that of the Tayasal disjunction at some sites. In particular, differ- . region (275 vs. 26), only .000591% of the esti. encestend to be magnified with regard to the mated population has been recoveredrelative Protodassic(A.D. 100-300) and Terminal Clas- to the site'spopulation peak.Thus, our skeletal sic (A.D, 800-1000) periods at many sites (d. samplesare extremelysmall, in spite of all the Culbert and Rice 1990). Estimatedpopulations excavationthat has beenundertaken. The ma- basedon settlement,as opposedto numbersof jor implication of thesefigures is that interpre- recovered burials, hint .3t differential burial tations madefrom sucharchaeological samples practices that standard archaeological sam- with regardto health, ageof death,and popula- pling is not finding. This gulf betweenthe esti- tion characterizationmay suffer from signifi- matedpopulation basedon settlementresearch cant sampling errors evenif the percentagesof and the number of burials tbat may be corre- relativepopulation derivedfrom both structural lated with this settlementis particularly strong counts and skeletalindividuals is equivalent. for the Terminal Classicera at both SantaRita

18 I DianeZ. Chase

, ~ Late Preclassic 300 B.C.-A.D. 250 Early Early Classic A.D.250-400 Late Early Classic A.D.400-530 Early Late Classic A.D.530-650 Late Late Classic A.D.650-780 Terminal Classicb A.D.780-1080

Corozal and Caracol. Assumingthat the settle- the early Late Classicand the late Late Classic ment data are being correctly interpreted, it periods. While the number of individuals iden~ can be suggestedthat burial patterning at these rifled in burials during both phasesof the Late two sites for this time period differed substan- Classic (162 and 113) may seem large com- tially from previous Classic period patterns. pared with the number of individuals identified This would suggestskewing not only of our for any phaseat SantaRita Corozalor Tayasal, burial populations but also of our understand- they are extremely small r'elativeto the larger ing of the changesand processesthat occurred projected population for Caracol. In addition, during this crucial time of transition. it would appear that there is underrepresenra- tion of osteologicalremains for the majority of Caracci phasesat CaracoI. The percentageof estimated Investigationsat Caracol have focusedon the population seenin burials variesfrom a low of Classicperiod (A.D.250-1080). Ten seasonsof .00009% in the Terminal Classic (A.D. 780- excavation have led to the recovery of a rela- 1080) to a high of nearly.0006% during the tively large osteological collection. However, Late Preclassic(300 B.C.-A.D. 250) and early becauseof the substantial population that in- Late Classicperiods (A.D.530~6S0). habited the site, there is still a question of the representativenature of the skeletal sample Santa Rita Corozal (Table2.3). The relative populationsat CaraccI Investigationsat SantaRita Coroza! were con- derived from structures and burials indicate ducted with the intent of producing informa- closest correspondenceduring the late Early tion on the Maya Postclassicperiod (Chaseand Classic (A.D. 400-530) and the subsequent Chase1988). The site was selectedfor excava- early Late Classicperiod (A.D.530-650), even tion becauseof its known Postclassicoccupa- though the largestskeletal samplesderive from tion, but earlier remains were excavatedwhen

SOUTHERN LOWLAND MAYA ARCHAEOLOGY 19 encountered. Identification of Santa Rita Co- Postdassicoccupation in the area. However, . investigationsproduced evidence for settlement} . rozal population history has been undertaken based both on structural and burial informa- predominantly on earlier horizons. The basic ; . methodology for undertaking an analysis of . . tion (Table 2.t). Methodologies for these analyses are provided in D. Chase (1990). Even population in the Tayasal area is explained by though only securely dated burials and occupa- A. Chase (1990). His comparison of relative tion were utilized in these analyses, the tWO populations based on burials and settlement databases provide nearly equivalent informa- has beenamplified in Table 2.2. Thesecalcuta- ': : tion for only two periods of occupation at the tions indicate nearly equivalent structure- and ;

site: the Early Classic period (A.D. 300-550) and burial-basedpopulations during three periods I. the late facet of the Late Postclassic (A.D. 1300- in Tayasal's history: the late Early Classic : 1530). Burial populations were found to ex- (A.D.400-550), the late LateClassic (A.D. 700- , ceed percentages of structurally projected pop- 950), and the Early Postdassic(A.D. 950-]200) ; .. ulations during the Early Predassic (1200- periods.During all other periodsof occupation 900 s.c.), Middle Predassic (900-300 B.C.), (totaling 1800 years) the percentageof relative ; population derived from structure counts was .' . and Late Preclassic periods (300 B.C.- A.D. 200), but structure. based population percentages found to exceedthe percentageof relativepopu- { . exceeded those in the burial sample during lation based on skeletal information substan- the ProtOclassic (A.D. 200-300), Late Classic tially. The estimatedpopulation of the approxi-" . (A.D. 550-900), Terminal Classic/Early Post- mately 90 krn2 area of the TayasaJ-Paxcaman classic (A.D. 900-1200), and early facet Late Zone was approximately22,000 in the late : . Postdassic (A.D. 1200-1300) periods. Thus. Late Classicperiod (A.D. 700-950). The rela- one can question the reliability of the exca- tive percentageof coevalpopulation seenin the vated skeletal sample in comparison to the evi. skeletalsample ranges from 0 to approximately dence for Occupation of structures during at .0002%. The smaller percentageof population

least four time periods totaling 900 years. Sim- seenin burials at Tayasalas opposedto Santa ~ ilarly. one can question the structural sample Rita Corozal or Cuacol may be related to the \ in contrast to the osteological sample during number of seasonsof work (only one excava- three time periods totaling 1400 years. How- tion seasonat Tayasalcompared with four at ever, as indiCated above, even in those horizons Santa Rita Corozal and more than ten at Caca- .~ . col) as well as to an excavationstrategy that fo- ; . when: the relative proportion of osteological samples exceeds or correlates with other ar- cusedboth on areal clearing of latest structures / chaeological information. the total number of and "vacant terrain" tests~Thus, in compari- , . individuals idennned represents such a small son to the other two sites, it is even more un-

portion of the total population (from less than clear how representativethe: Tayasal sample is 0'. .0005% of the Terminal Classic/Early Post- rdativeto the populationat large. classic estimated population to between .001 and .005% of all other estimated popula- Location and Typology of Interments" tions) that it is unclear how representative these The location of intermentsat any Maya site is; . samples really are relative to the population at relatedboth to ancientcultural practicesand to large. contemporary archaeologicalexcavarion strat- egies. At Caracol, the majority of interments Tayasal-Paxcaman have been encounteredin residentialarchitec- Excavations in the Tayasal-Paxcaman Zone tural compoundsor "plazuela groups." While were undertaken in an effort to identify Late interments are present in varying contexts

20 I Diane Z. Chase f

:t

';';" "{:r':""':"":.:~~:i':.'

~ within thesegroups, the prominent buriallaca- can also be posited that the Classic inhabitants rion in a CaracoIplazuela group is in relation maintained other burial areas that have not yet to the easternbuilding. Approximately 65% of been located. Caracol'sresidential groups are easilyrecogniz- . The location of more: than 120 tombs is able as having an easternfacus (where the east- known for Caracol, and archaeological infor- ern building is the focal point in a given group). mation has been recorded for more than 90 of Even when not recognizablyfocal, the eastern these. All date to the Classic period (and most to building was still often usedas a shrine or mau- the Late Classic period). More collapsed tombs soleum at Caracci (A. Chase and D. Chase are located whenever settlement pattern. re- 1994b). Such eastern constructions generally search is carried out at the site. In fact, based contain burials in one or more tombs along on the data from tombs, and particularly in with subsequentlyplaced intermentsin crypts, their distribution at Caracol, any social dichot- dsts, or simplefill. The pattern of easterninter- omy seen in Maya burial practices in the cen- ment is fairly clear-cut archaeologically.Most trallowlands becomes diminished by the Late Caracol tOmbshave emryways permitting mul- Classic period, when not only did a greater per- tiple useof the samechamber and most of these centage of the population have final resting tombs contain the remains of more than one places inside tombs, but there was also more dis- person.In contraStto other sitespracticing se- tributional equivalency in burial goods and pat- quentialmultiple-individual intermentsin tombs tems as compared to earlier times (Chase 1992). (where all bodies remain in me chamber)such Many interments at Caracol, whether in as at Guaytan (Smith and Kidder 1943) and at tombs or simple burials, contained the remains (Hammond et al. 1975), Caracol of more than one individual. As mentioned provides a different and diverseinterment pic- previously, not all intennents were primary. ture with regardto its tombs. Some interments Archaeological evidence: exists for secondary were primary with individuals buried imme- burials of single individuals in tombs and in diately in tombs. Other individuals wereclearly simple graves as well as evidence of multiple seco.ndaryburials within tombs. Still other in- primary interments combined with secondary dividuals were removedfrom tombs after a pe- interments in similarly varied circumstances. riod of time and interred elsewhere(D. Chase The interment of multiple individuals (some of and A. Chase1996). Eventually,however. the whom may be partially or wholly articulated) tomb was given its final use and formally is not unknown in the Maya world, but the sealed.This final use often consistedof the in- quantity of multiple-individual burials that have terment of a primary individual accompanied been recovered at Caracol (ca. 39% of the total by other bundled secondaryremains. Follow- Late Classic sample; <,:hase1994) is striking in ing tomb closure,crypt or cist intermentswere comparison to the paucity of these kinds of in- then placed tangentally to the lower eastern terments at other lowland sites. For instance, building step and subsequentburials were then at only 1.4% of the Late Classic burial intruded into the stairway itself. While tombs sample contains multiple bodies. The preva- and burials have beennoted in other (noneast- lence of multiple-individual interments at Cara- ern) locations (including the north and south col is part of a complex of features that can be buildings in Caracol'sresidential groups), they suggested as correlating with the creation of a do not occur in the same frequency as in an strong cultural identity at Caracol during the easternconstruction. Given the large popula- Late Classic period following a period of success- tion projected for Caracol and the archaeo- ful wars against Tikal and (A. Chase logically known residential burial patterns. it and D. Chase 1996). The emphasis on this

SOUTHERN LOWLAND MAYA ARCHAEOLOGY I 21

:: ... ::':":;':..\;.::...:::~~~'.::.:.:.:'::~<:.::>.<:~)'f?'.\::i';.::,:.:,~:i:~.<>~;.::: .::'i""':.~..:.:."::!:t:'~/;\:/:;,:.

~ D practice at the site may also conceivablycorre- at SantaRita Corozal (42 burials with 69 indi- H late with the need to inter an ever-increasing viduals) than during the earlier Classicperiod Late Classicpopulation within a limited space. (41 burials with 42 individuals). There is no ,1'::- At Santa Rita Corozall interments are en- evidenceat Santa Rita Corozal for the eastern :t ',1 f '~ countered in both residential and nonresiden- burial focus found at Caracol. :L tial strucrurallocations. Perhapsbecause of its At Tayasal,the burial sequencestarts with a greatertime depth, temporal variation in burial single elaborate Late Preclassicburial that was H patterns is more evident at SantaRita Coronl fouondin vacant terrain excavations.It was ac- than it is at Caracol. During the Prcclassic companied by eccentricobsidians a~d a jadeite fl: period, most of the skeletal population was and shell mosaic ornament. The Tayasalburi- buried in simple primary context in extended als datable to the Early Classicexhibit the same 1:~; ~ or flexed position below housesor houseplat- dichotomy noticed at Caracol and Santa Rita ':' :; forms. Most burial offerings included a single Corozal. The single tomb noted for this period , I "1:,' ceramicvessel, although someincluded shell or contained 14 vesselsand a host ofsmaller items, J~ .~

,other artifacts. By the Early Classic period, a whereas most other coeval burials had only , "j dichotomy in burial practices is noticeable at one or two vessels.The Late Classicinterments I' '~ Santa Rita Corozal. Two tombs were found in at Tayasal are almost formulaic: an eXtended , ?~

nonresidentialarchitecture in Structure7. These supine body accompaniedby one to four ves- 'i ,J ,: ;,1 1 : sels,one of which is often "killed" and inverted , ' are elaborate interments of single individuals, i ':' (one male and one female)containing a variety beneaththe headof the individual as if to serve :.':{ d of exotic ceramic, jadeite, lithic, and shell arti- as a pillow. The singleLate Classictomb, dating ,~ '" facts. Elsewhereat Santa Rita Corozal during to the beginningof the period, is a slight elabo- n n the Early Classic period, interments were lo- ration on this generaltheme with sevenceramic t',~ cated below housesand consistedprimarily of vessels and five jadeite beads. No multiple \ :) flexed individuals in cists or simple burials that burials are known from Late ClassicTayasal ,i i, , ':';> weregenerally accompanied by no more than a (n == 26); however, two multiple burials, each 1""~ single ceramic vessel that had been "killed" containing two individuals, are known from H u and placed over the head. Similar to Caracol, both the Early Classic (n = 13) and the Post- t " classic(n 12) periods. ,t,',j however, by the Late Classic period any di- = J:; chotomy in burial practices lessened.During J :1 the Postclassicperiod, while there was varia- Relative Aging, Sexing, and Health ';d tion in burial practices, tombs were no longer Status of Skeletal Populations t"~ used. Elaborate interments during this later The skeletal samples from each of these sites 'r: !' rime were marked by ~tonealtars and were lo- are somewhat fragmentary. Even in situ preser- r cated in association with multiple-room resi- vation of remains was generaUy poor. Thus, r',: in-field identification of age and sex often has dential structures and smaller shrines.Individ- l:, uals in these interments included both males taken precedenceover post-field analyses.Never- ~':' :~r and females, but were usually buried in an theless, there have been rare cases when post- upright flexed position. Thesepresumed high- field assessmentshave altered in.field interpre- sratusburials were accompaniedby pottery or tations. The author viewed all of the available r by jewelry made of shell, jadeite, or metal. skeletal material from each of these sites, but

OtherPostclassicinterments consisted of simple not always with the same intensity. The author J graves cut into or behind existing buildings. was not present for the 1971 Tayasal excava- 1 ,Multiple interments, both primary and second- tions and thus could only review the stored ary, are much more common in the Postclassic skeletal remains in Guatemala in conjunction l

lJ ;l.

22 I Diane Z. Chase

. . ",': ~;~,':,:':::'::,,:! ,;",,:, :':;'~,;:~'. :":':':' :, ~("':::'j ~;::,'-i ~.::~ ';,';:::',\?::;;:'~:f;i;~:',<::);~;f/( ~:,:

~ with other post-field analysesundertaken dur- historic information from CaracoIhieroglyphic ing the summerof 1977. A large number of the texts that record the death of one of Caracci's Santa Rita Corozal burials were excavatedby known rulers, Kan II, at the age of 71 in A.D. the author and all were viewed in-field and 680. Potential problems and discrepanciesfor briefly in the Corozal laboratory, bur many other Maya sites (specifically )have havenot beenfully reviewedpost-field. A simi- beenpreviously noted betweenskeletal age and lar situation exists for Caraeol. Analysis of the hieroglyphically recorded age (Marcus 1992; Santa Rita Corozal and Caracol materials is Ruz 1977). As Kan II's burial has not been still ongoing and, in fact, the Caracol sampleis found, we cannot assessthe validity of the site's being increasedon a yearly basis.Thus, certain textual statementsvis-a-vis skeletal analysis. of the following commentsmay be modified in However, few, if any, individuals at Caracol the future. can be assignedan age of "71." It must be cau- In all cases,as many factors as possiblewere tioned again, though, that the extant analysis included in the analysis. Age-at-deathin each has avoided any over-agingof osteologicalre- sample population is most accurate for sub- mains at Caracoi. -adultsin which dental eruption patterns could Eventhough the samplesare extremelysmall almostalways be used in conjunction with other relative to the once extant tOtal populations, lessreliable factors (such as long-bone length). the percentagesof archaeologicallyrecovered Age-at-deathof adults has generallybeen based burials at various agesof death may be instruc- on less reliable, degenerativechanges, espe- tive in viewing the populations of these sites. cially wear in teeth.However, a completeinter- For instance,in comparing the two inland sites nal scaling of wear following Miles (1963) has of Caracci (d. Chase 1994) and Tayasal(d. yet to be completed. Age-at-deathfor adults Chase 1983) for individuals identified as to was likely underestimated,rather than overesti- age-or-death,14.79% of the sampleat Caracol mated. Someindividuals in each of the'sample was composedof infant skeletons,while only populations are particularly difficult to analyze 5.36% of the sampleat Tayasalwas composed becauseof substantial antemortem tOoth loss of infants. At Tayasal,23.21 % of the sample that interfered with assessmentof dental wear. was composedof skeletonsof individuals over Sexingof skeletalremains also has beenun- 3S yearsof age,while at Caracol only 11.24% dertaken using as many meansas possible,but ofthe samplewas composedof such individu- has beenhampered by preservation.Sex assess- als. It is tempting to ascribesuch demographic mentswere made only on adults and only when . differencesto variations in population density there was reasonablygood evidence,preferably and urban environment (d. Storey 1992b for: from analysis of features on the pelvis and Teotihuadn). Alternatively) these differences skull. Other identifications (individual stature, may simply relate to differential sampling at the two sites. . pathologicallesions, etc.) weredependent upon preservationand thus were madeon an individ- The actual causeof death is rarely evidentin ual case-by-casebasis as sampleswould allow. the skeletalremains from Caracol.Health prob- The age-at-deathof individuals in the skele- lemsevident in the skeletalremains rather indi- tal population at Caracol ranges from infants cate that a given individual survived a particu- less than one year of age to adults approxi- lar health problem. Identifiablehealth problems mately50 yearsof ageor older. The majority of include dental problems such as enamel hy- adults in this skeletal sample, however, likely poplasia) calculus, caries, tooth loss, and al- lived to somewherebetween 25 and 35 yearsof veolar resorption, as well as other lesscommon age. This skeletal information compareswith maladies such as fused vertebrae,porotic hy-

SOUTHERN LOWLAND MAYA ARCHAEOLOGY 23

I ~ perostosis, and arthritis. The most common als while filing occurs in four burials (one Pre- affliction is enamel hypoplasia, existing in ap- classic)two Late Classic,one Early Postclassic). proximately 16% of the burial sample. Moder- One Postclassicburial additionally exhibits a ate to severe calculus is thus far 'noted in only single supernumerarytooth. Caracci is seem- sevenindividuals, or 2.1 % of the Caracol sample. ingly anomaloustor most Classicera lowland Porotic hyperostosis, found to be,present in rel- sites in that 34.34% of the burial sample atively high proportions in some Mayapopula- exhibits filing or inlays of jadeite, hematite, tions (d. Saul 1972a for ), and shell, making dental modification rela- has been identified in only seven individuals at tively common in the skeletal sample of the Caracol, equally distributed among adults and site. Of the Caracol interments, 11.66% have subadults. Interestingly, however, the identified inlays only, 14~11% have filed teeth only, and casesof porotic hyperostosis duster within spe- 8.57% include teeth that exhibit both inlays cific household groups. The known casescome and filing. Fully 20% of the excavatedinter- from only three locations at the site. mentsat CaracoI(33 burials in 26 groups) con- The Santa Rita Corozal individuals show tain individuals with inlaid teeth. This may be lessevidence of ailmentsthan thosefrom either compared with 2.6% of the total interments Caracol or Tayasal. Porotic hyperostosis occurs from Tikal (n = 6). The interments that have in only three cases and there is only a single individuals with inlaid teeth include those lo- recorded case of dental calculus. In comparison, catedin tombs in the epicenterthat presumably the Tayasal population exhibits no porotic hy- represent royalty, as well as many individuals perostosis and only a single case of noticeable buried in simple gravesin the farming areasof hypoplasia. Some 13.56% of the adult burials Caracol. Thus) the simple presenceof filing or at Tayasal had no caries or calculus in the teeth inlays has no dire~t correlation with sta.tus(a (n = 8). However, twO cases of possible rick- similar situation is also true for Copan; Whit- ets are recorded for Tayasal and 18.64% of tington 198~). However, the Caracol data also the population(n = 11) shows mild to severe indicate that certain inlay and filing patterns calculus build-up, indicative of other potential (such as mandibular inlays of jadeite in the in- dietary problems. Evans (1973), in his study cisors and caninesbounded by hematite-inlaid of calculus and caries in the Tayasal 'sample, premolars) may be indicative of a particular status. . suggested the presence of a dietary imbalance (specifically a high-carbohydrate, low~proteio diet) throughout much of the site's history. How Population History: Further Problems much of a potentia] role the environment played in Intrasite and Intersite Comparison in the health picture cannot be determined at The osteological sample at each of the three this time. From this rather limited sample, it sitesor zonesconsidered here was generated us- is unclear whether the seaside Santa Rita pop-, ing roughly companible methodologies.Areal ulation was healthier than either the lakeside clearing, axial trenching, and test excavations Tayasal or the upland Caracol populations. were undertaken at each site. In all three sites interments have beenencountered in a variety Dental Modification (Filing and Inlays) of locations, including placementin residential Dental modification is extremelyvariable across and nonresidentialconstructions, as well as in the three sites.No casesof either inlays or filing plazas. Individuals have also beenplaced in a have been noted for Santa Rita CorDIal. At diverserange of interment conditions, from in- Tayasalinlays occur in three Late Classicburi- clusion in trash dumps to formal placementin

24 I DianeZ. Chase

~ elaborately constructed tombs. However, the dividuals, and 22 "refuse interments" repre- intensity of investigationhas varied at eachsite. senting 42 individuals. The remainder of the Caracol has beenthe locus of ten years of re- sample derived from secondaryfill (and mid- search, but had a larger overall population. den) contexts. This combined sample appears SantaRita Corozal was a smallersite with four .to present a representativecross-section of a seasonsof excavation.Maximal Tayasalpopu- prehistoric population (Storey 1992b). Thus, lationswere larger than SantaRita Cocoza!but Storey seesher skeletal sample as adequately smaller than Caracci, but digging took place reflecting age and sex distributions. It would during only a singleseason. As noted, the tem- also ~pparently representsome 22.89%. of the poral foci of investigation also varied among compound residents,an extremely high total the sites as did the frequenciesof differing ex- for most Mesoamericancontexts. However, dis- cavation types and the emphasison structural agreementexists over how representativeeven as opposedto nonstructural investigations.All this skeletalsample is. While Storey(1992b; 70) of thesethings havea bearingon the osteologi- argues that the Tlajinga 33 sample "will re- cal samplethat is generatedand should be con- flect demographic characteristics of the ma- sideredin any attempt at making absolutecor- jority of the inhabitants of the.city," Sempow- relations of skeletalremains among thesesites. ski (1992; 30) explicitly disagrees,noting that. "most burial data from Teotihuacan.relate to Analysis of Smaller personsof intermediatestatus, whose remains Household Compounds were interred in their house and happen to Granted that synthetic interpretations relating havebeen well preserved." to skeletalpopulations at most Maya sites are Samples from most lowland Maya house problematic becauseof scale, the legitimate compounds or plaza groups are not as repre- question can be raised as to whether sampling sentativeas those from Tlajinga 33. This is par- problems can be better controlled in smaller, ticularly evident in the published data from more intensively excavatedcontexts. A brief Tikal. Haviland has presenteddata from a se- answer to this obviously complex question is ries of housemoundexcavations at Tikal, from "yes and no." which the representativenessof a given house Perhapsthe bestknown skeletalsamples that compound'sskeletal population can beextrapo- have been used to characterizea large popu- Jated.For Group 2G-1 (Haviland 1988), it can lation are those derived from the Tlajinga 33 be estimatedthat some 106 peopleoccupied it apartment complex at Teotihuacan (Storey over its history. Twelve burials of adult males 1985, 1992b). Storey(1992b:50,70) notesthat are known from .this group. Thus, although this "compound is but one of 2000" and that it 11.32% of the presumed burial population was occupiedfor "3 period of 450-500 years." from Group 2G-1 was recovered,the sampleis Millon (1976) estimatedthat eachTeotihuacan neverthelessskewed, including only matesthat compound housed populations of up to 100 are all associatedwith a single building in the people.Thus, over the span of its histOryTla- group. For Group 7F-l (Haviland 1981), it can jinga 33 presumablyhoused some 900 pe~ple. be estimated that some 245 people occupied Storey (1992b; 130) notes that '~the Tlajinga this compound over its history. Fifteen burials 33 compoundresidents recovered from skeletal were recoveredfrom excavationsin the struc- remainsnumbered 206." Of this number,there tures and associatedplaza of this group. Thus, were 42 primary burial contexts with 49 indi- some 6% of the toral population is represented viduals, 16 secondaryinterments with 19 in- in this burial sample.For Groups4F-1 and 4F-2

SOUTHERN LOWLAND MAYA ARCHAEOLOGY 25 (Haviland et a1.1985), it can be estimatedthat search,such as the dietary analysesbeing con- some 910 people occupied theselocales over a ducted on the SantaRita and Caracol samples long occupation history. Even though 31 buri- by Heney Schwarczand Christine White. als (spanningall segmentsof a potential popu- Viewing skeletal and burial information lation) were recovered,this sample represents among sites can be misleading if the proper only 3.41% of the overall population tbat once controls of context and scale are not main- lived here.Similar low figures,hovering around tained. For example, a comparison of Early 10% of a total group's population, can be ob- Classic interments at Santa Rita Cocozal and tained from calculations based on the more Caracol might tend to overemphasizethe sig- intensively excavated groups at Caracoi. In nificance of Santa Rita Corozal basedon the summary, then, the representativenessof the wealth of exotic items found in that site'stombs skeletal samplesfrom even the most detailed (d. Chase1992), items of far more beauty and excavations in Maya plazuela groups of tbe rarity than are presentlyknown from Caracci's sourh-centrallowlandsmust be q~estioned from many chambers.Santa Rita Corozal wasclearly an analytic standpoint in regardto both the res- a less important site politically than Caracol idential group and the population at large. during this rime. The prominenceof its burials likely reflects Santa Rita's closer proximity to trade routes and increasedefforts of peripheral Discussion rulers to emphasizetheir statusin death. Coeval differences in cultural practices re- Comparisonsof the skeletal populations from lating to interments among the sites are also CaracoI, Santa Rita Corozal, and Tayasalsug- worthy of attention. Early Classic interments gest very different population histories but re- at eachof the three sitesexhibit bimodal distri- vealsome interesting similarities. Epicentral Ca- butions. All three sites have elaborate Early racol was occupiedrelatively late (ca. 300 B.C.) Classictombs sharing broadly similar artifacts. comparedto both Tayasal(600 s.c.) and Santa However, a basic similarity in the pattern of Rita (1200 B.C.).However, Caracci reacheda placing singleceramic vessels near the headsof much larger peak population during the Late individuals in Early Classic and Late Classic Classic period than either of the other two primary interments at both Tayasaland Santa sites.Santa Rita Corozal is the only site of the Rita Corozal is not reflected in the burials of three to have its primary population peak oc- Caracoi. The greater frequency of tombs and cur in the Late Postclassicperiod. The skeletal inlaid teeth in the .LateClassic period at Cara- populations at all three sites suffered similar col, as opposedto either SantaRita Corozal or health problems. However, the sampledosteo- Tayasal.may reflect the site'sprosperity at this logical remains of the people from Caracol time, but also may be indicative of other inter- show more evidenceof maladies,a higher per- nal cultural factors (such as the intentional es- centageof infant skeletons,and a lower per- tablishment of a distinctive Caracol identity). centageof skeletonsof individuals older than Burials have been used to assist in making 35. Differencesseen among thesepopulations statusdistinctions at eachsite. However,this is may be related to a variety of factors such as never a simple matter. At Caracci, there does environment (lacustrineand coastalas opposed seemto be one key factor in statusassessments: to inland), tbe more urban natureof the densely the amount of tomb volume per individual. The greater tomb volumes (ca. 7 m 3 of space populated Caracol, or to sampling. Some an- swersmay possiblybe garneredfrom future re- per individual) appear to correlate with other

26 Diane Z. Chase

. ;. "

~ factors, suchas painted hieroglyphictexts, that ences in methodology and reporting with re- suggestroyal status.At SantaRita Corozal and gard to skeletalanalysis, but thereare also prob- Tayasal other factors, such as the architectUre lems in the basic sampling of skeletalremains. and artifact contents of the surrounding build- Differing archaeologicalresearch strategies may ing, when combined with interment type and yield distinctive or skewed skeletal samples, contents, have helped to yield better status as may past cultural practi~es. Furthermore, . assessments.Comparative study of interments comparisonof population percentagesbased on can also be usedto assessrelationships among datedstructural occupation as opposedto dated sites within a region. The distributional study osteological materials revealseven greater po- of tomb volume in the wider area surrounding tential samplingproblems whether one is view- Caracol reinforcesthe existenceof a hierarchy ing residential groups, sites, or wider regions. of sites subordinate to Caracol (Chase1992). Comparisonswithin and betweensites can only When viewing the occupation history of be expectedto be meaningfulif the parameters these three sites, it is useful to compare popu- involved in defining any set of archaeological . larion reconstructionsgained from settlement data havebeen carefully explored in an attempt data with the actual skeletalpopulation recov- to determine the reliability and comparability ered.Discrepancies between popuIa.tion per- of individual samplepopulations. centages,as expressedin settlementand skel- etal samples, may be suggestiveof sampling Acknowledgments problems in the recoveryof the skeletalpopula- tion. Suchcomparisons may also help to dem- The investigationsreported on abovehave been onstrate the severi~ of cultural changesassoci- funded by a wide variety of institutions. The ated with sp~cifictransitions that are evidentin work in the Tayasal-PaxcamanZone of Guate- the archaeologicalrecord. mala wassupported by The UniversityMuseum In summary,not only doescontextual analy- and tbe Anthropology Department of the Uni- sis of skeletal remains froin the lowland Maya versity of Pennsylvania.Investigations at Santa sitesof Caracci, SantaRita Corozal, and Taya- Rita Corozal were fund,ed by the National sal add signifiGantlyto the interpretations at ScienceFoundation (Grants BNS-8318531and each site, but the combined comparisonssug- BNS-8509304) as well as by the Explorers' gestmore about the variability in ancient Maya Club, SigmaXi, variousagencies at the Univer- populations than eachof theseanalyses would sity of Pennsylvania,and private donations.In- indicate in isolation. However, discussionand. vestigations at Caracol have been funded by compa~ison of skeletalmaterials within and be- the Dart Foundation, the Government of Be- tween sites is not without its difficulties. A lize, the Harry Frank GuggenheimFoundation, number of authors havequestioned the overall the National "ScienceFoundation (Grants BNS- comparability of data from divergent reports, 8619996 and SBR-9311773),the United States the ability to view health among different ar- Agencyfor International Development,the Uni- chaeological populations, and whether paleo- versity of Central Florida, the Instit~te of Maya epidemiologycan be attemptedusing archaeo- Studies, and private donations.. The author logical data (Ortner and Aufderheide 1991; helpwould and also input like into to thank this paper. Arlen F. Chasefor .his Wood et al. 1992). There are not only differ-

SOUTHERN LOWLAND MAYA ARCHAEOLOGY 27