Political Theaters of the Classic Maya Author(S): Takeshi Inomata Source: Current Anthropology, Vol

Plazas, Performers, and Spectators: Political Theaters of the Classic Maya Author(s): Takeshi Inomata Source: Current Anthropology, Vol. 47, No. 5 (October 2006), pp. 805-842 Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/506279 . Accessed: 18/01/2015 16:49

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The University of Chicago Press and Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Current Anthropology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006 805

Plazas, Performers, and Spectators Political Theaters of the Classic Maya

by Takeshi Inomata

Theatrical performances not only communicate preexisting ideas but also define political reality as it is experienced by participants. Theatrical events thus constitute a critical process of integration and conflict in a wide range of societies and have particularly significant effects on the maintenance and transformation of premodern centralized polities. The study of performances allows archaeologists to explore the interrelations between political, social, and cultural factors and provides an approach to action and meaning different from the one that views the material record as text. The analysis of plazas in Classic Maya society (AD 250–900) suggests that the performances of rulers depicted on stone monuments involved a large audience and that securing theatrical spaces for mass spectacles was a primary concern in the design of Maya cities. Such events gave physical reality to a Maya community and counteracted the centrifugal tendency of nonelite populations.

How did large societies of the past achieve a certain degree entities in the premodern world. The way ancient people ex- of cohesion underscored by collectively held cultural and perienced the presence of such political organization was not moral values? Anderson (1991, 6) has argued that “all com- always the same as ours. Whereas today the notion of the munities larger than primordial villages of face-to-face contact state is internalized in the political consciousness of numerous (and perhaps even these) are imagined” in the sense that individuals, many early states may not have had resources and individuals never know most of their fellow members or meet mechanisms to assert their constant presence in the minds them but nevertheless bear the image of their communion and daily lives of their subject populations. Foucault (1977 (see Canuto and Yaeger 2000). There is, however, a vast gap [1975], 187) noted that, in premodern Europe before the between “primordial villages” and the modern nation-states technologies of discipline were developed, state power was for which Anderson developed his concept. Whereas he has what was seen. Likewise, before the rise of modern nation- emphasized the role of the written media in the creation of alism, individuals’ identities as members of states may often imagined communities, many large communities in the past have been weaker than their identities as members of smaller emerged without much benefit of writing. While avoiding social groups such as kin groups and local communities (An- naı¨ve concepts of a true or natural community, we need to derson 1991). In certain historical contexts, then, subject pop- recognize that human sociality and identity are rooted in our ulations’ perception and experience of authorities and na- sensory perceptions of the presence and actions of others. tional unity were highly uneven, accentuated in the specific Many communities in antiquity were probably not totally temporal and spatial contexts of state-sponsored events such imagined but groups based to some degree on direct inter- as ceremonies and construction projects but diluted or even actions between individuals. In addition, no organization can nonexistent in the routines of daily lives. In those cases, what exist without symbols that give concrete, sensible forms to many individuals consciously recognized and thought about group identities (Kertzer 1988, 15). The values, traditions, may have been the tangible images of the ruler’s body, state and identities of a community are not timeless, transcendent buildings, and collective acts but probably not the abstract entities but anchored in the tangible images and acts that each notion of a state. individual can directly sense. These considerations call attention to the political impli- The relation between the tangible and the imagined aspects cations and consequences of theatrical performances in public of society is particularly important when we examine political events in which many individuals sense and witness the bodily existence and participation of other members and the cultural Takeshi Inomata is Associate Professor of Anthropology at the and moral values of the community are objectified and em- University of Arizona (P.O. Box 210030, Tucson, AZ 85721, U.S.A. bodied. In particular, I argue that the development of large [[email protected]]). The present paper was submitted 21 IX centralized polities would have been impossible in any his- 04 and accepted 14 II 06. torical context without heavy reliance on public events. Classic

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 806 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006

Maya society (AD 250–900), in which rulers and elites actively sponsored and participated in public rituals and festivals, provides fertile ground for an exploration of the intersection of theatrical performances and politics (ﬁg. 1). By analyzing the spatial contexts of public performances at Maya centers, I examine how public events facilitated and conditioned the integration and identity formation of a community and set the stage for the imposition and negotiation of asymmetrical power relations.

Theater, Community, and Power

Theory of Performance Recent developments in performance theory, theater studies, and dramaturgic analysis provide a theoretical basis for this study. The concepts of performance used by social scientists have a wide range of meanings. On one end of this continuum is a prescribed act in modern theater. Schechner (1977, 75; 1988, 6–16; 1994) distinguishes theater from other types of performances such as rituals, sports, and games by noting that it requires the physical presence of an audience that observes and evaluates it with an emphasis on entertainment. Beeman (1993, 379) stresses the symbolic reality of theater, in which the performers represent themselves in roles detached from their lives outside the performance. On the other end of the continuum is a broad definition of performance as an enactment of what it refers to (Pearson and Shanks 2001). In this view, the emphasis is on what human beings Figure 1. The Maya area, showing the locations of the centers do as opposed to thoughts and abstract structures. An explicit mentioned in the text. theoretical formulation of this perspective is found in the concept of the performative utterance in speech-act theory. Certain utterances do not simply describe social relations but Theatricality is defined in terms of the emotional—including effect them (Austin 1962). Goffman (1959, 22; 1967) has also both positive and negative—responses that the performance proposed a broad definition of performance: “all the activity produces in participants and its symbolic reality, with a se- of an individual which occurs during a period marked by his miotic system distinct from that of unconscious, routine acts continuous presence before a particular set of observers and (Fischer-Lichte 1992, 139–40; 1995; Pavis 1998[1980], 395). which has some effect on the observers.” He has emphasized In addition, theatricality involves the use of material images the theatricality that is present even in everyday activities and in dynamic motion as media of expression and communi- has examined their communicative and expressive qualities, cation in which the human body takes a central role (Grimes through which people project different identities and images 1987; Read 1993, 10). In this sense, theatricality is present in under different circumstances. many contexts outside of the modern formal theater. Al- The present study builds on these diverse theoretical views. though many of the events that I discuss may be called rituals, Nonetheless, the purpose of my research requires a definition I often use the term “theatrical performance” to make my of performance that is tighter than those of Austin and Goff- theoretical approach explicit (see Moore and Myerhoff 1977). man yet broad enough to include various activities which take The significance of these theoretical developments con- place outside of formal theaters (see MacAloon 1984a, 6). cerning performance can be situated in a broader trend in Following Hymes (1975, 13–19), I define performance as cre- archaeology and other social sciences which, inspired by prac- ative, realized, achieved acts which are interpretable, report- tice theory and agency theory, calls attention to what people able, and repeatable within a domain of cultural intelligibility. do (Bourdieu 1977[1972]; Giddens 1984). This view is ac- What distinguishes it is the qualities that are consciously rec- companied by a conceptualization of political processes as ognized by performers and an audience. I am particularly indissolubly tied to the so-called cultural domain of society. concerned with its theatricality, that is, the quality of com- By demonstrating that even tastes for certain types of art are municative acts that requires the presence of an audience closely associated with asymmetrical power relations, Bour- acting as observers and evaluators (Beeman 1993, 383–84). dieu (1984[1979]) has criticized narrow conceptualizations of

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Inomata Plazas, Performers, and Spectators 807 cultural practices as nonpolitical acts operating in closed sys- and defines their social relations (Palmer and Jankowiak 1996; tems of aesthetics (see also Inomata 2001b). He has also bro- Turner 1957, 1972). ken away from the other theoretical extreme, the treatment It follows that performance creates and communicates of art, theater, and other cultural domains strictly in terms meaning differently from text. Although a performance usu- of the expression or imposition of dominant ideologies. He ally has a conventional meaning shared by the majority of a has emphasized these domains’ relations to cultural capital, society, such acts are multivocal at a deeper level, representing or valued cultural knowledge, which can be converted into different meanings for different people and in different sit- symbolic capital and political power. Likewise, Gramsci’s con- uations (Turner 1967, 50). The ambiguity and diversity of cept of hegemony has urged social scientists and humanists meanings in performance, however, do not necessarily imply to examine all-encompassing political processes. Building on ineffective communication. Seeing is believing. Bodily per- Gramsci’s ideas, Williams (1977) has noted that hegemony is formance may sometimes have more persuasive power than a process of dominance and subordination in which political, verbal communication (Rappaport 1999; Robbins 2001). We social, and cultural forces are interlocked. Thus, the concept need to explore the persuasive, creative, and transformative of hegemony as “a whole body of practices and expectations, power of performance while recognizing the fluidity, ambi- over the whole of living,” is broader than that of ideology. guity, and indeterminacy of its meaning. Such theoretical developments provide critical inspiration for These considerations have important methodological im- the archaeological study of performance, which crosscuts the plications for archaeologists. Because of the inherent multi- political, social, and cultural domains. vocality of performance, an overly optimistic view about the The archaeological study of performance has the potential possibility of recovering meaning in the past may result in of going beyond approaches inspired by practice theory. A the imposition of the researcher’s own internal narratives. central issue in this regard is how we grasp the immediacy Wuthnow (1987, 332–44) has suggested that what he calls the of material presence and physical action. As important as the dramaturgic approach in social sciences, with its focus on the influence of practice theory has been, it does not sufficiently observable dimensions of actions, utterance, and interactions elaborate how the materiality of space in which people’s prac- in human lives, shifts researchers’ attention from the pursuit of subjective or semantic meaning to a more productive in- tices are situated empowers and constrains agents (Munn quiry into the conditions under which symbolic acts are 1992; Smith 2003, 15; see also Hall 1966). Likewise, it does meaningful. This observation is particularly true for archae- not fully address the bodily presence of audiences that perceive ology (see Barrett 1994). Instead of presupposing preexisting and affect the practices of actors. The study of performance fixed meanings, archaeologists need to place more emphasis urges us to examine specific details and processes of embodied on examining dynamic processes in which meanings are cre- acts, material and spatial contexts, and interactions between ated and contested through embodied performance. actors and observers (Inomata and Coben 2006). Increased attention to the materiality of space and body also provides an encouraging avenue for archaeological engagement in po- Spectacles of Unity and Division litical thinking. Performances may take place on diverse scales, ranging from At the critical intersection of culture and politics are the a solitary act of one individual with deities, ancestors, or generation, negotiation, and contestation of meaning. The natural beings serving as a perceived audience to a mass spec- focus on performance provides a perspective different from tacle involving thousands of people. Theatrical events of dif- the one that views the archaeological record as text (see Hod- ferent sizes all have important political implications. Even der 1986). The text-based notion of meaning assumes the daily practices on a small scale can be highly political, re- priority and preexistence of generative rules, thoughts, and flecting and re-creating the power relations of the society at ideas over bodily actions, sensual perceptions, and lived ex- large (Bourdieu 1977[1972]). Therefore we need to explore perience (see Geertz 1973; Le´vi-Strauss 1963). This assump- diverse operations and functions of theatrical events on dif- tion is not unrelated to the nature of academic practice cen- ferent scales without falling into mechanistic categorization. tered on intellectual reflections that are detached from the At the same time, the implications of different scales should practical concerns of the world (Bourdieu 2000[1997], 51; not be underestimated. In the interest of tight argument, this Stahl 2002, 29). The study of performance explores the du- paper focuses on large-scale performances involving a sub- ality—rather than the dichotomy—of thought and action stantial number of participants, such as public ceremonies, without privileging either (see Meskell and Joyce 2003). In festivals, and courtly interactions. MacAloon (1984b, 243–46) other words, a performance does not simply transmit pre- and Handelman (1990) call them “spectacles” and “public existing meaning but also creates new meaning and trans- events,” respectively. forms the existing one. It acts upon the world as it is expe- Public events physically bring together numerous individ- rienced by participants and produces social changes (Bell uals and allow them to sense the presence of others and to 1992; 1997, 72–83; 1998; Schechner 1994, 626–32; Tambiah share an experience. In other words, the large public perfor- 1979). The performance shapes the identities of participants mance grounds the constitution of a community that exceeds

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 808 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006 the range of daily face-to-face interaction in the physical re- Scott (1990, 2–19, 67–90) particularly emphasizes schisms ality made up of its members (Da Matta 1984; Handelman hidden behind superficial conformity. He contends that, 1990, 116–35; Singer 1959, 1972; Turner 1986, 24). It presents whereas the “public transcript” enacted on public stages is moments of a “real” community. In addition, performers in the representation of elites as they want themselves to be seen, public events typically dramatize the moral and aesthetic val- both elites and nonelites have their own “hidden transcripts,” ues of a community (Singer 1959). Theatrical performance is played out off-stage, which diverge from and contradict the not simply a reenactment of timeless community traditions public one. In addition, theatrical events may be dangerous but objectifies and embodies otherwise abstract notions (Bai- times in which the established order can be challenged and ley 1996, 13; Connerton 1989; Hobsbawm and Ranger 1983; subverted (Van Gennep 1960). In particular, carnivals and Rockefeller 1999, 123). This means that spectacles provided similar public events may provide occasions on which the premodern communities, which may have lacked print media populace openly expresses dissent from and resentment of the and other communication technologies, with opportunities powerful (Bakhtin 1968[1965]; Kertzer 1988, 144–50; Scott to create shared identities and common values among their 1990, 72–75). The system of cultural and aesthetic values of members. Theatrical events thus have real and direct political such events may also constrain the dominant, limiting their effects. They create and re-create a community, sometimes power (Bloch 1986; Inomata and Houston 2001a). The par- even transcending ethnic and linguistic boundaries (Futrell adox of theatrical performances is that even those designed 1997; Handelman 1990). to serve the dominant simultaneously empower those who The central role of theatrical performance in the consti- are intended to be subjugated through emotional elevation, tution of a political community implies that it is a critical affirmation of social identities, and renewed affinity to a com- arena for the negotiation of meaning and power (Comaroff munity (Fernandez 1972). and Comaroff 1991; Dietler 2001). One aspect of this process Geertz (1980, 123–35) goes farther to claim that public is the use of theatrical performance for and by the dominants performance in the theater state of historical Bali was the as a means of conveying their worldviews, history, cultural state’s primary purpose. In this view, the elaborate dramati- ideals, value systems, and social order (Baines and Yoffee 1998, zation of cultural themes through royal ceremonies was not 235; Demarest 1992; De Marrais, Castillo, and Earle 1996; a tool for the state’s political purpose; rather, the state served Lucero 2003). Another important aspect is the effect of public for the realization of this cultural drama. This claim appears performance that defines political reality. Bloch (1974, 59–60) rather farfetched, and Geertz’s interpretations have been crit- has suggested that the formalized discourse of ritual does not icized by Balinese specialists (e.g., Lansing 1991). Theoreti- allow deviation, leaving only the alternatives of participating cally, his view, which is at odds with the central proposition in it and following the protocol faithfully or rejecting it al- of my own, gives primacy to cultural meaning that dictates together. The implications of serious confrontation or pun- people’s actions. Still, his call for a poetics or aesthetics of ishment in the latter choice force most individuals to opt for power as opposed to the Weberian notion of the mechanics the former. Whether or not the participants quietly resent of power provides an important perspective (see Smith 2000; such events, participation defines certain aspects of the social Reese-Taylor and Koontz 2001). Although we should probably relations among the parties involved. Theatrical performance avoid Geertz’s extreme argument, it is helpful to explore the thus is not empty ritual behind which the real mechanism of historical conditions of theatrical events that stimulated po- power works; it is the real process of politics (Bell 1992, litical centralization and stratification. 197–223; Kertzer 1988, 77–101). Small egalitarian societies, as well as large hierarchical ones, Theatrical events are however, rarely unambiguous. The actively engage in public events. The preparation of a spec- inherent multivocality of theatrical signs makes the propa- tacle, along with the construction of theatrical space, may gation of dominant ideologies difficult if not impossible. The- have promoted the development of hierarchical organization atrical performance does not homogenize the emotion and by requiring dramaturgical and logistical organizers. Clark identity of participants (Evans-Pritchard 1974, 207–8). The (2004; Hill and Clark 2001) presents fascinating data indi- ambiguity of meaning and the uncertainty of effects are indeed cating that in Formative Mesoamerica extensive plazas were critical aspects of ritual and other public events (Fernandez constructed at critical junctures of social transformation from 1972; Kertzer 1988, 57–76; MacAloon 1984a, 9). As Bell (1992, small villages to larger, more centralized communities. Large- 221–22) points out, ritual and other theatrical events tolerate scale spectacles with associated architectural spaces, instead a fair degree of internal resistance and lack of interest among of being created after and as a result of the establishment of the participants while requiring their consent in the form of hierarchical political authorities, may have preceded and fa- their participation. Public events become effective because cilitated these political changes (Barrett 1994, 27–32; Bradley they ground and display a sense of community without over- 1984, 73–74). Moreover, public events may have created a riding the autonomy of individuals. Thus, the solidarity of a condition in which the emergence of central figures in the community is produced by people acting together, not by form of dramatic protagonists was tolerated or even desired people thinking together (Durkheim 1965[1915]; Kertzer and demanded by an audience. Such individuals may have 1988, 76). had the potential to become political leaders. In this regard,

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Inomata Plazas, Performers, and Spectators 809 rulers in many ancient polities appear to have shared certain leads to the relation between what are generally called the qualities with ritual specialists in nonhierarchical societies and public and private spheres. It should be clear that by focusing with actors or musicians today (see Schechner 1994, 623). on large-scale events I do not intend to privilege the “public” The archaeological study of the development of large cen- and the “extraordinary” over the “private” and the “ordinary.” tralized polities should direct its attention not only to the Moreover, an increasing number of archaeologists and an- political maneuvering of a small number of “aggrandizers” thropologists question the uncritical distinction between the but to the motivation and roles of an audience or the masses public and the private (Inomata et al. 2002; Robin 2003). This (Pauketat 2000). does not mean, however, that we should abandon the concept These diverse views of theatrical performance are not in- of the public. The work of Habermas (1991) remains signif- compatible. In any society, the potential of performance for icant in this regard. He demonstrates that what we call the ideological unification and imposition coexists with the per- public sphere was developed and transformed under the spe- sistence of multivocality and a possibility for the subversion cific social conditions of the modern Western world. Instead of power through theatrical acts, as does the use of theater of abandoning the concept of the public or presupposing its by the state with popular demands for large pageants that universality, we need to analyze how the public sphere is facilitate the emergence of a state. We need to examine the constituted in each historical context. For this purpose, the intersections of these diverse forces and the political dynamics public sphere should be defined in a loose, heuristic manner they create. as a social field of interaction which potentially involves a substantial number of individuals and shapes political processes on a large scale. The Creation of the Extraordinary At the same time, we need to pay attention to the common The study of these extraordinary events does not necessarily criticism of Habermas that his notions of the public sphere run counter to the recent emphasis on domestic lives and in different periods are highly idealized and their categorical daily routines in archaeological studies; instead, they com- distinctions overemphasized (Calhoun 1992). Habermas ar- plement each other. On the one hand, public performance is gues that, in the feudal society of medieval Europe, the ruler’s embedded in social relations, experiences, and economic ac- power was merely represented before the people, constituting tivities of everyday lives. On the other hand, the memory of the publicness of representation, but the public sphere as a past events and the anticipation of future ones shape the social realm of political debate did not exist. Performance perceptions and experiences of daily life. In addition, mass theory, however, indicates that such public representations spectacles affect day-to-day routines economically and phys- are not one-directional acts. Instead, they involve political ically as well because they require a long period of drama- negotiations between the central authority and those who view turgical and logistical preparation, including rehearsal, con- and perceive them, though their negotiations may not take struction of theatrical stages, and acquisition of foods and explicit discursive forms. These processes, then, are not totally gifts to be consumed and distributed during the events. For unlike those of the modern public sphere that Habermas example, colonial documents tell us that the Maya put sub- describes. stantial work into growing turkeys over the year to consume I should add that the public nature of political negotiation them on rare festive occasions (Cogolludo 1971[1654], 243, through performance is not limited to large centralized pol- 295), and their Classic-period ancestors certainly spent many ities in the premodern world. Small communities, in which days of the year in the preparation of public events. daily face-to-face interactions are possible, engage in collective In this regard, there is a certain analogy between percep- theatrical events that create important political arenas. Even tions of space and perceptions of time in many societies. As in modern societies public performances such as inaugura- Eliade (1957) noted, in premodern societies the spatial aspect tions and the speeches of presidents continue to have political of the world was not experienced as uniformly neutral but significance. The importance of mass spectacles in premodern marked with monuments and sacred places charged with polities is rooted in the political significance of performance unique, condensed meaning. The same is true for the tem- in general, which can take place on diverse scales in diverse poral aspect. The passage of time was viewed not as monot- social contexts. We need to explore public processes of po- onous or homogeneous but as punctuated by heightened litical negotiation in various historical moments to expose emotional experiences of extraordinary events. Even in mod- their commonality and variation. ern societies, both rites of passage associated with individuals such as weddings and funerals and calendrical events such as New Year’s Day and Christmas structure people’s perceptions Theatrical Spaces in Classic Maya of time and life. Thus, just as we cannot grasp unique public Centers events without addressing their basis in daily life, we cannot Public Performances in Plazas adequately understand the ordinary without considering its dialectic relation with the extraordinary. Classic Maya society was made up of numerous autonomous This consideration of the ordinary and the extraordinary or semiautonomous polities, each centered on a divine ruler.

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 810 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006

The importance of theatrical performance is evident in stone monuments and other artistic media. These often depict rulers and other elites engaging in performances, indicating that the dominants were not only sponsors of theatrical events but also protagonists. Many stelae show rulers in elaborate attire, such as feather headdresses, masks, jade pectorals, and shell belts, often in the guise of Maize God or some other deity (fig. 2) (Houston and Stuart 1996). Some of the accompanying texts note that they are performing ritual dances (Grube 1992). Tokovinine (2003) identifies the word cha’nil, which may be literally translated as “something being watched,” in monuments depicting dance scenes. The meaning and use of this term suggest to him that events such as royal dances were indeed public performances conducted in front of an audience. Other monuments depict elites playing the ballgame, which was a ritual as well as an athletic event tied to human sacrifice and the creation myth. Many public events probably involved numerous performers, including musicians and dancers, as indicated by the murals of Bonampak (Miller 1986). Although such iconographic depictions provide val- uable information, they deal exclusively with performers and remain virtually silent about the role of an audience and the spatial settings of the events. In addition, such pictorial renderings should be viewed as idealized notions of performance and as representations of how performance was remembered rather than as the unbiased record of past events (Bergmann 1999; Joyce 1992). Theatrical performances in Classic Maya society most likely took place in various spatial contexts, including small residential complexes and sacred locations outside of centers such as caves. Yet many of the mass spectacles involving a large audience were probably held in plazas—large open spaces Figure 2. Stela H from Copań, depicting the ruler Waxaklajuun surrounded by temples and other symbolically charged build- Ub’aah K’awiil in elaborate ceremonial attire. Behind it is the ings that marked the core of every Maya city. The use of stairway that defines the eastern edge of the Great Plaza. plazas for this purpose and the participation of numerous spectators among the colonial-period Maya are well-docu- mented in historical accounts (Barrera Va´sques 1965; Ciudad through narrow, muddy passages. Most paintings found in Real 1976, 314–71; Estrada Monroy 1979, 168–74; Tozzer caves in fact depict figures with simple clothing (Stone 1995, 1941, 94, 152, 158–59; see Inomata 2006; Low 2000, 108–9). 31–54). Although Bassie-Sweet correctly points out that some Comparable activities in plazas during the Classic period have stelae present symbols of caves and mountains, it is equally been suggested by many Mayanists (e.g., Andrews 1975, 37; possible that performances were conducted on or in front of Fash 1998; Jones 1969; Looper 2001; Lucero 2003; Ringle and pyramids and temples facing plazas that symbolically repre- Bey 2001). sented sacred mountains and caves (Schele and Mathews A more significant line of evidence is the presence of nu- 1998, 43; Stone 1995, 241). merous stelae there. It is probable that monuments com- Courtly events held in palace rooms and depicted in ce- memorating public ceremonies were erected in the same ramic paintings include rulers and other elites wearing rela- spaces where the events took place to help people to remember tively simple attire with small headdresses or hats (Reents- and reexperience their grandeur and excitement (Grube Budet 2001). In other words, the attire shown on stelae, with 1992). To develop this argument I must address competing enormous headdresses and backracks made of brilliantly col- hypotheses, particularly the one presented by Bassie-Sweet ored feathers, is far more extravagant than that used in ex- (1991) that many stone monuments represent rituals held in clusive architectural settings and appears to have been de- the more exclusive settings of caves. The elaborate headdresses signed specifically for high visibility in mass spectacles. More and backracks and heavy jade ornaments shown on stelae, direct evidence is found at Chicheń Itza´, Uxmal, and other however, appear extremely cumbersome for entering caves, northern centers, where small, low platforms were placed in which often requires climbing down cliffs and crawling large plazas. Noting the association of thrones with these plat-

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Inomata Plazas, Performers, and Spectators 811 forms, Ringle and Bey (2001, 277) argue that rulers occupied these structures to address large audiences that filled the plazas (see also Kowalski 1987). The Bonampak murals lend further support to this view. They depict scenes of captive presentations and elaborate dances held on a wide stairway, which Miller (1986, 115; Schele and Miller 1986, 218) has convincingly identified as the one flanking the plaza of this center. This spatial setting presents an effective theatrical stage, heightening the visibility of performers. Although the murals do not show audiences, the plaza was most likely filled with a large number of spectators. Also suggestive is the use of large palanquins to carry rulers and other elites, as depicted on lintels at Tikal and in some graffiti (fig. 3) (Chase and Chase 2001b, fig. 4.12; Har- rison 1999, 133, 153, figs. 77, 94; Trik and Kampen 1983, figs. 71, 72, 73). Ciudad Real (1976, 327) recorded similar litters used by the colonial-period Maya in public events. Some of the Classic-period palanquins were decorated with enormous statues of deities and jaguars towering behind the rulers. Such ostentatious presentations make sense only in terms of their use in mass spectacles in open spaces. Given these lines of evidence, it is highly likely that a substantial portion of stelae depict public performances held in plazas and other open spaces in the presence of a large audience, although I do not deny the possibility that some of them show rituals that took place in more exclusive settings. In this regard, we should note that some of the lintels at Yaxchilan and panels at Palenque appear to represent acts performed in semiclosed architectural settings, although oth- Figure 3. A graffito found at Tikal, depicting a ruler being carried ers refer to public events comparable to those shown on stelae. on a large litter with a statue (Trik and Kampen 1983, fig. 72, In other words, there is a loose correlation between the spatial reprinted by permission). settings in which various types of art were viewed and those of the acts shown in these art pieces. Stelae set in open plazas as theatrical spaces. Even in public ceremonies, plazas may and viewed by many visitors depicted public performances have been used in various ways. Such events appear to have involving a large audience and in many cases held in the same involved the erection of scaffolds and other temporary struc- spaces, whereas lintels and panels that adorned elite buildings tures and the use of banners, movable thrones, and palan- and could be seen by a limited number of high-status indi- quins, all of which affected the movements of participants viduals often dealt with rituals attended mainly by court mem- and their perceptions of theatrical spaces (Houston 1998, 339; bers and held in exclusive settings (see Sanchez 1997). Ce- Suhler and Freidel 2000; Taube 1988). Likewise, the erection ramic paintings were viewed by only a few individuals at a of stelae in plazas probably narrowed the potential range of time, typically in elite residences or administrative buildings. human bodies’ physical flow and of the places’ meanings by Many of them depicted courtly interactions that took place emphasizing memories of specific events. The Maya in some in similar architectural settings, although there are ceramic cases reset old stelae, attempting to alter or reconstitute the paintings depicting public events as well. Though these cor- effects of monuments in the physical and perceptual con- relations are far from exclusive, there is a general tendency struction of theatrical spaces. for stelae and other artistic media to prompt viewers to remember, reexperience, and reimagine the depicted acts in The Capacities of Plazas spatial settings that were the same as or comparable to those of the original events. The analysis of plazas as theatrical spaces provides an effective These observations, however, do not mean that plazas were step for the study of public events by archaeologists, who used only for public theatrical events. Various authors have cannot directly observe ancient performances. One way to proposed that some plazas were used as marketplaces (Becker test the notion of the use of plazas as theatrical spaces is to 2003, 265–66; Jones 1996, 86–87; Smith 1982, 107). Although analyze their potential capacities. Moore (1996, 147) cites the direct evidence for marketplaces is difficult to obtain, such estimated space available to individual participants, ranging use of plazas is not incompatible with their primary function from 0.46 to 21.6 m2/person. The lower figure would imply

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 812 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006

Figure 4. Tikal. a tightly packed area with little space for movement, whereas I examine the plaza spaces of three centers of different sizes the higher would leave ample space around each person or as examples: Tikal, one of the largest Maya centers (fig. 4), a large open stage for dynamic performance. The figure of Copań, a center of medium size in the southeastern periphery 21.6 m2/person, taken from data on Yanomamo¨ villages, is of the Maya area (fig. 5), and the relatively small center of probably too large, however, for the more urban situations Aguateca (fig. 6). Tikal has a history of occupation and mon- of the Maya lowlands. Everywhere in the world, city dwellers umental constructions that began in the Preclassic period and have to endure smaller spaces than those who live in rural boasts numerous plazas connected by wide causeways. Culbert settings. In this article I therefore employ the figures of 0.46, et al. (1990, 16) estimate the Late Classic population of the 1, and 3.6 m2/person. Moore did not find a consistent cor- 120-km2 area defined by seasonal wetlands and earthworks at relation between plaza sizes and the estimated populations of 62,000. Along with the West Plaza and the East Plaza, the the settlements in his analysis of Andean data, and he suspects Great Plaza probably formed the central ceremonial core of that this is because there were widely different ways of using Tikal (fig. 7). Plazas associated with Temple IV, Temple VI, plazas for theatrical performances. Thus, these densities and twin pyramid complexes also had the capacity to accom- should be viewed only as tentative values for heuristic pur- modate a substantial number of people. poses. Early occupations at Copań also date to the Preclassic pe-

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Inomata Plazas, Performers, and Spectators 813

Figure 5. Copań. riod, but substantial constructions at the ceremonial core area. Although the analysis of settlement data from peripheral started during the Early Classic. According to Webster and areas of Aguateca is still in progress, 8,000 would probably Freter (1990, 52), the Late Classic population of Copań was be a generous estimate of its Late Classic population. Most around 22,000. The public theatrical space of primary im- monuments depicting rulers’ performances are found in the portance consisted of the large continuous flat spaces of the large Main Plaza. A short causeway connected this highly Great Plaza, the Middle Plaza, the East Plaza, and the Plaza public space with a more restricted compound of the Palace of the Hieroglyphic Stairway (fig. 8). Freidel, Schele, and Par- Group, a probable royal palace (Inomata 1997). ker (1993, 463) point out that stone sculptures depicting the Table 1 indicates that these plazas had substantial capacities. Maize God dancing were recovered from a large platform east In addition, their layouts show easy access from outside, im- of the Great Plaza and suggest that the platform was possibly plying an emphasis on the inclusion of a large number of a place for the preparation, practice, or execution of dances. participants. In particular, assuming 1 m2/person the Main Most ceremonial constructions at Aguateca date to the Late Plaza of Aguateca was large enough to accommodate more Classic period, prior to an enemy attack that resulted in the than the entire population of its settlement. Using this figure burning and rapid abandonment of the central elite residential for space available per person, the combined ceremonial plaza

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 814 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006

Figure 6. Aguateca. of Copań could also have held more than the entire popu- plaza area. Large centers such as Tikal tend to have multiple lation, but it did not make an effective theatrical space because large plazas and their stone monuments are more dispersed. buildings obstructed sightlines between its various parts. The In addition to mass spectacles, the Classic Maya conducted Great Plaza and the Middle Plaza constituted a better the- more exclusive performances. Smaller spaces of the East Court atrical space, but a gathering of the entire population in these of Copań and the Palace Group of Aguateca were most likely areas would have required considerable crowding. At Tikal, places for theatrical events. Along with their arrangements sur- if participants were packed tightly, the entire population might rounding flat open spaces, their function as theatrical com- have been accommodated in either the central complex, the plexes is hinted at by Structure 10L-25 of Copań and Structure area in front of Temple IV, or the area in front of Temple VI. M7-33 of Aguateca. These low structures appear to have served Realistically, however, most theatrical events probably re- as open stages without roofs or walls and were probably used quired ample stages for performers, which would have made for ritual dance (Fash et al. 1992; Inomata et al. 2001). The gatherings of the entire population in these spaces less likely. estimated capacities of these plazas (based on the figure of 3.6 These observations indicate that, whereas the main plazas of m2/person) range from 5.6 to 11.4 percent of the total popu- smaller centers may have been able to hold the entire pop- lations, which may correspond roughly with the elite sectors ulation (see also Houston et al. 2003, 234; Looper 2001, 128), of society. In addition, architecture and excavated objects sug- public events with the simultaneous presence of the entire gest that the Palace Group of Aguateca was the primary resi- community became increasingly difficult as the size of a center dential complex of the royal family of this center. Yet we should grew. This tendency may be reflected in the layouts of centers note that performances in the Palace Group of Aguateca were of various sizes. Small centers such as Aguateca tend to have probably visible not only for an audience occupying the plaza one large plaza, where most of the stone monuments are of the complex but also for spectators on the causeway (Inomata found, as a focus of community rituals. The medium-sized 2001a). Theatrical events in restricted spaces appear to have center of Copań still maintains this focus on one continuous retained a certain level of inclusiveness.

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Inomata Plazas, Performers, and Spectators 815

Figure 7. The Great Plaza of Tikal viewed from Structure 5D-71 of the Central Acropolis.

Theatrical Spaces and City Planning at Tikal, although the Mundo Perdido complex also appears to have provided an important theatrical space. The Great Sequences of construction projects at these centers shed light on strategies of designing community ritual spaces at Maya Plaza was located between the North Acropolis, the most centers. important funerary place for rulers from Preclassic times on, At Tikal, the ﬁnal layout of the city resulted from its growth and the Central Acropolis, the main residential complex for over centuries. During the Preclassic and Early Classic periods, the royal family (Coe 1990; Harrison 1970). Clearly, this plaza the Great Plaza, along with the adjacent East and West Plazas, was a symbolically charged place with direct connections to was probably the primary focus of communitywide spectacles the dynastic past and present. During both the Early Classic

Figure 8. The Middle Plaza and the Great Plaza of Copa´n viewed from the ball court.

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 816 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006

Table 1. Sizes and Estimated Capacities of Plazas of Tikal, Copa´n, and Aguateca

Estimated Capacity

0.46 m2/person 1m2/person 3.6 m2/person

Area %of %of %of Plaza (m2) Capacity Population Capacity Population Capacity Population

Tikal (est. pop. 62,000) Great Plaza 8,506 18,491 29.8 8,506 13.7 2,363 3.8 West Plaza (including areas 22,918 49,822 80.4 22,918 37.0 6,366 10.3 in front of Temple III) East Plaza 6,969 15,150 24.4 6,969 11.2 1,936 3.1 Total Central area 38,393 83,463 134.6 38,393 61.9 10,665 17.2 Area in front of Temple IV 30,068 65,365 105.4 30,068 48.5 8,352 13.5 (including parts of the causeways) Area in front of Temple VI 25,963 56,441 91.0 25,963 41.9 7,212 11.6 Twin pyramid complexes Complex Q 11,322 24,613 39.7 11,322 18.3 3,145 5.1 Complex R 11,880 25,826 41.7 11,880 19.2 3,300 5.3 Copa´n (est. pop. 22,000) Great Plaza 12,747 27,711 126.0 12,747 57.9 3,541 16.1 Middle Plaza 10,932 23,765 108.0 10,932 49.7 3,037 13.8 East Plaza 11,194 24,335 110.6 11,194 50.9 3,109 14.1 Court of the Hieroglyphic 5,123 11,137 50.6 5,123 23.3 1,423 6.5 Stairway Total Ceremonial Plaza area 39,996 86,948 395.2 39,996 181.8 11,110 50.5 East Court 4,435 9,641 43.8 4,435 20.2 1,232 5.6 West Court 6,069 13,193 60.0 6,069 27.6 1,686 7.7 Aguateca (est. pop. 8,000) Main Plaza 11,456 24,904 311.3 11,456 143.2 3,182 39.8 Palace Group Plaza 3,289 7,150 89.4 3,289 41.1 914 11.4

Note: The areas of plazas include the surrounding terrace steps. The capacities of terrace steps are based on their areas regardless of the number of steps. and the Late Classic period, stelae were placed in lines in front connections with the East and West Plazas. In addition, the of the North Acropolis facing south, leaving ample space in construction of Structures 5D-29, 30, 31, 32, 33, and 34 en- the southern portion of the area. This pattern may imply that croached on the terrace of the North Acropolis (Coe 1990, the use of the plaza as a theatrical space remained relatively 587–617, 832–38). During the Late Classic period, the ruler, consistent, with performers often occupying the northern part Jasaw Chan K’awiil, ordered the erection of Temples I and II and audiences mainly the southern. Structure 5D-119, an el- over the demolished remains of Structures 5D-1-2nd and 5D- evated room built on the roof of Structure 5D-120 (Harrison 2-2nd, which further reduced access and visibility between 1970, 27), was equipped with a throne facing Temple I and the Great Plaza and the adjacent plazas (Coe 1990; Harrison the Great Plaza (fig. 9). It is probable that the ruler or other 1999, 142). The Great Plaza was now transformed into a more elites occupied this vantage point to view theatrical events exclusive theatrical space. In addition, the population of Tikal (see Valde´s 2001 for a comparable throne at Uaxactun). was growing rapidly during this period (Culbert et al. 1990, The first formal floor of the Great Plaza, along with those 108). of the West and East Plazas, was laid during the Late Preclassic As the central complex became less adequate for com- period. Although evidence suggests that some buildings stood munity events, the next ruler, Yik’in Chan K’awiil, commis- on Preclassic floors, the exact layout and extent of the early sioned the construction of Temples IV and VI, along with plazas are not clear (Coe 1990, 167; Jones 1996, 79). Coe associated open spaces substantially larger than the Great (1990, 173, 195) suspects that during the Late Preclassic pe- Plaza (Harrison 1999, 153–62; Martin and Grube 2000, 49). riod the Great Plaza boasted a floor area larger than the later Temple IV measured 64 m in height, and the ruler who stood versions. During the Early Classic period, the Preclassic build- on the stair of this building must have been visible from a ings in the Great Plaza were demolished and buried under a wide area. This trend of increasing theatrical space can also new floor. Structures 5D-1-2nd and 5D-2-2nd were erected be seen in twin pyramid complexes. During the Late Classic at the eastern and western ends of the plaza, disrupting the period, the Tikal dynasty built a ceremonial complex with a

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Inomata Plazas, Performers, and Spectators 817

Figure 9. The throne of Structure 5D-119 of the Central Acropolis, which faces the Great Plaza. pair of pyramids at the end of each k’atun (20-year-period). litters, suggesting that rulers were carried along causeways For the Maya who enthusiastically held various calendrical before they reached the main stages in front of the temples. rituals, k’atun-ending ceremonies that occurred only a few The use of causeways as stages for mass spectacles is com- times in the life of an individual were particularly important. parable to the carnivals and festive parades in the large cities Many stelae from various Maya centers commemorated these of modern societies. events. At Tikal, a newly constructed twin pyramid complex At Copań, the Great Plaza and Middle Plaza were con- was most likely the main stage of a k’atun-ending ceremony structed at the beginning of the fifth century, which may in which residents throughout the community participated correspond with the establishment of a dynasty by K’inich (Jones 1969). Each time, an ever larger twin pyramid complex Yax K’uk’ Mo’ (Traxler 2004). A substantial amount of fill was built, reaching the apex in Twin Pyramid Complexes Q was placed to create a plaza, which suggests to Cheek (1983b, and R, commissioned by Yax Nuun Ayiin II during the late 344) that its construction involved a significant part of the eighth century (Harrison 1999, 167–73). community. From the beginning, the plaza appears to have Despite these efforts, Tikal appears to have been reaching had dimensions and a layout comparable to those of the later the point where congregation of the entire population in one stage, with its northern end marked by Structure 10L-2 and space was physically difficult. The problem may have been its southern portion occupied by a ball court. A notable dif- mitigated by the use of causeways as additional theatrical ference is that the area south of the ball court was originally stages. Harrison (1999, 158, 160) suspects that Yik’in Chan a patio surrounded by platforms, and Cheek (1983b, 342–45) K’awiil was responsible for the construction of the Maler, proposes that this area was for residential and private use Maudslay, and Mendez Causeways that connected Temples whereas the northern sections were for public and communal IV and VI with other areas, whereas Jones (1996, 83) suggests activities. In the later part of the Early Classic, the Copanecos that the first versions of the Maler and Mendez Causeways gradually raised the plaza floors, covering some platforms and were built a century or so earlier. The Mendez Causeway creating an open space that would become the Court of the measured 50–80 m in width, the Tozzer Causeway 50–80 m, Hieroglyphic Stairway. At the beginning of the Late Classic the Maler Causeway 20 m, and the Maudslay Causeway 30–50 they laid out the floor of the East Plaza (Cheek 1983a). This m. Segments of these causeways were as large as the plazas sequence may reflect an effort to expand the plaza space as of small centers, and their width exceeded the practical needs the population of Copań grew. Although over the centuries of daily transport (cf. Chase and Chase 2001a). These wide the Copanecos constructed ever higher pyramids on the streets were probably stages for processions by elites, which southern side, they appear to have consciously preserved plaza may have been viewed by a large audience occupying spaces spaces. along their edges (see Reese-Taylor 2002; Ringle 1999). The The configuration of the Great Plaza of Copań as a the- lintels of Temples I and IV depict rulers seated on elaborate atrical space may have been altered during the eighth century

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 818 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006 by the thirteenth ruler, Waxaklajuun Ub’aah K’awiil, who change their residences—and possibly their political affilia- erected a series of stelae in the central section (fig. 2). This tions—relatively easily, as did their descendents during the arrangement of monuments may imply a somewhat different colonial period (Inomata 2004; see also Farris 1984, 72–79; use of space from that of the Tikal Great Plaza. Fash (1998, Restall 1997, 174). It is not clear how important the ties to 240) suggests that the stairs surrounding the Great Plaza of a specific dynasty were for the identities of individual farmers Copań may have provided seating areas for audiences. If so, compared with their connections to kin groups and smaller in many public events performers may have occupied the local groups. central part of the plaza while spectators sat or stood along I argue that the critical elements that held together this its edges. Structure 10L-4, located in the center of the open precarious integration of Maya communities were mass the- space, probably served as a focal point of such performances. atrical events sponsored and organized by the elite. Mass spec- At Aguateca, the Main Plaza was built at the time of the tacles, in which a large portion of a community assembled center’s foundation around AD 700. Whereas the stelae of and worked together, provided opportunities for individuals the early rulers were placed mainly in front of Structure L8- to witness and sense the bodily existence and participation 5 on the eastern edge of the plaza, the last ruler, Tahn Te’ of other members. Such gatherings not only facilitated the K’inich, erected his monuments in front of Structures L8-6 exchange of goods, the communication of information, and and L8-7, located in the southeastern corner, as well as in the the finding of mates but also created moments of “real” com- middle of the plaza. This may reflect a shift in main theatrical munities. Large-scale theatrical events gave physical reality to stages with the construction or renovation of these buildings. a community and helped to ground unstable community Prior to the final abandonment, Tahn Te’ K’inich was in the identities in tangible forms through the use of symbolic acts process of constructing a large temple on the western edge and objects. In other words, those who gathered for spectacles (Inomata et al. 2004). Thus, having sufficient plaza space, the made up a community. Classic Maya communities were not ruler of Aguateca did not have to expand it, but the use of something totally imagined. The “real” community of the this space apparently changed over time. Classic Maya was, however, only temporary. The continuous These analyses show that the configuration of theatrical cohesion of a community probably required constant repe- spaces in terms of movements and placements of performers tition of physical gatherings of its members. and spectators varied from one center to another. In some As is apparent in the Bonampak murals and various ce- cases, even the use of the same plaza changed over time with ramic paintings, some spectacles involved numerous elites as the construction of associated buildings and monuments. This performers, but the strong emphasis on rulers found in stelae observation points to the inherent flexibility of plazas as the- indicates that, symbolically and often physically, at the center atrical spaces. Yet the most important implication of these of public gatherings was the body of the sovereign. Rulers histories of plazas is that securing sufficient spaces for public were at once the sponsors, organizers, and protagonists of events was a primary concern in the design of Maya cities. many of the large theatrical events. The visibility of the ruler This means that plazas were meant to accommodate a large and other elites was retained to a degree even in smaller-scale number of individuals and such gatherings were extremely political and diplomatic meetings held in royal compounds important for Maya polities. Plazas and causeways were not and spaces associated with elite residences (Inomata 2001a; secondary spaces defined after the placement of temple pyr- Inomata et al. 2002). A Maya term for ruler, ajaw, may be amids but social spaces of extreme importance in their own literally translated as “he who shouts” (Houston and Stuart right (Ringle and Bey 2001, 278). 1996, 295), implying that the origin of Maya rulership was associated with verbal performance in theatrical events. Sim- The Politics of Performance in Classic ilar concepts appear to have been shared by other Meso- Maya Society american societies. An Aztec word for ruler, for example, was tlatoani, “one who speaks,” and many Mesoamerican arts Although some Maya cities had large populations, a significant depict “speech scrolls” representing acts of utterance. The portion of residents were scattered over wide areas. Dispersed centrality of rulers in communal events suggests that the iden- settlement patterns probably fostered a tendency toward the tities of a Maya community revolved around the images of breaking away of subject populations from the central au- supreme political leaders. Mass spectacles were probably the thorities (Demarest 1992). Economically, rural nonelites ap- occasions on which people felt their ties with the ruler most pear to have been largely independent of the central author- strongly. Large gatherings also gave the elite an opportunity ities in the acquisition of many economic items, with the to impose their ideologies and cultural values on the rest of possible exception of foreign materials such as obsidian and society through performances. In public events, rulers often dry-season water supplies from central reservoirs in certain emphasized their divine nature through the impersonation of areas (Bishop, Rands, and Holley 1982; Fry 1979; Rice 1987; deities and glorified themselves through the celebration of see also Lucero 1999; Scarborough and Gallopin 1991). The victories in warfare and the performance of ballgames that centrifugal tendency of Maya populations may have been fur- mimicked battles (Freidel and Schele 1988a; Houston and ther strengthened by the high mobility of farmers, who could Stuart 1996; Inomata and Triadan 2003; Looper 2003; Schele

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Inomata Plazas, Performers, and Spectators 819 and Miller 1986). Theatrical complexes made up of temples The political effects of theatrical events were also condi- and plazas were also the resting places of royal ancestors, tioned by the physical properties of the polities, particularly constantly reminding the participants of dynastic continuity. their demographic and spatial scales. This is precisely because Social memory of dynastic history and tradition, then, was the social significance of performance is rooted in the phys- not a timeless entity but a constant process of reiteration and icality of direct interaction and bodily copresence. In this re-creation through performances which allowed room for sense, large Late Classic Maya polities such as Tikal, Calakmul, their transformation and for the invention of new traditions. and Caracol may have been reaching a size at which political Further, the references to the dynastic past and royal prerog- integration through public performance was no longer sus- atives made in theatrical events did not homogenize percep- tainable. To avoid misunderstanding I should reiterate that tions and emotions of the participants but provided objec- public theatrical events are politically significant in societies tified notions on which they could reflect and act. During the of any size, but their effects are not the same in different Classic period the number of dynasties increased as new rulers social contexts. Although Tikal and other large Maya centers emerged at minor centers. Emergent political leaders were invested considerable effort in securing theatrical spaces for those who took advantage of this flexibility in the system to mass spectacles, gatherings of the entire community—face- invent new traditions that legitimized their political power to-face contact between elites and nonelites—were becoming through the claim of divine sanction. These observations increasingly difficult. These large centers may have been mov- highlight the nature of hegemony, which is not a static or ing toward the establishment of a bureaucratic system of a given structure but a process that requires constant attention more impersonal nature (Houston et al. 2003, 234). It is and action. It is not confined to political institutions but suggestive that the royal compounds of these large centers involves interrelations between the political, the social, and generally had more restricted access and their occupants were the cultural as experienced and acted upon by all those in- more shielded from outside than those of smaller centers. The volved (Williams 1977). later course of history in the Maya area tells us, however, that It follows that theatrical events were not political tools used Maya society never completely crossed this threshold. one-directionally by dominant groups. Rulers and nobles were strongly bound by the cultural and aesthetic values of the- Conclusion atricality that elites and nonelites alike subscribed to (Inomata and Houston 2001a; see Bloch 1986, 177). Rulers and court- The large plazas of Classic Maya centers were designed to iers had not only the right to conduct ritual human sacrifice accommodate a large number of individuals. The plazas of but the obligation to perform bloodletting accompanied by small to medium-sized centers, in particular, most likely held severe pain and the risk of infection. If they lost in battle, the majority of the community members on ceremonial oc- they were the ones who were sacrificed. In this sense, emergent casions. Although the accommodation of the entire popula- rulers at minor centers cannot be viewed purely as the creation tion in one plaza became increasingly difficult at large centers of self-aggrandizing individuals. The growing populations of as the polity grew, their residents still made a significant effort such settlements may have desired figures who would take to secure spaces for mass spectacles by creating plazas outside the central stage in communal events. In addition, the de- of core areas and constructing wide causeways. Along with mands of spectacles by elites and nonelites may have been prominent representations of rulers on stone monuments driving forces for political changes not foreseen by the par- placed in plazas, these data indicate that the Classic Maya ticipants. Large theatrical events required careful planning and strongly emphasized the theatrical performance and visibility logistical organization. As the population of centers grew sig- of rulers. Theatrical events probably held together a Maya nificantly during the Classic period, the organization of ever community around the ruler and the royal court, compen- larger theatrical events may have prompted changes in ad- sating for a tendency toward fragmentation. The elite may ministrative organizations with the establishment of special- have taken advantage of these opportunities to advance their ized offices. political agendas, but they were at the same time under con- Moreover, representations of political relations and values stant evaluation by viewers. The presence of plazas of varying through performance were in constant danger of failing. The- sizes at a center suggests that theatrical events also divided atrical performance as an interaction among participants in- the community, separating those who were allowed to par- volved a process of evaluation by viewers. The meaningfulness ticipate in exclusive performance from the less privileged. and acceptability of performance were constructed and ne- These observations remind us that human sociality is gotiated through interactions among participants who shared rooted in the sensory perceptions of others. Public perfor- certain knowledge and expectations but at the same time held mance is politically significant in any society precisely because divergent or even conflicting views. Theatrical events were this fundamental aspect of social engagement plays out prom- therefore dangerous occasions for actors. Poor performance inently in theatrical events. Still, the social effects of spectacles in political theater may have meant the loss of power and are particularly evident in premodern centralized polities, in status. The strong emphasis on the performance and visibility which constant face-to-face interactions of members were no of rulers implies that they were under constant scrutiny. longer possible and print media and other technologies of

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 820 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006 mass communication were not widely available. In Classic Late Classic period (Aoyama 2006a). Extensive excavation Maya society and possibly in various other ancient polities, during the Aguateca Restoration Project Second Phase located public events gave physical reality to the imagined community Cache 4 beneath the stucco floor in the southern area of the as the participants witnessed the bodily presence of others temple in 2003. Cache 3 (obsidian and chert eccentrics) had and shared their experience. The political importance of pub- been found in the northern part of the same temple during lic performances in diverse historical contexts also derives the first phase of these investigations. Thus, Ruler 3 and his from the process by which they objectify otherwise abstract followers appear to have deposited the caches along the north- notions of cultural and moral values through embodied acts south axis of Structure L8-5. A total of 57 pieces of chipped and materialized symbols. Such objectified notions do not stone artifacts was recovered from Cache 4—49 made of ob- necessarily represent homogenized meaning shared by differ- sidian and 8 of chert. The obsidian artifacts include a single ent individuals and groups but provide tangible common complete blade, 11 nearly complete blades, 16 prismatic blade points of reference for reflection and negotiation. In other segments, 19 eccentrics, and 2 large flake scrapers. It is worth words, theatrical events set the stage for the creation and noting that 5 of the 19 eccentrics (3 notched, 1 incised, and imposition of power relations and associated ideologies, as 1 a reptile) were made from macroblades. Moreover, two large well as resistance to and subversion of them. Instead of as- flakes were unifacially retouched into scrapers. Interestingly, suming the existence of collectively held subjective meaning their dimensions and weights are almost the same, suggesting in performance, we need to address how performance be- that a knapper deliberately manufactured a pair of identical comes meaningful in terms of political processes in which its scrapers for the temple dedication. In other words, thick, wide inherent multivocality and the inescapable physicality of hu- percussion blades and flakes were removed to regularize the man bodies, spaces, and objects condition and effect social surfaces of newly imported blade cores used for manufac- reality as perceived and acted out by the participants. turing these eccentrics. It should be noted that there were no eccentrics and only a single macroblade among the 2,169 Acknowledgments obsidian artifacts collected by the Aguateca Archaeological Project First Phase from 1996 to 1999 (Aoyama 2006b). More- I thank Lawrence Coben, Stephen Houston, Michael Smith, over, Cache 4 of Structure L8-5 contained more complete or and Daniela Triadan for stimulating discussion on this subject. nearly complete blades (Np12) than any of the eight other Marshall Becker, Patricia McAnany, and Julia Sanchez, as well extensively excavated structures in the center of Aguateca as anonymous reviewers, provided thoughtful comments on (meanp2.1, s.d.p2.2). The above data suggest that the Agu- earlier versions of the manuscript. ateca ruler controlled the main access to obsidian in the city and that the royal court may have administered the pro- curement and allocation of El Chayal obsidian blade cores. A total of 13 notched pressure blades appear to symbolize Comments “13 serpents.” For the ancient Maya, the Waterlily Serpent, symbolizing the surface of the water, was a supernatural pa- Kazuo Aoyama tron of the number 13. Some Classic Maya rulers used the Faculty of Humanities, Ibaraki University, Bunkyo 2-1-1, head of the Waterlily Serpent as a crown (Miller and Taube Mito, Ibaraki 310-8512, Japan ([email protected]). 7 1993, 184). Accordingly, the “13 serpents” symbolized by the IV 06 13 pieces of notched pressure blades in Cache 4 were loaded with ideological meaning. Moreover, 3 notched macroblades This most welcome case study on the physical qualities and and a notched small percussion blade may have represented historical contexts of theatrical spaces centered in public pla- “large serpents” and a “medium-sized serpent,” respectively. zas explores one important aspect of Classic Maya political Eight chert eccentrics from Cache 4 appear to have been processes—the intersection between theatrical performance manufactured from local raw materials and include 2 scor- and politics. I find it significant and enlightening concerning pions, a standing human, a trident crescent, a crescent, a the long-debated relations between Classic Maya politics and reptile, a serrated bifacial point, and an unclassified fragment. ritual and the mode and degree of integration of Maya centers It is important to note that chert eccentrics were associated of different sizes. Inomata cogently examines critical issues in with the royal palace and temples but not with residences. such research, including royal ritual as theatrical performance This strongly suggests that eccentrics were considered royal and the complex nature of its political effects. I present ad- ritual objects. Meanwhile, taking advantage of Copań’s un- ditional archaeological evidence to support his argument for usual location near the high-quality obsidian source of Ixte- the two sites he mentions. The study of obsidian and chert peque (80 km), either its twelfth or its thirteenth ruler de- artifacts from Cache 4 of Structure L8-5, located on the east- posited a cache of 700 unusually large macroblades (as long ern edge of the Main Plaza of Aguateca, allows us to document as 30 cm) and macroflakes reduced directly from macrocores finely flaked eccentrics and other artifacts deposited by Ruler of Ixtepeque obsidian in the middle of the Great Plaza during 3 and his followers in the temple dedication ritual during the the Late Classic period (Aoyama 1999, 2001). Such large

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Inomata Plazas, Performers, and Spectators 821 quantities of very large macroblades and macroflakes have centralized “authority” for domestic integration or religious not been discovered either outside the Principal Group in the leadership and direction for competition with foreigners, Copań Valley or in any other part of the Maya lowlands, which took the form of trade as well as military activities. suggesting that they were considered royal ritual objects. The Inomata’s use of the term “divine ruler” for the leader of theatrical performance and dedication ritual involved in the each of the several Maya polities assumes a singularity or unity deposition of royal lithic artifacts in theatrical spaces at Agu- of command that I have challenged for the past 30 years ateca and Copań must have reinforced the rulers’ political (Becker 1975, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1990). In presenting his evi- and economic power. dence he also refers to “images of supreme political leaders” but neglects to note that these people, regardless of rank, are also the social leaders who serve as the embodiment of social Marshall Joseph Becker integration within the community. In examining the roles of Department of Anthropology, West Chester University, 19 these leaders Inomata suggests that some “threshold” existed W. Barnard St., West Chester, PA 19382, U.S.A. (mbecker@ “that Maya society never completely crossed.” This “thresh- wcupa.edu). 22 III 06 old” surely relates to a developmental level of state societies but remains unclear in this context. Inomata has undertaken a discussion of an interesting feature The spectacles provided in the public sphere within each that appears to be central to all lowland Maya cities and towns polity (see Habermas 1991) are the concerns of this essay. No of the Classic Period—the tendency for their site cores to consideration is given to possible changes in function for these include one or more open zones of varying size that are areas over time. Inomata’s lack of temporal controls as well commonly identified as “plazas.” Inomata argues that these as his generalizations regarding degrees of complexity are sub- spaces were purposely built and used for public performances. ject to the same criticisms leveled by Calhoun (1992) in re- While this use has often been implied, Inomata seeks to un- viewing the work of Habermas. He provides an interesting derstand it in a larger cultural context. Although his inferences and useful framework for discussion of imagined processes regarding public events are speculative, they may be generally of theatricality among the Maya and inferences regarding the accepted in the absence of other convincing theories. In effect use of what are generally agreed to be public spaces, but the this study endeavors to take Lucero’s (2003) study of the results remain speculative. No suggestions are made regarding politics of ritual to another level. While doing so requires how one might go about testing them. Examination of the considerable speculation, Inomata provides an outstanding way any large, open space evolved at a site or was created position paper with a lucid review of the literature that relates through time might provide some interesting information on performance to various cultural contexts or physical spaces. the changing uses of such features of the cultural landscape. Inomata infers that “theatrical performances” or what I At Tikal much of the space in what became the Great Plaza would call group and/or public rituals took place in “pla- had once been the location of a number of temples. During zas”—“large open spaces . . . that marked the core of every the period when these structures were standing, the area must Maya city.” He recognizes that some open spaces may have have had a very different character and function. The point served as markets, but he does not develop these possible when this area of Tikal was cleared and what replaced these variations (cf. Becker 2003). Not clearly stated is the common small ritual structures would offer important clues to pro- use by some Mayanists of the basic term “plaza” to refer to cesses of social change there. Whether open areas at other an open space of any size that is bounded by buildings. Also sites had similar evolutionary histories is not known. We need problematic is Inomata’s concern with the capacities of such to conduct extensive tests across such “open” spaces to de- open spaces, supposedly for what might be seen as a standing- termine what kinds of structures may have once stood in room-only throng. Regardless of the total population of the them and whether small buildings and platforms continued Tikal polity, for example, we do not know how many people to occupy areas that now appear to have been entirely might attend public “performances” and whether there was unencumbered. differential attendance by gender or age. Thus the supposed “capacity” of the multiple plaza zones at any site may be irrelevant. Quite possibly the amount of open space at a site Oswaldo Chinchilla Mazariegos varies with the wealth of its polity and is unrelated and ir- Museo Popol Vuh, Universidad Francisco Marroquıń, 6 relevant to population size. Calle Final Zona 10, Guatemala 01010, Guatemala Inomata speaks of variations among Maya “communities” ([email protected]). 4 V 06 of different sizes. Where the most complex of these social groups, such as Tikal, fit into a continuum of state-level so- The architectural layout of Maya sites, with wide open exterior cieties is unclear. I believe that at best the largest of these spaces, has repeatedly suggested the practice of public per- polities were low-level states. In this I agree with Lucero and formances attended by wide audiences ever since Diego Garcıá others who have suggested that leaders among the Maya pro- de Palacio (1927[1576], 91) compared the ruined stairways vided only the most basic services to their communities— around the plaza at Copan to the Roman Coliseum. Various

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 822 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006 early testimonies offer eyewitness accounts from the early lated rituals enacted by the kings exemplify the need to “create colonial period (Landa 1982, 113–14; De la Garza et al. 1983, the extraordinary,” in Inomata’s words, dramatizing social 324), while ethnographic testimony highlights the importance relations that are also created in warfare itself. Such perfor- of public gatherings involving long and elaborate dances and mances may also have served to display and distribute war performances in the social life of Mesoamerican communities. spoils—an activity that likely stimulated allegiance to rulers The argument that such performances were crucial for the and war leaders even though it is largely deemphasized in integration of ancient Maya polities has the virtue of incor- public art. porating one of the most salient features of Mesoamerican The perspective advanced in this paper opens a rich avenue public life into the discussion of ancient political practice. for research, laying out the basic theoretical framework for However, it should be noted that early sources mention a further discussion. Potential problems that need to be raised wide variety of representations that probably had equally di- include temporal and regional variations in the size and layout verse social functions. For instance, Acunã (1978, 19) distin- of plazas and the presence or absence of monuments com- guished three main classes: okot, mostly penitential and pro- memorating public performances by kings. pitiatory dances, including war dances, baldzamil, humorous, vulgar performances, and ez yah, related to magic spells and charms. (Colonial-period spellings for Maya words, as used Andre´s Ciudad Ruiz and Jesu´ s Adańez Pavoń by Acunã, are respected in this comment.) Clearly, not all Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain performances carried out in ancient Maya cities had equally ([email protected]). 2 V 06 strong political implications, and yet Inomata is right in stressing that they allowed the inhabitants of dispersed settlements The Classic Maya city was a complex universe composed of the opportunity for personal contact and intense participation plazas with stelae, altars, sanctuaries, acropolis, palaces, ball in community life that may have strengthened their allegiance courts, and other specialized buildings, many of them dec- to particular cities and rulers. orated with carved and painted images—a universe sur- Classic Maya art and associated inscriptions are explicit rounded by myriad domestic units and often integrated by about the participation of rulers in dances and other perfor- systems of causeways. Its planning was not random; each mances. The interpretation of fully dressed rulers represented space, building, and monument had its own significance and on stelae as commemorating actual performances held in the was placed in the landscape according to that significance. plazas where they stand is an elegant explanation for such The Maya architectural landscape was a living entity that was representations and their architectural settings. I believe it is periodically activated through rituals performed by the rulers important to add that in many cases public performance by and other actors. rulers was related to warfare. As noted by Inomata, the Bo- The novel analysis developed by Inomata opens promising nampak murals and other monuments dealing with the pre- new directions for archaeological research on the functional sentation of captives typically emphasize their public setting and symbolic understanding of that universe and of ancient by showing participants placed on wide-stepped platforms, Maya culture in general. The interpretation of Maya rituals most probably facing plazas. Carved stairways—a monumen- in the framework of performance theory gives them a prin- tal format that was usually accessible from large plazas—are cipal role in the reproduction of political structures by intro- largely associated with warfare and captive sacrifice and prob- ducing spectators along with actors into the representation ably served as settings for such performances (Miller and and presenting this as an arena in which political revalidation, Houston 1987). Likewise, rulers’ appearances on large pa- rather than simply the prescribed function of the institution, lanquins at Tikal and elsewhere are recognized as commem- is the objective of the ritual process. This view is linked to orating the capture of such palanquins from rival kings (Mar- the archaeological record through attention to the spatial con- tin 1996). Numerous stelae show kings with elaborate dancing texts of public spectacles and the identification of the plazas costumes standing on debased captives. While the main sub- of Maya centers as the settings for such spectacles. As Inomata ject may be a public performance by the king, the presence shows, all this permits an approach to Maya urban design of the captives hints at war-related connotations of his per- and its transformations in terms of the type of ritual activity formance. This may have implications for understanding the anticipated, especially the number of spectators and the degree role of public performance in the creation and re-creation of of accessibility and visibility of the auditoriums and stages. Classic Maya polities. By itself, warfare may be a powerful Inomata’s article focuses on an analysis and discussion that force in bringing about sentiments of common identity and follow one of the many interpretative directions potentially allegiance to rulers. Opposition to outside enemies, the shared opened by his approach: the cohesion of a society with cen- vicissitudes of military campaigns, the common concerns of trifugal tendencies that imagines itself as a community defense, and loyalty to successful leaders are likely to create through the experience of a real community on ritual occa- shared identities and may also provide occasions for visual sions or, in material terms, the capacity of the plazas of centers contact with rulers and their retinues. Ritual celebrations of such as Tikal, Copań, and Aguateca to contain the dependent war campaigns through public performances of warfare-re- population. With respect to this, we have two observations.

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Inomata Plazas, Performers, and Spectators 823

On the one hand, the analysis links the presence of stelae person’s, or a crowd’s, interaction with stelae placed at the with the largest plazas, but this link cannot be asserted cat- side of or in the plaza itself is very different from an involve- egorically. For example, at Machaquila (Graham 1967; Cho- ment with massive, isotropic images carved in stucco defining coń and Laporte 2002; Ciudad et al. 2004) Plaza A contains the platforms surrounding the plaza. Stelae are focal points most of the site’s stelae although it is not the largest of the while the elaborate stuccos are ambient backdrops. Stelae take eight plazas of the central area or the most accessible and the viewer’s attention away from the ambience of the plaza. visible. The two causeways detected lead to Plaza D and to They are potent public monuments and need no imagery in Plaza C, which are the largest ones but have only three and order to be erected. Tikal has yielded many “plain” stelae, one stelae respectively. This evidence suggests a close rela- especially in the Late Classic Twin Pyramid Complexes and tionship between the social and dynastic memory recorded in the Great Plaza in front of Temples I and II. How would on these monuments and the buildings that delimit Plaza A, these monuments contribute to the theatrical space? They in which the majority of the city’s rulers were supposedly could be stage sets, screens, or frames for live actors, but they buried. At the same time, it suggests that rituals related to are not reminders of past performances. Carved stelae, works this whole ideological complex may have been restricted to of artistry and homage, express and accrue their own histories a smaller audience. as long as they remain standing. Over time they become in- However, we see the Machaquila example not as challenging dependent of the current plaza and its functions, vestiges of Inomata’s suggestion but as complementing it. From the con- regnal philosophies and histories. sideration of the foregoing case it follows that there may have I am not concerned that Inomata has applied performance been a degree of variation over space and time in the guide- theory to his analysis of plaza spaces; I think he does so quite lines of the design and the public versus more exclusive char- judiciously. I am no expert in performance theory, so my acter of the rituals. If so, we need to determine the diverse question is a general one. Is there a defining difference be- associations between the spatial features of plazas and mon- tween performance and “normal” behavior? My qualified an- uments or buildings. The similarities and differences identi- swer is that performance is intentional much as the making fied between Maya centers will be related to the various modes of art is intentional—that is, that there is an element of the of political revalidation of the rulers. In our view, this vari- irrational in any performance. Inomata states that “seeing is ation could be fruitfully explored and interpreted by consid- believing.” I think I understand what he is trying to say; what ering both the size and the degree of accessibility and visibility one sees with one’s own eyes and hears with one’s own ears of plazas in terms of the concepts that Inomata associates (a performance) is more convincing and believable than what with them. one is only told to believe. This may be true, but nevertheless images do deceive; they are created and intended to be illusions. The way performance distinguishes itself from normal Flora S. Clancy behavior is in its creation of illusions—in its marvelous, be- Department of Art and Art History, University of New lievable irrationality. Ancient Maya plazas were surely places Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131, U.S.A. (fl[email protected]). for performances choreographed by royal intentions, but per- 4V06 formance is a hazardous tool for crafting civil communities. Something else is involved; I think it is place (see Basso 1996) Inomata convincingly argues that the ancient Maya plaza is as much as it is performance. a theatrical space for the forming and maintenance of com- I am both fascinated and concerned about how we tread munity. I appreciate and applaud his nonreductive approach the distances between our scholarship and our subjects. Cer- to the analysis of plaza spaces and his attention to the material tain pathways can reflect a scholar’s present-day concerns. J. forms of plaza as guides for estimating possible functions. My Eric S. Thompson is an example. His vision of the peaceful, concerns have to do with the functions and artistry of stelae, philosophical, ahistorical Maya has been properly questioned what is meant by performance and performance theory, and, and abandoned, but ever since he died he has been a negative finally, what we, as scholars of the ancient Maya, do and how target for Maya iconographers and epigraphers. And yet, I we do it. think of his life: deeply religious, he suffered through two Inomata argues that stelae set in plazas depict the public devastating world wars and the terrible depression of the thir- performances held in those plazas and that their images served ties. The ancient Maya must have been a relief to him, a hope as mnemonic devices to prompt visitors to the plaza to re- that history could be stilled, that peace could exist somewhere, member and reimagine those performances. In the Maya re- and that religious, thoughtful men could temper the politics gion, plazas were part of cityscapes long before stelae were of power. About 30 years ago, Western popular culture began placed there. Preclassic plazas were places where great stucco to make human and natural disasters the stuff of romance, works depicting deities were created (Freidel and Schele and about 25 years ago scholars began to realize how bloody 1988b). The Early Classic addition to plaza spaces of stelae and bellicose the ancient Maya had actually been. Is this representing honored human beings signals a change in the coincidence? political and ceremonial intentions for public gatherings. A In reading Inomata’s first-rate scholarship on plazas and

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 824 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006 performance and their roles in the construction and main- 101). Similarly, large central plazas and urban cores are absent tenance of community, I was excited by his questions about from sites in the western Puuc region such as Xcalumkin and how ancient Maya polities contrived to come together as iden- from various Postclassic sites such as Santa Rita Corozal tifiable entities. He writes of ancient centrifugal forces coun- (Chase and Chase 1988, 87–98). These settlements also lack teracting the formation of community; people could “walk other symbolic markers of power, such as ball courts, pyramid away” from situations that became intolerable for them. Such temples, multiroom palaces, and stelae. It would be of great a strategy is no longer possible today; the whole world has importance to investigate the morphological link between become the community’s stage (pace Shakespeare), and we these features and plazas for a more profound understanding have nowhere to go to escape the intolerable. Community, of their function with regard to the theatrical events in which its formation and its maintenance, is therefore a paramount they were involved. issue for today and an effort to understand how the ancient The present article also addresses a very fundamental ques- Maya communities worked is definitely timely. tion with regard to the sources of power that were available to Maya rulers. Writers who highlight the ideological nature of Maya states often characterize them as fragile units with weak Nikolai Grube control over people and territory, based as they are on the rule Institut fu¨r Altamerikanistik und Ethnologie, Universita¨t of charismatic kings who use kinship and marriage rather then Bonn, Ro¨merstr. 164, 53117 Bonn, Germany (ups402@uni- the bureaucratic institutions of a state to administer their au- bonn.de). 16 V 06 thority. Such weak states would indeed be “virtual commu- I strongly concur with Inomata’s conclusions. Could early nities,” and the state would be absent for most of the population states ever have existed without the display of power and its in everyday life. Inomata wisely avoids distinguishing between divine legitimation in grand arenas? Wherever large audiences performance and other sources of power, but he implies that had to be addressed in preindustrial societies, performance Maya states interfered very little in the life of common people was the principal medium and public plazas for mass gath- when he speaks about a state that could not be experienced by erings were the locations in societies where writing was only the community other than through public events. However, marginally important. As Inomata shows us, the experience ethnohistorical sources from Central Mexico and the Maya of the bodily existence of others was necessary to experience Highlands prove that hegemonic states in Mesoamerica had the idea of a community. the control of exchange networks, trade routes, and especially Most colleagues will agree with Inomata that the principal the acquisition of tribute as their primary ambition (Grube and function of large plazas amongst the Classic Maya was to Martin 1998, 134–38). secure spaces for mass spectacles and public performance. Mesoamerican elites to some extent had control over the Although some might stress the possibility that plazas also production and allocation of prestige goods and some critical served as locations for markets, I find this highly unlikely utilitarian items, suggesting that the state probably was much given the presence of public monuments such as stelae and more present and real than is suggested by the idea of an altars in most of the plazas. Performance in plazas, as Inomata imagined community. A particularly important aspect of the points out, served the Maya rulers and elites to visualize asym- power of rulers must have been the control and management metrical power relations, social hierarchies, and the moral of water, the most vital and yet limited resource in many parts values of the community. In this regard, the Maya were not of the Maya lowlands, especially in cities requiring central different from most other premodern societies. We can look reservoirs such as Tikal and Calakmul (Lucero 2006). In all at Uruk and Enkidu, which were located in the vicinity of of these aspects the state must have been present much more centers of power and ritual activity on widely visible hilltops than only symbolically. The manipulation of ideological fac- (Oates and Oates 1976, 22), the enormous plazas in Angkor tors—the public performance of ritual in grand arenas— Wat and Angkor Thom, or the plazas of ancient China (Jackes rather then an end in itself was complementary to other strat- and Gao 2004). Large plazas constituted the central spaces of communities in the late preceramic period in the central An- egies for the allocation of power. I would argue here that des during the transformation from small villages to more “theater” contributed to the cognitive-symbolic base of Maya centralized communities (Grieder et al. 1988; Moseley 1975). states but that the basis of their authority cannot be broken The importance of public performance for the advance- up into ideological and objective (material) components. ment of political agendas makes the complete absence of pla- Maya kings possessed considerable power from their position zas in some regions of the Maya world even more remarkable. as heads of an administrative hierarchy and its institutions of The lack of plazas and with it any recognizable urban plan enforcement, including coercive power. Moral authority was in the Rıó Bec region of Campeche has led scholars to in- necessary to support the authority of rulers, but rather than terpret Rıó Bec as a group of settlements without any central serving only as an instrument backing their power also helped administration (Bueno Cano 1999; Nonde´deó et al. 2003, to motivate and mobilize their subjects.

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Inomata Plazas, Performers, and Spectators 825

and maintaining community identity and elite authority in Christian Isendahl Maya polities, they need to be understood in relation to other African and Comparative Archaeology, Department of political and economic processes rather than singled out as Archaeology and Ancient History, Uppsala University, Box the paramount mechanism as they are here. 626, SE-751 26 Uppsala, Sweden (christian.isendahl@ In Classic Maya communities, authority and political order arkeologi.uu.se). 29 IV 06 regularly permeated the physical as well as the constructed dimensions of reality; to varying degrees they were present in I agree with the essence of Inomata’s argument on the cen- the perception of landscape, cosmology, the calendar, the built trality of large-scale public events as a key mechanism in the environment, land-use rights, and identity, history, and mem- integration and identity formation of Maya communities and ory. In a sense, then, large-scale public events served to in legitimizing elite authority, a theme that recently has been strengthen sociopolitical order rather than being its outstand- explored from supplementary perspectives by Schortman, Ur- ing manifestation. I am highly skeptical of the assumption of ban, and Ausec (2001) and Halperin (2005), among others. a centrifugal tendency in Classic Maya populations that is I am also in total accord with the supposition that ensuring fundamental to Inomata’s argument. The characteristically spaces for such ceremonies was of major concern in Maya dispersed settlement patterns of most urban communities in urban site planning and that plazas formed an important the Maya Lowlands are probably better understood as con- category in this scheme. While I find the course of argument ditioned by a considerable reliance on settlement agriculture generally sound, I am not entirely convinced by some of its than as evidence of a centrifugal tendency owing to weak central tenets and assumptions. systems of political control and authority (Isendahl 2002). I My chief hesitation concerns whether the concept of “the- do agree very strongly with the idea of sociopolitical order’s atricality” is the best heuristic tool when applied in contexts being conditional and the subject of social negotiation but far removed from the modern formal theater. Although the would rather argue that authority—though in flux—was per- theater metaphor is certainly not novel in anthropological ceptible in the day-to-day life of most Classic Maya com- inquiry into political systems in which large-scale public cer- moners. From this perspective, theatricality both underesti- emonies formed fundamental instruments of integration and mates the power of Classic Maya elite ideology to manipulate, control, it burdens rather than enhances the current argu- in which the organization of recurrent large-scale ceremonies ment. Following Schechner (1994), in contrast to ritual performed an essential strategy, and overestimates commoner formance theatrical performance accentuates pretending and reflexivity. entertainment. It is concerned with the moment and is a In sum, Inomata’s contribution is a soundly structured, display of individual creativity rather than collective perfor- relevantly referenced, engagingly written, and generally well- mance. The audience consumes for its entertainment rather argued paper that would have been more convincing had he than participating, and spectators are usually free to criticize focused on performance theory rather than bringing his ar- the performance. Although there are shared features, theat- gument over the edge with theatricality. He has produced a ricality is simply not the most appropriate analogy for char- thought-provoking and stimulating paper on the mechanisms acterizing the sociopolitical mechanisms of large-scale public of political agency in Classic Maya communities. Classic Maya events. Agency and performance theory have proved very useful, for instance, in stressing multivocality and human creativity Rodrigo Liendo Stuardo in social change, but the importance that Inomata’s use of Universidad Nacional Autońoma de Me´xico, Circuito theatricality attributes to spectators as evaluators is mislead- Exterior S/N, Ciudad Universitaria, 04510 Me´xico, D.F., ing. Theatrical performance emphasizes the singular event Mexico ([email protected]). 6 V 06 (thus to some extent ignoring history) at the expense of con- ceptualizing such ceremonies as forming part of more durable Inomata breaks new ground in the field of Maya studies by and encompassing ideologically, symbolically, economically, exploring the intersection of “performance” with politics, and physically enforced systems for maintaining community structure, and action. He also raises several key issues related identity and asymmetrical power relations. While large-scale not only to the nature of ancient Maya political statecraft but political ceremonies formed a series of isolated events, the also to the way archaeology should approach the problem of sociopolitical order—which would often be the principal mes- human agency in ancient societies. sage of the elite organizers—was not manifested on these His suggestion that theatrical spaces (an ever-present fea- occasions only. Plazas and other ceremonial spaces serving ture in ancient Maya city planning) were used to counteract similar functions constituted a complex political or cere- the centrifugal tendencies of elite factions and nonelite pop- monial mosaic landscape that maintained meaning beyond ulations alike is a fresh and appealing line of inquiry that the isolated event. Since large-scale public events in plazas ought to be explored, expanded, and discussed. This need is were such important aspects of political life in constructing all the more pressing in an academic environment that sees

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 826 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006 pre-Hispanic Maya political organization as the product of the circumstances advanced by active, powerful, and aristo- Matthew Looper cratic individuals acting individually rather than forming part Department of Anthropology, California State University, of a specialized bureaucratic structure (Webster 2001, 141; Chico, CA 95929-0720, U.S.A. ([email protected]). 19 IV 06 Restall 1997, 24; Inomata and Houston 2001b). In this way, the “agency” of at least a few individuals is being recognized. As an art historian, I am impressed that this article draws The issue of centralization of political power in Maya society upon humanistic approaches to address the anthropological has traditionally been approached from two points of view, and archaeological problem of characterizing the sociopolit- one focused on the analysis of the places and architectural ical functions of ancient Maya architecture, particularly pla- features where power concentrates and the other relating to zas. Most studies that are relevant to this project are analyses the individuals subject to such power. Archaeologists have of ancient Maya literature (epigraphy), architectural history, chosen to pay more attention to the former than to the latter or the iconography and iconology of monumental art. While (de Montmollin 1995, 117). The point made by Inomata in some of these studies were conducted by anthropologists or relation to the way the archaeology of performance might be archaeologists fluent in humanistic methods (e.g., Sanchez relevant to the study of how “the materiality of space” serves 1997), a great many were conducted by art historians (see to “empower and constrain agents” is highly significant for Newsome 2001). While the integration of arts and sciences the construction of theoretical bridges that eventually might that is evident from this study can be partly attributed to a join these two seemingly incompatible theoretical paths. general tendency toward interdisciplinary collaboration in the Inomata, by stressing the idea of “performance” as public field of Maya studies, it is also symptomatic of the emphasis display, spectacle, and theatricality, connects neatly with the on performance as a mode of inquiry, which, as Fabian (1990, growing appreciation in anthropology in general of the role 10) notes, provides a way of “humanizing” anthropology. of the individual and collective action in the maintenance, Despite this humanistic tendency, the application of certain theatrical metaphors and models risks secularizing ancient transformation, and negotiation of social relations (Carrasco Maya performance. Several fundamental theoretical models 1991; Carl 2000, 328–29; Low 2003, 16; Gillespie 2000, 135; cited in this article (e.g., Schechner 1988, Turner 1986) present Moore 2005). Coming to understand how this process unfolds theater as an essentially secular activity for the purpose of in particular contexts (constrained or shaped by previous po- “entertainment” and thus separate from the more religiously litical events and economic and social structure) is a chal- oriented ritual. Whereas it could be said that such an approach lenging and productive enterprise both theoretically and serves to demystify these performances, the rhetoric of texts methodologically. The focus on performance might require, and images constantly refers to the prototypical actions of for example, experimentation with unconventional archaeo- supernatural beings who conduct sacrifices and dedicate stone logical techniques (space proxemics, perspectives, acoustics, monuments just as historical rulers do. Maya kings were fre- and a plethora of other techniques routinely used in perfor- quently entitled “divine lords,” testimony to their role as both mance theory) within a rigorous research design anchored in political and religious leaders. It could therefore be argued an explicit methodology in a way rather similar to what Moore that the application of theatrical models may distort the focus (2005, 215) suggests about the combination of pragmatism of ancient Maya public performances, which were saturated and a theory based on three main components—a solid with religious content. knowledge of the ethnography and ethnohistory bearing on On another level, the interpretation of social life based on culture-specific sets of beliefs and meanings, the use of social a theatrical model (particularly as conceived by Goffman theory of space, place, architecture, and landscape, and, finally, [1959, 1967]) may be problematic because of its basis in con- the testing of falsifiable hypotheses about the possible rela- ventional Western notions of dramatic representation (Schief- felin 1998). Such performances are predicated on a division tionships between archaeological remains and meaning. This between audience and performer in which the fictive personae may be the part of Inomata’s work that I admire most—his assumed by the performers create a third, on-stage world. commitment to the development of an explicit methodology This “symbolic reality” is treated like a sign which is in turn that pays attention to the specifiicities of Maya ancient civi- deciphered by the audience through distanced contemplation. lization without losing sight of theoretical problems that con- In fact, the historical origins of the concept of ideology— cern the field of anthropology at large. In this regard, his invoked frequently in this essay—can be traced to an icon- proposal, albeit focusing on just one aspect of the complex oclastic interpretation of theater as the expressive and inten- phenomenon of performance in ancient Maya society, shifts tional manipulation of audience by performers (Summers the stress from an analysis of the built environment of ancient 2003). In my view, theatrical models of society imply a cul- Maya cities (Houston 1998b) to the study of the actions that turally specific mode of communication which cannot be as- took place within it. sumed in the case of Maya performance (Looper n.d.).

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Inomata Plazas, Performers, and Spectators 827

Indeed, I would go so far as to argue that the communi- beliefs. Theater takes into account these different factors; per- cation of cognitive meanings constitutes a relatively minor formers and witnesses all have roles that are attuned to specific component of performance. In addition to their rhetorical events, typically with political overtones, but also perceive content, the performances are structured in such a way as to events in ways that best suit their needs or belief systems. engage the participants’ senses in the recognition and pro- Performers are judged by an audience; success benefited rulers duction of forms and configurations known as aesthetic tropes in the form of social and material support (surplus labor and (Tambiah 1985). These tropes do not “represent” a social goods). reality that is separate from them but are actualities themselves Inomata clearly demonstrates how important political the- in that they are the emotionally loaded patterns through which ater is; how and why this is the case are less fully addressed. social memory is perceived, organized, and manipulated. Be- For example, Roscoe (1993) details the importance and chal- cause it enlists the intersubjective practices that are integral lenges of not only the need to reach people but the logistics to social life, performance actualizes symbolic reality in social of doing so. The more people successfully integrated, the more terms rather than merely as a cognitive argument or prop- political capital and the greater challenge for rulers to interact osition (Schieffelin 1985). on a face-to-face basis with their supporters, Again, Inomata This is not to say that ancient Maya public performance notes that different centers have different audience capacities; was not theatrical in the sense of being highly visual—indeed, why is this the case? Performers can be judged successful only the overwhelming abundance of visual imagery that survives if people can participate in the performance to begin with. from this society attests to the desire to enhance the visibility Why did farmers, many of whom lived dispersed throughout of certain performances, as do the plaza spaces discussed in the hinterlands, come to centers at all? Because rulers also this essay. However, we should not lose sight of the fact that fulfilled material needs—specifically, water during the annual public performances sponsored by ancient Maya rulers were drought. Thus, audience size was influenced by how much fundamentally cosmological (or, dare I say, magical) rites de- water royals had at their disposal in the massive artificial signed to invoke divine blessings and protection and to pro- reservoirs located next to temples and plazas (Scarborough mote fertility and fecundity. In contrast to Western theater, 2003) and the amount of agricultural land in the vicinity and the performances did not represent a “symbolic reality” and beyond (Lucero 2006). Moreover, evaluating royal perfor- therefore did not require a rational human audience to de- mances had much to do with seasonal conditions—not cipher them. What was important was that the performance enough water, too much water, and so on. Thus, people be done in the proper way so that divine beings were invoked judged as “poor performances” those conducted without im- as coparticipants. This orientation is demonstrated by nu- mediate results in times of trouble and uncertainty (e.g., suc- merous images in which deities and ancestors peer down upon cession). The performances were likely ones that had been scenes of royal ritual. Analogously, it is possible that plazas performed numerous times before. Social, political, and eco- were designed not only with human audiences in mind but nomic conditions, not just the audience, determined their also to address divine agents in the form of deity images success. housed in surrounding temples, deified astronomical phe- As Inomata mentions, with farmers living dispersed be- nomena, and/or numinous figures embodied in the landscape. tween centers, there was likely an element of choice to atten- In short, the interpretation of ancient Maya performance dance at royal performances in any given year. Too many would be well served by taking into account culturally specific poor performances would have caused farmers to look to epistemologies rather than assuming an audience-performer other royals for what they needed. Further, in some cases they relationship—and the consequent communicative func- could look elsewhere within the same center (Lucero n.d.). tions—derivative of the Western dramaturgical model. Every Maya center had several temples and plazas, and while in some instances additional plazas were built to accommodate growing numbers of supporters, as Inomata suggests, different groups—lesser royals, elites, priesthoods, commu- Lisa J. Lucero nity groups, or other special-interest groups—could also have Department of Anthropology, New Mexico State University, been building their own ceremonial stages and arenas. I sug- Las Cruces, NM 88003, U.S.A. ([email protected]). 8 V 06 gest, then, that a poor performance may have resulted first in people’s trying another temple in the same center. Only Inomata has contributed a thought-provoking piece that will when the conditions that resulted in the change of venue did be useful not only to Mayanists but also to anthropologists not improve would they have chosen another center alto- who study complex societies, and I do not think that anyone gether. This idea goes a long way toward explaining the ornate would disagree with his claim that political leaders rely on Maya civic-ceremonial centers. Performers were always com- public events for integrative purposes. A completely material peting for audiences against others within and without. We basis for political power is not palatable. This is because it is can begin assessing whether different groups built temples important to take into account varied practices, agencies, and within centers by comparing their construction attributes,

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 828 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006 ritual deposits, and, when present, iconography and inscrip- promoted royal visibility as an idiom of power. Questions tions (Lucero n.d.). concerned with the historical reciprocity between Maya ar- These few comments aside, Inomata has provided us a chitecture and political order may be beyond the scope of foundation from which to explore further how and why Maya this article but are not beyond the scope of Inomata’s method. kings became some of the ancient world’s best performers. Similarly, the implications of his study for gauging the value of spectatorship in social process require considering the subject from a more encompassing point of view. His emphasis on performance as a tool for enhancing power relations adds Elizabeth A. Newsome a new dimension to what Classic Maya inscriptions have al- Department of Visual Arts, University of California, San ready told us about the political contexts of viewership. Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0084, U.S.A. (enewsome@ucsd. Epigraphers are familiar with a verbal compound that uses edu). 29 IV 06 the “eye” hieroglyph with extended sight lines to record the This important article directs much-needed attention to the act of “witnessing” ceremonial events. This phrase, based on dynamic role that spectacle and public assembly may have the root il, “to see,” occurs in statements of monument ded- played in Classic Maya political life. It offers researchers a ications, sacrifices, and period endings to record that indi- new appreciation for the scale and lasting importance of set- viduals of key political importance were present to behold tings designed for ritual gatherings in Maya urban design and those events (Houston and Taube 2000, 284–87; see also a promising empirical approach to aspects of social experience Houston and Stuart 1998). Stela 10 at Seibal follows this that, however intangible, were influential in the constitution expression with emblem glyph titles naming the lords of three of power. Most of us who have studied Maya architecture distant sites. In this and similar monuments, the iconographic and monumental art have an intuitive understanding of the depiction of royal performance and display is joined with an theatrical sensibilities implied in the construction of plazas, inscription emphasizing the reciprocal act of viewership by causeways, and the free-standing monuments that occupy these lords. As Foucault’s observations indicate, vision artic- them, but we have lacked a fully articulated, explicit meth- ulates power relations between the beholder and the object odology for discussing them in objective terms. What is so of the gaze (see, e.g., Bryson 1983). rewarding in Inomata’s study is his deductive method for Exploring spectatorship in the Americas may generate pos- observing, comparing, and modeling the development of sibilities for interpreting Pre-Columbian performance that these performative aspects of social discourse through their conventional Western understandings of the topic fail to pro- tangible indicators in the built environment. His use of the vide. For example, Rhonda Taube has learned that conno- concept of “imagined communities” to situate this focus on performance within the debate over sociopolitical process es- tations of the K’ich’e term for “seeing” or “watching” imply tablishes yet another satisfying convergence between postpro- “liking,” expressing a kind of social approbation for the form cessual archaeology and the growing cognitive, phenomeno- and content of the performance (Taube 2006, n.d.). Her stud- logical, and aesthetic humanism in studies of Mesoamerican ies of the styles and moods of spectatorship associated with art and writing. As an art historian, I especially value the contemporary and traditional dances suggest affinities with opportunities his approach provides for interdisciplinary un- the collective discourses of affiliation and resistance that In- derstandings of the way performance, visuality, and perceptual omata envisions. Productive analogies may also be discovered experience can sustain and generate cultural knowledge. in the highly theatrical dance dramas of the Northwest Coast, The article is ground-breaking in the extent to which the where spectatorship, gift giving, and feasting were critical to author utilizes performance theory, a body of scholarship validating systems of rank and status. Houston and Taube which has been applied in a very limited fashion to archae- (2000, 287) suggest that, for the Maya, sight may have sim- ological cultures. The reason, of course, is that mental expe- ilarly “discharged a witnessing or authorizing function” in rience can be approached only indirectly through the archae- ritual contexts. The viewership involved in the potlatch is not ological record. Exploring how transactions of understanding, passive spectatorship in the Western sense but more akin to consensus, and political authority were enacted through spec- what Jill Sweet (1985) called “active listening.” The state of tatorship and performance may inform the examination of mind and imagination that Sweet describes obliterates dis- agency and the flow of power in Maya communities. Agency and power have, however, been engaged in relation to the tance between audience and performers and, by ascribing an built environment in ways that Inomata does not address but active agency to the viewers’ involvement, fosters collective may be crucial to furthering his method. I would be interested belonging, harmony, and balance with universal forces. Such in his perspectives on the way vision interfaced with Maya comparative models may expand our perspectives on the so- spatial order, considering the interplays Foucault (1979[1975]; cial dynamics Inomata suggests for Classic Maya performance Bentham 1977) observed between environment and gaze that and inform our sense of their political impact.

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Inomata Plazas, Performers, and Spectators 829

an extraordinary traditional spectacle with specific, eminently Miguel Rivera Dorado social ends. Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain Inomata says that a plaza is a space in the center of the ([email protected]). 22 III 06 city surrounded by temples and other buildings with a strong symbolic charge, but these are features typical of other spaces that are usually called “courtyards.” Plazas are often simply Is the individual identity of a member of an ancient state open spaces that separate groups of buildings—transitional simply the product of actions and ceremonies sponsored by areas, in the terminology of architects and urbanists, that the authorities? Inomata seems to believe that it is, but there could be classified as no-man’s-lands, if we assigned those are historical cases in which there is consensus that abstract groups to kinship or corporate units, or perhaps as everyone’s elements are the raw materials—in Egypt involving funerary land. Their large dimensions and very irregular and open customs, the pharaoh, and the gifts of the Nile, in Greece design may distinguish plazas from courtyards, but in any involving myths, sanctuaries, war, and writers and philoso- case these are relative and rather vague categories. phers, and in Rome involving the idea of the republic and I agree with Inomata with regard to the ostentatious vest- the “civilizing mission.” He says that the development of large ments that the rulers displayed in public ceremonies, but I centralized states would have been impossible without gran- do not share his view of the role of litters and palanquins; diose public events. While these events are important in so- although they were adorned with figures or other motifs, this cieties with strong centrifugal tendencies, very primitive tech- does not mean that they were used in public events before a nologies, problems of transport and communication, and a large audience. These modes of transport, always luxuriously hostile environment such as the ancient Maya and still rele- decorated to express the status of their occupants, were not vant in many states whose territory is very extensive and usually used as seats or simply for display in fiestas and cel- includes different ethnic groups or peoples in different cul- ebrations. Platforms and staircases seem more logical ways of tural conditions, they are much less so in states with developed raising certain personages above the mass of humanity, al- administration, in which integrating factors such as militarism though these personages were of course able to arrive by and religious fundamentalism play a role. I am talking about palanquin at the exact location of the event. identity here; public state actions of course always reaffirm I share Inomata’s view that the main purpose of the plazas and consolidate group spirit and are a notable mechanism of of Maya cities was to accommodate well-attended ceremonies cohesion and integration. and fiestas, but it is important to keep in mind the need for I am not entirely convinced that theatrical events evolve space in which to contemplate certain buildings from an ap- ambiguously. If this were true, the polyvalence of theatrical propriate perspective. Like the plazas in front of medieval signs would make the propagation of dominant ideologies cathedrals, these plazas are not only places for meetings, the- difficult or impossible. I believe, in contrast, in the political atrical performances, and markets but also provide the dis- usefulness of theatrical performances, which transmit at least tance and vantage points that permit the appreciation of the the basic principles of the dominant system of values. Here building’s ornaments and symbolic motifs. Like the great fa- I use “political” in the Greek sense because the affairs of the cades of Christian churches, those of Maya buildings were, city call for moral and, if possible, ethical consensus. The for the illiterate people who made up the majority of the conflicts generated are another story. I cannot say that the population, immense books in which they could see and un- religious ceremonies in the temple of Jerusalem or the games derstand sacred histories and political doctrines. Moreover, in the Coliseum were ambiguous in this sense. They were their size, their style, their craftsmanship, their decoration, performances arising from particular cultural orientationsand and the perspectives afforded by their plazas contributed to designed to transmit shared and politically correct values. something equally substantial—emotion. I am, however, convinced about the theatrical character of the public events in Maya cities and their role in enhancing the cohesion of Classic society, the effectiveness of divine Julia L. J. Sanchez monarchies, and even the survival of the civilization in such Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA, A210 Fowler, a hostile environment (see Rivera 1982, 2001). It is necessary, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1510, however, to distinguish performances such as the pwe´ of U.S.A. ([email protected]). 8 V 06 Burma, an outgrowth of the development of social interactions like those that occur in popular celebrations around the Inomata discusses political performances among the Classic world and are supported by political power, from institutional Maya, concentrating on large-scale events held in public pla- theater in the hands of more or less free professionals, often zas. What the article contributes is not descriptions of the performing for gain. Political or religious performance is not, events themselves, which have been discussed at great length strictly speaking, one or the other but has the character of already, but the perspective from which the events are viewed.

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 830 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006

In other words, Inomata asks, “What if we looked at these “unidirectional” and involve implicit evaluation and negoti- data differently?” ation of power and authority between performers and viewers. Previously, the public rituals of Maya rulers have been Nevertheless, the discussion of theatrical performances and viewed from the perspective of maintenance of political their settings in Classic Maya polities seems rather uncon- power, economic strength, and religious ritual. Artistic rep- vincing. I cannot agree with one of the main arguments of resentations of the rituals have been viewed from various art the article, namely, that “public” events are represented pri- historical, iconographic, and epigraphic perspectives. All of marily on “public” monuments and objects of art. The very these approaches are valid and provide complementary in- distinction between “public” and “restricted” settings implies sights into ancient Maya life. Inomata adds another perspec- that we know the intended recipients of the messages carried tive: looking at the political events as performances in front by the objects, but this is not the case. The famed Bonampak of an audience. This perspective offers intriguing possibilities murals adorn three small dark rooms. The arguably public for the analysis of ritual in general and Maya ritual in par- scenes of Tikal kings carried in the captured palanquins of ticular. Inomata offers interesting ideas and experiments with their enemies appear on temple lintels, the least public setting a novel approach. Many opportunities exist for expanding on one can possibly imagine. There are more depictions of these ideas: dances, processions, presentations of tribute, and captives on Theater and performance studies have examined the role painted or carved vessels than on carved monuments. and perspective of the audience. Inomata introduces the con- The relationship between the location of a monument and cept, and it could be explored in much greater detail. the events depicted or described on it needs to be clarified. Inomata briefly mentions the change of sites over time. According to Houston and Stuart (1998), sculptured or Maya sites often grow more restricted over time, with build- painted images are extensions of the selves of the depicted ings added in or around the plazas. The architectural changes actors. These images engage with human participants as if are doubtless related to changes in the use of space, and it they were living actors themselves. Consequently, a panel de- would be interesting to explore the performance concepts picting a dancing lord ensures the everlasting presence of a associated with these changes. certain manifestation of that person in the act of dancing in Detailed ethnohistoric accounts describe various activities that place. It does not imply that the original act performed at Maya sites. Although the ethnohistories have been mined by the flesh-and-blood character took place or used to take place at the location of the monument. Therefore, the mon- for hundreds, perhaps thousands of articles, new ideas may uments are not, strictly speaking, commemorative but pop- yet be developed from this work. ulate the landscape with ever-acting manifestations of gods, Causeways and roads are another oft-studied aspect of kings, queens, and nobles. Maya sites. Ideas of performance, procession, and audience When it comes to determining the “prototypical” location continue to be explored in various ways (Keller 1996). of an act depicted or described on a monument, there are It is rare now in archaeology to see something completely usually few if any clues. Most events take place “in the land/ new. As my good friend Jim Sackett is fond of saying, people city so-and-so” (Stuart and Houston 1994). There are no like to claim that they have said something new when it deciphered terms for “plaza” or “dancing platform.” I am actually has been said before (Sackett 2006, 16). Much more aware of only two related references to an architectural setting often, contributions come in the form of interesting ideas that of dances. The inscription on Dumbarton Oaks Panel 1 allow us to continue our discussions and explore new direc- (Mayer 1980, 68–70, pl. 75) states that the protagonist danced tions. Inomata has added several ideas that will stimulate in a specific “house” at Piedras Negras. The inscription on further discussion and exploration, and I believe that this Stela 8 at Piedras Negras (Stuart and Graham 2005) refers to means that he has accomplished his goal admirably. a dancing event in the same “house” some 35 years later. The term “house” (naaj) might designate a group of halls with an adjacent courtyard (Plank 2004). It must have been a fairly Alexandre Tokovinine restricted setting. Department of Anthropology, Harvard University, Given the complexities involved in the analysis of Classic Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A. ([email protected]). Maya monuments and inscriptions, it might be productive 26 IV 06 to consider other sources of information on the nature of theatrical events and their spatial settings. For instance, Hous- Inomata’s article offers an important contribution to studies ton (1998a) suggests using graffiti in determining which areas of Classic Maya royal courts as settings in which the political of sites were open or closed to human traffic. He notes, among and moral orders of “imagined communities” were reiterated other things, that there are almost no depictions of humans through acts of theatrical performance. The author suggests on the stairs of the temples. This makes these structures es- that public performances offer moments of “real” community, sentially “nonpublic” as far as the presence of living humans of extraordinary experiences that shape the perceptions and is concerned. experiences of daily life. He argues that performances are not The volumetric assessment of potentially public spaces at

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Inomata Plazas, Performers, and Spectators 831

Classic Maya sites seemingly offers a robust source of data symbols. The theories of theater and performance help us to for determining the degree of exclusivity of state-sponsored focus explicitly on interplays of such factors. theatrical events. Inomata follows the method suggested in Isendahl’s and Looper’s tendency toward dichotomization earlier publications; for example, Fash (1998, 239–42) makes can also be seen in their categorical division of the secular similar observations with respect to the role of plazas at Co- from the religious. In many societies, including the Classic pań, Pechal, and Tikal as settings for public performances of Maya, religious notions permeate numerous aspects of daily variable exclusivity. However, as in the case of earlier works life, and what some consider “secular,” such as the theatrical on the subject, it remains unclear to what extent the volu- effect, is present in “religious” ceremonies. Instead of metric assessment of public spaces as opposed to population categorically labeling Maya public events as religious or estimates for only three sites is statistically significant and to cosmological, we should examine complex interplays of what extent the observations based on such limited data can various elements. Similarly, the symbolic reality of theater is be applied to hundreds of other Maya sites. not a unique entity detached from daily lives. As many The most important question that remains unanswered is anthropologists have argued, culture is a system of symbols, what kinds of public theatrical performances—in terms of and human life is saturated with them. In our daily routines content, not form—were essential to the maintenance of the we constantly create, use, and manipulate symbols and imagined communities of Classic Maya polities. Was a com- interpret and misinterpret them. I therefore defined munity imagined through celebrations of political and mili- theatricality not categorically but in terms of modes and tary power of its lords, through periodic reestablishments of degrees of the use of certain signs. space and time, or through the acts of asking for rain and Performance theory presents an even more fundamental placating local gods, the “guardians,” the “owners” of the criticism on the dichotomization of thought and action that land? Of course, the available data are very limited, but these gives primacy to the former. When Looper suggests that the questions are crucial for understanding the role of theatrical Maya needed to conduct performances properly in order to performances in the creation and maintenance of shared iden- invoke the divine beings, he is arguing for the preexistence tities in Classic Maya kingdoms and merit further investi- of ideas or understandings of the world that generate and gation. define people’s actions. We need to ask, however, how such ideas and perceptions came to exist in the first place and how they were maintained, shared, and transformed. For this purpose, we have to examine not only the way ideas defined actions but also the processes by which people’s actions and Reply experiences shaped their perceptions of the world. Looper’s comment gives the impression that beliefs in supernatural I am grateful that so many scholars wrote thoughtful beings transcended all other meanings and actions. To me, comments on my article. I focus my reply on three issues the importance of divine beings and the necessity to conduct salient in their discussions: (1) theories of performance and rituals properly were parts of the meanings that were created, theater and their application to Maya society, (2) performance reproduced, and negotiated through performance. Conducting and its relation to Maya polities, identity, and power, and (3) these rituals expressed such meanings whether this was various types of evidence on public events in Maya society intended or not, and participation in the events signaled and the methodology of examining them. As I write this reply compliance with these meanings, whether superficial or in the Guatemalan lowlands, I am unable to consult additional wholehearted. It is important to recognize that physical acts literature, but our ongoing fieldwork at a Maya site gives me define certain aspects of social relations. As Newsome points a renewed conviction of the importance of these issues. out, modes of physical interaction, including visibility and Theater, performance, and ritual. Isendahl and Looper suggest invisibility, are closely intertwined with the culturally shaped that the concept of theater is based on a modern Western view nature of power. The performance perspective highlights such and its application to Maya rituals is inappropriate. This point recursive relations between the materiality of bodies, actions, concerns a critical problem in the study of performance, and objects, and spaces, on one hand, and the intangible issues I appreciate this opportunity for further discussion. Their of emotions, perceptions, morality, and power, on the other. criticism appears to derive from their dichotomized view of Looper’s comments, as well as Rivera’s, imply the theater and ritual. My intention, in contrast, was to explore the assumption of homogeneity and coherence in people’s beliefs common features of the two. Thus, my emphasis on and perceptions at the expense of internal tension and fluidity. theatricality was not meant to replace the concept of ritual, nor Although Isendahl recognizes agency and multivocality, his did it privilege individual creativity over collective performance emphasis on “durable and encompassing systems” seems to or entertainment over participation. “Theaters,” even modern hint that he shares a certain aspect of this view. The traditional Western ones, are not detached from history, moral values, and concept of homogeneous culture and the overemphasis on conventional beliefs, and “rituals” can involve heightened abstract structure have come under serious challenge in recent emotional effects, the reactions of participants, and the use of years (Abu-Lughod 1991; Dirks et al. 1994; Inomata and

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 832 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006

Triadan 2004; Wade 1999). The harmonious appearance of emphasis on spectators as evaluators directs our attention culture and its continuity require conscious effort by certain more to interaction in specific social and spatial settings. This members of society to maintain them and involve contestation view does not necessarily presume a strict division between and negotiation. We need to examine how and under what actors and an audience. The participants can be at once conditions culture may be shared and when and how it may performers and spectators. Nor does it assume explicit exhibit rupture and change. evaluations by highly conscious critics. Most viewers’ reactions The theories of theater and performance examine public to Maya rituals were probably far more subtle and less events as critical moments in which certain views are imposed, conscious. Multivocality does not necessarily mean outright shared, resisted, and negotiated. In other words, theatrical rejection of religious beliefs but may entail varying degrees of events are multivocal. Meanings expressed and interpreted commitment to such beliefs, indifferent conformity, covert through performance are not fixed or singular. In this sense, I dissent, and individualized ways of internalizing religious am in agreement with Looper’s caution about overemphasizing notions. It follows that commoners’ participation in rituals does the communication of meanings, although this suggestion not always reflect fervent commitment to religious notions as appears to contradict his own insistence on the primacy of Looper appears to imply. Varying attitudes may lead to more religious beliefs in determining action. Clancy’s argument that explicit forms on other occasions. The humorous performances images deceive relates to this issue. She appears to have in mind that Chinchilla mentions may have functioned as such social the ambiguous correlations among physical representations, commentaries (see Taube 1989). One of the most negative their messages, and individualized perceptions discussed above. expressions may have been simple nonparticipation. As Lucero In this regard, her view and mine are probably not so different. notes, many Maya commoners probably had the option of What I intended, however, was a balanced consideration of the not attending ceremonies or of attending rituals sponsored communicative potential of performance as well. Performance by different elites, although I would conceptualize this process and viewing have substantial persuasive power with regard to less as a win-or-lose game. people’s actions and their physical states. In addition, we should Chinchilla and Tokovinine comment on the contents of not assume the existence of the absolute reality hidden behind performances as opposed to their forms. The study of the screens of illusion. What people do and see makes up the reality contents of performances is certainly important, and in of the world as they experience it. particular I strongly agree with Chinchilla as to the Isendahl, Looper, and I are probably in a close agreement importance of war-related performance for developing on the need to examine specific historical and social contexts. communal identities (Inomata and Triadan 2004). I should We are also well aware of the challenge of studying societies reiterate, however, that we need to recognize the indissoluble so distant from our own. As Clancy points out, our views are connection of the two instead of dichotomizing them and embedded in our own historical circumstances. Isendahl’s and privileging one at the expense of the other. In this article I Looper’s position, however, appear to diverge from mine as intentionally highlighted the forms and physical dimensions to how we develop historically sensitive inquiries. My concern of performances because I felt that many previous studies of is that the concepts of homogeneous culture and abstract Maya rituals and those of other societies had disproportionately structure are more inventions of researchers shaped by their privileged the contents and meanings of these events. I hoped own historical backgrounds than features of past societies. that the perspective I proposed would lead to new insights The criticism of the overarching notion of culture has led and enrich our understanding of Maya society by researchers to pay closer attention to the more concrete, complementing other kinds of work. In this sense, I appreciate observable events and actions that make up social processes Looper’s and Newsome’s favorable comments about the spirit (Appadurai 1996, 12; Barth 1994, 358; Friedman 1994, 207). of this approach and those of Liendo, Sanchez, and others Emphasis on events and actions does not mean disregard of who appear to see the potential for theoretical and history. To the degree that participants understand or think methodological advance. that they understand what happened before and contemplate Political process. Becker notes that my use of the term the outcomes of their actions, events are tied to the past and “divine ruler” assumes a singularity or unity of command, the future. Just as history shapes events, it is implicated in but he seems to miss my point. I follow many anthropological events. In this regard, I appreciate Newsome’s comments on studies of divine kingship that stress its symbolic aspect. By culturally constituted notions of performance and vision that emphasizing the public performances of rulers instead of their provide a bridge between the physicality of action and its managerial functions, I tried to examine how they served as embedded nature. embodiments of community identities. A ruler’s institu- Isendahl also criticizes the notion of spectators as tionalized position as the highest political authority does not evaluators. However, once we recognize the problem of imply a singular command in the operation of the polity. In uncritically assuming the homogeneity of culture and note this regard, Rivera appears to have misunderstood my the prevalence of multivocality, the importance of an audience argument about community identities. I do not think that as evaluators should be clear. While many studies inspired by individual identity was simply the product of ceremonies practice theory tend to focus on the practices of actors, the sponsored by the elite. Although I argued that experiences of

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Inomata Plazas, Performers, and Spectators 833 public events contributed to certain aspects of commoners’ the state into the identity of individuals. My main argument identity, I said that we do not know how important the ties was that the heavy emphasis on public events in Classic Maya to a specific dynasty were for the identities of individual society created moments of real community that coexisted farmers. Identities were probably shaped in substantial part with imagined ones. In contrast, modern society, with a large by other factors, including their affiliations with kin groups population precluding face-to-face contact, is more of an and smaller local groups. imagined community sustained partly by a more developed Becker says that I do not clarify where Maya polities lie on bureaucracy and communication technologies. the continuum of state-level societies. I find such a one- Likewise, in suggesting a centrifugal tendency in Maya dimensional view of social evolution problematic. Social polities I did not mean the absence of centralized control over changes have multiple dimensions, among them administrative certain aspects of commoners’ lives. The foregoing discussion systems, economic organization, and the symbolism associated should make it clear that I do not think that the centrifugal with rulers, which are not transformed simultaneously. This tendency derived one-directionally from “weak” systems of does not, however, mean that we should abandon cross-cultural political control. Although I agree with Isendahl that the studies and try to understand individual societies in the closed dispersed settlement patterns in the Maya lowlands were contexts of their historical particularities. The development of conditioned by agricultural practices, we interpret the political bureaucratic administrative systems that I discussed is one of implications of these patterns differently. In my view, the the dimensions that can be examined through comparative dispersed settlement pattern was a critical contributor to the studies, but we should not assume that changes in this aspect centrifugal tendency. Dispersed populations are far more were always correlated with transformations in other difficult to control than nucleated ones, as can be seen in the dimensions of society. Spanish strategy of congregacioń in the Colonial-period Maya Aoyama, Grube, Isendahl, and Lucero suggest elite control area. To unite a dispersed population effectively, the state of certain material goods and the daily lives of nonelites in needs certain administrative apparatus, transportation and Classic Maya society. This was not a central issue of my paper, communication technologies, and a strong sense of affiliation but I should clarify my position. I believe that it is misleading to the central authority on the part of nonelites. I feel that to classify states as “weak” or “strong” and that there is not evidence for such features is weak in Classic Maya society, much point in categorically distinguishing ideologically based and I suggested that mass spectacle sponsored by the central states from bureaucratic ones. Even in modern states with authority was important in counteracting the centrifugal developed bureaucracies, including the Nazi regime, with its tendency. heavy reliance on coercion, ideology is a critical component I agree with Aoyama, Grube, Isendahl, and Lucero that the of state power. Equally problematic is the polarization of relation between public performance and other political and centralized control of commoners and the economy and the economic processes is a critical issue, although a thorough absence of such control. Instead, we need to examine under treatment of this question was beyond the scope of this paper. what conditions and in what ways they had influence or I should stress that in focusing on public performance I did control. In this regard, Grube’s and my views are probably not intend to privilege it as the paramount mechanism over not substantially different. others. It is obvious that no polity can exist without its We should also avoid an overly rigid and standardized economic basis, certain administrative mechanisms, and model of the state that disregards historical particularities. ideological constructs. Similarly, its development would be The study of states is inevitably affected by our own experience impossible without public performances. In this regard, I of living in modern society, in which the state penetrates into concur with Grube’s view that these diverse elements are various aspects of daily life through its taxation system, police inseparably intertwined. The material control by elites was force, legal system, city plans, standardized measurements, rooted in the sense of a community and its moral values, omnipresent symbols, and deeply internalized senses of which were constructed partially through public events and national identities. We need to consider the possibility that shared to a certain degree by the masses. Community experiences of living in ancient states may have been quite identities and the social relations of members mean little different from modern ones. My suggestion of limited state without material settings and physical actions. Furthermore, interference in the daily lives of nonelites in Classic Maya political processes take many forms and occur in diverse society was made in such comparative terms. I proposed that settings. For example, I have elsewhere discussed the political mass spectacle was probably one of the occasions on which interactions that unfolded in households and other smaller Maya commoners felt their ties with the ruler most strongly, settings (Inomata 2001b; Inomata et al. 2002). Mass spectacles but I did not mean that the state could not be experienced become effective only through their connection and contrast in other circumstances. Moreover, the notion of an imagined with more intimate but equally political actions, including community does not necessarily indicate the weak presence food production, craft production, gift exchange, and small- of the state in daily life. On the contrary, the original scale meetings. formulation of the concept by Anderson implies that an Lucero points out that theatrical events require logistical imagined community can reflect a profound penetration of and organizational bases. In a sense, ever larger spectacles

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 834 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006 became possible with the development of centralized polities, landscape. I also concur with Clancy’s comment that with their material supplies and administrative structures. The monuments accrue their own histories. These meanings and reverse may be true, too; we should examine how demands histories, however, cannot be understood apart from the for public events might have driven developments in logistical memories or imaginations of performances by flesh-and- and organizational systems. I am sympathetic with Lucero’s blood actors. The accompanying texts typically narrate comment that the social effects of public performance are specific historical events attended by the individuals depicted, conditioned by political and economic settings, but I would in some cases with explicit references to their dances and stress that these factors are not external to the participants. other performances (Grube 1992). In other words, these Social consequences are shaped by agents who assess and react carvings were not general representations of individuals but to political and material conditions. In other words, political anchored to real historical acts. After their erection, the and economic settings affect the outcomes of performances monuments invited subsequent performances, including through the participants. This also means that these settings viewing, placement of offerings, and recitals of inscriptions. do not “determine” their success in a mechanistic manner. Even the plain stelae that Clancy mentions may have been Evidence of public events. As Newsome notes, past associated with such performances, though in less direct and performance is not directly accessible to us. Most evidence is less explicit ways than the carved ones, and it is possible that circumstantial. The difficulty in addressing theatrical events some of them were originally painted. Such histories mean in the past should not, however, deter us from exploring this vital issue. My argument was that, although individual pieces that these monuments mediated between memories of past of evidence may be rather ambiguous, we can develop sound performances and future acts. This process was embedded in interpretations by combining various lines of inquiry. A specific spatial settings with social agents who occupied these particularly important source of information is the spaces because, as discussed above, no performance can ethnohistoric record mentioned by Chinchilla, which tells us transcend its specific context. It follows, contrary to Clancy’s about mass spectacles held in plazas during the Colonial comment, that stelae never became independent of the plazas period (Inomata 2006). It is very likely that similar events in which they stood. took place in Classic-period plazas. An important objective Becker and Tokovinine consider my data on plaza capacities of our study, however, should be to examine how public irrelevant or problematic. These numbers were not meant to performance articulated with polf coritical conditions in be direct indicators of the sizes of past events. They are, at specific historical contexts. Obviously, this relationship best, circumstantial evidence loosely pointing to the number changed from the Classic period to Colonial times, and this of people who could have been involved in events held in the forces us to consider other lines of evidence. spaces. This ambiguity, however, does not mean that we Tokovinine points out that public events are not necessarily should disregard these data. They have significant implications depicted on monuments placed in plazas. As I said, the when combined with other lines of evidence, including correlation between art media and types of performance is ethnohistorical documents on Colonial-period spectacles, loose and far from exclusive. The important point of my depictions in art, and histories of urban development. discussion on the use of plazas was that a significant Space is in some cases shaped with specific theatrical effects proportion of the stelae erected in those open spaces depicted in mind and in others with a heavier emphasis on symbolic public performances. The reverse correlation—public events’ meanings and cultural conventions. Even spaces in the latter being depicted primarily on stelae—on which Tokovinine case, with their unyielding physicality, have effects on focuses his comment is less clear. I have noted that various visibility, audibility, and movements of bodies that may not lintels and ceramic paintings also show public scenes. always be consciously expected by their designers and Tokovinine’s criticism involving these examples misses the builders. For example, as Rivera notes, some configurations point of my argument. Contrary to Tokovinine’s suggestion, an important clue to may have been meant in part to provide appropriate the relations between art media and types of performance is perspectives for viewing buildings. Yet we can still examine probably the intended viewers of the images. Stelae erected the theatrical consequences of the resulting forms. Likewise, in open plazas tended to depict public performances in which the pyramidal shape of Maya temples may have primarily elites and nonelites possibly took part and were probably represented sacred mountains, but an effect of this form was meant to be seen by both elites and nonelites. Lintels and the high visibility of kings and other elites who climbed their ceramic paintings that show more exclusive scenes, as well as stairs and the near impossibility of their hiding from the public events, were most likely viewed mainly by elites, and masses. The primary function of palanquins, on which Rivera individuals of the same social groups participated in the events comments, was obviously the transport of the privileged, but depicted. they presented significant theatrical effects with the visibility I agree with Tokovinine that stelae as extensions of the of their occupants and their elaborate decorations. The selves of the individuals depicted populated the ritual transport of rulers was a spectacle and could have had

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Inomata Plazas, Performers, and Spectators 835 commemorative qualities, as Chinchilla notes. Such physical References Cited properties of space, including the capacities of plazas, provide Abu-Lughod, L. 1991. Writing against culture. In Recapturing a starting point for analysis. anthropology: Working in the present, ed. R. G. Fox, 137–62. The archaeological study of performance is in an incipient Santa Fe: School of American Research Press. stage, and we need substantial work to develop effective Acunã, R. 1978. Farsas y representaciones esceńicas de los Mayas methods of inquiry. One important approach is the analysis of antiguos. (Centro de Estudios Mayas Cuaderno 15.) Me´x- histories of plazas that Becker and Sanchez mention. One ico, D.F.: Universidad Nacional Autońoma de Me´xico. reason that I chose Tikal as an example was that it was one of [OC] the best-studied Maya sites, but our understanding of the early Anderson, Benedict. 1991. Imagined communities: Reflections histories of its plazas seems to be quite tenuous. Although on the origins and spread of nationalism. 2d ed. London: Becker suggests that many buildings were standing in the Great Version. Plaza before the Late Classic period, the Tikal Report (Coe Andrews, George F. 1975. Maya cities: Placemaking and ur- 1990, 587–88) describes only two early structures (Str. 5D-sub banization. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. 20 and 5D-sub 25) other than those found under Temples I Aoyama, Kazuo. 1999. Ancient Maya state, urbanism, ex- and II and the North Acropolis. The early configuration of the change, and craft specialization: Chipped stone evidence of Great Plaza is unclear. Our limited understanding of plaza the Copań Valley and the La Entrada Region, Honduras. histories is partly due to archaeologists’ traditional focus on University of Pittsburgh Memoirs in Latin American Ar- buildings rather than open spaces. We need to develop research chaeology 12. [KA] specifically designed for the study of plaza configurations, their ———. 2001. Classic Maya state, urbanism, and exchange: histories, and meanings. Caches and burials in plazas and Chipped stone evidence of the Copań Valley and its hin- surrounding buildings, discussed by Aoyama, also provide terland. American Anthropologist 103:346–60. [KA] significant clues to the performances that took place there ———. 2006a. Political and socioeconomic implications of (Lucero 2003). The study of these features should include the Classic Maya lithic artifacts from the Main Plaza of Agu- analysis not only of their contents but also of the spatial contexts ateca, Guatemala. Journal de la Socie´te´ des Ame´ricanistes 92. in which performances took place. In press. [KA] Ciudad and Adańez, Chinchilla, Clancy, Grube, and ———. 2006b. Elite artists and craft producers in Classic Tokovinine comment on temporal and regional variations in Maya society: Lithic evidence from Aguateca, Guatemala. plaza configurations and uses. Although my objective was not Latin American Antiquity 17. In press. [KA] to provide an exhaustive review of numerous sites, I certainly Appadurai, Arjun. 1996. Modernity at large: Cultural dimen- recognize the importance of this issue. Our goal, however, sion of globalization. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota should not be to pursue the statistical significance that Press. Tokovinine notes; we need to consider specific historical Austin, J. L. 1962. How to do things with words. Oxford: Ox- contexts. For this reason I think that overly restrictive a priori ford University Press. definitions of plazas are counterproductive. Ciudad and Bailey, F. G. 1996. Cultural performance, authenticity, and Adańez present an important example of plazas at Machaquila´ second nature. In The politics of cultural performance, ed. that appear to indicate certain forms of performance shaped D. Parkin, L. Caplan, and H. Fisher, 1–17. Providence: by a specific dynastic history. I also appreciate Grube’s Berghahn Books. comment on the unique patterns in the Rıó Bec and western Baines, J., and N. Yoffee. 1998. Order, legitimacy, and wealth Puuc regions, which may reflect distinctive political in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. In Archaic states, ed. organizations. G. M. Feinman and J. Marcus, 199–260. Santa Fe: School These data at the same time highlight the challenge of of American Research Press. studying past performances through the archaeological Bakhtin, Mikhail M. 1968(1965). Rabelais and his world. record. They require not only data on physical configurations Trans. Helene Iswolsky. Cambridge: MIT Press. of plazas and population estimates but also detailed data on Barth, F. 1994. A personal view of present tasks and priorities sequences of plaza modification and local political histories. in cultural and social anthropology. In Assessing cultural At most sites, our grasp of such information is far from ideal. anthropology, ed. R. Borofsky, 349–60. New York: McGraw- We should not, however, be too pessimistic. The key is the Hill. explicit focus on people’s actions embedded in material and Barrera Vasquez, Alfredo. 1965. El libro de los Cantares de historical settings and their relations with thoughts, values, Dzitbalche´.Me´xico, D.F: Instituto Nacional de Antropo- and power. It provides an avenue of effective inquiry into logıá e Historia. past societies and suggests that archaeologists should be able Barrett, John C. 1994. Fragments from antiquity: An archae- to make significant contributions to the study of performance. ology of social life in Britain, 2900–1200 BC. Oxford: —Takeshi Inomata Blackwell.

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 836 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006

Bassie-Sweet, Karen. 1991. From the mouth of the dark cave: Trans. Richard Nice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Commemorative sculpture of the Late Classic Maya. Norman: Press. University of Oklahoma Press. ———. 1984(1979). Distinction: A social critique of the judge- Basso, Keith. 1996. Wisdom sits in places: Landscape and lan- ment of taste. Trans. Richard Nice. Cambridge: Harvard guage among the Western Apache. Albuquerque: University University Press. of New Mexico Press. [FSC] ———. 2000(l997). Pascalian meditations. Trans. Richard Becker, Marshall Joseph. 1975. Moieties in ancient Meso- Nice. Stanford: Stanford University Press. america: Inferences on Teotihuacan social structure. 2 pts. Bradley, Richard. 1984. The social foundations of prehistoric American Indian Quarterly 2:217–36, 315–30. [MJB] Britain: Themes and variations in the archaeology of power. ———. 1983. Kings and classicism: Political change in the Harlow: Longman. Maya lowlands during the Classic Period. In Highland- Bryson, Norman. 1983. Vision and painting: The logic of the lowland interaction in Mesoamerica: Interdisciplinary ap- gaze. New Haven: Yale University Press. proaches, ed. Arthur G. Miller, 159–200. Washington, D.C.: Bueno Cano, Ricardo. 1999. Entre un rıó de robles: Un acer- Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. [MJB] camiento a la arqueologıá de la regioń Rıó Bec.Me´xico, D.F.: ———. 1986. The abandoned heart of Copan, Honduras: Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia. [NG] Reconstruction of a Classic period Maya city in ruins by Calhoun, Craig, ed. 1992. Habermas and the public sphere. the sixteenth century. In Los Mayas de los tiempos tardios, Cambridge: MIT Press. ed. Miguel Rivera and Andre´s Ciudad, 31–61. Madrid: So- Canuto, Marcello A., and Jason Yaeger, eds. 2000. The ar- ciedad Espanõla de Estudios Mayas. [MJB] chaeology of communities: A New World perspective. London: ———. 1988. Changing views of the changing Maya: Evo- Routledge. lution and devolution in an ancient society. Revista Espan˜- Carl, Peter. 2000. City-image versus topography of praxis. ola de Antropologıá Americana 18:21–35. [MJB] Cambridge Archaeological Review 10: 328–35. [RL] ———. 1990. Estructura social en la evolucioń de los estados Carrasco, Davı´d. 1991. Introduction: Aztec ceremonial land- polı´ticos de Mesoame´rica. In Los Mayas: El esplendor de scapes. In To take place: Aztec ceremonial landscapes, ed. una civilizacioń, ed. Andre´s Ciudad Ruiz. Madrid: Turner. Davı´d Carrasco, xv–xxvi. Niwot: University Press of Col- [MJB] orado. [RL] ———. 2003. Plaza plans at Tikal: A research strategy for Chase, Arlen, F., and Diane Z. Chase. 2001a. Ancient Maya inferring social organization and processes of culture causeways and site organization at Caracol, Belize. Ancient change at lowland Maya sites. In Tikal: Dynasties, foreigners, Mesoamerica 12:273–81. and affairs of state, ed. J. A. Sabloff, 253–80. Santa Fe: School ———. 2001b. The royal court of Caracol, Belize: Its palaces of American Research Press. and people. In Royal courts of the ancient Maya, vol. 2, Data Beeman, William O. 1993. The anthropology of theater and and case studies, ed. T. Inomata and S. D. Houston, 102–37. spectacle. Annual Review of Anthropology 22:369–93. Boulder: Westview Press. Bell, Catherine. 1992. Ritual theory, ritual practice. Oxford: Chase, Diane Zaino, and Arlen F. Chase. 1988. A Postclassic Oxford University Press. perspective: Excavations at the Maya site of Santa Rita Co- ———. 1997. Ritual: Perspectives and dimensions. Oxford: rozal, Belize. Pre-Columbian Art Research Institute, San Oxford University Press. Francisco, Monograph 4. [NG] ———. 1998. Performance. In Critical terms for religious stud- Cheek, C. D. 1983a. Excavaciones en la Plaza Principal. In ies, ed. M. C. Taylor, 205–24. Chicago: University of Chi- Introduccioń a la arqueologıá de Copań, Honduras, vol. 2, cago Press. ed. Proyecto Arqueolo´gico Copań, 191–289. Tegucigalpa: Bentham, Jeremy. 1977. Le Panoptique. Paris: Belfond. [EAN] Secretarıá de Estado en el Despacho de Cultura y Turismo. Bergmann, B. 1999. Introduction: The art of ancient spectacle. ———. 1983b. Excavaciones en la Plaza Principal: Resumen In The art of ancient spectacle, ed. B. Bergmann and C. y conclusiones. In Introduccioń a la arqueologıá de Copań, Kondoleon, 9–35. Washington, D.C.: National Gallery of Honduras, vol. 2, ed. Proyecto Arqueolo´gico Copań, Art/New Haven: Yale University Press. 319–48. Tegucigalpa: Secretarıá de Estado en el Despacho Bishop, Ronald L., Robert L. Rands, and George R. Holley. de Cultura y Turismo. 1982. Ceramic compositional analysis in archaeological Chocoń Tun, Jorge Enrique, and Juan Pedro Laporte. 2002. perspective. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory La ciudad de Machaquila. In Reconocimientos y excavaciones 5:275–330. arqueolo´gicas en los municipios de Melchor de Mencos, Do- Bloch, Maurice. 1974. Symbols, song, dance, and features of lores, Poptun y San Luis, Peteń, 1–32. Guatemala: Instituto articulation. Archives Europeénnes de Sociologie 15:55–81. de Antropologıá e Historia. [AC, JA] ———. 1986. From blessing to violence: History and ideology Ciudad Real, Antonio de. 1976. Tratado curioso y docto de las in the circumcision ritual of the Merina of Madagascar. Cam- grandezas de la Nueva Espanã: Relacioń breve y verdadera bridge: Cambridge University Press. de algunas cosas de las muchas que sucedieron al padre fray Bourdieu, Pierrre. 1977(1972). Outline of a theory of practice. Alonso Ponce en las provincias de la Nueva Espanã siendo

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Inomata Plazas, Performers, and Spectators 837

comisario general de aquellas partes.Vol.2.Me´xico, D.F.: Culture/power/history: A reader in contemporary social the- Instituto de Investigaciones Histo´ricas, Universidad Na- ory, ed. N. B. Dirks, G. Eley, and S. Ortner, 3–45. Princeton: cional Autońoma de Me´xico. Princeton University Press. Ciudad Ruiz, Andre´s, Marıá Josefa Iglesias Ponce de Leoń, Durkheim, E´ mile. 1965(1915). The elementary forms of the Jesu´s Adańez Pavoń, and Alfonso Lacadena Garcıá-Gallo. religious life: A study in religious sociology. Trans. Joseph 2004. Investigaciones arqueolo´gicas en Machaquila: La Ward Swain. New York: Free Press. morada de #TI’CHAHK-ki, prıńcipe de la tierra. Revista Eliade, Mircea. 1959. The sacred and the profane: The nature Espanõla de Antropologıá Americana 34:29–62. [AC, JA] of religion. Trans. Willard R. Trask. London: Harcourt Brace Clark, John E. 2004. Mesoamerica goes public: Early cere- Jovanovich. monial centers, leaders, and communities. In Mesoamerican Estrada Monroy, Agustıń. 1979. El mundo K’ekchi’ de la Vera- archaeology, ed. J. A. Hendon and R. A. Joyce, 43–72. Ox- Paz. Guatemala City: Editorial del Eje´rcito. ford: Blackwell. Evans-Pritchard, E. E. 1974. Nuer religion. Oxford: Oxford Coe, William R. 1990. Excavations in the Great Plaza, North University Press. Terrace, and North Acropolis of Tikal. Tikal Reports 14. Fabian, Johannes. 1990. Power and performance: Ethnographic Philadelphia: University Museum, University of Penn- explorations through proverbial wisdom and theater in Shaba, sylvania. Zaire. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. [ML] Cogolludo, Diego Lopez de. 1971(1654). Los tres siglos de la Farris, Nancy M. 1984. Maya society under colonial rule: The dominacioń espanõla en Yucatań o sea historia de esta prov- collective enterprise of survival. Princeton: Princeton Uni- incia. Vol. 1. Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlangs- versity Press. anstalt. Fash, W. L. 1998. Dynastic architectural programs: Intention Comaroff, Jean, and John L. Comaroff. 1991. Of revelation and design in Classic Maya buildings at Copan and other and revolution: Christianity, colonialism, and consciousness sites. In Function and meaning in Classic Maya architecture, in South Africa. Vol. 1. Chicago: University of Chicago ed. S. D. Houston, 223–70. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Press. Oaks Research Library and Collection. Connerton, Paul. 1989. How societies remember. Cambridge: Fash, Barbara, William Fash, Sheree Lane, Rudy Larios, Linda Cambridge University Press. Schele, Jeffrey Stomper, and David Stuart. 1992. Investi- Culbert, T. P., L. J. Kosakowsky, R. E. Fry, and W. A. Haviland. gations of a Classic Maya council house at Copań, Hon- 1990. The population of Tikal, Guatemala. In Precolumbian duras. Journal of Field Archaeology 19:419–42. population history in the Maya lowlands, ed. T. P. Culbert Fernandez, James. 1972. Persuasion and performances: On and D. S. Rice, 103–21. Albuquerque: University of New the beast in every body . . . and the metaphors of everyman. Mexico Press. Daedalus 101(1):39–60. Da Matta R. 1984. Carnival in multiple planes. In Rite, drama, Fischer-Lichte, Erika. 1992(1983). The semiotics of theater. festival, spectacle: Rehearsals toward a theory of cultural per- Trans. Jeremy Gaines and Doris L. Jones. Bloomington: formance, ed. J. J. MacAloon, 209–40. Philadelphia: Insti- Indiana University Press. tute for the Study of Human Issues. ———. 1995. Theatricality: A key concept in theatre and De la Garza, M., A. L. Izquierdo, M. C. Leoń, and T. Figueroa, cultural studies. Theatre Research International 20:85–89. eds. 1983. Relaciones histo´rico-geogra´ficas de la gobernacioń Foucault, Michel. 1977(1975). Discipline and punish: The birth de Yucatań (Me´rida, Valladolid y Tabasco).Vol.2.Me´xico, of the prison. Trans. Alan Sheridan. New York: Pantheon. D.F.: Universidad Nacional Autońoma de Me´xico. [OC] Freidel, David A., and Linda Schele. 1988a. Kingship in the Demarest, A. A. 1992. Ideology in ancient Maya cultural evo- Late Preclassic Maya lowlands: The instruments and places lution: The dynamics of galactic polities. In Ideology and of ritual power. American Anthropologist 90:547–67. Pre-Columbian civilizations, ed. A. A. Demarest and G. W. ———. 1988b. Symbol and power: A history of the Lowland Conrad, 135–58. Santa Fe: School of American Research Maya cosmogram. In Maya iconography, ed. Elizabeth P. Press. Benson and Gillett G. Griffin, 44–93. Princeton: Princeton De Marrais, Elizabeth, Luis Jaime Castillo, and Timothy Earle. University Press. [FSC] 1996. Ideology, materialization, and power strategies. Cur- Freidel, David A., Linda Schele, and Joy Parker. 1993. Maya rent Anthropology 37:15–31. cosmos: Three thousand years on the shaman’s path. New de Montmollin, Olivier. 1995. Settlement and politics in three York: Morrow. Classic Maya polities. Madison: Prehistory Press. [RL] Friedman, J. 1994. Cultural identity and global process. Lon- Dietler, M. 2001. Theorizing the feast: Rituals of consumption, don: Sage. commensal politics, and power in African contexts. In Fry, Robert E. 1979. The economics of pottery at Tikal, Gua- Feasts: Archaeological and ethnographic perspectives on food, temala: Models of exchange for serving vessels. American politics, and power, ed. M. Dietler and B. Hayden, 65–114. Antiquity 44:494–512. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press. Futrell, Alison. 1997. Blood in the arena: The spectacle of Ro- Dirks, N. B., G. Eley, and S. Ortner. 1994. Introduction. In man power. Austin: University of Texas Press.

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 838 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006

Garcıá de Palacio, D. 1927. Relacioń hecha por el Licenciado and government: America’s first social compact?American Palacio al Rey D. Felipe II en la que describe la Provincia Anthropologist 103:331–45. de Guatemala, las costumbres de los indios y otras cosas Hobsbawm, Eric J., and Terrence O. Ranger, eds. 1983. The notables. Anales de la Sociedad de Geografıá e Historia 4(1): invention of tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University 71–92. [OC] Press. Geertz, Clifford. 1973. The interpretation of cultures. New Hodder, Ian. 1986. Reading the past: Current approaches to York: Basic Books. interpretation in archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- ———. 1980. Negara: The theatre state in nineteenth-century versity Press. Bali. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Houston, S. D. 1998a. Classic Maya depictions of the built Giddens, Anthony. 1984. The constitution of society. Berkeley: environment. In Function and meaning in Classic Maya University of California Press. architecture, ed. S. D. Houston, 333–72. Washington, D.C.: Gillespie, Susan D. 2000. Maya “nested houses”: The ritual Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. construction of place. In Beyond kinship: Social and material ———. ed. 1998b. Function and meaning in Classic Maya reproduction in house societies, ed. Rosemary A. Joyce and architecture: A symposium at Dumbarton Oaks. Washington, Susan D. Gillespie, 135–60. Philadelphia: University of D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks. [RL] Pennsylvania Press. [RL] Houston, S., H. Escobedo, M. Child, C. Golden, and R. Mu- Goffman, Erving. 1959. The presentation of self in everyday nõz. 2003. The moral community: Maya settlement trans- life. Garden City: Doubleday Anchor. formation at Piedras Negras, Guatemala. In The social con- ———. 1967. Interaction ritual. Garden City: Doubleday struction of ancient cities, ed. M. L. Smith, 212–53. Anchor. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Books. Graham, Ian. 1967. Explorations in El Peten, Guatemala. Mid- Houston, Stephen, and David Stuart. 1996. Of gods, glyphs, dle American Research Institute Publication 33. [AC, JA] and kings: Divinity and rulership among the Classic Maya. Grieder, Terrence, A. B. Mendoza, C. Earle Smith, and R. M. Antiquity 70:289–312. Malina. 1988. La Galgada, Peru: A Preceramic culture in ———. 1998. Ancient Maya self: Personhood and portraiture in the Classic period. Res 33:72–101. [EAN, AT] transition. Austin: University of Texas Press. [NG] Houston, Stephen, and Karl Taube. 2000. An archaeology of Grimes, R. L. 1987. Ritual studies. In Encyclopedia of religion, the senses: Perception and cultural expression in ancient vol. 12, ed. M. Eliade, 422–25. New York: Macmillan. Mesoamerica. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 10:261–94. Grube, Nikolai. 1992. Classic Maya dance: Evidence from [EAN] hieroglyphs and iconography. Ancient Mesoamerica 3: Hymes, Dell H. 1975. Breakthrough into performance. In 201–18. Folklore: Performance and communication, ed. D. Ben-Amos Grube, Nikolai, and Simon Martin. 1998. Polı´tica clasica maya and K. S. Goldstein, 11–74. The Hague: Mouton. dentro de una tradicioń mesoamericana. In Modelos de Inomata, Takeshi. 1997. The last day of a fortified Classic entidades polı´ticas mayas, ed. Silvia Trejo, 131–46. Me´xico, Maya center: Archaeological investigations at Aguateca, D.F.: Instituto Nacional de Antropologıá e Historia. [NG] Guatemala. Ancient Mesoamerica 8:337–51. Habermas, Ju¨rgen. 1991. The structural transformation of the ———. 2001a. The Classic Maya royal palace as a political public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. theater. In Ciudades mayas: Urbanizacioń y organizacioń Trans. Thomas Burger. Cambridge: MIT Press. espacial, ed. A. Ciudad Ruiz, M. J. Iglesias Ponce de Leoń, Hall, Edward. 1966. The hidden dimension. Garden City: Dou- and M. del C. Martıńez Martıńez, 341–62. Madrid: Socie- bleday Anchor. dad Espanõla de Estudios Mayas. Halperin, Christina T. 2005. Social power and sacred space ———. 2001b. The power and ideology of artistic creation: at Actun Nak Beh, Belize. In Stone houses and earth lords: Elite craft specialists in Classic Maya society. Current An- Maya religion in the cave context, ed. Keith M. Prufer and thropology 42:321–49. James E. Brady, 71–90. Boulder: University Press of Col- ———. 2004. The spatial mobility of non-elite populations orado. [CI] in Classic Maya society and its political implications. In Handelman, Don. 1990. Models and mirrors: Toward an an- Maya commoners, ed. J. Lohse and F. Valdez Jr. Austin: thropology of public events. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- University of Texas Press. versity Press. ———. 2006. Politics and theatricality in Maya society. In Harrison, Peter D. 1970. The Central Acropolis, Tikal, Gua- Archaeology of performance: Theaters of power, community, temala: A preliminary study of the functions of its structural and polities, ed. T. Inomata and L. Coben, 187–221. Walnut components during the Late Classic period. Ph.D. diss., Creek: AltaMira Press. University of Pennsylvania. Inomata, T., and L. Coben. 2006. An invitation to the ar- ———. 1999. The lords of Tikal: Rulers of an ancient Maya chaeological theater. In Archaeology of performance: Thea- city. London: Thames and Hudson. ters of power, community, and polities, ed. T. Inomata and Hill, Warren D., and John E. Clark. 2001. Sports, gambling, L. Coben, 11–44. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press.

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Inomata Plazas, Performers, and Spectators 839

Inomata, T., and S. Houston. 2001a. Opening the royal Maya Kowalski, Jeff K. 1987. The House of the Governor: A Maya court. In Royal courts of the ancient Maya, vol. 1, Theory, palace at Uxmal, Yucatan, Mexico. Norman: University of comparison, and synthesis, ed. T. Inomata and S. Houston, Oklahoma Press. 3–23. Boulder: Westview Press. Landa, D. 1982. Relacioń de las cosas de Yucatań. Ed. Angel ———. eds. 2001b. Royal courts of the ancient Maya.Vol.1. Marıá Garibay. Me´xico, D.F.: Editorial Porruá. [OC] Boulder: Westview Press. [RL] Lansing, J. Stephen. 1991. Priests and programmers: Technol- Inomata, Takeshi, Erick Ponciano, Oswaldo Chinchilla, Otto ogies of power in the engineered landscape of Bali. Princeton: Romań, Ve´ronique Breuil-Martıńez, and Oscar Santos. Princeton University Press. 2004. An unfinished temple at the Classic Maya centre of Le´vi-Strauss, Claude. 1963. Structural anthropology. New York: Aguateca, Guatemala. Antiquity 78:798–811. Basic Books. Inomata, Takeshi, Erick Ponciano, Richard Terry, Daniela Looper, Matthew G. 2001. Dance performances at Quirigua´. Triadan, and Harriet F. Beaubien. 2001. In the palace of In Landscape and power in ancient Mesoamerica, ed. R. the fallen king: The royal residential complex at the Classic Koontz, K. Reese-Taylor, and A. Headrick, 113–36. Boulder: Maya center of Aguateca, Guatemala. Journal of Field Ar- Westview Press. chaeology 28:287–306. ———. 2003. Lightning warrior: Maya art and kingship at Inomata, T., and Daniela Triadan. 2003. El espectaćulo de Quirigua. Austin: University of Texas Press. muerte en las tierras bajas mayas. In Entrar en el camino: ———. n.d. Ancient Maya dance. MS. [ML] La muerte en la civilizacioń maya, ed. A. Ciudad Ruiz, M. Low, Setha M. 2000. On the plaza: The politics of public space H. Ruz Sosa, and M. J. Iglesias Ponce de Leoń, 195–208. and culture. Austin: University of Texas Press. Madrid: Sociedad Espanõla de Estudios Mayas/Me´xico, ———. 2003. Embodied space(s): Anthropological theories D.F.: Centro de Estudios Mayas, Universidad de Autońoma of body, space, and culture. Space and Culture 6 (1):9–18. de Me´xico. [RL] ———. 2004. Culture and practice of war in Maya society. Lucero, Lisa J. 1999. Water control and Maya politics in the Paper presented at the Amerind Seminar “Warfare in Cul- southern Maya lowlands. In Complex polities in the ancient tural Context: Practice, Agency, and the Archaeology of tropical world, ed. E. A Bacus and L. J. Lucero, 35–50. Conflict.” Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological As- Inomata, Takeshi, Daniela Triadan, Erick Ponciano, Estela sociation 9. Pinto, Richard E. Terry, and Markus Eberl. 2002. Domestic ———. 2003. The politics of ritual: The emergence of Classic and political lives of Classic Maya elites: The excavation of Maya rulers. Current Anthropology 44:523–58. rapidly abandoned structures at Aguateca, Guatemala. Latin ———. 2006. Water and ritual: The rise and fall of Classic American Antiquity 13:305–30. Maya rulers. Austin: University of Texas Press. [NG, LJL] Isendahl, Christian. 2002. Common knowledge: Lowland Maya ———. n.d. Classic Maya temples, politics, and the voice of urban farming at Xuch. Uppsala: Uppsala University. [CI] the people. MS. [LJL] Jackes, M., and Q. Gao. 2004. Jiangzhai and BanPo (Shaanxi, MacAloon, J. J. 1984a. Introduction: Cultural performances, PRC): New ideas from old bones. In From the Jomon to culture theory. In Rite, drama, festival, spectacle: Rehearsals Star Carr: Proceedings of the International Conference on toward a theory of cultural performance, ed. J. J. MacAloon, Temperate Hunter-Gatherers, ed. L. Janik, S. Kaner, A. Mat- 1–15. Philadelphia: Institute for the Study of Human Issues. sui, and P. Rowley-Conwy, 1–12. Oxford: British Archae- ———. 1984b. Olympic games and the theory of spectacle ological Reports. [NG] in modern societies. In Rite, drama, festival, spectacle: Re- Jones, Christopher. 1969. The twin-pyramid group pattern: hearsals toward a theory of cultural performance, ed. J. J. A Classic Maya architectural assemblage at Tikal, Guate- MacAloon, 241–80. Philadelphia: Institute for the Study of mala. Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania. Human Issues. ———. 1996. Excavations in the East Plaza of Tikal. Tikal Martin, S. 1996. Tikal’s “Star War” against Naranjo. In Eighth Reports 16. Philadelphia: University Museum, University Palenque Round Table, 1993, ed. M. Macri and J. McHargue, of Pennsylvania. 223–35. San Francisco: Pre-Columbian Art Research In- Joyce, R. 1992. Images of gender and labor organization in stitute. [OC] Classic Maya society. In Exploring gender through archae- Martin, Simon, and Nikolai Grube. 2000. Chronicle of the ology: Selected papers from the 1991 Boone Conference, ed. Maya kings and queens: Deciphering the dynasties of the C. Claassen, 63–70. Madison: Prehistory Press. ancient Maya. London: Thames and Hudson. Keller, Angela. 1996. Roads to understanding: Language and Mayer, Karl H. 1980. Maya monuments: Sculptures of unknown Lowland Maya “sacbes” of the Classic Period. Paper pre- provenance in the United States. Ramona: Acoma Books. sented at the 61st Annual Meeting of the Society for Amer- [AT] ican Archaeology, New Orleans. [JLJS] Meskell, Lynn M., and Rosemary A. Joyce. 2003. Embodied Kertzer, David I. 1988. Ritual, politics, and power. New Haven: lives: Figuring ancient Maya and Egyptian experience. Lon- Yale University Press. don: Routledge.

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 840 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006

Miller, Mary Ellen. 1986. The murals of Bonampak. Princeton: Reese-Taylor, K. 2002. Ritual circuits as key elements in Maya Princeton University Press. civic center designs. In Heart of creation: The Mesoamerican Miller, M. E., and S. D. Houston. 1987. The Classic Maya world and the legacy of Linda Schele, ed. Andrea Stone, ballgame and its architectural setting. Res: Anthropology and 143–65. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press. Aesthetics 14:46–65. [OC] Reese-Taylor, K., and R. Koontz. 2001. The cultural poetics Miller, Mary, and Karl Taube. 1993. Illustrated dictionary of of power and space in ancient Mesoamerica. In Landscape the gods and symbols of ancient Mexico and the Maya. Lon- and power in ancient Mesoamerica, ed. R. Koontz, K. Reese- don: Thames and Hudson. [KA] Taylor, and A. Headrick, 1–28. Boulder: Westview Press. Moore, Jerry D. 1996. Architecture and power in the ancient Restall, Matthew. 1997. The Maya world: Yucatec culture and Andes: The archaeology of public buildings. Cambridge: society, 1550–1850. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Cambridge University Press. Rice, P. M. 1987. Economic change in the lowland Maya Late ———. 2005. Cultural landscapes in the ancient Andes: Ar- Classic period. In Specialization, exchange, and complex so- cheologies of place. Gainesville: University Press of Florida. cieties, ed. E. M. Brumfiel and T. K. Earle, 76–85. Cam- [RL] bridge: Cambridge University Press. Moore, S. F., and B. G. Myerhoff. 1977. Introduction: Secular Ringle, W. M. 1999. Pre-Classic cityscapes: Ritual politics rituals: Forms and meanings. In Secular ritual, ed. S. F. among the early lowland Maya. In Social patterns in Pre- Moore and B. G. Myerhoff, 3–24. Assen: Van Gorcum. Classic Mesoamerica, ed. D. C. Grove and R. A. Joyce, Moseley, Michael E. 1975. The maritime foundations of Andean 183–224. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Li- civilization. Menlo Park: Cummings. [NG] brary and Collection. Munn, Nancy D. 1992. The cultural anthropology of time. Ringle, W. M., and G. J. Bey III. 2001. Post-Classic and Ter- Annual Review of Anthropology 21:93–123. minal Classic courts of the northern Maya lowlands. In Newsome, Elizabeth. 2001. Trees of paradise and pillars of the Royal courts of the ancient Maya, vol. 2, Data and case study, world: The serial stelae cycle of “18-Rabbit-God K,” king of ed. T. Inomata and S. D. Houston, 266–307. Boulder: West- Copan. Austin: University of Texas Press. [ML] view Press. Nonde´deó, Philippe, Dominique Michelet, Marie-Charlotte Rivera, Miguel. 1982. Los mayas: An Oriental society. Madrid: Arnauld, E´ ric Taladoire, Julie Patrois, and Ramzy Barrois. Editorial de la Universidad Complutense. [MR] 2003. Rıó Bec: Primeros pasos de una nueva investigacioń. ———. 2001. La ciudad maya: Un scenario sagrado. Madrid: Mexicon 25(4):100–105. [NG] Editorial de la Universidad Complutense. [MR] Oates, D., and J. Oates. 1976. The rise of civilization. Oxford: Robbins, Joel. 2001. Ritual communication and linguistic ide- Oxford University Press. [NG] ology. Current Anthropology 42:591–614. Palmer, Gary B., and William R. Jankowiak. 1996. Perfor- Robin, Cynthia. 2003. New directions in Classic Maya house- mance and imagination: Toward an anthropology of the hold archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Research 11: spectacular and the mundane. Cultural Anthropology 11: 307–56. 225–58. Rockefeller, Stuart Alexander. 1999. “There is a culture here”: Pauketat, T. 2000. The tragedy of the commoners. In Agency Spectacle and the inculcation of folklore in highland Bo- in archaeology, ed. M. Dobres and J. Robb, 113–29. London: livia. Journal of Latin American Anthropology 3:118–49. Routledge. Roscoe, Paul B. 1993. Practice and political centralization: A Pavis, Patrice. 1998(1980). Dictionary of the theatre: Terms, new approach to political evolution. Current Anthropology concepts, and analysis. Trans. Christine Shantz. Toronto: 34:111–40. [LJL] University of Toronto Press. Sackett, James. 2006. Archaeological discourse. Backdirt, Win- Pearson, Mike, and Michael Shanks. 2001. Theater/archae- ter. [JLJS] ology. London: Routledge. Sanchez, Julia L. 1997. Royal strategies and audience: An anal- Plank, Shannon E. 2004. Maya dwellings in hieroglyphs and ysis of Classic Maya monumental art. Ph.D. diss., Univer- archaeology: An integrative approach to ancient architecture sity of California, Los Angeles. and spatial cognition. British Archaeological Reports Inter- Scarborough, Vernon L. 2003. The flow of power: Ancient water national Series 1324. [AT] systems and landscapes. Santa Fe: School of American Re- Rappaport, Roy A. 1999. Ritual and religion in the making of search Press. [LJL] humanity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Scarborough, Vernon L., and Gary G. Gallopin. 1991. A water Read, Alan. 1993. Theatre and everyday life: An ethics of per- storage adaptation in the Maya lowlands. Science 251: formance. London: Routledge. 658–62. Reents-Budet, D. 2001. Classic Maya concepts of the royal Schechner, Richard. 1977. Essays in performance theory: court: An analysis of renderings on pictorial ceramics. In 1970–1976. New York: Drama Book Specialists. Royal courts of the ancient Maya, vol. 1, Theory, comparison, ———. 1988. Performance theory. Revised ed. New York: and synthesis, ed. T. Inomata and S. D. Houston, 195–236. Routledge. Boulder: Westview Press. ———. 1994. Ritual and performance. In Companion ency-

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Inomata Plazas, Performers, and Spectators 841

clopedia of anthropology: Humanity, culture, and social life, Sweet, Jill D. 1985. Dances of the Tewa Pueblo Indians: Ex- ed. T. Ingold, 613–47. London: Routledge. pressions of new life. Santa Fe: School of American Research Scheiffelin, Edward L. 1985. Performance and the cultural Press. [EAN] construction of reality. American Ethnologist 12:707–24. Tambiah, Stanley J. 1979. A performative approach to ritual. [ML] Proceedings of the British Academy 65:113–69. ———. 1998. Problematizing performance. In Ritual, per- ———. 1985. Culture, thought, and social action: An anthro- formance, media, ed. F. Hughes-Freeland, 194–207. New pological perspective. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. York: Routledge. [ML] [ML] Schele, Linda, and Peter Mathews. 1998. The code of kings: Taube, K. 1988. A study of Classic Maya scaffold sacrifice. In The language of seven sacred Maya temples and tombs. New Maya iconography, ed. E. Benson and G. Griffin, 331–51. York: Scribner. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Schele, Linda, and Mary Ellen Miller. 1986. The blood of kings: ———. 1989. Ritual humor in Classic Maya religion. In Word Dynasty and ritual in Maya art. Fort Worth: Kimbell Art and image in Maya culture: Explorations in language, writ- Museum. ing, and representation, ed. W. F. Hanks and D. S. Rice, Schortman, Edward M., Patricia A. Urban, and Marne Ausec. 351–82. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. 2001. Politics with style: Identity formation in prehispanic Taube, Rhonda. 2006. Pageantry and parody in contemporary southeastern Mesoamerica. American Anthropologist 103: Maya performance: Repetition and revision in Momoste- 312–30. [CI] nango, Guatemala. Paper prepared for the conference “Rit- Scott, James C. 1990. Domination and the arts of resistance: ual Performance, Pageantry, and Ceremony in Ancient Hidden transcripts. New Haven: Yale University Press. Singer, Milton B. 1959. Traditional India: Structure and Mesoamerica,” Boston. [EAN] change. Philadelphia: American Folklore Society. ———. n.d. The dancing body of difference: Contemporary ———. 1972. When a great tradition modernizes. London: Maya dances of Momostenango, Guatemala. MS. [EAN] Pall Mall. Tokovinine, Alexandre. 2003. A Classic Maya term for public Smith, Adam T. 2000. Rendering the political aesthetic: Po- performance. http://www.mesoweb.com/features/tokovi- litical legitimacy in Urartian representations of the built nine/performance.html. environment. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 19: Tozzer, Alfred M. 1941. Landa’s Relacioń de las cosas de Yu- 131–63. catan. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Ar- ———. 2003. The political landscape: Constellations of au- chaeology and Ethnology 18. thority in early complex polities. Berkeley: University of Cal- Traxler, L. P. 2004. Redesigning Copan: Early architecture of ifornia Press. the polity center. In Understanding Early Classic Copan, ed. Smith, A. Ledyard. 1982. Excavations at Seibal, Department of E. E. Bell, M. A. Canuto, and R. J. Sharer, 53–64. Phila- Peten, Guatemala: Major architecture and caches. Memoirs delphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archae- of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology 15 ology and Anthropology. (1). Trik, Helen, and Michael E. Kampen. 1983. Tikal report no. Stahl, Ann Brower. 2002. Colonial entanglements and the 31: The graffiti of Tikal. University Museum Monograph practices of taste: An alternative to logocentric approaches. 57. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. American Anthropologist 104:827–45. Turner, Victor W. 1957. Schism and continuity in an African Stone, Andrea J. 1995. Images from the underworld: Naj Tunich society. Manchester: Manchester University Press. and the tradition of Maya cave painting. Austin: University ———. 1967. The forest of symbols. Ithaca: Cornell University of Texas Press. Press. Stuart, David, and Ian Graham. 2005. Corpus of Maya hier- ———. 1972. The ritual process. Ithaca: Cornell University oglyphic inscriptions. Vol. 9.1 (Piedras Negras). Cambridge: Press. Harvard University Press. [AT] ———. 1986. The anthropology of performance. New York: Stuart, David, and Stephen D. Houston. 1994. Classic Maya Performing Arts Journal Publications. place names. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. [AT] Valde´s, J. A. 2001. Palaces and thrones tied to the destiny of Suhler, C., and D. Freidel. 2000. Rituales de terminacioń: the royal courts in the Maya lowlands. In Royal courts of Implicaciones de la guerra maya. In La guerra entre los the ancient Maya, vol. 2, Data and case studies, ed. T. In- antiguos mayas: Memoria de la Primera Mesa Redonda de omata and S. Houston, 138–64. Boulder: Westview Press. Palenque, ed. S. Trejo, 73–104. Me´xico, D.F.: Instituto Na- Van Gennep, Arnold. 1960. Rites of passage. Chicago: Uni- cional de Antropologıá e Historia. versity of Chicago Press. Summers, David. 2002. Representation. In Critical terms for Wade, Peter. 1999. Working culture: Making cultural identities art history, 2d ed., ed. R. S. Nelson and R. Schiff, 3–19. in Cali, Colombia. Current Anthropology 40:449–72. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [ML] Webster, David. 2001. Spatial dimensions of Maya courtly life:

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 842 Current Anthropology Volume 47, Number 5, October 2006

Problems and issues. In Royal courts of the ancient Maya, Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. ed. Takeshi Inomata and Stephen Houston, vol. 1, 130–67. Williams, Raymond. 1977. Marxism and literature. Oxford: Boulder: Westview Press. [RL] Oxford University Press. Webster, D., and A. Freter. 1990. The demography of Late Wuthnow, Robert. 1987. Meaning and moral order: Explora- Classic Copan. In Precolumbian population history in the tions in cultural analysis. Berkeley: University of California Maya lowlands, ed. T. P. Culbert and D. S. Rice, 37–61. Press.

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 18 Jan 2015 16:49:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions