UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE a Study of Classic
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE A Study of Classic Maya Rulership A Dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Anthropology by Mark Alan Wright August 2011 Dissertation Committee: Dr. Karl A. Taube, Chairperson Dr. Wendy Ashmore Dr. Stephen D. Houston Copyright by Mark Alan Wright 2011 The Dissertation of Mark Alan Wright is approved: ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Committee Chairperson University of California, Riverside Acknowledgements Countless people have helped bring this work to light through direct feedback, informal conversations, and general moral support. I am greatly indebted to my dissertation committee, Karl Taube, Wendy Ashmore, and Stephen Houston for their patience, wisdom, and guidance throughout this process. Their comments have greatly improved this dissertation; all that is good within the present study is due to them, and any shortcomings in this work are entirely my responsibility. I would also like to thank Thomas Patterson for sitting in on my dissertation defense committee on impossibly short notice. My first introduction to Maya glyphs came by way of a weekend workshop at UCLA led by Bruce Love back when I was still trying to decide what I wanted to be when I grew up. His enthusiasm and knowledge for the Maya forever altered the trajectory of my undergraduate and graduate studies, and I am grateful for the conversations we‘ve had over the ensuing years at conferences and workshops. I have continued to study the glyphs at the Texas Meetings at Austin, where I have met many wonderful people that have helped me along the way. The following (incomplete) list is comprised of people that I‘ve interacted with through email or at various conferences, symposia or other fora that have given me new insights or ideas concerning my research (and occasionally set me straight on some of my misguided theories). Some of the conversations were brief, others were more detailed, but all made an impact on me. In no particular order, thanks to Marc Zender, Alexandre Tokovinine, Stanley Guenter, Dorie Reents-Budet, Lucia Henderson, Erik Boot, David Stuart, Danny Law, Gerardo Aldana, Mark Van Stone, iv Peter Mathews, Bill Saturno, Kerry Hull, Julia Guernsey, John Clark, Allen Christenson, Michael Coe, Mathew Looper, Genevieve Le Fort, Andrew Weeks, and many others. This dissertation relies heavily on the foundation laid by two great scholars in particular, Pierre ―Robbie‖ Colas and Virginia ―Ginny‖ Fields, both of whom passed away unexpectedly during my time as a graduate student. Robbie‘s work on theonyms and divine titulary is the basis for a large portion of my Chapter 2, and Ginny‘s dissertation examined the origins of divine kingship among the Maya, which is a thread that runs throughout this entire work. I had the honor of knowing Robbie and Ginny, and they both provided me with resources and insights that proved critical to my research. Despite their genius, they exemplified kindness and humility. Thank you to my fellow graduate students in the Anthropology Department at UC Riverside for making the grad school experience much more enjoyable. Thanks especially to Laurie Taylor, Lauren Schwartz, Lucia Gudiel, Melissa Yeager-Farfan, Taisuke Inoue, Shuji Araki, Laurette McGuire, Mike Mathiowetz, Matt Yacubic, Shankari Patel, Patrick Linder,Christina Halperin, Reiko Ishihara-Brito, and Ryan Mongelluzzo, for great conversations over the years. I would also like to thank Brant Gardner and Diane Wirth for helping to create order out of the organizational chaos that I unleashed in the writing process. I would still be in bullet-point limbo were it not for their suggestions. I am greatly indebted for the financial support I received throughout this study to conduct research. The Foreign Language and Area Studies Fellowship Program (FLAS) funded my language studies in Yucatan in 2007 and 2009. The Ancient America v Foundation funded my language research in 2004 in Jocotán, Guatemala. BYU Religious Education Graduate Studies Grants funded summer research and attendance at the European Maya conference in 2008. I am grateful to the Maxwell Institute at BYU for awarding me the Nibley Fellowship yearly from 2003-2007. On a personal level, I would like to thank my mother, Janet Wright, for raising me in a house full of books about archaeology and a curio cabinet full of artifacts (legally obtained, of course!), for earning a certificate in archaeology from UCLA, for going off to Israel to dig at Tel Dan when I was a teenager, and for dragging me to my first Maya Weekend at UCLA. My love of archaeology (and a good portion of my library) came directly from her. None of this would have been possible without the unconditional love and support of my brilliant and beautiful wife Traci. We met when we were both in graduate school, and she has only ever known me as a stressed-out grad student. She has shown amazing resilience as I have left her for weeks and months on end to do fieldwork or attend conferences, and far too often even when we‘re together my mind ends up wandering around the ancient Maya area instead of truly being with her in the present. Yet she always makes me laugh and she‘s the only one capable of lifting my spirits when I‘m discouraged and she kept me going when I felt like giving up. Now that this chapter (or these five chapters, rather) of our life are behind us, my beloved ―dissertation widow‖ can finally have her husband back. Thank you for believing in me even when I didn‘t believe in myself, Traci. I couldn‘t have done it without you. vi Dedication For Traci vii ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION A Study of Classic Maya Rulership by Mark Alan Wright Doctor of Philosophy, Graduate Program in Anthropology University of California, Riverside, August 2011 Dr. Karl A. Taube, Chairperson Classic period Maya rulers are often reduced to ―ideal types‖ and are discussed in terms that would suggest they were a homogenous group of individuals cut from the same cloth. Contrary to that assumption, this study employs epigraphic, iconographic, archaeological, ethnohistoric and ethnographic data to demonstrate there was significant local and regional variation in the way kingship was expressed through artistic programs, calendrics, ritual activity, accoutrements of power, sacred warfare, the taking of theophoric throne names and titulary, and the composition and adaptation of local pantheons. The identity of each polity was inseparably connected with that of its ruler, and variations on the rulership theme served to reinforce their unique identity in the larger landscape vis-à-vis other polities. The underlying theoretical approach relies on concepts of mimesis and alterity, duality, and complementary opposition, all of which are creative viii acts which serve to establish a sense of Self in contrast to the Other, both human and divine. This study also examines concepts of divine kingship and deification, and argues that rulers were ―functionally divine‖ while living and were elevated to ―ontologically divine‖ status upon becoming apotheosized ancestors after death. As apotheosized ancestors, they took their place in the pliable local pantheon which further reinforced the unique identity of each site. ix Table of Contents Chapter 1 Theoretical, Historical, and Methodological Foundations of the Study of Divine Kingship in Mesoamerica ..................................................................................... 1 The Theoretical Foundation ...................................................................................................... 1 Divine vs. Sacred: The Contested Nature of Kingship among the Classic Maya ......................... 3 The Functional Divinity of Classic Maya Rulers .......................................................................... 6 The Ideological Aspect of Divine Kingship ................................................................................. 7 The Social Aspect of Divine Kingship ......................................................................................... 9 The Divided Aspect of Divine Rule ........................................................................................... 10 The Material Aspect of Divine Kingship ................................................................................... 10 The Historical Foundation of Divine Kingship in Mesoamerica ................................................ 12 The Uniqueness of Each Polity and the Creation of Identity .................................................... 14 Concepts of Self and Other ...................................................................................................... 15 Mimesis ................................................................................................................................... 19 Methodology and Methodological Concerns .......................................................................... 23 Cross-Cultural Comparison and Ethnographic Analogy ....................................................... 23 The (somewhat) Direct Historical Approach ........................................................................ 24 Epigraphy and Iconography ................................................................................................. 26 Outline of Text......................................................................................................................... 26 Chapter 2 Royal Responsibilities