Society for American Archaeology Spatial Orders in Maya Civic Plans Author(s): Wendy Ashmore and Jeremy A. Sabloff Source: Latin American Antiquity, Vol. 13, No. 2 (Jun., 2002), pp. 201-215 Published by: Society for American Archaeology Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/971914 . Accessed: 30/01/2015 11:38 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]. Society for American Archaeology is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Latin American Antiquity. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 11:38:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions SPATIALORDERS IN MAYACIVIC PLANS WendyAshmore and JeremyA. Sabloff Ancient civic centers materialize ideas of proper spatial organization, among the Maya as in other societies. Weargue that the position and arrangementof ancient Maya buildings and arenas emphatically express statementsabout cosmology and politi- cal order.At the same time, the clarity of original spatial expression is often blurred in the sites we observe archaeologically. Factors responsiblefor such blurring include multiple other influences on planning and spatial order,prominently the politi- cal life history of a civic center. Specifically, we argue here that centers with relatively short and simple political histories are relatively easy to interpretspatially. Those with longer development,but relatively little upheaval, manifestmore elaborate but relatively robustand internally consistent plans. Sites with longer and more turbulentpolitical histories, however,materialize a more complex cumulativemix of strategies and plausibly, therefore,of varyingplanning principles invokedby sequent ancient builders. Weexamine evidencefor these assertions by referenceto civic layouts at Copa'n,Xunantunich, Sayil, Seibal, and Tikal. En los antiguos centros cfvicos se materializanideas acerca de la organizacionespacial adecuada, tanto entre los mayas como entreotras sociedades. En este estudiose proponeque la ubicaciony la disposicionde antiguos edificiosy espacios abiertosmayas expresanenfaticamente ideas respecto a la cosmologfay el ordenpolftico. Al mismo tiempo, la claridad de la expresionespacial original a menudoes difusa en los sitios arqueologicos,debido a muchasotras in;Quenciasen la planeacion y el ordenespaciales, sobre todo la historia de la vida polftica de cada centro cfvico. Espeefficamenteproponemos que los centros que tienen historias polfticas cortas y simples son relativamentefaciles de interpretarespacialmente, mientras que aquellos con desarrollos mas pro- longados, aunque con agitacion polftica limitada,presentan una planeacion interna mas elaborada y relativamentefuerte. Sin embargo,en los asentamientoscon historiaspolfticas largas y mas turbulentas,se materializauna mezelama's compleja de estrate- gias y, presumiblemente,en consecuenciaquienes los construyeronse basaronen una ampliavariedad de principiosde planeacion. En este estudio exploramoslas evidenciaspara fundamentarestas propuestasrefiriendo a la disposicion cfvica de Copan,Xunan- tunich,Sayil, Seibal y Tikal. Recognizing andinterpreting spatial order has Bradley 2000; Emerson 1997; Hegmon 1989; a long and rich history,with inquiriesfrom Whalenand Minnis 2001). Local historyand social varied perspectives and many disciplines memorymold the perpetuationor alterationof any (e.g., Eliade 1959; Lawrence and Low 1990; particularplace and its meanings (e.g., Ashmore Rapoport1982; Rykwert 1988; Ucko et al. 1972; 2000; Barrett 1999; Basso 1984, 1996; Bradley Wheatley 1971; Willey 1956). Like our colleagues 1993). The factorsidentified as shapingcivic plans, in otherdisciplines, archaeologists the world over are specifically,are similarly complex, and likewise fre- paying increasedattention to symbol and meaning quently highlight ideationalsources (e.g., Benson in the landscapeand the built environment,to the 1980; Carlet al. 2000; Steinhardt1986). range of meanings inscribed on architectureand Forthe ancientMaya, as for manyother peoples, space,and to the meansavailable for inferringthose it is increasinglyclear that maps of civic centers meanings(e.g., Ashmore2000; Ashmore and Knapp evince considerable planning and meaningful 1999;Bender 1993,1998; Bradley1993,2000; Fritz arrangementin the placementof buildings,monu- 1978,1986; Houston 1998;Kowalski 1999; Lekson ments, and open spaces. Because the arrangement 1999; Townsend 1992). Such meanings are fre- we perceive was often the result of centuries of quently identified as cosmological or political or growthand changing spatial design, structurein the both, as inferredfrom local analogy or from more cumulativewhole is less immediatelyclear than it general,cross-cultural, and theoretical treatises (e.g., appearsin the orderlygrid of Teotihuacan,whose Wendy Ashmore * Departmentof Anthropology,University of California,Riverside, CA 92521-0418 Jeremy A. Sabloff * Universityof PennsylvaniaMuseum, 33rd & Spruce Streets, Philadelphia,PA 19104-6324 LatinAmerican Antiquity, 13(2), 2002, pp. 201-215 CopyrightC)2002 by the Society for AmericanArchaeology 201 This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 11:38:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 202 LATINAMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 13, No. 2, 2002] masterplan was laid down at the outset in the city's history.Even for Teotihuacan,however, the sources of the initiallydiscernible order and its meaningare proving ever more complex as investigationpro- ceeds (e.g., Cowgill 2000; Sugiyama 1993). In this paper,we describetwo such sources for Maya spa- tial patterning. Ourmost fundamentalguiding assumption is that the position and arrangementof civic construction was anythingbut random.From that base, we assert thatthe spatialexpressions of Mayacosmology and of Maya politics constituted the most prominent ideationalfoundations for planning,and acknowl- edge thatmany factors have affectedthe claritywith whichsuch foundations may be discernedtoday from archaeologicalsite plans. Prominentamong these factorsare the length and turbulenceof local politi- cal histories,which exemplify the critical roles of his- toryand social memory in shapingthe archaeological recordwe observe.To illustratethese points,we dis- cuss evidence from Copan, Xunantunich, Sayil, Seibal, and Tikal (Figure 1).l Figure 1. Map of Maya area. Redrawn, after Sabloff and Two furtherpoints are crucialin consideringour Tourtellot 1991. assertions.First, our intent is programmaticand our conclusionsprovisional. That is, ourargument is less of successive constructions.Vogrin (1989) makes aboutthe detailsof site-specificinferences and more somewhatsimilar arguments for othersites, includ- abouturging increased field inquiryinto ideational ing Copanand Quirigua. modelsfor ancienturban planning. Second, we read- Hereour focus is thelayout of aggregatesof build- ily acknowledge that ideational factors do not ings, civic precincts, and indeed, whole sites. We account for all patterningevident in Maya civic identify two potent sources of spatialpatterning at plans. Again, our contentionis that more research these scales: Maya concepts of directionality,and is needed to establishthe mix of ideational,social, politicalaffiliation through emulation of civic archi- environmental,economic, engineering, historical, tectureat more reveredor powerfulplaces. and other sources in observed architecturalforms Studiesof directionalposition and orientation rec- and arrangements. ognize the pervasiveand enduringMaya organiza- tion of space accordingto cardinaldirections, often Sources of Ancient Maya Civic Spatial Order includinga centerpoint, and sometimesusing inter- Ancientcognition figures prominently in manyinter- cardinalpositions as well (e.g., Hanks 1991; Vogt pretationsof ancientMaya architecture. Orientation 1969). ClemencyCoggins (1980) detailsthe politi- of individualbuildings is often linked to astronom- cal significanceof four-partdesigns in Mesoamer- ical phenomena,for example,and these may be tied, ica, and cites twin-pyramid groups at Tikal as in turn, to hierophaniesor other manipulationsof quintessential architecturalexemplars (compare light,shadow, and monumentality, to constitutepolit- Guillemin1968 on twin-pyramidgroups)(Figure 2). ical celebrationsof figuressuch as BirdJaguar III of These latterarchitectural assemblages are partic- Yaxchilan,or Pacal the Greatof Palenque(Schele ularly importanthere because of Coggins's com- 1977; Tate 1985; compare Brady and Ashmore pellingargument that they map horizontally the daily 1999).Taking adifferentanalyticalperspective, Peter verticalpath of the sun.That is, whereasthe east and Harrison(1994) has arguedthat, at Palenqueand in west pyramidsof these groupsindicate the rise and the CentralAcropolis of Tikal,particular geometric setting points of the sun, the northand south posi- relationshipsaccount for theposition and orientation tions mark"momentsbetween" sunrise and sunset This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Fri, 30 Jan 2015 11:38:14 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions - REPORTS 203