stanton brown paglia ro 1998
TRANSCRIPT
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 1/58
1
GARBAGE OF THE GODS? SQUATTERS, REFUSE DISPOSAL, AND
TERMINATION RITUALS AMONG THE ANCIENT MAYA
Travis W. Stanton, M. Kathryn Brown, and Jonathan B. Pagliaro
DO NOT CITE IN ANY CONTEXT WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE
AUTHORS
Travis W. Stanton, Departamento de Antropología, Universidad de las Américas, Puebla,Sta. Catarina Mártir, S/N, Cholula, Puebla, C.P. 72820, México
M. Kathryn Brown, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Texas,Arlington, 601 South Nedderman Drive, Room 430, Arlington, TX 76019
([email protected])Jonathan B. Pagliaro, Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University,Dallas, TX 75275 ([email protected])
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 2/58
2
Abstract:
Differentiating the material patterning between domestic refuse from squatters and
ceremonial trash generated from termination rituals has been difficult for Maya
archaeologists. Rich floor assemblages, especially from elite contexts, have been
interpreted as ‘decadent’ squatter refuse by some researchers and the remains of
abandonment rituals by others. The identification and separation of these classes of
behavior are essential for interpretations of floor assemblages. In this paper, we examine
data from numerous contexts, in order to contextualize the debate over the interpretation
of these two models. Ethnoarchaeological, ethnohistoric, and archaeological data
indicate that close scrutiny of the context and material composition of such deposits are
needed to distinguish these very different classes of behavior.
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 3/58
3
Resumen:
El patrón material entre el desecho doméstico y los restos de los rituales de destrucción
calculados, o depósitos de rituales de terminación, ha sido difícil de diferenciar para los
arqueólogos en el área maya. Los conjuntos de artefactos de piso, especialmente de
contextos de la élite, son interpretados como desecho de ocupación por algunos
investigadores y como restos de rituales de abandono violento por otros. La identificación
y separación de estas clases de comportamiento son esenciales para la interpretación de
los conjuntos de pisos. En este trabajo, examinamos información de varios contextos para
obtener una lista de características preliminares diseñada para distinguir depósitos rituales
de desecho doméstico. Información etnoarqueológica, etnohistórica y arqueológica de
tales depósitos indica que un buen análisis del contexto y de la composición de los
materiales de los depósitos puede ayudar a distinguir diferentes clases de
comportamiento.
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 4/58
4
“A closely related process is ritual abandonment of structures.
Ethnographic accounts indicate the houses in some societies are
abandoned with considerable de facto refuse, sometimes after burning,
upon the death of an adult occupant (e.g., Deal 1985:269). Although such
practices are seemingly common, archaeologists seldom consider this
possibility.” (Schiffer 1987:92)
“Many archaeologists would be surprised, as we were, to find the almost
absence of ceramic or other artifacts in the excavation of a normally kept
up house of today.” (Moore 1965:32, in reference to the excavation of an
historic house at Dzibilchaltún, Yucatán)
Differentiating the material patterning between domestic refuse generated by
squatters and ceremonial trash (see Walker 1995) generated from termination rituals has
been difficult for Maya archaeologists. Particular classes of midden-like deposits found
in abandoned elite-civic architectural contexts are currently interpreted as domestic refuse
by some scholars while interpreted as termination ritual deposits by others. Considering
that ancient refuse has been studied all over the world and that the processes of
deposition (Binford 1978, 1983; Schiffer 1972, 1976, 1987) and modern Maya refuse
disposal (Clark 1991; Deal 1985, 1998; Deal and Hagstrum 1995; Hayden 1979; Hayden
and Cannon 1983; Smyth 1991) have been addressed in the anthropological literature,
such disparate interpretations of midden-like deposits on the floors of abandoned elite-
civic structures are problematic. Yet it is the ambiguous nature of some of these contexts
which has raised the current debate concerning domestic middens and ritual deposits. On
a superficial level they tend to look similar. Closer examination of many deposits
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 5/58
5
identified as squatter refuse, however, reveals that they can yield distinct patterning not
expected for domestic refuse disposal. Unfortunately, the patterning of these problematic
deposits remains confusing to archaeologists focused on the analysis of elite floor
assemblages despite some attempts to classify them as the remains of ritual activity.
The current debate hinges on numerous midden-like deposits found primarily in
elite-civic architectural contexts (e.g., on palace or temple floors) throughout the Maya
lowlands and beyond. Although such deposits are often ascribed to ‘squatter’ activity,
ethnoarchaeological models of refuse disposal do not predict that domestic middens
should be encountered in these contexts (e.g., functioning ex-elite houses in pre-
abandonment stages [as implied by Thompson 1954] or abandoned temple
superstructures located above settlement zones). The squatter model was advanced by
Thompson (1954) over 50 years ago without much supporting evidence. Others have
adopted the model without critical reflection on its theoretical grounding (e.g., Pendergast
1979). Unfortunately, the squatter model does not employ ideas concerning
abandonment processes and implicitly assumes all refuse to be generated from relatively
similar processes. For Thompson, the fact that elite floor deposits superficially resemble
refuse in final depositional contexts proves that squatters were living decadently in elite
temples and palaces, throwing large amounts of trash irreverently on floors near or at the
location where the squatters were living. Work on termination rituals has been the first
attempt to really challenge this assumption. We believe, however, that before we begin
to call such floor deposit the remains of termination rituals or squatter activity, we should
take a step back and consider formation processes and alternative models in more detail.
We argue that these two general models (squatters and ritual abandonment) could
be further investigated. First, the squatter model could be further developed to explain
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 6/58
6
what kind of formation processes (e.g., dumping in already abandoned structures or
gradual abandonment processes) could have resulted in such deposits. Supporting the
squatter model with more detailed evidence will move us away from the type of
speculation that plagued Thompson’s work. Moreover, the idea of squatters could be
flushed out more. This is a term whose definition is often assumed, but rarely articulated.
Second, models focused on abandonment or post-abandonment ritual behaviors need to
be further explored and developed with more quantitative studies. One of these models
relies on the idea that some structures were subjected to termination rituals during
extensive renovations or at abandonment. Progress towards the quantification of
termination deposits is being made, but much work remains. Other related models could
include a host of post-abandonment rituals that have yet to be explored.
This article is an attempt to contextualize the squatter/termination ritual debate
and identify the primary questions to be explored by future investigations. Despite recent
work on termination rituals, the interpretational problems associated with both sides of
the debate have been rarely articulated. Using numerous examples from the literature to
establish material patterning, we explore the contexts and depositional processes that
affected numerous floor deposits throughout the Maya lowlands. We begin by
considering how floor deposits form in pre-abandonment, abandonment, and post-
abandonment contexts, in order to establish a range of models for domestic refuse
deposition. Turning to a consideration of termination rituals, we discuss several
problematic deposits. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of the major questions
which continue to face archaeologists working with such deposits.
WHERE THE GARBAGE GOES IN PRE-ABANDONMENT CONTEXTS
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 7/58
7
To begin a discussion contrasting ancient Maya domestic and ceremonial trash,
we should start with what we know about ancient Maya refuse disposal in pre-
abandonment contexts (cf., Deal 1998:117-126) from a non-archaeological perspective.
What does refuse disposal look like in a normally functioning Maya household?
Ethnohistories and ethnoarchaeological studies are logical places to search for
comparisons with archaeological refuse. Ethnohistoric evidence, however, is very scanty.
Bishop Diego de Landa described purification rituals that Contact period Maya undertook
in maintaining their houses and temples (Tozzer 1941:151-152). Landa stated that
domestic structures were kept clean by regular sweeping and annual renovations in which
some of the household material culture was replaced. The resulting refuse was disposed
in dumps located outside of towns. Although Landa’s descriptions suggest that the Maya
kept their houses clean, his focus was on annual rather than daily cleaning activities.
Further, Landa examined behavior in households where there is no indication that
abandonment processes were operating. Descriptions of abandoned houses are virtually
nonexistent in the ethnohistoric literature. It is unknown whether abandoned structures
were regularly used for refuse disposal during the early Colonial period. Landa only
mentions refuse dumps that were located away from communities leaving the answer to
this question ambiguous.
Ethnoarchaeological investigations throughout Mesoamerica have been able to fill
some of the gaps present in the ethnohistoric literature. The most informative of these
studies have come from research in the Maya highlands (Deal 1985, 1998; Hayden 1979;
Hayden and Cannon 1983, 1984a, 1984b). In a study of Tzeltal and Chuj informant
responses, Hayden and Cannon (1984b; see also Deal 1998:117) found that several
principles governed discard behavior: 1.) economy of effort; 2.) potential value of refuse;
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 8/58
8
and 3.) potential hindrance by refuse. When combined with specific situations and types
of refuse Hayden and Cannon argued that these principles produced particular disposal
behaviors. Subsequent ethnoarchaeological research supports the notion that these
principles operate in a wide number of modern societies (Kamp 1991; Sutro 1991;
Wilson et al. 1991).
Operating within these principles several stereotypical discard behaviors were
generated by Deal (1985, 1998) in a study of 160 modern Tzeltal Maya households in
highland Chiapas. In relation to refuse accumulation within structure boundaries three of
these behaviors are relevant: provisional discard, maintenance disposal, and dumping
disposal. Provisional discard refers to the disposal of items that have become unusable
for their original use. Such items, however, may still have value; potential to be repaired
or used for some other function. Objects that are provisionally discarded enter a sort of
refuse limbo. They are placed in areas where they can be easily retrieved, but do not
interfere with daily activities. Some of these items are never retrieved and remain in
these contexts after abandonment. Maintenance disposal consists of the effects of
cleaning where refuse accumulates. In addition to high traffic areas such as patios where
refuse is swept or picked up and tossed or carried away, maintenance disposal focuses on
hard to sweep areas, or artifact traps (e.g., under beds). Dumping disposal is the discard
of refuse in dump sites within a household compound (outside of functioning
architectural contexts) or at neighborhood refuse dumps. While Deal (1985, 1998) does
not identify the dumping of refuse in abandoned structures, such behavior is certainly
possible. In Deal’s pre-abandonment model, refuse may accumulate around patio edges
and in out of the way areas, but floors and patio areas are kept relatively clean. Thus,
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 9/58
9
refuse does not accumulate in appreciable amounts in these contexts and what refuse does
accumulate tends to be small artifacts that are trapped in hard to clean areas.
Deal’s (1985, 1998) study finds parallels in other ethnoarchaeological studies.
For example, Hayden (1979; see also Deal 1984, 1998; Hayden and Cannon 1983) found
that functioning Maya houses were kept relatively devoid of refuse. He states that “all
structures were kept extremely clean. The only refuse in the kitchen was a few pieces of
broken comal used as a windbreak for the fire.” (Hayden 1979:200) Refuse was not kept
in functioning houses, nor was it observed that abandoned structures were used as refuse
dumps. It was often deposited in community dumps (Hayden and Cannon 1983) away
from structures or in household refuse areas between 2 and 23 meters from occupied
structures (Hayden 1979:200, 216). While the placement of refuse within this zone may
be variable and dependent upon the domestic lot size and composition (see Arnold 1991;
Santley 1992), this pattern has been confirmed by further ethnoarchaeological and
archaeological research (Hutson and Stanton 2006, in press; Joyce and Johannessen 1993;
Robin 2002).
Some of the best archaeological data regarding this occupational stage of refuse
disposal in the Maya area come from the site of Cerén, El Salvador, a site that was
rapidly abandoned and buried due to volcanic activity (see McKee 1999; McKee and
Sheets 2003; Sheets 1992, 1998, 2000, 2002; Sheets et al. 1990). Data from this site
suggest that relatively little refuse was in association with housefloors at the time of
abandonment (see Beaudry-Corbett et al. 2002; McKee 2002). These data also suggest,
however, that some provisional discard stored in rafters has the potential for being
mistaken for other types of deposits such as the remains of termination rituals.
Provisional discard might leave patterns of isolated sherd scatters on the floors of
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 10/58
10
structures (partial vessels fallen from decayed rafters or stored under perishable
furniture). Additionally, provisional discard might be found in niches such as the whole
vessel found in a niche of Str. M8-8 of Aguateca (Inomata 2003:51). Non-curated
artifacts left as de facto refuse might also present problems of interpretation as well. Yet
as we will explain in more detail below, many of the deposits in question have far more
material than we might expect for provisional discard or de facto refuse explanations.
Further, a variety of materials (marl and fragmented bone) we might not expect to be
provisionally discarded are often present in these deposits suggesting some other type of
activity.
Recent archaeological work at Chunchucmil, Yucatán also supports the
ethnoarchaeological model described above (Hutson and Stanton 2006, in press). The
large Early Classic occupation of this site is ideal for exploring activity areas and refuse
disposal, because many of the residential groups are bounded by stone walls, or
albarradas, that often form walkways (Magnoni 1995). Thus, spatial relationships
among open lots, structures, and walkways are well preserved. Two small adjacent patio
groups were intensively investigated between 1999 and 2001 with the intent to test Deal’s
(1985, 1998) ethnohistoric model of refuse disposal. We discuss the data from the A’ak
Group here.
The A’ak Group is a small patio group with four structures centered around a
patio and one ancillary structure to the north (figure 1).1
Its albarrada walls enclose an
area of 3,910 m2. A two by two meter grid was placed across the entire houselot and
intensive surface collections were conducted in each grid square. Outside the area of the
patio, 50 by 50 cm units were placed on every corner of a five by five meter grid.
Although chemical, phytolith, microartifact, and macrobotanical samples were collected
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 11/58
11
from each unit, we discuss the macroartifacts collected in the ¼ inch screens here. Figure
1 illustrates the densities of ceramic artifacts across the solar area of the group. It is clear
that artifact patterning conforms to the Deal’s ethnoarchaeological model. Sherds were
encountered in greater quantities near the edges of patios or in ‘out of the way’ areas
between structures. Additionally, middens were encountered near the ancillary structure
and between Str. 22 and Str. 23. This midden was exposed with a more extensive
excavation. In contrast, the complete horizontal excavations of Str. 23 and Str. 24 did not
yield high artifact densities (Hutson 2000, 2004). Artifact densities in and around Str. 22
were also generally low, though fragments of provisionally discarded vessels were found
around the structure’s edges (Hutson et al. 2004). In addition to supporting the
ethnoarchaeological model of refuse disposal in pre-abandonment households, the
Chunchucmil data suggest that in some cases abandonment processes do not result in
deposition on housefloors, a conclusion supported by numerous archaeological examples
of domestic floors that are relatively devoid of refuse (e.g., Fitting 1979:367; Hammond
and Gerhardt 1990:476; Matthews 1983:159; Thomas 1981; Webster and Gonlin
1988:187).
While these data may be probabilistic in the sense that future archaeological
investigations may reveal examples that do not conform to the ethnoarchaeological
model, they suggest that we should look beyond pre-abandonment refuse disposal to
explain the extensive deposits found on many civic-elite floors in the Maya area. Neither
the ethnoarchaeological nor the archaeological studies presented above indicate that
people under normal circumstances live in the ‘decadent’ squalor implied by the squatter
model. Since no adequate reason is given as to why squatters, if indeed squatters were
responsible for the deposits in question, would live in filth,2 we must look to alternative
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 12/58
12
models of squatter refuse deposition such as abandonment processes and dumping
disposal.
THE IMPACT OF ABANDONMENT PROCESSES ON FLOOR ASSEMBLAGES
While the ethnoarchaeological studies suggest that thick or extensive midden-like
deposits resembling the remains of the proposed termination rituals do not accumulate in
pre-abandonment households, the questions of how abandonment processes may impact
archaeological floor assemblages or whether refuse dumping occurs in abandoned houses
are not fully addressed in the ethnoarchaeological literature on the Maya. Archaeological
and ethnoarchaeological studies of abandonment (see Cameron 1991; Cameron and
Tomka 1993; Inomata and Webb 2003; Stevenson 1982) indicate that the processes of
abandonment can shape the nature and composition of archaeological floor deposits. A
consideration of this literature can help to elucidate the patterning found in floor contexts.
Several ethnoarchaeological and archaeological studies have demonstrated that
when the abandonment of a settlement or structure is anticipated, there is a higher
likelihood that maintenance processes will be performed with less regularity (Deal
1998:126-127; Plunket and Uruñela 2003; Schiffer 1987:97-98; Stevenson 1982). Thus,
the process of anticipated abandonment results in the accumulation of refuse in areas that
would normally be kept clean in pre-abandonment contexts. If there is anticipated return,
objects may be cached. For example, Plunket and Uruñela (2003:16) found that prior to
the first century A.D. eruption of Popocatepetl many of the houses at Tetimpa, Puebla
had been cleaned and the material culture (e.g., ceramic vessels and metates) placed in
storage positions (e.g., corners of rooms). Since the volcanic activity prevented these
objects from ever being used again, they entered the material record as de facto refuse
(cf., Schiffer 1987:89).
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 13/58
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 14/58
14
Post-abandonment dumping behavior is another possibility to explain the final
deposits found on many elite-civic floors in the Maya area. Although the manner in
which Thompson (1954) and others (e.g., Pendergast 1979, 1982, 1990) phrase their
explanations of these deposits is to suggest that in some cases Terminal Classic
‘squatters’ were dumping refuse in abandoned rooms, indicating a breakdown of Classic
period norms, the question that arises from this hypothesis is: what would post-
abandonment dumping look like?
Unfortunately, very little work has been done on post-abandonment dumping.
While most of the ethnoarchaeological research done on refuse disposal covers the idea
of dumping refuse in discreet areas away from functioning households, not very much of
this literature focuses on the practice of dumping inside abandoned structures. While
many archaeologists who have lived in traditional communities know that this practice
exists in modern contexts (e.g., Hutson and Magnoni 2002; Rothschild et al. 1993:125),
there are very few data concerning its nature.
Archaeologically, clear examples of post-abandonment dumping disposal are hard
to find due to their confusion with termination deposits. At Cerén, Beaudry-Corbett et al.
(2002:49) identify Str. 5 as standing, but having fallen into disuse prior to the Loma
Caldera eruption. Several “small sherds and a handful of broken and worn obsidian
blades found scattered on and around the structure platform” (Beaudry-Corbett et al.
2002:49) indicate that small amounts of refuse were being disposed at this location. It
was not, however, the kind of refuse dump that might be interpreted as termination
deposits discussed in detail later in this paper. We cite this example from Cerén, because
there has been very little work published to distinguish dumping behavior from
termination rituals in the archaeological literature. Although the Cerén example does not
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 15/58
15
help us make this distinction very well, it is one of the few examples we can be confident
of calling refuse disposal in an abandoned structure. In fact, although domestic middens
in general have been unquestionably identified by researchers working in the Maya area,
descriptions of such deposits are neither common nor extensive. For instance, Haviland
(1985:100) generally defined archaeological refuse as consisting of sherds and other
artifacts, as well as animal bones, charcoal, and ashes, while Schortman (1993:64)
identified midden as cultural material deposited as the result of purposeful refuse
disposal. These types of definitions are common, but are unproductive for our attempt at
distinguishing middens from termination deposits. It is as if Maya archaeologists have a
tendency to treat domestic middens as an obvious category that requires little or no
description, leading to the masking of potential variation that could be essential for an
informed understanding of these types of contexts.
Beyond the problem of lacking comparative archaeological data, several problems
arise with the consideration of dumping behavior. First, we might imagine dumping
behavior to be extremely variable in regards to formation (e.g., one event vs. several),
material consistency (what is being dumped), and further methods of treatment (burning
or covering with soil). We would surmise that understanding dumping deposits will
require some intensive study, in order to make clear comparisons with termination
deposits. A second problem does not simply relate to the lack of ethnoarchaeological
work on dumping behavior, but to the ethnoarchaeological study of refuse disposal in
general. The ethnoarchaeological contexts we have are very different from the
archaeological contexts of the deposits in question. Even if further studies are conducted
on the ethnoarchaeology of dumping disposal in abandoned structures, we must take care
in choosing the context in which this research is conducted. To date, the
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 16/58
16
ethnoarchaeology of refuse disposal has focused on domestic refuse in household
contexts. The archaeological deposits in question generally come from abandoned (e.g.,
termination rituals or squatter activity)3 or re-used (squatter activity or post-abandonment
ritual behavior) elite-civic structures such as temple and palaces. We have no
ethnoarchaeological data on similar ethnoarchaeological contexts in abandoned churches
or municipal palaces for example. While the proponents of the squatter model might
counter that the ancient temples and palaces in question had been converted into domestic
space by the proposed squatters, this problem should be kept in mind since many ancient
elite-civic structures were probably not viewed as ordinary architecture. Many of these
structures had been highly charged sacred spaces, at most, only several decades prior to
the placement of the deposits in question. By explaining away what we know about
Maya concepts of place, cosmology, and consecration/dedication-
termination/undedication by interpreting the supposed squatters as profane peoples does
little more than portray the Terminal Classic Maya as a people fallen from grace,
perpetuating the old idea of a decadent Postclassic Maya culture.
The ambiguous concept of ‘squatters’ also leaves our understanding of how such
people would behave rather muddled. Not only do we not have ethnoarchaeological data
concerning ‘squatter’ refuse disposal patterns, we are not sure exactly who these squatters
were. The term squatter implies someone who re-uses architecture in a domestic fashion
after an abandonment episode without the express consent of the previous owners-users.
Since re-use is involved, the architecture is no longer technically abandoned. The term
also seems to imply a lack of substantial architectural rebuilding or modification. Yet
who are the hypothetical people who during the Terminal Classic are proposed to have
re-used many of the structures that have the problematical deposits discussed here? Were
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 17/58
17
they invaders, commoners who took over sacred space after the collapse of kingship, or
remnants of elite families? Each of these cases might present different residential and
disposal patterns. Yet except for the proposed fine orange invasion (e.g., Sabloff and
Willey 1967) we see few attempts to try and distinguish different types of ‘squatters.’
We certainly agree that there are data that suggest squatters may have existed in certain
contexts (e.g., Child and Golden, in press). Yet they remain very ill-defined in the
literature. We feel that the term is useful, but that it needs greater clarification using
archaeological and ethnographic data. Now turning to the following section we discuss
the concept of termination rituals as a alternative explanation to the squatter model.
TERMINATION DEPOSITS AS A TYPE OF ABANDONMENT PROCESS
Since the 1980s termination rituals have been seriously considered as alternative
explanations to the extensive and often complex deposits found on many elite-civic Maya
floors (see Ambrosino et al. 2003; Ardren 1999; Brown and Garber 2003; Farr 2004;
Freidel et al. 1998, 2003; Inomata 2003; Mock 1994, 1998; Pagliaro et al. 2003; Stanton
and Brown 2003:7-10; Suhler 1996; Suhler and Freidel 2000, 2003; Walker 1998).
Sharing some of the same attributes as domestic midden deposits, the material correlates
of termination rituals can be quite misleading. Although termination deposits may be
found in other contexts (e.g., in transposed midden deposits where the remains of these
rituals were swept), they are often found on the floors of abandoned elite structures.
Robert Wauchope (1948:25) and William Coe (1959:94-95) were the first Maya
archaeologists to recognize the ritual nature of these deposits (see also Stanton and
Brown 2003; Suhler and Freidel 2000). Coe coined the phrase ‘terminal offering’ in
reference to a deposit of partial smashed censers on Str. K-5-2nd
at Piedras Negras,
Guatemala during the University of Pennsylvania excavations. Satterthwaite (1958:67-
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 18/58
18
70) also identified patterns of intentional building collapse and monument destruction
with ‘hostile’ intent at Piedras Negras, although this activity may not have been
temporally related to the Str. K-5-2nd
deposit. Even with the identification of this type of
behavior with ritual and possibly hostile activity, subsequent research by the University
of Pennsylvania at Tikal rejected this possibility (Shook 1958) in spite of similar
patterning (Coe 1990; Coe and Browman 1958:48). Many of these scholars, along with
Thompson (1954), were convinced that the ‘debris’ associated with many of these
deposits were the refuse of squatters living ‘decadently’ in the temples. This model was
perpetuated for decades and continues to influence the interpretations of elite-civic floor
deposits in the Maya area (see Brown [1977:263] for an exception). Interestingly,
though, archaeologists working at Tikal were also proponents of the term ‘problematic
deposit.’ This term is used to identify deposits which are unexpected given their contexts
(such as middens on elite structure floors). As we shall discuss in more detail below, this
term may provide a useful alternative to mono-interpretational models such as squatters
or termination deposits when the data appear too ambiguous to distinguish what type of
behavior caused deposition.
Regardless of the utility of the term ‘problematic deposit,’ recent research
indicates that the act of terminating structures should be reconsidered as an alternative
explanation to the squatter model or the general explanation of these types of deposits as
domestic middens. This work suggests that termination rituals were performed for a
variety of different reasons including the initiation of new construction episodes, warfare,
and structure abandonment. Detailed analyses of deposits associated with the destruction
and abandonment of buildings have been conducted at a number of Maya sites (see
Ambrosino et al. 2003; Brown and Garber 2003; Freidel et al. 1998, 2003; Inomata 2003;
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 19/58
19
Mock 1994, 1998; Pagliaro et al. 2003; Suhler 1996; Suhler and Freidel 2000, 2003;
Walker 1998). Evidence suggests that much of this destruction can be considered the
remains of complex rituals of structure termination. Several classes of destructive
deposits have already been identified and more will likely be teased out of complex
stratigraphic deposits in the future. Although each class of deposit has been associated
with different behaviors, all termination deposits appear to have one thing in common;
the intent to ritually ‘kill’ an object, structure, person, or place. This behavior results in
what Walker (1995) terms kratophanous material culture; material culture purposefully
removed from dynamic cultural contexts, in order to contest their continued use.
To briefly summarize the ideas behind termination rituals, research suggests that
the ancient Maya believed that their world was animate. Power derived from sacred
landscapes, material objects, or deceased ancestors could be manipulated by social
agents. Ritual behavior focused on imbuing or charging these sources of power with life,
termed consecration rituals, is known from ethnographic sources (see McGee 1998;
Stross 1998: Vogt 1998). House animating rituals involving the sacrifice and
consumption of chickens with the burial of the chicken heads facing the cardinal
directions is a well-known ethnographic example of structure animation (Vogt 1998).
The house must be fed during the ritual, because it is in the process of becoming alive.
Caching behavior is an often cited example of the remains of consecration rituals from
the archaeological record (see Pendergast 1998). Archaeologists generally argue that
much of the caching behavior we see in archaeological contexts reflects behavior similar
to the ethnographic animating rituals just mentioned. Yet there appear not only to have
been rituals of symbolic charging and rejuvenation in the past, but rituals of decharging
and destruction as well. We call these termination rituals. In the ethnographic record,
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 20/58
20
termination rituals are generally associated with death (Stross 1998:37; Vogt 1998:27-
29). Stross (1998:37), however, notes that the ritual “abandonment of houses in
Mesoamerica involves pulling down one or more corner posts, and often the roof, usually
accompanied by copal incense purification, prayers, and other offerings.” This
architectural destruction in the ethnographic record resonates with the ideas of
architectural destruction proposed by those forwarding the termination model.
In many archaeological contexts, especially from abandonment or post-
abandonment elite-civic architecture, we find patterns that suggest the deliberate
destruction of buildings, as well as the breaking and deposition of material culture.
Although these deposits can in some ways mimic patterns of domestic refuse disposal, we
argue that their contexts often differentiate them from what we would expect from
domestic refuse disposal. They more resemble the ritual acts of destruction that occur
during the ethnographic structure abandonment described by Stross (1998:37). Our prior
research goals regarding termination deposits have primarily focused on deposits related
to violent conflict (Brown and Garber 2003; Pagliaro et al. 2003; Stanton and Brown
2003; Stanton and Gallareta Negrón 2001). These deposits are termed desecratory
termination ritual deposits. Other types of termination deposits have been identified,
however, highlighting the poorly understood variability of ‘killing’ a structure. Other
termination deposits include those from reverential ritual behavior. These deposits have
been described extensively by researchers working at Cerros (Freidel 1986; Garber 1981;
Walker 1998) and in the Belize River Valley (Pagliaro et al. 1998, 2003).
Desecratory termination deposits were formed by the violent destruction of
artifacts and architecture after some type of conflict. Such conflict could be conquest
warfare or internal factional competition. Regardless of the type of conflict, selected
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 21/58
21
structures were sometimes ritually ‘killed,’ in order to symbolically destroy (or kill) the
symbols of the ‘enemy.’ Given pur prior research goals we will highlight this type of
termination deposit to demonstrate some of the reasons why the ancient Maya ritually
terminated structures. Some of the archaeological examples we give in the following
section may be associated with warfare. Yet since many of these deposits are
problematical, they may represent a wide variety of different behaviors. Our point in the
following sections is to distinguish these problematic deposits from what we would
expect from domestic refuse to look like.
DESCRATORY TERMINATION RITUAL DEPOSITS
Desecratory termination rituals could be interpreted as relating to the world-wide
practice of sacking. Sacking is well-known from many parts of the world. Whether the
people instigating the sacking were external like the Viking raiders of English coast or
internal like the French revolutionaries, buildings were often burned or dismantled,
valuables were looted, people were killed, monuments were defaced, and so forth.
Variable as the practice of sacking may be, it often has these and other manifestations.
The situation here, however, is more complex as the Maya highly ritualized this behavior.
The sacking itself becomes part of a destruction ritual geared to desecrate and remove
sacred power from objects, monuments, and important buildings within a community.
This ritualized behavior has patterns recognizable in the archaeological record.
Therefore, while Chase and Chase (2003) argue that extensive floor deposits found at
sites such as Caracol are the result of sacking, we suggest that the sacking of elite
structures by the ancient Maya followed a set of highly ritualized proscribed rules beyond
just random destruction and therefore should be classified as a type of special ritual.
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 22/58
22
Most, if not all, scholars of the Maya would agree that this was a highly ritualized
society. Likewise, few, if any, Maya archaeologists would dispute the presence of
dedicatory offerings in architecture. As argued above, we believe that such offerings,
when located in elite-civic contexts, represent the remains of ancient acts to create and
harness supernatural power by elite attempting to create and maintain positions of power.
For instance, Brown (2003) has documented that the introduction of subfloor caches or
consecration offerings in public architecture during the Preclassic corresponded directly
with the introduction of restricted monumental architecture such as the pyramidal form,
associated with the emergence of elites. These data suggest that elites were purposefully
manipulating rituals associated with the construction of public architecture to legitimize
their elevated position in the community.
We argue that Classic Maya rulers continued to legitimize their status, in part, by
co-opting civic space from the community and commissioning the construction of
monumental architecture that they symbolically imbued with supernatural power.
Legitimization of power was often accomplished by linking one’s self to the ancestors
buried within housemounds and temple complexes which may have been considered
w’itz or sacred mountains (Schele and Freidel 1990; Stuart 1997). Structures such as
Pakal’s funerary monument, the Temple of the Inscriptions at Palenque, Chiapas, seem to
have functioned as portals to the otherworld where the deified ancestors resided (Freidel
et al. 1993; Schele 1986). Some buildings were even marked with breath imagery
indicating that they were symbolically alive (see Houston and Taube 2000; Taube 2001).
We argue that the placement of ancestors, as well as dedication caches were acts of
laying claim to power by various factions. Just as the burial of an important ancestor in
the floor of a house may have functioned for a corporate group to lay claim to the
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 23/58
23
household and possibly agricultural rights within the community (see McAnany 1995),
the placement of a ruler within civic architecture may have been a particular faction’s
claim to rulership or even a community’s claim to a larger socially prescribed territory.
More succinctly, some architecture was imbued with cosmological power symbolizing
and legitimizing claims in the material world.
These same cosmological forces animating structures must have been considered
by opposing groups when conflict occurred. For the Maya to go to great lengths to
cosmologically charge their structures with the power of their deities and ancestors, they
must have given this power great respect. Places and objects could be dangerous,
because they were vessels of supernatural power. To successfully defeat a center or
ruling line and gain control of a center, this power may have had to be defused and
replaced with one that would serve the needs to the usurping group.4 In other words,
Maya sacking was not just random and wanton destruction. Rather, it was carefully
executed so that the loser’s ties to ancestral power and legitimization was dismantled by
killing their living temples and houses. In other words, desecratory termination rituals
were acts of undedication or in Hubert’s (1994:13) terms, deconsecration. Rededication
through renewed construction could then occur if the victors chose to lay claim to the
defeated center and re-establish dynastic rule or if a local faction gained ascendance.
Although the evidence for the desecration of architecture may be variable
throughout the Maya region, many of the patterns appear to be similar. These rituals
involved extensive damage to structures and the deposition of several artifact types on
floors and atop collapse. Floors were often cut open, possibly in attempts to locate and
defile ancestors and dedicatory caches buried beneath them. Burials are sometimes found
looted and burned with the remaining contents strewn about crypts, tombs, or floors. In
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 24/58
24
short, structures were sometimes subjected to intensive burning, monuments were
defaced, and several types of deposits, often resembling refuse, were laid down. These
deposits also include ceramic vessels and other objects that were smashed on floors and
can be found scattered throughout structures giving the floor deposits the look of
domestic midden. Reconstructable partial and whole vessels can often be refitted from
relatively discrete areas. Vessel assemblages from such deposits are sometimes
characterized by a high percentage of non-local types such as the slatewares discovered
in destroyed buildings at Río Azul (Adams 1990) and Colha (Mock 1994, 1998). When
these activities occurred at the time of abandonment of the site or structure, they often
remained as final deposits on floors rather than being cleaned up.
In a previous publication (Pagliaro et al. 2003:79-80), two of us proposed a
preliminary trait list for desecratory termination ritual deposits. This list included:
1. intensive burning,
2. intentional structural damage,
3. deposition of white marl (possibly signifying ritual burial [death?] or
purification, depending on the context),
4. breaking and scattering of pottery (scattering rituals being an important part of
elite rituals including blood sacrifice),
5. rapid deposition,
6. dense concentrations of sherds with sharp breaks (due to the erosional
protection of rapid breakage and deposition in a large deposit), and
7. large quantities of elite artifacts (which might better be stated as ritual
artifacts).
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 25/58
25
While we still agree that the traits in this list generally typify deposits we believe to be
the result of termination rituals, it is only a rough qualitative preliminary assessment of
what may generally characterize such deposits. More quantitative studies are currently
being performed at places such as Yaxuná (Ambrosino, in prep), but these data were not
available during the writing of this article. Further, it is important to mention that
termination deposits may contain materials that were not intended to be part of the ritual
(e.g., de facto refuse left on in the structures prior to the beginning of the ritual).
Inomata’s (1997; Inomata and Stiver 1998; Inomata and Triadan 2000) floor assemblages
at Aguateca may reflect a mixing of termination, or ceremonial, and de facto refuse.
In the following section we discuss deposits from several sites across the Maya
lowlands. Comparing these data to the general trait list for termination deposits above, as
well as with the models domestic refuse deposition presented in a previous section we
illustrate that there are some obvious contextual differences. The data demonstrate that
there are many patterns in final abandonment deposits on elite-civic structure floors that
are unexpected given models of domestic refuse disposal. We suggest that some of these
deposits are the result of termination rituals following violent conflict, often at a moment
of structure or site abandonment. We caution, however, that some of the deposits we
present below may be the result of other types of activities. These deposits were selected
not for their relation to possible warfare-related destruction, but because the quality of
research and reporting of these deposits makes them execellent examples to compare
them with the material patterning discussed in the previous sections. Our discussion of
these deposits is cursory and further research is clearly needed to understand the
variability and complexity of such contexts.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXAMPLES OF PROBLEMATIC DEPOSITS
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 26/58
26
We begin our discussion of archaeological examples with a case that has been
previously interpreted within logic of the squatter model. Although we believe these
deposits to be the remains of termination rituals, in all fairness we should introduce them
in terms of being problematic deposits. All of the following deposits we describe come
from elite-civic contexts and are associated with some form of architectural destruction.
In our opinion, the element of destruction associated with these contexts is a key part of
making the interpretation of these deposits problematic.
We begin with the site of Altun Ha, Belize. Several deposits found at this site
were interpreted by Pendergast as the remains of domestic refuse formed after
abandonment by squatters. Excavations revealed ‘midden-like’ deposits on many of the
floors of the A Group (Pendergast 1979, 1982, 1990). Pendergast (1979) identified a
domestic use for the A Group during the period following initial abandonment.5 This
interpretation follows the idea proposed by Thompson (1954) that the collapse of Maya
civilization in the southern lowlands was due, in part, to the moral decay of Maya society.
“Though probably the most sacrosanct part of A-1, the Building was
clearly profaned by domestic use after its abandonment, resembling in this
respect the Building of A-3. In both A-1 and A-3, it appears that one or
more front rooms (in A-1, the two with exterior doorways) were used for
residence, while the remainder served as repositories for garbage.”
(Pendergast 1979:94)
“No clearer indication could be found of the shift in Altun Ha life which
came with the fall of the Classic, as what had been a sacred area devoted
to worship of a deity came to be a smoke-blackened, garbage strewn,
decaying home.” (Pendergast 1979:161)
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 27/58
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 28/58
28
indeed appear to be trash of some sort. A case could be made that the material was
domestic refuse that was transposed from some other context, and in fact, there is some
evidence from other types of contexts that the Maya regarded some trash as symbolically
charged (Hutson and Stanton, in press). The fact that the floor deposits occur in only two
rooms suggests that it is possible that ‘squatters’ may have been living in the other rooms.
What is curious, however, is the eroded nature of the deposit which suggests that it may
have been exposed to the elements for some time rather than protected within the
confines of vaulted architecture. Further, the proposed squatters were placing trash in an
enclosed area that could not air out, just meters from where they may have been living.
We suggest an alternative to this interpretation; that these deposits were refuse brought in
to the structure and employed to end the use of, or perhaps defile, the inner sanctum of
the temple. Similar processes of midden transposal to architectural contexts at the time
of abandonment have been described elsewhere in the Maya lowlands (e.g., Clayton et al.
2005; Driver and McWilliams 1995) and from the American Southwest (e.g.,
Montgomery 1993). While, other explantions are certainly possible, the contexts do not
appear to suggest squatter activity.
A second deposit was encountered in the debris atop Str. A-1. This deposit
consisted of a large number of sherds (1,556) which contained numerous Terminal
Classic and Postclassic basins suggesting a transitional date between the two periods or
perhaps an introduction of Postclassic ceramics from an external source at a time when
Terminal Classic material was falling into disuse. Pendergast (1979) uses these data to
argue that the top of the temple continued to be used as a refuse dump after the building
had collapsed. Additionally, four to five individuals were ‘buried’ in this debris, all of
which were found in fragmentary and ‘scattered’ form. Only one of the burials was
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 29/58
29
found in situ and was located within Room 2. Although fragmentary, this burial was
thought to be an adult male individual. The materials in the collapse debris are perhaps
the most puzzling. If ‘squatters’ continued to live at Altun Ha after the collapse of the
superstructure of A-1, why would they have transported midden up a tall building that
could not have served well as a residence? This behavior certainly goes against the
principle of economy of effort suggesting that motives other than simple refuse disposal
were at work. Further, the presence of fragmented and scattered human bone suggests
that the materials, at least in the debris, may be ceremonial trash rather than domestic
midden.
Complementing the evidence from Altun Ha Str. A-1, data resembling similar
deposits have been reported from from Str. A-11 at Xunantunich, Belize. Str. A-11 is
part of the Plaza A-III complex and is suggested by Yaeger (2005) and MacKie (1985) to
be the residence and court of the Xunanatunich rulers during the Late Classic. MacKie
(1985:31-50) suggests that the ‘ruined’ state of Str. A-11 in conjunction with a lack of
sediment buildup on the floors may indicate that the building was destroyed rapidly by
either an earthquake or human agents. He found it implausible, however, that the 17 or
more whole vessels recovered on the floors of the structure could have been so scattered
across the rooms if the vault stones had caused the vessels to break. After analyzing the
sherd distribution, he stated that “the extensive scattering of sherds of individual vessels
inside the building is very strange.” (MacKie 1985:47) Although MacKie (1985)
suggested a possible earthquake for this destruction, more recent excavations on Str. A-
11 clearly shows intentional dismantling of all the lower rooms of the building. Yaeger
(2005) found evidence that the corbel vaults and wall facings in four lower rooms were
intentionally pulled down. Recent excavations also revealed that several large vessels
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 30/58
30
were broken in the central and eastern rooms and that the sherds were scattered across the
floor, similar to the deposit Mackie had encountered in the upper rooms of the building.
The remains of a young adult individual was encountered in the far eastern lower room of
Str. A-11 and may be the remains of a sacrificial victim. Interestingly, the deposits on
the floors were sealed with white marl and limestone rocks which essentially filled in the
rooms. An unusual offering was placed on top of the marl layer in one of the lower
rooms and consisted of several red-slipped bowls of a type that is rarely found at
Xunantunich (Yaeger 2005). The purposeful architectural destruction, scattering of
broken vessels, and sealing of the rooms with white marl in conjunction with the
presence of ‘foreign’ ceramic vessels may suggest some form of violent action against
the royal residence and court of Xunantinich (Jason Yaeger, personal communication
2005). This may be they same type of behavior observed for Str. A-1 at Altun Ha.
Returning to Altun Ha, located immediately to the south of Str. A-1 Pendergast
(1979:127) found an “extensive mass of grey, ashy soil” containing charcoal on the east
side of Str. A-8. This deposit was found to be 1.8 m thick where it abutted the platform
face of the structure. Included within the deposit was a large amount of faunal material
(2,982 specimens), 405 small artifacts, 84,334 sherds (lots of polychromes; common
forms were bowls, cylindrical vases, and dish-plates suggesting a focus on food
consumption rather than cooking or storage), 41 partial or nearly complete vessels, 100
vessel sections, 43 bone artifacts, and 45 shell artifacts. The deposits certainly has a look
of a massive event, or series of closely spaced events, including a focus on food
consumption. At the north end of the deposit, the refuse overlay the lower steps (Stair 8)
of the structure indicating that the people responsible for its deposition were not
concerned that the refuse could hinder passage around and up the structure. This context,
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 31/58
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 32/58
32
refuse’ during the Terminal Classic just prior to the cessation of occupation. We suggest
that this ‘refuse’ is the result of termination rituals. Not only do these deposits occur in
the remains of collapsed elite structures at Copán, but they are directly associated with
intensive burning. In the words of Andrews and Fash (1992):
“It might be argued that our evidence for the destruction of buildings at
the core of Copan is limited to four buildings and that fires in a few
buildings could have come about in more natural and less meaningful
ways. But it must be remembered that the four buildings mentioned are
among the few vaulted structures of importance excavated in recent years.
Such evidence was most likely overlooked in the past, and most of the
great buildings in central Copan were cleared long ago, so that we will
probably not find large numbers of structures with clear traces of
destruction by burning. In considering the case for violent terminal
events, we should recall the small round altars from Structures 10L-29 and
10L-43. Both commemorate 11 Ahau 18 Mac (790) and both were neatly
and identically snapped in half. The one from 10L-29 was vandalized just
before the building collapsed, and the one from 10L-43 may have been
broken as part of the same event. The fragmentary rectangular altar
excavated in 1990 from the building collapse behind 10L-32 (CPN 19222,
(probably a companion piece sitting next to Altar F on the bench of the
center room, was badly shattered, and most of it was not found.
Intentional vandalism preceding the destruction of 10L-32 seems
indicated.” (Andrews and Fash 1992:86)
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 33/58
33
Structure 9N-82, or the House of the Bacabs, is another example of an elite
residential structure from Copán which exhibits non-accidental burning (Webster 1989).
In short, the stratigraphy of this structure from floor level upwards consists of a layer of
cultural debris, or ‘refuse,’ a flexed individual, and collapse. It is possible that the
individual represents a sacrificial victim who was either sacrificed and placed in the room
or was killed when the vault collapsed. In another building in the same complex,
Structure 9N-81, pieces of charcoal and burned daub were recovered from atop the floor
indicating that the structure had been burned. A smashed olla and effigy incensario were
also recovered along with stone replica ballgame gear. Some of this ballgame
paraphernalia was broken. Although the ‘cultural debris’ is not extensively described,
these excavations seem to fit the pattern of destruction associated with termination
rituals.
While the exact nature of the activity resulting in these deposits is open to
interpretation, they do not appear to resemble domestic middens. Although we suggest
that termination rituals may be a possibility, such deposits should be considered
problematic. There are many different interpretations that can be forwarded for these
types of floor deposits. Further research into the context and artifact composition of such
deposits may clarify what types of behaviors were responsible for their depositions.
Using examples from the literature we can only point out that the patterning on these
floors does not correlate with what we might expect for domestic middens. The level of
detail in the published data is often not fine enough to actually restudy the deposits in
their entirety. We have tried to rectify our lack of understanding of these deposits by
examining problematic contexts in our own work, but have found that the complexity and
ambiguity hinders our comprehension of depositional behaviors in many cases.
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 34/58
34
For example, one of us has previously reported on termination deposits at the site
of Blackman Eddy, Belize (Brown 2003; Brown and Garber 2003). The Blackman Eddy
case is intriguing due to the fact that it dates to a very early period (Middle Formative, ca.
600 B.C.) and suggests that warfare related ritual destruction has a long history in the
Maya lowlands. Evidence associated with the destruction of Structure B1-4th
includes
architectural dismantling and burning of a mask facade, parts of the summit surface, and
basal platform. The upper portion and backing to the mask facade had even been
dismantled and pulled away from the platform. Yet the summit of the platform did not
have a large amount of debris on the surface, and appears to have been swept clean prior
to the construction of the overlying architectural phase. An unusual deposit, however,
was found abutting the back retaining wall of the platform consisting of a dense cluster of
smashed ceramic material and carbon. The ceramic material was in secondary context
suggesting that it was broken on the summit surface and deliberately swept off the back
edge. We believe that the ‘ceremonial trash’ of a termination ritual had been dumped in
this secondary context, creating interpretational problems for the deposit. The remains of
the desecration were for the most part, cleaned up and removed prior to the construction
of a new architectural phase (although still abutting the structure). We bring up this
context to illustrate that some of the types of interpretational problems arising from the
study of ‘trash’ in elite-civic contexts. We believe this to be the remains of a desecratory
termination ritual, but can easily see of the secondary nature of the deposit could fit more
easily into the patterns of refuse cleaning illustrate in the ethnoarchaeological studies.
DISCUSSION
The confusion as to what constitutes normal ancient Maya refuse as opposed to
remains of termination rituals has been a result of their seemingly similar material
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 35/58
35
patterning. On closer examination, many terminal deposits located on elite-civic
structure floors appear to be found in contexts which suggest behavior other than
domestic refuse disposal by sacrilegious squatters. These deposits are often associated
with architectural destruction, intensive burning, and the deposition of layers of white
marl.
The primary goal of this article is to point out that there are some basic patterns
regarding terminal deposits in elite-civic floor contexts to be further explored. The
squatter model does not explain the presence of intensive burning,7 architectural
destruction, and high levels of valuable and often broken objects, as well as occasional
burial disturbance and sacrificial victims. Although other post-abandonment activity may
be responsible for some of the patterns identified as termination rituals or squatter
activity, we believe that a large proportion of these deposits are the result of rituals of
structure termination conducted during abandonment activity, often after violent conflict.
Alhough more archaeologists are accepting termination rituals as legitimate ways of
interpreting data, an increased focus on formation processes is needed to really begin to
understand the nature and complexity of these deposits. The formation of desecratory
termination deposits as the result of rituals associated with conflict is one testable
hypothesis that can be pursued when confronted with deposits similar to those we have
outlined here. Other possibilities such as the ceremonial deposition of refuse in
architectural contexts at the time of abandonment should be further investigated. Even
the squatter model could be further pursued. Our point is that many of the ‘domestic
middens’ found in elite contexts and attributed to ‘squatters’ may be the result of other
activities. It is necessary to closely analyze the contexts and compositions of such
deposits to understand depositional behavior.
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 36/58
36
Acknowledgements. We thank James Ambrosino, Traci Ardren, David Freidel, Scott
Hutson, Takeshi Inomata, Payson Sheets, Charles Suhler, William Walker, Jason Yaeger,
and two anonymous reviewers for comments of previous drafts of this paper. Payson
Sheets generously provided unpublished data from excavations at Cerén, El Salvador for
a previous draft of this paper. Melisa Santoyo Espinosa translated the Spanish abstract.
We maintain responsibility for the final version.
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 37/58
37
REFERENCES CITED
Adams, R. E. W.
1990 Archaeological Research at the Lowland Maya City of Rio Azul. Latin
American Antiquity 1:23-41.
Ambrosino, James N.
in prep Warfare and Destruction in the Archaeological Record at Yaxuná,
Yucatán, México. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology,
Southern Methodist University, Dallas.
Ambrosino, James N. Traci Ardren, and Travis W. Stanton
2003 The History of Warfare at Yaxuná. In Ancient Mesoamerican Warfare,
ed. by M. Kathryn Brown and Travis W. Stanton, pp. 109-124. AltaMira
Press, Walnut Creek.
Andrews, E. Wyllys, V, and Barbara W. Fash
1992 Continuity and Change in a Royal Maya Residential Complex at Copan.
Ancient Mesoamerica 3:63-88.
Ardren, Traci
1999 Palace Termination Rituals at Yaxuna, Yucatan, Mexico. In Land of the
Turkey and the Deer , edited by Ruth Gubler, pp. 25-36. Labyrinthos,
Lancaster.
Arnold, Phillip J., III
1991 Domestic Ceramic Production and Spatial Organization: A Mexican Case
Study in Ethnoarchaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Beaudry-Corbett, Marilyn, Scott E. Simmons, and David B. Tucker
2002 Ancient Home and Garden: The View from Household 1 at Cerén. In
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 38/58
38
Before the Volcano Erupted: The Ancient Cerén Village in Central
America, edited by Payson D. Sheets, pp. 45-57. University of Texas
Press, Austin.
Binford, Lewis R.
1978 Dimensional Analysis of Behavior and Site Structure: Learning from an
Eskimo Hunting Stand. American Antiquity 43:330-361.
1983 In Pursuit of the Past: Decoding the Archaeological Record . Thames and
Hudson, New York.
Brown, Kenneth L.
1977 The Valley of Guatemala: A Highland Port of Trade. In Kaminaljuyu and
Teotihuacan: A Study in Prehistoric Culture Contact , edited by William T.
Sanders and Joseph W. Michels, pp. 205-395. The Pennsylvania State
University Press, State College.
Brown, M. Kathryn
2003 Emerging Complexity in the Maya Lowlands: A View from Blackman
Eddy, Belize. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of
Anthropology, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX.
Brown, M. Kathryn, and James F. Garber
2003 Evidence of Conflict during the Middle Preclassic in the Maya Lowlands:
A View from Blackman Eddy, Belize. In Ancient Mesoamerican Warfare,
edited by M. Kathryn Brown and Travis W. Stanton, pp. 91-108. Altamira
Press, Walnut Hill.
Cameron, Catherine M.
1991 Structure Abandonment in Villages. In Archaeological Method and
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 39/58
39
Theory, Volume 3, edited by Michael B. Schiffer, pp. 155-194. The
University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Cameron, Catherine M. and Steve A. Tomka (editors)
1993 Abandonments of Settlements and Regions: Ethnoarchaeological and
Archaeological Approaches. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Chase, Diane Z., and Arlen F. Chase
2003 Texts and Contexts in Classic Maya Warfare: A Brief Consideration of
Epigraphy and Archaeology at Caracol, Belize. In Ancient Mesoamerican
Warfare, edited by M. Kathryn Brown and Travis W. Stanton, pp. 171-
188. AltaMira Press, Walnut Hill.
Child, Mark B., and Charles W. Golden
in press The Transformation of Abandoned Architecture at Piedras Negras. In
The Use and Perception of Abandoned Structures in the Maya Lowlands,
edited by Travis W. Stanton and Aline Magnoni. University Press of
Colorado, Boulder.
Clark, John E.
1991 Flintknapping and Debitage Disposal among the Lacandon Maya of
Chiapas, Mexico. In The Ethnoarchaeology of Refuse Disposal, edited by
Edward Staski and Livingston D. Sutro, pp. 63-78. Anthropological
Research Papers, No. 42. Arizona State University, Tempe.
Clayton, Sarah C., W. David Driver, and Laura J. Kosakowsky
2005 Rubbish or Ritual? Contextualizing a Terminal Classic Problematic
Deposit at Blue Creek, Belize. Ancient Mesoamericaa 16:119-130.
Coe, William R.
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 40/58
40
1959 Piedras Negras Archaeology: Artifacts, Caches, and Burials. The
University Museum, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
1990 Excavations in the Great Plaza, North Terrace, and North Acropolis of
Tikal. Tikal Report, No. 14. The University Museum, University of
Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Coe, William R., and Vivian Broman
1958 Excavations in the Stela 23 Group. Tikal Report, No. 2. The University
Museum Press, Philadelphia.
Deal, Michael
1985 Household Pottery Disposal in the Maya Highlands: An
Ethnoarchaeological Interpretation. Journal of Anthropological
Archaeology 4:243-291.
1998 Pottery Ethnoarchaeology in the Central Maya Highlands. University of
Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
Deal, Michael, and Melissa B. Hagstum
1995 Ceramic Reuse Behavior Among the Maya and Wanka. In Expanding
Archaeology, edited by James M. Skibo, William H. Walker, and Axel E.
Nielson, pp. 111-125. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
Driver, David and Jennifer K. McWilliams
1995 Excavations at the Ontario Village Site. In The Belize Valley Archaeology
Project: Results of the 1994 Filed Season, edited by James F. Garber and
David M. Glassman, pp. 26-57. Report submitted to the Department of
Archaeology, Belmopan, Belize.
Farr, Olivia Navarro
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 41/58
41
2004 Killing Spaces: Ritual Termination at the Southeast Acropolis at El Perú-
Waka’. Paper presented at the 103rd
Annual American Anthropological
Association Meeting, Atlanta, GA.
Fitting, James E.
1979 The Kaminaljuyu Test Trenches: Description and Artifact Yield. In
Settlement Pattern Excavations at Kaminaljuyu, Guatemala, edited by
Joseph W. Michels, pp. 307-589. The Pennsylvania State University
Press, State College.
Freidel, David A.
1986 The Monumental Architecture. In Archaeology at Cerros Belize, Central
America, Volume I: An Interim Report , edited by David A. Freidel and
Robin A. Robertson, pp. 1-22. Southern Methodist University Press,
Dallas.
Freidel, David A., Linda Schele, and Joy Parker
1993 Maya Cosmos: Three Thousand Years on the Shaman’s Path. William
Morrow and Company, INC., New York.
Freidel, David A., Barbara MacLeod, and Charles K. Suhler
2003 Early Classic Maya Conquest in Words and Deeds. In Ancient
Mesoamerican Warfare, edited by M. Kathryn Brown and Travis W.
Stanton, pp. 189-215. AltaMira Press, Walnut Hill.
Freidel, David A., Charles K. Suhler, and Rafael Cobos Palma
1998 Termination Ritual Deposits at Yaxuna: Detecting the Historical in
Archaeological Contexts. In The Sowing and the Dawning: Termination,
Dedication, and Transformation in the Archaeological and Ethnographic
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 42/58
42
Record of Mesoamerica, edited by Shirley B. Mock, pp. 135-144.
University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Garber, James F.
1981 Material Culture and Patterns of Artifact Consumption and Disposal at
the Maya Site of Cerros in Northern Belize. Unpublished Ph.D.
Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist
University, Dallas.
Hammond, Norman, and Juliette C. Gerhardt
1990 Early Maya Architectural Innovation at Cuello, Belize. World
Archaeology 21:461-481.
Haviland, William A.
1985 Excavations in Small Residential Groups of Tikal: Groups 4F-1 and 4F-2.
Tikal Report, No. 19. The University Museum, University of
Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Hayden, Brian D.
1979 Material Culture in the Mayan Highlands: A Preliminary Study. In
Settlement Pattern Excavations at Kaminaljuyu, Guatemala, edited by
Joseph W. Michels, pp. 183-222. The Pennsylvania State University
Press.
Hayden, Brian D., and Aubrey Cannon
1983 Where the Garbage Goes: Refuse Disposal in the Maya Highlands.
Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 2:117-163.
1984a The Structure of Material Systems: Ethnoarchaeology ion the Maya
Highlands. Paper No. 3. Society for American Archaeology, Washington,
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 43/58
43
D. C.
1984b Interaction Inferences in Archaeology and Learning Frameworks of the
Maya. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 3:325-367.
Houston, Stephen D., and Karl Taube
2000 An Archaeology of the Senses: Perception and Cultural Expression in
Ancient Mesoamerica. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 10:261-294.
Hubert, Jane
1994 Sacred Beliefs and Beliefs of Sacredness. In Sacred Sites, Sacred Places,
edited by David L. Carmichael, Jane Hubert, Brian Reeves, and Audhild
Schanche, pp. 9-19. One World Archaeology, No. 23. Routledge,
London.
Hutson, Scott R.
2000 Excavations at the A’ak Group. In Chunchucmil Regional Economy
Program: Report of the 2000 Season, edited by Travis W. Stanton, pp. 18-
46. Business and Social Science Division, Jamestown Community
College, Jamestown, New York.
2004 Dwelling and Identity at the Ancient Urban Center of Chunchucmil,
Yucatan, Mexico. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of
Anthropology. University of California, Berkeley.
Hutson, Scott R., and Aline Magnoni
2002 Mapping Modern Garbage Disposal in a Village Setting. In Pakbeh
Regional Economy Program: Report of the 2001 Field Season, edited by
Bruce H. Dahlin and Daniel Mazeau, pp. 55-57. Department of Sociology
and Anthropology, Howard University, Washington D. C.
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 44/58
44
Hutson, Scott R., and Travis W. Stanton
2006 Patrones de Acumulación de Desechos en una Unidad Habitacional
Prehispánica de Chunchucmil, Yucatán. In Los Mayas de Ayer y Hoy:
Memorias del Primer Congreso Internacional de Cultura Maya, Tomo I ,
edited by Alfredo Barrera Rubio and Ruth Gubler, pp. 73-88. Solar
Servicios Editoriales, Mérida.
in press Trash and Practical Reason: The Logic of Discard in Ancient Maya
Houselots. Cambridge Archaeological Journal.
Hutson, Scott R., Crystal West, Jamie Ford, and Brett Moore.
2004 Horizontal Excavations at the A’ak Group. In Pakbeh Regional Economy
Program: Report of the 2002 Field Season, edited by Bruce H. Dahlin and
Daniel Mazeau, pp. 86-104. Department of Sociology and Anthropology,
Howard University, Washington, D. C.
Inomata, Takeshi
1997 The Last Days of a Fortified Classic Maya Center: Archaeological
Investigations at Aguateca, Guatemala. Ancient Mesoamerica 8:337-351.
2003 War, Destruction, and Abandonment: The Fall of the Classic Maya Center
of Aguateca, Guatemala. In The Archaeology of Settlement Abandonment
in Middle America, edited by Takeshi Inomata and Ronald A. Webb, pp.
43-60. The University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
Inomata, Takeshi, and Laura Stiver
1998 Floor Assemblages from Burned Structures at Aguateca, Guatemala: A
Study of Classic Maya Households. Journal of Field Archaeology 25:431-
452.
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 45/58
45
Inomata, Takeshi, and Daniela Triadan
2000 Craft Production by Classic Elite Maya in Domestic Settings: Data from
Rapidly Abandoned Structures at Aguateca, Guatemala. Mayab 13:57-66.
Inomata, Takeshi, and Ronald W. Webb (editors)
2003 The Archaeology of Settlement Abandonment in Middle America. The
University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
Joyce, Arthur A., and Sissel Johannessen
1993 Abandonment and the Production of Archaeological Variability at
Domestic Sites. In Abandonment of Settlements and Regions:
Ethnoarchaeological and Archaeological Approaches, edited by Catherine
M. Cameron and Steve A. Tomka, pp. 138-153. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
Lange, Frederick W., and Charles R. Rydberg
1972 Abandonment and Post-Abandonment Behavior at a Rural Central
American House-Site. American Antiquity 37:419-432.
Lightfoot, Ricky R.
1993 Abandonment Processes in Prehistoric Pueblos. In Abandonment of
Settlements and Regions: Ethnoarchaeological and Archaeological
Approaches, edited by Catherine M. Cameron and Steve A. Tomka, pp.
165-177. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
MacKie, Euan W.
1985 Excavations at Xunantunich and Pomona, Belize, in 1959-60. BAR
International Series 251. BAR, Oxford.
Magnoni, Aline
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 46/58
46
1995 Albarradas at Chunchucmil and in the Northern Maya Area. Unpublished
B.A. Thesis, University College London, Institute of Archaeology,
London.
Marcus, Joyce, and Kent V. Flannery
1996 Zapotec Civilization: How Urban Society Evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca
Valley. Thames and Hudson, London.
McGee, R. Jon
1998 The Lacandon Incense Burner Renewal Ceremony. In The Sowing and the
Dawning: Termination, Dedication, and Transformation in the
Archaeological and Ethnographic Record of Mesoamerica, edited by
Shirley B. Mock, pp. 41-46. University of New Mexico Press,
Albuquerque.
McKee, Brian R.
1999 Household Archaeology and Cultural Formation Processes: Examples
from the Ceren Site, El Salvador. In The Archaeology of Household
Activities, edited by Penelope M. Allison, pp. 30-42. Routledge, London.
2002 Household 2 at Cerén: The Remains of an Agrarian and Craft-Oriented
Corporate Group. In Before the Volcano Erupted: The Ancient Cerén
Village in Central America, edited by Payson D. Sheets, pp. 58-71.
University of Texas Press, Austin.
McKee, Brian R., and Payson D. Sheets
2003 Volcanic Activity and Abandonment Processes: Cerén and the Zapotitan
Valley pf El Salvador. In The Archaeology of Settlement Abandonment in
Middle America, edited by Takeshi Inomata and Ronald A. Webb, pp. 61-
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 47/58
47
74. The University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
Mock, Shirley
1994 Destruction and Denouement During the Late-Terminal Classic: The
Colha Skull Pit. In Continuing Archaeology at Colha, Belize, edited by
Thomas R. Hester, Harry J. Shafer, and Jack D. Eaton, pp. 221-231.
Studies in Archaeology 16. Texas Archaeological Research Laboratory,
University of Texas, Austin.
1998 The Defaced and the Forgotten: Decapitation and Flaying/Mutilation as a
Termination Event at Colha, Belize. In The Sowing and the Dawning:
Termination, Dedication, and Transformation in the Archaeological and
Ethnographic Record of Mesoamerica, edited by Shirley B. Mock, pp.
113-123. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Montgomery, Barbara K.
1993 Ceramic Analysis as a Tool for Discovering Processes of Pueblo
Abandonment. In Abandonment of Settlements and Regions:
Ethnoarchaeological and Archaeological Approaches, edited by Catherine
M. Cameron and Steve A. Tomka, pp. 157-164. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
Moore, William E.
1965 Excavations at Structures 601-06. In Dzibilchaltun Program: Progress
Report on the 1960-1964 Field Seasons, edited by E. Wyllys Andrews IV,
pp. 29-35. Middle American Research Institute, Pub. 31. Tulane
University, New Orleans.
Pagliaro, Jonathan B., James F. Garber, and Travis W. Stanton
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 48/58
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 49/58
49
Hazards at Tetimpa, Puebla, Mexico. In The Archaeology of Settlement
Abandonment in Middle America, edited by Takeshi Inomata and Ronald
A. Webb, pp. 13-27. The University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
Reilly, F. Kent, III, and James F. Garber
2003 The Symbolic Representation of Warfare in Formative Period
Mesoamerica. In Ancient Mesoamerican Warfare, edited by M. Kathryn
Brown and Travis W. Stanton, pp. 127-148. AltaMira Press, Walnut Hill.
Robin, Cynthia
2002 Outside of Houses: The Practices of Everyday Life at Chan Nòohol,
Belize. Journal of Social Archaeology 2:245-268.
Rothschild, Nan S., Barbara J. Mills, T. J. Ferguson, and Susan Dublin
1993 Abandonment at Zuni Farming Villages. In Abandonment of Settlements
and Regions: Ethnoarchaeological and Archaeological Approaches,
edited by Catherine M. Cameron and Steve A. Tomka, pp. 123-137.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Sabloff, Jeremy A., and Gordon R. Willey
1967 The Collapse of Maya Civilization in the Southern Lowlands: A
Consideration of History and Process. Southwestern Journal of
Anthropology 23:311-336.
Santley, Robert S.
1992 A Consideration of the Olmec Phenomenon in the Tuxtlas: Early
Formative Settlement Pattern, Land Use, and Refuse Disposal at
Matacapan, Veracruz, Mexico. In Gardens of Prehistory, edited by
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 50/58
50
Thomas W. Killion, pp. 150-183. University of Alabama Press,
Tuscaloosa.
Satterhwaite, Linton
1958 The Problem of Abnormal Stela Placements at Tikal and Elsewhere. Tikal
Report 3. The University Museum Press, Philadelphia.
Schele, Linda
1986 Architectural Development and Political History at Palenque. In City-
States of the Maya: Art and Architecture, edited by Elizabeth P. Benson,
pp. 110-137. Rocky Mountain Institute for Pre-Columbian Studies.
Schele, Linda, and David A. Freidel
1990 A Forest of Kings: The Untold Story of the Ancient Maya. Quill, New
York.
Schiffer, Michael B.
1972 Archaeological Context and Systematic Context. American Antiquity
37:156-165.
1976 Behavioral Archaeology. Academic Press, New York.
1987 Formation Processes in the Archaeological Record. University of New
Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Schortman, Edward M.
1993 Quirigua Reports III: Archaeological Investigations in the Lower
Motagua Valley, Izabal, Guatemala. The University Museum, University
of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Sheets, Payson D.
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 51/58
51
1992 The Ceren Site: A Prehistoric Village Buried by Volcanic Ash in Central
America. Case Studies in Archaeology Series. Harcourt Brace College
Publishers, Fort Worth.
1998 Place and Time in Activity Area Analysis: A Study of Elevated Contexts
used for Artifact Curation at the Cerén Site, El Salvador. Revista
Española de Antropología Americana 28:63-98.
2000 Provisioning the Ceren Household: The Vertical Economy, Village
Economy, and Household Economy in the Southeastern Maya Periphery.
Ancient Mesoamerica 11:217-230.
Sheets, Payson D. (editor)
2002 Before the Volcano Erupted: The Ancient Cerén Village in Central
America. University of Texas Press, Austin.
Shook, Edwin M.
1958 Tikal Report No. 1: Field Director’s Report: The 1956 and 1957 Seasons .
Tikal Reports, No. 1. The University Museum Press, Philadelphia.
Smyth, Michael P.
1991 Modern Maya Storage Behavior . University of Pittsburgh Memoirs in
Latin American Archaeology, No. 3. University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh.
Stanton, Travis W., and M. Kathryn Brown
2003 Studying Ancient Mesoamerican Warfare. In Ancient Mesoamerican
Warfare, edited by M. Kathryn Brown and Travis W. Stanton, pp. 1-16.
AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek.
Stanton, Travis W., and Tomás Gallareta Negrón
2001 Warfare, Ceramic Economy, and the Itzá: A Reconsideration of the Itzá
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 52/58
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 53/58
53
1998 Deliberate Destruction and Looting in Precolumbian Times at the
Feathered Serpent Pyramid in Teotihuacan, Mexico. In The Sowing and
the Dawning: Termination, Dedication, and Transformation in the
Archaeological and Ethnographic Record of Mesoamerica, edited by
Shirley B. Mock, pp. 147-164. University of New Mexico Press,
Albuquerque.
Suhler, Charles K.
1996 Excavations at the North Acropolis, Yaxuna, Yucatan, Mexico.
Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Southern
Methodist University, Dallas.
Suhler, Charles K., and David A. Freidel
2000 Rituales de terminación: Implicaciones de la guerra maya. In La Guerra
Entre los Antiguos Mayas, edited by Silvia Trejo, pp. 73-103. Instituto
Nacional de Antropología e Historia, D. F.
2003 The Tale End of Two Cities: Tikal, Yaxuna, and Abandonment Contexts
in the Lowland Maya Archaeological Record. In The Archaeology of
Settlement Abandonment in Middle America, edited by Takeshi Inomata
and Ronald A. Webb, pp. 135-147. The University of Utah Press, Salt
Lake City.
Taube, Karl
2001 The Breath of Life: The Symbolism of Wind in Mesoamerica and the
American Southwest. In The Road to Aztlan: Art From a Mythic
Homeland , edited by Virginia M. Fields and Victor Zamudio-Taylor, pp.
102-123. Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Los Angeles.
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 54/58
54
Thomas, Prentice M., Jr.
1981 Prehistoric Maya Settlement Patterns at Becan, Campeche, Mexico.
Middle American Research Institute Pub. 45. Tulane University, New
Orleans.
Thompson, J. Eric
1954 The Rise and Fall of Maya Civilization. University of Oklahoma Press,
Norman.
Tozzer, Alfred M. (translator)
1941 Landa’s Relación de las Cosas de Yucatán. Papers of the Peabody
Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology. Harvard University.
Kraus Reprint Corp, New York.
Vogt, Evon Z.
1998 Zinacanteco Dedication and Termination Rituals. In The Sowing and the
Dawning: Termination, Dedication, and Transformation in the
Archaeological and Ethnographic Record of Mesoamerica, edited by
Shirley B. Mock, pp. 21-30. University of New Mexico Press,
Albuquerque.
Walker, Debra S.
1998 Smashed Pots and Shattered Dreams: The Material Evidence for an Early
Classic Maya Site Termination at Cerros, Belize. In The Sowing and the
Dawning: Termination, Dedication, and Transformation in the
Archaeological and Ethnographic Record of Mesoamerica, edited by
Shirley B. Mock, pp. 81-99. University of New Mexico Press,
Albuquerque.
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 55/58
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 56/58
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 57/58
57
1993:161).
8/13/2019 Stanton Brown Paglia Ro 1998
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/stanton-brown-paglia-ro-1998 58/58
58
FIGURE CAPTIONS:
Figure 1: Distribution and Density of Ceramic Artifacts from the Solares of the A’ak and
Muuch Groups, Chunchucmil, Yucatán