Space Syntax in Maya Architecture Annegrete Hohmann-Vogrin ...

282 Annegrete Hohmann-Vogrin
everything that can be seen now was actually there at one point. This is the only stage
we can reconstruct to represent the whole area (figure 119). The difficulties in describing
the agglomerations of structures that are the results of frequent overbuilding soon led to
the realization that monumental building groups, which can be found in the core areas
of ancient Maya cities, are among the best examples to demonstrate or understand the
space-creating function of architecture, and that the description has to focus on the spatial
configuration. Plazas, courtyards and causeways, platforms and terraces, were defined
as the principal constituent elements (figure 120). Adequate documentation and analysis
shall cover not only their specific spatial context, but also the structure of the continuous
space thus created. On that basis, an interpretation may focus on different aspects, for
instance on aspects concerning physical control, or on aspects of cultural symbolization,
as long as the analysis was not designed to answer only one question.
Physical control addresses the reaction of the built environment to the specific environmental
conditions: heat or cold, flora and fauna, heavy rains, water supply, transportation
resistances, and availability of building materials. It has been shown that, to
a certain degree, the specific shape and layout of Maya settlements could be explained
only through these facts (Hohmann-Vogrin, 1998). In the same way, the built environment
can also be an expression of cultural symbolization, representing the specific worldview
of the Maya (Hohmann-Vogrin, 2000). Both approaches explore the intentions behind the
way the Maya built their world, and how they are reflected in the ultimate configuration
of that world. In this field, my conclusions were drawn mainly on the basis of structural
similarities supported by other archaeological, ethnographic, and epigraphic sources.
The other - intimately related - questions address the effect of the built environment
on human beings, i.e. how it could have been perceived at the time when it was in use,
and whether this can tell us something about the functional frame and the social milieu
it generated.
We may assume that it is again the overall configuration that determines: -functional
possibilities of a specific area, as this definitely depends on its position in the fabric as a
whole, and - the social milieu, as this is constituted by the potential of space to generate
mutual awareness and encounters.
Most likely, the attempt to answer these questions still seems rather ambitious. I
already tried to approach the first question in my dissertation, published later in “Die
Architektur von Copan” (Hohmann and Vogrin, 1982). I sought to determine the centrality
of the different areas in the Main Group in Copan, of plazas or courtyards, in comparison
with their accessibility (Hohmann and Vogrin, 1982, p. 91), based on a method proposed
by Norman Hammond in his work on Lubaantun (Hammond, 1975, p. 78-83). This was a
rather simple and rough approach.
Since the publication of “The social Logic of space” (Hillier and Hanson, 1984), my plan
had been to apply space syntax concepts to Maya urbanism. At first sight, especially the
concept and definition of “convex space” was appealing and suitable in the context of Maya
towns, but differences turned out to prevail. Hillier and his colleagues have investigated
mainly the old European cities, or what he and we would designate as “normal cities”,
defined as variations of the following:
“Buildings are arranged in outward-facing blocks so that building entrances continuously
open to the space of public access. The space of public access is arranged in a series
of intersecting rings that are regularized by a greater or lesser degree of linearization of
space to form the - more or less deformed - grid of the town. Through this linearization
the larger-scale structure of the town is made intelligible both to the peripatetic individual