2005 Exploring the Roles of Temples at Yalbac. Research Reports ...

27 EXPLORING THE ROLE OF ANCIENT MAYA TEMPLESAT YALBAC, BELIZELisa J. LuceroThroughout the world, places of worship –temples or churches– are built to honor various gods, patron deities, oras places for religious expression and experiences. Scholars’ interpretations of Late Classic (c. A.D. 550 – 850)Maya temples have been relatively vague on their roles and functions except in cases where they served as stagesfor royal ceremonies. Since the majority of secondary centers such as Yalbac, do not have written or obviousiconographic records, I explore the possibility of temple attributes revealing histories given their crucial role indaily social, religious, and political life. The analysis of evidence from looters trenches at Yalbac, whilepreliminary, has exciting implications regarding the role of temples and their potential to serve as text on ClassicMaya society.IntroductionThroughout the world, places ofworship –temples or churches– are built tohonor various gods, patron deities, or asplaces for religious expression andexperiences. Temples are also majorlandmarks and create the need for labor, asin Egypt, Mesopotamia, and South India(e.g., Morrison 1993). Temples link townsand their rural hinterlands through periodicceremonies, festivals and feasts, and“represent an impressive commitment ofresources to … faith” (Stein 1977:25) aswitnessed in their maintenance, ritualspecialists, and support staff. Inscriptionsand iconography note to whom the templewas dedicated as well as who constructed it,they highlight the kinds of donationsincluding land and village revenues.Temples also serve as the core of royalpublic life because religion is vital forpolitical legitimating - monarchs fundtemples and conduct most of theirceremonies at temples. Rites revolve aroundroyals and their ancestors to show that theyhave the ‘mandate of heaven’ (e.g., Chang1983) because worldwide rulers areassociated with prosperity (Hocart1970[1936]: 128-155). In Egypt, forexample, everyone relied on the pharaoh toperform key rites to ensure that the Nilewould bring adequate water (Hassan 1994).The king was the major intermediarybetween heaven and earth. In brief, crossculturallytemples provide sanctuary, a homefor gods, a place to worship and pray a stagefor religious and political ceremonies,festivals and feasts, storage for food andsupplies, workshops for the manufacture ofsacred and profane goods, a depository forofferings, and a place to redistribute foodand gifts.Scholars’ interpretations of LateClassic (A.D. 550-850) Maya temples have,however been relatively silent on thesematters (cf. Loten 2003; Taube 1998).While well described, discussion of templesrarely focuses on more than the basicfunction of serving as stages for elites andkings to perform religious ceremonies. Thisis somewhat surprising since Maya centersare famous for their temples, which areinscribed or decorated with vibrant scenes,focusing on the builders of temples - kings,their families, and their ancestors. Godsplayed a secondary role. The history orfunction of the temple, however, is notrevealed by this monarch-centric focus.Research Reports in Belizean Archaeology, Vol. 2, 2005, pp. 349-356.Copyright © 2005 by the Institute of Archaeology, NICH, Belize.

Exploring the Role Yalbac TemplesWere all Maya temples built the same, or dotemples show variability? In either case, didthey serve varied functions? Were templesbuilt for different gods, or did they all havesimilar functions? Were they funded bydifferent groups of people, not just kings?Different groups could include wealthyfamilies or elites, lesser royals or nobles, oreven community members. The fundamentalquestion is: Why did the Maya build somany temples? Before we can address thesequestions, we need more concreteinformation about temple histories. In thispaper, I present preliminary data fromtemple looters trenches at Yalbac that showpromising results regarding variability.Since the majority of secondary centerslike Yalbac do not have written records, Iexplore whether or not temple attributes canreveal histories indicating that temples werecrucial in daily social, religious, andpolitical life. Attributes explored includefrequency of temples within centers, sizedifferences, location with regard to othermonumental architecture, layout andaccessibility (private or restricted), historyof use, and construction patterns includingstyle, labor, materials, decorative features,and ritual deposits.YalbacYalbac site is located under junglecanopy, near pockets of good agriculturalland, along Yalbac Creek, a perennialstream, on the eastern border of the southernlowlands (Graebner 2002a, 2002b; Lucero2004; Lucero et al. 2004). J. Eric Thompsonmade brief mention of an eastern group ofYalbac in the 1930’s (1939:2, 282), butappeared to have inadvertently missed thesite core (Figure 1). Plaza test pits yieldedceramics dating from c. 300 B.C. throughA.D. 900, or the Late Preclassic through theTerminal Classic period.The six pyramid temples at Yalbacrange from 8 to 16m in height of which fiveexhibited looters trenches (LTs). Thelooters trenches were recorded in profilesduring the 2002-2004 seasons and yieldedimportant clues as to constructionsequences. At present, the temples allappear to lack summit structures and plasterfloors; some have cut-stone terraced facadesand dry and mortared boulder and cobblecore fill. Surface ceramics indicate thetemples were used through the Late Classicperiod (A.D. 550-850), even though theMaya began building some much earlier inthe Late Preclassic (300-100 B.C.) (e.g.Plaza 3 temples).All temples are located on large openplazas, though Plaza 3 is slightly morerestricted than Plaza 2. These two plazascontain the two tallest temples, Str. 2A (40 x36 m, 16 m tall) and Str. 3A (45 x 25 m, 11m tall), and Plaza 2 has the only ballcourt.Interestingly, the western structure of theballcourt is attached to the front of thetemple rather than at the back as one finds atXunantunich and Cahal Pech; either theMaya no longer used the temple or movedthe staircase to the side, or they built thetemple after the ballcourt, perhaps to enclosethe plaza (John Morris, pers. comm., 2004).Str. 3A and Str. 3D (45 x 25, 8 m tall) arethe only temples with wings on the northand south sides, which likely contain tombs(Jaime Awe, pers. comm. 2004).Plaza 2 temples are on averagebigger than Plaza 3 temples (15,960 cm 3 vs.7,792 cm 3 ). Plaza 2 temples have morefaced stones on average (19% vs. 12%) andare thrice the average size of the Plaza 3temples (1,318 cm 2 vs. 435 cm 2 ). Shapedstone blocks are faced on all exposed sides,especially on the front sides of temples. Theback or sidewall blocks appear to be facedonly on one side (e.g. LT 7 and LT 29, Str.3A). The exposed core fills at Str. 2E (40 x36 m, 8 m tall) and Str. 2F (30 x 30 m, 10 mtall) have mortar, usually of marl, plaster,gravel, or sand. In contrast, Str. 3A and Str.350

L. LuceroFigure 1. Yalbac.3B (20 x 20 m, 6 m tall) have both mortaredand dry core fills; while dry core fill requiresless materials and labor, it is more difficultto contain and is more unstable (Schele andMathews 1998:30). Core fill boulders arelarger on average in Plaza 2 temples,averaging 569 cm 2 compared with 416 cm 2at Plaza 3 temples, and they comprise agreater proportion (30% vs. 15%).However, Plaza 3 temples have moresimilarly sized (sorted) faced stone and corefills (boulders, small boulders, and cobbles);for example, the average range difference ofPlaza 3 faced stone is 564 cm 2 comparedwith 1887 cm 2 at Plaza 2 temples. TheMaya may have used more midden depositssince we found greater quantities of sherdsin Plaza 3 temples (though they might351

Exploring the Role Yalbac Templesrepresent items broken by looters). In sum,the Maya built bigger Plaza 2 temples usinglarger stone blocks and mortared fills, andused more sorted fills for Plaza 3 temples.In a preliminary comparison withcontemporary construction patterns of threeresidential compounds within 500 m of thesite core, it is clear that the Maya used largerfaced stones and boulders (length is greaterthan 15 cm) at temples. Small boulders(length: between 11-15 cm) and cobbles(length: 1-10 cm) are more comparable insize. For example, the eastern mound (23 x9 m, 2.5 m tall) of Site 4, an elite compoundconsisting of seven structures around aplaza, has standing walls constructed withfaced stone blocks. They range from 50 to362 cm 2 , whereas those from temple LTsrange from 251 to 1678 cm 2 . The rangedecreases as site size diminishes; Site 14, aU-shaped elite structure (28.5 x 18 m, 3 mtall) (Graebner and Lucero 2003), hasstanding walls with faced stones rangingfrom 40 to 350 cm 2 and Site 18, a commonerhouse (9.5 x 9.5 m, 1.5 m tall) (Lucero andGraebner 2003), has low walls with facedstones ranging from 38 to 294 cm 2 .Temple LTs have also revealed thatconstruction patters differ from acropolistype construction patterns, (Str. 1A, 55 x 45m, 20 m tall) (Hooper 2004a, 2004b), thesurface ceramics of which date to the LateClassic. The upper most acropolis LTs (1and 2) exposed vaulted ceilings, a possibleroof comb, red-plastered walls, a moldedand plastered throne bench, thick walls (0.7-1 m), and standardized cut limestone (Figure2). When the Maya filled in these roomsbefore rebuilding, they used sorted fill and acompact plaster mortar. Plaster floors arethick (5 cm+) and of high quality (fine,hard). Plaster has relatively high labor costs(Abrams 1998). From LT 4 on the upperwest terrace of the royal residence, werecovered architectural decoration from thelooter’s back dirt consisting of stuccofragments with traces of red paint. The LTon at the base of Str. 1A on Plaza 1, LT 17,exposed construction styles more similar toLTs at the temples (boulder core fill, facedstone façade, and no obvious plaster floors),as well as a speleothem fragment,(considered sacred to the Maya as portals tothe Xibalba).Figure 2. Acropolis architectural features.We do not know much about ritualdeposits because looters apparently werequite successful in removing caches andgrave goods. However, since looters werenot interested in broken items and left thembehind, we do have some idea; for example,LT 9 at Str. 3B revealed a Late Classicburial immediately underneath the easternsummit stone facade, most of which wasdestroyed by looters (Figure 3). Theremaining lip-to-lip vessels contained drilledshell, obsidian points, and a cut and polishedjaguar tooth. From a lithic concentration atthe roots of an uprooted tree, (likely fromover a tomb) at the northeast side of Str. 3D,we recovered thousands of thin fine-grainedpastel-colored chert blades and flakes. TheMaya were known to place thousands ofchipped chert or obsidian flakes and bladesover the lintel or roof of a tomb, in caches,such as those found at Tikal (Moholy-Nagy1997). During the clean-up of LT 8, Str.3D, we also recovered human skullfragments, a complete unmodified clam352

L. LuceroFigure 3. Structure 3B, LT 9 burial.shell, a slate disc (likely a mirror backing),obsidian blades, a marine shell disc, andmany decorated sherds from vases, jars,plates, and bowls. During the clean up ofLT 21, Str. 2F, we found a figurine fragmentof a head, perhaps of God N (Figure 4).While the exact significance of this deity isnot totally agreed upon, God N is definitelyassociated with the celestial world as, forexample, a sky-bearer, and is also associatedwith sacred mountains (Taube 1992:92-99).God N is often depicted with Chaak, the raingod, another celestial connection. Finally,the ballcourt alley test excavations yieldedseveral speleothem fragments.The architectural differences amongtemples and between other structure typesare obvious and may indicate to whom theyare dedicated and by whom they were built.To address these issues, we plan in futureseasons to collect more information ontemple histories, architectural featuresincluding terraces, staircases and plasteredsurfaces and decorative features includingmasks, inscribed or painted walls, doorways,or lintels, as well as stelae or altars. We alsointend to investigate labor expenditurewhich would be needed for each LateClassic building phase (e.g., river orquarried cobbles, the percentage of plaster inmortared fills, and the type of limestoneused), and the location, quantity, quality anddiversity of ritual deposits,Concluding RemarksDid Str. 2F serve as a rain/celestial353

Exploring the Role Yalbac TemplesFigure 4. Figurine fragment from Structure 2F, perhaps of God N.temple (God N)? It is attached to Str. 2G,which on closer inspection might turn out tobe an artificial pool (it is quite steep on allsides). What is the significance of theballcourt being attached at the front of thelargest temple (Str. 2A)? Were the ballcourtand temple a stage for re-enacting creationrites, since ballcourts play a large role inorigin myths (Schele and Miller 1986:243-245)? Its proximity to the acropolis mightindicate it association with the ruling family.Further, its location on the largest and mostaccessible plaza indicates large audiences.Plaza 3 temples might represent anecropolis, perhaps for founding and royalfamilies; the large plaza size suggests thatpublic ceremonies took place, whatever theirpurpose.Architectural and ritual data arecritical when centers lack obviousiconographic and hieroglyphic records.Even when the records are present, theyfocus on kings, not gods. Does this meanthat temples without inscriptions were builtby non-royals, or were they all built by theroyal family and thus did not require kingsto claim the obvious? If all temples weresimilarly built, does this indicate that theyserved multiple functions –for example,seasonal ceremonies, feasts, games, royalrites, and other public events? If templesshow variability, does it indicate that theywere built by different groups (e.g., factions)or that they were built for different gods orfunctions? Do differences only indicatetheir being built at different times in the LateClassic (cf. Jones 1996, 2003)? Thesequestions are critical, especially since mostsecondary centers such as Yalbac lackinscriptions and/or public iconography. Theresults presented, while preliminary, haveexciting implications regarding the role oftemples and their potential to serve as texton Classic Maya society.354

L. LuceroAcknowledgments. I want to thank theInstitute of Archaeology for their continuedsupport, especially Jaime Awe and JohnMorris. I also want to thank the organizersof the conference, especially SherilyneJones. Continued support from RobertVitolo is invaluable, as is that from NewMexico State University and field schoolstudents Sandra Andrade, Joanne Baron,Adam Lujan, Ivy Luchetti, and ChadNorred. None of the fieldwork would havebeen possible without the support andfriendship of field assistants Zedikiah Scott,Cleofo Choc, Jose Ernesto Vasquez, IsabelAscencio (Don Luna), and Henry de Paz.Finally, I want to thank Nadine Gray fortaking time out from her dissertationresearch to conduct the chronologicalassessment of the ceramic assemblages.References CitedAbrams, Elliot M.1998 Sites as Structures: The ConstructionProcess and Maya Architecture. In Functionand Meaning in Classic Maya Architecture,edited by S. D. Houston, pp. 123-140.Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D. C.Chang, K. C.1983 Art, Myth, and Ritual: The Path toPolitical Authority in Ancient China.Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Graebner, Sean M.2002a Monumental Architecture and theAncient Maya: The Royal Acropolis atYalbac, Central Belize. M.A. Thesis. NewMexico State University, Las Cruces.2002b Ancient Maya Royal Courts: Yalbac,Central Belize. In Results of the 2001 Valleyof Peace Archaeology Project: SaturdayCreek and Yalbac, edited by L. J. Lucero,pp. 73-83. Report submitted to theDepartment of Archaeology, Ministry ofTourism and Culture, Belize.Graebner, Sean M., and Lisa J. Lucero2003 Residential Yalbac: Site 94N22N-14. InResults of the 2002 Valley of PeaceArchaeology Project: Yalbac, edited by L. J.Lucero, pp. 18-41. Report submitted to theDepartment of Archaeology, Ministry ofTourism and Culture, Belize.Hassan, Fekri1994 Population Ecology and Civilization inAncient Egypt. In Historical Ecology:Cultural Knowledge and ChangingLandscapes, edited by C. L. Crumley, pp.155-181. School of American ResearchPress, Santa Fe.Hocart, Arthur M.1970 [1936] Kings and Councillors: An Essay inthe Comparative Anatomy of Human Society.Edited by R. Needham. University of ChicagoPress, Chicago.Hooper, John M. D.2004a Energetic Investment in the Acropolisat Yalbac, Belize: A ComparativeApproach. M.A. Thesis. New Mexico StateUniversity, Las Cruces.2004b Yalbac’s Royal Acropolis: Looter’sTrench Operations. In Results of the 2003Valley of Peace Archaeology Project:Yalbac, edited by L. J. Lucero, pp. 13-35.Report submitted to the Institute ofArchaeology, National Institute of Cultureand History, Belize.Jones, Christopher1996 Excavations in the East Plaza of Tikal.Tikal Reports No. 16. University MuseumPublications. University of Pennsylvania,Philadelphia.2003 The Tikal Renaissance and the EastPlaza Ball Court. In Tikal: Dynasties,Foreigners, and Affairs of State, edited by J.A. Sabloff, pp. 207-225. School ofAmerican Research, Santa Fe.Loten, H. Stanley2003 The North Acropolis: Monumentality,Function, and Architectural Development.In Tikal: Dynasties, Foreigners, and Affairsof State, edited by J. A. Sabloff, pp. 227-252. School of American Research, SantaFe.Lucero, Lisa J.2004 Exploring Classic Maya Politics:Yalbac, Central Belize. In Archaeological355

Exploring the Role Yalbac TemplesInvestigations in the Eastern MayaLowlands: Papers of the 2003 BelizeArchaeology Symposium, edited by J. Awe,J. Morris, and S. Jones, pp. 83-91. ResearchReports in Belizean Archaeology Volume 1.Institute of Archaeology, National Instituteof Culture and History, Belmopan, Belize.Lucero, Lisa J., Scott L. Fedick, Andrew Kinkella,and Sean M. Graebner2004 Ancient Maya Settlement in the Valleyof Peace Area, Belize. In Archaeology of theUpper Belize River Valley: Half a Centuryof Maya Research, edited by J. F. Garber,pp. 86-102. University Press of Florida,Gainesville.edited by S. D. Houston, pp. 427-478.Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D. C.Thompson, J. Eric1939 Excavations at San Jose, BritishHonduras. Carnegie Institution ofWashington Publication No. 506. CarnegieInstitution, Washington, D. C.Lucero, Lisa J., and Sean M. Graebner2003 Residential Yalbac: Site 94N22N-18. InResults of the 2002 Valley of PeaceArchaeology Project: Yalbac, edited by L. J.Lucero, pp. 42-50. Report submitted to theDepartment of Archaeology, Ministry ofTourism and Culture, Belize.Moholy-Nagy, Hattula1997 Middens, Construction Fill, andOfferings: Evidence for the Organization ofClassic Period Craft Production at Tikal,Guatemala. Journal of Field Archaeology24:293-313.Morrison, Kathleen D.1993 Supplying the City: The Role ofReservoirs in an Indian Urban Landscape.Asian Perspectives 32:133-151.Schele, Linda, and Mary Ellen Miller1986 The Blood of Kings: Dynasty and Ritualin Maya Art. George Braziller, New York.Stein, Burton1977 Temples in Tamil Country, 1300-1750A.D. Indian Economic and Social HistoryReview (Delhi) 14:11-45.Taube, Karl1992 Major Gods of Ancient Yucatan.Studies in Pre-Columbian Art andArchaeology No. 32. Dumbarton Oaks,Washington, D. C.1998 The Jade Hearth: Centrality, Rulership,and the Classic Maya Temple. In Functionand Meaning in Classic Maya Architecture,356