Excavations in Residential Areas of Tikal--Group 7F-1: Tikal Report 22 9781934536827

Table of contents :
Table of Contents
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
I: INTRODUCTION
II: ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY
Introduction
Structure 7F-29
Structure 7F-30
Structure 7F-31
Structure 7F-32
Structure 7F-33
Structure 7F-35
Structure 7F-36
Structure 7F-Sub.1
Structure 7F-Sub.2
Platform 7F-1
Platform 7F-2
Platform 7F-3
Chultun 7F-8
III: BURIALS
Preliminary Comments
Description
Burial 1
Burial 2
Burial 3
Burial 4
Burial 132
Burial 134
Burial 140
Burial 150
Burial 159
Burial 160
Burial 162
Burial 190
Burial 191
Burial 192
Burial 193
Burial 194
Discussion
Household Burials
Residential Burials of Special Significance
Problematical Burials
Relative Social Status
Continuity of Occupation
Possible Ties to the Ruling Dynasty
Provisional Conclusions
IV: CACHES AND PROBLEMATICAL DEPOSITS
Preliminary Comments
Description
Cache 1
Cache 2
Cache 161
Cache 162
Cache 207
Problematical Deposit 37
Problematical Deposit 66
Problematical Deposit 98
Problematical Deposit 100
Problematical Deposit 103
Problematical Deposit 166
Problematical Deposit 167
Problematical Deposit 233
Discussion
Ceremonial Deposits
Domestic Offerings and/or Living Debris
Redeposited Material
Ties to the Ruling Aristocracy
Changes in Offertory Practices
Provisional Conclusions
V: ARTIFACTS
Preliminary Comments
Review of the Artifacts
Structure 7F-29
Structure 7F-30
Structure 7F-31
Structure 7F-32
Structure 7F-33
Structure 7F-35
Structure 7F-36
Structure 7F-Sub.1
Structure 7F-Sub.2
Conclusions
Discussion
Evidence for Upper-Class Status
Ties to the Ruling Aristocracy
Provisional Conclusions
VI: MONUMENTS AND MISCELLANEOUS STONES
Preliminary Comments
Description
Stela 23
Miscellaneous Stone 63
Miscellaneous Stone 95
Miscellaneous Stones 96 and 97
Miscellaneous Stone 133
Miscellaneous Stone 134
Miscellaneous Stone 145
Miscellaneous Stone 150
General Discussion
Provisional Conclusions
VII: CONCLUSIONS
Preliminary Comments
Group Time Spans
Time Span 25
Time Spans 24–22
Time Spans 21 and 20
Time Spans 19 and 18
Time Spans 17 and 16
Time Spans 15 and 14
Time Spans 13 and 12
Time Span 11
Time Spans 10–8
Time Spans 7–1
Time Spans 27 and 26
Functional Assessment
Structure 7F-29
Structure 7F-30
Structure 7F-31
Structure 7F-32
Structure 7F-33
Structure 7F-35
Structure 7F-36
Structure 7F-Sub.1
Structure 7F-Sub.2
Platform 7F-1: Units 9 and 10
Summary
Evidence for Upper-Class Status
Architectural Indicators of Class
Indicators of Class from Burials
Artifactual Indicators of Class
Class Status and the Earliest Occupation of Group 7F-1
Summary
Ties to the Ruling Aristocracy
Burial 160 and the Founding of “New Group 7F-1”
Burial 162 and the Ceremonial Architecture
Continuity of Occupation
The Periods of Ceremonial Activity and Inactivity
The Carved Monuments
Summary
APPENDIX A: Kinship and Residence in Group 7F-1
APPENDIX B: Operation 3 Lots Assigned to Lot Groups
APPENDIX C: Miscellaneous Texts from Group 7F-1
APPENDIX D: Estimates of Total Volume of Best-Known Constructions within Group 7F-1
REFERENCES
ILLUSTRATIONS

Citation preview

Tikal Report No. 22

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL: GROUP 7F-1

This page intentionally left blank

University Museum Monographs 141

Tikal Report No. 22

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL: GROUP 7F-1

William A. Haviland

Series Editors William A. Haviland Christopher Jones

Published by UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA MUSEUM of Archaeology and Anthropology Philadelphia 2015

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA Haviland, William A. Excavations in residential areas of Tikal. Group 7F-1 / William A. Haviland. pages cm. -- (University Museum monographs ; 141) (Tikal report ; no. 22) Includes bibliographical references . ISBN 978-1-934536-81-0 (hardcover : acid-free paper) -- ISBN 1-934536-81-4 (hardcover : acid-free paper) -- ISBN 1-934536-82-2 (e-book) 1. Tikal Site (Guatemala) 2. Mayas--Antiquities. 3. Mayas--Dwellings. 4. Maya architecture. 5. Excavations (Archaeology)--Guatemala. 6. Social archaeology--Guatemala. 7. Guatemala--Antiquities. I. Title. II. Title: Group 7F-1. F1435.1.T5H379 2015 972.81’01--dc23 2015026549

© 2015 by the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology Philadelphia, PA All rights reserved. Published 2015 Published for the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology by the University of Pennsylvania Press. Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper.

DEDICATION To Marshall Joseph Becker, whose work in 1963 signaled the importance of Group 7F-1.

This page intentionally left blank

Table of Contents

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-29 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-31 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-32 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-33 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-35 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-36 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-Sub.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-Sub.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Platform 7F-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Platform 7F-2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Platform 7F-3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chultun 7F-8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III BURIALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Preliminary Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burial 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burial 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burial 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burial 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burial 132 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burial 134 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burial 140 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burial 150 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burial 159 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burial 160 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burial 162 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

xi xiii 1 5 5 5 8 18 21 25 26 27 27 28 29 33 33 35 39 39 39 39 40 40 41 41 43 44 45 46 47 52

viii

CONTENTS

Burial 190 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burial 191 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burial 192 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burial 193 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burial 194 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Household Burials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Residential Burials of Special Significance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Problematical Burials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Relative Social Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Continuity of Occupation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Possible Ties to the Ruling Dynasty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Provisional Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV CACHES AND PROBLEMATICAL DEPOSITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Preliminary Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cache 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cache 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cache 161 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cache 162 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cache 207 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Problematical Deposit 37 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Problematical Deposit 66 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Problematical Deposit 98 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Problematical Deposit 100 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Problematical Deposit 103 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Problematical Deposit 166 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Problematical Deposit 167 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Problematical Deposit 233 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ceremonial Deposits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Domestic Offerings and/or Living Debris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Redeposited Material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ties to the Ruling Aristocracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Changes in Offertory Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Provisional Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V ARTIFACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Preliminary Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Review of the Artifacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-29 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-31 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-32 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-33 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-35 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-36 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

54 55 57 58 59 59 60 60 63 63 64 65 67 69 69 69 69 70 70 71 71 73 73 74 75 75 75 76 76 76 76 77 77 77 78 78 79 79 83 83 87 92 92 95 95 95

CONTENTS

Structure 7F-Sub.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-Sub.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Evidence for Upper-Class Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ties to the Ruling Aristocracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Provisional Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI MONUMENTS AND MISCELLANEOUS STONES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Preliminary Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stela 23 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Miscellaneous Stone 63 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Miscellaneous Stone 95 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Miscellaneous Stones 96 and 97 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Miscellaneous Stone 133 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Miscellaneous Stone 134 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Miscellaneous Stone 145 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Miscellaneous Stone 150 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . General Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Provisional Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Preliminary Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Group Time Spans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Time Span 25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Time Spans 24–22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Time Spans 21 and 20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Time Spans 19 and 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Time Spans 17 and 16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Time Spans 15 and 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Time Spans 13 and 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Time Span 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Time Spans 10–8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Time Spans 7–1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Time Spans 27 and 26 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Functional Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-29 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-31 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-32 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-33 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-35 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-36 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-Sub.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-Sub.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Platform 7F-1: Units 9 and 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ix

95 95 97 100 100 101 102 103 103 103 103 104 104 104 104 105 105 105 105 107 109 109 109 109 111 111 111 111 112 112 112 112 112 113 113 113 114 114 115 115 116 116 116 116 116 117

x

CONTENTS

Evidence for Upper-Class Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Architectural Indicators of Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Indicators of Class from Burials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Artifactual Indicators of Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Class Status and the Earliest Occupation of Group 7F-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ties to the Ruling Aristocracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burial 160 and the Founding of “New Group 7F-1” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Burial 162 and the Ceremonial Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Continuity of Occupation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Periods of Ceremonial Activity and Inactivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Carved Monuments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX A: Kinship and Residence in Group 7F-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX B: Operation 3 Lots Assigned to Lot Groups. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX C: Miscellaneous Texts from Group 7F-1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX D: Estimates of Total Volume of Best-Known Constructions within Group 7F-1 . . . . REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ILLUSTRATIONS

117 117 118 118 119 119 119 119 119 120 120 121 122 123 128 130 131 133

Tables

Table 1.1 Revision of Architectural Designations Used in Tikal Report 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 1.2 Chronological Divisions and the Long Count . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 2.1 Structure 7F-29: Time Spans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 2.2 Structure 7F-30: Time Spans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 2.3 Structure 7F-31: Time Spans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 2.4 Structure 7F-32: Time Spans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 2.5 Structure 7F-35: Time Spans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 2.6 Structure 7F-36: Time Spans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 2.7 Structure 7F-Sub.1: Time Spans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 2.8 Structure 7F-Sub.2: Time Spans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 2.9 Platform 7F-1: Time Spans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 2.10 Platform 7F-2: Time Spans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 2.11 Platform 7F-3: Time Spans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 2.12 Chultun 7F-8: Time Spans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 3.1 Burials from Group 7F-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 3.2 Floor Area and Volume of Group 7F-1 Graves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 3.3 Chronology of Group 7F-1 Burials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 3.4 Summary of Materials Associated with the Intermediate and Late Classic Burials, Structures 7F-30 and 31 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 4.1 Location and Significance of Caches and Problematical Deposits from Group 7F-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 5.1 Group 7F-1: Lot Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 5.2 Artifacts from General Excavations in Group 7F-1 Illustrated in Tikal Report 27B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 5.3 Basic Household Artifacts from Group 7F-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 5.4 Common Household Artifacts from Group 7F-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 5.5 Other Artifacts from Group 7F-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 5.6 Structure 7F-29: Sherds and Artifacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 5.7 Structure 7F-30: Sherds and Artifacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 5.8 Structure 7F-31: Sherds and Artifacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 5.9 Structure 7F-32: Sherds and Artifacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 5.10 Artifacts from Structure 7F-32 Illustrated in Tikal Report 27B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2 4 6 10 20 25 27 28 28 29 34 35 36 36 39 40 60 62 70 80 84 85 86 88 90 91 92 93 94

xii

Table 5.11 Table 5.12 Table 5.13 Table 5.14 Table 5.15 Table 5.16 Table 5.17 Table 5.18 Table 5.19 Table 7.1 Table 7.2 Table 7.3

TABLES

Structure 7F-33: Sherds and Artifacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-35: Sherds and Artifacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-36: Sherds and Artifacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-Sub.1: Sherds and Artifacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structure 7F-Sub.2: Sherds and Artifacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Platform 7F-1: Sherds and Artifacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Platform 7F-2: Sherds and Artifacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Platform 7F-3: Sherds and Artifacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Basic and Common Household Artifacts from Group 7F-1 Made of Obsidian Instead of Chert . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Group 7F-1: Time Spans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Height in Meters of Building Floors Above Nearest Contemporary Surface of Platform 7F-1: Structures 7F-29, 7F-30, 7F-31, and 7F-32 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Platform Indices Compared: Structures 7F-29, 7F-30, 7F-31, and 7F-32 . . . . . . . . . .

95 96 96 96 97 98 99 99 101 110 114 115

Illustrations

Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Figure 15 Figure 16 Figure 17 Figure 18 Figure 19 Figure 20 Figure 21 Figure 22 Figure 23 Figure 24 Figure 25 Figure 26 Figure 27 Figure 28 Figure 29 Figure 30 Figure 31 Figure 32 Figure 33

Structures 7F-29-2nd and 3rd: Plan Structures 7F-29-1st-A and 1st-B: Plan Structure 7F-29: Section A-A’ Structure 7F-30-5th and Platform 7F-3-2nd: Plan Structure 7F-30-5th and Platform 7F-3-1st: Plan Structure 7F-30-4th: Plan Structure 7F-30-3rd: Plan Structures 7F-30-2nd and 7F-31-2nd: Plan Structures 7F-30-1st-A, B, and C, and Structures 7F-31-1st-A, B: Plan Structure 7F-30: Section A-A’ Structures 7F-30 and 7F-31: Section B-B’ Structures 7F-32-2nd-C, B, and A: Plan Structures 7F-32-1st-H and G: Building Plan Structures 7F-32-1st-F and E: Building Plan Structures 7F-32-1st-D, C, and B: Building Plan Structure 7F-32-1st-A: Plan Structure 7F-32: Section A-A’ Structure 7F-32: Sections B-B’ and C-C’ Sections and Wall Elevations within Rooms of Structure 7F-32 Structures 7F-35 and 36: Plan Structures 7F-35 and 36: Sections A-A’ and B-B’ Structure 7F-Sub.1: Plan Structure 7F-Sub.2 and Bedrock beneath Structure 7F-29: Plans Burial 160: Plan East Wall of Burial 160: Elevation Intermediate Classic Burials on the Axis of Burial 160: Plans Transitional and Late Classic Burials on the Axis of Burial 160: Plans and Section of Burial 150 Burials on the Axis of Structure 7F-31: Plans Burials from Chultun 7F-8 and Structure 7F-29: Plans Group 7F-1 as Constructed in Time Span 25 Group 7F-1 as It Appeared in Time Span 20 after the Alterations of Time Span 21 Group 7F-1 as It Appeared in Time Span 18 after the Alterations of Time Span 19 Group 7F-1 as It Appeared in Time Span 14 after the Alterations of Time Span 15

xiv

Figure 34 Figure 35 Figure 36 Figure 37 Figure 38 Figure 39 Figure 40 Figure 41 Figure 42 Figure 43

ILLUSTRATIONS

Group 7F-1 as It Appeared in Time Span 12 after the Alterations of Time Span 13 Group 7F-1 as It Appeared in Time Span 10 after the Alterations of Time Span 11 Group 7F-1 as It Appeared in Time Span 2 after the Alterations of Time Spans 9–3 A Comparison of Height and Platform Index of the Large Houses and Temples of Group 7F-1 Hypothetical Genealogy of the Residents of Group 7F-1 from Group Time Spans 25–1 Details in Room 1 of Structure 7F-29 and 32: Photographs Details in Room 1 of Structure 7F-32: Photographs (Continued) Details in Room 3 of Structure 7F-32: Photographs Details in Room 3 of Structure 7F-32: Photographs (Continued) Burial 160: Photographs of Painted Inscription and Skeleton A In Situ; Burial 193: Photograph Before Removal of Grave Roof

I

Introduction

Group 7F-1 is located on a knoll at 7F: S207 E170, 1,250 m SE of the Great Plaza of Tikal, 340 m SW of Str. 6F-27 (Temple of the Inscriptions), and 195 m S of the Inscriptions Reservoir. Originally mapped as a collection of adjacent platforms and courts, with two templelike structures on the E, two very small structures on the W, and three more substantial ones on the N, S, and towards the center of the group (TR. 2:fig. 1), subsequent plane-table survey (TR. 11:Str. 7F-29 through 36) modified this only by adding one more structure (7F-34). Larger and more complex than any other group in Sq. 7F, this one is also noteworthy for the presence of a carved monument (since moved to the Tikal Museum). Discovery of this St. 23 (in December, 1956) prompted the first controlled excavations undertaken by the Tikal Project (TR. 1:16). Early in 1957, as part of efforts to record all carved surfaces (TR. 12:41), Vivian L. Broman and William R. Coe cleared debris from the lower part of the stela (TR. 1:16; TR. 2:27). Discovering that its base was missing, they continued digging in hopes of finding it, and perhaps an associated altar (TR. 2:fig. 3). Neither was discovered, but what did emerge from this early work (Op. 3A, reported in TR. 2) were glimpses of offertory and mortuary practices at Tikal, insights into monument mutilation and reuse, data on Terminal Classic activities, and hints of the complexities to come once investigation of the site center got underway. No problems were solved, but several were raised, not the least of which concerned the nature of each structure, and how the group functioned. No further work was undertaken, however, as by 1958 the focus of attention had shifted to the Great Plaza and North Acropolis. When work resumed in Gp. 7F-1, it was as an offshoot of the program of small structure investigation (TR. 12:26–31). In 1963, Marshall J. Becker sought to confirm that examples of what came to be called “Plaza Plan 2” could be found in all parts of the central 9 km2 of Tikal (TR. 12:29), and Gp. 7F-1 was one of those selected for testing (as Op. 3B and C). Noting the large size of Str. 7F30, Becker thought that it might be the product of a lon-

ger and more complex construction history than any other “Temple on the E” so far excavated (reported in TR. 21). This, and the possibility that adjacent 7F-31 might predate 30, made them good places to look for information on the early development of “Plaza Plan 2.” The 1963 excavations, like those of 1957, raised more questions than answers. Although Gp. 7F-1 could be interpreted as the residence of people of wealth and high social standing, who maintained their own private “temples,” the presence of an impressive chamber burial (Bu. 160) so far from the center of Tikal suggested that it could also be interpreted as an example of what William R. Bullard called a “minor ceremonial center.” These he saw as elements in a regional political and religious hierarchy, responsible for the administrative and ceremonial affairs of particular zones, but answerable to a higher center of “church” and state. According to Bullard (1960:359–360), minor centers should be appreciably larger than house compounds but smaller than major centers, ordinarily including one or more pyramidal structures arranged in company with lower buildings around one, two, or three adjacent plazas. Vaulted range-type buildings may be present, but should not form extensive compounds. Group 7F-1 meets these criteria (cf. also TR. 2:fig. 1 with Bullard 1960:fig. 3), and its lavish “tomb” suggests some sort of link to the seat of government and religion at the heart of Tikal. Paradoxically, it was curiosity as to what lay beyond the confines of the TR. 11 map that prompted further investigation of Gp. 7F-1, which seemed to resemble in size and complexity some of the small outlying sites that Tikal Project personnel were just then (1964) beginning to explore (TR. 13:xi). The presence of carved monuments at some of these—El Encanto, Jimbal, and Uolantun— focused attention anew on St. 23 and also on St. 25, from nearby Gp. 7F-3 (TR. 8 and 20A). At the time, the prevailing idea was that both had been dragged from somewhere on or near the Great Plaza, even though Linton Satterthwaite had suggested that there might have been

2

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

two centers of early monument erection at Tikal (TR. 3:74–75). Building on his suggestion, I put forward the hypothesis that the original placement of both St. 23 and 25 was somewhere in Gp. 7F-1, which may have had a function analogous to that of an El Encanto or Uolantun. The precise nature of that function, of course, remained unknown. In a final effort to solve the puzzle of Gp. 7F-1’s purpose, I carried out a third season of excavation in 1965. Since all previous work had been done in or near Str. 7F30 and 31, most of this work was devoted to the others, especially 7F-29, 32, and 35 (Op. 3E, 3F, 3G). Three others (7F-33, 34, and 36) were only tested (Op. 3I, 3H, 3J); one of them (7F-34) proved not to be a structure at all. The two “temples” 7F-30 and 31 were not entirely neglected, however, as they were probed in front for plaza floors by which they might be linked to other construction, to learn more about the buried construction that Coe and Broman (in TR. 2) labeled “Feature 3,” and to seek evidence (which was never found) for the original setting of monuments in front of the building beneath which Becker had found the chamber burial, 160 (Op. 3B, 3C, 3D). I have since regretted not digging more here, for as will be seen in part II herein, there are still loose ends. On the other hand, project resources were limited, and further investigation of the two “temples” would have come at the expense of knowledge about other elements of the group. Moreover, it is now certain (for reasons given in part VI) that neither St. 23 nor 25 originally stood in Gp. 7F-1, but were moved there from epicentral Tikal later in the history of the group. Preparation of this report, like the excavations on which it is based, was accomplished in three stages. A first draft was prepared and circulated to Becker and Coe in 1968 for their criticism and comments. At the same time, plans and sections were sent to John McGinn for drafting. All three individuals had important things to say and questions to raise that proved vital to completion of the report, although other commitments prevented further work until 1974. It was then that Clemency Coggins began asking questions about the group and its burials that she needed answered for her study of painting and drawing styles at Tikal. By then, too, there was a pressing need to straighten out various “messes” in the burials and caches that had been pointed out by Coe. Spurred on by the need to provide both individuals with reliable information, a thorough reconsideration and revision of the earlier effort was undertaken. This was encouraged by Coggins’s work, which opened up new interpretive leads; although not all of her hypotheses have been borne out, her questions of me, and her answers to my questions of her, have been as important to the completion of this report as have Becker’s, Coe’s and McGinn’s comments and criticisms.

Following this revision, a summary article on Gp. 7F-1 was published (Haviland 1981), but the full report was again set aside in favor of other priorities (including completion of TR. 20); contributing as well was my discomfort with reconstructions of Str. 7F-30 in its various forms. Not until 2011 was work resumed on TR. 22, by which time it was thought that a fresh look at 7F-30 would be beneficial. Unfortunately, numerous uncertainties remain, which are spelled out in its write-up. With the benefit of hindsight, it is clear that further extensive excavation of this evident temple should have been carried out. This publication, which has as its central purpose the recording of all data from the Op. 3 excavations, is concerned as well with a series of hypotheses. In broad outline, these are that, from late Early Classic times until its abandonment, Gp. 7F-1 was an elite residential group that included houses, ceremonial structures, and perhaps servants’ quarters. It was founded, upon the death of one of Tikal’s Early Classic rulers, by his co-ruler, who moved here when he died and buried him in an elaborate tomb. (Although the formal definition of tomb must await completion of TR. 35. Throughout this report, the term is used to refer to a burial in which an individual was placed with his or her elite belongings, without earth covering the body or dirt in the face, in a chamber far larger than needed for mere containment of the corpse and associated materials; see Haviland and Moholy-Nagy 1992:53.) The co-rulers’ descendants continued their residency well into Terminal Classic times, but over this period their fortunes waxed and waned, perhaps partially in response to political developments at Tikal. As this report proceeds, these hypotheses will be developed in greater detail. That said, care has been taken to avoid “stacking the deck” in their favor by being selective and omitting important data. As was done in TR. 19 (especially pp. 1–4), basic information is first presented, and then examined for its bearing

TABLE 1.1 Revision of Architectural Designations Used in Tikal Report 2 New Designation Str. 7F-30:U. 33 Str. 7F-30:U. 34 Str. 7F-Sub.l Plat. 7F-l-lst:Fl. 1 Plat. 7F-l-2nd:Fl. 1 Plat. 7F-1:U. 14 Plat. 7F-1:U. 5 Plat. 7F-1:U. 1

Old Designation Feature 2 Feature 1 Feature 3 Floor 1 Floor 2 Floor 3 Floor 5 Floor 4

INTRODUCTION

on the hypotheses under consideration. Here, parts II, III, IV, and V correspond to II, V, VI, and VII of TR. 19, although there are some differences: all architectural data will be found in part II (instead of a separate section as in TR. 19), definition and discussion of lot groups are in part V (see also Appendix B), and group time spans are defined in part VII, prior to integrating insights from all preceding sections in a final assessment of the hypotheses noted above. Discussion of St. 23, 25, and several miscellaneous stones will be found in VI. The report concludes on a more speculative note (in Appendix A) with a trial reconstruction of kinship and residence in Gp. 7F-1. Although data from the 1957 excavations are fully integrated with those from more recent ones in this report, not all details reported in TR. 2 are presented anew here. Instead, aided by Table 1.1 (TR. 2 was written before terminology was standardized as per TR. 12), the reader is referred back to the earlier publication whenever appropriate. Terminology utilized in this report is that set forth in TR. 12 (esp. pp. 47–49 and 61–63), with emendations as described in TR. 19 (pp. 3–4) and 20A (p. 2), as well as above with respect to the word “tomb.” Establishment of time spans for each structure and platform follows the precedent TR. 19 sets by defining a single series for each in all its guises, rather than separate series for each 1st, 2nd, and so forth (as in TR. 14). This produces, for example, one set of seventeen time spans (Table 2.2 [see below] for Str. 7F-30 [1st through 5th]), instead of five separate series: TS. 1–7 for 1st, another TS. 1–2 for 2nd, TS. 1–2 for 3rd, TS. 1–2 for 4th, and TS. 1–4 for 5th. By adopting this approach, the logical connection between products of development is stressed, although time span content would be the same whichever procedure was used (e.g., content of TS. 11 of 7F-30 is no different than what content of a TS. 2 of 7F-30-3rd would be). Furthermore, whether one defines time spans as here, or as defined in TR. 14, the group time spans derived from them would be the same twenty-seven group time spans in Table 7.1 (see below). One other departure from TR. 14 is definition herein of two distinct architectural developments (1st and 2nd) for Str. 7F-32. This is largely a matter of labeling, for certainly what is called 1st represents a major alteration of original 2nd; the whole structure in a very real sense was turned around to face N instead of S (although access to the now isolated Rm. 1 from the S was retained). Yet, because the Maya managed to do this without actually tearing down the structure and putting up a new one on the same spot, some might hesitate to label these 1st and 2nd, but would instead speak of a 7F-32-A and B. Whichever alternative one chooses, however, does not change the basic facts. A word about the definition of Gp. 7F-1 itself is also necessary. Almost all of what is known about this group

3

begins with construction of Str. 7F-30-5th, 7F-32-2nd-C, 7F-Sub.1, Plat. 7F-1-4th, and Plat. 7F-3-2nd, even though traces of earlier architecture (Str. 7F-Sub.2) exist. As will become apparent, there is reason to regard the nature of the oldest occupation as quite different from that of the later Gp. 7F-1. In the text, the oldest occupation will be referred to as “Old Gp. 7F-1,” the latest as “New Gp. 7F-1.” Although basic chronological control in Gp. 7F-1 is based primarily on stratigraphy, dating of time spans relies heavily on established dates of late Manik, Ik, Imix, and Eznab Ceramic Complexes of Tikal. For convenient reference, these are given in Table 1.2, together with currently used period names appropriate to the era represented by occupation of Gp. 7F-1. Since two different dates have been published for the end of Late Classic and onset of Terminal Classic times (TR. 33A:table 1; TR. 25A:table 1), some explanation is required for the one used here. T. Patrick Culbert (in TR. 25A) bases his estimate on the close resemblance of Eznab pottery to Bayal ceramics, which appeared at Seibal about 10.0.0.0.0; he thinks it highly unlikely that as many as three katuns (60 years) would have passed before similar pottery appeared at Tikal (T. P. Culbert pers. comm., 1985). By contrast, Christopher Jones (TR. 33A:31 and 130), following Coe, argues that St. 11 with its altar and underlying cache are so within Classic traditions that continuity of Imix pottery is probable. Support for this view comes from Bu. 77, which contained Imix ceramics; Coe (in TR. 14:865–866) argues that this interment, beneath an unfinished Str. 5D-11, is that of the ruler portrayed on St. 11. Peter D. Harrison (pers. comm.) disagrees with Coe’s interpretation, citing (among other reasons) a likely female sex for the corpse in Bu. 77. Nevertheless, a date some time after 10.2.0.0.0 (recorded on St. 11) is possible for the appearance of Terminal Classic Eznab pottery. Furthermore, up to 60 years of coexistence of late Imix with Bayal ceramics is not out of line with the degree of overlap that seems to have existed between Postclassic complexes in the Maya lowlands (cf. Chase and Chase 1985:13; Freidel 1985:305–306). The assistance of numerous individuals in writing this report needs acknowledgment. My great debt to Becker, Coe, Coggins, Jones, and McGinn should be clear from what has already been said, and I am most appreciative of their contributions of both data and ideas. Becker and Coe deserve added recognition for having called attention to the potential importance of Gp. 7F-1 at times when it might otherwise have been neglected in favor of investigations elsewhere at Tikal. Other important contributions were made by Henry Schwartz, Becker’s field assistant in 1963, Edward Crocker, who assisted him briefly in the same year, and Anthony Gahan, who joined these other two in offering aid when the “tomb” was discovered. In

4

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 1.2 Chronological Divisions and the Long Count PERIOD

LONG COUNT

DATE

Early Postclassic

CERAMICS Caban

J\LJ V3U

Terminal Classic

Eznab lu.z.U.U.U

J\D oOV

late Late Classic

Imix o 1R R o n

A~n ^^^

early Late Classic

Imix Q 1^ 0 0 0

/YD 6Q?

Intermediate Classic2

Ik o /c n n n

AT^ ^^A.

Manik IIIB3

Early Classic 9.2.5.0.0

AD 480

1. After TR.27A:xiv 2. After TR. 14 3. After Laporte 2003:290

1965, Francis P. Bowles helped map the excavations and rigged up lighting systems for tunnel excavation; Karen L. Mohr and Martha Schiek participated in the excavation of Bu. 190, 192, and 193. Invaluable assistance was furnished by Ismael Terceco, who drew the field plan of Str. 7F-32 and the supplementary sections and wall elevations that appear here in Fig. 19. Without his help, much less could have been accomplished in 1965. Others who have contributed in one way or another to this report are Linda Schele, who provided assistance with inscriptions, Culbert, who was forthcoming with evaluations of the ceramics in the field and (later on) was responsive to my questions about burial pottery, and Hattula Moholy-Nagy, who most kindly provided me

with extended comments on the artifacts and who also answered numerous questions. Jane Homiller did preliminary drafts of all the plans and sections except for the plan and wall elevation of Bu. 160, which were done by Virginia Greene. Homiller’s patience with the author’s directions and sometimes tardiness in returning things to her is appreciated. Jennifer Quick and after her Betty Christensen provided the valuable function of filling requests for information from the Tikal files in Philadelphia. Kathryn Greer and especially Barbara Hayden deserve special thanks for their word processing and editing of endless manuscript drafts, made no easier by having to decipher my writing. To Toni Rosencrantz goes my gratitude for much tedious proofreading.

II

Architecture and Constr uction History

Introduction Before worrying about by whom, and for what, Gp. 7F-1 was used, it is important to have as thorough an understanding as possible of the architectural entities that comprise the group. Accordingly, it is the purpose of this section to describe each structure, platform, and chultun that has been investigated, and to discuss in detail its construction history. The latter is necessary not only because the composition of Gp. 7F-1 changed from time to time, but also because the basis for architectural reconstructions cannot be made clear otherwise. Little attention is given to the hypotheses with which this report is concerned, lest these exert an undue influence on the architectural reconstructions. These hypotheses are best left to subsequent sections, once the physical composition of Gp. 7F-1 is understood. Datum for all the excavations in the group is St. 23 itself.

Structure 7F-29 In its final form, Str. 7F-29, located on the N side of Plat. 7F-1, was a range-type structure of five rooms (Fig. 2). Its plan is similar to those of the upper stories of Str. 4D-14 and 5E-51 (TR. 23A:fig. 9b and 45a). As Op. 3E, the major portions of the three eastern rooms were cleared, and selective probes exposed portions of the S and E walls. A trench to bedrock penetrated the front-rear axis and a tunnel beneath the interior platform of Rm. 1 revealed details of construction of the rear (N) wall. Structure 7F-29 is discussed here as three architectural developments, the latest of which was subsequently modified. Since the supplementary platform of 29-1st and each of the three rooms that were investigated all showed

evidence of only one modification, it is assumed that a single act of renovation was responsible. Portions of earlier construction were noted in the axial trench, as well as beneath the S wall of Str. 7F-29. Some of this pertains to a structure or structures that might represent architectural developments for 7F-29, or structures that more properly might be placed in the “Sub” series. For reasons discussed below, this construction is treated as architectural developments of Str. 7F-29 (Table 2.1). STRUCTURE 7F-29-3RD As seen in the axial trench (Fig. 3), the earliest activity at this locus consisted of quarrying operations (Fig. 23b), followed by construction of a plaza floor (Plat. 7F-1:U. 2). This is discussed elsewhere (see Plat. 7F-1-4th). After a period of use of unknown duration, the northern portion of the plaza floor was torn out (CS. 4). Fill was then dumped over the remaining portion of the floor, and above bedrock to the N. At the same time, a wall of a single course of well-cut, rectangular masonry (U. 7) was built to retain this fill on the N. Unit 6, a pause-line of compact, light-colored earth, marks the termination of this operation (CS. 3). Unit 6 served as the base surface for the structure represented by U. 2. Unit 2 is pavement that clearly served as a platform floor. As seen in the axial trench (Fig. 3), it was laid over a fill that was put in place in two stages. Dark earth, with several stone blocks in it, was dumped on U. 6. This was covered by a compact, light-colored earth fill on which the floor itself was laid. The N limit of U. 2 is not known, for it was later torn out for construction of the N wall of Str. 7F-29-1st-B (Fig. 3:14). Unit 3, identified in a trench along the E portion of the front wall of Str. 7F-29-1st-A, apparently is a portion of the same structure represented by U. 2 (Fig. 1). This wall

6

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

now runs beneath the final wall of 29-1st-A to a point 7.24 m E of the axial trench. Here, a probe established the presence of a corner, inside of which a floor surface at the level of the top of U. 3 was located. Since it has the same elevation as U. 2, it must be a portion of the same floor. For lack of more detailed information, a single construction stage (CS. 2) has been defined for construction of U. 2 and 3.

The entire form and size of the architecture represented by U. 2 and 3 cannot be reconstructed with certainty without further excavation. Moreover, much of it appears to have been destroyed in the course of later construction. Excavation along U. 3 revealed a break 2.24 m W of its E end, beyond which there is no further masonry. Evidently, the wall was ripped out W of this point. This

TABLE 2.1 Structure 7F-29: Time Spans Time Span

Construction Architectural Floor Stage Development

Unit

Special Deposits: Bu. PD.

Lot Group (Table 5.1)

Abandonment and collapse

1 2

166-7

3

Ist-A

1

5

192

4a,b 4c,d

Final use; transition from Imix to Eznab ceramics Modification of structure

3c

4

4e 1

2

3

Construction of vault Construction of building walls Construction of building platform

Ist-B 3b

4 5

4

Construction of supplementary platform

3a

Demolition of earlier construction

6

Use of 2nd; transition from Ik to Imix ceramics

6 7 8

Useof29-B Construction of interior platforms and floors

8

2

5

Other Data

2nd

1

1

Ib

2

2,3

Ic

9

3

4

Construction of a replacement for 3rd

2

3rd

7

la

Construction of a building onU. 2 Construction of building platform Construction of base surface Partial demolition of existing plaza surface; Ik ceramics in vogue

ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

is consistent with evidence from the axial trench. An entirely different kind of fill from that of 29-3rd runs S into the area of Plat. 7F-1, and begins at a point 0.10 m S of the front wall for Str. 7F-29-1st-B (Fig. 3:14), overlying U. 6. This fill is precisely like that seen elsewhere for Plat. 7F-1-2nd, so it appears that Str. 7F-29-3rd was partially destroyed when Plat. 7F-1-2nd was constructed. Since much of the front of Str. 7F-29-3rd was eventually destroyed, it is impossible to be sure what the structure looked like. It is reconstructed in Fig. 1 by analogy with 29-1st as having had a straight front wall, with U. 3 running to a SW corner the same distance E of the W wall of 29-1st-A, so that the SE corner is W of the E wall of 1st-A. Further excavation would be necessary to prove this; since 1st-A and B were range-type structures, however, and since there is a similar possibility for 2nd, Str. 7F-29-3rd may have been as well. There is no proof of this, though, and the extent of U. 2 so far N might seem to argue against this. Instead, what is suggested is that 293rd was a wide building platform. It could have supported a pole-and-thatch range-type building. In favor of this is the absence of a posthole in the SE corner of U. 2, such as would be expected in the case of an ordinary rectangular, one-level building platform (TR. 20B), and indications discussed later that the fortunes of the residents of Gp. 7F-1 were just beginning to recover from a particularly low ebb. STRUCTURE 7F-29-2ND This architectural development is represented by U. 1, a floor remnant W of the axial trench (Fig. 1). Its elevation is 0.45 m above that of U. 2, and 0.22 m below that of Fl. 2 of Str. 7F-29-1st in Rm. 1 (Fig. 3). That Fl. 2 of 1st postdates U. 2 is clearly indicated by the presence of U. 2 beneath it. Unit 2 was built when Ik pottery was in vogue, and when contemporary platform floors were laid up to, but not beneath, associated buildings or other constructions above their surface (TR. 35). Since Str. 7F-29-2nd was at some point almost totally demolished, little can be said about it. Only 0.60 m of U. 1 survived this demolition, but its N edge shows a clear turnup, so a wall must once have stood here. Its stratigraphic relationship to Str. 7F-29-3rd, plus the fact that 3rd seems to have been done away with when Plat. 7F-1-2nd was built, suggests that 29-2nd was served in front by the floor of Plat. 7F-1-2nd. As noted elsewhere, U. 2 of 7F-29 seems to have been incorporated into that floor. The height of U. 1 above this is sufficient to suggest that it is the floor of a building platform (equivalent to Fl. 1 and 2 of Str. 7F-29-1st in Rm. 1), and that there was probably a lower platform level in front of it to the S. Just where the front wall of this would have been is a matter for speculation. The turnup of U. 1, then, could

7

have been to a rear-building wall, or to a “bench” such as was constructed in 29-1st-B. The latter appears most probable, since it looks as though destruction of the rear wall of 29-3rd took place when 1st-B was built. Given this, it seems likely that the rear of 2nd was built up from the rear of Str. 29-3rd. STRUCTURE 7F-29-1ST-B Construction of this structure (Fig. 2) may be divided into at least six construction stages on the basis of evidence from the axial trench, although it is possible that more were involved. Construction Stage 6 saw the almost complete demolition of the earlier Str. 7F-29-2nd. Along with this, the N portion of U. 2 was apparently torn down to its base surface where the wall of the new structure was to be built. Following preparation of the site, the supplementary platform for 29-1st was built, probably as a single construction stage (CS. 5). Gray earth fill was dumped on the surviving surface of U. 2, and the front retaining wall was set down into that floor. Evidence for this intrusion consists of the stratigraphic relationship between U. 2 and the floor of Plat. 7F-1-2nd already discussed, as well as the presence of Imix sherds in the partially sealed sample from beneath U. 2 (Table 5.1 [see below]; LG. 1b). The only way to account for these sherds is by the intrusion of the wall for Str. 7F-29-1st-B (Fig. 3:3), for sealed samples from beneath U. 2 did not produce such sherds. To the N, where U. 2 had been destroyed, a battered wall was built. Composed of two rows of rectangular masonry against a rubble core, it sat on the old base surface (U. 6) for the structure represented by U. 2. An old retaining wall (U. 7), associated with U. 6, continued to serve with the new structure, which was set back 0.48 m from U. 7. Unit 4, a pause-line with some rubble to the S, marks the top of the fill for CS. 5. The actual building platform was built as CS. 4. For this, single-course walls were assembled on the fill of the supplementary platform; 3.30 m N of its front wall, 1.64 m from its end walls, and 0.04 m S of the face of its back wall. As seen in Rm. 1, a fill of rubble was placed under what was to become the floor of the room, while earth was dumped N of this over U. 4. The pavement of the supplementary platform may have been laid up to the walls of the building platform at this time. It is more likely, however, that this floor was laid at a later time, when the interior was finished. The next stage of construction (CS. 3) saw completion of the building walls, although probably not the roof. These walls were set back 2 to 4 cm from those of the building platform. They were constructed of thin rectangular masonry stretchers as facing on a core of rubble (Fig. 39a). Some of the corners were bonded, others were

8

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

not. The original height of the walls is unknown. There was no sign of wall inserts near the entrances to Rm. 1, 4, or 5. The roof of Str. 7F-29-1st had completely collapsed, but the amount of debris, and the presence of beveled stones, clearly proves that the building was vaulted. It is assumed that the vault was built before the interiors of the rooms were finished (CS. 2). The angle of the bevel of the vault stones averages 116 degrees. The back ends of the stones were tapered, so as to bond into the hearting of the vault. Roof collapse on the E end platform of Rm. 1 showed an intact vault spring of 0.10 m. Construction Stage 1 saw completion of 29-1st-B. In the rear of Rm. 1, 4, and 5 (and probably Rm. 2 and 3), platforms were constructed on the fill of the building platform (Fig. 2). They were faced with vertically set rectangular masonry that abuts the room-end walls. A second course of like masonry was set horizontally above the first, so as to produce a cornice on the platforms in Rm. 1 and 4 (and probably 2). The fill of the interior platforms was covered by plaster surfaces, and plaster floors (Fl. 2) were laid in each room. These floors cover the masonry of the building platforms in the doorways, and turn up to the building walls and interior platform walls. A peculiarity of Fl. 2 in Rm. 5 is the presence of a round hole (Fig. 2:U. 8). Its regularity suggests that a post was set here, but for what reason it is hard to imagine. Unit 8 is located directly in front of the S end of the interior platform. It was probably also in the course of CS. 1 that the exposed top of the supplementary platform was surfaced. STRUCTURE 7F-29-1ST-A After a period of use, Str. 29-1st was extensively renovated. The exact sequence of events is not known, but an overall contemporaneity seems indicated. The supplementary platform was modified by the construction of a new front wall, 0.60 m S of the original front wall (Fig. 1 and 3:11). This new wall was based on Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1, which was associated with Str. 7F-29-2nd. Whether an entirely new floor was laid on the exposed surface of the supplementary platform is not known. Evidence from the E end suggests that much of the original floor continued in use, with new floor surface added where necessary. In front of the doorway to Rm. 5 (Fig. 2:2), a single floor surface was found, with a plaster patch that turns up to an extension of the building platform (see below). Room 1 was altered by the addition of two very high room-end interior platforms (Fig. 2:12,13). The walls for these were built directly on the original floors of the room and interior platform. A new floor (Fl. 1) was then laid. This turns up to the face of the old interior platform, the faces of the new platforms, and the building walls. The room-end platforms, like the earlier platform, were built

with a cornice. The total length of the platforms is 0.32 m, less than the width of the room, with the added thickness of the front building wall. In Rm. 4, a new floor (Fl. 1) was laid over Fl. 2, as in Rm. 1. A plastered masonry block (Fig. 2:U. 5) may have been placed on the surface of the interior platform at this time. The plastered face of the block was even with the cornice face of the platform. The E end of the block abuts the E wall of the room. The purpose of the block is unknown; perhaps the whole E end of the interior platform was raised. The modification of Rm. 5 apparently commenced with the interment of Bu. 192 through Fl. 2 in front of the interior platform and against the S wall of the room. The end wall of the building platform was extended to the E by the addition of a new wall (Fig. 2:10). The surface of the supplementary platform was patched to turn up to this wall, and a new floor was laid inside the room (Fl. 1). This sealed Bu. 192 and turned up to the walls of the building and the interior platform. The U. 8 hole is also apparent in Fl. 1. Later, another hole was dug into the floor to receive PD. 166.

Structure 7F-30 Structure 7F-30 is the larger of two structures on the E side of the plaza area bounded on the N and S by Str. 7F-29 and 32. Coe and Broman in 1957 (TR. 2) investigated St. 23, which was reset in front of Str. 7F-30. Their excavations revealed four burials, one apparently initial relative to a later, small, terracelike feature that was added onto the front of Str. 7F-30. The structure, though, was substantially untouched by their work, which was focused on the stela. In 1963, Becker returned to investigate the structure itself. To do so, he began a deep trench through the apparent E-W axis, beginning where Coe and Broman left off in 1957. This work revealed a complex sequence of burials, caches, and problematical deposits associated with the initial construction and later renovations of 7F30. The overall pattern suggested an elaborate version of a pattern seen elsewhere at Tikal: relatively formal burials associated with the construction or alteration of an apparently ritual structure, always positioned on the E edge of a plaza (TR. 21). Finally, in 1965, I dug two tunnels into the structure N and S of Becker’s trench, producing more burials, a cache, and further architectural data. In spite of all this work, Str. 7F-30 is still difficult to interpret. All available information is from the deep trench, the N and S tunnels, and a trench through the axis of neighboring Str. 7F-31 (built over earlier architecture associated with Str. 7F-30). Hence, the full extent of various walls and floors is not certainly known. In addition, the correlation of walls and floors between trenches and

ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

tunnels is dependent on indirect evidence. The only remedy would be to excavate extensively Str. 7F-30, something that, in hindsight, should have been done. In 1963, Becker was merely seeking verification for his hypothesis that 7F-30 conformed to his “temple on the E” pattern (“Plaza Plan 2,” TR. 21). At that time he thought his trench would suffice. In 1965, interest lay in the other structures of the group as I sought to put 7F-30 in the context of Gp. 7F-1 as a whole. Further work on 7F-30 was limited to what might produce evidence for the one-time erection of monuments in front of an early version of it. Only later was the complexity of what was naively assumed to be a fairly “straightforward” architectural sequence realized. Thus, in the face of numerous uncertainties, a probabilistic reconstruction of 7F-30 in its various forms is all that we have. Justification of that reconstruction requires considerable discussion of the evidence, and the alternative ways that it might be interpreted. The deep trench excavated by Becker constitutes the basic point of reference, so for each architectural development, the data from it are discussed first. Following this, available evidence from the two tunnels and the trench through 7F-31 is related to that from the deep trench (Table 2.2). An added complication is that some forms of 7F-30 featured a substantial terrace (Plat. 7F-3) on its W. Even though it extends farther S, the evidence indicates that this terrace was built as an integral part of the structure. Although it is described separately, the stratigraphic relationships of units of Plat. 7F-3 to those of Str. 7F-30 are noted here. STRUCTURE 7F-30-5TH Architectural elements (Fig. 4, 5, and 10) that evidently belong to the earliest version of Str. 7F-30 are U. 1 through 12, with their various fills as seen in the deep trench (Fig. 10). In summary, these were assembled as bedrock was cleared, and the chamber excavated for Bu. 160 (CS. 13). Following the interment, workers laid up a three-course masonry wall in its entrance, the interior of which they plastered. Impressions of textile are evident in the plaster used to finish the inside surface of this wall. Left was a space 0.44 m high through which to exit. This was then sealed with large stone blocks, at the same time that fill (described in the caption to Fig. 10) was loaded into the shaft. Completion of this operation (as CS. 12) is marked by a pause-line, U. 1. Following CS. 12, the core of a structure was built up in a series of four stages (CS. 11–8) to a height of about 2.20 m, for which a rough retaining wall on the W (U. 2) was erected in 0.40 to 0.70 m increments. As each section was installed, fill was placed E of it, and pause-lines (U. 3, 4, and 5) mark completion of all but CS. 8. That the top of U. 2 and its fill marks the end of this stage is indicated by

9

apparent continuity of overlying fill to the W (see below). Although not confirmed by excavation, the elements of CS. 11–8 probably ran E to abut U. 6, which is something of an enigma. In Fig. 10, this nearly vertical wall is depicted as the rear of the substructure of 5th (not to mention succeeding versions of 7F-30; see Fig. 4–9). Yet, it is distinctly different from the walls of other substructures at Tikal, which normally were built with a pronounced batter. Even in Gp. 7F-1, the contemporary Str. 7F-32-2nd-C displays such walls. There is good reason for this, as battered walls are less prone to collapse. Multicourse vertical walls, however, worked perfectly well for temporary purposes, and U. 6 strongly resembles the walls that face construction cores within the substructure of Str. 5D-331st (TR. 14; Fig. 9b; see especially the core walls within the upper three levels). All this raises doubts that U. 6 really was the back wall of 7F-30, but no other likely candidate was seen in the 1.20 m excavated E of it. Possibly, a battered E wall did once exist, but its total collapse has rendered it unrecognizable. Perhaps deeper excavation behind the structure might reveal its base. Meanwhile, in the absence of visible evidence to the contrary, 7F-30 is reconstructed as if U. 6 was its back wall, despite doubts. Returning to construction of 30-5th, the next action seems to have been placement (as CS. 7) of the lowest five steps of a stairway, U. 13, fill for which rests on light-colored earth, U. 7. Above this, stair fill abuts U. 2. A pauseline, U. 9, runs from the rear of the riser stone for the fifth step to U. 2 just below its top, and marks the end of CS. 7. Whether stones were set as stretchers or headers is not noted in excavation records. The question arises as to why the first five steps were built at this time, rather than earlier or later in the construction sequence. A reasonable hypothesis is that work could not proceed further without some special provision being made to get both men and materials up to the elevated construction surface. This is supported by the height of U. 2 with its fills, the presence of U. 7 and 8 beneath the stairway and its fill, and what is known of male stature at Tikal (Haviland and Moholy-Nagy 1992:fig. 4.1, scheduled for full discussion in TR. 30). There is no clear structural reason for U. 7 and 8; indeed, structural soundness would have been enhanced by placing the stairs and their fill directly on bedrock, in the manner of U. 2 with its fill. Yet, U. 7, at least, was purposely placed; it abuts U. 2, and its thickness (ca. 0.30 m) is too great for it to be dust that accumulated naturally between CS. 11 and 7. A logical reason for its placement is that, as U. 2 with its fill was built up higher and higher, access to the construction surface became more difficult. Average stature for “working class” males at Tikal in Early Classic times (when this construction took place; see below) was close to 1.63 m; therefore, U. 4 (the pause-line that separates the fills of

10

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 2.2 (Part 1) Structure 7F-30: Time Spans Time Span

Architectural Development

Construction Stage

Unit

Special Deposits

Descriptive Data

1

Abandonment and collapse

2

Useof7F-30-lst-A

Lot Group

Ceramics in Vogue

6 3

Str.7F-30-lst-A

34

Bu.l,PD.100

Str.7F-30-lst-B

Useof7F-30-lst-C Construction of building?

1

Str.7F-30-lst-C

2

31,32

Partial demolition of 7F-30-2nd Use of 7F-30-2nd

8

Str.7F-30-2nd

1

28

Construction of building?

2

30

Construction of upper platform level

3

23 (part) 29

Reconstruction of existing substructure

4

Bu.l50,PD. 98,103

Partial demolition of 7F-30-3rd

Reconstruction of building?

1

Str.7F-30-3rd

2

3

12

4

Useof7F-30-3rd

10

11

Imix

Construction of new upper level

3

9

Eznab

Extension of lowest step

6

7

5

Useof7F-30-lst-B

4 5

Construction of small, frontal platform

Bu.132, Ca.161

Widening of substructure toW Partial demolition of Str.7F-30-4th Use of 7F-30-4th

3

Ik

ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

11

TABLE 2.2 (Part 2) Structure 7F-30: Time Spans Time Span

Architectural Development

Construction Stage

Unit

Special Deposits

1 13

Str.7F-30-4th

2

Descriptive Data

Lot Group

Ceramics in Vogue

Construction of building? 20-25

Bu.140, Ca.162

3

Reconstruction of substructure

2

Partial demolition ofStr.7F-30-5th Useof7F-30-5th

14 1

19

Construction of summit platform and possible building

2

14,1618

Completion of substructure

3

15

New mason's stair constructed

4

6 (part), 12,13 (part)

Final height reached

5

6 (part), 11

Height increased by 1 m

6

6 (part),

Height increased by 0.60 m

10,13 (part) 15

Str.7F-30-5th

7

9,6 (part), 13(part)

Lowest 5 steps of U.I 3 built

8

2(part), 6 (part), 7,8

Construction reaches height of 2.20 m

9

2(part), 5,6 (part)

Construction of substructure continues

10

2(part), 4,6 (part)

Construction of substructure continues

11

2(part), 3,6 (part)

Construction of substructure begins

12

1

Shaft for Bu.160 filled

13

Bu.160

Clearing of bedrock and construction of burial chamber

1

Manik

12

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

CS. 9 and 10) would have been, roughly, at neck height for a man of average stature standing on bedrock. Unit 5, the pause-line dividing the fills of CS. 8 and 9, would be at about the same height if the “average man” were standing on U. 7. The top of U. 2, though, is 2.20 m above bedrock and 1.86 m above U. 7. Construction could have proceeded to this height, in the absence of some special means of access to the construction surface, only if some makeshift means were available to allow workers to pass materials from below to those on the construction surface above. Earth or other debris dumped by the structure walls in the manner of U. 7 would have served this purpose. Something more was needed to proceed beyond the top of U. 2, and the lower five steps of U. 13 appear to have solved the problem. As CS. 6, the height of the growing structure was increased by some 0.60 m (cf. to the increments of CS. 10 and 11) as additions were made to the walls, fills, and the U. 13 stairway. Materials for this were probably carried up the previously constructed part of that stairway. Marking the end of CS. 6 is U. 10, a pause-line; the fill itself is continuous from the stairway across the top of U. 9, up over U. 2, and all the way to U. 6. Black material included in this fill is not known in any of the preceding ones, although there could be some in unexcavated portions. Similar material was used in succeeding construction stages. Another increment in height, this time of close to 1.00 m, defines CS. 5. Again, additions were made to walls and stairs as fill was piled up between them and over that already in place. As before, most fill was rubble, but in this case the upper portion consists of alternate bands of black earth (like that seen in CS. 6), and white earth. The uppermost light-colored stratum, U. 11, appears to be a pauseline marking the end of CS. 5. It runs from U. 6 eastward, ending 0.80 m or so from the stairway (about 0.10 m E of a later intrusive cut for Bu. 140). The substructure was brought to its final desired height with the completion of U. 6, installation of a fill-retaining wall to the W (U. 12), and the dumping of fill in between (CS. 4). The top of U. 12 probably served as the top step of U. 13, although later intrusion of Bu. 140 (immediately W of U. 12) destroyed proof. Nevertheless, upward projection of U. 13 treads and risers meets U. 12 at a reasonable distance below U. 14, a remnant of the substructure floor. This pavement runs E from the top of U. 12, which it covers. Stratigraphy indicates that fill beneath U. 12 was dumped from W to E, confirming use of U. 13 stairs to gain access to the elevated construction surface. At first glance, fill of CS. 4 looks quite different from fills used in earlier stages. Because of this, one might regard it as a later addition to an earlier structure, associated with the U. 18 stairway (discussed below). Against this, the only feature that conceivably could be a floor earlier

than U. 14 is U. 11. Because this surface seems to end (on the W) a good 0.10 m E of the cut for Bu. 140, it could not have extended as far as the U. 13 stairway. Even if it did, this interpretation would require that the upper three courses of U. 6 postdate those courses below by a significant amount of time. Yet, there is no evidence for this; the masonry is similar and no traces of plaster patching (indicative of an addition to an existing wall) occur on the outer face. Finally, if one looks at the fills of CS. 7–4, one notices a transition from all rubble, to rubble with black earth, to less rubble and more black earth with some light-colored earth, to almost no rubble and much dark, as well as light-colored, earth. Evidently, the supply of rubble showed signs of exhaustion as early as CS. 6, and new sources of fill began to be tapped. The latter, apparently, became the prime sources by CS. 4. The question arises here: was the construction just summarized all that remains of earliest Str. 7F-30, or was there more to it? Deferring, for the moment, discussion of finished exterior structure walls, four possibilities deserve consideration: (1) Unit 13 in its entirety was a finished stairway up to the earliest summit floor, but without a paved plaza in front. Instead, exposed bedrock served, except for the area extending 1.70 m W of the bottom step, where compact earth overlies bedrock (Fig. 10:14), steadily thinning out to the W so as to meet the rock surface without any great unevenness. (2) A terrace, about 0.65 m high, was built in front of 7F-30, with its unpaved surface (Plat. 7F-3:U. 1) turning up to the fourth riser of U. 13. Thus, earliest Str. 7F-30 was served by all but the lowest three steps of U. 13. (3) Platform 7F-3 with its unpaved surface was built in front of the original 7F-30, but U. 13 was buried beneath another set of steps that served as the finished stairway (represented by U. 15, based on Plat. 7F-3:U. 1). (4) A terrace, about 1.00 m high, was constructed in front of 7F-30, surfaced with plaster pavement (Plat. 7F-3:U. 5), on which the Maya built a finished stairway, likely represented by U. 18. In this view U. 15, though well built, served as a short mason’s stairway, and U. 16 and 17 (see below) were fill-retaining walls analogous to U. 2. There are problems with each of these hypotheses. For the first, the rough construction of U. 13 seems more appropriate for a mason’s, rather than a finished stairway. Furthermore, the absence of plaster on, or in front of the stairway, seems peculiar, given its use in Bu. 160 as well as for the structure floor. Lack of evidence for a turndown of U. 14 over U. 12 to form the top step of U. 13 is also a problem. Perhaps later intrusion of Bu. 140 is responsible for this lack, although one might expect that, with U. 12 forming part of the E wall of the burial shaft, those who dug it would have followed the plaster face of the top step down (had it existed), rather than destroying the

ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

plaster, but not the masonry behind it. These same two problems apply to the second possibility as well; indeed, the absence of finished pavement on the terrace is particularly odd. It seems improbable that the Maya would have built a structure with a good plaster floor, only to provide it with a terrace on the front with well-built masonry walls, but no such pavement. Not only is Plat. 7F-3:U. 1 not plaster, but its turnup to U. 13 indicates that it was not mere foundation for a plaster surface. There is, though, a further difficulty: the wall that Plat. 7F-3:U. 1 abuts on its W edge appears to be an E wall of Plat. 7F-1, rather than a W wall of Plat. 7F-3 (see Plat. 7F-1). Platform 7F-3:U. 1 continues the level of Plat. 7F-1 eastward to Str. 7F-30:U. 13. Yet, it was not plastered, although Plat. 7F-1 was. An unpaved gap between a plaza and a structure, both with plaster floors, seems extremely unlikely. The third possible interpretation involves the same problems as the first two, with three additional ones: (1) Platform 7F-3:Unit 1 turns up to the U. 13, rather than the U. 15 stairway, although this could be explained as the incidental result of workmen using U. 13 after this terrace surface was laid, but before U. 15 was built. (2) More serious: if U. 15 was used with Plat. 7F-3:U. 1, then it was later almost completely torn down when Plat. 7F-3:U. 5 was laid. This plaster floor extends 0.50 m beyond the back of the fourth step of U. 15, although the known tread depths of these steps do not exceed 0.25 m. Consistent with this, the first step of well-built U. 18, sequentially the next known stairway for Str. 7F-30, overlies Plat. 7F-3:U. 5 by 6 cm, and unites with a later pavement of Plat. 7F-3. What is inconsistent is that the fill behind U. 18 is continuous with that behind U. 15, which rules out destruction of a U. 15 stairway. Moreover, the steps of U. 15 and 18 are positioned in such a way relative to one another as to imply that the treads of the latter are exactly where those of the former would have been (if indeed U. 15 was once a full-fledged stairway). One may note also that the fourth step of U. 15 is similar in construction to the second through fifth steps of U. 18. What is suggested is that, at most, two steps of U. 15 were removed. (3) The steps of U. 15, rather than being plastered, have a thin coating of packed marl on the lowest two, and on the second tread this coating turns up to the face of the third riser masonry itself. It seems clear that this is not a case of a finished stairway that was later removed above this point. Although the fourth alternative interpretation is favored here, there are problems with it, too. The main one is the presence of so much preceding construction. This required that, as the bulk of Str. 7F-30 was brought to the desired height necessitated by U. 13 , work was begun on a terrace W of the structure. Platform 7F-3:Unit 1 marks a pause between CS. 2 and 3, creating a packed surface on which a stairway (U. 15) was begun. Its four steps were

13

used briefly for construction purposes, until workers were ready to build the terrace up to its final height. At that time, the terrace floor (Plat. 7F-3:U. 5) was laid, extending partly over U. 15 and some of its fill, following which the stairway was extended upwards to completion (U. 18). Even if these efforts may seem excessive, they are consistent with the practice of building walls on floors, rather than running floors up to walls, as seen in contemporary Str. 7F-32-2nd (see below). Another problem—the union of the lower step of U. 18 with a floor postdating Plat. 7F-3:U. 5—disappears, if the Maya removed and altered the masonry blocks that formed the lower tread when they laid Plat. 7F-3:U. 8; this would have caused no disturbance to U. 18 or its fill. Why this should have been done remains a mystery, but it does recall removal, for no practical reason, of the basal step of Str. 5D-22-3rd-B (TR. 14:351). Consistent with removal and replacement of the 7F-30 step is that all known stairs of U. 18 are of identical construction, except this lowest one. Unfortunately, plaster on U. 18 was not sufficiently preserved to confirm or refute later disturbance of this lowest step. Although none of these possibilities can presently be conclusively proven or disproven, the fourth seems most likely. At least seven points may be used to argue in its favor: (1) Evidence presented above suggests that U. 13 was a mason’s stairway. (2) There is no clear sign that U. 15 was ripped out above the fourth riser, yet the similarity of this to all but the basal riser of U. 18 suggests no great time-lapse between their construction. Thus, the most economical way to explain these two stairs (with their fills in relation to Plat. 7F-3:U. 5) is as just outlined. (3) Consistent is the lack of plaster on U. 15, but its onetime presence on U. 18. Although the Maya later removed most of this plaster, some of it remained on the fifth stair tread and the riser behind (see Fig. 10). (4) Lack of turndown of U. 14 over U. 12, already noted, would be expected if U. 14 were not laid as part of CS. 4 to serve with U. 13, but rather as part of the final construction to serve with U. 18. (5) Fills of CS. 4 and (to a degree) CS. 5 are similar to those of Plat. 7F-3 below both U. 1 and 5. These consist largely of layers of light and dark earth. A pavement, above which Plat. 7F-3:U. 2 was built (and which is perhaps contemporary), also has a dark fill (Fig. 10:40). Thus, all may have been drawn from the same sources and so are contemporary, especially since the black material does not occur in later fills. (6) All of the sherds from these fills are from Manik pots, whereas Ik sherds appear in the fill of the next known architectural development. (7) It seems improbable that the floor of original Str. 7F30 would be plastered, while the area in front was not. The earliest plaster pavement in front of the structure is Plat. 7F-3:U. 5, which may well be contemporary with the

14

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

earliest plaster floor of Plat. 7F-1, to the W. It follows that only the fourth possibility has the virtue of consistency here: plastered plaza, terrace, structure floor, and stairs. In sum, despite uncertainties, the interpretation favored here is that Str. 7F-30-5th included U. 18, with the terrace in front represented by Plat. 7F-3:U. 2 and 5. Accordingly, U. 14 and 18 are assigned to CS. 2, U. 15 to CS. 3, and other units as already noted to CS. 4–12. Construction Stage 1 is defined for features on the summit pavement; minimally some sort of platform represented by U. 19. Built of masonry blocks on the surface of U. 14, its W face stood 2.70 m in from the top of the last riser of U. 18. With a height of 0.60 m, it may be ruled out as a mere upper level of the 7F-30-5th summit. Unfortunately, excavation was not sufficient to reveal its lateral extent, and eventual destruction by the Maya 0.60 m E of its W face precludes determination of its E-W dimension. Perhaps at the same time that its back portion was ripped out, all plaster was removed from its W face and top. Whether or not U. 19 ranks as an “interior platform” (perhaps a freestanding one, like U. 66 and 67 of Str. 5D-22-1st; TR. 14:378) is not known, for excavations were too limited to provide evidence for or against the existence of a building. Because a vaulted building of masonry was part of contemporary Str. 7F-32-2nd, the same may have been true here. No vault stones from demolition of such an edifice were found. Numerous fragments of stucco, most of which bore traces of paint, were discovered overlying Plat. 7F-1:U. 5. Although they could have been brought in from anywhere with material to be used for fill, proximity to Str. 7F-30-5th favors it as their source. Similar to stucco from Early Classic structures at Uaxactun (TR. 2:33), these pieces could be from a building, but could as well be from substructure ornamentation. So when all is said and done, we simply do not know whether or not the summit of 30-5th stood open or was roofed. So far, this necessarily extensive discussion of Str. 7F-30-5th has dealt with those architectural elements seen in the deep trench through the presumed structure axis. Various walls and floors that may also relate to 5th were encountered in the two tunnels, as well as within the trench into Str. 7F-31. It is these that are discussed next. Unit 16 and 17 are retaining walls that were encountered in the N and S tunnels, respectively (Fig. 4). Both run roughly N-S, but they are not well aligned with one another; U. 16 runs 6 degrees W of magnetic N, whereas U. 17 runs 6 degrees E of magnetic N. The masonry, too, is very roughly dressed. Unit 16 ends at a NW corner in the N tunnel; with the wall that runs E it forms a 75-degree angle. Unit 17 runs S of the trench through Str. 7F31, but where it ends is unknown. Unit 17 is positioned, roughly, in line with the first

riser of U. 18, the supposed stairway for Str. 7F-30-5th. Unit 16 is positioned 0.60 m or so W of the stairway. The top of U. 17 is at the same elevation as the top (fourth) tread of U. 15; it too is abutted by Plat. 7F-3:U. 4, and Plat. 7F-3:U. 5 runs over its top. Given these relationships, along with their rough dressing and alignment, U. 16 and 17 are interpreted as fill-retaining walls. Presumably, they are analogous to U. 2, having retained structure fill prior to construction of the W terrace (Plat. 7F-3). Unit 15 of Str. 7F-30-5th would have been an aid in carrying up the fill for these walls once Plat. 7F-3:U. 1 was in place, for from here up U. 13 would have been behind the wall cutting off access to it. Once the W terrace was completed, the 4.60 m of U. 16 N of the terrace must have been plastered and incorporated into the facing of Str. 7F-30-5th, for the N wall of the terrace abuts this wall. If the above is correct, then it offers further support for the hypothesis that Str. 7F-30-5th was served by U. 18. Otherwise, U. 13 would have to have been wholly inset relative to U. 16 and 17, which is virtually unheard of for stairways at Tikal in Classic times. Given the scanty data available, the overall appearance of Str. 7F-30-5th is difficult to visualize. With U. 18 a fully projecting stairway, its final riser would mark the front of the actual structure. Assumed is axial placement, reasonable considering that later stairways for 7F-30 were so placed, and that this was common practice at Tikal, at least in Classic times. Moreover, axial placement was common for burials comparable to 160, in front of which U. 18 was observed (but note exceptions, such as Bu. 116 beneath Str. 5D-1; TR. 14:609). Unknown is how wide the stairs were, for they run N and S of their exposure in the deep trench. They are arbitrarily reconstructed in Fig. 4 as the same length as those for 30-1st, which puts their N end perhaps 0.60 m N of the deep trench. They could not have ended much farther S, or their N end would have been exposed in the trench. An E-W dimension for 7F-30-5th comparable to that of the contemporary Str. 7F-32-2nd substructure is reasonable in view of what is known (and not known) about the back of 30-5th. Where its N and S walls lay is even more problematical. Its S wall must lie N of the trench through Str. 7F-31, as Plat. 7F-3:U. 8 was encountered beneath the grave of Bu. 159 (see Fig. 11). The shape of the mound overlying the ruins of Str. 7F-30 suggests that, in its later forms, its lateral dimension was less than that of 7F-32-2nd. To anticipate later conclusions, we suspect 305th to have been a temple, and suggest a ratio of lengthto-breadth similar to that of Str. 5D-22-2nd (TR. 14), a structure probably in use when 7F-30-5th was built. But in the face of so many uncertainties, one must be cautious. The best that can be hoped for is a rough idea of what 7F-30-5th was like, but no more.

ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

STRUCTURE 7F-30-4TH Although this has a less complex construction sequence than 5th (Fig. 6, 10, and 11), there are still problems of interpretation. One thing seems clear: operations began with partial demolition of features that were part of 5th (see preceding discussion), and this defines CS. 3. As this proceeded, the floor of 5th (U. 14) and 0.20 m of fill beneath were removed, at least at its eastern and western extent. On the W, this may have been less extensive than on the E, where paving was removed up to a point 2.60 m in from U. 6. Here, a new plaster surface (U. 24) was laid (in CS. 2) at an elevation 0.20 m below the older U. 14. Burial 140 is thought to have intruded into 5th on its front-rear axis at this time. As CS. 2, a new substructure, represented in the deep trench by U. 20 through 24, was built over what was left of the older one. Unit 20 is the remains of a stairway that was built on Plat. 7F-3:U. 8. A projection of its surviving four steps upwards meets the base of U. 21, a single course of masonry set into the gray earth fill of 7F-304th. Apparently, this is the top step of the same stairway as U. 20; the intervening steps are missing owing to later intrusion of Bu. 132. Running E 2.40 m from the top of U. 21 is a floor, U. 22, which probably once ran as far as the rear wall of the structure. Its partial destruction stems from the later placement of PD. 103, probably Bu. 150, and construction of Str. 7F-30-2nd. In the fill beneath U. 21 is Ca. 162, which is aligned with Bu. 140 (see below). The Maya may have retained the original rear of 7F30 in the new 4th, just as the original substructure of nearby Str. 7F-32 was retained in all subsequent versions. This possibility for 7F-30, however, was never investigated and so remains speculative. What is known is that the Maya built a new wall—U. 23—at least 2 m W of its face, on the surface exposed after removal of U. 14. Surviving now as a single course of masonry, U. 23 seems to be the base of a wall that must have been as high as U. 22. From the base of U. 23 a pavement, U. 24, runs E onto the top of U. 6. Evidently, the substructure of 4th consisted of a supplementary platform, topped by what may be a building platform. Unfortunately, excavations were too limited to reveal traces of a building, if one was present. Since there are clues that one may have been part of 3rd, the possibility must be allowed for 4th as well, and for its construction a provisional CS. 1 is defined. The only other architecture referable to 7F-30-4th (seen in the S tunnel) was a wall, U. 25 (Fig. 6). Built on Plat. 7F-3:U. 5, Plat. 7F-3:U. 8 runs up to the W side of its base, and therein lies a problem. In the deep trench, the basal step of Str. 7F-30:U. 18 is based above Plat. 7F-3:U. 5 and is in union with Plat 7F-3:U. 8. From this, one might suppose that the basal step of U. 18 and 7F-30:U.

15

25 are parts of the same architectural entity. The trouble is, though, that it would require a fully inset stairway, which is unheard of in Intermediate Classic Tikal architecture. The only outset stairway that could possibly go with U. 25 is U. 20. There is, though, an alternative reconstruction: after Str. 7F-30-5th had been in use for a while, modifications were carried out on Plat. 7F-3, in the course of which Plat. 7F-3:U. 8 was laid. Although its basal step was altered in the process, 7F-30-5th continued in use with no other modification (Fig. 5). Then, just prior to building 7F-30-4th, the Maya began the removal of Plat. 7F-3:U. 8 where the new W wall of the structure was to stand. They then began to build the wall, probably intending to remove the rest of the pavement W of it, as they were going to eliminate Plat. 7F-3 altogether and lay a new floor for Plat. 7F-1. They had a change of heart, however, and eventually incorporated Plat. 7F-3:U. 8 into Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1. Although this “change of heart” is hypothetical, this is precisely what happened in the case of Str. 7F-Sub.1 when Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 was laid, and Plat. 7F-3:U. 8 is at the same elevation. At any rate, U. 25 (of 7F-30) seems to have been installed before this change of heart, and the steps were built afterward (a sequence of construction, with wall preceding stairs, that was earlier seen in the case of U. 2 and 13). Confirmation of this reconstruction could probably be gained by a probe through U. 25. There is reason to suspect that Plat. 7F-3:U. 8 will be found behind the wall, as suggested by the floor of Bu. 159, in Str. 7F-31 behind Str. 7F-30:U. 25. The burial was dug down to an older pavement, which then served as the floor for the grave (Fig. 11). The elevation of this is 6 cm above that of Plat 7F-3:U. 8, 3.30 m to the W (an insignificant difference) but 0.12 m above that of Plat. 7F-3:U. 5. Thus, the plaster surface beneath Bu. 159 is probably part of Plat. 7F-3:U. 8, which means that U. 25 has to be intruded through that floor. The surviving height of U. 25, as seen in the trench through Str. 7F-31, is 1.16 m above Plat. 7F-3:U. 8. Almost surely, the wall did not stand as high as U. 22, for this would have placed its top 1 m W of U. 21, requiring a partially inset stairway. Furthermore, as already noted, the evidence of U. 6, 23, and 24 in the deep trench suggests that the substructure was terraced. Presumably, then, U. 25 was built up to a height of 1.30 m—the elevation of U. 24—whereupon a second wall (equivalent to U. 23) for an upper substructure level was constructed an unknown distance to the E. If positioned the same distance from U. 25 as U. 23 is from U. 6, then the top of the stairway projected about 1 m beyond the substructure wall. Perhaps, though, the wall was in line with U. 21 (as reconstructed in Fig. 6); otherwise, the structure floor would have been unusually long and narrow.

16

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

The overall dimensions of Str. 7F-30-4th are not known. It seems clear that the old N wall (and possibly U. 6) continued to serve the new structure. Platform 7F-1-2nd:Floor 1 (which served Str. 7F-30-4th) ends on the N at the top of a wall that continues W from the N face of the structure. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the building platform is reconstructed as being set back an equivalent amount as U. 23 is from U. 6. The precise location of the S wall is unknown, but may be reconstructed within fairly narrow limits. First, it is clear that the building platform extended at least as far as the S edge of the trench through Str. 7F-31, for its fill here survives to a height of 1.16 m above the top of the supplementary platform (Fig. 11). It could not have extended significantly farther S, based on what is known of the stairway. The N end of the stairs could have been no farther than 5.20 m from the NW corner of the building platform, or it would have been seen in the deep trench. Assuming a symmetrical relationship between substructure and stairway, the latter must be at least 7 m wide, putting its S edge 5.20 m N of the S side of the trench through 7F-31. The stairway wall could not have been more than 0.30 m S of this, or its junction with U. 25 would have been seen in the S tunnel. Given this information, it is clear that though the measurements cannot be precise, the reconstruction in Fig. 6 is reasonable. Almost certainly, therefore, the frontrear axis of Str. 7F-30-4th was shifted considerably to the S of where it had been for 5th. STRUCTURE 7F-30-3RD As shown in Fig. 7, a reconstruction of this version of 7F-30 must be done almost completely in broken line. The only architecture surely referable to it is U. 26 (seen in the deep trench), although 22, 23, and 24 (and possibly 6) seem to have continued in service. The greatest problem is the stairway. On stratigraphic grounds, the first act was removal of a large portion of the stairway (U. 20) for 4th, so that the remarkable Bu. 132 could be placed due W of the earlier Bu. 160. Once this was done, workers piled up light-todark gray earth, with some rubble, covering the burial and providing a fill over which a pavement, U. 26, was laid (at exactly the same elevation as existing U. 22). As seen in the section through the deep trench (Fig. 10), U. 26 no longer runs all the way E to U. 21. Three possible explanations for this come to mind, the first being that PD. 98 was put in place, U. 26 was then laid up to it, followed by construction of the stairs above the problematical deposit to a new, higher floor represented by U. 28. Against this possibility is the presence of Tulix (Imix contemporary) censers in PD. 103, sealed beneath the fill of U. 28. The dates for Bu. 132 and Ca. 161 (discussed in

parts III and IV) are consistent with one another, but not with PD. 103, suggesting that U. 28 is a later construction than U. 26. Another objection is that interments related to the old Bu. 160 axis all are associated with some modification of Str. 7F-30. Burial 150, which is related to that axis, clearly postdates Bu. 132 and predates Bu. 190 and 191. The only construction to which this burial can be connected is one of which U. 28 was a part, an interpretation consistent with stratigraphy as well as the dates for Bu. 150 and PD. 103. A second, more likely possibility is that U. 26 originally ran all the way to U. 21, where U. 22 and U. 23 continued its surface eastward. Thus, 7F-30-3rd represented a widening to the W of 4th, making the structure less elongate. Later (when 2nd was built) PD. 98 was intruded into U. 26 over the old Bu. 132, destroying floor continuity. In favor of this is the elevation of U. 26 (precisely that of U. 22), an apparent “chop-line” beneath the problematical deposit, and the evidence just noted against the first possibility. Although the problematical deposit does contain a broken Ik vessel (Imix ceramic production had begun by the time 3rd was abandoned), Bu. 150, which marks replacement of 3rd by 2nd, contains Ik as well as Imix pottery (see also discussion of PD. 98). A third and final possibility is that U. 26 is the surface of a deep landing that ran from the top of a stairway to a building wall, to which it turned up. Later, when 2nd replaced 3rd, the building was torn down, leaving a gap between the inside and outside floors where the wall had been. Problematical Deposit 98 was then placed in this gap, to be covered by fill for stairs leading up to U. 28. Lacking further evidence, a choice cannot be made between these last two interpretations. Consequently, Str. 7F-30-3rd almost surely represents an enlargement to the W of 4th, portions of which (U. 22, 23, and 24 in the deep trench and the E wall) continued in use as parts of the new structure. Given reuse of older walls and floor E of the juncture of U. 22 and 26, logic requires that the N and S walls of 4th were augmented by extensions to the W (consistent with that of U. 26 W of U. 22). There is, however, no proof for this. The N tunnel did not probe above Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1, and as seen in the trench through Str. 7F-31 (Fig. 11), the later construction of that structure would have destroyed evidence for 7F-30-3rd (worth noting, though, is a break in Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 just about where one would expect a front wall for Str. 7F-30-3rd to have been ripped out; see Fig. 7 and 8:59). Nothing certain is known about the front wall and stairs of 7F-30-3rd, but since its N, E, and S faces seem to have been “terraced” (as was true for 4th), its front may have been as well. Also reasonable is the supposition that the front stairs were as wide as those for 4th, although

ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

those for the succeeding 2nd (U. 27) were considerably narrower. It may be, though, that U. 27 represents not a new stairway for 2nd, but the stairway for 3rd, later altered by the removal of its southern 3 m, when a new S wall was provided for 2nd. In favor of this is the fact that it looks very much (in Fig. 10) as if U. 27 was built in conjunction with placement of fill for 7F-30-3rd behind it. Given the state of ruin of the steps, this is not conclusive, but it is consistent with the presence of Ca. 161 directly beneath the lowest surviving step of U. 27 (there is no evidence for its intrusion). The cache belongs to the Uz Offertory Assemblage (TR. 27A:20), which is noteworthy considering that the eccentric flints and obsidians in Bu. 132 are appropriate for Uz offerings. Apparently, Ca. 161 was placed during construction of 3rd, but if the stairway for 3rd had been torn out to be replaced by U. 27 (when 2nd was built), it is hard to see how the offering could escape being disturbed. Yet, there is no evidence for such disturbance. One objection to U. 27 being part of a stairway for 3rd is that its bottom step rests on fill 0.38 m above the plaza pavement that served 3rd. This can be countered, though, by the argument that there once existed a lower step, which was removed when the plaza was given its final surface. Consistent with this, Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 was totally removed over a wide area in front of Str. 7F30, including where such a step would have been, when the final floor was laid. Moreover, if one assumes that the lowest two stair risers were the same height as the known height of the third riser, and that the tread of the lowest step was a few centimeters below the base of the next stair block (just as the lowest surviving tread of U. 27 is below the base of the next block up), then the reconstructed bottom step fits perfectly between U. 27 and Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1. To sum up, the work that produced Str. 7F-30-3rd seems to have resulted in a structure much like the one that preceded it, although it was less long and narrow (cf. Fig. 6 and 7). As with the preceding structure, the burial axis included a cache placed W of the interment. The following construction stages may be tentatively defined: CS. 3 for partial demolition of 4th; CS. 2 for placement of Bu. 132, Ca. 161, and construction of the western extension; CS. 1 for reconstruction of whatever building stood on top of the substructure. STRUCTURE 7F-30-2ND Evidence from the deep trench suggests that construction began with the partial demolition of the earlier 3rd and intrusion of Bu. 150 through 3rd (actually, the floor and fill of 4th that served 3rd as well; Fig. 8). Operations (CS. 4) ended with the placement of PD. 98 and 103, which, to judge by their high ash and charcoal

17

content, not to mention the heavily burned appearance of U. 22 between the two, were connected with a single ceremonial event. Implied is ritual activity similar to that noted between construction stages of Str. 5D-33-1st (TR. 14:529–533, 545, and 549), which was roughly coeval with 7F-30-2nd. As already noted (see 7F-30-3rd), this event took place at a time when Ik pottery was still available, even though Imix production had begun (see discussion of Bu. 150), explaining the seeming anomaly of an Ik vessel in PD. 98 and Tulix (Imix contemporary) censers in PD. 103. With their ceremonial concerns satisfied for the moment, the Maya began (as CS. 3) to pile mixed earth and rubble over U. 22 and its exposed fill E of Bu. 140 and 150. This was built up in a series of three layers at the same time that a rough wall (U. 29) was installed to retain it on the W. Presumably, courses were added to the existing E wall (represented by U. 23) for the same purpose, and to serve as finished rear facing. Supporting this interpretation is a line E of which the structure fills have collapsed, continuous from U. 28 down to the surviving basal course of U. 23. Had a new wall been built farther E, say, extending U. 6 upwards, the old U. 23 would have been buried inside the fill of 2nd. When 7F-30 later fell into ruin, one would expect to see more of U. 23 surviving, with some more recent fill evident just E of it (similar to the fill of 7F-30-4th E of U. 19). Instead, it looks as if U. 23 “peeled off,” with some of its fill then following. When CS. 3 reached the top of U. 29, there was further extensive burning (on top of the third layer of fill) suggestive of another round of ceremonial activity. Then (as CS. 2) the top layer of fill was put in place, retained on the W by a finished, one-course wall (U. 30). Evidently an upper riser, U. 30 is the sole survivor of a stairway that, for unknown reasons, was later destroyed. A reasonable reconstruction is that there were three steps leading to U. 30 from U. 26, which continued to serve now as a pavement for a lower building platform level in front of the upper one. Assumed is that these stairs were as wide as those that led up to U. 26 from Plat. 7F-1. Following CS. 2, there seems to have been a third round of ritual activity, manifest by signs of extensive burning on the material over which a new floor, U. 28, was to be laid. Thus, this pavement appears to mark another construction stage, rather than termination of CS. 2, which is, therefore, probably associated with a building (unfortunately, evidence either for or against such an edifice is lacking). Since the front edge of U. 28 falls short of the front of 7F-30-3rd, a return of the building to the long (N to S), narrow (E to W) proportions of old 4th might be suggested. On the other hand, Bu. 159, initial and dedicatory to Str. 7F-31-2nd, appears to be contemporary with Bu. 150. Implied is contemporaneity of 31-2nd with 302nd, in which case the length of the latter was reduced

18

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

relative to 3rd. So the relative proportions of 3rd were likely retained in 2nd. Beyond the deep trench, the N substructure wall, and front wall N of the stairway, probably remained much as before. Consistent is continued use of U. 23 in the E wall, continued use of Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 (and possibly U. 6), and configuration of the ruin mound for Str. 7F-30. The only difference between 2nd and its predecessor N of the stairway seems to have been the addition of the higher platform level. By contrast, the southern portion of 7F-30 was changed considerably, owing to construction of 312nd (cf. Fig. 7 and 8). Therefore, the S face of 30-2nd was built considerably N of the S end of 3rd (on the basis of information about 7F-31, the location of the S wall of 302nd can be located with reasonable confidence, as in Fig. 8). With such radical shortening of 30-2nd, its stairway (U. 27, retained from 3rd) was probably reduced in width to maintain the symmetry of its axial placement. Thus, the 4 m N-S dimension of U. 27, as reused in 30-1st, probably was realized with construction of 2nd. Given this dimension, U. 26 and 30 are approximately the same length S of the stairs as they are to the N. A result of the shortening of 30-2nd was elimination of its supplementary platform on the S (retention here would have blocked access to the stairs of 31-2nd). Assumed is that the supplementary platform was retained on the N, E, and W faces of 30-2nd, although excavation was not carried out to confirm or refute this. STRUCTURE 7F-30-1ST-C As a last major modification, the Maya increased the height of 7F-30 by 1.30 m. For this, they piled fill on top of U. 28, over which they laid a plaster floor (U. 31), mere traces of which now survive (Fig. 9 and 10:37). For access, seven or so new steps (U. 32) were added to the top of existing U. 27, although these are now so badly ruined that broken masonry is all that remains. Before these upper stairs were built, those leading to the top of 2nd were torn out, and so, at least two construction stages may be defined, the earliest (CS. 3) for partial demolition of 2nd and a later one (CS. 2) for construction of U. 31 and 32. The presence of deep debris E of the structure, and an abundance of modeled stucco all over the surface of the ruin mound, point to the existence of some sort of building as part of Str. 7F-30-1st-C, and for its construction, CS. 1 is proposed. It is likely that, as part of CS. 3, the basal step of U. 27 was removed. (Reasons for supposing that such a step once existed have already been given.) That it was removed at this rather than some other time is suggested by the presently observable relationship between Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1 and U. 27, lack of a burial in the fill of Str. 7F-30-1st-C on the Bu. 160 axis, and the presence in front

of 1st-C of Bu. 190 and 191, which flank that axis. These burials were intruded through Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1, most probably when Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1 was laid (consistent are the dates for that surface and the burials). Since the interments flank the Bu. 160 axis, they may be regarded as the missing ones for Str. 7F-30-1st-C. Thus, it appears as if the burials were put in place, the bottom step of U. 27 was removed with Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1, and the final pavement was laid to turn up to the base of what used to be the second step of U. 27. Owing to exceedingly poor preservation of 7F-301st-C, an overall reconstruction has to be almost purely speculative. The one presented in Fig. 9 is conservative, in the assumption that, where possible, older substructure walls continued to be used in the new substructure. This is consistent with the overall configuration of the ruin mound, established earlier practices, and the little that is known of Str. 7F-31-1st. Also assumed is that, where not buried beneath U. 32, part of U. 26 continued to serve as a supplementary platform surface in front of the building platform of 1st-C. Possibly, though, U. 26 was removed where it was not to be covered by the stair fill, in which case the surface it represents was eliminated. STRUCTURE 7F-30-1ST-B The distinctly minor modification seen in 1st-B consists of U. 33, which is an addition to the bottom step of the U. 27 stairway (Fig. 10). Exposed in the original excavations of St. 23 (Table 1.1 and TR. 2:28, 36), Coe and Broman assumed that the entire stairway postdated Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1, on which U. 33 rests. As it turns out, U. 33 was a later addition that increased the depth of the lowest tread to 0.85 m. A secondary turnup to it from Fl. 1 can be seen. STRUCTURE 7F-30-1ST-A Defining this structure is a small platform, U. 34 (Fig. 9), added onto the base of the stairway on Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-1st, on Str. 7F-30:U. 33, and on the lowest two steps of U. 27 (Fig. 10). Within its fill were several smashed censers, PD. 100. Excavated in 1957 by Coe and Broman, it is adequately described in TR. 2 (pp. 28 and 36–38; Table 1.1 herein).

Structure 7F-31 The only excavation of 7F-31, a small, squarish structure built against the S side of Str. 7F-30, was a trench through its front-rear axis, and a probe along the N side of its W wall (see Fig. 8, 9, and 11). Although few details are known, these, coupled with inferences from mound configuration and reconstructions of Str. 7F-30, permit a general understanding of the structure (see Table 2.3).

ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

STRUCTURE 7F-31-2ND Evidence from the axial trench shows that construction of 7F-31-2nd was preceded by partial destruction of Str. 7F-30-3rd (as CS. 3), which evidently extended this far S (Fig. 7). Apparently, the W fill, floors, and walls of 3rd were completely stripped back to Str. 7F-30:U. 25 (the front wall of the supplementary platform for 4th). In the process, the top of U. 25 (along with whatever floor existed behind it), the wall of the building platform of 4th, Str. 7F-30:U. 22, 23, and 24, and some of their fills were removed. Into what remained, a grave was dug for Bu. 159, the shaft of which was subsequently filled and sealed by a thin stratum of small stones (Str. 7F-31:U. 3). As CS. 2, a substructure wall (U. 1) was installed against the E face of fill for Str. 7F-30-4th. Built of welldressed, rectangular blocks of stone, how high this stood is unknown, for its top has since collapsed. Suspected is that one course of masonry is missing, placing a substructure pavement that is no longer present just above U. 3. The latter would have served above the burial fill as a foundation for a plaster surface. This reconstruction accords reasonably well with what is known of the stairway for 7F-31-2nd, and places the summit of 2nd about 0.35 m below that of the lower level of the 30-2nd building platform (as seen in the deep trench, Fig. 10). West of Bu. 159, medium-brown earth was dumped over what survived of Str. 7F-30-4th fill (Fig. 11:7). Although the later intrusion of Bu. 193 had disrupted the stratigraphy, it is probable that the packed gray earth fill for the stairs (U. 2) was piled up against this fill; the stairs themselves were built on Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 (beneath the stair fill, this joins Plat. 7F-3:U. 8). A projection upwards of the average tread and riser measurements of the surviving five steps that were not destroyed by intrusion of Bu. 193 accords reasonably well with the reconstructed elevation for the substructure floor, discussed above. Moreover, the juncture occurs in line with the later front wall of Str. 7F-31-1st. Since U. 1 was probably reused in that structure, the location of the front walls may have been about the same for the earlier one. In short, the reconstruction of Str. 7F-31-2nd up to this point is fairly secure. Excavations did not encounter the N and S walls of U. 2 so there is no certainty about its width. In Fig. 8, it is reconstructed as being the same width as the stairway for Str. 7F-31-1st, making it about as wide relative to the N-S dimension of the structure as U. 27 is relative to the same dimension of the building platform for 7F-30-2nd. A reconstruction of the N and S faces of the structure is somewhat problematical (Fig. 8:63, 64). Since the E wall of 2nd seems to have been reused for 1st, the N and S walls may have been as well. It also appears that the location of the W face of 2nd was the same as that of 1st. Giv-

19

en all this, it is reasonable to project the reconstruction of 1st backwards to 2nd; moreover, it conforms well with a reconstruction of a building platform for Str. 7F-30-2nd that is symmetrical relative to its stairway. Worth noting, too, is that the posited location of the S end of 7F-312nd is virtually the same as the S end of the supplementary platform for Str. 7F-30-3rd and 4th (Fig. 7:56). Thus, it is possible that a portion of that wall, rather than being demolished, was incorporated into the new wall for Str. 7F-31-2nd; alternatively, the new wall for 7F-31-2nd could have been laid up against fill for Str. 7F-30-4th (as was done with Str. 7F-31:U. 1). In sum, Str. 7F-31-2nd appears to have been roughly square in shape, and considerably smaller and lower than Str. 7F-30-2nd, which it abutted. Assumed is that some sort of building stood on its platform as was true of 1st; a final construction stage (CS. 1) is proposed for its construction. STRUCTURE 7F-31-1ST-B This structure is somewhat of an enigma, so far as its top is concerned, but its substructure can be reconstructed with a fair measure of confidence (Fig. 9). Work began with the partial demolition of 2nd (CS. 3), including removal of the substructure floor, and all but five of the U. 2 stairs (see Fig. 11). This demolition seems to have been specifically for the intrusion of Bu. 193 through stairway fill, and into the old Plat. 7F-3:U. 8. Following this, the burial shaft was filled with gray-colored earth, similar to that originally used for U. 2, mixed with blocks of masonry. The same material dug out for the grave was probably replaced, along with the stair masonry. New steps (U. 4) were then built directly over the old ones (CS. 2). Of these, only five now remain, but they once rose a total of 2.22 m above Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1, on which they were built. Beginning at this elevation, but 1.20 m E of the final riser of U. 4, is another stairway, U. 7, consisting of four steps. These lead to an elevation 1.00 m above the top of U. 4. It appears, then, that U. 4 led to some sort of a “landing,” and that the substructure floor was higher, possibly at the elevation of the uppermost step of U. 7. No pavement survives, however, and it is possible that U. 7 rose higher, the uppermost steps having since been destroyed. If so, the substructure summit would have been quite small, and so this possibility seems remote. There is no evidence that Str. 7F-31-1st-B was served by a new rear wall; more likely, U. 1 was built upwards to the new floor level. This is at least consistent with the configuration of the ruin mound, and no trace of another wall was found. Enigmatic are two walls, U. 5 and 6, exposed N of the stairway. Unit 5 is of a single course, built on about the same level as the “landing” between U. 4 and 7. Unit 6 was built immediately behind it, at the same elevation

20

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 2.3 Structure 7F-31:Time Spans Time Span

Architectural Development

Construction Stage

Unit

Special Deposit: Lot Group Burial (Table 5.1)

Other Data

1

Abandonment and collapse

2

Final use; transition from Imix to Eznab ceramics

3 3

Ist-A

Use of Ist-B

4

5

Ist-B

1

5,6

2

4,7

3

Construction of building 2

Construction of new substructure Partial demolition of 2nd

193

Use of 2nd; production of Imix ceramics begins

6

Construction of building

1

7

Lowest step eliminated with laying of Plat. 7Fl-lst:Fl.l

2nd

2

1,2

3

3

as the top of U. 5. Unit 6 now stands 1.20 m in height, probably not far from its full original height, for it seems too thin to have supported much above what survives. Perhaps the stone (Fig. 11:12) on the top of U. 4 is the now-fallen top course. Evidently, then, U. 4 led to a doorway in U. 5 and 6, with U. 7 continuing up inside these walls. Similar recessed stairs may be seen in structures W of 5C-54 in the “Lost World” Group. There are two possibilities for U. 5 and 6: either they represent the front of an upper platform for 1st, into which the U. 7 stairs were inset, or else they represent the wall (possibly base-wall) for a building. The second alternative is favored for three reasons: (1) The relationship between U. 5 and 6 is suggestive of a building wall with plinth, albeit a large one (cf. Str. 7F-29-1st:Fig. 2); (2) There is no evidence that U. 7 ever rose as high as the top of U. 6; (3) Large blocks of masonry above the reconstructed floor level for 1st (Fig. 11:13) suggest masonry fallen from building walls onto accumulating debris over such a surface. Thus, a final construction stage (CS. 1) is

1 159

Construction of substructure Partial destruction of Str. 7F-30-3rd; Ik ceramics in vogue

proposed for erection of such a building, probably partially of pole-and-thatch, given absence of vault stones and the thinness of U. 6. Units 5 and 6 were followed northwards for a distance of 2.08 m from the doorway, at which point there seems to be a corner (expectable if the building platforms for Str. 7F-30-2nd and 1st were basically symmetrical; see Fig. 9). Assumed is that counterparts to U. 5 and 6 ran S of the doorway about the same distance, a hypothesis that accords nicely with the configuration of the ruin mound. The width of the stairs (U. 4) is reconstructed on the assumption that they were as wide relative to the structure as are the stairs to the building platform of Str. 7F-30-2nd and 1st. This seems to fit well with the presumed width of the structure doorway. STRUCTURE 7F-31-1ST-A This modification of Str. 7F-31-1st is nearly irrelevant; it was caused by the laying of Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1, which eliminated the bottom step of the U. 4 stairway.

ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

Structure 7F-32 This is a range-type structure of four rooms on the S edge of Plat. 7F-1; as Op. 3G, three of its rooms (2, 3, and 4) were completely cleared, along with the major portion of the fourth (Rm. 1; Fig. 12–16). The substructure was tunneled along its front-rear axis down to base surface (Fig. 17); the bottom of its N wall was followed to its W end (Fig. 12), and supplementary probes revealed further details. Although Str. 7F-32 underwent numerous modifications, only two full-scale architectural developments have been defined (Table 2.4; see below). STRUCTURE 7F-32-2ND-C In its original form, 7F-32 was a large, range-type structure that faced S (Fig. 12). On the basis of the excavations through the centerline, construction may be divided minimally into four stages, although the size of the building platform suggests that it must have been erected in several parts. The first one known (CS. 4) saw a wall built on Plat 7F-1:U. 3, about 6.50 m N of the S edge of that floor; as masonry work proceeded, debris was dumped behind it (Fig. 17:21), ensuring its stability. To retain this fill on the S, a rough wall (U. 1), battered like the N one, was laid up 1.20 m S of the edge of Plat. 7F-1:U. 3 (Fig. 17). A major pause-line may be seen in the fill just over 1 m above the plaza floor level (Fig. 17:24), and two minor ones may also be seen (Fig. 17:22, 23). To complete the building platform (CS. 3), workers piled up fill S of U. 1, widening the platform in that direction, and providing a base for the stairway. Little is known of this stairway, owing to its extremely poor preservation, but it may have been no wider than the doorway to which it led (see Fig. 17:25). It appears that, as each step was constructed, a layer of mortar for the tread was laid over fill, masonry for the next riser up was then set on this, following which the mortar in front was smoothed to provide a finished surface. The top three treads are quite narrow with low risers, while the two below were higher, with deeper treads. Perhaps the original stairway was subsequently rebuilt, and the original steps were all low with shallow treads (see discussion of 1st). Excavations exposed portions of the N, E, and W building platform walls; the one on the N has a large center outset of 9 cm, with an apron molding 0.80 m above the surface of Plat. 7F-1:U. 3. On either side of this is a basal molding, 0.48 m in height and 0.09 m deep, from which the wall rises to an apron molding 0.93 m above Plat. 7F-1:U. 3. These moldings probably turn the corners onto the E and W faces, but there has been no excavation to confirm this. Each end wall does seem to have a center outset, though, so it is likely that they were smaller versions of the rear one. All these walls were battered,

21

and were constructed of large, roughly shaped blocks of various sizes that were given a heavy coat of plaster. At the spring of the apron, masonry was installed as headers deep into the fill (Fig. 17). The last act of CS. 3 was to pave over the entire top of the building platform (Fl. 1 of 2nd, described in Fig. 12). Although the N platform wall is as high as this floor, the E (and presumably the W) end wall is not; there, the floor drops 0.39 m to a lower level, which runs out 0.42 m to the wall top (Fig. 12:4). On the S is a plaster surface 1.30 m deep 19 m below the floor in Rm. 1 (Fig. 17:4). The wall at which this ends on the N was set into the pavement mortar, which was then smoothed off in front (similar to stair construction, as described above). As CS. 2, a building was erected on Fl. 1 of 2nd, the N and S walls about 0.30 m in from the edge of the substructure. The E (and probably W) walls were set on the very edge of this pavement, but there was an exposed ledge at a lower level just outside (see above). The building itself has two large rectangular rooms, tandemly placed, with their long axis running E-W; a smaller rectangular room is located at each end. Thus, the outside walls form a rectangle, and the partition an “I” shape. This same arrangement of rooms is seen in the Early Classic Str. SE-423 at Navahuelal, and the lower story of Str. 5D-46 at Tikal (also Early Classic). Each room of 32-2nd has a centrally placed doorway to the outside, even though the only steps were on the S, but from Rm. 1 (the S one), small vaulted doorways gave access to Rm. 2 on the W and Rm. 3 on the N (Fig. 19 and 39b–d). Similar doorways connected Rooms 2 and 3, and 3 and 4 (Fig. 41a, 42a); Rm. 2 and 3, then, could be entered directly from Rm. 1, but Rm. 4 could be entered only via Rm. 3. Used in building wall construction was a veneer of small stones, irregular in shape and size, which were given a heavy coat of plaster. This turns down onto the floor of the building platform. In Rm. 1, a small vent at floor level penetrates the S wall near its W end (Fig. 12:6), with perhaps another one to match it on the E. At a height of 2.70 m, the walls were topped by specially shaped spring stones (Fig. 17:26) installed as stretchers, above which vaults were built for each room (as CS. 1). These vaults have long since collapsed completely, but the stones were shaped into long, thin headers with bevels averaging an angle of 112 degrees. There is evidence that the plaster of room walls and floors was painted red. This was particularly prominent in Rm. 1, where red paint was seen on the plaster of Fl. 1 of 2nd and the walls where they were protected by later construction. In addition, there were burned patches on Fl. 1 of 2nd in the W end of Rm. 3, and in Rm. 4 near its outside doorway.

22

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

STRUCTURE 7F-32-2ND-A AND B Structure 7F-32-2nd underwent two minor modifications, the first of which was the walling up of the doorway between Rm. 1 and 3 (Fig. 12:7 and 39b,c). The masonry used for this duplicates that of the building walls, so perhaps this took place not long after construction of 1st-C. It rests directly on Fl. 1 of 2nd and, in Rm. 3, rises without a break to the top of the doorway. In Rm. 1, however, there is a square niche 0.40 m deep and 1.30 m above Fl. 1 of 2nd (see Fig. 19a:1; 39c and 40a). Both faces of the doorway masonry were plastered. Later, an interior platform (U. 3) was built in the NW corner of Rm. 1 against the masonry in the doorway. Based on Fl. 1 of 2nd, from which there is a secondary turnup (Fig. 12 and 19a), its walls abut those of the building. Although the top of U. 3 was paved, this was torn out in the course of later construction. STRUCTURE 7F-32-1ST The only major modification of 7F-32 seems to have come after an extended period of use, judging from the amount of debris that accumulated against its N wall (Fig. 17:30, 31). Actually, there were several alterations, which are best to examine room by room, following discussion of external changes. The discussion will conclude with a “summing up” of the sequence of events. With the addition of a stairway along its N side, a major change was effected in structure orientation; previously, it could be entered only from the S but now it could be entered directly from Plat. 7F-1 (Fig. 16). For this, a series of broad, deep steps were built, the end walls of which abut the old N face of 2nd, concealing all but 0.75 m of the original wall at either end. The masonry used for this construction consists for the most part of well-dressed rectangular blocks installed as stretchers and is quite different from that of the earlier walls, including that which seals the doorway between Rm. 1 and 3, or that of U. 3. At least three steps were built, leading up from the level of Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-1st. A wall (U. 2) found beneath that plaza pavement, parallel to and 1 m N of the first riser from Fl. 1 (Fig. 17), suggests the presence of a lower step, however. This had the same tread depth as the others, and was later covered by a new floor. It could have been associated with Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1, and indeed, there is a break in the fill beneath the stairway at about the level of this plaza surface. Thus, three broad steps seem to have led up from Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-2nd; beneath them is a primary midden that probably was leveled off (at the elevation of Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-2nd) to allow their construction. Structure 7F-32:Unit 2 was evidently based on this, and gray earth was dumped behind it to serve as fill. As the next two risers were set in place, gray earth and rubble were loaded in

behind them against the old structure wall. Plaster surfaces, long since destroyed, were undoubtedly provided for the treads, and the top one is thought to have abutted the leading edge of the original platform, which served as an upper riser. There is no evidence that a new room floor was laid. A limited test by the W wall of the building platform (Fig. 18a) seems to indicate that broad, deep steps were constructed against the structure in a manner similar to those on the N (probably at the same time). Preservation was poor in this area, but U. 4 and 5, a wall and floor remnant respectively, suggest a step with a tread 2 m deep built against the original end wall of the building platform. Above this tread, that wall may have continued to serve as another riser with the original end plinth as a top step. Later on, another wall (U. 6) extended the lower step by 0.44 m, and a new floor (U. 7) was laid above U. 5, which was partially demolished at the time. Still later, a riser (U. 8) was built on U. 7, extending the tread depth of the upper step beyond that of the old end plinth. A probe along the E face of the building platform disclosed some slight evidence of another outside stairway (Fig. 16), in the form of a wall (U. 9) that abuts the building platform on the N end of its central outset. Because post-abandonment destruction was extensive in this area, there were no other remains. Since the later surface of Plat. 7F-1 apparently did not extend this far S, and since stairways were added onto the N and W of the structure, it is fairly certain that U. 9 represents the N end of one that was added onto the E. It is not known if there were changes to the S exterior of 7F-32, but the S stairway may have been altered, for the construction of the basal steps seems different from those above (Fig. 17). Perhaps deeper and higher steps were built over the original ones; if so, the more recent upper steps have left no traces. Considerable excavation would be required to verify this suggestion. Room 1 was the only one of 7F-32 that was not completely excavated, but even so a sequence of at least three modifications is apparent. As the first (Fig. 13 and 19a), two new interior platforms were built, one expanding existing U. 3 in the W end of the room (U. 10) and one in the center rear (U. 11). For U. 10, the E wall of U. 3 was extended all the way to abut the S room wall. The doorway into Rm. 2 was eliminated at this time (Fig. 39d); above U. 10, all but the uppermost 0.50 m or so is blocked by masonry, but below, the stone and sherd fill of U. 10 extends into the doorway. Construction of U. 10 terminated with removal of the original pavement of U. 3 and the laying of a new one on the enlarged platform. Also built on Fl. 1 of 2nd was U. 11, and like the contemporary interior platforms of Rm. 1 and 4 of Str. 7F29, it had a cornice. Retained by its walls is a fill of stones

ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

of assorted sizes, over which was laid plaster paving that abuts the building wall and the top of U. 11. The total length of U. 11 is unknown (its E end was not excavated), but it was evidently rectangular. With U. 10 and 11 in place, Fl. 1 of 1st was laid in Rm. 1, directly over Fl. 1 of 2nd. This new pavement, which averages 6 cm in thickness, turns up to the S building wall, U. 10 and 11, and the N wall between these two platforms (Fig. 17 and 19a). The second alteration in Rm. 1 saw replacement of U. 10 by a new room-end interior platform (U. 12) and conversion of U. 11 into a thronelike “bench” (Fig. 14 and 19a). Following partial demolition of U. 10, a new N-S wall 4 cm higher than the old one was built 0.60 m farther E, on Fl. 1 of 1st. The space between the old and new platform faces was then filled, and the new enlarged platform was paved. On U. 11, a wall 0.34 m thick at its base, vertical on its W side but sloped on the other, was put up on the W end of the existing platform, which (assuming a comparable wall on the E end) gave it its thronelike appearance. Floor 1 of 1st was given a secondary turnup to both U. 11 and 12. As a last alteration in Rm. 1, U. 11 and 12 lost their separate identities to be incorporated into a single large and complex interior platform, U. 13 (Fig. 15 and 20a). From the face of U. 12, a new wall was built on Fl. 1 of 1st—patched to turn up to it—that runs eastward 0.24 m in front of the E-W wall of U. 11. Behind this new wall the Maya placed a distinctive mixture of sherds and small stones, which they then covered with a plaster surface 0.16 m thick. This pavement also covers U. 12 fill (its floor having been torn out), and runs 2.10 m E of the W wall of the room, whereupon it turns up and over a vertical wall 1 m thick, and then down to join the sloping surface of the old raised end wall of U. 11 (Fig. 19a and 40d; the old floor of U. 11 was extended out to the new E-W wall of U. 13). It is likely that a similar pavement in the unexcavated portion of Rm. 1 matched this raised area of the platform. At this time, or perhaps previously when U. 12 was built, two ceramic inserts were placed in the N wall of the room (Fig. 19a:U. 14 and 15 and Fig. 39b,c, 40b,c). The smaller of the two, U. 14, is located 0.84 m E of the W wall, 0.55 m above the surface of U. 13. Unit 15, the larger, is located 1.67 m E and 0.59 m above the surface of U. 13. Their placement raises questions as to their purpose. Did they support a wall hanging between them? Or were there at one time matching inserts in the now-collapsed opposite wall so that a curtain could be hung along the front of U. 10, and later, U. 12? Ceramic analysis indicates contemporaneity between these and the fill sherds of U. 12 and 13. Both were specially made, rather than recycled jar necks, and one is illustrated in TR. 27A (fig. 149b).

23

Interestingly, no ceramic inserts were found near any outside doorway of 7F-32. Five modifications of Rm. 2 are evident, the first being the closing of the doorway to Rm. 1, discussed above. That this predates by some time the construction of U. 17, the second modification, is indicated by the finished door masonry that extends all the way down to Fl. 1 of 2nd. Probably at the same time, but perhaps earlier, U. 16 (Fig. 13) came into being in the NW corner of the room. This small interior platform was also built on Fl. 1 of 2nd, of a bricklike masonry; patchwork around the base of U. 16 produced a secondary turnup from the floor. The fill of the new platform consisted of earth and some sherds, and the surface pavement was largely destroyed. The third alteration was construction of a room-end interior platform (U. 17) in the S portion of Rm. 2 (Fig. 13 and 19c). The wall for this, based on Fl. 1 of 2nd, was given a batter and abuts the E and W room walls. Ultimately, U. 17 was partly demolished, followed by enlargement of the S room-end platform (U. 18), built over the remains of the older one (Fig. 14 and 19c). For this, new facing masonry was placed on Fl. 1 of 2nd, abutting the E and W building walls. A fill of stone and lime was dumped behind this and over the remnant of U. 17, all of which was covered by a floor 0.10 m thick. A fourth modification was to close off the doorway to Rm. 3 (Fig. 15, and see below), at which time a new pavement was laid in Rm. 2 (Fig. 19c,d: Fl. 2 of 1st). This turns up to U. 16 and (apparently) 18, as well as the masonry that closed the doorway. In preparation for this paving, Fl. 1 of 2nd was extensively roughened, apparently to produce a firmer bond with the new one. Perhaps at this time U. 6 and 7 were constructed outside the room. It was sometime later, though, that the S wall of U. 16 (Fig. 14) was extended to the E to produce a room-end interior platform (U. 19:Fig. 15). Part of this new masonry was based on Fl. 2 (Fig. 19c) that was, however, ripped out S of U. 16 (except for patches by U. 18). Unit 19 abuts the E building wall and U. 16; earth fill was placed behind it and pavement 5 cm thick was laid over the whole new platform (at some point in this process, the old floor of U. 16 was largely destroyed). Floor 1 of 1st, laid between U. 18 and 19 (Fig. 19c), completed this last remodeling of Rm. 2. Changes in Rm. 3 began with construction of an interior platform (U. 20) against the center of the back wall (Fig. 13, 14, 41a). All that survives of the platform is its W end abutting the S room wall. Its walls rest on Fl. 1 of 2nd, from which there is a secondary turnup. The shape of U. 20 was unusual, in that it has an inset in the center of its W end, 0.50 m deep and 0.35 m wide. Presumably, it had a matching inset in its E end, but the Maya demolished this when they built U. 22.

24

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

The next modification of Rm. 3 saw creation of a new interior platform (U. 21) in the W end of the room, at which time the doorway to Rm. 2 was closed off (Fig. 15 and 41b,c). The face for U. 21 (Fig. 41d) was built of large blocks of masonry, with spalls, on Fl. 1 of 2nd (which had been extensively burned here) with a secondary turnup from that floor (Fig. 19e). A mixture of large stone blocks with what appeared to be habitation debris (abundant carbon and sherds) was placed behind this wall. This was prevented from spilling into Rm. 2 by the large masonry with spalls that the Maya used to seal the doorway. On the Rm. 2 side, this masonry rises from Fl. 1 of 2nd, while on the Rm. 3 side, it extends up from the top of U. 21 (Fig. 41c). Near the top in Rm. 3 (2 m above Fl. 1 of 2nd), a vent was left, although this was later plugged with a single stone (Fig. 41a,b). Unit 21 was finished off with a plaster surface, 7 cm thick, which abuts the room walls, the masonry in the old doorway to Rm. 1, and the base of the masonry in the doorway to Rm. 2. The next addition to Rm. 3 was another interior platform, U. 22, built on Fl. 1 of 2nd against the center of the back wall (Fig. 17, 18). Serving as fill for U. 22 was a remnant of the largely demolished U. 20 along with light-colored earth and stones, all of which were covered by a plaster surface that abuts the building wall behind. The room floor was also repaved, its new surface (Fl. 1 of 1st) abutting the walls of both U. 21 (Fig. 19e) and 22. To bring the uppermost riser of the N stairs up to the level of this new floor (0.10 m above the old one), new masonry was set into Fl. 1 of 2nd just outside the door. Ultimately Fl. 1 of 1st was extensively burned N and E of U. 22. Two other interior platforms were eventually built in Rm. 3 (Fig. 16), one of which, U. 23, joined together the surfaces of U. 21 and 22 into a single, L-shaped platform (Fig. 15), the main portion of which completely filled the W half of the room (Fig. 41b). The new facing for U. 23, based on Fl. 1 of 1st, runs from the W jamb of the outside door to abut the front wall of U. 22. It retains an earth fill, which was covered by a plaster floor 6 cm in thickness. The other interior platform (U. 24), similarly constructed on Fl. 1 of 1st, occupies the E end of Rm. 3 (Fig. 16). Its front abuts the N and S room walls and retains earth fill, over which a plaster surface (7 cm thick) was laid to abut the top of a wall filling the lower portion of the doorway to Rm. 4 (see below). Left was a raised threshold 0.09 m high and 0.24 m wide (Fig. 16:9). Thus, the doorway continued in use as a crawlway between the rooms (Fig. 19f, 42b). Traces of burning were apparent over all the S half of the platform pavement. In Rm. 4, the sequence of alterations is much simpler than in any of the others. Here, a large L-shaped interior platform (U. 25) was built on Fl. 1 of 2nd (Fig. 13–16),

filling the N 1.71 m, and the back 1.15 m of the room. Its face abuts the S and E building walls, and there is a secondary turnup from Fl. 1. Earth fill was placed behind the wall of U. 25, retained in the doorway to Rm. 3 by masonry 0.24 m in thickness and 0.79 m in height (Fig. 13:9, 19f, and 42c). This wall was built of large rectangular blocks, with interstices chinked with small stones, and located on the surface of Fl. 1 of 2nd, even with the face of the building wall in Rm. 3. A coat of plaster covered this exposed face in Rm. 3. The N end of U. 25 was built up to a height of 0.78 m and covered with plaster 0.10 m in thickness, leaving the previously noted low threshold in the doorway to Rm. 3. The central 2.07 m of U. 25 was lower than the N end (only 0.37 m high), and its pavement, 0.03 m in thickness, turned up to the higher N portion, as well as a matching high portion on the S (Fig. 19b). The only other change in Rm. 4 was the construction of U. 26, an addition to U. 25 that filled in the rest of the S room end (Fig. 16). The front of U. 26 was built on Fl. 1 of 2nd, and against the high E face of the S portion of U. 25. The height of U. 26 is unknown, as only the lowest 0.20 m survived. Correlation of these various additions and alterations is difficult to make. Nonetheless, there are certain points of reference, and ceramic analysis offers further aid. Construction of the E stairway, the earliest N and W stairways, and renovation of the S stairway are thought to have taken place at a single time, probably along with closure of the doorway between Rm. 1 and 2, and restriction of that between Rm. 3 and 4 (with the construction of U. 25 in Rm. 4). Consistent is the somewhat slim ceramic evidence available (Table 5.1; see below), and certainly elimination of the doorway between Rm. 1 and 2 (that between Rm. 2 and 3 was previously blocked) would have required other stairways than the existing one on the S. It would not be illogical to have built all stairways at this time, although this clearly is not proof that this was done. The N stairway alone could have sufficed. Closure of the doorway between Rm. 2 and 3, and construction of U. 21 in Rm. 3 surely took place at a single time. Equally certain is that this postdated construction of U. 17 and 18 in Rm. 2, U. 12 in Rm. 1, and (also in Rm. 1) placement of U. 14 and 15 (these last three all postdate construction of U. 18 in Rm. 2). Suspected is that the change to the W stairs represented by U. 6 and 7 took place when Fl. 2 of 1st was laid in Rm. 2. It seems likely that the last floors in Rm. 2 and 3 were laid at one and the same time. Because this is when the upper riser of the N stairway was set in place, it is thought that this is when the last modification of the W stairway (represented by U. 8, see Fig. 18a) took place. Thus, U. 23 and 24 represent the last alterations of 7F-32.

ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

On the basis of the above, then, a minimum of eight modifications for 1st may be defined (A through H; see Table 2.4 and Fig. 13–16). Not known is where U. 26 fits in this scheme, and U. 14, 15, and 16 are also somewhat of a problem. It must be emphasized once again that a good deal in the way of proof is lacking for this sequence. It is, however, the most logical on the basis of present information, and probably is correct at least in broad outline.

Structure 7F-33 This large structure located about 19 m S of Str. 7F32, and which faces the open area of Plat. 7F-2, remains virtually untouched by excavation. In 1965, there was time only for a test pit (Op. 3J) to be sunk a little over 1.00 m into its top. A rather inconclusive sample of sherds was recovered (Table 5.1; see below), but no intact architecture was encountered. On the basis of surface configura-

TABLE 2.4 (Part 1) Structure 7F-32: Time Spans Time Span

Architectural Construction Development Stage

Floor

Unit

Lot Group (Table 5.1)

Other Data Abandonment and collapse

1 lie ,e] lla

2

Final modification

llb,d 3

Ist-A

23,24,26?

10a,l3

Final use Useoflst-B

4 5

Ist-B

Rm.2:Fl.l Rm.3:Fl.l

8,19,22, 26?

9

2g

6,7,21,26? Ist-C

Doorway between Rm. 2 and 3 closed; floor laid in Rm. 2; W stairs altered; platform built in Rm. 3

8

Rm.2:Fl. 2

Use of Ist-D; transition from Imix to Eznab ceramics

8

9

Ist-D

13,14?, 15?,26?

7

12,14?, 15?,26?

11

5

Ist-E

Use of Ist-E Construction of large platform in Rm.l and possible placement of wall inserts Use of Ist-F; use of Imix ceramics begins

12

14

Construction of large platform and possible placement of wall inserts, Rm.l

6

10

13

Platforms constructed, floors laid, and stairs altered, Rm. 2 and 3 Use of Ist-C

6 7

Ist-F

18,26?

25

4

Construction of platform in Rm.2 Use of Ist-G

26

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 2.4 (Part 2) Structure 7F-32: Time Spans Time Span 15

Architectural Construction Development Stage

Floor

Ist-G

Unit

Lot Grou P (Table 5.1)

Other Data

17,26?

3

Construction of platform in Rm.2 Use of Ist-H

16 17

Ist-H

Rm.l:Fl.l

2,4,5,9, 10,11, 20,25, 16?

2a,d 2e,f 2g,h,i

Useof2nd-A

18

3,16?

19

Construction of platform in Rm.l and perhaps in Rm.2

2nd-A 20

21

2c

Construction of NE and W stairs; renovation of S stairs; doorways between Rm. 1 and 2 closed; 3 and 4 restricted. Platforms built in Rm.l.

2b

Use of 2nd-B; transition from Manik to Ik ceramics Doorway between Rm.l and 3 closed

2nd-B

Useof2nd-C

22

23

1

Construction of vaults

2

Construction of building walls

3

2nd-C

4

Completion of building platform

1 1

1

Construction of building platform begun; Manik ceramics in vogue

tions, 7F-33 could have been either a “temple,” somewhat smaller than 7F-30, or another range-type structure comparable to Str. 7F-32.

ally is just N of the centerline. A single architectural development is represented (Table 2.5); for illustrations, see Fig. 20 and 21a.

Structure 7F-35

DESCRIPTION

This westernmost structure of Gp. 7F-1 faces eastward across Plat. 7F-2, on the opposite side of which is the W end of Str. 7F-32. All that remains of 7F-35 is a three-level platform resembling some others that probably supported buildings of pole-and-thatch (TR. 19:120 and TR. 20B:19). As Op. 3F, a trench was dug through what was thought to be the front-rear axis, although later excavation along the back to the NW corner, and a probe that located the SW corner, revealed that the trench actu-

To begin, the Maya partially demolished an existing plaza surface (Plat. 7F-2:U. 1 and 2), following which a thin stratum of earth was placed over what was left (CS. 5). Next, the E wall for the platform was assembled of masonry (CS. 4) that appears to be identical in size and form to that used in the rear wall (discussed below). This E wall was not completely excavated, but there is no reason to doubt its placement on fill of CS. 5. Once in place, gray earth was dumped behind, sloping down from the top of the masonry to the base surface to the W.

ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

27

As CS. 3, work was begun on the W platform wall, 7F-36:Unit 1 is a surviving portion of a floor that runs N and the front for the second platform level (there was unfrom the top of the veneer, but since it runs beneath other doubtedly work on the ends at this time, though these walls (to be discussed below), it is likely that 7F-36 origimay have been begun in CS. 4). The well-cut rectangunally took the form of a single-level rectangular platform, lar masonry used for the outer veneer of the W wall was on which perhaps a building of pole-and-thatch was conbased on fill of CS. 5; just inside is rubble, some of which structed (see TR. 19:106 and table 88 and TR. 20B:table was actually put in place at the time of CS. 5. The loading 2.5 for comparable structures). in of brown earth to bring the fill up to the level of the STRUCTURE 7F-36-1ST second platform surface terminated CS. 3. Completion of the uppermost platform level, very litUnit 2 is based on U. 1, and is masonry that runs tle of which has survived subsequent natural destruction, N, probably originally from the S end of the structure, defines CS. 2. From what remains of its front face—built then turns to run W, turning again (about 1 m W of the on fill of CS. 3—blocks of masonry, square in cross-secNE corner of U. 2) once more to run N. Its placement tion and installed as stretchers, were used for its construcappears to have converted 7F-32 from a one-level to a tion. No postholes were found to attest to the presence two-level platform (see TR. 19:106 and table 91 for comof a building of perishable materials, but this occasions parable structures). If bilateral symmetry is assumed, the no surprise in view of the total destruction of platform center portion of the front face of the upper level was floors. Moreover, fill beneath was sufficiently deep where inset about 1 m in relation to the ends. excavated (1 m) so that there was no need to set posts into bedrock, nor into U. 1 and 2 of Plat. 7F-2 (in comparaStructure 7F-Sub.1 ble structures elsewhere at Tikal, main posts were normally not set to a depth of more than 0.70 m; see Haviland Located a short distance W of Str. 7F-30, this is the 1963:278 and TR. 20B:2). Given the existence of midden structure discovered in the fill of Plat. 7F-1 by Coe and material off the end of the structure (see part V), the oneBroman in 1957 (Table 1.1; TR. 2:30–32, 47, and TR. 2:fig. time presence of a building makes sense, and CS. 1 is al2, 3, 5); their excavations exposed its front steps, a portion lowed for its construction. of its floor, and small portions of its front (E) wall. Their Rectangular, three-level platforms are known elsedescription was properly cautious, pointing out a number where at Tikal in Gp. 2G-1 (Str. 2G-58-1st, 2nd, and 3rd); of things that ought to be checked by further excavations, 3D-3 (Str. 3D-10-1st); 3F-1 (Str. 3F-241st); 3G-1 (Str. 3G-1-1st and 2nd); 4E-2 (Str. 4E-52); 4F-2 (Str. 4F-13); and 6C-1 (Str. 5C-46-1st; all in TR. 19 and 20B). TABLE 2.5 Of these, 7F-35 resembles most closely Structure 7F-35:Time Spans 3D-10-1st, which is of comparable size Construction Other Data Time Lot Group (TR. 20B:table 2–13). Span

Structure 7F-36 This small, apparently rectangular structure on the S edge of Plat. 7F-1 faces, across Plaza 7F-1, Str. 7F-31. Time did not permit its thorough excavation in 1965, but its S end was tested as Op. 3I (Fig. 20 and 21b). Tentatively, two architectural developments may be posited (Table 2.6).

Stage

(Table 5.1) Abandonment and collapse

1 2

3

2a,b 1

Construction of building and platform floors

2

Construction of upper platform level

3

la

STRUCTURE 7F-36-2ND A portion of its S end wall was exposed, built of well-cut rectangular blocks based on Plat. 7F-1:U. 8. It seems to run W to the plaza retaining wall, but its eastern extent is unknown. Structure

Use; transition from Imix to Eznab ceramics

Construction of lower platform level

4

5

Construction of second platform level

Ib

Preparation of base surface; Imix ceramics in vogue

28

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 2.6 Structure 7F-36: Time Spans Unit

Architectural Development

Time Span

Lot Group (Table 5.1)

Other Data Abandonment and collapse

1 2

1st

3

2

3

Use of 1st; transition to Eznab ceramics

2

Alteration to produce a two-level platform Use of 2nd

4 5

1

2nd

1

Single-level platform built on Plat. 7F-1:U. 8; Imix ceramics in vogue

TABLE 2.7 Structure 7F-Sub.l: Time Spans Time Span

Lot Group (Table 5.1)

Other Data

1

Abandonment and destruction for construction of Plat. 7F-l-2nd-D (Ik ceramics in vogue)

2

Use; transition from Manik to Ik ceramics

3

1

Construction

as was done in 1965. Thus, a general reconstruction of Str. 7F-Sub.1 is possible, as in Fig. 22. DESCRIPTION Although the Maya seem to have been unable in this case to build a proper right angle, 7F-Sub.1 basically is a rectangular, one-level platform with axially placed steps, and as such, it is similar to platforms excavated elsewhere at Tikal (especially Str. 4F-7-D, which is of comparable size; see TR. 19:table 88 and TR. 20B:table 2.5). All other structures of this sort are thought to have had buildings of pole-and-thatch on their platforms, but Str. 7F-Sub.1 seems an exception, for there clearly is no posthole in its NW corner, where one would be expected (see TR. 19:118). It was, apparently, constructed as an open platform. Its stairs and front wall were built on Plat. 7F-1:U.

5, which ends at the top of a wall a short distance beneath the structure. A secondary turnup from U. 5 was accomplished by patches of plaster but, as discussed in conjunction with Plat. 7F-1, the structure and Plat. 7F-1:U. 5 are probably contemporary constructions. A projection W of the Bu. 160 axis from Str. 7F-30-5th falls on the first step of Sub.1, roughly on its front-rear axis, an orientation that was no doubt intentional. Ultimately, 7F-Sub.1 was partially destroyed, when Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D was constructed. For time spans, see Table 2.7.

Structure 7F-Sub.2 Located 0.76 m E of later Str. 7F-Sub.1, the very existence of this small structure would not be known had we not excavated beneath U. 5 of Plat. 7F-1, just to see what

ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

was there. All that remained was its floor and underlying fill, which were excavated down to bedrock as part of Op. 3D. For illustration, see Fig. 23a. DESCRIPTION All that survives are two portions of the interior floor, positioned a mere 0.30 m above the bedrock surface, which form a rough square. The outer edges turn up where an exterior wall must have stood, and there seems to have been an entrance from the E, for a portion of the floor extends beyond the wall line there. A small mass of rubble on the S side of the floor is all that remains of the walls; whether these were entirely of masonry cannot be determined, but at least the lower portion was. Since the overall form and size of this structure is highly reminiscent of Str. 4F-42 in Gp. 4F-2 (TR. 19:fig. 36a and 41a), this would suggest that, like its counterpart, 7F-Sub.2 had walls the thickness of a single block of masonry. If so, the stonework probably did not stand very high. A peculiarity of the floor is the presence of a gap averaging 0.42 m in width that runs E-W for the full length of the structure. Perhaps a wall once stood here, but this is hard to believe—it would have divided the building into impossibly small rooms. Nor is there any sign of a floor turnup for a wall. For some unknown reason, this floor gap must have been formed when 7F-Sub.2 was torn down for construction of Plat. 7F-1-4th. Nothing is known of the relations of this structure to other pieces of construction, except that it must predate all the other known structures of Gp. 7F-1. For time spans, see Table 2.8.

Platform 7F-1 This raised platform, on the edges of which stand Str. 7F-29, 30, 31, 32, and 36, was extensively excavated in front of Str. 7F-30 and 31, first in 1957 as Op. 3A (TR. 2), with further work in 1963 as part of Op. 3B and 3C. Two years later, other portions were investigated as Op. 3D, to

TABLE 2.8 Structure 7F-Sub.2: Time Spans Time Span

Lot Group (Table 5.1)

Other Data

1

Abandonment and partial destruction for construction of Plat. 7F-l-4th; late Manik ceramics in vogue

2

Use

3

1

Construction; early Manik ceramics in vogue?

29

see if evidence could be found for early monument erection, and to tie together architectural sequences from one structure to another. The latter effort was partially successful, but broken pavements and logistical problems in some instances make it difficult to correlate various floor remnants. In the following reconstruction of the building history of Plat. 7F-1, the basic point of reference is the floor sequence W of Str. 7F-30 (Fig. 10); floors and walls of Plat. 7F-1 in association with other structures will be related to this sequence as the discussion proceeds. PLATFORM 7F-1-4TH This earliest version is represented W of Str. 7F-30 by U. 4, 5, and 11 (Fig. 4, 5, and 10). Unit 5, the floor first encountered by Coe and Broman (Table 1.1; TR. 2:28, 30–32), was laid over fill quite similar to that seen in Str. 7F-30-5th:CS. 4 and 5 and Plat. 7F-3-2nd:CS. 2 and 3 (cf. Fig. 10:6, 9, 10, 19, 23, and 40). The black earth in all these instances appears to have been drawn from a single source. In Plat. 7F-1, it was retained on the E by a wall, U. 4, from the top of which runs U. 5. Dumped against the E face of U. 4 was fill for Plat. 7F-3 (Fig. 10:19), and U. 2 of Plat. 7F-3 was built above it. Although the E faces of the two walls are in line, their W faces are not. This is expectable if Plat. 7F-3:U. 2 was built after U. 5 of Plat. 7F-1 was laid, for then the W face of U. 4 would have been hidden, though its E face would still have been visible (see Plat. 7F-3). From U. 4, U. 5 runs W beneath the stairs of Str. 7F-Sub.1, where its plaster runs over the top and down the face of a wall, U. 11, to a packed stratum of light-colored earth just like that on which U. 4 was built (Fig. 10:41). Obviously, U. 5 was laid prior to construction of 7F-Sub.1, for the stairs and E wall to the N were built on it, with a secondary turnup to them. Interesting to note is that a straight projection of the W edge of U. 5 would have it (and U. 11) fall a good 0.44 m in front of 7F-Sub.1 S of its stairs, yet excavation revealed no such gap here. Surely, the laborers who worked on U. 5 and 11 adjusted their alignment so that they would lie beneath planned Str. 7F-Sub.1. In the N tunnel into Plat. 7F-3 (Fig. 4), Plat. 7F-1:U. 5 was seen to run up to the base of Plat. 7F-3:U. 7, just as it does to the base of Plat. 7F-3:U. 2 W of Str. 7F-30. North of U. 7, the floor runs E to Str. 7F-30:U. 16, and ends in a straight line at the NW corner of Str. 7F-30. Evidently, this was the northern limit of Plat. 7F-1-4th. In a test pit W of Str. 7F-Sub.1 Coe and Broman discovered the remains of two floors, now designated as U. 1 and 14 (Fig. 22 and Table 1.1; TR. 2:28 and 30). Neither was followed E of the back wall of 7F-Sub 1, so their precise relationship to that structure is unknown. It seems likely, though, that U. 1 is equivalent to U. 5, and contemporary with it.

30

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

Like U. 5, U. 1 is the first floor above bedrock, overlying it by the same 0.60 m interval as U. 5, and its elevation is consistent with the rise of U. 5 from E to W seen between Str. 7F-30 and 7F-Sub.1 (Fig. 10). Further information comes from the trench through Str. 7F-29 in the form of U. 2, a floor found beneath 293rd (Fig. 3). Excavations to the depth of this pavement were not undertaken S and E of 7F-29, but U. 2 is based on earth fill over bedrock, and its elevation is only 8 cm above that of U. 1. Again considering the rise of U. 5 from E to W, with which the elevation of U. 1 is consistent, this difference between the elevations of U. 1 and 2 is expected (the closest exposure of U. 2 to U. 1 is 8 m W and slightly N). The N end of U. 2 was destroyed by the Maya when they built Str. 7F-29-3rd, but if the destruction amounted to no more than the removal of a retaining wall, then the termination of U. 2 was in line with a projection W of the N edge of U. 5 as seen by the corner of Str. 7F-30. In the tunnel along the axis of Str. 7F-32 (Fig. 17), a floor (Plat. 7F-1:U. 3) was seen to run beneath that structure; like U. 5, it is the first pavement above bedrock, and it too overlies a dark earth fill (cf. Fig. 10:40 with Fig. 17:28). Moreover, the construction that overlies this floor (Str. 7F-32-2nd-C), like that built upon U. 5 elsewhere, contains Manik ceramics with none later. The surface of U. 3 is some 0.40 m lower than U. 5 by the stairs of Str. 7F-Sub.1, but evidence indicates that the pavement sloped down from that structure to the E and up to the NW, so this difference seems insignificant. Unit 3 ends 6.40 m S of the N wall of Str. 7F-32-2nd (which was built upon it), where there is a rough retaining wall of small stones based on the black earth fill. Unit 3 is also known to have extended as far as the W end of Str. 7F-32-2nd, placing the floor as much as 3.40 m W of Str. 7F-Sub.1. This, in turn, supports the argument already made that there must have been a plaster surface for Plat. 7F-1-4th behind that structure. Another exposure of floor now thought to relate to Plat. 7F-1-4th is one encountered beneath Str. 7F-35, there labeled as U. 1 of Plat. 7F-2. Although originally thought to represent a Plat. 7F-2-2nd, which extended N from Str. 7F-33, this does not now seem likely, for as discussed in the next section, the pavement does not seem to have extended S of a line from Str. 7F-32. This and the lack of any other structure in the immediate vicinity suggest that a separate Plat. 7F-2 did not exist until later. Unit 1 does fall within the range of known variation for portions of Plat. 7F-1-4th pavement, however, which, as already noted, did extend W of Str. 7F-Sub.1, but did not extend S of Str. 7F-32. Platform 7F-2:Unit 1 lies directly on bedrock, or gray earth fill where bedrock is low (Fig. 21), and it ends to the W on the top of a masonry wall

that stands about 0.23 m in height above a lower floor (Plat. 7F-2:U. 2) extending to the W. Although labeled as Plat. 7F-2:U. 3, the wall must relate to Plat. 7F-1-4th if the interpretation above is correct. Both plaster surfaces, and the wall, overlie or retain the same gray earth fill, indicating that U. 2 was laid immediately before, and U. 1 immediately after, the wall was built. This kind of construction is consistent with Early Classic practices and, in fact, no sherds later than Manik come from the fill. This, again, supports association with Plat. 7F-1-4th. In the test pit through the end of Str. 7F-36, a wall (Plat. 7F-1:U. 9) and a tamped earth surface (Plat. 7F-1:U. 10) were found beneath Plat. 7F-1:U. 8 (Fig. 21). These may be remains of Early Classic construction, again suggesting a link to Plat. 7F-1-4th. Unit 10 is 0.76 m higher than the nearest exposure of Plat. 7F-1 (Plat. 7F-3:U. 1, discussed above), so perhaps these two bits of construction relate to a small structure built on the W side of Plat. 7F-1-4th. This would help explain why Plat. 7F-1-4th extended so far in this direction. To sum up, the evidence seems to indicate that U. 1, 2, 3, 5, and Plat. 7F-2:U. 1 are remnants of a single floor for Plat. 7F-1-4th, and that this was part of the same construction that produced Str. 7F-Sub.1, Plat. 7F-3-2nd, and probably Str. 7F-32-2nd-C, as well as some sort of structure on the W (represented by U. 9 and 10). Broad expanses of this pavement surrounded Str. 7F-Sub.1 on all sides. Although the northern, eastern, and southern limits of Plat. 7F-1-4th are known, the western limit is not (Fig. 30); here, there is a retaining wall (Plat. 7F-2:U. 3), but another floor (Plat. 7F-2:U. 2) runs W from its base an unknown distance. PLATFORM 7F-1-3RD The first alteration of Plat. 7F-1 appears to have been connected with construction of Str. 7F-29-3rd and, perhaps, Plat. 7F-3-1st. It is clear that Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 postdates use of Str. 7F-29-3rd, for its elevation is the same as that of 7F-29-3rd, which evidently was incorporated into it (see below). Moreover, 29-3rd was built on fill dumped on top of the floor for Plat. 7F-1-4th, so that surface was not available for use in front of the structure. The sole remaining possibility is pavement (U. 14), encountered behind Str. 7F-Sub.1 by Coe and Broman (their “Floor 3”; TR. 2:30). Where Coe and Broman encountered it, U. 14 has an elevation of 220.31 m, 0.15 m above U. 1 (see above). Given a rise in this pavement from SE to NW comparable to one actually seen in later Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-1st, then U. 14 would exactly meet 7F-29:U. 6 at the S end of the axial trench (Fig. 3). Unit 6, on which 7F-29-3rd was built, runs N beneath the structure, but in front its surface is exceedingly hard, suggestive of a badly destroyed floor. Thus, the Maya may have proceeded here

ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

as they often did at Tikal: they built up an extensive area to a desired level, erected a structure upon it, and then paved in front to serve as a plaza (particularly good examples of this are Str. 2G-56-B, 2G-57-2nd, 2G-Sub.2-3rd, 3D-8, 3F-29-1st, 3G-1-3rd, 5B-7-2nd, and 7C-3-2nd, all in TR. 20A). So it is highly plausible that there was a formal plaza in front of 7F-29-3rd that included 7F-29:U. 6 in front of that structure. When 29-3rd was later partially razed, it stands to reason that the plaza surface in front could have been badly damaged. All this, therefore, points to plaza pavement extending between Str. 7F-29-3rd and 7F-Sub.1. On the basis of U. 14, the top of 7F-Sub.1 was 0.24 m above this surface, which must have abutted the rear of Sub.1. The floor of 7F-29-3rd, though, was some 0.50 m above the plaza surface, which suggests that there was probably a step on the front of it. The extent of this new Plat. 7F-1 surface is a matter of debate. Two possibilities come to mind, the first being that the pavement of Plat. 7F-1 was raised over its whole extent. Otherwise, Plat. 7F-1 between Plat. 7F-3 and Str. 7F-Sub.1 would have been very much lower than it was W of 7F-Sub.1, in front of Str. 7F-29-3rd. This is the second possibility, which would require some sort of retaining wall built on the floor of Plat. 7F-1-4th, leading down from the new floor to what survived of the old. If such a step-down existed, it must have run W from Str. 7F-Sub.1, for no retaining wall running S from Sub.1 was seen to abut the N face of Str. 7F-32-2nd. Instead, trash accumulated here over the floor of Plat. 7F-1-4th until pavement for 2nd was laid (Fig. 17:30, 31). In favor of the first possibility, the elevation of U. 14 W of Str. 7F-Sub.1 is the same as the top of rubble fill E of it (Fig. 10:47). Fill for Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-2nd above this is quite different in character, and so could have been a later addition, after a floor (for 3rd) was ripped out here (as Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-12nd was later ripped out). Moreover, such a floor would obviate the need for stairs to gain access to Plat. 7F-3-1st, for which no stairs are known (but see below). On the other hand, two points cast doubt on this interpretation. For one, the masonry block fill E of 7F-Sub.1 is similar to that seen elsewhere, which clearly relates to Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-2nd (Fig. 3 and 11); it is quite unlike that beneath Str. 7F-29:U. 6. For a second, there is no stratigraphic evidence W of Str. 7F-31 (Fig. 11) or N of Str. 7F-32 (Fig. 17) for the one-time presence of such a floor. Indeed, as already noted, trash apparently continued to build up N of 7F-32 on the floor of Plat. 7F-1-4th until Fl. 1 of 2nd was laid. In sum, the second possibility is favored here: that the floor represented by U. 14 was laid only W of Str. 7F-Sub.1 (Fig. 22), perhaps because, with a structure now built NW of 7F-Sub.1, it was desirable to be able to get onto Sub.1 from the W as well as the E.

31

PLATFORM 7F-1-2ND-D This architectural development is represented W of Str. 7F-30 by a wall, U. 12, and by Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-2nd, which has been described by Coe and Broman (Table 1.1; TR. 2:28, 32–34). As noted by Coe and Broman, the floor incorporated the old surface of Str. 7F-Sub 1; it also incorporated much of the surface of Plat. 7F-3-1st (Plat. 7F-3:U. 8). In the N tunnel (Fig. 6), Fl. 1 was seen to run from the top of the N wall of Plat. 7F-3-1st (where Plat. 7F-3:U. 8 terminates) to a retaining wall (Plat. 7F-1:U. 12) constructed on the N edge of U. 5. Evidently, the location of the N edge of Plat. 7F-1 remained the same as before. In the trench through Str. 7F-31 (Fig. 11), Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-2nd was identified on the basis of its elevation and stratigraphic relationships. It is not known precisely where, in this trench, the floor joins Plat. 7F-3:U. 8, but it has to be at least 3 m E of where the W wall of Plat. 7F-31st once stood (see Fig. 5); both the pavement and its fill were followed this far E. Evidently, when Plat. 7F-1-2nd was to be built, the Maya began to raze Plat. 7F-3-1st, just as they began to raze Str. 7F-Sub.1. In both cases, though, they changed their minds and decided to incorporate what was left of the old surfaces into the new one. Perhaps this was the result of a Maya construction foreman’s sudden realization that the elevations of Plat. 7F-3:U. 8 and the top of Str. 7F-Sub.1 were nearly identical. Floor 1 of Plat. 7F-1-2nd was identified S of Str. 7F29, in the axial trench through that structure (Fig. 3), on the basis of its stratigraphic relationship to Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-1st and the character of the fill beneath it. This fill is largely composed of block masonry similar to that W of Str. 7F-30 and 31, and unlike any other fills for Plat. 7F1. The higher pavement is about the same distance above the pavement for Plat. 7F-1-4th as is Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 by the stairs for Str. 7F-Sub.1. Finally, it is the first plaster surface beneath Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1, though this and Fl. 1 of 2nd are a bit closer together vertically near Str. 7F29 than they are by 7F-30. The fill overlies Str. 7F-29:U. 26 which, as already noted, is thought to relate to Plat. 7F-1-3rd. On the N, it ends at a chop-line, S of which Str. 7F-29-3rd had been removed. Here, it looks very much as if Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 incorporated the remaining pavement of Str. 7F-29-3rd into its surface, just as it did the floors of Str. 7F-Sub.1 and Plat. 7F-3-1st, but proof has been destroyed by the apparent later intrusion of the front wall of Str. 7F-29-1st-B (Fig. 3:3). Platform 7F-29:Unit 2 behind that wall has the same elevation, however, as Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 in front. Noteworthy is that Str. 7F-29-3rd, like Plat. 7F-3-1st and Str. 7F-Sub.1, was partially razed prior to the laying of Fl. 1. Although no trace of Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 was found N of Str. 7F-32, it has already been argued that 7F-32:U.

32

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

2 is the riser of a basal step for that N stairway of the structure that was later eliminated by the laying of Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1 (Fig. 17:Plat. 7F-1:U. 6). The top of the fill on which U. 2 of Str. 7F-32 rests is at roughly the same elevation as Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 farther N, which probably extended as far S as this step. Precisely where Plat. 7F-12nd ended on the W is impossible to say (Fig. 32). One last feature of Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D deserving of notice is U. 13, a posthole in the floor in front of Str. 7F-30 (Fig. 6). Two meters S of this is another, Plat. 7F-3:U. 11. They are roughly in line with the front wall of Str. 7F-304th, and hint that a small structure or shelter of pole-andthatch materials stood in front of the NW corner of 4th. PLATFORM 7F-1-2ND-C This modification was caused by construction of Str. 7F-30-3rd. As reconstructed (Fig. 7), the easternmost portion of Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 must have been buried beneath the front part of 7F-30-3rd. No other alteration of Plat 7F-1-2nd is known to have taken place at this time. PLATFORM 7F-1-2ND-B This alteration was caused by the construction of Str. 7F-31-2nd on Fl. 1, where it was reexposed by the stripping away of fill for the S end of Str. 7F-30-3rd (Fig. 7 and 8). Other than this, Plat. 7F-1-2nd probably remained as before. PLATFORM 7F-1-2ND-A This last version of 2nd was brought about by construction of Str. 7F-29-1st-B and 7F-31-1st-B (Fig. 34), both of which have been discussed elsewhere. Neither seems to have substantially altered the overall plan of Plat. 7F-1-2nd. PLATFORM 7F-1-1ST-C This final large-scale reconstruction saw widespread repaving at a higher elevation. In front of Str. 7F-30, this is represented by Fl. 1 of 1st, which was laid following destruction of Fl. 1 of 2nd. Since the new surface lies some 0.15–0.30 m higher, the platform walls had to be altered, and in fact the N wall of 1st-C seems to have been shifted considerably N of the comparable wall of 2nd (see below). Coe and Broman encountered Fl. 1 of 1st, whose description need not be repeated here (Table 1.1; TR. 2:28, 35), except to note that pavement does not run beneath Str. 7F-30, as they thought. Instead, it runs beneath U. 33 of 7F-30 to turn up to the stairway of 7F-30-1st-C (U. 27; see Fig. 10). In 1965, Fl. 1 of 1st was exposed near Str. 7F-29-1st, to which it turns up (Fig. 2). East of 7F-29, Fl. 1 of 1st runs far N of the edge of Plat. 7F-1-2nd (cf. Fig. 6, 7, and 8 with Fig. 2 and 9). A likely reconstruction is that the edge of Plat. 7F-1-1st was in line with the rear wall of

29-1st-A, and ran to the NW corner of Str. 7F-30-1st-C (Fig. 35). Near Str. 7F-32, a plaster surface (U. 2) within 2 cm of the elevation of Fl. 1 at its southernmost exposure by Str. 7F-30 is doubtless the same pavement; it covers the posited lowermost step up to 7F-32 from Plat. 7F-1-2nd (see discussion of 7F-32), abutting the riser of the next step up (see Fig. 16 and 17). The E wall of the stairway extends deeper than the level of Fl. 1; probably the edge of the platform was in line with the stair front. Consistent is the presence of a midden off the end of the stairway, below the level of Fl. 1 (Table 5.1 [see below]:LG. 11e of 7F-32). The E edge of Plat. 7F-1-1st-C may have been in line with the front of Str. 7F-31-1st, but no traces of Fl. 1 of 1st were found in front of that structure. Obviously, it must once have been present there; a projection of its surface covers the basal step for Str. 7F-31-1st (Fig. 11). West of Str. 7F-32, a stepped wall (U. 7) runs 16.80 m to the NE corner of Str. 7F-35 (Fig. 16 and 20; actually, it runs another 2.80 m beyond, turns a corner and then runs N). Although no floor remains were found in association with the top of U. 7, it is close to the same elevation as U. 6, indicating that it probably marks the S edge of Plat. 7F-1-1st. Also close to the same elevation is U. 8, the surface on which Str. 7F-36 was built (Fig. 21b). It, too, is probably a remnant of Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-1st, even though it is somewhat thicker than remains of that pavement farther E. PLATFORM 7F-1-1ST-B A slight change to Plat. 7F-1-1st was caused by enlargement of the bottom step of Str. 7F-30 (Fig. 9:U. 33). This step is based on Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1, as Str. 7F-36-2nd also seems to be (Fig. 21b:Plat. 7F-1:U. 8). Although it is impossible to be sure the two were built at the same time, Str. 7F-36 was modified once prior to the next alteration of Plat. 7F-1-1st, so this seems reasonable. PLATFORM 7F-1-1ST-A Platform 7F-1-1st was changed for the last time by construction on its floor of Str. 7F-30:U. 34 (discussed in the section on Str. 7F-30). EARLY ACTIVITY Evidence for activity that in some cases surely predates Plat. 7F-1-4th comes from excavations in front of Str. 7F-30 and the trench through Str. 7F-29. In the former instance, it consists of Str. 7F-Sub.2, the walls of which were probably razed when Plat. 7F-1-4th was built, for U. 5 of Plat. 7F-1 was laid a mere 0.35 m above the floor of 7F-Sub.2. The structure itself has been described above. In the trench through Str. 7F-29, quarried bedrock was seen beneath Plat. 7F-1:U. 2, where a series of rect-

ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

angular grooves and basins shows that blocks were quarried (Fig. 23b). This, though, might have been for stone to use in Str. 7F-30-5th. Three postholes were also seen. For time spans, see Table 2.9.

Platform 7F-2 Platform 7F-2 designates the plaza between Str. 7F32 on the E, 7F-35 on the W, 7F-33 on the S, and Plat. 7F-1:U. 7 on the N. Excavations in Plat. 7F-2 were incidental to investigation of surrounding features, including a test pit (Op. 3H) in a feature labeled on the site map as Str. 7F-34 (TR. 11). This was not a structure at all, however, just an irregularity in the surface of Plat. 7F-2 (Fig. 20). DESCRIPTION At first, it appeared that two architectural developments could be defined for Plat. 7F-2, with 2nd being represented by two early floors, U. 1 and 2, with a wall, U. 3. For reasons discussed in the section on Plat. 7F-1, it later became dubious that U. 1, 2, and 3 relate to Plat. 7F-2 at all; instead, they are thought to relate to Plat. 7F-1-4th, leaving a single architectural development for Plat. 7F-2 (Table 2.10). Its only architecture consists of a floor (Fl. 1) that turns up to Str. 7F-35, as well as Plat. 7F-1:U. 7 (Fig. 20), and is, therefore, contemporary with both. Just how extensive this surface was is unknown; no trace of it appeared in the Op. 3H test pit, but experience in small structure excavations elsewhere at Tikal indicates that one is least likely to find traces of recent floors near the center of a plaza. In this case, a tree throw could have produced the mounding that the mappers labeled “Str. 7F34.” Probably, Fl. 1 ran as far E as Str. 7F-32, since Plat. 7F-1:U. 7 does, and it might have run S to Str. 7F-33.

Platform 7F-3 Platform 7F-3 is a terrace on the W side of Str. 7F-305th (Fig. 4 and 5). Although it was an integral part of that structure, its orientation was not the same, and it was altered on one occasion when Str. 7F-30 was not; therefore, it warrants separate discussion. PLATFORM 7F-3-2ND Work on Plat. 7F-3 began, as CS. 3, by filling the gap between already constructed U. 13 of Str. 7F-30 and U. 4 of Plat. 7F-1, bringing its level up to that of Plat. 7F-1:U. 5 (Fig. 10:16–20). Working from E to W, the Maya dumped light-brown earth in front of and over the lowest two steps of U. 13; on top of this they piled light-gray earth, followed by black earth (similar to that seen in Str. 7F-305th:CS. 6, 5, and 4; and beneath Plat. 7F-1:U. 5), deposited from the surface of Plat. 7F-1 (against Plat. 7F-1:U. 4).

33

Fill operations concluded with the loading in of further earth and rubbish, which was leveled off for a working surface at the same elevation as the plaza. This surface is marked by a stratum of packed, light-colored material (Plat. 7F-3:U. 1) that abuts the top of Plat. 7F-1:U. 4 and turns up to the fourth riser of Str. 7F-30:U. 13. Architecture of Str. 7F-30-5th:CS. 3 was built on Plat. 7F-3:U. 1, so there must have been a substantial pause between CS. 3 and 2 of Plat. 7F-3-2nd. Following construction of Str. 7F-30:U. 15, 16, and 17, work resumed on Plat. 7F-3-2nd (as CS. 2) with the erection of terrace walls, inside of which was placed a fill of light, limestone powder (over U. 1 and Str. 7F-30:U. 15). A thin pause-line (Fig. 10:U. 3) overlies this material, but it probably does not indicate a significant pause in construction because it does not completely cover the fill. Rather, the pause seems to have been associated with a return to the source of black earth that provided earlier fills, as noted below. Such black earth overlies U. 3, and is capped by a pause-line (Fig. 10:U. 4), comparable to the earlier U. 1, which runs from the top of the terrace wall to the top of Str. 7F-30:U. 15. In the trench through Str. 7F-30 (Fig. 10), the W terrace wall is represented by Plat. 7F-3:U. 2. Built on Plat. 7F-1:U. 4, the outer (W) face of U. 2 is set back 6 cm from the W face of Plat. 7F-1:U. 4, while the E faces are in alignment. This suggests that when Plat. 7F-3:U. 2 was built, the E side of Plat. 7F-1:U. 4 was visible above Plat. 7F-3:U. 1, but its W side was hidden by the floor of the plaza (Plat. 7F-1:U. 5). In the N tunnel, a wall was seen which, on the basis of position, height, and floor associations, must be a portion of U. 2. This forms a NW corner with another wall, U. 6, which runs E to abut Str. 7F-30:U. 16. Unit 6 must have been placed merely to retain fill, for U. 1 runs farther N beneath it, and the finished terrace floor runs N above it. The finished N face for the terrace, U. 7, was built 1 m N of U. 6 on the edge of U. 1 and, like U. 6, it abuts Str. 7F-30:U. 16. The reason U. 2 no longer can be seen meeting the W end of U. 7 is clearly because of the later intrusion of Bu. 191. In the S tunnel, the W wall (U. 2) had been torn out to permit the placement of a later burial (190). Just how far to the S U. 2 ran is not known, but it had to be as far as the trench through Str. 7F-31, for U. 1, 4, and 5 were followed there (Fig. 4:51 and Fig. 11). Thus, the terrace extended farther S than did Str. 7F-30-5th; if bilateral symmetry is assumed for Plat. 7F-3-2nd, with Ca. 207 marking its centerline, then a S wall analogous to U. 7 would have been positioned about as shown in Fig. 4:52. The reason for the asymmetrical placement of Plat. 7F-3-2nd relative to Str. 7F-30-5th is not known with certainty, but if it had not extended as far S as it did, it would not have sealed Bu. 162 (as it does; see Fig. 4 and 11). As discussed in part III,

34

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 2.9 Platform 7F-1: Time Spans Time Span

Architectural Floor Unit Development

Spea alDejDosits: Bu. Ca. PD.

Other Data

Lot Group (Table 5.1)

Abandonment and erosion

1 2 3

4a 4c

Ist-A

Final period of use 4b

Use of Ist-B; transition from Imix to Eznab ceramics

4

5

Ist-B

Modification by construction ofStr. 7F-30-lst-Band 7F-36-2nd on Fl. 1 of 1st Use of Ist-C

6 7

Ist-C

1

6-8

190, 2 191, 4?

3a 3d 3b

3c

2nd-A

Use of 2nd-B; transition from Ik to Imix ceramics 2nd-B

Modification by construction of Str. 7F-31-2nd on Fl.l of 2nd Useof2nd-C

12 13

Modification by construction of Str. 7F-30-3rd on Fl.l of 2nd

2nd-C

Useof2nd-D

14 15

2nd-D

1

12,13

2,3 4?

37,66 1

2

3rd

Height raised, eliminating Str. 7F-Sub.l and Plat. 7F-3-lst

Height of NW portion raised

14

18

19

5b

Use of 3rd and further accumulation of Str. 7F-32:LG.2b

16

17

Fl.l of 2nd extensively destroyed, new floor laid, and St.23 reerected.

Modification by construction ofStr. 7F-29-lst-Band 7F-31-lst-BonFl.l of 2nd

10

11

5a

Useof2nd-A

8 9

Str. 7F-30-lst-A built on Fl.l of 1st

Use of 4th and accumulation of Str. 7F-32: LG.2b; transition from Manik to Ik ceramics 4th

1-5, 9-11

la-e

Str. 7F-Sub.2 razed and original Plat. 7F-1 constructed

ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

TABLE 2.10 Platform 7F-2: Time Spans Time Span

Floor

Lot Group (Table 5.1)

Other Data

1

Abandonment and erosion

2

Use; transition from Imix to Eznab ceramics

3

1

1

Construction of plaza; Imix ceramics in vogue

this appears to have been a burial of special importance, which may be the reason that Plat. 7F-3-2nd was laid out as it was. The final stage (CS. 1) in construction of the terrace was to lay a good plaster floor (U. 5). This covers the top of the masonry of U. 2 and 7, turning down over the faces of both walls, and it ends on the E against fill for Str. 7F-30-5th. The original bottom tread of the stairway (U. 18) of Str. 7F-30 probably was placed on the E edge of Plat. 7F-3:U. 5. Because the pavement of Plat. 7F-3-2nd was 1 m above that of Plat. 7F-1-4th, there obviously must have been stairs somewhere to provide access to the terrace. Since no such stairs have been found, they either exist where there have been no excavations, or else they were torn out at some later time. The latter is likely, for stairs would have hampered construction of the front wall for Plat. 7F-3-1st (cf. Fig. 4 and 5). One would expect stairs to have been axially placed, by analogy with Str. 7F30 and 7F-Sub.1; if they were built on the floor of Plat. 7F-1-4th (as were the stairs of Str. 7F-Sub.1), then they could later have been torn out without causing noticeable damage to the floor. This, and the later damage caused by intrusion of Bu. 190, would explain the absence of all traces of an axial stairway in the S tunnel. PLATFORM 7F-3-1ST This enlarged version of Plat. 7F-3 is represented by two walls (U. 9 and 10), a floor (U. 8), and a posthole (U. 11), although the latter may be a later intrusion (see Plat. 7F-1-1st-D). Unit 9 replaced U. 2, and was built on Plat. 7F-1:U. 5 less than 1 m W of the earlier wall; given the proximity of the two, any stairs that may have existed for Plat. 7F-3-2nd must have been ripped out for this construction. Also built on U. 5 of Plat. 7F-1, 2 m N of U. 7, was U. 10. Like U. 7, which it replaced, U. 10 abuts Str. 7F-30:U. 16, less of which was now exposed N of U. 10. Terminating on the tops of U. 9 and 10 is the floor, U. 8, which S and E of U. 7 and 9 was laid directly on the plaster

35

surface of 2nd. The new pavement runs up to the bottom step of Str. 7F-30-5th, which was set into its mortar with a turnup to its face (see Fig. 10:U. 18 of 7F-30). Sealed by U. 8 is Bu. 134, between U. 2 and 9 on the old Bu. 160 axis. Unknown is whether a new S wall, analogous to U. 10, was built for Plat. 7F-3-1st, for there was no excavation S of the trench through Str. 7F-31 (in which U. 8 was seen). Construction of a new S wall may be indicated by failure to find a cache for Plat. 7F-3-1st. Each architectural development of Str. 7F-30 had some sort of offering, along with a burial, and Plat. 7F-3-2nd was an integral part of 7F-30-5th. The offering of the latter was Ca. 207, thought to have been placed on the axis of Plat. 7F-3-2nd (by contrast, offerings associated with Str. 7F-30-4th and all subsequent offerings were placed on the Bu. 160 axis, perhaps because the terrace in front no longer existed). We have the burial (Bu. 134) for Plat. 7F-3-1st, but if a new wall was built farther S, its axis (and any cache placed on it) might be as much as 1 m S of Ca. 207, just beyond the S tunnel. Platform 7F-3-1st, like 2nd before it, was too high to be accessed without benefit of stairs. None were found, but they may have been torn out (as portions of the front of 1st are known to have been), when Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D was built. For time spans of Plat. 7F-3, see Table 2.11.

Chultun 7F-8 A routine probe to bedrock W of Str. 7F-31 resulted in the unanticipated discovery of this chultun, which had been filled anciently following Bu. 162. The singular nature of this interment, coupled with unusual features of the chamber, gave rise to the idea that the chamber might have been constructed to serve as a sepulcher, rather than a chultun, but for reasons discussed below, this now seems unlikely. For illustrations, see Fig. 4 and 11. DESCRIPTION As shown in plan and section, the chultun now consists of a single chamber, roughly round in plan, with its maximum diameter some 0.20 to 0.40 m above floor level; from here up, the walls converge to an unusually large orifice that opens into the eastern portion of the chamber. The eastern half of the orifice is now 0.80 m lower than the western half, but bedrock has been quarried away E of a line that runs N-S across the opening of the chultun, leaving a vertical face. Hence, there may at one time have been no difference in elevation between the two sides. Because Plat. 7F-3:U. 1 (part of the construction associated with Str. 7F-30-5th) seals the chultun fill, it seems likely that this quarrying provided stone for that construction. In the process, the older Ch. 7F-8, which was of no further use as a chultun, was altered.

36

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 2.11 Platform 7F-3: Time Spans Time Span

Architectural Construction Development Stage

Unit

Special Deposits: Bu. Ca.

Lot Group (Table 5.1)

Other Data

1

Abandonment

2

Use of expanded terrace 1st

3

8-10, 11?

2

134

Expansion of terrace Use; transition from Manik to Ik ceramics

4 1

5 2nd

Completion of Wterrace

5,7

2

2-4,6

3

1

207

Ib

Walls and fills placed for terrace W of Str. 7F-30-5th la

162

Area between Plat. 7F-l-4th and the core of Str. 7F-30-5th filled; late Manik ceramics in vogue

TABLE 2.12 Chultun 7F-8: Time Spans Time Span

Architectural Development

Special Deposits Bu.162

1

Plat.7F-3:la

Other Data

Conversion of chultun into a burial chamber, sealed beneath Plat. 7F-3. Use of chultun; Manik ceramics in vogue.

2 3

Lot Group (Table 5.1)

Ch.7F-8

Although this explanation seems to account well enough for the two-level nature of the orifice, it does not account for its unusual N-S length (1.10 m), which is much larger than normal. One possibility has already been mentioned: that this is not a chultun at all, but a specially constructed chamber for Bu. 162. In favor of this interpretation is the suspected importance of that burial (discussed in part III), and its association with Plat. 7F-3 (see above discussion of Plat. 7F-3). Against, though, are four points, the first being the asymmetry of Plat. 7F-3 relative to Str. 7F-30-5th and 7F-Sub.1. As has been noted, the

Construction of onechamber chultun.

axes of the two structures are oriented to Bu. 160, while that of Plat. 7F-3 is S of this, even though Plat. 7F-3 was an integral part of the construction for Str. 7F-30. The proposed explanation for this is that the Maya wished to include Bu. 162 beneath Plat. 7F-3. Since the other construction was oriented to Bu. 160, it would seem likely that had a chamber been constructed especially for Bu. 162, it would have been in a location less likely to result in the architectural disharmony seen here. This suggests that, instead of specially constructing a chamber, the Maya made use of an existing chultun that happened to be handy. In

ARCHITECTURE AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

the process of converting it into a burial chamber, they may have enlarged its orifice, and because it was off the Bu. 160 axis, the construction that covered it could not be oriented to that line. If, then, Ch. 7F-8 began as an ordinary one-chamber chultun, which later had its orifice lengthened and one side lowered, it would have looked almost identical to some others at Tikal (Ch. 5F-4 being a good example; D. Puleston, pers. comm., 1974). This is a second point in favor of the idea that Bu. 162 was placed in a modified chultun. A third point is the frequent reuse of chultuns at Tikal for interments; Bu. 162 may simply represent one more example of this practice. Fourth, the presence of a small structure (7F-Sub.2) that predates Str. 7F-30-5th, Plat. 7F-3-2nd, and Bu. 162, and which is similar to one

37

known elsewhere in a group of domestic structures, implies the prior existence of a residential group located on the knoll on which Gp. 7F-1 was built; a chultun, for storage purposes, would be a logical feature in such a group. In sum (Table 2.12), Ch. 7F-8 almost surely was constructed as a chultun similar to several others known from Tikal (at least 11 are known; see planned TR. 32). It was in use at the same time as Str. 7F-Sub.2, although it could predate (slightly) that structure, and have been constructed at the end of Preclassic times. The chultun and the structure were abandoned together to make way for construction of Str. 7F-30-5th and associated architecture, at which time, stone was quarried away from the E side of the orifice. It was then, too, that the orifice was lengthened as the chultun was converted into a chamber for Bu. 162.

This page intentionally left blank

III

Burials

Preliminary Comments

Description

Sixteen burials are known from Gp. 7F-1 (Table 3.1), of which four (found in 1957) are described in TR. 2. Here, full descriptions of the twelve burials found in 1963 and 1965 are presented, with such reassessment of the others as is necessary, given better knowledge of proveniences. Next is an examination of the following hypotheses: that these are residential burials of people of relatively high social status, perhaps with their servants, and that those in ten of the graves were descendants (or spouses) of one or both of the adults in Bu. 160 and 162. Full comparison of these burials with all others from Tikal is slated for TR. 35; full discussion of skeletal material for TR. 30; description and illustration of interred pottery is in TR. 25A (see also Coggins 1975 for discussion of ceramic decoration); associated artifacts are in TR. 27A and B.

TABLE 3.1 Burials from Group 7F-1 Location Burials

Burial 1 LOCATION: On the front-rear axis of Str. 7F-30-1st-A, W of earlier Bu. 160 (Fig. 9, 10, and TR. 2:41). 3A/12; no illustration. GRAVE: This is a roughly rectangular pit dug through the fills of Plat. 7F-1-1st and 2nd down to Plat. 7F-1:U. 5, lined with mud-coated rubble, and roofed by masonry slabs 0.60 m above U. 5. Although the chamber was left empty of all but the body and associated materials, some earth had sifted in from the deliberately filled shaft above. The shaft was approximately as deep as the chamber was high, and the chamber was somewhat larger than required to merely dispose of the body and accoutrements (see Table 3.2 for volume and floor area of the grave).

Str. 7F-29

Str. 7F-30

Str. 7F-31

Plat. 7F-1

Plat. 7F-3

192

1 132 140 150 160 190* 191* 194

159 193

2 3 4** 190* 191*

134** 162***

*In Plat. 7F-1, probably related to Str. 7F-30 **Placed on the same axis as Str. 7F-30 burials ***Placed on the same axis as Str. 7F-31 burials

INDIVIDUAL AND ASSOCIATED MATERIAL: See TR. 2:41, and fig. 14–15; also TR. 25A:fig. 98d. SKELETAL MATERIAL: See TR. 2:41. Not noted there: the surviving upper central incisor that was drilled for an inlay also had its occlusal surface cut or ground flat (Type G1, Romero 1960:fig. 1). All lower incisors had a center notch cut out (Type A1; ibid., fig. 1).

40

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 3.2 Floor Area and Volume of Group 7F-1 Graves

1

3.21

1.04

0.68

in any household burial, or any other made during the era of Imix pottery production (TR. 19:123–141 and TR. 20B:58). All things considered, a post-Imix date for this interment seems likely; consistent with Eznab dating is the presence of transitional Tulix-Pach censers in the fill of U. 34 (PD. 100).

2

None

NA

NA

SEQUENTIAL POSITION:

3

None

NA

NA

4

None

NA

NA

132

2.31

0.69

0.34

134

None

1.48

0.12

140

3.67

1.47

1.30

150

3.00

1.02

0.82

This is the westernmost burial on the axis on which Bu. 1, 4, 132, 134, 140, 150, and 160 were placed, in fill of Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 (TR. 2:fig. 2). Included in 3A/14; for plan, see TR. 2:fig. 9.

159

5.94

1.86

1.71

GRAVE:

160

15.62

6.14

8.11

162

None

3.93

5.90

190

3.75

0.92

1.15

191

0.86

0.64

0.77

192

p

0.60

p

193

6.97

0.54

0.23

194

Unknown

0.50

Unknown

Burial

Total Excavation Volume (m3)

Grave Floor Area (m2)

Chamber Volume (m3)

Str. 7F-30:TS. 3 (Table 2.2); Terminal Classic.

Burial 2 LOCATION:

No special grave was constructed; instead, the body was laid on Plat. 7F-1:U. 5, following which fill for Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D was heaped up over and around it (see TR. 2:42). INDIVIDUAL AND ASSOCIATED MATERIAL: See TR. 2:42. No associated material. SKELETAL MATERIAL: See TR. 2:42. DISCUSSION: The burial clearly took place at the time of construction of Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D (see comment, TR. 2:42). SEQUENTIAL POSITION:

DISCUSSION: See TR. 2:41, 42. The burial clearly was contemporary with construction of Str. 7F-30:U. 34. Although there was an uneven layer of lime at the level of Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1 over fill in the N part of the grave shaft, fill in the S part continued uninterrupted from U. 34 down to the roof of the burial chamber. The Zacatel Cream Polychrome, slightly outcurving-side bowl from Bu. 1 is discussed by Coggins (1975:595), who accepts Coe and Broman’s (TR. 2:40) suggestion that this was an heirloom. She further suggests that it was made no earlier than the last two katuns of Imix times (Coggins 1975:592), although Culbert (TR. 25A:fig. 98d) thinks that it probably was made after the appearance of Eznab ceramics. The other vessel, a utilitarian red-ware bowl, would be completely out of place

Plat. 7F-1:TS. 15 (Table 2.9); Intermediate Classic.

Burial 3 LOCATION: In fill for Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1, 3.40 m N and 1.42 W of St. 23 (TR. 2:fig. 2). 3A/15; see TR. 2:fig. 10 for plan. GRAVE: No special grave was prepared; the body was simply included within the fill for Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D (see TR. 2:43). INDIVIDUAL AND ASSOCIATED MATERIAL: See TR. 2:43 and fig. 16. (Objects placed in the mouths of the deceased, as here, are now known from

41

BURIALS

some Tikal burials but are not common; see, for example, TR. 20B:60.) See TR. 2:43. Not noted there is that a wide notch was cut from the corner of the right upper canine (Type B6, Romero 1960:fig. 1); the left upper canine was not found but is presumed to have been similarly notched.

to lay it out on that floor, to be covered by fill for its replacement. On balance, the interment most likely took place late in construction of Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D; absence of Fl. 1 of 2nd above may be explained as part of the extensive destruction of the pavement when Plat. 7F-1-1st-C was constructed. Nevertheless, placement at the time of construction of 1st-C cannot be ruled out.

DISCUSSION:

SEQUENTIAL POSITION:

This burial clearly took place while Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D was under construction. This makes it contemporaneous with Bu. 2, as noted by Coe and Broman (TR. 2:42), although its position higher in the fill indicates that it happened later in the construction process. Noteworthy is inclusion of an object with the subadult of Bu. 3, while nothing was included with the adult male of Bu. 2.

Probably TS. 15, but possibly TS. 7 of Plat. 7F-1 (Table 2.9); Intermediate or Late Classic.

SKELETAL MATERIAL:

SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Plat. 7F-1:TS. 15 (Table 2.9); Intermediate Classic.

Burial 4 LOCATION: Just W of Bu. 1 in Plat. 7F-1, on the same axis on which were placed Bu. 2, 132, 134, 140, 150, and 160 (see Fig. 6 and 9). 3A/22; not illustrated. GRAVE: No special preparation was evident; either a shallow pit was dug into upper fill for Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1, or else the body was put in place and fill was then dumped around and over it. INDIVIDUAL AND ASSOCIATED MATERIAL: See TR. 2:44. No associated material known, but excavation was incomplete. SKELETAL MATERIAL: See TR. 2:44. DISCUSSION: The sequential position of this burial is somewhat uncertain. Almost surely, it was in place when Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1 was laid (TR. 2:43–44); at the latest, it was interred precisely then. The stratigraphy shows no signs of an intrusive pit (TR. 2:fig. 3), however, and the burial is below the elevation of Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1. Moreover, if it were placed when Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1 was laid, there would have been no need to intrude it through the earlier pavement. Easiest disposal of the body would have been

Burial 132 LOCATION: Str. 7F-30, intruded into U. 20 (the stairway for 4th) and covered by fill for U. 26 (a floor for 3rd; see Fig. 7 and 10). The burial is 2.40 m E of older Bu. 160, which was placed on the front-rear axis of 7F-30-5th, but this is about 2 m N of that for 7F-30-3rd and 4th. 3B/4; for plans, see Fig. 26c,d. GRAVE: This is a formal-walled-roofed grave (see TR. 19:142– 143 for definition), composed of six large masonry blocks approximately 0.60 m high, set 0.10 to 0.25 m from one another on each side. These formed sidewalls, but no comparable masonry closed off the ends. Four large stone slabs were then placed askew as a roof, which, in combination with inward-canted wall stones, gave the grave a vaultlike appearance. Smaller stone rubble was heaped over and around the grave, and was in turn surrounded and covered by fill on which a floor, Str. 7F-30:U. 26, was eventually laid (Fig. 10:30 and 26). Although there was earth on and around the body when discovered, this probably resulted from soil working through gaps between wall and roof stones as these were set in place. In spite of its distinctive appearance, and the substantial excavation required for its construction, the grave was no larger than necessary to contain the single body (see Table 3.2 for floor area and volume). INDIVIDUAL AND ASSOCIATED MATERIAL: Individual: Subadult of unknown sex; body lay supine, with head N facing up, and lip-to-lip cache vessels (Fig. 26d3) as a “pillow.” The upper arms extended in two parallel E-W lines, the left one across and its elbow by the right side of the body. The arms were tightly flexed at the elbow, so that the hands were positioned over the face. The legs were flexed and tilted over toward the W, with the knees apparently touching the right elbow. Flexion at

42

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

the knees was especially tight, placing the feet 0.15 m SW of the pelvis. Associated material: 2 Ik pottery vessels (Fig. 26d1 and 2), a Saxche Orange Polychrome barrel and a rare Vercal Orange barrel (TR. 25A:fig. 46a,b); an Ucum Unslipped, outflaring-side cache vessel with a Kokob Carved, outflaring-side cache vessel, large variety, used as a cover (ibid., fig. 45), on which is MT. 290 (TR. 27A:fig. 57n). The last two vessels were directly beneath the head of the corpse, as if to cushion it. The two barrels (Fig. 26d1 and 2) were upright, flanking the head above the cache vessels. Some organic material may have been contained in one of them (Fig. 26d1). Immediately N of this vessel was some organic material and a small mammal skeleton, as yet unidentified. Contained in the cache vessels were 8 chert eccentrics (TR. 27A:fig. 6f,g); 8 obsidian eccentrics (ibid., fig. 24h,i); 1 obsidian sphere (ibid., fig. 33y); 2 obsidian prismatic blades; 13 bird skulls, including Ncytidromus albicollis (Pauraque), Oryzoborus funereus (Thick-billed seed finch), Psilorhinus morio (Brown jay), Buteo megnirostris (Roadside hawk), Icterus perhaps spurious (Oriole); 2 fish vertebrae; 1 piece of branched coral; 5 pieces of Bryozoa; 25 lumps of soft sponge; 1 piece of Gorgonian; and a sample of fibrous matted marine material. The numerous unmodified marine shells (cf. TR. 27A:fig. 170–178, specifically 172b2, 174g, 240k) include 7 whole Vermicularia spirata; 8 (6 whole) Anadara transversa; 8 whole Arca zebra (2 plus 3 pairs); 1 Anadara (lunared) ovalis; 10 (6 whole, 2 immature) Crepidula aculeate (1 with oyster); 1 Crepidula sp.; 1 whole Dinocardium robustum; 5 (1 whole) Chione cancellata (2 with Ostrea sp.); 1 whole Noetia ponderosa; 7 whole Brachidontes, probably exustus (1 plus 6 pairs); 18 whole (6 plus 6 pairs) and 22 fragments Ostrea sp.; 1 whole Anadara transversa; 1 whole and 1 fragment Anomalocardia sp.; 1 whole Crepidula fornicata; 1 whole and 1 fragment Nassarius sp. (possibly Pacific sp.); 1 whole Cerithium sp.; 1 whole Crucibulum sp.; 1 whole and 2 fragments Balanus sp. (found on a Chione); 1 whole Anachis sp.; 3 whole Turrids sp.; 5 whole Epitonium sp. and Cerithium sp.; 43 univalve and bivalve fragments; 3 Arca sp. fragments; 1 Dentalium sp. fragment; 1 Mulinia, probably lateralis fragment; 1 whole and 3 fragments of Marginella sp.; 1 Crucibulum, probably auricula, fragment; 3 Busycon sp. (2 right- and 1 left-handed, immature); Pinna sp. or Atrina sp. fragments; 6 unmodified stingray spines; remains of possibly 4 partially intact and loose jade and shell mosaic assemblages (ibid., fig. 69a1–4, b–d); 4 plus 1 terminal human phalanges; 4 small lumps of jade (ibid., fig. 69a5); ca. 40 bits, 3 mm or less, of cinnabar scattered among the other objects; 7 small unmodified stones, including 1 quartz, several limestone, and one talc. SKELETAL MATERIAL: Preservation of this skeleton was reasonably good,

but since death occurred before adulthood, sex cannot be diagnosed. Septal apertures were present in both humeri, however, and while these can occur in males, they are more common in females. At Tikal, they occur with greatest frequency among the socially elite (burials from the N and Central Acropolises; see forthcoming TR. 30) and least commonly among the lower classes (burials from small domestic groups). Head shape had not been artificially altered, nor was there any sign of pathology. DISCUSSION: The sequential position of this burial would be clear—intruded into the stairway of Str. 7F-30-4th and covered by fill of 3rd—were it not for the break in U. 26 (a floor for 3rd) above. Fill above the burial does appear to extend some 1.60 m W beneath the darker material on which U. 26 was laid, however, and so it must precede the pavement. The break, therefore, probably relates to later placement of PD. 98 (see Fig. 10:31). The objects placed with the deceased set this burial apart from most others, and bring to mind some of the more spectacular chamber burials of Gp. 5D-2 (discussed by Coggins [1975:236–243, 317–319]). For present purposes, it is sufficient to note that, beside this one, only Bu. 160 (also from Str. 7F-30) included a cache among the grave goods (TR. 27A:23, 24). In quantity and diversity of unmodified shells, the Bu. 132 cache far surpasses any other special deposit known from Tikal. The chert and obsidian eccentrics bring to mind Bu. 200 from the North Acropolis, the only one other than this and Bu. 160 that seems to have included them inside the grave (TR. 27A:23). Coe (pers. comm.) noted that the chert and obsidian eccentrics, marine materials, mosaic elements, and unworked jade bits are reminiscent of the Uz Offertory Assemblage (TR. 27A:20). The chert eccentrics, like those in Bu. 200 (which dates soon after the appearance of Ik pottery; see TR. 14:840 and chart 1), are fixed as Class EF-3 (ibid., fig. 6f,g), appropriate for both Uz and Yikel offerings, although the set is unique in some respects. Class EF-3 cherts are dated between 9.6.0.0.0 and 9.15.0.0.0 (TR. 27A:22). The EO-1E obsidians (ibid., fig. 24h,i) figure heavily in Yikel caches and date early in the period between 9.2.0.0.0 and 9.15.0.0.0 (ibid., fig. 24). Clearly, Bu. 132 dates to the time of Ik pottery production. Although Vercal Orange is rare at Tikal, it is an Ik type, as is Saxche Orange Polychrome. Culbert (TR. 25A:fig. 45) regards Kokob Carved as an Ik type as well, even though its production may have begun in late Manik times. Overall, a date earlier, rather than later, in Ik times for this burial seems likely. Indeed, absence of eccentrics inside the grave of North Acropolis Bu. 195, the next in sequence after Bu. 200, suggests that the custom of so

BURIALS

43

placing eccentrics had become passé by its date, soon after 9.8.0.0.0 (AD 597; TR. 14:841). On stratigraphic grounds, Bu. 132 is the third of three containing Ik pottery (after Bu. 134 and 140). Taking into account all clues to dating, sometime between 9.7.0.0.0 and 9.8.0.0.0 seems a reasonable guess. That the person interred in Bu. 132 was someone special is indicated not only by the cache with its impressive contents placed in the grave, but also by MT. 290. According to Simon Martin (pers. comm., 2015), glyph D is ch’o-ko, which can mean either “young,” “youth,” or “prince.” It is carried by rulers, and so attests to the high status the person in Bu. 132. Other glyphs are almost certainly a single name, possibly that of the deceased. Finally, the central element of MT. 290 is 7-IHK’-K’AN-NAL for Wuk Ihk’ K’an Nal, a supernatural location that remains poorly understood.

Associated material: A broken, Sibal Buff Polychrome barrel (TR. 25A:fig. 46b), with a large piece missing, was placed just E of the pelvis.

SEQUENTIAL POSITION:

High in the fill of Plat. 7F-3-1st, but sealed by its floor, this burial took place well along in construction of 1st. Presumably the interruption of construction was brief, since no pause-lines are visible in the fill. To Coggins (1975:314), the pottery vessel suggests a date of 9.11.0.0.0–9.11.10.0.0 for the interment, but Culbert (TR. 25A:fig. 46b) does not offer an opinion on its placement in the period of Ik pottery manufacture. There are, though, reasons to regard Coggins’s dating as too late, one being that this is the first of a sequence of four burials that contain Ik pottery (Bu. 132, 140, and 150 follow in that order). Hence, one would suspect it was earlier, rather than later, in Intermediate Classic times. Second, Coggins based her date on the absence of vessels like the one in Bu. 195 (the burial of the 22nd king of Tikal) and her assumption that Bu. 200/PD. 134, which did contain barrel-shaped vessels, was later (Coggins 1975:314 and 360). More recent work strongly suggests Bu. 200 was that of the 21st king (Haviland 1997:table 1), who died in AD 562 (9.6.8.0.0), when Tikal was defeated in a “Star War” with Calakmul (Martin 2003:24). His was the first North Acropolis burial to include Ik pottery (TR. 14:846 and chart 1). A more realistic date for Bu. 134, then, would be somewhere around 9.6.0.0.0 to 9.7.0.0.0. The nature of the human remains requires further comment. Clearly, this was not a primary burial of an intact corpse, even though the bones (excepting the ribs) were located as they would be found had a body been placed supine in a N-S alignment, with legs flexed at the knees and tipped to the W. The broken and incomplete pot might suggest secondary burial (reburial from a previous grave), but the correct articulation of one arm and both legs indicates an individual not long dead when interred, and contrasts with known secondary burials (PD. 212 and 213 in TR. 19; Bu. 152 and PD. 64, 110, 221, and 231 in TR. 20A). The correct relative placement of what

Str. 7F-30:TS. 11 (Table 2.2). Intermediate Classic, probably some time between 9.7.10.0.0 and 9.8.0.0.0.

Burial 134 LOCATION: Plat. 7F-3, in the fill for 1st and sealed by Plat. 7F-3:U. 8 (Fig. 5 and 10). This is 5.90 m W of Str. 7F-30-5th, on the front-rear axis of that structure and 8.30 m due W of earlier Bu. 160. 3B/8; for plan, see Fig. 26a. GRAVE: This is a rectangular, formal-walled grave (see TR. 19:142 for definition), made up in part by Plat. 7F-3:U. 5 and 9 (the W walls of Plat. 7F-3-2nd and 1st respectively). Masonry blocks placed between these two walls served as the ends of the grave. Lacking any specially constructed roof, it was purposely earth filled, and was no larger than necessary to contain the single body (see Table 3.2 for floor area and volume). INDIVIDUAL AND ASSOCIATED MATERIAL: Individual: Adult, probably male. The right arm extended S from the right shoulder (represented by the scapula, clavicle, and proximal humerus), with the right hand clenched in a fist over the pelvis. The right thigh continued the line of the arm to the knee, which was flexed; below, the leg was bent up against the thigh such that the foot, had it not been missing, would have been due E of the head of the femur. The left leg was similarly placed beneath the right; its foot was also absent. In addition to the feet, the left arm, vertebrae, and skull were not present, and the ribs were out of correct anatomical position.

SKELETAL MATERIAL: Incomplete remains make sex diagnosis difficult, but the size and robustness of the bones are typical of Tikal males. The individual appears to have been taller than the average later Classic male, but very close to the mean for those placed in the chamber burials of Gp. 5D-2 after 9.6.0.0.0. Proper articulation of arm and shoulder bones indicates that this limb was in one piece when buried, as was the body from the waist down (excepting the missing feet). Limbs were clearly separated from the torso, most of which was absent. DISCUSSION:

44

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

remained of the corpse, too, contrasts with most secondary burials. Therefore, this probably was a two-stage burial, in which the corpse was subject to some kind of postmortem alteration prior to final disposal. In this case, the extensive butchering and dispersal of body parts could be indicative of procurement of some body parts (even a skull) to keep as relics or for some other purpose. More likely, it seems indicative of a violent death, perhaps in a major accident or even in combat, followed by deliberate mutilation. It does not seem coincidental that this was the first burial in Gp. 7F-1 after Bu. 162, in which the corpse was similarly cut up (see its discussion). Given the revised dating for this one, the deceased could have been a victim of the wars of Wak Chan K’awiil (aka “Double Bird”), the 21st king of Tikal, perhaps even the “Star War” of 9.6.8.0.0. Alternatively, he could have been a victim of the dynastic intrigues associated with the return of Wak Chan K’awiil (see Martin 2003:23–24). Whatever the cause of death, survivors were able to retrieve the remains and dispose of them as best they could with a single pot, broken and incomplete, like the body.

arms were flexed at the elbows, with the hands together just below the mouth. Associated material: Vessel No. 1, a Zacec Black cylinder (TR. 25A:fig. 46c1; a type rare at Tikal), was placed upright immediately W of the right leg (below the knee); just S was Vessel No. 2, also placed upright, a Saxche Orange Polychrome barrel (ibid., fig. 46c3) on which is MT. 342; S again was an upright Vessel No. 4, a Saxche Orange Polychrome, lateral-ridge tripod plate (ibid., fig. 46c4), the edge of which covered part of the corpse’s foot; W and again upright, was Vessel No. 3, a second Saxche Orange Polychrome barrel (ibid., fig. 46c2). A jade bead (TR. 27A:fig. 110a) was placed just below the left wrist, at the side of the chest; 1 plain and 1 extensively altered stingray spine (ibid., fig. 183c9) lay in the pubic region; 3 marine shells (cf. TR. 27A:fig. 170–178; Arca imbricata, Chama sp., and Trachycardium isocardia) were beneath the pelvis; 15 hematite mosaic elements (ibid., fig. 84w) were found together, but their precise location is unknown. The same is true of 1 piece of soft massive coral and 2 pieces of Vermetidae (cf. ibid., fig. 179).

SEQUENTIAL POSITION:

SKELETAL MATERIAL:

Plat. 7F-3:TS. 3 (Table 2.12), early in Intermediate Classic times, probably ca. 9.6.0.0.0–9.7.0.0.0.

The remains were relatively well preserved, so that diagnoses of age, sex, and primary burial are secure. The individual was more robust than the average Intermediate Classic Tikal male; not only was his stature greater than the average for men of his time, it was above the average for the subjects of Late Classic chamber burials at the epicenter of Tikal. No pathologies are evident.

Burial 140 LOCATION: Str. 7F-30, intruded into the fill of 5th on its frontrear axis (Fig. 6 and 10), directly above earlier Bu. 160. 3B/14; for plan, see Fig. 26b. GRAVE: The grave is best described as a small chamber with a vaultlike ceiling (see Table 3.2): its walls and roof were specially constructed of masonry, it is somewhat larger than required for disposal of the single body, and the chamber was not purposefully filled with earth. Like the far larger Bu. 160, the grave has an “entrance,” formed in this case by a cut into the stone block fill of Str. 7F-30-5th. This opening was walled up by masonry on its E (burial) side, after the interment was in place. Like that of Bu. 160, the chamber itself extends both N and S of the entrance; its walls were formed by the stone block fill of Str. 7F-30-5th into which it was cut. For its part, the roof was constructed of stone slabs cantilevered so as to form the vaultlike ceiling (Fig. 10). INDIVIDUAL AND ASSOCIATED MATERIAL: Individual: Old adult male, whose body was placed in an extended position, supine, head to the N facing up. His

DISCUSSION: The sequential position of this burial is not immediately evident, even though Fig. 10 shows it as apparently intruded through Str. 7F-30-4th and sealed by 2nd. There are, though, three reasons for questioning an association of this burial with construction of 2nd, the first being very clear evidence that production of Imix ceramics had begun by the time 2nd was built, whereas the burial contains Ik ceramics. The second is that another important interment was associated with 2nd (Bu. 150), whereas Bu. 140 is the only one that could have been associated with 4th. If it were not so associated, then this would be the only architectural development of 7F-30 for which we have no initial burial. Finally, there is the great depth of the grave: its floor was 3.20 m below that (U. 22) for 4th. Digging down through the structure floor, heavy stone block fill would have been reached at 1.20 m. For the Maya to have excavated another 2.00 m of this, for a chamber that was to be only 1.16 m high, does not make sense, especially since it would have been difficult to do in the confined space of the shaft. None of these objections, taken singly, is sufficient to

45

BURIALS

disprove an association of Bu. 140 with construction of Str. 7F-30-2nd. The Ik pottery, for one thing, could represent heirlooms; for another, 7F-30-4th might have had an initial, dedicatory burial farther S on its centerline (although all other burials in 7F-30 were arranged on the axis of original Bu. 160). Finally, the importance of Bu. 140 might have justified the extra work and effort required to place it so deeply in the structure fill. Taken together, though, these do not adequately dispose of the objections. Seeing Bu. 140 as initial to 4th not only removes these objections in a manner consistent with a pattern seen in other burials (150 and 159), but makes comprehensible other seeming anomalies (see below). The interpretation favored here, then, is that Bu. 140 was intruded into 7F-30-5th when construction was begun on 4th (just as burials inaugurated every other alteration of the structure). To this end, the stone block fill of 5th was removed to a depth of 2 m for construction of the grave. This measurement compares with the 1.80 m that Bu. 150 was intruded through the floor into 7F-304th and the 2.40 m that Bu. 159 was intruded when Str. 7F-31 was built; in other words, these three burials show a consistency that would be lacking had Bu. 140 in fact been dug down through the floor (U. 22) of 7F-30-4th. The greater depth of Bu. 159, incidentally, may be explained by the fact that those who dug it were not faced with a compact, stone block fill such as encountered by the gravediggers for Bu. 140 and 150. What remains to be explained is the apparent intrusion of Bu. 140 through 7F-30-4th shown in Fig. 10. The explanation may well concern Bu. 150; all others associated with 7F-30 are on the same axis as the original Bu. 160 regardless of where the actual centerline of the structure fell at the time. Thus, Bu. 1, 132, 134, and 140 are on that axis and the contemporary Bu. 190 and 191 flank it. Burial 150 is just to one side of that line, immediately S of Bu. 140. This leads to the hypothesis that Bu. 150 was intended to go on that line, towards which end workers began to dig a grave on the burial axis of 7F-30-3rd (which continued to utilize the old floor of 4th). Once they reached the top of the older 5th, it became obvious to them that they had hit the top of a shaft for an earlier interment, upon discovery of which they simply moved over to the S and completed their grave for Bu. 150. The result is that the erroneous initial cut for Bu. 150 looks like an intrusion of 140. Two other bits of stratigraphic evidence confirm this interpretation. The first concerns the fill of the shaft: in section, a slight difference may be noted at the level of U. 14, the floor for 7F-30-5th (Fig. 10:27). Below this, the shaft was filled with compact masonry blocks (probably reused from the fill of 5th), although there were also masonry blocks above; these were loosely packed, with much more earth. This change is taken to mark the point

at which the gravediggers realized they were headed for an older burial. Their shaft above this point they ultimately backfilled with debris from construction of the grave for Bu. 150 (which also penetrated slightly the stone block fill of 5th, though not as deeply as did that for Bu. 140). The second bit of evidence is that Becker’s excavations revealed no sign of an intrusive pit through the fill of 7F-304th for Bu. 150. For this reason, we thought at first that the interment inaugurated construction of 4th, and that it was older than Bu. 132 and 140. Ceramic analysis, however, showed Bu. 150 to be more recent than the other two, as well as the fill ceramics of 4th. Hence, the burial had to be intruded, even though no shaft could be seen above it. Now, there is an explanation of the anomaly—the gravediggers came down over Bu. 140, and then undercut the fill of 4th from the N. The decoration on pottery vessels from Bu. 140 is described by Coggins (1975:315–317). She suggests a date of ca. 9.11.10.0.0–9.12.0.0.0 for these pots, but this is certainly too late. The interment came after Bu. 134, but before Bu. 132, both of which contain Ik pottery. Based on their dating (see their discussion), a “guess date” for this one would be ca. 9.7.0.0.0–9.7.10.0.0. SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Str. 7F-30:TS. 13 (Table 2.2), in Intermediate Classic times, probably between ca. 9.7.0.0.0–9.7.10.0.0.

Burial 150 LOCATION: Str. 7F-30, intruded into 4th and sealed by fill for 2nd (see “Discussion”) immediately S of Bu. 140 (Fig. 8). This is just S of the front-rear axis of 7F-30-2nd, but N of that for 4th and 3rd. 3B/17; for plan and section, see Fig. 27a,b. GRAVE: This is a small, stone-lined chamber, reminiscent of the grave for Bu. 140. Walls held back the fill of Str. 7F-30-4th, into which the burial was placed, and the floor of the chamber was the stone block fill of 7F-30-5th beneath it. The corpse and associated materials were placed in the grave through an entrance from the W, which was then sealed by placement of large masonry slabs. These were arranged at an angle, with their low ends on the edge of the entrance floor and their high ends held in place by fill above the center of the grave. Because the E wall of the chamber was built so as to lean in slightly to the W, the cross section of the chamber is reminiscent of a vault (see Fig. 27a). The burial chamber was left unfilled (save for the mortuary materials), and was slightly larger than

46

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

required just to contain the remains (see Table 3.2 for volume and floor area). INDIVIDUAL AND ASSOCIATED MATERIAL: Individual: Middle adult male placed in an extended position, not quite supine, but tilted slightly over onto his right side, with head N, facing W, in Vessel No. 2. His arms were slightly flexed at the elbows so that the hands lay together in the pubic region. His legs were fully extended, with his lower right leg and foot beneath Vessel No. 3. Associated material: A Palmar Orange Polychrome cylinder with a poorly fitting Zacatel Cream Polychrome cover with handle (TR. 25A:fig. 47a), filled with an as yet unidentified material (3B-69), was placed upright just W of the right shoulder (Fig. 27b1). The head rested inside (Fig. 27b2) an Ucum Unslipped, unusual outflaring-side dish (TR. 25A:fig. 47d); a Saxche Orange Polychrome lateral-ridge tripod plate (TR. 25A:fig. 47c) was upright, on top of the lower right leg and foot (Fig. 27b3). A Saxche Orange Polychrome barrel (TR. 25A:fig. 47b) was upright immediately S and slightly W against the rim of the plate (Fig. 27b4). Two jade beads (TR. 27A:fig. 110b) were in the mouth of the deceased, an Arca imbricata shell (cf. ibid., fig. 174a) was just W of the pelvis (Fig. 27b5). SKELETAL MATERIAL: Reasonably good preservation makes diagnosis of age and sex secure, and confirms as well that the burial was primary. In situ stature measurement indicates an unusually small individual, but the bones themselves suggest a very robust one. There was no apparent pathology. DISCUSSION: The problem concerning the sequential position of this burial has already been discussed in connection with Bu. 140. As reconstructed, gravediggers dug down through the portion of Str. 7F-30-4th that continued in use as part of 3rd, saw that they were in danger of opening up an earlier burial (140), and so undercut the fill to the S to complete their grave construction (the difficulty of working under such cramped conditions may account for the smaller size of the Bu. 150 grave, compared to Bu. 140). Following the interment, the grave shaft was filled and the first fill for 7F-30-2nd was dumped over the top, sealing it (see Fig. 10). Both Culbert (TR. 25A:fig. 47) and Coggins (1975:319–324) have commented on the mixture of Ik and Imix pottery types and traits in this burial, implying that a transition between ceramic complexes was underway at the time of the interment. Coggins suggests that the cylinder and lid may have been imported, but Culbert, while recognizing that they are unusual in many respects,

considers them within local traditions. He does, though, see the barrel as a possible import. The unslipped dish is of a rare type at Tikal, used only for special vessels and its shape is uncommon; Coggins proposes that it, too, was perhaps imported. Both Coggins and Culbert agree that the tripod plate (which is slightly worn) is a local Ik type; its feet were either broken or sawed off, following which the scars were ground smooth. Two of the vessels bear painted inscriptions: the plate (MT. 292) and the cylinder (MT. 293). The latter begins (at B) with the introductory glyph for the Primary Standard Sequence (PSS), followed by what appears to be a dedicatory verb. After this, however, the text loses its resemblance to the expected PSS (L. Schele, pers. comm., 1990). The last several glyphs—I, J, and A—may be the owner’s name, and an Emblem Glyph (not of Tikal) may be included (at F), although one circlet of the superfix is missing. The last prior burial to include a cylinder with a lid was Bu. 160, the first burial to be made in Str. 7F-30. Both it, and Bu. 140 also display painted inscriptions. Unlike those earlier ones, however, the inscription on the Bu. 150 cylinder was executed in a confident manner. By contrast, the glyphs on the Bu. 150 plate appear hastily painted. SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Str. 7F-30:TS. 9 (Table 2.2), about the time of the transition from Ik to Imix pottery, ca. 9.12.10.0.0–9.13.0.0.0.

Burial 159 LOCATION: Str. 7F-31, intruded into the fill of 7F-30-4th and sealed by 7F-31:U. 3 (Fig. 8 and 11). This is on the frontrear axis of 7F-31, 6.40 m due E of the older Bu. 162. 3C/9; for plan, see Fig. 28a. GRAVE: Roughly rectangular and almost identical to the small chamber for Bu. 150 previously described, the walls were composed of masonry placed against the fill of Str. 7F-304th, into which the grave was dug (see Table 3.2 for volume of material removed). On the E side, the masonry was built up into a half vault; on the W, an entrance was left 0.60 m above the chamber floor. This entrance was eventually closed off by five large slabs tilted to the E so as to rest against the top of the half vault. Two smaller pieces of masonry closed off the ends of the entrance, and interstices were chinked by small stones. Below this vaultlike roof, the walls of the chamber were coated with mud; forming a floor for the grave walls was Plat. 7F-3:U. 8. The burial chamber, larger than required to contain the corpse and accompanying objects, was left unfilled with

47

BURIALS

earth, but the shaft above was not (see Table 3.2 for floor area and volume of chamber). INDIVIDUAL AND ASSOCIATED MATERIAL: Individual: Middle adult male, placed in a supine position, head to the N facing up. Legs were fully extended, as were his upper arms, but the elbows were flexed so that hands were together on the chest, just below the chin. Stains on the bones and particularly on the floor beneath the bones seem to be from rotted cloth. Bones and floor display red pigment. Associated material: A barrel, possibly Sibal Buff Polychrome (TR. 25A:fig. 48b), placed upright above the left shoulder (Fig. 28a1); a cylinder, possibly Sibal Buff Polychrome (TR. 25A:fig. 48a), on which is MT. 98, upright immediately E of the pelvis (Fig. 28a2); a Saxche Orange Polychrome lateral-ridge tripod plate (TR. 25A:fig. 48c), on which MT. 99 was placed, just N of the corpse’s head (Fig. 28a4); placed mostly inside this was another plate, an unnamed black-on-brown type, lateral-ridge tripod plate (TR. 25A:fig. 48d), though a bit N so that its rim touched the end wall of the chamber (Fig. 28a3). An obsidian prismatic blade (3C-10) could have fallen into the chamber from overlying fill; its location is not specified by the excavator. SKELETAL MATERIAL: Relatively good preservation gives assurance of diagnosis of age and sex and the conclusion that the burial is primary. Stature, from in situ observation, was considerably greater than the average for males of the time, and was slightly above the mean for males buried in Late Classic chamber burials at the center of Tikal. There was no artificial alteration of head shape, and no evident pathology. DISCUSSION: The sequential position of this burial is relatively straightforward: it was intruded into the part of Str. 7F-30-4th that continued in use as part of 3rd (Fig. 11:1). The fill of the grave shaft was capped by a layer of small stones at the same elevation as that to which the fill of 7F-30-4th was removed when 30-2nd and 31-2nd were built (Fig. 11:2 and Str. 7F-31:U. 3). The floor of 31-2nd is thought to have been laid just above U. 3, making the burial initial to Str. 7F-31-2nd. The alternative, that the burial was a later intrusion into 2nd, is ruled out by the inclusion of Ik pottery in the grave. The similarity of the grave to that of Bu. 150 has already been noted. The pottery, also, is similar, in forms present (barrels, cylinders, and plates), in the combination of Ik and Imix decorative elements (the forms are Ik, but the “U” shapes below the rim decoration on the cylinder are characteristic of Imix ceramics at Tikal), and perhaps

in a combination of local and probable imported types (Coggins 1975:326–329). Two painted inscriptions are also present (MT. 98 and 99). Neither has yet been translated, though B-C of MT. 98 may be yuk’ib, the word for “his drinking vessel” (L. Schele, pers. comm., 1990). Coggins suggests the same dating for the pottery of both Bu. 150 and 159, which is as it should be given the sequential position of the interment. A final observation pertains to the Saxche Orange Polychrome plate, on which is MT. 99. This is one of the Tikal “dancer plates” and, though no doubt locally made, it is more like the well-known Uaxactun dancer plate than any of the other Tikal examples (Coggins 1975:327). Although worn in the center, neither it, nor the other plate from Bu. 159, was without its feet (as was the one in Bu. 150). SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Str. 7F-31:TS. 7 (Table 2.3), contemporary with Bu. 150 at the time of the transition from Ik to Imix pottery.

Burial 160 LOCATION: Beneath (and sealed by) Str. 7F-30-5th, on its frontrear axis (Fig. 4, 10). 3B/18; for plan, see Fig. 24. GRAVE: Hollowed out of bedrock 1.10 m beneath its surface (Fig. 10), this spacious chamber (Table 3.2) approaches the rectangular in plan, except that its sides and ends are rounded and there are no sharp corners. Niches are located in the W wall N and S of the chamber entrance; the floor of the niche on the N is roughly 0.35 m higher than that of the chamber, and so formed a kind of shelf. The entrance itself consists of a shaft, in which a series of four steps from W to E were quarried from bedrock. In addition, the floor of the entrance slopes down towards the E. Although the burial chamber was paved with plaster, the walls were not so coated, excepting the central portion of the E wall. This was given a thin coat of mud, on which was painted an Initial Series Introducing Glyph and below it the glyph for baktun 9 (Fig. 25, 43a). The lowest few centimeters of the latter were hidden by the pavement, which therefore was laid after the glyphs were painted. Evidently, the plaster was not entirely dry when the interment was made, for some of the chert, obsidian, and fabric was smeared with it. Except where plastered, pick marks and soot smudges were clearly visible. One of these was in the precise center of the E wall, extending from about 0.15 m above floor level to the ceiling (the glyphs were slightly off center, to the N). The other smudges

48

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

were on the N and S end walls; implied is the burning of incense at three places in the chamber. The last act of the burial party was to wall up the entrance, partially plastering the masonry on the inside, as described elsewhere (see discussion in part II of Str. 7F-30-5th:CS. 12). INDIVIDUAL AND ASSOCIATED MATERIAL: Individual: Middle adult male (Sk. A); older child (Sk. B); subadult (Sk. C). Skeleton A, the principal, was placed supine with head to the N facing up, legs fully extended, with arms positioned so that his elbows projected out, forearms perpendicular to the body and hands at about diaphragm level on the body. The right hand was next to the left, but higher on the body. Immediately N of the principal were Sk. B and C, both face down with heads by the N wall of the chamber. The left leg of Sk. B was fully extended, while the right one was slightly bent at the knee. The left arm was flexed, with the hand by the head. Skeleton C, immediately E of Sk. B against the chamber wall, was in a more contorted position. Its left arm was flexed at the elbow, which was slightly out (W) from the body, the hand W of the head near the elbow of B. The right arm projected E from the body to the elbow, which was partially flexed so that the hand was positioned by the right hip. The left leg projected slightly to the left of the body, with the thigh against the leg of B, and the knee flexed slightly more than 90˚, the foot to the E. The right leg also projected, not quite so much as the left one, and the knee was slightly bent so as to place the foot 0.35 m due E of the head of Sk. A. The positions of these two juveniles are discussed further below (see “Skeletal Material”). Associated material: Of the 15 Manik IIIB pottery (Laporte 2003:290), alabaster, and perishable stucco-covered vessels, the following 7 were placed together S and slightly W of Sk. A: a stucco-coated vessel (fig. 24:1) of now-disintegrated wood (TR. 27A:fig. 224b); alabaster bowl (Fig. 24:2) with rim band of green-painted stucco (TR. 27A:fig. 139c); a Balanza Black, round-side dish with flat base (Fig. 24:3 and TR. 25A:fig. 36a4); a Dos Arroyos Ceramic Group, basal-flange dish: open-side variety (Fig. 24:4 and TR. 25A:fig. 36a1); a Balanza Black, round-side tripod dish (Fig. 24:5 and TR. 25A:fig. 36a2); a Balanza Black, narrow-mouth jar with medium neck (Fig. 24:6 and TR. 25A:fig. 36a10); and a Pita Incised, cylindrical tripod: straight-side variety (Fig. 24:7 and TR. 25A:fig. 36a9); all were placed upright save the round-side dish, tripod dish, and jar, which lay on their sides, nested, with the tripod dish against the jar and the round-side dish (the smallest) opening to the E. The round-side dish, basal-flange dish, and cylindrical tripod contained some as yet unidentified material; W of the cylindrical tripod were fragments of light-colored clay that could have been a lid for it, or possibly a mask. Placed upright W of the knees and right upper

arm respectively of Sk. A (Fig. 24:8) were a second Pita Incised, cylindrical tripod: straight-side variety (TR. 25A:fig. 36a8) and (Fig. 24:9) a Quintal Unslipped, outflaring-side bowl (TR. 25A:fig. 36a5); inside the bowl was an unmodified Arca zebra or imbricata shell (cf. TR. 27A:fig. 174a) and a mass of very fine, plain-weave cloth; partly inside the cloth and partly nearby was more unfired clay, and the cylindrical tripod contained as yet unidentified material. Placed together on the floor of the N niche (Fig. 24:10, 11) were 2 Pita Incised, unusual wide-mouth jars with unusual lids (TR. 25A:fig. 36a6, 7); a Pita Incised, round-side dish with flat base (Fig. 24:12 and TR. 25A:fig. 36a3); and a plaster-coated vessel (Fig. 24:13) of now-disintegrated perishable material (TR. 27A:fig. 225), inside which was an alabaster ring-base bowl (ibid., fig. 139b). Plaster fragments with remnant black-painted glyphs (ibid., fig. 224a, MT. 347) found SW and E of the stucco-coated vessel are from a flaring-walled, flat-based wooden dish. The following materials were directly associated with Sk. A: cinnabar, in the form of small lumps and powder over the skeleton and other materials; textile fragments and impressions; 2 white shell, round ear ornaments (TR. 27A: fig. 146cC); 1 possible ring or hair-bead of jade (ibid., fig. 106d13); 1 greenstone, jade and shell mosaic mask (ibid., fig. 90, 91; MT. 361), 1 small, symmetrical, and 11 large, irregular, jade beads (ibid., fig. 106d1–12); 1 Spondylus bead (ibid., fig. 156x); 2 white shell, rectangular pendants (ibid., fig. 148f); 1 modified and 3 imitation stingray spines (ibid., fig. 182b11, 185c7–9); 4 unmodified marine shells (Arca zebra or imbricata, Nerita sp., Ostrea sp., Chama sp.; cf. ibid., fig. 170–178); 2 pieces of coral (ibid., fig. 179a–c); 1 bird skeleton (Pharomachris mocino or Quetzal); 9 perforated and 1 unperforated Spondylus shells, all with scraped interiors (typified by ibid., fig. 166b). Surrounding Sk. A was a deposit of organic material, including the textile remains and substantial quantities of pigment. Evidently, the body was on some sort of cloth placed on the ground that left impressions in stillwet floor plaster as well as plaster on one chert eccentric (TR. 27A:fig. 9g, Type EF-2), indicating that the cloth was quite large. Its weave was plain, but of fairly fine thread, and impressions suggest it overlay thatch palms. One or more mantles, plain but extremely finely woven, some showing traces of red paint, seem to have been spread over the corpse, with some of the pigment sprinkled on the cloth after its placement. The shell discs were on either side of the head, where (presumably) they had fallen from the ears. Vertically, on the back of the skull rather like a skullcap, was the unperforated Spondylus shell (on it were traces of cloth). The almost life-size mask was found in pieces mostly below the face, but pieces were also on both sides of the face, from which the mask probably fell. Found by the right hand, the jade ring may not

BURIALS

have been on a finger; it was not reamed out, but rather was biconically drilled with a ridge midway in the hole. It may have been a hair bead specially placed with the hand (Fig. 24:24), along with a jade bead (TR. 27A:fig. 106d2). The small jade bead, with another larger one, were placed in the mouth; 3 beads (Fig. 24:23, 25, and 26) were on either side and above the chest (TR. 27A:fig. 106d1, 3, 7); 2 beads (ibid., fig. 106d4, 6) were above the right and left iliac crests (Fig. 24:27, 31) and 3 beads (TR. 27A:fig. 106d4, 6, 10) formed a line running from the E side of the right leg, to just E of the left one, and 25 cm farther E (Fig. 24:32–34). The location of the twelfth bead cannot be specified as it was found in sifting burial debris. In view of the triple arrangement at the chest and thighs, it probably was one of a trio that included the two in the pelvic region. The Spondylus bead was in the mouth, with the two jade beads noted above. The two Spondylus pendants were together by the right wrist (Fig. 24:25), but their peculiar appearance (TR. 27A:fig. 148f) led Coe (pers. comm., 1991) to speculate that they originally helped to secure the ear ornaments from behind the earlobes by means of strings. The modified stingray spine was below the right wrist, near the fingers of the left hand (Fig. 24:26). The imitation ones were beneath and on either side of the lumbar vertebrae. The four unmodified shell fragments and the coral pieces were with the imitation spines, suggesting all were in a small “package” beneath the body. The complete Quetzal skeleton (Fig. 24:35) reveals that the whole bird was put here. The perforated Spondylus shells were arranged three together in E-W arrangements, one trio above the chest, the second in the pelvic region, and the third trio just above the knees (see Fig. 24:26, 28, 31–34). The following objects were around and beneath Sk. B and C: 1 profile head made of Spondylus shell, jade and hematite (TR. 27A:fig. 87b1,2); 29 chert eccentrics (ibid., fig. 9g); 13 obsidian eccentrics (ibid., fig. 26, 27h,n, 28h, 31q); 24 obsidian prismatic blade cores and fragments (cf. ibid., fig. 62), with numerous obsidian prismatic blades and fragments, as well as flakes and 6 flake cores; 2 nacreous shell elements (ibid., fig. 87b3, 4). The profiled head was immediately NW of the head of Sk. B (Fig. 24:15); 7 of the chert eccentrics were placed near or under the legs of Sk. B, 13 between and over the legs of Sk. C, and 9 in the area between the right arm and leg of Sk. C (Fig. 24:16); 12 of the obsidian eccentrics were near or beneath the legs of Sk. B, and 1 was between the legs of Sk. C (Fig. 24:17); the prismatic blade cores, prismatic blades, flakes, and flake cores (only the cores were counted) were mixed with the eccentrics; Becker’s assistant recording the excavation in his field notes reported that “the whole north part [of the chamber] was covered with chips, flakes and cores” (Fig. 24:18); the shell objects were beneath the right side of the chest of Sk. B (Fig. 24:19).

49

SKELETAL MATERIAL: Skeletal preservation permitted accurate determination of age and sex (skeletons below adulthood cannot be accurately sexed), as well as identifying this as a primary burial. Skeleton A is that of a robust man, whose stature was above the Early Classic mean for Tikal, and almost up to the mean for those males in Early Classic chamber burials at the site center (Haviland and Moholy-Nagy 1992:57 and forthcoming TR. 30). There is some flattening of the rear of his head, but no other artificial modification of shape. He evidently did a lot of squatting, for squatting facets are present. An extra lumbar vertebra is an anomaly, though it likely caused him no problem; vertebral osteoarthritis, however, was marked, with some actual vertebral fusion. This could have been promoted by being overweight and/or having a postural problem, but in any event, it would have restricted his movement. Another problem was fairly extensive generalized periodontitis. Also right upper premolars seem to have been lost antemortem. Abrasion of anterior teeth was more advanced than posteriors, with about one-third of coronal length worn down. Finally, severe microdefects, especially Wilson Bands, are visible in the dentition. Although such defects are not probably pathological, they may indicate environmental stress (Danforth 1989:50–52). There are three notable things about the juvenile skeletons. First, both had similar dental problems. The adult upper incisors of the child were erupting out of position, and those of the subadult were the same. Although unproven, a genetic relationship between the two is suggested; perhaps they were siblings. Second, the backs of their heads are somewhat flattened, as is that of Sk. A. Possibly, this resulted from the way they were cradled as infants. Finally, there is the important observation that the vertebral columns of both were perfectly articulated except at one spot (low in the thoracic region), a fact suggesting that their backs were broken. DISCUSSION: Several aspects of this burial require discussion. To begin, its sequential position is quite clear—it was initial to the earliest version of Str. 7F-30 (5th), construction of which started with the interment. (The sequence of events that completed the interment has already been described in part II.) By analogy with Bu. 48, one would suppose that the inscription painted on the wall of the grave dates it, although this is not certain for either interment. Furthermore, the date itself is ambiguous; Coggins (1975:217) read it as 9.4.3.0.0 (AD 517), basing her reading on identification of the variable in the Introductory Glyph as patron of the month Yax. Later, Schele (pers. comm., 1990) identified it as ak’bal, patron of the month Mol. Jones

50

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

(pers. comm., 1990) notes that the Yax identification would be acceptable, except that the otherwise consistent eyes of the Venus sign are missing. Instead, two scrolls are present that fit the ak’bal signs seen in Thompson (1960:35–50, fig. 6). Thus, Jones accepts Schele’s identification. This still leaves numerous possibilities, although looking at other evidence may narrow the choice. It is clear from the ceramics placed within it that Bu. 160 dates from a time when late Manik pottery was in vogue (Manik IIIB pottery dates between AD 480 and 550; Laporte 2003:290). One of the vessels even seems to presage a common Ik type (TR. 25A:fig. 36a1). Moreover, this interment is one of only three known at Tikal in which chert and obsidian eccentrics were placed on the floor, rather than above, the grave; the others are Bu. 132 (also from Gp. 7F-1) and Bu. 200 (in North Acropolis Str. 5D-22-1st). Both of these contained Ik pottery, evidently from early in the era of its production (see discussion of Bu. 132), suggesting advent of a short-lived practice of placing eccentrics inside mortuary chambers that began quite late in Early Classic times. Those in Bu. 160 are standard for Muul caches, which also include (as here) obsidian debitage, imitation stingray spines, marine shells, jade and shell beads, jade ornaments, mosaic statuettes, and coral, among other things (TR. 27A:19). Muul caches normally predate 9.4.0.0.0 (TR. 35; in preparation), but the Class 4 chert and Class 2 obsidian date as late as 9.6.0.0.0 (TR. 27A:22, 24). Cache 207 is essentially coeval with Bu. 160 on stratigraphic grounds, and in this were eccentrics appropriate for Yikel caches. This contemporaneity of Muul and Yikel elements recalls the mix of these elements in offerings associated with construction of Str. 5D-22-1st on the North Acropolis (TR. 14:415), an event that took place midway between AD 475 and 600 (TR. 14:chart 1), near the very end of Early Classic times. One might infer from all this that Bu. 160 dates not far from that time. If the date within the chamber does record its occupant’s death (a reasonable enough interpretation despite lack of proof), then it ought to fall within the limits just specified. Although there is no guarantee that the Maya intended a Period Ending, the fact that a complete Initial Series was not given suggests that this was so. Assuming that a tun end was intended, the likely possibilities for Mol dates are 9.4.8.0.0, 9.4.9.0.0, 9.4.10.0.0, or 9.4.11.0.0. Other possibilities that exist are at least 72 tuns earlier or later, and so fall outside acceptable limits. Therefore, despite uncertainties, a date between 9.4.8.0.0 (AD 522) and 9.4.11.0.0 (AD 525) is possible for Bu. 160. Unfortunately, other complications necessitate further discussion, to be resumed after consideration of other aspects of the interment. As noted above, the adult male was either wrapped or covered by some sort of mantle. The remains suggest that the cloth was several layers thick, covered the entire

body, and contained the red pigment inside (large quantities were on all the bones). More pigment was scattered unevenly over the outside of the fabric as well as the beads and Spondylus valves. Since no traces of textile were found over any piece of the mask, it is likely that it was on the outside of the cloth cover. It was, though, smeared (rather than sprinkled) with red pigment. Field notes taken at the time of excavation express the opinion that the grave contained “at least 20 pounds of cinnabar.” The dead man evidently wore few ornaments, the only certain one being the Spondylus “skull cap.” The shell ear ornaments may have been worn, unless their attachment required the two “shell pendants” found by the right wrist (see the above discussion). If so, the ornaments were simply placed by the ears. Otherwise, what few ornaments were present were placed loose on or near the corpse. This includes the nine perforated Spondylus shells and their accompanying jade beads arrayed outside the fabric covering along the body. This brings to mind the Spondylus shells and jade beads arranged at fairly regular intervals around the corpses in many Gp. 5D-2 chamber burials that Coe (TR. 14:483) concluded were parts of necklaces and pectoral devices disassembled to surround the deceased. In Bu. 160, they did not surround the corpse, but were placed over it. Nor do the devices seem to have been disassembled; rather, three arrays such as those shown on the chests of dignitaries on a cylinder from Bu. 116 (TR. 25A:fig. 68a) were placed, one above the chest, one above the waist, and one above the thighs (in spite of displacement owing to decay of flesh and fabric, this arrangement is clear). Burial 195 in Str. 5D-32 (TR. 14:566) had a similar pectoral of three Spondylus shells. The ritual pairing of jade and Spondylus may also apply to the Spondylus bead, and the small, symmetrical bead of jade, both found in the mouth of the deceased. Also, there is the package of marine material under the man’s back, another parallel with chamber burials elsewhere (TR. 14:925). The modified stingray spine by the right wrist also is known from several chamber burials (TR. 14:924). The careful arrangement of the adult male (compared with the seemingly casual arrangement of the two juveniles), the fact that he was buried with at least some ornaments and the others were not, his central location, and his seniority all indicate that he, not the juveniles, was the focus of this burial. Evidently, it was his “tomb” and (presumably) the youths were sacrificed to accompany him. From this point of view, their apparent broken backs and contorted positions are potentially significant. It looks very much as if their backs were deliberately broken, whereupon they were flung face down into the chamber on top of the chert and obsidian artifacts. They may have been still alive when thrown in (the seeming disarray of

BURIALS

the obsidian debitage suggests it was kicked around), but there certainly is no proof of this. The man in Bu. 160 was obviously someone of importance, or young individuals would not have been killed to accompany his corpse. Most of such sacrifices were normally a feature of chamber burials at the epicenter of Tikal up until the time of Bu. 200 (ca. AD 562). Indeed, this burial is unlike all others at Tikal except for the chamber burials in which the kings of the city were placed. The grave itself in size and construction calls to mind Early Classic Bu. 10 and 48, both hewn from bedrock, as was this one. In all three cases, the chamber was far larger than necessary to hold the deceased and the items accompanying him (it usually was a male; Haviland 1997:2–3). Other shared traits with royal interments, many of them already noted, include full dorsal extension with head N (TR. 14:922) placed on (or wrapped in) some sort of fabric; grave empty of fill (no “dirt in the face”); presence of red pigment, the Spondylus “skull cap”; the symbolic interplay of Spondylus and jade; the shells and beads of these substances placed along the body; the stingray spine by the wrist; and the package of marine items beneath the man’s back (see TR. 14:924–926). To these may be added the lithic debris inside the chamber, the difference being that such debitage was placed above, instead of in, the graves in Gp. 5D-2 (TR. 14:925). Another common theme of chamber burials is the presence of numerous pottery vessels, including possible imports. Those in Bu. 160 are not highly decorated, and include two that are poorly made (TR. 25A:fig. 89a2 and 10 and Coggins 1975:223), possibly the result of haste to produce vessels in time for the interment. Two other vessels had seen prior wear (TR. 25A:fig. 89a1 and 5); the two-lidded, wide-mouthed jars, however, are possible imports (Coggins 1975:223). Some of these pots, like several in epicentral chamber burials (TR. 14:924), may have contained foodstuffs. In contrast to the rather drab pottery, however, are the richly stuccoed and superbly painted wooden vessels, and the two of alabaster. These recall the alabaster vessel in the grave of the ruler “Stormy Sky,” the only one besides this with a painted inscription on the wall. Stormy Sky’s burial and the preceding Bu. 10 are also the only ones until Bu. 160 to contain birds. Returning to the wooden vessels, one of them is as spectacular as any vessel from a royal chamber burial. This is the one illustrated as fig. 225 in TR. 27A, and it features a depiction of the primordial sea of Maya mythology, reference to which is made in virtually every one of the Tikal chamber burials. To quote Linda Schele (pers. comm., 1990): This is one of the really great objects from the entire Tikal inventory. The image shows a wa-

51

ter band with three waterlily monsters [TR. 27A:fig. 225aC, F, J] (variants of the one on the base of the tree in the Temple of the Foliated Cross at Palenque) and a lovely tree with two birds roosting in it [ibid., fig. 225aB and C]. The bottom edge is badly damaged, but I think it was full of little creatures—fish and oysters—cavorting in the waters. Six deities play or fish in the waters. The last one on the right of the roll out [ibid., fig. 225aK] is paired with the first on the left [ibid., fig. 225aA].… The next pair to the left [ibid., fig. 225aD, E] is identified as Mountain Ahaus with the one on the left called the Li Witz Ahau and the one on the right, Tah Witz Ahau (Torch Mountain Lord). The next pair includes the creature on the left of the Akbal vase [ibid., fig. 225aG] and the second figure over— that is, the one next to the Waterlily Monster [ibid., fig. 225aI; also fig. 57r]. The second one is called the Bolon Witz Ahau, a location [sic] that shows up on Stela 31. All six of these creatures are identified as supernaturals by their square eyes and other features. The last being—the one to the right of the Akbal vase—is the soul of the dead man [ibid., fig. 225aH]. He is fully human and he has his hand in what we call the “Woe is Me” gesture. This is a visual representation of the occupant’s visit to the Otherworld at his death. A similar scene appears in the later burial of the 26th king of Tikal on incised bones (TR. 27A:fig. 189a). The traits Bu. 160 shares with those of kings in Gp. 5D-2 suggest a link with the ruling dynasty of Tikal. Coggins (1975:215–233) was the first to argue that the man in this grave was once a ruler of Tikal and the subject of St. 25. Others have developed this idea, one being Simon Martin (1999:4–5; 2003:18–24), who observes that a ruler he dubs Kaloomte’ Bahlam seems to appear on this monument, who on St. 12 is identified as the 19th in the line of Tikal kings (also see below, pp. 65–67, “Possible Ties to the Ruling Dynasty”). The major portion of St. 25 was found by the Tikal Project a mere 244 m SE of Gp. 7F-1, where it had been dragged by the Maya, so it is possible that it once stood in Gp. 7F-1. Jones and Satterthwaite (TR. 33A:51, 57) propose that St. 23 and 25 were dedicated as a pair, the subject of St. 23 being Woman (or Lady) of Tikal, who Martin thinks was the daughter of the 18th ruler of the city. Her stela was reerected in Gp. 7F-1 in Late Classic times in front of Str. 7F-30, on the axis of Bu. 160 (see part VI). In fact, both individuals are named on St. 12, she as a “Lady (Ix) Kaloomte’ ” and he as 19th ruler. According to Martin, Kaloomte’ Bahlam’s legitimacy probably came through marriage or guardianship of Lady of Tikal. He was considerably older than she, as he is men-

52

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

tioned on St. 10 in connection with a war event 18 years before her birth (stated on St. 23). Martin’s proposal is that he was a war captain not of royal blood, but that he and his supporters used Lady of Tikal, who was only 6 years old at the time, to assume power after her father’s death. The age difference between Lady of Tikal and Kaloomte’ Bahlam would make him not far from 60 years old at the time of the 9.4.13.0.0 date on St. 12, which its inscription says he “owns,” when the two apparently performed calendrical ceremonies together. If he died soon after, his age at the time would fit at the upper end of the age range estimated for the man in Bu. 160. But here lies a problem: as discussed earlier, the date painted on the grave wall is interpreted as no later than 9.4.11.0.0, yet Kaloomte’ Bahlam was still alive and well enough to carry out ceremonial duties two years later. Thus, either the corpse in Bu. 160 is not his, or the date on the wall is not his death date. One possibility is that 9.4.11.0.0 is close to 2 katuns after Kaloomte’ Bahlam’s success in the Masul war of 9.2.11.7.8, mentioned on St. 10. Could this mark that anniversary? A further problem is the lack of the sort of opulent jewelry one might expect to find on a royal corpse. Certainly, the two rather plain ear ornaments are a far cry from jade ones sported by several Tikal rulers. Moreover, why bury a king so far from the usual place for royal burial? The answer may lie in dynastic intrigues that many scholars have suspected were afoot around this time. He may have been buried outside of epicentral Tikal, without much personal jewelry, because usurpers took control of the city upon his death (see discussion of Bu. 162 for further thoughts along this line). As past ruler, he could have been entitled to a royal burial, but usurpers would not permit this at the center of power. As will be seen, this interpretation of events has considerable explanatory value in understanding other events in Gp. 7F-1. SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Str. 7F-30:TS. 17 (Table 2.2), near the end of the Early Classic Period, probably around 9.4.11.0.0 or 9.4.13.0.0.

Burial 162 LOCATION: Ch. 7F-8, sealed by fill for Plat. 7F-3-2nd (Fig. 4 and 11); due E of what later was to be the centerline of Str. 7F-31. Included in 3C/7 (see below, Table 5.1). For plan, see Fig. 29a. GRAVE: An existing, one-chambered chultun was probably modified as previously discussed (in part II, above), thereby providing a large burial chamber (Table 3.2) with an

egg-shaped entrance opening to the E (see Fig. 11). Once the body was in place, the chamber was completely filled, apparently from a midden (see part V, Plat. 7F-3:LG. 1a). INDIVIDUAL AND ASSOCIATED MATERIAL: Individual: Young or middle-aged adult female (see “Discussion”), placed near the W wall of the chamber, with the head more or less S, facing down. The head may have been detached from the ribs and vertebrae, which were probably articulated, for it is a bit farther N than expected if still attached to the body. An arm lying extended to the left of the torso was, however, upside down, with the shoulder by the pelvis and the hand under the mouth. Bone fragments suggest that the other arm was placed to the right of the torso. The right and left pelvic bones were also apart; the right innominate was just below the torso, but the left was 0.23 m to the E. The right leg bones were placed near the right innominate, but they were not articulated at either the knee or hip. The distal ends of the left tibia and fibula were directly below (N of) the right innominate. From here, the bones extended E to the knee, from which the femur extended NE. The knee seems to have been articulated, but the head of the femur was 0.60 m from the innominate. Associated material: An unnamed red-appliqué type urn bowl (TR. 25A:fig. 36b), with much of the appliqué missing, was more or less upright 1.14 m SE of the head, and the complete skeleton of a mammal, originally thought to be a spider monkey, but later identified as opossum by Patricia Urban, was placed between the woman’s torso and the W wall of the chamber, head also to the S. Aside from these two objects obviously associated with the corpse, fill close to the floor of the chamber contained numerous artifacts. Since the chamber was filled with artifact-rich material, however, these were not necessarily intended to accompany the burial. This is true of several censer fragments, which also occur in some abundance in the fill for Plat. 7F-3-2nd at this locus; in fact, there are several fits between fragments on or near the chamber floor and those higher up. Three metate fragments are also probably trash and mano fragments occur higher up in the fill, with other utilitarian lithic tools. A miscellaneous formed object of pottery, a figurine fragment, and various unworked animal bones may be eliminated on similar grounds. This leaves the following items: fragment of worked shell, fragment of an unmodified Spondylus shell (measures 4.3 cm), bones of a human child (presumably a complete skeleton), adult human teeth, bone tube, and bone perforators. With but two exceptions, none of these items are unknown in domestic trash, and indeed human bone material is even fairly common in such debris (examples in TR. 20B). Since a midden seems to have been the source of the material used to fill the chamber,

BURIALS

it seems best to regard these things as recycled trash. The two exceptions are the Spondylus sp. fragment and the child bones. Altered and unmodified Spondylus shells were placed in many Gp. 5D-2 burials (see TR. 14:925), and they are not usually found in domestic trash, nor are complete human skeletons. Accordingly, it may be that both were part of Bu. 162, even though precise positions are unknown. SKELETAL MATERIAL: Sex diagnosis is secure, as is the conclusion that this is not a primary burial, but age at death presents a problem. On the basis of suture closure, middle adulthood is suggested, while on the other hand the state of the dentition, which was examined by a practicing dentist, Dr. Charles Hadden, is more compatible with age in the early twenties. Unfortunately, neither criterion is really reliable for age diagnosis (Krogman and Işcan 1986:129 and 361– 366). The only certain fact is that the woman died before reaching old age, possibly while still a very young adult. The amount of grit in the Tikal diet from grinding corn on stone metates inclines one toward the earlier age of death, and to regard this as a case of early suture closure. Artificial shaping of the head is evident, as are squatting facets. A septal aperture is present in the surviving humerus, a feature more typical of females than males (see forthcoming TR. 30). At Tikal, septal apertures are most common in skeletons of people of high rank (those from North and Central Acropolis burials) and least common in skeletons from small domestic groups. Stature is about average for Early Classic females at Tikal (TR. 30), and the bones suggest that the woman was of average robustness. The only evident pathologies are dental, although the cortical bone of the skull in general seems thin, as if there may have been a calcium deficiency. Generalized periodontitis was fairly advanced. The upper right third molar shows extensive coronal cavities with an abscess, and root surface caries may be seen on the upper right first molar. The tooth between the two seems to have been extracted early, but the left upper canine was apparently congenitally missing. There are generalized dehiscences on the buccal plate of the maxilla. DISCUSSION: The sequential position of this burial is clear, for the material used to fill the chamber was continuous with that for Plat. 7F-3:U. 1, the pause-line that marks the end of CS. 3 of Plat. 7F-3-2nd (see Fig. 11). The burial, therefore, is initial to Plat. 7F-3-2nd and probably terminal relative to Ch. 7F-8 (not known is whether the chultun had already been abandoned). As already noted, the burial clearly is not primary, which leaves two possibilities: either it is two-stage or

53

secondary. The former is more likely, for evidently the body was sufficiently fresh upon burial for the bones of the torso, at least one arm, and one leg to be properly articulated. The bones of secondary burials are normally more jumbled (see discussion of Bu. 134). Apparently, after this woman died, her corpse was dismembered (butchered?) prior to disposal. The elapsed time between death and burial is not known, but probably was not too long, otherwise, more of the bones would have come apart, as decomposition proceeds rapidly in such warm climates. It looks as if some attempt was made to place the remains in proper anatomical order when they were buried, as was done with surviving body parts in the later Bu. 134 in Plat. 7F-3. In this instance, though, the efforts were less successful. In the discussion of Bu. 160, an argument was made that its subject was Kaloomte’ Bahlam, the man portrayed on St. 25, and husband or guardian of the woman who was the subject of St. 23. Here the hypothesis is advanced that this woman, known as Lady or Woman of Tikal, was the one whose skeleton was found in Bu. 162. Lady of Tikal was obviously a woman of unusual prominence at Tikal, for she is the only woman to have had a stela of her own. It may be that Kaloomte’ Bahlam’s right to rule was by virtue of her descent from the previous ruler. Burial 162 may seem an unlikely one for a woman of such prominence, but this prominence may account for some of its unusual features. Although interments in chultuns are not unknown at Tikal in fairly low-class residential settings (see e.g., TR. 19:Bu. 163; Haviland 1963 and TR. 20A:Bu. 62, 63, and 143), the chultuns were not subjected to alteration as was this one. Some of the remodeling of Ch. 7F-8 may have had nothing to do with its use as a grave, but the lengthening of the orifice probably did. What was produced was a large chamber and entrance hewn from bedrock that, on a smaller scale and in reverse (it opens to the E, not W), is suggestive of the chamber for Bu. 160 and no longer much like a chultun. Note, too, that the head of the body was to the S and face down, the reverse of Sk. A in Bu. 160. The placement of a mammal skeleton is unusual in Tikal burials and suggests that someone special was the subject of this one. So, too, does the Spondylus shell fragment, which is all but unique in the burial of a female at Tikal. The only other certain instance is Bu. 193, found in a structure (7F-31) that may have been deliberately oriented to Bu. 162. Otherwise, Spondylus shells seem to occur rarely outside chamber burials of men (an exception is Bu. 87 in Gp. 4H-5, but the sex of the individual is not known; TR. 21:49–50). Elsewhere (in part II, above), it was noted that the orientation of Plat. 7F-3-2nd was different from that of Str. 7F-30-5th (to which it was closely tied), as well as from Str. 7F-Sub.1, which faced the platform. The center-

54

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

lines of the two structures apparently related to Bu. 160, while that of Plat. 7F-3 was farther S, perhaps because the Maya wished to include Bu. 162 beneath it. Later, when Str. 7F-30 underwent its first major alteration (7F-30-4th), it was lengthened to the S, placing its end due E of Bu. 162 (Fig. 6). Later yet, the S wall of Str. 7F-30 was shifted northward once again (for 2nd), at which time a separate structure (7F-31) was built against it, with the centerline of the new building due E of the old Bu. 162 (Fig. 8). Thus, a continuing preoccupation with Bu. 162 helps explain otherwise anomalous architectural features. However suggestive this may be, that the woman in Bu. 162 was Lady of Tikal, there are other aspects of this deposit to take into account. These include dismemberment of the lady’s corpse, the lack of the sort of grave goods one would expect in a royal “tomb,” and the fact that her chamber, instead of being left empty of all but the body and associated materials, was filled with what looks like ordinary household garbage. Moreover, the urn placed with her had seen better days (in addition to the missing appliqué, a piece of the urn was also missing to the left of the mask). The Spondylus shell, too, was but a fragment. This does not seem like a way to treat a royal woman! Worth consideration here is the idea advanced by Stanley Guenter (2000) that Lady of Tikal was murdered. After all, the years we are dealing with are ones in which many scholars have detected signs of dynastic disturbance (Martin 2003:18), the inauguration of a six-year old girl being but one. The dismembered remains in Bu. 162 would be consistent with a violent end, and the peculiar interment could represent conflicting thoughts over how to dispose of them. On the other hand, what better way for usurpers to proclaim their triumph, and utter contempt for her, than to—literally—”trash” the remains of the vanquished queen. Still, there may have been worry about the necessity to properly contain whatever power yet resided in the royal corpse. Then, too, whatever surviving relatives she had would likely have wanted to do their best by her in what were very difficult circumstances. Whatever the merits of this scenario, the architectural sequence near Bu. 162 is consistent with it. Construction began on Plat. 7F-3-2nd after the substructure for Str. 7F-30-5th had been built up to its desired height. Thus, it is likely that Lady of Tikal died after Kaloomte’ Bahlam, but before construction over his “tomb” was completed, probably within a year. Deprived of the protection of her male co-ruler, political rivals seized the opportunity to get rid of her. Since a chultun was available that could readily be utilized as a burial chamber, this was done and Plat. 7F-3 was completed in such a way as to position her remains beneath it. Much later, Kaloomte’ Bahlam’s temple was lengthened purposely to extend S as far as her burial.

Later still, a small temple (in her memory) was constructed E of her burial against that of Kaloomte’ Bahlam’s. This will be discussed further in the concluding section of this report. Lady of Tikal’s birth date is recorded on St. 23 as 9.3.9.13.3 (Martin 1999:4), and Bu. 162 cannot date much after 9.4.13.0.0. This is the proposed date for Bu. 160 (see its discussion), following which the substructure of Str. 7F-30-5th was mostly built before Bu. 162 took place. If she was interred in Bu. 162, and if she died soon, say, in 9.4.14.0.0, she would have been 24 years old at the time. This is compatible with the earlier assessment of age at death as revealed by the skeleton. SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Plat. 7F-3:TS. 5; Ch. 7F-8:TS. 1 (Table 2.12), near the end of Early Classic times.

Burial 190 LOCATION: Plat. 7F-1, intruded through Fl. 1 of 2nd immediately in front (W) of Str. 7F-30-1st, N end of the grave, 1 m S of stairs of 30-1st, and 3 m S of the front-rear axis of 30 (Fig. 9). 3B/9; for plan, see Fig. 27c. GRAVE: A large irregularly shaped pit was dug through that portion of Plat. 7F-3:U. 8 that survived as part of the floor for Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 (Fig. 5), penetrating Plat. 7F-3:U. 5 (Fig. 4) and (slightly) U. 1 (Fig. 10). In the process, Plat. 7F-3:U. 2 (Fig. 4:50) and U. 9 (Fig. 5:53) were removed. Although the grave, where it penetrated U. 1, was no larger than required to contain the body and associated materials, the pit as a whole was far larger than necessary (see Table 3.2). Lacking specially constructed walls or roof, the grave was backfilled with earth and other debris. INDIVIDUAL AND ASSOCIATED MATERIAL: Individual: Subadult, probably a male, placed in a supine position, head to the N facing up, but very slightly to the W. The legs were fully extended, as were the upper arms, but the elbows were tightly flexed with the hands on the shoulders. Associated material: 4 Imix pottery vessels; a Palmar Orange Polychrome tripod plate with beveled lip (TR. 25A:fig. 81a) placed upright over the pelvis and thighs (Fig. 27c1); a Zacatel Cream Polychrome, slightly outcurving-side bowl (TR. 25A:fig. 81b) placed upright over the left side of the abdomen (Fig. 27c2); a Ucum Unslipped cylinder (TR. 25A:fig. 81d) placed upright at the W side of the abdomen (Fig. 27c3), NW of the plate but against its

55

BURIALS

rim; a Palmar Orange Polychrome cylinder (TR. 25A:fig. 81c) placed upright against the left side of the left foot near the ankle (Fig. 27c4). Just E of the left knee were 2 pairs of rosettes of white marine shell (TR. 27A:fig. 145p1–4), 2 above and immediately SE of the plate, and 2 below 0.10 m S of the others, beneath some unworked shells (see below); 3 of 4 sew-on ornaments of nacreous shell (TR. 27A:fig. 149b) were in line over the left leg directly beneath the plate, while the fourth was just E of two southernmost rosettes; 5 unmodified snail shells, including a Pomacea flagellata fragment and 1 freshwater mussel shell with an inscribed seated figure on the interior (TR. 27A:fig. 181e) E of the knees, 2 between the 2 sets of rosettes and 2 over the lower (S) set; the location of 2 shells and of a small peglike object of white marine shell (TR. 27A:fig. 145p5) is not precisely known; an incomplete and tapered long bone fragment with inscribed glyphs (MT. 167; TR. 27A:fig. 211c) was in two pieces, face down, over the lower right leg and by the right knee; ca. 70 small pieces of cut bone were beneath the same unworked shells beneath which the two rosettes were placed; 1 of 2 lumps of hematite pigment in the plate was near its S edge, the other between the legs midway from knee to ankle; a large, irregular masonry block was located beneath the back of the body in the thoracic region, with 2 of 5 pieces of the charcoal on it beneath the body; the other pieces of charcoal were over the skull, under the mandible and under the left wrist. Two chert chips and a rodent tooth catalogued in Lot 19 almost surely were fill items. SKELETAL MATERIAL: Subadult age and primary burial are clearly indicated by this skeleton. Although sex can normally be securely diagnosed for adult remains only, the unusual robustness and size of these bones leave little doubt but that the individual was a male. Stature clearly is above the Late Classic mean for males and is comparable to the mean stature for principals in chamber burials of that time (see forthcoming TR. 30). No pathology is evident. DISCUSSION: This interment unquestionably postdates Plat. 7F-12nd-A, for it was intruded through its paving without the intrusion being plastered over. The most likely time for this to have taken place was when Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1 was laid, which would have sealed the burial. This was when Str. 7F-30-1st-C was built, after the appearance of Imix ceramics. Platform 7F-1-2nd-A is dated by Str. 7F-311st-B and Bu. 193, which seems slightly earlier than Bu. 190 (see below for discussion of Bu. 193). Finally, 1st-C is the only major modification of Str. 7F-30 for which there was no initial burial on the axis of the old Bu. 160. Burial 191, however, seems to be contemporary with 190 (see

discussion of Bu. 191), and was placed about the same distance N of the axis that 190 was S, suggesting that these two together substituted for the missing axial burial. None of the vessels from this grave impress one as being “everyday” pottery and all are in some way atypical (TR. 25A:fig. 81). The bowl is stylistically unlike others from Tikal, although its rim border is comparable to a bowl rim from chamber Bu. 196 (Coggins 1975:424); the Ucum Unslipped cylinder, though probably locally made, is unusual, the decorative bands and Ix-like elements (MT. 166) on the other cylinder are rare (TR. 25A:fig. 79b3). As for the plate, the depiction on its interior base of a dancer possibly transforming into a jaguar (see Lewis-Williams 1992:21) is “remindful of Ik practice” (TR. 25A:fig. 81a) on an Imix form (see also Coggins 1975:422–424). This apparent combination of an Ik design on an Imix form hints at a date for the burial somewhat earlier than the ca. 9.15.0.0.0 date proposed by Coggins. Two of the vessels—the plate and the decorated cylinder—bear painted inscriptions (the previously noted MT. 166 and 168), and a third was carved in the bone object (MT. 167). Miscellaneous Text 168 is probably the name of the jaguar dancer. Although the start of MT. 167 is gone, the first readable glyph (TR. 27A:fig. 211cZ2) and maybe the one above it should be the owner’s personal name (L. Schele, pers. comm., 1990). The left image in the next glyph is gone, but the second is identified by Schele as the head of God K, a standard component in the names of the late kings of Tikal. The next (Z3) is Zac (or ti) Te Ahau, which is followed by the Tikal Emblem Glyph (at Z4). Martin and Grube (2000:51) take this to be the name of an otherwise unknown Tikal ruler, “?K’awiil Sak Te’ Ahau.” Schele reads the last glyph as Tu bak, “in or with his bone,” but cannot find anything that makes sense with the preceding one (Z5). The unmodified shells as well as the incised one are all freshwater species that, when found in special deposits, are most often in the burials of rulers and others of high rank (TR. 27A:59). All things considered, the body in Bu. 190 appears to be that of someone of prominence, youthful though he was. For further discussion of Bu. 190, see Bu. 191. SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Plat. 7F-1:TS. 7 (Table 2.9), after 9.13.0.0.0 but before 9.15.0.0.0 (the era of early Imix ceramic production).

Burial 191 LOCATION: Plat. 7F-1, intruded through Fl. 1 of 2nd immediately in front (W) of Str. 7F-30-1st, 1.35 m N of its stairs and

56

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

3.40 m N of its front-rear axis (Fig. 9). This location N of the stairs of 7F-30-1st is comparable to the location of Bu. 190 S of those stairs. 3B/21; for plan, see Fig. 27d. GRAVE: A pit was dug down through that portion of Plat. 7F-3:U. 8 that continued to serve as part of Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 (Fig. 5); in the process, the NW corner of Plat. 7F-3:U. 2, 5, and 7 (Fig. 4) was removed. The bottom of the pit disturbed a small section of Plat. 7F-1:U. 5 (Fig. 4), but Plat. 7F-3:U. 1 (Fig. 10) was relatively undisturbed and served as the grave floor. No bigger than necessary to contain what was placed in it (Table 3.2), the grave was roughly ovoid, with four masonry blocks forming a W wall. There was no other special construction. Following interment, the grave was completely filled by earth and other debris. INDIVIDUAL AND ASSOCIATED MATERIAL: Individual: Young adult female, placed with her head N, resting in a tripod dish and facing up but slightly E. Her body seems to have been tipped up slightly on the left shoulder, but was on its back in the lumbar region. The legs were bent so that the knees were to the E and slightly S, with the feet S of the pelvis. The right foot was on top of the left, and both were on the corner of the southernmost stone of the W grave wall. The left arm was extended, with the hand down by the hip joint, but the upper right arm was parallel to the body, with its elbow bent so that the forearm lay across the body, the hand just above the left pelvis. Associated material: A Zacatel Cream Polychrome tripod dish (TR. 25A:fig. 82a1) was placed upright in the eastern half of the grave (Fig. 27d1) so that when the body was put in place, the chest and left arm were partly over it, causing its E edge to tip up; a Chilar Fluted, slightly outcurving-side bowl (Fig. 27d2; TR. 25A:fig. 82a5) was inside a Zacatel Cream Polychrome short cylinder (ibid., fig. 82a4) that was tipped under the S edge of the Zacatel Cream Polychrome plate (Fig. 27d3), E of the right hand; an unnamed brown-on-black resist type cylinder (TR. 25A:fig. 82a3) was positioned upright immediately S the short cylinder (Fig. 24d4); a Palmar Orange Polychrome tripod dish with beveled lip (TR. 25A:fig. 82a2), its feet removed, was upright beneath the head (Fig. 27d5). A conch shell hair bead (TR. 27A:fig. 146r) was found over the vertebrae S of the right shoulder. SKELETAL MATERIAL: Diagnosis of age and sex are reasonably secure, as is the conclusion that this was a primary burial. This woman was a bit more robust than usual for Tikal females, and was of greater than average stature (see forthcoming TR.

30). Her skeleton displays two benign anomalies: a sternal perforation and septal aperture. The former is rare at Tikal; the latter occurs with greatest frequency in skeletons from the North and Central Acropolis burials. Highly unusual are several notched and inlaid teeth; notched teeth are not all that rare at Tikal, but they most often are those of men. Inlaid teeth are rare, and were found in the man in the sequential chamber Bu. 195 (his were removed at some point), and in Bu. 23, and 24 from the North Acropolis. The teeth inlaid here seem to have been all four upper incisors, with jade discs (the left lateral incisor was missing its inlay, and the left central was missing entirely), and the upper canines, with hematite (the inlay in the right canine was missing). The two lower lateral incisors were cut on their occlusal surface so each had three sharp points (Type A2, Romero 1960:fig. 1). This woman had severe problems with osteoarthritis, which had progressed to the point where there was extensive lipping of the vertebrae, and even some vertebral fusion, as well as severe lipping of the sacroiliac joints. This would have restricted her range of movement, but it could have been far more serious than this to a woman still in her childbearing years. In childbirth, it is essential that there be a certain amount of “give” in the mother’s pelvis, and for this there is normally some loosening of the joints just prior to birth. As will be noted in the discussion below, this may relate to the fact that the right hand was missing two terminal phalanges. Dental pathology consists of root surface caries on two premolars and three molars as well as considerable buildup of calculus. DISCUSSION: The stratigraphic relationship of this burial to Plat. 7F-1 and 3 is virtually the same as that of Bu. 190, so the same discussion applies. As noted above, this one has the same location relative to Str. 7F-30-1st-C N of its stairway as Bu. 190 has to the S. Consistent is Coggins’s (1975:426) opinion that the pottery in Bu. 191 is contemporaneous with that of Bu. 190. Almost surely, then, Bu. 191 was placed when Plat. 7F-1-1st-C and Str. 7F-30-1st-C were constructed. Given the evident contemporaneity of Bu. 190 and 191, one may speculate on the possible relationship between the two individuals: though young, the woman in 191 was still old enough to have been the mother of the youth in 190. He seems to have been about fifteen at death, and if she were thirty, he would have been born when she was fifteen. This is consistent with the evident age at death of the two skeletons; in fact, the son may have been born when his mother was twenty and she may not have died until the age of thirty-five. The woman in Bu. 191 probably died a natural death, for her severe osteoarthritis at her young age suggests that

57

BURIALS

her health was not good. Possibly her restricted sacroiliac joints caused trouble in childbirth, although one might expect the skeleton of a fetus to be included in the burial if that were the cause of death. In this connection, it is worth noting the two missing phalanges from her right hand. In the Maya lowlands, some child burials are known that include adult phalanges, presumably from the mothers (Tozzer 1941:129, n. 604). Possibly, then, this woman lost children twice in childbirth after the birth of her son in Bu. 190, but prior to her own death. Given the probable natural death of the woman, could a son in Bu. 190 have been sacrificed to accompany her? This is possible, but seems unlikely. First, there is no evidence that he was killed, though the method used might not have left any traces. More compelling is the greater “richness” of Bu. 190 compared to 191, when all items included in his grave are considered; this suggests greater importance for the youth, in spite of his age. In any event, the apparent natural death of the woman implies that the two burials together probably were not sacrifices to commemorate some special event at Tikal (contra Coggins 1975:425). More plausible is that mother and son contracted a severe disease that killed them both, a hypothesis that gains support from the death of at least one other adult (in Bu. 192) at the same time (see Tables 2.1, 2.2; 7.1 [see below], and part VII, below). Although this woman’s status may not have been as high as that of her presumed son in Bu. 191, she seems to have been someone of prominence nonetheless. With the exception of chamber burials, those with Imix pottery rarely include more than three vessels, and women were more likely to be shortchanged than men (see e.g., TR. 19:149 and TR. 20B:Table 3.5). By contrast, this woman was provided with five pots, one of them (the black-onbrown resist cylinder), though crude, a probable import (TR. 25A:fig. 82a3). Also noteworthy is the Muan Feather design on the Zacatel Cream Polychrome plate; the only other like items from Classic Tikal graves come from Bu. 116 and 196 (TR. 25A:fig. 82a1; Coggins 1975:426). These are the “tombs” of Ruler A and a man once thought to be his son (TR. 33A:129–130). The bowl, with its vertical fluting, recalls those in Intermediate Classic chamber Bu. 23 from Gp. 5D-2. The short cylinder has on its bottom an Ahau glyph with 14 on the left, 2 above, and 7, 8, or 9 on the right (MT. 169), which brings to mind the Ahau tripod plates, also from Bu. 23 (TR. 25A:fig. 82a4). This combination of Ahau design and fluted vessel is shared only with Bu. 23 and no other (Coggins 1975:427–428), of interest in view of the combination of Ik and Imix elements in the plate from Bu. 190 (also shared with Bu. 23 are dental inlays). This vessel also has on it depictions of a black cockroach otherwise known at Tikal only from a sherd in a Central Acropolis interment (Bu. 183).

SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Plat. 7F-1:TS. 7 (Table 2.9), contemporary with Bu. 190 early in Late Classic times.

Burial 192 LOCATION: Str. 7F-29, intruded through Fl. 2 of 1st and sealed by Fl. 1 of 1st, just inside the S wall of Rm. 5, between the doorjamb and the interior platform (Fig. 2). 3E/27; for plan, see Fig. 29b. GRAVE: A pit, irregular in shape and longest in an E-W direction, was dug through Fl. 2 of 1st into the fill of Str. 7F-29-1st-B. This undercut slightly the S wall of Rm. 5. No special walls were constructed, but it was partially roofed by two rectangular masonry blocks; one of them, 0.10 m thick, covered the head and upper chest; the other, 0.38 m thick, was placed at the midpoint of the grave over its S side. The grave was no larger than required for the one individual (Table 3.2), and it was purposely earth filled. INDIVIDUAL AND ASSOCIATED MATERIAL: Individual: Adult, sex possibly female (see “Discussion”). So few pieces of the skeleton were preserved that little can be said of body arrangement, but the head was definitely E, resting on an inverted bowl (Fig. 29b3). Areas of rotted bone between this and apparent lower leg and foot bone fragments S of a tripod plate suggest supine full extension. Associated material: A Zacatel Cream Polychrome tripod dish with beveled lip (TR. 25A:fig. 82b2) was placed upright near the W end of the grave (Fig. 29b1), next to (W of) a Saxche Orange Polychrome barrel (TR. 25A:fig. 83a) that was upright, probably N of the legs (Fig. 29b2), and in which were carbon fragments and what probably were six small bone discs, stacked together (these apparently got lost somewhere along the way, but they sound like fish vertebrae); a Palmar Orange Polychrome slightly outcurving-side bowl (TR. 25A:fig. 82b1) was placed upside down in the E end of the grave (Fig. 29b3), where it served as a kind of pillow for the corpse. An unretouched obsidian blade core was 7 cm E of the barrel; one of two unmodified snail shell (Euglandina sp.) fragments was 0.11 m N of this but closer to the N wall of the grave; another 7 cm N was a limestone spindle whorl (TR. 27B:fig. 106u), which had been painted red, and it may have been placed over or under part of the body, for there was a mass of rotted bone just N of it; the second shell fragment was in

58

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

the center of the grave, 7 cm S of the bowl. Several sherds, a piece of carbon and a red plastered stucco fragment appear to have been stray items present in the earth used to backfill the grave.

SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Str. 7F-29:TS. 3 (Table 2.1), in the era of early Imix pottery production.

SKELETAL MATERIAL: Preservation was so poor that no observations were possible (see “Discussion”). DISCUSSION: Although proof is impossible, the size of the grave and the scraps of bone present strongly suggest primary burial of an adult in an extended position. Moreover, the spindle whorl strongly suggests that the individual was a woman, for in those Tikal burials that include spindle whorls (where sex could be diagnosed from the skeleton), the individual is always female (TR. 27B:47). The sequential position of the burial is clear; it is terminal to Str. 7F-29-1st-B and initial to 1st-A. Since the burial includes both Ik (the barrel) and Imix pottery types (the bowl and the dish), Culbert (TR. 25A:fig. 82b) considers it to come from a time transitional between the two complexes, but this is unlikely since Imix sherds are consistently present in the fills of 1st-B (Table 5.6 [see below]:LG. 3a, 3b, and 3c of Str. 7F-29). Either the Ik barrel was an old piece that the burial party chose to place with the deceased, or else it was an old type that continued to be produced into early Imix times. In support of the latter, the reserved circle design is early Imix in character, especially in conjunction with a round-sided vessel, according to Coggins (pers. comm.). Moreover, the pot is not typical Saxche Orange Polychrome (TR. 25A:fig. 83a). In Coggins’s opinion, it is unlikely that Bu. 192 is later than Bu. 190 and 191, and as noted in their discussions, features of Ik and Imix Complexes are combined in the pottery of those graves, as here. Therefore, the same 9.13.0.0.0– 9.15.0.0.0 dating must apply here. The stratigraphic relationship of this burial to Str. 7F-29-1st-A and B, both of which are potentially residential, recalls household burials in less elaborate contexts elsewhere at Tikal (TR. 19:152–153 and TR. 20B). Consistent are grave construction, orientation (quite different from the burials of Str. 7F-30 and 31), sex of the deceased, and the inclusion of utilitarian items (the spindle whorl at least). The burial, too, is less richly stocked than those in Str. 7F-30; there are generally fewer items, no imported pots, and local rather than imported shells. The possibility of this being a household burial will be discussed later in this section. It is also worth noting here, though, that the differences between the Str. 7F-30 burials and this one in a range-type structure are reminiscent of the differences between the Central Acropolis burials and those of the North Acropolis-Great Plaza.

Burial 193 LOCATION: Str. 7F-31, intruded through the stairs of 2nd into Plat. 7F-3:U. 4, 5 and 8 (Fig. 9 and 11). This is on the front-rear axis of Str. 7F-31, about 2 m E of Bu. 162 and 3.50 m W of Bu. 159. 3C/10; for plan, see Fig. 28b and 43c. GRAVE: Rectangular, formed by the cut into the floors of Plat. 7F-3-1st and 2nd right next to the W wall for Str. 7F-304th (U. 25), with a floor provided by Plat. 7F-3:U. 4 that the grave did not penetrate completely. A formal roof was constructed of five slabs that were placed at an angle over the burial; their W ends rested on the surface of Plat. 7F-3:U. 8, their E ends higher against Str. 7F-30:U. 25 (Fig. 11). Although considerable excavation preceded its construction, the grave itself was just sufficiently large for the burial (Table 3.2). It was not purposely earth filled, however. INDIVIDUAL AND ASSOCIATED MATERIAL: Individual: Adult female, laid out with her head N, facing up and to the W, body fully extended, supine but tipped slightly to the W. Associated material: A Chilar fluted cylinder (TR. 25A:fig. 83b2), placed upright just W of the right thigh (Fig. 28b3), and a legless Zacatel Cream Polychrome dish with beveled lip (TR. 25A:fig. 83b1) was over the left knee and thigh, tipped up to the W with the right knee in it (Fig. 28b4). A perforated Spondylus sp. shell with scraped interior (TR. 27A:fig. 166, 167) was in the neck region (Fig. 28b5); a rodent skeleton by the left elbow (Fig. 28b7); a carved stone was found W of the grave at the foot of the second and third slabs (Fig. 28b1). The stone itself, irregular in shape, with a carved circle and red pigment in the carving, could be unrelated to the burial. SKELETAL MATERIAL: Primary burial, age, and sex are all firmly established by the skeleton. It looks as though this woman was unusually short of stature (see forthcoming TR. 30), but there is no evident pathology. Of note is one remaining inlaid tooth (see Bu. 191 for comment on inlaid teeth). DISCUSSION: Sequential position is reasonably clear: considerable

59

BURIALS

fill for the stairway of Str. 7F-31-2nd was removed, following which the grave was prepared. After interment, fill material previously removed was thrown back, and the stairs of Str. 7F-31-1st-B were built over it (see part II). Thus, the burial was initial to 7F-31-1st-B, as Bu. 159 was to 31-2nd. This woman was not richly provided with grave goods, but those present are interesting. The perforated Spondylus shell is unusual in a burial, especially of a woman; two meters due W is the grave with the only other woman apparently buried at Tikal with Spondylus shell (actually a fragment; see Bu. 162). Both vessels are outside the usual range of Imix ceramics, the dish—which may have been an import—was made without feet, and the cylinder is unusually small (TR. 25A:fig. 83). The cylinder does resemble those in the “tomb” Bu. 23—one of only three in Gp. 5D-2 containing a man with inlaid teeth— while the design on the plate is unique in the Maya polychrome repertoire (Coggins 1975:420–421). The pottery is thought to date the burial to ca. 9.13.10.0.0–9.14.0.0.0 (ibid.:420). SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Str. 7F-31:TS. 5 (Table 2.3); early in the Late Classic period.

Burial 194 LOCATION: Str. 7F-30, just inside (S) of the N substructure wall of 3rd and 2.50 m E of the W substructure wall (Fig. 7). 3B, no lot defined; no illustration. GRAVE: Only the bottom of this burial has been seen, as it was encountered in the ceiling of the N tunnel excavated beneath Str. 7F-30 and it was not further exposed. The grave consists in part of a cut into Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-2nd, forming a rectangle large enough to contain the one body, and no more (Table 3.2). INDIVIDUAL AND ASSOCIATED MATERIAL: Individual: Child, of unknown sex, apparently laid out in an extended position, head to the N. Because the body was not fully viewed, no further observations are possible. Associated material: None seen. Surely, nothing was beneath the body, but whether or not objects were placed above is unknown. SKELETAL MATERIAL: The bones were not removed, so careful observations were not possible. It looked like a primary burial.

DISCUSSION: The grave was clearly dug into Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1, which was not patched above the burial. This would not have been done before construction of Str. 7F-30-3rd, for the floor here remained in use until then. After that, it is thought to have been deep beneath the NW corner of 3rd, so it is doubtful that any burial made here after construction of 3rd would have been placed so deeply as to penetrate the old floor. SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Str. 7F-30:TS. 11 (Table 2.2), in Intermediate Classic times.

Discussion The best way to handle a general discussion of these burials is to defer that of Bu. 160 and 162 until later in this section, proceeding first with the others. Throughout, the reader will find it useful to keep in mind the chronology (summarized in Table 3.3) abstracted from the preceding presentation of the individual burials. A first conclusion is that collectively these probably represent what were defined in TR. 20B (section III) as residential burials, meaning that the people in them once lived in Gp. 7F-1. As argued in TR. 20B:44 (see TR. 19:152–153 for preliminary discussion), residential burials can be of two kinds: household ones, representing the routine interment of a recently deceased resident of the group, and burials of some special significance. Household ones conform to seven criteria: they are located beneath or near probable houses; they coincide with abandonment of a structure, which might or might not be rebuilt; they include individuals of all ages and sexes; although they sometimes were placed on the front-rear axis of a structure, they were not regularly so placed; they display variation in location, grave construction, orientation, position of the body, as well as position and quantity of objects included with the corpse; they include utilitarian, or at least previously used items; they show less “richness” and graves are smaller than the chamber burials at the Tikal epicenter. Residential burials of special significance deviate from household ones in the following ways: location beneath a special purpose structure within a residential compound, most often on the E side of a plaza or platform; they always have an initial relationship to construction above them; they most often are of adult males, but only occasionally juveniles or women; they are always situated on the front-rear axis of overlying architecture; they show less variation of grave construction, orientation, position of the body; and associated materials are invariably present.

60

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 3.3 Chronology of Group 7F-1 Burials Burial

Estimated Long Count Date

1

ca. 10.2.0.0.0

190,191,192; 4?

ca. 9.15.0.0.0

193

ca. 9.13.10.0.0-9.14.0.0.0

150,159

ca. 9.12.10.0.0-9.13.0.0.0

132,194

ca. 9.7.10.0.0-9.8.0.0.0

2,3,140; 4?

ca. 9.7.0.0.0-9.7.10.0.0

134

ca 9 6 0 0 0 - 9 7 0 0 0

162

ca 9 4 13 00+

160

ca. 9.4.13.0.0

Household Burials Of the burials under consideration here, three—Bu. 2, 3, and 192—seem reasonably to meet the criteria of household burial. At first, Bu. 3 might be considered problematical, given its location W of the axis along which burials of special significance in Str. 7F-30 were placed (see below). The youthful age of the individual interred, however, the similarity of the interment to Bu. 2, its obvious difference from those in Str. 7F-30, and the fact that it clearly was not initial combine to suggest that it was not of special significance. Further, it was not squarely located on the axis, with only its N end being on this line, the rest of the burial to the S. This could merely indicate a miscalculation in location on the part of the burial party, but in view of the other considerations it indicates that location on the axis was not a critical concern. Of these three burials, one (Bu. 192) was in a structure that, as already noted, was clearly suitable for use as a house, while the other two were included in plaza fill, as household burials sometimes were (see TR. 20B:section III). Burial 192 is potentially either initial to the last version of Str. 7F-29, or terminal to the preceding one, but because no interments are known to be initial to other versions of 29, it is reasonable to regard this one as terminal. The other two burials also seem more likely to be terminal rather than initial. The simplicity and location of these two argue against their having any special significance, and they were placed at a time when existing structures were being done away with and/or remodeled anyway (Bu. 3

was not even made until construction of Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D was well advanced). The three burials probably include both sexes, certainly adults and juveniles, and two of the three were not oriented to any structure axis, front-rear or otherwise. The apparent axial position of the third, as noted above, may have been coincidental. These certainly display about as much variation as three burials can: two were simply placed on an open surface and covered by fill, and one was put in a shallow pit that was partially roofed with stone slabs. The body in Bu. 2 was fully flexed, head to the SE facing E; that in Bu. 3 was fully flexed, head to the N facing E; that in Bu. 192 was extended with the head to the E. There were no grave goods with Bu. 2; one calcite object was placed in the mouth of the juvenile in Bu. 3, but several objects were placed with Bu. 192. This kind of variation was not the result of temporal changes in customs (TR. 20B:section III). For its part, Bu. 192 did include at least one utilitarian item, the spindle whorl, and the pottery vessels may well have seen use prior to their inclusion with the deceased. Although it contained shells, these were of local snails, rather than imported marine species. All three interments are far smaller and simpler than chamber burials, the most elaborate (Bu. 192) having a floor area (0.60 m2) comparable to the average of 0.58 m2 for household burials in Gp. 4F-1 and 2 (calculated from Bu. 16, 20, 31, 39, 40, and 43, as reported in TR. 19). Also the most well stocked of the three, Bu. 192, is only slightly more so than household burials elsewhere (see e.g., TR. 19:tables 106 and 107 and TR. 20B:tables 3.4 and 3.5); it pales by comparison to all inhumations in Str. 7F-30, save Bu. 1.

Residential Burials of Special Significance Eight burials, from Str. 7F-30 and 31, seem to fall into this category (Bu. 1, 132, 140, 150, 159, 190, 191, and 193); all are associated with structures that probably were not houses on the E side of a plaza. Those in Str. 7F-31 were situated on the front-rear axis, but in 7F-30, only Bu. 1 and 150 were so placed, with 132 and 140 slightly off it. The reason for this seems to be that all interments in this structure sought to adhere to the line on which the original axial Bu. 160 was placed, however, in spite of a slight shift to the S in the location of the centerline of Str. 7F-30-4th and 3rd. Hence, all may be considered axial. Reasons have already been given for considering Bu. 190 and 191 as axial in their discussion. In 7F-30, Bu. 160 clearly has an initial relationship, for no architecture is known to have preceded it at its locus, and the original construction of 30 began with the interment. Moreover, every significant subsequent modification of 7F-30 was accompanied by an inhumation in alignment with Bu. 160, nor is there one that is terminal

BURIALS

to 7F-30-1st-A. Given these two facts, the best way to interpret Bu. 1, 132, 140, 150, and 190 with 191 is as initial to the various versions of 7F-30 that followed them, rather than terminal to those that immediately preceded them. Of the burials in Str. 7F-31, 159 is almost as surely initial to the original 7F-31, as 160 is to the original 7F30. Just as Bu. 159 initiated construction of 7F-31, so 193 prefaced the only significant modification of that structure, nor is there any terminal burial for that remodeling. Hence, Bu. 193, too, is best regarded as initial. As expected, most of these interments were of adults, rather than juveniles, and men, rather than women. Burial 193 may have been an exception, owing to a possible commemorative relationship of 7F-31 to the old Bu. 162 (both graves contained women). In Str. 7F-30, by contrast, a woman was never buried on the axis, but instead with a young male, flanking it. Another possibility is that the woman in Bu. 193 was the wife of the man in Bu. 159. If the dates proposed for these burials (Table 3.3) are anywhere near correct, then the woman may have died only 10 years after the man, or at most 30 years later. If she married young, as Tikal women may have done on occasion (see discussion of Bu. 191), then she could easily have survived her husband by 30 years, especially since, if he were the man in Bu. 159, he died in middle, rather than old, adulthood. This possibility will be discussed further in Appendix A. Variety is by no means absent from these eight burials, but it does seem to have been limited. Comparing graves, that for Bu. 140, the first in Str. 7F-30 itself after 160, recalls its predecessor, even though on a far smaller scale. Omitting, for the moment, Bu. 132, the next in 7F30 was 150. Its grave, in turn, resembles that of Bu. 140. Burials 190 and 191 deviated from the earlier ones, for their graves were much simpler. While there may have been some tendency in Gp. 7F-1 towards simplification of grave construction over time, as will be discussed below, it is doubtful that the graves of 190 and 191 can be explained on that basis alone. Given their placement flanking the burial axis of Str. 7F-30, in lieu of an actual on-axis inhumation, it may be that the individuals in them were not of sufficient importance to justify more elaborate graves. Unlike those people in Bu. 160, 140, and 150, neither of these was an adult male. The last burial, No. 1, suggests a poor version of the sort of graves constructed for 140 and 150. To return to Bu. 132, its grave differs in the way it achieves its vaultlike appearance from those of the preceding 140 and the succeeding 150. Perhaps it, like the graves of 190 and 191 just discussed, differs because the body in it was not that of an adult male, as were those in Bu. 160, 140, 150, and 1. On the other hand, small though it was, at least it, too, resembled a chamber.

61

In Str. 7F-31, the grave for Bu. 159 was not unlike that for 150. That for Bu. 193 was similar to some formal roofed graves in small domestic groups, but in another sense can be regarded as a diminutive version of the small graves for the other burials in Str. 7F-30 and 31 (excepting 190 and 191). Again, though, the deceased was not an adult male. In sum, all adult males buried in Str. 7F-30 and 31 were provided with graves that suggest chambers, whereas those for adolescents and women were less elaborate. All graves, though, were longest in a N-S direction. (Grave construction will be discussed further below.) Body position was quite similar in most of these eight interments. All but Bu. 1 surely featured heads to the N, facing up, although three tipped slightly to the W and one to the E (probably this is not significant). All but Bu. 1 were supine, though some bodies were slightly tilted to one side (again, this probably is not significant). Burials 140, 150, 159, 190, and 193 were extended, though in three cases the elbows were bent with hands near the mouth or shoulders. Burials 132 and 191 both had partially flexed legs, but the arms were flexed in the former, although not so much in the latter. Burial 1 is a problem, for the position of the body is not clear. It might have been seated (as favored in TR. 2); if so, this may be a time-related variable (other seated Terminal Classic burials are known, e.g., Bu. 25; TR. 19). If not, it was extended, with head to the N, just like the others. All of these burials included several pottery vessels, usually four, though their number and placement differed. All but Bu. 193 included one or two bowls (if we consider barrels as precursors of bowls); all but Bu. 1 and 132 included one or two cylinders, and all but Bu. 1 and 132 included one or two plates or dishes (sometimes modified and sometimes not, but never with a “kill” hole). The difference shown by Bu. 1 probably involves time-related changes in mortuary practices, but Bu. 132 cannot be explained in this way, falling as it does between the two similar Bu. 140 and 150. Perhaps, though, plates were not deemed necessary, given the presence of the two platelike cache vessels. All but Bu. 1 and 191 contained more than pottery vessels alone (see Table 3.4): 6 (Bu. 132, 140, 150, 190, 191, 193) included marine materials; 3 (Bu. 132, 140, 150) included jade; 3 (Bu. 132, 190, 193) included animal bones; 3 (Bu. 132, 159, and 190) included red pigment; Bu. 132 included chert and obsidian eccentrics and human phalanges; and Bu. 140 included hematite mosaic elements. Changes through time may have played some part in this variation, as may age and sex of the deceased, but limited options may have existed at any given time. All burials on the axis of Str. 7F-30 (excepting Bu. 1 and 134) included inscriptions of one sort or another (Appendix C); no other burials (save 159, on the axis of Str. 7F-31) included inscriptions of any sort.

62

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 3.4 Summary of Materials Associated with the Intermediate and Late Classic Burials, Structures 7F-30 and 31 earlier Burial Pottery Number of vessels Barrels /bowls Cylinders Plates /dishes Cache bowl and lid

later

140

132

150

159

193

190

191

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

4 2 1 1

4 2

4 1 1 2

4 1 1 2

2

4 1 2 1

5 2 1 2

1 1

1

Present in Burial 160 Yes S e e T e X

t

Marine Materials Shell Coral Stingray spines Sponge

X

X

x

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X X

Chipped Stone Chert eccentrics Obsidian eccentrics Obsidian prismatic blades Pecked and Ground Stone Jade Hematite mosaic elements Unmodified stone

Red Pigment

Yes Yes Yes Yes

X X

p

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Yes Yes No No

X X

Bones Animal Bird Fish Human Inscriptions

p

X

X

X

X

X

p p

Yes No Yes No Yes

2

3

1

Yes

X

X

X

X X X

1

1 X

Yes Yes Yes Yes No

2

Yes

x — present

Speaking generally (and omitting the Terminal Classic Bu. 1), all seven of these interments appear to have been at least somewhat more important than the proposed household Bu. 192 when location, initial relationship to construction, and grave construction (including objects and presence of miscellaneous texts) are taken into account. The totality of these, with the limits to variability, implies that they were somehow special. At the same time, though, the bowl-plate-cylinder combination and position of the deceased is something they have in common with

the household Bu. 192. The latter, too, contained shells, although they were local, rather than the marine species of Bu. 132, 140, 150, 190, 191, and 193. Indeed, preburial wear was evident on plates in Bu. 150, 159, and 191, although all three included probably imported vessels as well. In the face of these assorted observations, the special significance of the burials in Str. 7F-30 and 31 seems to have been in the setting of a residential group. In some instances, the individuals in residential burials of special significance elsewhere may have been sac-

63

BURIALS

rificed (see, for example, TR. 19:Bu. 26–30), but probably not here. Those men in Bu. 1 and 140 lived longer than the majority of Tikal males (see forthcoming TR. 30), so the probability is high that they died natural deaths. The men in Bu. 150 and 159 were in middle adulthood, which is when most Tikal men died naturally (see forthcoming TR. 30). The woman in Bu. 191 seems to have had health problems, and so she may have died of natural causes at an early age; as to the woman in Bu. 193, her age at death is not known, except that she had reached adulthood. The two subadults are the most problematical, but reasons have already been given for supposing that the youth in Bu. 190 probably was not deliberately killed. In any event, natural death before adulthood was by no means unknown at Tikal. What is suggested, therefore, is that these people were the most important residents of Gp. 7F-1 and that when they died, they were given special burials, followed by new construction.

Problematical Burials Postponed until now is consideration of three burials, 4, 134, and 194, which are difficult to evaluate. Were it not for their locations, one would not hesitate to label them as household burials. The first two are situated squarely along the same axis as the burials in Str. 7F-30, raising the possibility that they might be somehow special. There is reason to doubt this in the case of Bu. 4, which is contemporary with either Bu. 140 or 190, with 191. Since it is vastly simpler in grave construction and (so far as known) associated materials from 140, it seems dubious that it had any special significance if it dates from that time. Also dubious is that a special burial would have been placed on axis at the time Bu. 190 and 191 were positioned flanking that axis, especially given their apparent contrast in quantity and quality of associated materials compared with Bu. 4. It is likely, then, that someone happened to die when Plat. 7F-1 was undergoing modification, whereupon the survivors decided to take advantage of the opportunity to bury the deceased in front of the important Str. 7F-30, on its axis. Burial 134 may be another matter. This is the first known in Gp. 7F-1 since the impressive Bu. 160 and unusual 162. At the same time, the first construction was underway at the locus of Str. 7F-30 since it was first built. Given that every notable alteration of 7F-30 itself was marked by an important burial, it is possible that this small-scale resumption of activity also required one. In fact, burials may have prompted the rebuildings of 7F-30 and, by extension, Plat. 7F-3 as well. If this resumed activity took place after a period of “hard times,” then the burial might be expected to be less than lavish, as this one certainly was. Further discussion of this proposition will

be found later in this report (part VI). Noteworthy is that the corpse in Bu. 134 seems to have been treated very much like the one in preceding 162. In the discussion of that interment, the suggestion was made that Bu. 162 caused the Maya to alter the plan of Plat. 7F-3-2nd, to which the burial is initial. For its part, Bu. 134 is potentially terminal to Plat. 7F-3-2nd or initial to 1st. In the absence of any known terminal burial for the latter, it is probable that 134 was truly initial, and of special significance. Burial 194 was placed beneath the corner of Str. 7F-30-3rd, and should be contemporary with 132. Not only does it impress one as being a radically poorer interment, but it had no relation whatever to the burial axis of that structure. It may be that this just happened to be a convenient place to bury a child, who just happened to die when Str. 7F-30-3rd was under construction.

Relative Social Status On the basis of quality and quantity of grave goods, compared to contents of other residential burials of comparable date, those from Gp. 7F-1 (excepting Bu. 2, 3, 4, and 194, of which more shortly) are richer than most, and not noticeably poorer than any (TR. 19:tables 106, 107; TR. 20B:tables 3.4, 3.5; Coggins 1975:329–337, 428–443). The implication is that those responsible for the Gp. 7F-1 burials were of relatively higher social status than those responsible for most other known residential burials, and probably lower in status than none. The residential burials most similar to those of Gp. 7F-1 are from Str. 4G-9, 4H-4, 5G-8, 5G-11, and 6B-9 (see TR. 21). Since all are of special significance, from temples on the E edges of plazas, the proper comparison is to the burials from Str. 7F-30 and 31. Of the three earlier ones (Coggins 1975:329–337), Bu. 72 with its one admittedly splendid pot (TR. 25A:fig. 42c), but nothing else, is clearly poorer compared to its near contemporary, 132, with its cache and multiple vessels. Burial 81 (TR. 21:12) seems no richer than its near contemporaries, 150, 159, and even 193 (which has fewer vessels, but has other items not present in Bu. 81). The same is true of Bu. 96 (TR. 21:27), but this comes from a group (4H-1) in which the occupants may have specialized in the decoration of ceramics for elite consumers and/or controlled their distribution. Accordingly, they may have had access to pottery that would otherwise have been unavailable to them. Structure 4G-9, the location of Bu. 81, was part of the same multiplaza-residential unit (TR. 20B:table 6.11) as Gp. 4H-1, and so its occupant too could have possessed finer ceramic vessels than otherwise warranted. None of the burials with Imix pottery (ibid.:428–443) is quite up to Bu. 190 and 191.

64

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

Some further support for high social status on the part of the occupants of Gp. 7F-1 comes from a consideration of physical stature. The individuals in Bu. 134, 140, 159, 190, and 191 were significantly taller than the averages for their sexes and times (see forthcoming TR. 30, and in the interim Haviland and Moholy-Nagy 1992:57), those men in Bu. 134, 159, 160, and 190 being close to the averages for men in the chamber burials of Gp. 5D-2, while the man in Bu. 140 seems to have been even taller. Only two individuals were unusually short, those in Bu. 150 and 193. Implied is that conditions of life for these people were more like those experienced by the aristocracy than by those of lesser social status (ibid., 56–57). The mean stature for those men buried in Str. 4G-9, 4H-4, 5G-8, 5G-11, and 6B-9 is below that for those men buried in Gp. 7F-1 (TR. 30). The simplicity of Bu. 2, 3, possibly 4, and 194 stands in marked contrast to all the others from Gp. 7F-1. All were placed in Plat. 7F-1 (although the latter two came to be overlain by expansions of Str. 7F-30), but more important is their lack of special grave construction and paucity—in some cases absence—of associated materials. Indeed, they may be compared only with the poorest burials in residential groups elsewhere (TR. 19:tables 106, 107 and TR. 20B:tables 3.4, 3.5). At least two of them (Bu. 2 and 3) look as if they were interred opportunely in the course of plaza construction. Implied is that the individuals in these four interments were subordinate to those in all the others. An obvious hypothesis is that they were members of families that included servants or retainers of those who resided in Gp. 7F-1. Consistent are clear indications from the skeletons that these people did not live as well as did those whose graves were in Str. 7F-30 and 31. The person in Bu. 2 seems to have suffered from Paget’s disease, osteitis, or syphilis, while the one in Bu. 3, who died young, suffered from nutritional underdevelopment (TR. 2:42–43). The person in Bu. 194 died even younger.

Continuity of Occupation A third conclusion about these burials (again excepting Bu. 2, 3, 4, and 194) is that they suggest continuity of occupation of Gp. 7F-1; that is to say the group was occupied right up to the end by descendants of the man in Bu. 160 or his co-ruler. Indeed, the limited variability already noted among the burials in Str. 7F-30 and 31 implies some perpetuity of practices over time for those of special significance. Specifically, most of the features of subsequent interments in 30 and 31 seem to have appeared first in Bu. 160. The first example of continuity may be seen in the position of the deceased. The man in Bu. 160 was laid

out in an extended position, supine, and head to the N, an arrangement approximated by nearly every subsequent burial, possibly including Bu. 1. The one certain exception is Bu. 132, but even here the deceased was oriented to the N and was supine (most flexed burials at Tikal were not supine; see e.g., TR. 19:table 110; TR. 20B:table 3.8). The fact that Bu. 132 was of a subadult, rather than adult, may have had something to do with why it differed from the others. Grave construction, too, reflects continuity. As already noted, that for Bu. 140, though smaller, recalls the chamber of Bu. 160, while that of 150, in turn, strikes one as a diminutive version of that for 140. The grave for Bu. 132 was not quite like these other two, possibly because the person in it was a subadult, rather than an adult male like the others, but even though its construction differed, it did resemble a small vaulted chamber (like the others; cf. Fig. 10, 27a) and it was not packed with earth. The grave for Bu. 159 was similar to that for 150, and its mud-plastered walls bring to mind the use of mud plaster in 160. The grave for Bu. 193 was very much smaller and simpler than the earlier ones, perhaps because its subject was a female, rather than a male. What is more, she may have been kin by marriage, rather than descent, to the others. Nonetheless, in common with the earlier graves, Bu. 193 had inclined roof stones and was not purposely earth filled. The graves of Bu. 190 and 191 were simpler still, but again they contained the bodies of a female and a subadult, rather than an adult male. There was a return to a more elaborate grave for Bu. 1, which did contain an adult male. With its mud-plastered walls, Bu. 1 harks back to 159. Overall, then, it looks very much as though there is a thread of continuity running through these inhumations as far as their graves are concerned. Consistent is the adherence of those burials placed in Str. 7F-30 to the Bu. 160 axis even in spite of shifts through time in the location of the centerline of the structure. This almost certainly indicates continued attention to that original chamber burial. Threads of continuity are to be seen as well in the associated materials (Table 3.4). The items in Bu. 160 were far more diverse than those of the subsequent ones, but nevertheless, there are few objects from those later burials that do not remind one of some items included in the first one. As did its successors, Bu. 160 included multiple vessels (9 ceramics, 2 stone, 3 wooden). The actual number was reduced in subsequent graves, wooden and stone vessels disappearing entirely, with four of clay becoming nearly standard. The Manik ceramics of Bu. 160, of course, differ from the Ik and Imix ceramics of the later ones, but it did include cylindrical shapes, bowls, and tripod dishes that seem to anticipate the later tripod plates. Plates (usually tripod) and cylinders were all but standard

65

BURIALS

for the subsequent burials, as were bowls, if some or all of the Ik barrels were counterparts of Imix bowls, as suggested earlier. The pottery of Bu. 160 included local types as well as probable imports (Coggins 1975:223), a combination also seen in the later Bu. 150, 159, 190, 191, and 193, if not others. Finally, two non-ceramic vessels in Bu. 160 bore painted inscriptions, and at least one pottery vessel in every subsequent burial save 1, 134, and 193 bore some sort of text, usually painted, but carved in the case of the Bu. 132 bowl. In Bu. 190 there were as well the glyphs inscribed in bone. Shell objects, coral, and stingray spines were included in Bu. 160, and continued to be placed with the two subsequent ones. Sponges were added to Bu. 132, but in subsequent interments, marine materials were represented by shell objects alone (only absent in Bu. 1 and 159). Perhaps this represents some kind of simplification through time coupled with differences in individual social status; for example, the man in Bu. 159 (beneath Str. 7F-31) may not have ranked as high as his contemporary in Bu. 150 beneath the larger Str. 7F-30. Burial 160 included chert and obsidian eccentrics, as well as prismatic blades, and these appeared again in 132 (although not loose on the floor). In both cases, these materials were placed inside the graves, instead of outside as in the case of almost all North Acropolis-Great Plaza chamber burials (with the exception of North Acropolis Bu. 200, these are the only ones at Tikal where this was done). Otherwise, chert and obsidian eccentrics and prismatic blades dropped out of these burials (excepting a possible prismatic blade in 159). Jade (almost all beads) was present in Bu. 160, and continued to be placed in the next three Str. 7F-30 interments. The beads in Bu. 140 and 150, though fewer in number, recall those in the first grave, and the shell and jade mosaic pieces in Bu. 132 remind us of the presence of jade and shell, and also jade and pyrite mosaics in Bu. 160. The hematite mosaic elements from Bu. 140 are items sometimes found in caches, but the unmodified stones from Bu. 132 are unique, apparently one-time inclusions. Once again, a tendency to simplification seems indicated by the lack of lithic items in Bu. 159 and subsequent ones. And, again, some of this difference may relate to differences in social status. Burial 160 contained a bird but, except for the human skeletons, no other bone material. Bird remains and human remains (phalanges only, perhaps from the mother?) appeared once more in Bu. 132, but not again. Animal bones, which appeared first in Bu. 162, were included in two or three later ones, but seem never to have really caught on as a regular inclusion. The two fish vertebrae in the Bu. 132 vessels were a one-time phenomenon. Red pigment was sporadic in its occurrence; present in Bu. 160, it skipped the next one to reappear in 132. It

was present in Bu. 159, but was not seen again in a Str. 7F-30 burial (or Bu. 193) until 190. Little has been said here of Bu. 1, except to note that the grave surely, and the body position possibly, are reminiscent of the earlier Str. 7F-30 burials. It also falls on the Bu. 160 axis. In associated materials, though, it seems quite different from the others. While this might suggest a break in the continuity of these burials, the difference does not necessarily indicate a replacement of occupants of Gp. 7F-1. The burial postdates the days of Tikal greatness, and by then the standards of wealth of previous burials may have been beyond the means of Gp. 7F-1 occupants. Nonetheless, they did place with it a bowl with Muan Feather design, perhaps an heirloom, suggesting a link with the earlier Bu. 191. A further link is suggested by the fact that the man in Bu. 1, like the woman in 191, once had inlaid teeth. In his case, they might have been removed when he died, but if lost earlier, they might indicate that he could not afford replacements. Another burial about which little has been said is 134, but to understand it, further discussion of Bu. 160, 162, and related issues is required.

Possible Ties to the Ruling Dynasty A vexing question relating to Bu. 160 and 162 is, whose bodies were in them? That the man in 160 was someone of considerable importance seems indicated by the sacrifice of two youths to accompany his corpse, the identical number found in Bu. 48 (the last royal burial known to precede Bu. 160) and, evidently, in Bu. 200, the first royal burial known to postdate Bu. 160 (TR. 14:table 156). Although sacrificial victims are regularly present in Gp. 5D-2 graves of the Classic Period until shortly before 9.8.0.0.0 (TR. 14:922), they are not normally found in other interments (there are some possible exceptions; see, for example, TR. 19:132). Indeed, Bu. 160 is unlike all others from Tikal except the chamber burials at the site epicenter. The chamber itself is considerably larger than those of Bu. 22, 24, and 48, and slightly larger than those of Bu. 23 and 200 (cf. chamber volume recorded in Table 3.2 with those in TR. 14:table 156). Only Bu. 8, 10, 116, 195, and 196 exhibit larger volumes. Similarly, the floor area of Bu. 160 (Table 3.2) is substantially greater than those of Bu. 22, 24, 48, and 200, almost the same as that of Bu. 23, and smaller only than those of the same Bu. 8, 10, 116, 195, and 196 (TR. 14:table 156). Apart from size, the Bu. 160 chamber most closely resembles those of Gp. 5D-2 Bu. 10, 23, 48, and 195. All were hewn from bedrock (though Bu. 23 only partly so), and all save Bu. 195 had entries with steps quarried into bedrock. With respect to this feature, the Gp. 7F-1 grave differs from the others only in that its entry was from the W, rather than the S, but this

66

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

is easily explained by its location beneath architecture that faced W, rather than S. Finally, the N and S niches in Bu. 160 might be counterparts of the end benches in later Bu. 23; at least the N one was raised above floor level and like the N bench in Bu. 23, on it alone were placed pottery vessels. The presence in Bu. 160 of several jade beads, red pigment, stingray spines, and obsidian are likewise shared with the Classic Period chamber burials of Gp. 5D-2. The pattern of nine plus one scarcely altered Spondylus shells is known otherwise only from chamber burials of the North Acropolis-Great Plaza. More particularly, the orderly placement on and around the corpse of jade beads and Spondylus valves, with one of the latter positioned on the back of the head like a skull cap, is a tradition regularly adhered to in all Gp. 5D-2 chamber burials that postdate Bu. 160 (we cannot say it was absent in looted Bu. 200), at least through Bu. 196 (TR. 14:858). The custom may even have begun with Bu. 10 (TR. 14:925). The one other grave with a painted inscription on the wall is the earlier Bu. 48, and the only birds included in burials up to this time were in Bu. 10 and 48. The single discordant note comes from the pottery vessels, most of which are drab and some of which are poorly made and misshapen; they seem a far cry from the highly decorated types found in most Classic Period chamber burials. Still, some appear to have been imported, and the lack of finely made types seems offset by the presence of the stucco-coated and painted vessels made of wood, two of which bear painted inscriptions (MT. 100 and 347), and the two alabaster vessels (known otherwise only in Bu. 48). Given so many resemblances to the epicentral chamber burials of Tikal, some of which are known and most of which are suspected (with good reason) to be the last resting places of the kings of the city (TR. 33A:table 6 and Haviland 1997:table 1), not to mention an almost total lack of resemblances to residential burials, some sort of link with the ruling dynasty of Tikal seems plausible. Coggins (1975:215–233) was the first to suggest that the man in Bu. 160 was once a ruler of Tikal and was portrayed on St. 25, a monument found by the Tikal Project a mere 244 m SE of Gp. 7F-1, where it had been dragged by the Maya, perhaps from Gp. 7F-1 itself (a possibility examined in part VI, below). In revised form, this hypothesis still has much to recommend it. As reconstructed by Martin (2003:18–23 and table 1.1), a woman was inaugurated as Ahau in 9.3.16.8.4, three years after the death of the 18th ruler (Chak Tok Ich’aak II), who was probably her father. Because she was only 6 years old at the time, this “Lady of Tikal” did not rule alone, but was partnered with an older man, apparently a high-ranking military official who assumed the superior title “Kaloomte’” with the designation of 19th in the line of Tikal kings. Nicknamed “Kaloomte’

Bahlam,” his legitimacy came through her descent from the preceding king. The 18th king’s name even appears in MT. 347 on a vessel in Bu. 160 (Guenter 2002:55). Sometime after 9.4.13.0.0, Kaloomte’ Bahlam died and Lady of Tikal may have as well. Who assumed power then is something of a mystery; a man dubbed “Bird Claw,” whose only monument is St. 8 (Martin and Grube 2000:89) was once considered a likely candidate, but has since been ruled out (S. Martin, pers. comm., 2015). Whoever this ruler was, he was followed by the 21st ruler, Wak Chan K’awiil, whose accession was soon after 9.5.3.9.15. A son of Chak Tok Ich’aak II, he was a younger brother of Lady of Tikal, born at about the time of his father’s death. Apparently, he had been away, possibly at Naranjo (Martin 2005:8), returning to Tikal at the time of his accession. Implied by all of this is dynastic intrigue, with Wak Chan K’awiil unable to assume his rightful position as king until after the departure or death of the successor to his sister and her co-ruler. Earlier in this section, it was proposed that Bu. 160 was that of Kaloomte’ Bahlam, and Bu. 162 that of Lady of Tikal. Indications are that her death was not a natural one, in which case the person responsible was likely the mysterious 20th ruler or Wak Chan K’awiil. It appears that, following her protector’s death, Lady of Tikal was banished from the seat of power to a peripheral location, where she buried her co-ruler, built a palatial house (Str. 7F-32-2nd) for herself and saw construction well advanced on Kaloomte’ Bahlam’s funerary temple before her own demise. All of this is consistent with what is known (and not known) of the dates for all these activities, as well as the age at death of the man and woman in the two burials, despite lack of definite proof. Later burials from Str. 7F-30 and 31 do not show as strong a resemblance to the chamber burials of kings as does 160, but there are things suggestive of links with royalty. One is the ch’o-ko glyph, associated with rulers, on the cache vessel lid in Bu. 132. Burial 132 also shares with Bu. 200 the placement of cache materials within the grave. Unfortunately, later reopening of the grave by the Maya has destroyed evidence of how this material was arranged in Bu. 200, but it likely was on the floor (as in 160) rather than in a container (as in 132). Not until Bu. 193 are there other hints of ties to rulers. The woman in this grave had inlaid teeth, as did the ruler in Bu. 23; her grave also contained a fluted cylinder similar to those in Bu. 23 (cf. TR. 25A:fig. 40c–f and fig. 83b2). Likewise, the woman in Bu. 191 had inlaid teeth and was accompanied by two fluted bowls, one with an Ahau glyph like those on plates in Bu. 23 (cf. TR. 25A:fig. 39, 40a, and 82a4). On its outside was a cockroach design, common enough at other Maya sites, but known elsewhere at Tikal only on a sherd from the Central Acropolis, the home of the royal family. Finally,

67

BURIALS

tripod plates with Muan feather designs like the one in Bu. 191 are known only from chamber Bu. 116 and 196, those of Ruler A and a man who is perhaps his son (cf. TR. 25A:fig. 82a1, and fig. 65b, 66, 92h,i, 93–95). Paired with Bu. 191 was 190, in which was a bowl with a rim border like that on a bowl in Bu. 196 (cf. TR. 25A:81b and 91l). Although this may have no more than broad chronological significance, the bone with MT. 167 signals a more direct link to the holders of power at Tikal. Though different from the inscribed bones in Bu. 116 and 196, this one from Bu. 190 includes the Tikal Emblem Glyph, normally associated only with rulers (TR. 33A:5, 8). Also present is the head of God K, a standard component in the names of the late kings of Tikal (see earlier discussion of Bu. 190). Possibly named is an otherwise unknown ruler “?K’awiil Sak Te’ Ahau.” Burials 190, 191, and 193 all date within the period of the reign of Jasaw Chan K’awiil I (Martin 2003:table 1.1), who claimed to be a descendant of Lady of Tikal’s ancestors. If the descendants of Lady of Tikal continuously occupied Gp. 7F-1, as proposed earlier, then the people in these burials were distant cousins, or the spouses of cousins, of Jasaw Chan K’awiil I. The skeletal material from Gp. 7F-1 affords further hints of ties to rulers of Tikal. Six individuals were of greater than average stature: those from Bu. 134, 140, 159, 160, 190, and 191; only two were of less-than-average stature (see forthcoming TR. 30, in the interim Haviland and Moholy-Nagy 1992:56–57). The men in Bu. 134, 140, 159, 160, and 190 were close to, or above the mean for their time in relationship to the stature of chamber burial principals. Furthermore, the individuals in Bu. 132, 162, and 191 all display septal apertures, which are most common in skeletons from both the North and Central Acropolis, and least common in skeletons from small domestic groups. This trait may have a genetic underpinning (Spence 1974), and so constitutes another strong link with the aristocracy of Tikal (TR. 30). At this point, a return to the subject of Bu. 134 is in order. This has been interpreted as a burial of special significance associated with Str. 7F-30. Because it is so much simpler than 160, which preceded it, and 140, which succeeded it, might suggest a break in the continuity of occupation. There is reason to doubt that this was the case, though, for four reasons: (1) there is the apparent continuity from Bu. 160 to 150 and the others already discussed; (2) Bu. 134 was placed on the Bu. 160 axis, even though the centerline of Plat. 7F-3, in which the interment was made, was positioned farther S; (3) as noted in the discussion of Bu. 162, there seems to be continuity between it and Bu. 134 in the way the body was treated; (4) there is another possible explanation for the simplicity of Bu. 134. As proposed in its discussion, the man in this grave may have been a battle casualty. Alternatively, Wak Chan

K’awiil, angry at having been kept from power so long by his sister, may have disposed of her son in revenge. In any event, Bu. 134 is the only one known from Gp. 7F-1 that may date from the reign of Wak Chan K’awiil, although it could date to the time of that king’s death or very shortly after. It is intriguing to note that the next two burials in Str. 7F-30 (Table 3.3) all seem to fall within the reign of the 22nd king of Tikal, Animal Skull. Now recognized as descended from a patriline other than Wak Chan K’awiil’s (Martin 2003:25), he may not have felt threatened by the descendants of Lady of Tikal, whose fortunes seem to have been improving since their low point following their loss of power. To pursue this speculation further, no burials are known from Gp. 7F-1 until about the time of Jasaw Chan K’awiil’s accession as 26th ruler, a period of some three or four generations (three kings ruled successively over this period, the last being Jasaw Chan K’awiil’s father). There is then a cluster of burials during Jasaw’s reign, followed by another hiatus spanning four generations or so until the last, Bu. 1. This pattern is not easily explained; as a guess, it may be that the men were accepted back into the royal court and were accorded burial elsewhere, bearing in mind that all but the first two of this last group of interments in Gp. 7F-1 were either women or subadults, rather than adult men. The men, moreover, are presumed to have been relatives, even if distant, of the Late Classic kings. When all is said and done, there is no conclusive proof for any of this, no matter how appealing the scenario.

Provisional Conclusions From the preceding, the following conclusions seem warranted (all will receive further examination in the concluding section of this report): (1) The interments of Gp. 7F-1 can be accepted as residential burials. Burials 2, 3, and 192 almost surely, and 4 and 194 probably, may be considered household burials; Bu. 1, 132, 140, 150, 159, 160, 190, 191, and 193 almost surely, and 134 and 162 probably, may be considered residential burials of special significance. (2) Almost as firm as the first conclusion is that those individuals placed in all but Bu. 2, 3, 4, and 194 ranked relatively high in Tikal society. By contrast, those in Bu. 2, 3, 4, and 194 appear to have ranked low. Possibly, the latter were members of a family or families that provided servants or retainers for those who lived in Gp. 7F-1. (3) There is good reason to conclude that “New Gp. 7F-1” was occupied from first to last by descendants of its founders, who entombed the man in Bu. 160, and their spouses. If the founders included Lady of Tikal, then the occupants of the group were descendants of Early Classic rulers of Tikal.

68

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

(4) On a more speculative level, the following arguments have been presented. The first burial of those discussed here was that of the 19th ruler of Tikal, who, for whatever reason, was not allowed to be buried where kings were normally interred. Yet, having been a ruler, he was entitled to a royal burial, even though not in the traditional place. Not long afterward, his co-ruler, a woman of royal descent, died (probably murdered) and was buried not far from her partner. Some of her descendants continued to live in Gp. 7F-1 until the very last days of Tikal, after 10.2.0.0.0. After their exclusion from the seat

of power, surviving members of this family seem to have been “on the outs” with the royal court, until their fortunes picked up following the accession of Animal Skull. With his succession, the men may once again have been able to participate in affairs of the royal court, until Terminal Classic times. Although this scenario makes considerable sense in terms of the burial evidence alone, it cannot be considered as a reasonably secure reconstruction of events until other lines of evidence have been considered, as will be done in the concluding section of this report.

IV

Caches and Problematical Deposits

Preliminary Comments Thirteen special deposits other than burials were encountered in Gp. 7F-1, five of which qualify unequivocally as caches, while the significance of the others is less obvious. Accordingly, the latter were assigned to the category of “problematical deposit,” or PD. (see TR. 19:154). Two of the caches (1 and 2) were described in TR. 2, while PD. 37 and 66 were touched upon, without being formally defined or described (TR. 2:32–34). Here, Ca. 1 and 2 are reexamined in light of new data, and all other offerings and problematical deposits are presented for the first time. In the case of the latter, particular attention is paid to purpose. Table 4.1 lists proveniences of all caches and problematical deposits. Following their description, arguments are presented that each resulted from ceremonial and other activities carried out by people to whom Gp. 7F-1 was home, and who may have been related to some of the rulers of Tikal. For full comparison of these caches and problematical deposits with all others from Tikal, see forthcoming TR. 35; data on materials from them appear in TR. 25A, 27A, and 29.

Description Cache 1 LOCATION: Plat. 7F-1: off-center below site of St. 23 in partial stone-lined repository (see TR. 2:44 and fig. 3). 3A/21.

CONTENT AND ARRANGEMENT: Included in the cache were the following: 9 eccentric obsidians (TR. 2:fig. 11 and TR. 27A:fig. 22e); 8 chert eccentrics (TR. 2:fig. 12 and TR. 27A:fig. 4h,i); 9 unworked marine shells (Arca zebra or imbricata, Noetia ponderosa, Chione cancellata, Dinocardium robustum, 4 Plicatula sp. and Ostrea sp., possible Balanus sp.; cf. TR. 27A:fig. 170–178, specifically fig. 174d); 1 Spondylus mosaic element (ibid., fig. 181c); 2 fragmentary pyrite mosaic(?) elements (ibid., fig. 76g3); 6 specular hematite mosaic elements (ibid., fig. 76a2); 5 jade mosaic elements (ibid., fig. 76a1); 1 worked jade chunk (ibid., fig. 132j); 39 small jade fragments (cf. ibid., fig. 136) and 1 facially polished fragment (ibid., fig. 132j); 1 possible shell mosaic element (ibid., fig. 76a4). Arranged as noted in TR. 2:44. DISCUSSION: An extensive discussion of this cache by Coe and Broman is included in TR. 2 (pp. 36, 38, 39, 44–45); they considered it to be associated with the resetting of St. 23. However, Coe (pers. comm., 1991) had second thoughts, suggesting that the association of cache and monument was coincidental. In TR. 14 (p. 296), he notes a “total lack of evidence for placement of caches, either reused or newly assembled, with secondarily installed stelae.” Both cache and monument were in alignment with the burial axis of Str. 7F-30, but it may have been pure chance that the stela happened to be positioned above the cache. There is merit to this suggestion, as Ca. 1 is now known to be more or less typical of a Yikel Offertory Assemblage (TR. 27A:20). Yikel caches generally date from late Early Classic through Intermediate Classic times, but since this one is early Yikel, it probably predates Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-11st, dated by Late Classic Bu. 190 and 191. This is the

70

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 4.1 Location and Significance of Caches and Problematical Deposits from Group 7F-1 Nature of Deposit

Location Str. 7F-29

Ceremonial deposits

Domestic offering and /or habitation debris

Str. 7F-30

Plat. 7F-1

Plat. 7F-3

DISCUSSION: Ca. 161 Ca. 162 PD. 98 PD. 100 PD. 103

Ca. 1 Ca. 2

Ca. 207

PD. 166 PD. 167 PD. 37 PD. 66 PD. 233

Redeposited material

TR. 27A:fig. 170–178, specifically fig. 174f); 2 jade chips and an obsidian chip. Arranged as reported in TR. 2:45–46. On the basis of Coe and Broman’s discussion (TR. 2:46), Ca. 2 was probably placed at the time of construction of Plat. 7F-1-1st-C:Fl. 1. Coe (TR. 35) assigns it on a material basis to the Zay Offertory Assemblage, which is essentially contemporaneous with Intermediate Classic Ik ceramics. A date early in Late Classic times is acceptable (TR. 27A:20), however, which seems to be when Fl. 1 was laid. SEQUENTIAL POSITION:

floor thought to be associated with the resetting of the monument (see its discussion in part VI). Coe and Broman noted the possibility that Ca. 1 and Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-2nd were coeval, observing “the top of the cist was about 5 cm. below projected Fl. 2” (TR. 2:39). This is our Fl. 1 of 2nd, dated by Bu. 140 in Str. 7F-30 to earlier in Intermediate Classic times. Coe and Broman (TR. 2:39, 45) cite evidence that the deposit was disturbed when Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-1st was laid, accounting for one or two eccentrics found nearby. Thus, the position of the monument above the cache may not be accidental after all. If the cache was disturbed in preparation for laying Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1, then those who reset the stela would have known of its existence. SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Plat. 7F-1:TS. 15 (Table 2.9), early in Intermediate Classic times, disturbed early in Late Classic times when Plat. 7F-1:Fl. 1 of 2nd was laid (TS. 7). Yikel Offertory Assemblage.

Cache 2 LOCATION: Plat. 7F-1, intruded through Fl. 1 of 2nd-D (see TR. 2:fig. 2 and 3). 3A/28. CONTENT AND ARRANGEMENT: The cache contained: 19 unworked marine shells (3 Arca zebra, Vermicularia spirata, Trachycardium isocardia, Dinocardium robustum, 2 Glycymeris sp., Cardita sp., paired immature Cardita sp., 4 Crepidula sp., 5 Balanus sp.; cf.

Plat. 7F-1:TS. 7 (Table 2.9). Zay Offertory Assemblage, early Late Classic.

Cache 161 LOCATION: Str. 7F-30, beneath the stairs of 3rd, 4.60 m directly W of Bu. 132 (see Fig. 7 and 10). 3B/7. CONTENT AND ARRANGEMENT: An Ucum Unslipped, straight-neck miniature jar, and fitted lid (TR. 25A:fig. 110b) was placed with small stones around it in structure fill directly beneath the lowest surviving step of Str. 7F-30:U. 27. Inside were the following: 3 unworked shells (Murex recurvirostris), Cerithium sp., Chione sp. (cf. TR. 27A:fig. 170–178, specifically fig. 171h); 2 examples of Vermetidae (cf. ibid., fig. 179j,k), and 1 piece of coralline algae (cf. ibid., fig. 179l, 180d); 134 central and 24 terminal fish vertebrae (cf. ibid., fig. 180c); 32 marine materials, including stingray scutes, and ca. 10 Spondylus chips; 3 unmodified stingray spines; an imitation stingray spine (ibid., fig. 185c6); 5 incised obsidians (ibid., fig. 49e). Unknown is the precise arrangement of these materials within the container. DISCUSSION: The fill in which this offering was concealed appears to be the same as that around Bu. 132 and over which U. 26 (a floor for Str. 7F-30-3rd) was laid. For reasons given in the discussion of 7F-30, U. 27 is also thought to have been built as part of 3rd, but it could have been constructed for 2nd. If the former, the cache should be

CACHES AND PROBLEMATICAL DEPOSITS

contemporary with Bu. 132, which has an initial relationship to 3rd. If the latter, then Ca. 161 was intruded into the fill for Str. 7F-30-3rd; otherwise, it probably would have been disturbed in the construction of U. 27. The reason for this is that the underside of the U. 27 stair block was in contact with the top of the cache, which workmen ripping out the front of 7F-30-3rd (necessary had U. 27 been built for 2nd) almost surely would have come upon. No visible evidence for intrusion was seen, and so the offering is interpreted as initial to Str. 7F-30-3rd. Coe (TR. 35) assigned this cache to a generalized Uz Offertory Assemblage, specifically Uz General (TR. 27A:20), which is essentially contemporaneous with Ik and Imix ceramics (TR. 14:chart 1). Consistent is the dating for Bu. 132 and Str. 7F-30-3rd; another indirect link with Bu. 132 is suggested by two of the incised obsidians that portray the seven and nine prefixed deities (ibid., fig. 57e1, 2), one of which (ibid., fig. 57n) also appears on the cache vessel cover from Bu. 132. Interestingly, the other deity (ibid., fig. 57r) appears on a wooden vessel from Bu. 160, and the two together on St. 2 (ibid., fig. 57c1, 2). These are the only examples known from Tikal. Although chert eccentrics are sometimes found in Uz caches, they are absent from Ca. 161. Eccentrics were, however, present in the cache vessel from Bu. 132, but are of Class EF-3, rather than Class EF-2 or 1B, which are most typical of Uz. This discrepancy in cache material parallels that seen between Bu. 160 and Ca. 207 (see their discussion in part III). The interpretation of Ca. 161 as initial to 7F-30-3rd is consistent with evidence for ritual activity associated with construction of 4th (Ca. 162) and 2nd (PD. 98 and 103). Cache 161 is the only deposit that could possibly represent similar activity connected with construction of 3rd. Worth noting is that Ca. 161 was not placed on the centerline of Str. 7F-30-3rd (which remained the same as for 4th); instead, it adhered to the same axis on which the earlier Ca. 162 was placed (see discussion of Ca. 162). SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Intermediate Classic Str. 7F-30:TS. 11 (Table 2.2), Uz (General) Offertory Assemblage.

Cache 162 LOCATION: Str. 7F-30, beneath the top step of 4th, 2.20 m directly W of Bu. 140. 3B/10; for plan and section, see Fig. 6 and 10. CONTENT AND ARRANGEMENT: The following were all placed together in the fill of Str. 7F-30-4th, 0.12 m beneath U. 21 (the uppermost step

71

of that structure): 10 jade chips (cf. TR. 27A:fig. 136); 8 unmodified marine shells (Arca imbricata, Vermicularia spirata, Ostrea sp.); 5 Brachidontes sp. (cf. ibid., fig. 170–178); and 1 piece of coralline algae (cf. ibid., fig. 179q,r). DISCUSSION: The sequential position of this cache is clear: it was sealed by Str. 7F-30:U. 21, with U. 22 behind it. The later intrusive cut into the stairway for placement of Bu. 132 barely missed disturbing the cache, but did stop 0.10 m short of it. Hence, the offering must have an initial relationship to Str. 7F-30-4th, which is dated by early Ik ceramics in its fill as well as in Bu. 140 (also seen as initial to 4th). Consistent is Coe’s assignment of Ca. 162 to the Zay Offertory Assemblage (TR. 35), which is contemporaneous with late Manik, Ik, and late Imix (TR. 27A:20) pottery. The position of Ca. 162 relative to the centerline of Str. 7F-30 requires special notice; it is considerably N of the front-rear axis of 4th, but on that of 5th (the same one on which the earlier important Bu. 160 was placed). Hence, in spite of a southward shift of the centerline of the building, the cache (with Bu. 140) adhered to the old Bu. 160 axis. SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Str. 7F-30:TS. 13 (Table 2.2). Zay Offertory Assemblage, early Intermediate Classic.

Cache 207 LOCATION: Plat. 7F-3, in the fill of Plat. 7F-3-2nd:CS. 2 and sealed by its floor, U. 5. 3B/22; for plan, see Fig. 4. CONTENT AND ARRANGEMENT: This offering was concealed in a pit in fill for Plat. 7F-3-2nd without any stones to define a repository. Placed over the pit, however, was a flat stone, roughly triangular in shape, measuring 0.20 m by 0.27 m and 0.15 m thick at its N edge, 0.08 m thick at its S edge. The pit itself was 0.30 m in diameter, 0.10 m in depth. The cache was discovered when the pick of a workman in the S tunnel (Fig. 4) struck its S edge from below. Thirty objects proceeded to pour from the cache: 5 chert eccentrics (TR. 27A:fig. 6k,l); 9 obsidian eccentrics (ibid., fig. 21m, also fig. 35b); 5 worked jade objects (1 adorno illustrated in TR. 27A:fig. 132g); 2 shell and jade possible mosaic items (ibid., fig. 72e); 12 unworked marine shells (Dinocardium robustum, Trachycardium isocardia, 1 paired Spondylus sp., 4 Arca imbricata, Chama sp., Ostrea sp., Crepidula aculeate, a possible Cardita sp. fragment, Veneridae; cf. ibid., fig. 170–178); 2

72

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

large pieces of Bryozoa (cf. ibid., fig. 179g–i); and 1 sand dollar (ibid., fig. 180a). A chert chip was in one of the Cardium shells, and 2 jade chips were in another shell. Those objects that remained in the cache were carefully removed in the field and placed in numbered bags, but unfortunately not all of the numbers were recorded in the lab when they were catalogued. Hence, the following description is all that is possible. Directly beneath the stone cover, and extending 0.15 m N of it, was one of the chert eccentrics, while immediately beneath was a second. Right under the SW corner of the stone was one of the eccentric obsidians, beneath which (and under the S side of the stone) was one piece of Bryozoa. The second was N of this, directly under the stone; beneath both was a third chert eccentric, E of which (with its end overlapping the second chert eccentric) was another of the obsidians. North of the second chert and the obsidian beneath the stone and the S edge of the sand dollar was a fourth chert (the sand dollar had its N edge 4 cm beneath the stone cover). Also beneath the Bryozoa was a pointed obsidian eccentric (ibid., fig. 21m13), pointing S, while beneath the second chert eccentric was another obsidian. A shell and one other now-unknown object were found, one on the N end of the pointed obsidian eccentric and one (the shell) under the second piece of Bryozoa extending E and slightly N of it. DISCUSSION: When this offering was first discovered, it looked as though it must have been placed right after Bu. 190. Careful probing of the area, however, clearly established that it was sealed by Plat. 7F-3:U. 5 and the foundation (U. 4) beneath that pavement. Much later, the grave dug for Bu. 190 barely missed disturbing the cache, although this is not certain. Because the chert eccentrics do not constitute a complete set, gravediggers may have nicked the edge of the cache. What is clear is that Ca. 207 was placed in the fill of Plat. 7F-3-2nd:CS. 2 just before U. 4 (which marks the end of CS. 2) was laid over the fill. There is absolutely no question about this. As noted in the discussion of Plat. 7F-3, CS. 2 of 2nd followed CS. 3, but preceded CS. 2 of Str. 7F-305th. Construction of 5th, in turn, was inaugurated by Bu. 160, thought to date ca. 9.4.13.0.0 (AD 527). Though Ca. 207 was placed later in the construction of Str. 7F-30-5th (and its related Plat. 7F-3-2nd) than Bu. 160, this obviously could not have been very much later. The bulk of the work on the substructure of Str. 7F-30-5th was done, but a finished stairway, floor, and building had yet to be provided. This brings us to a discrepancy—Bu. 160 contained within it chert and obsidian eccentrics of types common to Muul Offertory Assemblages (TR. 35); there is nothing peculiar about them. Cache 207, on the other hand,

is assigned to the Yikel Offertory Assemblage. Muul assemblages normally predate 9.4.0.0.0 (AD 514) at Tikal, whereas a date of 9.4.13.0.0 seems early (though not impossible) for Ca. 207 (W. Coe, pers. comm.). How, then, can these facts be reconciled with an apparent contemporaneity, ca. 9.4.13.0.0, between Bu. 160 and Ca. 207? Actually, there does appear to have been overlap of Muul and Yikel caches in the late Early Classic period (TR. 14:chart 1), and a mix of the two is seen in late Early Classic Str. 5D-22-1st (TR. 14:409–411). Looking at the eccentrics, those in Ca. 207 could date as early as 9.2.0.0.0 (TR. 27A:22, 24). Those in the burial may reflect a conservatism, a kind of reverence for the past, which did not affect contemporary offertory patterns. If (as argued in part III) the man in Bu. 160 was a ruler of Tikal, “old style” eccentrics, such as were used in caches in his and his predecessors’ reigns, may have been appropriate for his “tomb,” in spite of their becoming passé in secreted offerings by that time. The location of Ca. 207 calls for special comment. Platform 7F-3 essentially was an integral part of Str. 7F30, in front of which it formed a terrace. The important axis of Str. 7F-30 was always the E-W one on which Bu. 160 was placed, and to which all subsequent burials in the structure were oriented (as was one—Bu. 134—that was later placed in Plat. 7F-3). In spite of the fact that all other caches in direct association with Str. 7F-30, as well as all problematical deposits in similar association, were also placed on that axis, Ca. 207 was about 3.00 m S of it. Presumably, the Maya had a specific reason for this; possibly, it had to do with Bu. 162. Elsewhere (in the discussions of Plat. 7F-3 and Bu. 162), it was pointed out that Plat. 7F-3 extended S of Str. 7F-30, and that its centerline must have been S of that for Str. 7F-30. Given the placement of all other known and suspected offerings (Ca. 2 excepted) directly associated with Str. 7F-30 on the E-W axis established for 7F-305th (with which Plat. 7F-3 in both of its manifestations was associated), it is likely that Ca. 207 was placed on the E-W axis of Plat. 7F-3-2nd. If so, then Plat. 7F-3-2nd extended just far enough S to encompass Bu. 162 beneath it. As noted in the discussion of that inhumation, there are reasons to suppose that the woman interred was someone special; moreover, the burial has an initial relationship to Plat. 7F-3-2nd. It seems likely, then, that this platform was deliberately constructed so as to position Bu. 162 beneath its SW corner. This meant that its centerline was S of that for Str. 7F-30-5th, which is why the cached offering was placed where it was, rather than on the axis for Bu. 160. SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Plat. 7F-3:TS. 5 (Table 2.11), late in Early Classic times. Yikel Offertory Assemblage.

CACHES AND PROBLEMATICAL DEPOSITS

Problematical Deposit 37 LOCATION: Plat. 7F-1, near the top of the compact, limestone block fill for 2nd-D, E of Str. 7F-Sub.1 (precise position unknown). 3A/included in Lots 5 and 7. CONTENT AND ARRANGEMENT: The following materials were crammed into two pockets of loose dark soil (TR. 2:32): from 3A/5, one obsidian scraper on a flake (TR. 27A:fig. 68n), 46 obsidian prismatic blades, 36 obsidian flakes, and 25 chert flakes; from 3A/7, 346 obsidian prismatic blade fragments (one of them green), 185 obsidian flakes, 7 obsidian core fragments, and 87 chert flakes. DISCUSSION: Although the sequential position of this deposit is clear (Plat. 7F-1:TS. 15), its purpose is not. The abundance of obsidian recalls PD. 217 in Gp. 4F-2 (TR. 19:158–159) that almost surely was debris from an obsidian workshop. This could be the same, but since it was part of the fill for Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D, it is redeposited from somewhere else. There are no in situ deposits, nor any other evidence, that the occupants of “New Gp. 7F-1” ever specialized in obsidian working (see part V). It is possible, though, that obsidian work took place at this locus before “New Gp. 7F-1” came into being with construction of Str. 7F-305th. The evidence for this is extremely slim and indirect: first, the only other green obsidian from Gp. 7F-1 was a prismatic blade fragment from the fill of Str. 7F-Sub.1, which hints at an original association between PD. 37 and the earliest occupation at this locus (“Old Gp. 7F1”); second, Str. 7F-Sub.2 greatly resembles a structure (4F-42) in Gp. 4F-2 that was located right behind a house (TR. 19:fig. 39a,b) occupied by obsidian workers (ibid., p. 182); finally, if those who occupied this locus prior to construction of “New Gp. 7F-1” were obsidian workers, workshop debris would have been readily available to use in later fills. Moholy-Nagy has offered an alternative interpretation (pers. comm.). This is that PD. 37 is ceremonial in nature, and in support, she notes that in two known obsidian workshops at Tikal, there is little or no chert, whereas the Maya seem to prefer to associate the two substances in ceremonial deposits (much as they liked to associate Spondylus and jade, as in Bu. 160). She also notes the lack of green obsidian in the two known obsidian workshops. Green obsidian artifacts, she believes, were imported ready-made, rather than being manufactured locally. Furthermore, green and gray obsidian, with chert, is a combination seen in many Early Classic ceremonial

73

deposits. Finally, she notes a piece of carved limestone in 3A/5, which obviously is not obsidian workshop debris, and which she would include in PD. 37. Of the two possibilities, the idea of a redeposited obsidian workshop is favored here, for the reasons already given and because Moholy-Nagy’s points can be explained in a manner consistent with the hypothesis. To take the first point, obsidian-workshop debris itself may not include chert, but presumably those who worked obsidian, like most other householders (TR. 19:177–178 and TR. 20B:112), did some chert work. For example, a known obsidian workshop is part of Str. 4F-15, debris from which forms the basis of PD. 217, in which there is no chert (TR. 19:158). Yet, other occupation deposits from 4F15 produced 28 chert cores, 355 unused chert flakes, 39 chert nodules, and 9 hammer stones (TR. 19:table 119, 122). Clearly, the obsidian workers who lived in 4F-15 did some chert knapping as well; they just did not do it in exactly the same place. It is easy to imagine that, had this debris from 4F-15 been redeposited, rather than left in situ, some chert debris probably would have gotten mixed with the obsidian. Therefore, the chert in PD. 37 could be household debris that got mixed with debitage from an obsidian workshop at the time of redeposition. The green obsidian prismatic blade could be included for the same reason. Finally, the piece of carved limestone is a piece of MS. 133 (discussed in part VI, below), other pieces of which occur elsewhere in the fill of Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D. The association of this fragment with PD. 37, therefore, seems coincidental. In sum, this deposit may be redeposited debris from an obsidian workshop. The ultimate source of the material is unknown, but it may be from the earliest occupation of this locus (“Old Gp. 7F-1”). SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Plat. 7F-1:TS. 15 (Table 2.9), Intermediate Classic; redeposited from elsewhere.

Problematical Deposit 66 LOCATION: Plat. 7F-1: in fill of 2nd-D between Str. 7F-30 and Sub.1, unsealed, and possibly including some fill for Plat. 7F-1-1st-C. 3A/included in Lots 7, 8, 19, and 21 (TR. 27A:fig. 174d). CONTENT AND ARRANGEMENT: Found widely distributed in the fill (along with numerous other sherds and artifacts) were (from 3A/7) 8 unworked marine shells, including 3 Arca zebra, Anadara transversa, Ostrea sp., Crepidula fornicata, Trachycardium iso-

74

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

cardia, Vermicularia spirata (TR. 27A:fig. 170f), 1 chert eccentric (ibid., fig. 12v), and 1 obsidian eccentric (ibid., fig. 32d), 2 obsidian “lancet” prismatic blades (ibid., fig. 62g1, 2); from 3A/8, 2 obsidian prismatic blades, 1 chert flake; from 3A/19, Trachycardium isocardia shell, 1 jade bead fragment (ibid., fig. 126c), 1 Spondylus shell figurine (cf. TR. 27A:fig. 160); from 3A/21, Noetia ponderosa shell (cf. TR. 27A:fig. 174d). These were not purposefully arranged. DISCUSSION: The above material is part of that discussed by Coe and Broman (TR. 2: 32–34); it is selected for special attention here because it consists of known or possible cache items. This and the fact that the objects were widely scattered, rather than placed together in a purposeful manner, indicate ancient disturbance of a cache or caches, with subsequent redeposition when Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D was constructed (although there may be contamination from later fill). The ultimate source of the material is unknown; all in situ caches from Gp. 7F-1 are located in, or in front of, Str. 7F-30 (as far W as Str. 7F-Sub.1). When Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D was constructed, the building and part of the floor of Str. 7F-30-5th were demolished, with much of the painted stucco and perhaps masonry from the building apparently winding up in the fill from which PD. 66 comes. Large sections of the floors of Plat. 7F-3 and Str. 7F-Sub.1 were torn up at the same time. Caches are likely to have been encountered at any of these loci, which may be why none are known for Str. 7F-30-5th and Plat. 7F-3-1st (all other important modifications of these constructions are associated with initial ceremonial offerings). SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Plat. 7F-1:TS. 15 (Table 2.9), redeposited in Intermediate Classic times from earlier contexts.

Problematical Deposit 98 LOCATION: Found in Str. 7F-30, directly above Bu. 132 (Fig. 8 and 10), on the axis on which all caches and burials were placed. The deposit intruded slightly into 7F-30:U. 26, and was probably covered by fill for the upper stairs of 7F-302nd. 3B/3. CONTENT AND ARRANGEMENT: The following artifacts were found mixed together with ash and charcoal at the level of Str. 7F-30:U. 22 and 26, which formed the floor for 3rd: a Saxche Orange Polychrome round-side bowl, broken into several pieces (TR.

25A:fig. 142b), 18 censer fragments (to be illustrated in TR. 29), and a used chert flake. The entire deposit was no more than 0.23 m deep, and was capped by a thin stratum of lime. DISCUSSION: A first glance at Fig. 10 might suggest this deposit followed intrusion of Bu. 132 into fill beneath Str. 7F-30:U. 26, but for reasons discussed in connection with that interment, it cannot have been so. Rather, U. 26 sealed the fill, which was placed after the interment of Bu. 132. For reasons discussed in connection with Str. 7F-30 (in part II), U. 26 must have run without break up to U. 22, and together, these served as the substructure floor for 7F-30-3rd. Hence, PD. 98 must postdate use of this floor. Ultimately, an upper stairway for 7F-30-2nd was built at this location, and PD. 98 almost surely is initial to 2nd. A problem with this interpretation is the presence of some sherds from an Orange Polychrome bowl in 3B/4, the fill above Bu. 132. This discrepancy is easily accounted for, however, by the difficulty of clearly separating, at the time of excavation, the problematical deposit material from that in the top of the fill into which it was intruded. A minor digging error in the field could easily have left a few bits of material from the very bottom of the deposit in the very top of the underlying fill. Problematical Deposit 98 may not be complete in and of itself. East of it, the surviving floor for 7F-30-3rd (U. 22) was very heavily burned, up to PD. 103. This, like PD. 98, had a high ash and charcoal content and contained censer fragments; it also clearly had an initial relationship to 7F-30-2nd. Taken together, the two deposits resemble PD. 171 and 270 that Coe (TR. 14:933) sees as resulting from ceremonies to emphasize major stages in construction. In the same vein, most stages of Str. 5D-33-1st show burning, with comparable cases in Str. 5D-22-1st and 3rd as well as 26-1st (TR. 14:937). In the case of Str. 7F-30, implied is a single important ritual event connected with construction of 2nd (probably similar to those which occurred between stages of construction of Str. 5D-33-1st; see TR. 14:529–533, 545, and 549), just as ceremonial activity connected with construction of the preceding 3rd and 4th resulted in placement of Ca. 161 and 162, on the same axis where PD. 98 and 103 were later positioned. Given this, and lack of a cache initial to (and on the axis of) 2nd, PD. 98 and 102 together should probably be regarded broadly as the “cache” for 2nd. There is further discussion of this later in this section. SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Str. 7F-30:TS. 9 (Table 2.2), a time of transition from the Intermediate to Late Classic periods.

CACHES AND PROBLEMATICAL DEPOSITS

Problematical Deposit 100 LOCATION: Str. 7F-30, on the tread of the second step of U. 27 (Fig. 9), on the axis on which all caches and burials in this structure were placed. Almost surely, it was covered by the easternmost fill of Str. 7F-30:U. 34. 3A/5; for plan, see Fig. 10. CONTENT AND ARRANGEMENT: This deposit consisted of six censer fragments (TR. 2:fig. 13; to be illustrated in TR. 29) all together on the step, with fragments of a second censer scattered in the fill of U. 34 (see below Table 5.1:LG. 5 of Str. 7F-30). DISCUSSION: Stratigraphy indicates that a single censer, either whole or broken, was left on the step for Str. 7F-30 to be covered by the fill of U. 34; the deposit therefore has an initial relationship to Str. 7F-30-1st-A. Implied is ritual activity connected with construction that modified Str. 7F30 for the last time, recalling the earlier PD. 98 and 103, which were placed on the same axis, and in which censers were also prominent. Just as these two may be broadly regarded as the “cache” for 7F-30-2nd, so may PD. 100 be regarded as the “cache” for 1st-A. The censer material, which relates to the Tulix, or transition from the Tulix to Pach Complex, is of potential importance in dating the construction of 7F-30-1st-A. SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Str. 7F-30:TS. 3 (Table 2.2), in Terminal Classic times.

Problematical Deposit 103 LOCATION: Located in Str. 7F-30, 4.20 m E of PD. 98 (Fig. 8), just E of the cut through Str. 7F-30:U. 22 that was made for the placement of Bu. 150 (see Fig. 10). It was covered by fill for CS. 3. 3B/16. CONTENT AND ARRANGEMENT: Several censer fragments were mixed randomly together with ash and charcoal on top of fill for 7F-30-4th at the elevation of U. 22 (here destroyed), including two of a probable censer of cache-type ware (to be illustrated in TR. 29). Entire deposit formed a layer no more than 8 cm thick. DISCUSSION: Clearly postdating use of U. 22, a floor that served

75

both Str. 7F-30-4th and 3rd, this deposit was covered by fill for 2nd. Therefore, it must have an initial relationship to Str. 7F-30-2nd. As discussed in connection with PD. 98, both it and 103 almost surely resulted from a single ritual act, and may be regarded in a broad sense as the “cache” for 2nd. This interpretation is not ruled out by the presence of an Ik vessel in PD. 98 and Tulix (Imix contemporary) censers in PD. 103, for both Ik and Imix vessels were present in Bu. 150 that, like these deposits, has an initial relationship to 2nd. SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Str. 7F-30:TS. 9 (Table 2.2), at the very start of Late Classic times.

Problematical Deposit 166 LOCATION: Str. 7F-29:Rm. 5, in a hole through Fl. 1 of 1st against the N wall (Fig. 2). 3E/24. CONTENT AND ARRANGEMENT: Four pounds and five ounces of large sherds from a number of late Imix or Eznab pottery vessels were packed together in a hole 0.14 m deep and 0.35 m in diameter in the floor of Rm. 5. At first they were thought to represent major portions of circa 2 vessels, but as it turned out, several vessels are represented, nor is there the major portion of any single vessel. DISCUSSION: The sequential position of this deposit is clear: the hole was intruded into the floor for Str. 7F-29-1st-A. This could have been done at any time while that structure was in use, but is most likely to have been done at the time of abandonment (it is hard to envision continued use of a room with a hole in its floor). The purpose of the deposit is more of a problem; the sherds are just like those that were strewn around the floors of the rooms when Str. 7F-29 was finally abandoned (see discussion in part V, below). The content of the problematic deposit looks very much like occupation debris, and the arrangement of sherds is just like those in domestic middens. These facts combine with the sequential position of the deposit to suggest that the sherds were part of the living trash that was left behind by the last occupants of 7F-29. The only problem is: why should they have been placed in a hole in the floor? Two possible solutions come to mind, the first being that the hole was made for some purpose quite unrelated to the sherds. In support of this is the presence of another, though smaller hole in the floor (Fig. 2:U. 8). Eventually, occupation de-

76

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

bris from the room floor found its way, purposely or accidentally, into the hole. The second possibility is that PD. 166 represents some kind of offering of utilitarian items of the sort described for residences in TR. 19 (p. 160) and 20B (pp. 65–66). SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Str. 7F-29:TS. 2 (Table 2.1), in Terminal Classic times.

Problematical Deposit 167 LOCATION: Str. 7F-29, on the floor of Rm. 5. 3E/25. CONTENT AND ARRANGEMENT: This deposit contained sherds representing twothirds of a large Maax Red-striated jar (TR. 25A:fig. 148). These pieces were all bunched together in one place on the floor. DISCUSSION: The vessel is a monochrome red jar, even though the clay of this one fired to an orange color; brushing roughened its exterior, and burned areas are apparent on its base. Were it not a Manik-type utilitarian jar, or the major portion thereof, it would appear to have been left on the floor of Str. 7F-29-1st-A by those who made use of the structure, as part of habitation debris strewn around 1st-A when it was abandoned (see “Review of the Artifacts from Str. 7F-29” in part V, below). How a Manik vessel could have survived for some 300 years, however, to be discarded amongst Eznab pottery, is a mystery. As a guess, this could be some sort of terminal domestic offering. SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Str. 7F-29:TS. 2 (Table 2.1); Terminal Classic.

Problematical Deposit 233 LOCATION: Plat. 7F-1, in fill of Fl. 1 of 1st, S of Str. 7F-29. 3D/4. CONTENT AND ARRANGEMENT: Widely distributed in fill without purposeful arrangement were a mano fragment; a metate fragment; 3 unworked Arca zebra shells; 1 unworked Vermicularia spirata (cf. TR. 27A:fig. 170–178); coral (cf. ibid., fig. 179); a miniature, weathered cylinder and an Aguila Orange miniature cover (TR. 25A:fig. 155a); a figurine fragment; a censer fragment (to be illustrated in TR. 29); and 2 oz of late Manik sherds.

DISCUSSION: This problematical deposit was defined by the presence of cache material in what otherwise would have been regarded as a run-of-the-mill fill lot. Since the materials were widely scattered (as objects in fill usually are), rather than placed together in a purposeful manner, they were obviously redeposited from some earlier unknown context. Because all known undisturbed ceremonial deposits in Gp. 7F-1 were found in or in front of Str. 7F-30, and since both it and the plaza in front underwent numerous architectural alterations, often involving partial demolition of earlier architecture, the material in PD. 233 may be from a cache originally placed in or near Str. 7F-30. It may even have been redeposited more than once, for Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-1st was laid after the appearance of Imix ceramics, while the Manik vessel and sherds in 3D/4 date back to the earliest days of Gp. 7F-1. Possibly, the material came from fill of Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D, which also contained redeposited cache material (see PD. 66); when Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1 was laid, extensive portions of the floor for 2nd-D were destroyed right above the fill that contained PD. 66. Not all of the sherds and artifacts of 3D/4 are redeposited cache items. Some or all of the sherds, as well as the household items (the mano, metate, figurine, and censer fragment) probably relate to the other items in Plat. 7F-1:LG. 3b (see Table 5.1, below) and might be added to the totals for “other fill” in Table 5.4 and 5.5 (see below). SEQUENTIAL POSITION: Plat. 7F-1:TS. 7 (Table 2.9), redeposited in Late Classic times from an earlier context.

Discussion The various caches and problematical deposits just described are easily sorted into three categories: ceremonial deposits, domestic offerings and/or occupation debris, and redeposited material (Table 4.1). In the following section, the functional and social implications of these categories are discussed. Namely that Str. 7F-30 almost surely was used for ceremonial purposes, that some or all of the other structures (7F-29 in particular) may have been houses, and that those who lived here may have had ties to the ruling elite. A further possibility is that before “New Gp. 7F-1” was founded (at the time of Bu. 160), the locus may have been the site of an obsidian workshop.

Ceremonial Deposits All of the caches and three of the problematical deposits, located in, or in front of Str. 7F-30, fall into the

CACHES AND PROBLEMATICAL DEPOSITS

category of ceremonial deposits (Table 4.1). Five were initial to some version of 7F-30: Ca. 162 to 4th, Ca. 161 to 3rd, PD. 98 and 103 to 2nd, and PD. 100 to 1st-A. Although this seems to leave Str. 7F-30-5th, 1st-C, and 1st-B without apparent initial deposits, this was not necessarily the case. Construction of Plat. 7F-3-2nd was an integral part of Str. 7F-30-5th, allowing its initial deposit, Ca. 207, to be interpreted as the one for Str. 7F-30-5th. There is, though, another possibility: the cache of this structure may later have been disturbed and redeposited, with much of the building stucco, in fill for Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D (see discussion of PD. 66, and 233). The initial deposit for Str. 7F-30-1st-C could have been Ca. 2, while Str. 7F-30-1st-B involved so insignificant an alteration that ceremonial activity may not have been associated with it, or may have been so minor that it left no tangible remains. Whether or not Ca. 2 and 207 were specifically dedicatory to Str. 7F-30 in one of its manifestations, they seem to have been put in place when it was under construction or being renovated. Furthermore, as noted, Plat. 7F-3-2nd was an integral part of 7F-30-5th. So, dedicatory or not, Ca. 207 is clearly tied to that structure nonetheless. This leaves Ca. 2 as the only ritual deposit not clearly tied to 7F-30; yet, it was placed in the area in front of 7F-30, even though not on its axis. One other cache tied to Str. 7F-30, by virtue of its position in line with the other offerings and burials in that structure, is Ca. 1, contemporary with Ca. 162. Though the two are of different offertory assemblages (Yikel and Zay), such discrepancy is known from other situations (see discussion of Ca. 207). Of the eight deposits surely or probably initial to the various forms of Str. 7F-30, five are orthodox caches and three are not, but all resulted from ritual activities that took place at times of construction. Hence, in spite of the difference in form between the caches and problematical deposits, there does appear to have been a thread of continuity over time. Continuity is also implied by placement of all but Ca. 2 and 207 on the axis of Bu. 160, regardless of where the centerline of Str. 7F-30 fell at any particular time. It is interesting that the earlier deposits were caches and two of three later ones were not. This change in the form, but not necessarily the purpose, of rituals associated with the periodic rebuilding of Str. 7F-30 happened by the time of the materialization of 2nd, which is dated by Bu. 150 to the time of transition between Ik and Imix ceramics. This subject will be taken up again later in this discussion. This association of ceremonial deposits with Str. 7F30 almost surely indicates that it was not a house. Uz and Zay caches are known only from temples, and Yikel from temples or monuments (TR. 27A:20). Initial ceremonial deposits are unknown in houses at Tikal, with the ex-

77

ception of Str. 5D-46, which was the residence of Chak Tok Ich’aak I, 14th in the line of Tikal kings (Harrison 2003:178). Other offerings are known from some houses, but they are not at all like those here (for examples, see TR. 19:PD. 6, 46, 47, 210, 211, 215, and TR. 20A:PD. 108, 130, 131, 140, 217, 262, 263). This does not mean that other structures of Gp. 7F-1 might not have been dwellings, for none are associated with ceremonial deposits like those in or in front of Str. 7F-30. Furthermore, caches are known from nonresidential buildings located within residential groups (e.g., Ca. 85 and PD. 23, 24, and 25 in Gp. 4F-1 and PD. 99, 109, and 124 in Gp. 7C-1, 3F-3, and 5D1; see TR. 19 and 20B). Although these are not like the secreted offerings from Gp. 7F-1, a possible explanation for this discrepancy will be presented later in this section.

Domestic Offerings and/or Living Debris Two problematical deposits that seem to consist of occupation debris, and which were not axially placed, fall into this category (Table 4.1). Little need be added to their individual discussion, save to underscore that their presence in Str. 7F-29, along with the absence of ceremonial deposits like those associated with 7F-30, indicates that 7F-29 could have been a house.

Redeposited Material Three problematical deposits are placed in this category (Table 4.1), and again, little need be added to their individual discussion. Two seem to be cache material that once may have been associated with Str. 7F-30. The fill in which PD. 66 was found also included much painted stucco, probably from demolition of the building for Str. 7F-30-5th. Problematical Deposit 233 may have been redeposited from this fill, while PD. 37 could be workshop debris from an occupation prior to construction of “New Gp. 7F-1.”

Ties to the Ruling Aristocracy Two aspects of the ceremonial deposits are suggestive of ties to the rulers of Tikal, one being the conventional nature of the caches. Other Yikel, Uz, and Zay offerings, except for some of those that have been redeposited, are not known outside of major ceremonial precincts or places where the lords of Tikal may have lived. Caches are known from other parts of the site, but they are different, all of which suggests some sort of link between those responsible for the caches in Gp. 7F-1 and the ruling dynasty. In the discussion of the burials from Gp. 7F-1, the argument was made that “New Gp. 7F-1” was occupied by descendants of one of the Early Classic rulers of Tikal.

78

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

If this were so, then it is understandable that elite offertory practices were followed in Gp. 7F-1. A hint—it is no more than that—of ties to the rulers of Tikal consists of the seven and nine prefixed deities on the obsidians in Ca. 161. The only other depictions of these deities at Tikal outside of Gp. 7F-1 (where there are two others, in Bu. 160 and 132) are on St. 2, commissioned by one of the early kings of Tikal.

Changes in Offertory Practices Noteworthy is a change in practices that occurred by the time of construction of Str. 7F-30-2nd. It may be that this is no more than a time-related phenomenon, for Late Classic ceremonial deposits from the Great Plaza-North Acropolis show what may be a similar tendency (H. Moholy-Nagy, pers. comm.). Caches become less numerous, smaller, and include fewer valuable and exotic items than before. In fact, there is an upsurge in the number of cachelike deposits, the contents of which seem odd in terms of previous standards. In Gp. 7F-1 residents followed ceremonial practices comparable to those in epicentral Tikal. These practices were then dropped with construction of Str. 7F-30-2nd, as revealed by PD. 98 and 103. These deposits were made in a pause between CS. 4 and 3 of 30-2nd and bring to mind similar activity in the course of construction of Str. 5D-33-1st. Roughly coeval with 7F-30-

2nd (TR. 14:528), many of the pauses between construction stages of 5D-33-1st saw ceremonial activity, leaving in its wake charred surfaces (TR. 14:527, 529–533, and 937). Marked numbers of censer parts from fill of 33-1st are thought to be discarded from these interim rituals (ibid., 550, and see also p. 527). After their ritual of censers, fire, and smoke, occupants of Gp. 7F-1 reverted to a conventional cache (Ca. 2) for their next offering, but returned for their last known offering to censers and fire (PD. 100).

Provisional Conclusions The caches and problematical deposits just discussed offer support for the hypothesis that Gp. 7F-1 was residential, although Str. 7F-30 almost certainly served a ceremonial, rather than domiciliary, function. Those who lived in the group adhered to offertory practices typical of the high-status people whose rituals were carried out in the ceremonial areas of epicentral Tikal. It may be that the Gp. 7F-1 people were descendants of one of the Early Classic rulers of Tikal, in which case we might expect them to emulate the practices of the ruling class whenever Str. 7F-30 was altered. In addition to all this, there is some slim evidence that before “New Gp. 7F-1” came into being, its locus was the site of an obsidian workshop. Such a hypothesis, however, must be regarded as tentative.

V

Artifacts

Preliminary Comments The purpose of this section is twofold: to present a structure-by-structure review of the artifacts recovered from Gp. 7F-1 (excepting those from burials, caches, or problematical deposits), and to see what they indicate about the structures with which they were associated. To anticipate, it will be argued that following the death of the man in Bu. 160, “New Gp. 7F-1” is an example of the sort of residential group that included a ceremonial structure or structures on the E edge of a plaza (Plaza Plan 2; TR. 12:29 and TR. 21), and that its occupants were of upper-class status. As a corollary of this proposal, the occupants may have had links with the ruling dynasty of Tikal. The point of departure is analysis of the artifacts from the small residential groups reported in TR. 20B (see also TR. 19:161–178). This section begins with summary reviews of objects recovered from each of the structures of Gp. 7F-1. To assist with this, Tables 5.3 through 5.5 have been prepared, to which the reader should refer as the reviews proceed (see below; these are comparable to tables 117, 119, 120, 122, and 123 in TR. 19). Provenience data, with suboperation and lot numbers, are given in Table 5.1; Tables 5.2 and 5.11 (see below) provide references to illustrations of selected objects in TR. 27B. The summaries are organized to shed light on the question: what were the structures of Gp. 7F-1 used for? Each is, therefore, a provisional functional assessment, so far as is indicated by artifacts. On the basis of the analysis from TR. 20B, one would expect objects collected around houses to occur in some abundance, ideally in middenlike deposits that include ash, charcoal, and food debris (where there has been sufficient protection from the elements to ensure their preservation). Utilitarian pottery should be

well represented, as should basic household implements (for those found in every household, see Table 5.3). Along with these, some types commonly but not invariably present in houses may also be included (Table 5.4). Other objects found (Table 5.5) should by and large be compatible with domesticity, and should not include large quantities of specialized ceremonial items. Artifacts from the hypothetical ceremonial structures, by contrast, should not occur in middenlike deposits. Furthermore, decorated pottery appropriate for ritual use should predominate over utilitarian wares, basic and common household implements should not be much in evidence, and ceremonial items should be more prominent than in household trash. Following a structure-by-structure review, an attempt will be made to evaluate the social-class position of the residents of Gp. 7F-1, and their possible ties to the ruling dynasty. The criteria by which this evaluation is made are discussed at that time. The problems and assumptions involved in an artifact analysis such as this, with which the reader should be familiar, are discussed in TR. 19 (pp. 161–162) and 20B (pp. 67–68) and need not be repeated here. As in those reports, the focus here is on primary occupation debris, that is, material left in place where used or where discarded by those who made use of these structures. Fill material is not ignored, however, as much of it may be redeposited from earlier primary deposits in Gp. 7F-1. In addition, earliest fills may relate to the occupation of “Old Gp. 7F1,” and so are treated separately in order to see what they may indicate about this earliest occupation (see Tables 5.3–5.5:Str. 7F-Sub.2). As in earlier analyses (in TR. 19 and 20B) of artifacts from residential groups, there are differences in the samples available from the various structures. The reader should bear in mind that Str. 7F-29, 30, 31, 32, and 35

80

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 5.1 (Part 1) Group 7F-1: Lot Groups Feature Str. 7F-29 (Op. 3E)

Str. 7F-30 (Op. 3A,B)

Str. 7F-31 (Op. 3C)

Str. 7F-32 (Op. 3G)

Lot Group

Lot

Provenience

Ceramic Evaluation

la

4,26

Str. 7F-29-3rd, fill of CS. 3, sealed by U. 6

Late Manik

Ib

3,22

Str. 7F-29-3rd, fill of CS. 2, partially sealed byU. 2

Late Manik, some Ik and/ or Imix

Ic

5,15

Str. 7F-29-3rd, fill of CS. 2 and 3, sealed U. 2

Late Manik, 1 possible Ik

2

23

Str. 7F-29-2nd fill of CS. 1, sealed by U. 1

Manik

3a

2,7

Str. 7F-29-lst-B, fill of CS. 5, partially sealed

Manik, Ik, Imix

3b

6

Str. 7F-29-lst-B, fill of CS. 4, sealed

Manik, Ik possible, Imix

3c

1,12,18

Debris from collapse of building; unsealed fill of Str. 7F-29-lst-B:CS. 2, 3

Manik, Ik, Imix

4a

9

Occupation debris in Rm. 1

Eznab

4b

8

Occupation debris in Rm. 4

Eznab

4c

13,14,21

Occupation debris in Rm. 5

Unknown, possibly Eznab

4d

16

Occupation debris on floor outside doorway of Rm. 3

Ik and/ or Imix

4e

10,11

Occupation debris N of structure, mixed with fill

Manik, Imix, Eznab

1

None defined

Str. 7F-30-5th, fill, partially sealed by U. 14 and 18

No data

2

3B/13

Str. 7F-30-4th, fill, partially sealed by U. 20, 21, and 22

Early Ik

3

None defined

Str. 7F-30-3rd, fill, partially sealed by U. 26 and 27

No data

4

3B/11

Str. 7F-30-2nd, fill, sealed by U. 28

No data

5

3A/6,9,11

Str. 7F-30-lst-A, fill, unsealed

Manik, Ik, Imix

6

3B/1,2,6

Debris from collapse of structure, largely unsealed fill for Str. 7F-30-lst-C, 2nd, and 3rd

Manik, Ik, Imix, possible Eznab

1

8

Str. 7F-31-2nd, fill, mixed with fill of Str. 7F-30-4th, unsealed

Manik, Ik

2

2

Str. 7F-31-lst and 2nd, fill, unsealed

Ik and/ or Imix

3

1

Debris from collapse of structure, largely unsealed fill of Str. 7F-31-lst

Manik, Ik, Imix

1

26

Str. 7F-32-2nd-C, fill, sealed in building platform

Manik, possible Ik

ARTIFACTS

81

TABLE 5.1 (Part 2) Group 7F-1: Lot Groups Feature Str 7F-32 (Op. 3G)

Lot Group 2a

Lot

6,11

Provenience

Ceramic Evaluation

Str. 7F-32-lst-H, fill, unsealed, N stairway

Manik and Ik

Str. 7F-32-lst-H, midden beneath 2a

Manik and Ik

con't

2b

7,8,10,12, 13,16,17

2c

14

Str. 7F-32-lst-H, fill, partially sealed by U. 4 and 5

Manik and Ik and/ or Imix

2d

20

Str. 7F-32-lst-H, fill, unsealed, U. 9

Ik

2e

37

Str. 7F-32-lst-H, fill, partially sealed in U. 10

Ik?

2f

28

Str. 7F-32-lst-H, fill, sealed in U. 11

Manik?

2g

27

Str. 7F-32-lst-H, fill, unsealed, U. 16

Ik?

2h

35a

Str. 7F-32-lst-H, fill, unsealed, U. 20

Ik

2i

30

Str. 7F-32-lst-H, fill, sealed in U. 25

Manik, Ik

3

34

Str. 7F-32-lst-G, fill, unsealed, U. 17

Manik, Ik

Str. 7F-32-lst-F, fill, sealed in U. 18

Manik, Ik

4

33,35b

5

31

Str. 7F-32-lst-E, fill, unsealed, U. 12

Manik and Imix

6

36

Str. 7F-32-lst-D, fill, sealed in U. 13

Imix

7

39

Str. 7F-32-lst-D or E, U. 14 and 15

Imix

8

22

Str. 7F-32-lst-C, fill, sealed in U. 21

Eznab

9

25

Str. 7F-32-lst-B, fill, sealed in U. 19

Ik

lOa

23

Str. 7F-32-lst-A, fill, sealed in U. 23

Eznab

lOb

9

Str. 7F-32-lst-A, fill, sealed in U. 24

Manik, Ik, possible Imix

lla

19,24

Above living levels inside and outside Rm. 1

Ik and/or Imix and Eznab

lib

18,32

Above living level inside and outside Rm. 2

Manik and Ik and/or Imix

lie

1,3-5,21

Above living level inside and outside Rm. 3

Mostly Eznab

lid

15

Above living level inside Rm. 4

Imix and probable Eznab

lie

38

E of structure N of U. 9

Mostly Eznab

82

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 5.1 (Part 3) Group 7F-1: Lot Groups Feature

Lot Group

Lot

Provenience

Ceramic Evaluation

Str. 7F-33 (Op. 3J)

1

1,2

Test pit in top of structure, probably fill with some late occupation debris

Manik and Ik and/ or Imix

Str. 7F-35 (Op. 3F)

la

1,7,8,12

Str. 7F-35, fill, CS. 2-4, unsealed

Manik, Ik, and Imix

Ib

9,10

Str. 7F-35, fill, CS. 5, unsealed

Manik and Ik

2a

2,4,5

N of structure and W of Plat. 7F-1: U. 7, top to base of walls

Some Ik, mostly Imix and Eznab

2b

3

W of structure, top to base of wall

Some Ik, mostly Imix and Eznab

1

31/2

Str. 7F-36-2nd, fill, partially sealed by U. 2

p

2

31/1

Str. 7F-36-lst, fill, unsealed

Manik

3

3F/6

Top to base of walls off SW corner

Probable Ik; probable Imix

Str. 7F-Sub.l (Op. 3D)

1

1

Fill, partially sealed

Manik

Str. 7F-Sub.2 (Op. 3D)

1

9

Fill, sealed

Manik

Plat. 7F-1 (Op. 3A,B,D, E-G,I)

la

3B/9,25 3D/8

Plat. 7F-l-4th, fill, sealed by U. 5

Late Manik, some Preclassic

Ib

3E/17

Plat. 7F-l-4th, fill, sealed by U. 2

Manik, some Preclassic

Ic

3G/29

Plat. 7F-l-4th, fill, sealed by U. 3

Manik, some Ik

Id

3A/23

Plat. 7F-l-4th, sherd mosaic in U. 5 (TR. 2:fig. 8)

p

le

3F/11

Plat. 7F-l-4th, fill, sealed by Plat. 7F-2:U.l

Manik

2

3A/7,14, 20,25; 3D/6

Plat. 7F-l-2nd-D, fill for Fl. 1, unsealed

Heavy Manik, Ik, Imix, Eznab

3a

3D/7

Plat. 7F-l-lst, fill, sealed by Fl. 1

Manik, 1 Preclassic

3b

3A/3,8, 10,16,29

Plat. 7F-l-lst, fill for Fl. 1, unsealed

Manik, Ik, Imix

3c

31/3

Plat. 7F-l-lst, fill, sealed by U. 8

Manik

Str. 7F-36 (Op. 3F,I)

ARTIFACTS

83

TABLE 5.1 (Part 4) Group 7F-1: Lot Groups Feature

Lot Group

Lot

Provenience

Ceramic Evaluation

3d

3 A/ 19

Plat. 7F-l-lst and 2nd, fill, unsealed

Manik, Ik and/or Irnix

4a

3A/18 3D/2,3 3E/19,20

Above Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-l-lst near Str. 7F-29

Irnix, Eznab

4b

3 A/ 1,2

Above level of Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-l-lst near Str. 7F-30 and St. 23

Manik, Ik, Irnix, Eznab

4c

3G/2

Above level of U. 6 near Str. 7F-32

Mostly Eznab

5A

Surface to Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-l-2nd

Manik, Ik, Irnix

5B

3A/ 13,24, 27,3D/5 3A/17,26

Surface to bedrock

Manik and Ik and/ or Imix

Plat. 7F-2 (Op. 3H)

1

1-3

Test pit, probable fill for Plat. 7F-2-lst

Manik, Ik, Imix

Plat. 7F-3 (Op. 3B,C)

la

3B/15,23 3C/3-6

Plat. 7F-3-2nd, fill, CS. 3 sealed by U. 1

Early and late Manik

Ib

3B/24,26

Plat. 7F-3-2nd, fill, CS. 1,2, sealed by U. 5

Manik

2

3B/12,20, 27-29

Plat. 7F-3-lst, fill, sealed by U. 8

Much Manik, 1 Ik sherd

Plat. 7F-1 (Op. 3A,B,D, E-G,I)

were extensively enough excavated to provide reasonably good samples of associated objects, while 7F-33 and 36 were not. Neither is there a good sample from 7F-Sub.1, but in this case the cause is not insufficient excavation. Rather, the structure was abandoned earlier than the others, many of which underwent several later alterations, insuring that any primary occupation debris from Sub.1 has been widely redistributed in various later fills. Another potential problem to keep in mind has to do with the hypothetical upper-class status of the occupants of “New Gp. 7F-1,” which at least raises the possibility that certain activities, such as cooking that were often carried out in lower-class houses, took place here in separate outbuildings, rather than the houses themselves. This is of particular importance for the structure-by-structure reviews that follow. Earlier analyses of artifacts from residential groups have been affected to varying degrees by incomplete ceramic data. In some cases, pottery sherds were sorted into utilitarian and decorated classes that have potential functional and social significance, but in other cases, they

have not. The latter unfortunately is the case for Gp. 7F-1. Field observation indicates that sherds from utilitarian and decorated vessels were present in virtually all lot groups, but in what frequencies is not known. Another problem is that while all sherds recovered in the 1965 season were weighed, those from the 1957 season were not, and only some from 1963 were. Consequently, even the most general quantitative data are not always available, and few observations about pottery vessels will be found here.

Review of the Artifacts Structure 7F-29 For a list of artifacts by lot group, see Table 5.6. Primary occupation debris was present in some quantity in Rm. 1, 4, and 5 (LG. 4a–c; see also PD. 166, 167), just outside the door of Rm. 5 (LG. 4d), and on Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-1st, in front of the structure, extending up to about 4 m S (Table 5.16 [see below]:Plat. 7F-1:LG. 4a). The prox-

84

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 5.2 Artifacts from General Excavations in Group 7F-1 Illustrated in Tikal Report 27B (see also Table 5.10) Lot Group

Catalogue Number

TR. 27B:Figure

Object

Str. 7F-29

la

3E-26/26

5b

Ovate biface reworked to gouge

Str. 7F-30

5

3A-1/6

97e

Whetstone

5

3A-100/6

134d

Eccentrically perforated sherd (probable pendant)

Str. 7F-31

2

3C-2/2

104a

Barkbeater

Str. 7F-35

Ib

3F-36/9

127e

Miscellaneous worked bone

2a

3F-7/2

140q

Terracotta spindle whorl

2a

3F-9/2

219J*

Cylinder stamp

la

3B-148/25

36g

Chert thin biface

2

3D-29/6

lllk

Ground stone elongate soft stone object

3b

3A-46/10

lllf

Ground stone elongate soft stone object

3b

3A-103/16

103a

Barkbeater

4a

3D-4/2

59k

Chert blade struck to correct flaking error

4a

3D-12/2

109J

Small worked sphere

4a

3D-13/2

132k

Centrally perforated worked sherd

4b

3A-108a/2

33m

Chert thin biface

4b

3A-108b/2

38p

Chert thin biface

4b

3A-189/1

133d

Incompletely perforated worked sherd

4b

3A-74/1

148e*

Spondylus sewn-on ornament

1

3H-2/1

52c

Biface scraper

1

3H-3/2

136a,a'l

Unperforated worked sherd

la

3C-56/4

56u

Chert drill on a blade

la

3C-19/4

136k

Unperforated worked sherd

la

3C-25/7

96e

Hard stone with polished surface

la

3C-18d/7

122}

Bone needle with scratched eye

Ib

3B-1 50/26

59r

Chert blade with cortex

2

3B-151/28

58g

Chert blade core

Plat. 7F-1

Plat. 7F-2

Plat. 7F-3

*TR. 27A

TABLE 5.3* Basic Household Artifacts from Group 7F-1 Str. 7F-29 Occupation Total

Str. 7F-30 Occupation Total

Str. 7F-32 Occupation Total

Figurines

7

8

3

4

2

6

Cores

4

8

4

4

4

Ovate bifaces

1

2

2

2

2

2

Elongate bifaces

Str. 7F-33 Occupation Total

Str. 7F-35 Occupation Total

Str. 7F-36 Occupation Total

Str. 7F-Sub.2 Occupation Total 2

Other Fill

2

17

17

4

5

5

4

5

6

6

3

3

6

5

5

2

2

3

3

3

1

14

Irregular, retouched flakes

5

Flake- blades

7

9

8

16

4

19

3

3

12

14

68

Used flakes

2

6

4

4

9

14

7

8

4

4

8

Unused flakes

9

18

3

3

15

30

14

17

9

9

84

Manos

6

6

3

3

3

6

4

5

2

2

7

Metates

1

1

2

2

9

9

4

4

*Not considered here are jar necks, identified in TR. 20B as reused for pottery vessel stands. Such recycled jar necks were not yet recognized as basic items when Gp. 7F-1 artifacts were processed, and so were not singled out for attention.

2

1

1

5

86

Str. 7F-29 Occupation Total

Str. 7F-30 Occupation Total

Censers

2

5

8

31 +

Centrally perforated sherds

1

1

1

1

5

5

Blades

Str. 7F-31 Occupation Total 2

2

Str. 7F-32 Occupation Total 6

3

8

4

Str. 7F-35 Occupation Total 5

5

3

3

2

2

19

5

Rubbing stones

+ = in eludes totals recorded as "misc." on lot cards and tabulated here as 2+

6

2

2

3

3

2

2

19

Other Fill 15 1

1

Pointed, retouched flakes Hammer stones

Str. 7F-Sub.2 Occupation Total

1

1

1 2

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 5.4 Common Household Artifacts from Group 7F-1

ARTIFACTS

imity of this latter material to Str. 7F-29, and its decreasing quantity to the S, leaves little doubt that it was discarded by people who were making use of the structure. Although LG. 4e of 7F-29 is another potential source of primary occupation debris, it included but few sherds (which are temporally mixed) and no other artifacts. Evidently, trash was not regularly discarded behind the structure, which is not surprising since the rear-building wall appears to have had no openings in it. Therefore, LG. 4e may be safely ignored here. Only in Str. 7F-29:LG. 4a and 4b and Plat. 7F-1:LG. 4a could the sherds be securely dated. Since there is no reason to assume that the rest of this material is significantly earlier, all of it must relate to TS. 2 of Str. 7F-29. The material from Rm. 1, consisting of several body sherds (including some from a red-ware bowl), came from the surface of the E room-end platform. That from Rm. 4 includes a reconstructible, plain-ware “flower pot” vessel that had been left on the floor against the face of the interior platform. Towards the E end of this room, and out from the platform, was a small pile of sherds apparently from a single vessel. A few other pieces were scattered around on the floor, along with a used chert core fragment, an unmodified chert flake, and a hammer stone. In Rm. 5, a granite mano fragment was on the surface of the interior platform, along with a few sherds, and more sherds were found by the doorway, as well as just inside and outside of it. Of the artifacts, three (75%) are basic household implements, and the fourth (25%) is a common one. The problematical deposits have been discussed elsewhere (part IV). With the possible exception of PD. 166 and/or 167, the whole situation strongly points to household belongings left behind by occupants of Str. 7F-29-1st-A when it was abandoned. Perhaps they were not removed because some were already broken, and others were of little value. Later, when the roof fell in, there was further breakage and scattering of the debris. The material from the plaza in front of Str. 7F-29 has the characteristics of a small midden. Not only were pieces of pottery and artifacts relatively abundant (over 50 lb. of sherds alone), but the sherds were large with clean, sharp, unworn breaks, and were often “nested” as they usually are when found in undisturbed domestic middens (see e.g., TR. 19:fig. 60b; TR. 20A:fig. 181d). Field observation suggests that fragments of utilitarian vessels occurred in some quantity; excluding pottery vessels, 74% of the artifacts consist of eight out of the ten basic household implements, and 15% consist of three of the six common household implements. There are only five other items, or 11% of the total, one of which (a Pomacea shell) could be food refuse. Of the basic household implements, those that are missing are irregular retouched flakes and elongate bifac-

87

es. Since the bifaces generally occur in lesser frequencies in household debris than do the other basic types, they are the most likely to be missing from a limited sample of such debris, so their absence here is not necessarily critical. Irregular retouched flakes are basically a particular kind of used flake, and used flakes are present; therefore, their absence probably is not critical either. So again, household debris is suggested, in this case strewn by occupants of Str. 7F-29-1st-A over the plaza in front of their house. Overall, sherds and artifacts strongly indicate that Str. 7F-29-1st-A was a house, at least when Eznab ceramics were in use. There is, though, a problem; some small range-type structures that were used as residences in Terminal Classic times served other functions before (see e.g., Str. 4E-31; TR. 19:179). Unfortunately, earlier primary occupation debris from Str. 7F-29 was not found, but it is possible that some of the fill for Str. 7F-29-2nd and 1st-B was drawn from occupation debris of 3rd and 2nd respectively. From this standpoint, it is worth noting that sherds from utilitarian vessels were present in fills for 2nd and 1st. Other objects, though, were not plentiful, and included only one core, one used and one unused flake, one hammer stone, one chert nodule, and two bone fragments. Although these certainly do not prove a domestic function for early versions of 7F-29, they are at least consistent with such a function. This is very much like Str. 7F32, which in its final form also served as living quarters, but unlike Str. 7F-30 and 31, which probably were not. Since 7F-32 seems to have served from first to last as a residence, it is probable that 7F-29 did as well.

Structure 7F-30 Unlike Str. 7F-29, 32, 35, or 36, most of the artifacts associated with use of 7F-30 come from caches and problematical deposits (i.e., Ca. 161, 162; PD. 98, 100, 103). Excavations in and around this structure produced very little else in the way of primary occupation debris, and even its fills contained few pieces of pottery or other objects (all listed by lot group in Table 5.7). There was not so much as a sherd in LG. 1 and 3, while LG. 2 and 4 included very few sherds and no other artifacts. The little primary occupation debris found is included in LG. 6 and Plat. 7F-1:LG. 4b (see Table 5.16, below). The latter is discussed by Coe and Broman (TR. 2:40); the former is similar in nature, but from higher on the ruin mound. Both potentially consist of material left on the stairs and floor of 7F-30-1st-A, as well as on the plaza in front of the stairs, so it should pertain to TS. 2 of 7F-30. The sherds are temporally mixed, however, showing that there has been contamination from fills as 7F-30 collapsed. But, since objects other than sherds are known only from the

88

TABLE 5.5 (Part 1) Other Artifacts from Group 7F-1 Study Category

Object

Str. 7F-29 Occ. Total

Str. 7F-30 Occ. Total

Pottery Artifacts Miniature vessel Effigy vessel

Str. 7F-31 Occ. Total

Str. 7F-32 Occ. Total 1

1

1

1 1

Stamp Bead

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

Earspool Flute

1

Perforated disc

1

1

Incompletely perforated sherd

1

Unperforated shaped sherds

1

Unclassifiable formed objects

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1 1

1

Unperforated disc

Irregular biface

Other Fill

1

Eccentrically perforated sherd

Flaked Stone Rectangular/ oval b if ace Artifacts

Str. 7F-Sub.2 Occ. Total

2

1 1

2

4

4

3

3

1

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

Spindle whorl

Str. 7F-35 Occ. Total

TABLE 5.5 (Part 2) Other Artifacts from Group 7F-1 Study Category

Object

Str. 7F-29 Occ. Total

Flaked Stone Artifacts (con't)

Unclassifiable b iface

1

Nodule

Str. 7F-30 Occ. Total

1

1

Other Fill

1

1

1 1 1

1

1

1 1

1

Limestone pebble

1

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

18

1

1

1

Shell and Bone Shell pendant Artifacts Shell, other worked

1

1

1

1

ARTIFACTS

Monument fragment

3

1 1

1

1

1 2

Unworked human bone Unworked animal bone Unworked bone, unidentifiable 2

2

3

1

2

1

2

188

205

1

9

9

3

8

11

1

1

2

1

CXD VO

89

Bone, problematic

Str. 7F-Sub.2 Occ. Total

1 1

Carved limestone

Shell, unworked

Str. 7F-35 Occ. Total 1

1

Barkbeater

Unclassifiable

Str. 7F-32 Occ. Total

1

Ground, Pecked, Whetstone and Polished Grinding stone Stone Artifacts

Sphere

Str. 7F-31 Occ. Total

90

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 5.6 Structure 7F-29: Sherds and Artifacts Study Category

Object

Lot Group la Ib Ic

Pottery Vessels

Sherds per cubic meter (Ibs)

8/4 9/3 5/13+ 0/12 5/5 3/13 5/0 ? 3/10 3/13 1/0 1/9

Other Pottery Artifacts

Figurine Censers Censer ladle Unclassifiable formed object

Flaked Chert Artifacts

Flake cores Used flake core Ovate biface (reworked to gouge) Used flakes Unused flakes Nodule

Flaked Obsidian Artifacts

Prismatic blades

Ground, Pecked, and Polished Stone Artifacts

Mano Hammer stones

Shell and Bone Artifacts

Bone, problematical

2 1 1

2

3a

3b

3c

4a

4b

4c

4d

4e

1

1

2

1 1

1

2

1

6

2

1 1 1

1

2

fill of U. 34, the small platform that defines 7F-30-1st-A (Fig. 9), such artifacts as contaminate the two lot groups under discussion here probably have washed or been rooted out of that platform. The source of this platform fill is discussed further below. These two lot groups produced about as many items as did those containing primary occupation debris around Str. 7F-29, but the materials do differ somewhat from those around 29. While nine of the ten basic household types are present, these account for only 61% of the total objects, a substantial percentage, but one that does not reach the 74% to 75% frequencies for 7F-29. Common household items account for 27% of the total collection; three types are present, but censer fragments are unusually prominent, accounting for 16% of all objects (they are usually far less prominent in household debris; see, for example, TR. 20B:91). The fragments were found in such locations as to suggest breakage in connection with ritual activities in and in front of 7F-30-1st-A. Artifacts other than basic or common household types account for 12% of the total collection, and include one ornamental and one possibly utilitarian type. The rest are problematical, although some could be ceremonial.

1 1

1

2

The overall situation strongly suggests that special ceremonial activity took place in Str. 7F-30-1st-A, which did not take place in 7F-29 (or Str. 7F-32 and 35; see below). This involved the use of censers (and see PD. 98, 100, and 103), with perhaps some of the other artifacts. The presence of many of the other objects, though, can be accounted for by a combination of two factors: some of them may have washed or been rooted from the poorly preserved 7F-30:U. 34 (see below), and others may be part of the rubbish that occupants of Str. 7F-29 seem to have strewn around in some abundance on the surface of Plat. 7F-1 (see the discussion of Str. 7F-29 above). The lack of objects, other than sherds, in the earlier fills of Str. 7F-30 is of potential significance. Assuming that fill was usually procured from sources as near as possible to the construction in which it was used suggests that trash deposits were not available near the various versions of Str. 7F-30, at least prior to the construction of 1st-A. This would offer some slight, though far from conclusive, support to the hypothesis that 7F-30 was ceremonial, or at least not a house. Along this line, it is worth noting that pieces of Manik ceremonial vessels are especially prominent among the sherds from the fill of neighboring Str.

ARTIFACTS

91

TABLE TABLE 5.7 5.7 Structure Structure 7F-30: 7F-30: Sherds Sherds and and Artifacts Artifacts Study Study Category Category Pottery Pottery Vessels Vessels

Other Other Pottery Pottery Artifacts Artifacts

Object Object Sherds Sherds per per cubic cubic meter meter (Ibs) (Ibs) Figurine Figurine whistle whistle Censers Censers Eccentrically Eccentrically perforated perforated sherd sherd Ring Ring base base sherd sherd

Flaked Flaked Chert Chert Artifacts Artifacts

Unclassifiable Unclassifiable biface biface Unused Unused flakes flakes

Flaked Flaked Obsidian Obsidian Artifacts Artifacts

Prismatic Prismatic blades blades

Ground, Ground, Pecked, Pecked, and and Polished Polished Stone Stone Artifacts Artifacts

Manos Manos Metate Metate Whetstone Whetstone Carved Carved limestone limestone Limestone Limestone pebble pebble Limestone, Limestone, problematical problematical

Shell Shell and and Bone Bone Artifacts Artifacts

Bone, Bone, human, human, misc. misc.

7F-31-2nd (Coggins 1975:248); these may have been used originally in Str. 7F-30-5th, discarded close by, and ultimately included in the fill for 7F-31. Another possibility is that the Maya made some attempt to keep these fills “clean,” which again would suggest a special significance for 7F-30. In support of this interpretation is the lack of any cultural material at all in the fill of Str. 7F-30-5th, even though considerable trash seems to have been available nearby, for it was used extensively in some of the contemporary fills of Plat. 7F-3-2nd. Against this interpretation is the fact that the fills of various North Acropolis pyramids, such as Str. 5D-33 and 34, were loaded with a variety of artifacts, including concentrations of mano and metate fragments (e.g., TR. 14:502, 548–550). Still, in this respect, things may have been done differently in Gp. 7F-1 than in epicentral Tikal. If the fills of Str. 7F-30 were deliberately kept clean, then the presence of artifacts in the fill of 1st-A (TR. 2:39) is of interest. What they suggest is debris from rituals conducted in front of 1st-B like those presumed to have taken place in front of 1st-A; of thirty-six objects, 64% are censer fragments, 25% (a figurine fragment and eight prismatic blades) are basic household implements, and 12%

Lot Lot Group Group 1 22 3 1 3 00

few few

00

4 4

5 5

6 6

33 sherds sherds

??

??

11 22+ 22+ 11

22

11 11 33 11

11 11 11

44 22 11 11

22

are neither basic nor common household implements. Some of the censer fragments relate to PD. 100, but not all do. At least two censers seem to have been broken on the spot on the plaza floor, which were then included in the fill for Str. 7F-30:U. 34. In addition to the two basic household implements already mentioned, the fill of 1st-A also contained an unusual whetstone (TR. 27B:fig. 97e), an eccentrically perforated sherd (probably a pendant; see TR. 27B:fig. 134d), a limestone pebble, and a problematical limestone object. If this fill, like all others of 7F-30, was kept clean of artifacts save those that were debris from ceremonial activity, then these objects may have been used in connection with that activity. Certainly, they are unlike most items found in or near houses. For their part, the prismatic blades may be occupation debris that, by chance, happened to be lying on this part of the plaza surface. At the very least, though, it can be said that these fill objects together seem to represent debris from ceremonial activity associated with Str. 7F-30-1st-B, which is relatively (but not completely) uncontaminated by living debris. The cultural materials associated with Str. 7F-30-1st-A appear to represent the same thing, though with greater contamination.

92

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

In sum, while they do not prove it, the collections from Str. 7F-30 are compatible with the idea that 1st-B and A were used for ceremonial purposes. Furthermore, there is no clear artifactual evidence that Str. 7F-30, in any of its forms, was ever lived in.

Structure 7F-31 Any primary occupation debris from this structure is contained in LG. 3 (Table 5.8), and is potentially the same sort of material as the primary occupation debris from Str. 7F-30, just discussed. It is therefore noteworthy that the only artifacts, other than pottery sherds, are censer fragments. Furthermore, although the ceramics indicate considerable fill contamination of this lot group, no censer fragments are known from the fill of 7F-31. This may not be much to go on, but it does seem to indicate some sort of ceremonial function, at least for 7F-31-1st (TS. 4 through 2). TABLE 5.8 Structure 7F-31: Sherds and Artifacts Study Category

Object

Pottery Vessels

Sherds per cubic meter (Ibs)

Other Pottery Artifacts

Censers

Ground, Pecked, and Polished Stone Artifacts

Barkbeater

Lot Group 1 2

3

?

?

?

2

1

The fills of Str. 7F-31, like those of 7F-30, were almost devoid of artifacts. The only object found was a barkbeater fragment (TR. 27B:fig. 104a), a rare item in most household debris, and just where this one came from prior to its redeposition in the fill of 7F-31 is not known. In any event, the nature of the fills for 7F-31 offers some slight suggestion that household trash deposits were not located close by, and may have been purposely kept “clean,” as suggested for the fills of Str. 7F-30.

Structure 7F-32 For a list of artifacts by lot group, see Table 5.9; for a list of objects illustrated in TR. 27B, see Table 5.10. In Str. 7F-32, primary occupation debris was especially evident in Rm. 1 and 3 (LG. 11a and 11c), with some in Rm. 4 (LG. 11d). Material in Rm. 2 (LG. 11b) seems to in-

clude more fill from collapsed structure walls, with primary occupation debris not so obvious; nonetheless, some was probably present. Platform 7F-1:Lot Group 4C potentially includes primary occupation debris left on the final plaza floor, like that in front of Str. 7F-29. It contains only sherds, however, with no other artifacts, so it can be ignored here. Finally, an apparent midden, LG. 11e, lay against the E wall of the structure, between the S edge of Plat. 7F-1 and U. 9 of 7F-32 (Fig. 16). The artifacts in all these lot groups together should pertain largely to TS. 2 of Str. 7F-32. The material in Rm. 1 was found just in front of the thronelike U. 13 (Fig. 16). In addition to 14 lb. of sherds, 11 artifacts were included: a core, an ovate biface, a used flake, two unused flakes, a prismatic blade, two manos, two metates, and a hammer stone. Ten of these are basic household implements, and one is a common household implement. In Rm. 3, debris was scattered all over the floors, as well as the stairs outside; sherds (35 lb.), ash, charcoal, and burned stones (some quite sizeable) were especially abundant between U. 24 and the E end of U. 23 (Fig. 16). The artifacts included 2 figurines; 1 chert and 1 obsidian prismatic blade; 6 used and 2 unused flakes; 6 metates (all basic household types); 2 censers (a common household type); 1 irregular biface (a utilitarian item?); 4 unworked animal bones; and 6 unidentifiable, unworked bones (possible food debris); 2 uncarved monument fragments and an unidentifiable limestone object. In spite of the presence of the latter three items, this certainly seems to be domestic trash. In Rm. 4, debris lightly scattered on the floors included 1 lb. of sherds, a censer fragment, a used and an unused flake. In Rm. 2, the artifacts found were an obsidian thin biface and approximately 165 unworked animal bone fragments, along with 3 lb. of sherds. Nineteen pounds of sherds, but no artifacts, were collected from the midden (LG. 11e). All things considered, people must have been living in Str. 7F-32 during TS. 2, and they, like the occupants of Str. 7F-29-1st-A, left some of their broken belongings behind on the floors of their house when this was finally abandoned. These belongings consisted of eight of the ten basic types, four of the six common types of household implements, and two or three other types of objects. They also left food debris and ash and charcoal, the latter presumably from cooking fires. As was the case with the final occupation of Str. 7F-29, this primary occupation debris dates from the time when Eznab ceramics were in use. So once again the problem arises: did Str. 7F-32 serve as a house before then? Fortunately, an excellent source of primary occupation debris was discovered that relates to Str. 7F-32-2nd-C, B, and A (TS. 22 through 18): LG. 2b, a huge midden that accumulated against the N wall of the building platform. This was packed with sherds, and in-

TABLE 5.9 Structure 7F-32: Sherds and Artifacts Lot Group 1 2a 2b

Study Category

Object

Pottery Vessels

Sherds per cubic meter (Ibs)

Other Pottery Artifacts

Figurines Miniature vessel Effigy vessel fragment Spindle whorl Censers Censer ladle Spherical bead Flute Perforated disc, reworked Unperforated disc, reworked Reworked sherd Unclassifiable formed objects

Flaked Chert Artifacts

Ground, Pecked, and Polished Stone Artifacts

Shell and Bone Artifacts

2c

2d

2e

2f

80/11+ 1/12

5/6

0/4

?

2h ?

2i

3

0/14

7/0

4 3/3+

5

6

3/3 24/15

7

8

9

lOa

lOb

lla

lib

?

6/4

1/8

9/12

1/10

14/3

3/0

1

1

1

1

lid

lie

34/15 1/4

19/2

lie

2

1 1 1

1

1

1

2

1

2

1

1

1

1

1 1 1 1

1

1 1

1

1 1

3 5

1

1

1

1

1

2 1

Cores Thin bifaces Prismatic blades Used flake

3

1

3

9

1 1

2

1 2

1

1

1

8 1

1

1

1 1

1

1

1

1

1

1 2

1

6

1

8

2

1

Manos Metates Rubbing stones Hammer stones Whetstone Limestone, monument frag., unmodified Limestone, unidentified Shell, rosette Shell, unworked Bone, animal, unworked Bone, unidentifiable, unworked

2g 0/8

2

1

1

2

1

2 2

1

1

1

1

1

1

6

1

1

1

ARTIFACTS

Flaked Obsidian Artifacts

Flake core Retouched core Ovate bifaces Elongate bifaces Irregular bifaces Thin bifaces Used prismatic blade Used flakes Unused flake Nodule

6/9 18/7

2

1 2

11

1

1 19

1 1

2

1 16 1

1

1

165±

4 6

93

2

94

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

the art of Palenque. (Coggins’s fig. 68 shows the second fragment reversed—it actually matches the first fragment; C. Jones, pers. comm., 1986.) Also included is a carved Catalogue Lot TR. 27B: Object cache bowl lid (3G-27, with MT. Number Group Figure (Op. 3G) 210) showing the open maw of a vision serpent spitting out a being that 28/12 Elongate biface 2b 14b seems to be Chac Balam, “great jagChert thin biface 13/8 31j uar” (L. Schele, pers. comm., 1990). Obsidian thin biface 651 18/8 Aside from pottery vessels, the Obsidian thin biface 66y 44/20 2d artifacts from LG. 2b include the 136a,a'4 Unperforated worked sherd 46/20 following basic household implements: 3 cores; 3 ovate bifaces; 5 136a,a'2 66/34 3 Unperforated worked sherd elongate bifaces; 1 used and 9 un(made from base of hollow vessel used flakes; 2 prismatic blades; 1 support) mano and 1 metate (8 out of the 68/36 Ceramic spindle whorl 6 140w 10 basic household types). In addition, they include 4 of the 6 comCeramic cordholder, Variety F 80/39 7 149b mon types of household implement: 2 censers; 2 thin bifaces; 1 rubbing 150c Plaster small spheres,painted pale 22/10 8 stone, and 1 hammer stone. Other reddish orange (probably architectural decoration) items consist of a miniature vessel; an effigy vessel; a whetstone; 145h* Rosette of white marine shell 53/25 9 an unworked shell; 19 unworked animal bones and 2 unidentifiable Pottery bead 17/9 2181* lOb unworked bones. Although all of these non-bone objects are rare in 1/1 591 Chert blade struck to correct lie flaking domestic trash, all (save effigy vessels) occur on occasion in trash even *TR. 27A from small domestic groups (TR. 20B:Tables 5.13–5.17). The bones, for their part, are suggestive of food refuse. The shell, too, could be the same, for the species is Pomacea flagcluded large quantities of ash and charcoal as well. It beellata, which was a source of food at Tikal. In sum, LG. gan to build up as material was dumped on Plat. 7F-1:U. 3 2b provides strong evidence that Str. 7F-32 served as a (Fig. 17:30), and eventually reached a depth of at least 1.10 residence from TS. 22 through TS. 18. m against the wall of 7F-32 (Fig. 17:31); ultimately, its top If Str. 7F-32 were constructed originally as a resiwas leveled off for construction of the N stairway for 1stdence, and if it served in the same capacity just before H. It seems clear that this buildup of trash was the result abandonment, then it is likely that it had this function all of material being regularly discarded onto the surface of along in the period between TS. 16 and 4. The various fills Plat. 7F-1 from the back of Str. 7F-32-2nd, through the of 7F-32 contained some artifacts, some of which may doorway from Rm. 3. It should, therefore, tell much about relate to TS. 16 through 4, although there is no way to the function of 7F-32-2nd-C through A. be sure. The mere fact that objects usually were present The over 80 lb. of broken pottery collected from in fills suggests that trash was present nearby to draw on LG. 2b has not been separated into utilitarian and other for construction, a situation similar to Str. 7F-29, but uncategories, but on the basis of observations in the field, like Str. 7F-30 and 31. The objects in the fills are not unutilitarian vessels were well represented. Decorated vesknown from domestic debris elsewhere, although an apsels, however, were also present, some of which are disparent ceramic flute is highly unusual. Lot Group 8, which cussed by Coggins (1975:233 and 243–244). These include contained almost 7 lb. of sherds (usually large with sharp a carved black cylinder vessel (3G-24), with MT. 208, on breaks, and including pieces of utilitarian vessels), a used which is depicted a costume element that next appears in and an unused flake, a bone fragment, and considerable TABLE 5.10 Artifacts from Structure 7F-32 Illustrated in Tikal Report 27B

ARTIFACTS

ash and charcoal, surely was a redeposited midden. In sum, cultural materials from the fills of Str. 7F-32 do not contradict the proposition that it served from first to last as a house. They may not conclusively prove it, but they do at least offer some support of it.

Structure 7F-33 The test pit into the top of this structure evidently produced nothing but fill, for surface material did not differ significantly from that deeper in the pit. In addition to 6 lb. of sherds, three artifacts were found which, although basic household types, are really not sufficient to draw real conclusions (Table 5.11). The paucity of material suggests an analogy with the fills of Str. 7F-30 and 31, except that these were more extensively sampled. Comparable excavation of Str. 7F-33 might produce many more objects, in which case analogy with Str. 7F-29 and 32 might be more appropriate.

TABLE 5.11 Structure 7F-33: Sherds and Artifacts Study Category

Object

Lot Group 1

Pottery Vessels

6/4 Sherds per cubic meter (Ibs)

Other Pottery Artifacts

Figurine

1

Flaked Chert Artifacts

Unused flakes

2

95

cussed, including the midden associated with Str. 7F-322nd, which was more extensively excavated than this one but which produced fewer items. Nine of the ten basic types of household implements are present, and account for 75% of the total artifacts found, while four of the six common types are present, accounting for another 14%. The remaining 11% consist of an unclassifiable biface; an unclassifiable ground, pecked, and polished stone object; a human bone fragment (not uncommon in household trash; see TR. 20B:Table 5.17); a miniature vessel; a spindle whorl (TR. 27B:fig. 140q); a stamp (TR. 27A:fig. 219j); an unperforated shaped sherd (all occasionally found in household trash; see TR. 20B:Table 5.13); and a ceramic flute and a monument fragment. The latter, with other monument fragments from Gp. 7F-1, is discussed in part VI of this report. Surely a residential function is indicated for Str. 7F-35, with the spindle whorl and stamp suggesting that perhaps more than the usual amount of textile work took place here.

Structure 7F-36 Very few artifacts of any sort were found in the excavations of 7F-36 (Table 5.13), but this is not necessarily significant, for the excavations were so limited that they could easily have missed the richest sources. Lot Group 3 may contain some primary occupation debris, most likely mixed with fill, but aside from a mere 2 lb. of sherds from utilitarian and decorated pottery, the only artifact is a mano fragment. At least this is consistent with a residential function, even though it does not prove it. No other function, however, is suggested.

Structure 7F-Sub.1 Structure 7F-35 Two lot groups potentially include primary occupation debris: 2a and 2b (Table 5.12). Both contained sherds in abundance, 125 lb. in LG. 2a and 15 lb. in LG. 2b. The large size of the sherds, the sharp breaks, the fact that they were found “nested” together and that utilitarian types are well represented, indicate that both lot groups consist of midden material that accumulated in back, and off the end of, Str. 7F-35. The greatest accumulation was just W of the juncture between 7F-35 and the W wall of Plat. 7F-1 (Fig. 20:5); quantities tapered off markedly to the N, W, and S. The stratigraphy and dating of the ceramics indicates that the material pertains to TS. 2 of 7F-35. Apart from broken pottery, the artifacts all come from LG. 2a, and are more abundant than those from any other source of primary occupation debris so far dis-

There are no sources of artifacts that clearly relate to the use of this structure, and since it was never modified, there is no possibility that any of its fill relates to its early use. It may be significant, though, that no objects (other than sherds) are known from its fill (Table 5.14), at least raising the possibility that its fill was deliberately kept “clean” as has been suggested for Str. 7F-30. Certainly, an abundance of cultural materials in the contemporary fills of Plat. 7F-1 and 7F-3 indicates debris that contained artifacts was available for use. While a conclusive statement about the function of Str. 7F-Sub.1 is not possible, this at least leaves open the prospect that it was not a house.

Structure 7F-Sub.2 As was the case with 7F-Sub.1, there are no sources of artifacts that clearly relate to the use of this structure, nor can its fill be turned to for clues (Table 5.15). Structure

96

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 5.12 Structure 7F-35: Sherds and Artifacts Study Category

Object

Lot Group la Ib

2a

2b

Pottery Vessels

Sherds per cubic meter (Lbs)

64/5

125/7

15/2

Other Pottery Artifacts

Figurines Miniature vessel Spindle whorl Stamp Censers Flute Whistle Centrally perforated sherds Unperforated worked sherd

Flaked Chert Artifacts

Flake cores Used cores Ovate bifaces Elongate bifaces Unclassified biface Thin bifaces Used flakes Unused flakes

Pottery Vessels Ground, Pecked, and Polished Stone Artifacts

1

Manos Metates Hammer stones Limestone monument frag. Unclassifiable artifacts

1

Bone, animal, unworked Bone, human, unworked Bone, unidentifiable, worked

1

Sherds per cubic meter (Ibs) Mano

Lot Group 1 2 0/8

0/8

7 14 3

Ground, Pecked, and Polished Stone Artifacts

Object

2 3 6 2 1 2

1 3

Prismatic blades

TABLE 5.13 Structure 7F-36: Sherds and Artifacts Study Category

16 1 1 1 5 1 1 3

Flaked Obsidian Artifacts

Shell and Bone Artifacts

6/8

4 4 2 1

1

1 1 1

TABLE 5.14 Structure 7F-Sub.l: Sherds and Artifacts Study Category

Object

3 2/4 1

Pottery Vessels

Sherds per cubic meter (Ibs)

Lot Group 1 1/1

ARTIFACTS

7F-Sub.2 is a remnant of an occupation at this locus prior to the founding of “New Gp. 7F-1,” which makes it likely that the earliest fills for “New Gp. 7F-1” architecture derive from that earlier occupation. Thus, artifacts from those fills should provide clues to the nature of that occupation. This earliest material comes from Str. 7F-32:LG. 1, Str. 7F-Sub.1:LG. 1, Plat. 7F-1:LG. 1a and 1b, and Plat. 7F-3:LG. 1a (Tables 5.9, 5.14, 5.16, 5.18). The latter includes a middenlike deposit loaded with ash, charcoal, and sherds (not weighed) in Ch. 7F-8, which produced most of the artifacts. Fill from Plat. 7F-2 (Table 5.17) could also relate to the earliest occupation, but is more problematic, and so not discussed here.

TABLE 5.15 Structure 7F-Sub.2: Sherds and Artifacts Study Category

Object

Lot Group 1

Pottery Vessels

Sherds per cubic meter (Ibs)

11/11

Flaked Obsidian Artifacts

Prismatic blades

2

Shell and Bone Artifacts

Unclassifiable bone, unworked

1

Of seventy-five objects other than pottery vessels, 47% are basic household implements, representing seven of the ten basic types. Missing are metates, but since manos are present, a larger collection would undoubtedly produce metates. Also missing are irregular retouched flakes, probably not serious since these are really no more than a particular kind of used flake, which is present. The absence of cores may mean that no chert knapping took place; hammer stones and nodules are also absent, and unused flakes are not abundant (but see PD. 37). Another 27% of the items are common household types: censers and a point-retouched flake. The abundance of censers is noteworthy, and will be discussed further below. Of the remaining artifacts, two ear spools are ornamental and all the rest are problematical. They could be utilitarian, and they include bone remains that could be food debris. Considered all together, this material is suggestive of a household situation, except for two things. The first is the absence of evidence for chert knapping, an activity that appears to have taken place (at least on a small scale) in virtually every small residential group. Possibly, this lack of evidence is an accident of discovery; PD. 37 may include debitage from this early occupation, and fur-

97

ther excavation of early material might produce clearer evidence. The other factor is the abundance of censers, which usually are not so prominent in household debris, although there is a possible explanation for this. Of the nineteen censer fragments, all but two are from LG. 1a of Plat. 7F-3, material not put in place until after much of the work on Str. 7F-30-5th and Plat. 7F-1-4th had been completed, and the other fill lots under discussion here were already in place. Of seventeen censer fragments in this fill, sixteen were in or above Ch. 7F-8, which had been modified to serve as a chamber for Bu. 162, probably a burial of special significance. It is, therefore, possible that the censers relate to ritual activity associated with construction of Str. 7F-30-5th and/or the interment of Bu. 162. After they were broken, they were swept up and thrown on an existing domestic midden, which was then used as fill for the earliest construction stage of Plat. 7F-3-2nd. In sum, the earliest artifacts do not preclude a domestic function for the structures of “Old Gp. 7F-1,” of which Str. 7F-Sub.2 was one. Indeed, there are some features that strongly hint at such a function, although certain peculiarities of the collection preclude really convincing evidence for a domestic function.

Conclusions From the preceding, the evidence strongly supports Str. 7F-29, 32, and 35 as houses, all of which have much in common so far as artifactual material is concerned. In association with all three were middenlike deposits, and collections from all three show a tendency for high frequencies of basic household implements, but low frequencies of other items. The low frequencies are clearest for 7F-29 and 35; 7F-32 appears to be an exception primarily because of the large quantity of bone fragments, considered in the “other” category. Since these may be food remains, this does not seem to be a serious problem. For all three structures at least eight, and usually nine, out of the ten basic household types are represented (the absent elongate bifaces for Str. 7F-29 have already been discussed). What is missing in all three cases are irregular retouched flakes, but since used flakes are present, and irregular retouched flakes may be thought of as one kind of used flake, this probably is not important. Another similarity is that at least three, and usually four, common types of household implements are known from each of the three structures. Finally, the fills used in the various rebuildings and modifications of 7F-29 and 32 (no alterations are known for 7F-35) are “dirty,” in that they include at least moderate amounts of artifactual material. This suggests that habitation debris was available nearby to draw on for construction. Although there are differences in the artifact collections from all three structures, these do not appear to have

98

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 5,16 Platform 7F-1: Sherds and Artifacts Study Category

Object

Pottery Vessels

Sherds per cubic meter (Ibs)

Other Pottery Artifacts

Figurines Flute Censers Censer ladle Centrally perforated worked sherds Unperfor. sherd discs Incomplete perf sherd Unclassifiable formed objects

Flaked Chert Artifacts

Flake cores Used flake cores Ovate bi faces Elongate bifaces Rectangular/ oval biface Unclassifiable biface Thin bifaces Irregular, retouched flake Drill (pointretouched flake) Prismatic blades Used flakes Unused flakes Flakes

Flaked Obsidian Artifacts

Cores Prismatic blades Flakes

Ground, Pecked, and Polished Stone Artifacts

Manos Metates Rubbing stones Grinding stone Hammer stones Barkb eater Carved limestone Limestone monument fragments Sphere Unidentifiable artifacts

Shell and Bone Artifacts

Lot Group la Ib

Ic

21/12 5/11 4/11

Id

le

? 9/0

2

3a 3b

3c

5/9+ 1/12 ? 1/15

3d

?

1 2

1

1

4a

4b

50/9+

4c

5b

? 11/9 3/1+

7

3

2

6 1 1

1

5a

1

2 1 1 1 1

1

1

1 1

4 2 1 1 1

2 2

3 1

5 1

2

2

1

3

1 3 1

1 1

1

1

Spondylus, sewnon ornament Unworked shell

Note: The + sign after a number indicates that the number was indefinite; for example, if the object listed was "Chert flakes," a quantity of 2+ was assigned to that listing.

6 34 15

1 8 2

2 1 1

3 2 1 1

15

1 1 1

1

1

1 18

2 17 18

1 2 5 3

4 18

1 6

4

5 1

1 1

4 3 1 1

1 1

1

1

4 5

1

?

ARTIFACTS

99

TABLE 5.17 Platform 7F-2: Sherds and Artifacts Lot Group 1

Study Category

Object

Pottery Vessels

Sherds per cubic meter fibs")

30/15+

Other Pottery Artifacts

Censers Reworked sherd

8 1

Flaked Chert Artifacts

Core Ovate biface Used flakes Unused flakes

1 1 2 7

Flaked Obsidian Artifacts

Prismatic blades Flake

2 1

TABLE 5.18 Platform 7F-3: Sherds and Artifacts Study Category

Object

Lot Group

Pottery Vessels

Sherds per cubic meter (Ibs)

la not weighed

Other Pottery Artifacts

Figurine Ear spools Censers Biconically perforated sherd Textile impressed sherd Rounded reworked sherds Oblong, unperforated reworked sherd Unclassified, formed objects

1 2

2

35/7+

1 5 1

17

1 3 1 2

Ovate bifaces Elongate biface Point-retouched flake Prismatic blade cores Used prismatic blade Used flakes Unused flakes

2 1 1

Flaked Obsidian Artifacts

Used prismatic blades Retouched prismatic blade Unused prismatic blade

6

Ground, Pecked, and Polished Stone Artifacts

Manos Metates Hammer stone

1

Shell and Bone Artifacts

Shell, misc., unworked Bone, animal, unworked Bone, human, misc. Bone, unidentifiable, worked

Flaked Chert Artifacts

Ib 23/2

1 1

1

2

1

1

1 5

1

1

9

2 2 1 1 3 2 1

100

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

any special significance, with one or two possible exceptions. Both apply to 7F-35: (1) its midden was a much more concentrated source of trash than those associated with 7F-29 and 32; (2) the presence of a spindle whorl and stamp in its occupation debris, but not that of 7F29 or 32, perhaps hints at some special textile work here. Together, these suggest the possibility that the occupants of 7F-35 performed service functions for the occupants of the other structures, a possibility discussed in part VIII of this report. Structures 7F-30 and 31 probably were not houses, and stand apart from those just discussed. First, there were no associated middenlike deposits as with 7F-29, 32, and 35, especially the last two; indeed, 7F-30 and 31 produced far fewer artifacts than 7F-32 and 35. Although those from 7F-30 are about equal in numbers to those from 7F-29, it must be remembered that those items from 7F-30 that are the subject of this section are far outnumbered by others from the caches and problematical deposits in and near this structure. This is not true for Str. 7F-29 or, for that matter, 32 and 35. Second, there is a tendency for lower frequencies of basic household implements than seen in the collections from 7F-29, 32, and 35. Moreover, among common household types, censers are far more prominent than they are in the collections from 29, 32, and 35. This, as well as the location of the censer fragments when found in association with 7F-30, probably reflects special ritual activities in it and 7F-31. In addition to all this, the fills of 7F-30 and 31, unlike those of 29, 32, and 35, are relatively “clean,” which implies at the least a lack of nearby trash to draw on for construction at most points in time. It may even be that the Maya deliberately sought to keep these fills, but not the others, “clean.” Three structures, 7F-33, 36, and Sub.1 are problematical, primarily because, for one reason or another, few artifacts were collected from them. The limited test of 7F33 suggests that its fill might be as “dirty” as those of 7F29 and 32. The limited test of 7F-36 produced one of the most obvious of all household implements, a mano, and nothing else. Thus, the possibility that both were lived in remains open. No artifacts at all were found in association with Str. 7F-Sub.1, raising the possibility that it was not a house. Classifiable artifacts that may relate to Str. 7F-Sub.2 and the original occupation at this locus (but not necessarily 7F-Sub.2 itself) are largely basic and common household types, although censer fragments are unusually numerous. Since the latter may have come from ritual activity connected with the construction of Str. 7F-30-5th and/or the interment of Bu. 162, there is a strong possibility that the earliest activity at this locus was residential in nature.

Discussion If Gp. 7F-1 was residential, as the artifacts seem to indicate, then the question arises: what was the status of its occupants? Specifically, if Tikal society was stratified, were the occupants of Gp. 7F-1 of lower or upper-class status? The rest of the discussion is concerned with this problem.

Evidence for Upper-Class Status What seems indicated is that the occupants of “New Gp. 7F-1” were of upper class, rather than lower class, status. Based on the discussion in TR. 20B (pp. 157–158), this should be indicated in the following ways: First, the artifacts should not indicate that occupants of the group practiced any specialized occupation that was of low status. Second, the inventory of objects should be a relatively rich one, which is to say that, in addition to the basic household implements, it should include four or more of the common household types, and twelve or more classifiable types other than the basic or common ones (Table 5.5). Furthermore, some of the basic or common items most easily made from locally available raw materials should instead be of imported “luxury” materials (Table 5.19). Finally, objects of really exotic materials such as jade and marine shell should be present. Green obsidian might be considered here, although Moholy-Nagy (pers. comm.) reports that its distribution is tied more to time than to social status. The peak occurrence of green obsidian is in Early Classic times, when it was widely distributed (even if in limited quantity) at Tikal. There is no evidence at all that the occupants of “New Gp. 7F-1” were engaged in such low-status occupations as obsidian or shell working, figurine production or stone working. There are some indications of chert knapping, but certainly no more than customarily took place in every household. There are also hints that occupants of Str. 7F35 were involved in some textile work, but the evidence is not sufficient to indicate specialization in it (this point will be raised again in part VIII of this report). The artifact inventory for Gp. 7F-1 (excluding the material from the original occupation of the locus) qualifies as a relatively rich one. For the group as a whole, all six of the common household types are known (Table 5.4), as are more than twelve types of classifiable objects other than basic or common household ones (Table 5.5). Basic and common household implements made of obsidian, rather than the more usual chert, are also known (Table 5.19). Some of those from the various fills may ultimately have been redeposited from the earliest occupation of this locus, but thin bifaces, cores, and flakes are known from undisturbed trash associated with Str. 7F29 and 32. Finally, imported shell is known from primary

ARTIFACTS

101

TABLE 5.19 Basic and Common Household Artifacts from Group 7F-1 Made of Obsidian Instead of Chert Artifact

Number

Cores

1 2 6 2 1

Flakes

Thin bifaces

Provenience Primary occupation debris, Str. 7F-29-lst-A Primary occupation debris, Str. 7F-32-2nd Fill, Plat. 7F-l-2nd-D Fill, Plat. 7F-l-lst and 2nd Fill, Plat. 7F-l-lst-C

5 1

Fill, Str. 7F-32-lst-H Fill, Plat. 7F-l-2nd-D Fill, Plat. 7F-l-lst and 2nd Fill, Plat. 7F-l-lst Fill or late occupation, Plat. 7F-1 Fill, Plat. 7F-2

1 1 1

Primary occupation debris, Sr. 7F-32-lst-A Primary occupation debris, Str. 7F-32-lst-A Fill, Str. 7F-32-lst-H

1 15 18 2

occupation debris associated with Str. 7F-30 (one object), the fill of Str. 7F-32-1st-B (two objects), the fill of Plat 7F-1-1st (one object), and the fill of Plat. 7F-3-1st (one object). It is important to realize that these various “luxury” items are in addition to those from the various burials, caches, and problematical deposits. Overall, these artifacts seem to indicate that the occupants of “New Gp. 7F-1” were not of lower-class status. Furthermore, it is possible to state that these people were almost surely of higher-class standing than those of any of the residential groups discussed in TR. 19 and 20. At the time of this analysis (1990), the data were not available to make any comparison with artifacts from the residential groups that are the subject of TR. 21. It is difficult to evaluate the class standing of those who made use of the early Str. 7F-Sub.2 and whatever others were at this locus (“Old Gp. 7F-1”) prior to the founding of “New Gp. 7F-1.” The reasons are that the artifacts are few in number, and that some related to Str. 7F-30-5th and/or Bu. 162 are probably mixed with them. By themselves, they do not indicate the practices of any known low-status occupation, but other evidence at least raises the possibility that there was an obsidian workshop here (see PD. 37). In addition, only two common household types and three other classifiable types of objects are present in the collection. Furthermore, the basic and common artifacts are all of locally available raw materials, except for the prismatic blades and the manos for which imported materials were a necessity in all households. Indeed, the only really exotic material consists of the green obsidian used for a prismatic blade found in the fill of

Str. 7F-Sub.2 (a green prismatic blade was also present in PD. 37). As already noted, this probably is not an indicator of high social status in this case. Overall, it is possible that the original occupants of the Gp. 7F-1 locus were lower-class people comparable to those who lived in the residential groups discussed in TR. 19 and 20.

Ties to the Ruling Aristocracy Although not much to go on by themselves, sherds from two cache vessels, one from Str. 7F-32:LG. 2b and the other from 7F-30:LG. 5 (Table 5.1) hint at ties to the rulers of Tikal. The one from Str. 7F-32 is from a carved vessel not unlike the one in Bu. 132; a similar fragment, possibly from the same vessel, comes from the fill of 7F-32-1st-E (3G-62/31 MT. 214). It appears to have a jaguar head, of some kind, attached to the sign for way[bi] or wayib. Schele (pers. comm., 1990) suspects it names the creature in the vision serpent as the way (nagual) of the owner. The other carved cache vessel is 3A-64/11 (with MT. 327); though not precisely like the two sherds from Str. 7F-32 (Coggins 1975:245–246), it is like two known from the North Acropolis. To generalize more broadly, aside from these examples from Gp. 7F-1, carved cache bowls are known primarily from or near the North and Central Acropolises, where the rulers of Tikal lived, carried out their rituals, and buried their dead. Another hint—it is no more than that—comes from five sherds of a single black cylinder found in LG. 2b of Str. 7F-32, on which is depicted a costume element that next appears in the art of Palenque (Coggins 1975:233).

102

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

Similar links to the art and iconography of Palenque are discussed by Coggins (ibid.:243–244) in connection with Bu. 160 and 162, thought to be those of a king and queen. Although Coggins speculates that some of their descendants moved W from Tikal, these sherds in trash from 7F-32-2nd are a clue that at least some of their descendants may have lived in this structure.

Provisional Conclusions Analysis of the artifacts indicates that Gp. 7F-1 probably was residential. Structure 7F-29, 32, and 35 must have been houses, 7F-33 and 36 may have been, but 7F-

30 and 31 probably were not. Rather, they seem to have been used for some special purpose, presumably ceremonial in nature, by those who lived in the group. Structure 7F-Sub.1, too, may have served some special purpose. The residents of “New Gp. 7F-1” certainly were not of lower-class status in Tikal society. Just how high they ranked is not entirely clear from the artifacts alone (other than those in special deposits), but there are hints, slim though they are, at ties to the ruling dynasty. Before establishment of “New Gp. 7F-1,” there was an occupation of its locus (“Old Gp. 7F-1”) that also was probably residential; if so, these earlier householders were likely of lower social class status than those who lived in “New Gp. 7F-1.”

VI

Monuments and Miscellaneous Stones

Preliminary Comments The purpose of this section is to present descriptions of the various miscellaneous stones (MS.) from Gp. 7F1; to update the published information on St. 23; and to assess the possible significance of these data toward an understanding of the nature of Gp. 7F-1. The descriptive material comes first, with evaluations of when the stela and miscellaneous stones came to be where they were found. Following is a general discussion that tackles the problems of why they eventually came to be in Gp. 7F-1, and where they were originally placed.

Description Stela 23 LOCATION: Group 7F-1, in front (W) of Str. 7F-30, on the axis of 1st (Fig. 9 and TR. 2:27). A large top fragment (Frag. 1), and nine small, carved pieces (TR. 33A:fig. 36b) were preserved. Fragment 1 stood askew on Plat. 7F-1, facing W (TR. 2:27 and this report, Fig. 9) and leaning slightly in that direction, buried by mound talus to the bottom of its second row of glyphs. One of the small pieces was found in front of and below Frag. 1, but another was quite close to the surface (TR. 2:33). Where the others were found is not specified; presumably they were near Frag. 1. DESCRIPTION: For description, extended discussion, and listing of all previous (as of 1982) references, see TR. 33A:50–51;

illustrations are in TR. 4 (fig. 22) and TR. 33A (fig. 35a–c, 36a,b). The initial series date of 9.3.9.13.3 (AD 504) refers to the birth of a woman named on the monument who is most often known today as Lady (or Woman) of Tikal; likely it is her portrait that adorns its front. Alternatively, by analogy with Piedras Negras St. 3, the portrait could be that of a man, in spite of references to the woman’s birth and an important event in her life seven years later. This seems unlikely, however, because Proskouriakoff (1961:96–97) identified the high headdress of the figure as a woman’s costume element (C. Jones, pers. comm., 1990). Today, the female identity of the figure is widely accepted (see Martin 1999:4 and 2003:18–19). A distance number counts forward six years from the initial series to her accession as Ahau in 9.3.16.8.4 (TR. 33A:51 and Martin and Grube 2000:38). Although not known for certain, a dedicatory date of 9.4.3.0.0 (AD 517) is a distinct possibility (TR. 33A:51). There is, however, no reason why it could not be 9.4.0.0.0 (S. Martin, pers. comm., 2015). OFFERING: There was no certain offering, but see previous discussion of Ca. 2 in part IV. DISCUSSION: On the basis of their 1957 excavations, Coe and Broman concluded that St. 23 was probably reset after 10.2.0.0.0 (TR. 2:48), but noted that “physical evidence at the spot permits the reerection at any time after Phase D” (TR. 2:37), which is to say, at any time after the laying of Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D:Fl. 1. A reexamination of possibilities now is in order. Resetting prior to the laying of Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-11st almost surely may be ruled out, as this would have

104

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

the monument balanced on Fl. 1 of 2nd on its jagged E edge, along with several stones beneath its W edge. Such a setting would have been highly unstable; with nothing to hold the stones in place, it would have taken very little to knock the stela over. The question is, then, did the resetting take place when Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1 was laid, or was it intruded into that floor later, as Coe and Broman thought? Since Fl. 1 could be traced no closer to the stela than 0.20 m, the second is a very real possibility. The Maya could have dug into the floor, put up the stela, backfilled the hole, and perhaps repaved around it. No evidence for such a “patch up” was noted, but the resetting would have been reasonably stable even without it. On the other hand, the absence of paving near St. 23 may easily be explained as the result of severe root action, which had obliterated most traces of plaster surface up to 7.50 m to the W (TR. 2:fig. 3). It looks very much as if the missing floor around St. 23 may be attributed to this, rather than intrusion of the carved stone. Furthermore, projections of Fl. 1 suggest that it may have run precisely to the top of the break on the W face of the stela, which would have hidden from sight the stones that propped it up, as well as the break itself, while obscuring no more of the carving than absolutely necessary. So resetting when Fl. 1 was laid is the interpretation favored here, for these and other reasons to be discussed later in this section. (Further discussion of St. 23 will also be found toward the end of this section.) SEQUENTIAL DATA: Probably reset in Late Classic Plat. 7F-1:TS. 7; almost surely no earlier, but possibly as late as Terminal Classic TS. 2 or 3 (Table 2.8).

Miscellaneous Stone 63 LOCATION: From Str. 7F-30:LG. 6 (Table 5.1). DESCRIPTION: See TR. 33A:90 and fig. 64v. DISCUSSION: This probably is a glyphic piece from a monument (TR. 33A:86); the material in LG. 6, in which it was found, relates to the final period of occupation in Gp. 7F-1, when Eznab ceramics were in vogue. The possible significance of this piece is discussed below. SEQUENTIAL DATA: Most of LG. 6 pertains to Str. 7F-30:TS. 2 (Tables 2.2, 5.1).

Miscellaneous Stone 95 LOCATION: From Str. 7F-35:LG. 2a (Table 5.1). DESCRIPTION: See TR. 33A:92 and fig. 66g. DISCUSSION: This is probably a piece of a stela or altar (TR. 33A:86); the material in LG. 2a relates to the use of Str. 7F-35, when Imix, followed by Eznab, ceramics were in use. The possible significance of this piece is discussed below. SEQUENTIAL DATA: Lot Group 2a was deposited in the course of Str. 7F-35:TS. 2 (Table 2.5 and 5.1), in Late or Terminal Classic times.

Miscellaneous Stones 96 and 97 LOCATION: From Str. 7F-32:LG. 11c (Table 5.1). DESCRIPTION: See TR. 33A:92 and fig. 66h,i; MS. 96 was burned and MS. 97 may have been; both were of pink limestone. DISCUSSION: Both appear to be from monuments (TR. 33A:87), perhaps the same one; their pink color recalls MS. 133, described below. Conceivably, all could be from the same monument as well, though proof for this is lacking. The material with which they were found seems to consist of domestic debris left in Rm. 3 by the final occupants of Str. 7F-32, when Eznab ceramics were in production. These two pieces are discussed further, below. SEQUENTIAL DATA: Lot Group 11c was deposited in the course of Str. 7F-32:TS. 2 (Table 2.4) in Terminal Classic times.

Miscellaneous Stone 133 LOCATION: From Plat. 7F-1:LG. 2 (Lots 5 and 7), and 3d (Lot 19). See Table 5.1. DESCRIPTION: See TR. 33A:94 and fig. 67e–i.

MONUMENTS AND MISCELLANEOUS STONES

DISCUSSION: Although Jones and Satterthwaite (TR. 33A:50, 94) suggest that these fifteen fragments, which were surely from a single monument, could be pieces of St. 23, their color is more pink. The interlaced design seen on some, however, seems similar to those on the armband and belt of the figure on the left side of St. 23 (TR. 33A:fig. 23a and 67a,b). In addition to the shared design element, the fragments were found near St. 23, most in fill for Plat. 7F-1-1st-D. Unfortunately, pavement was missing in this area, which had seen severe disturbance. Thus, these may have worked their way down from a higher position, as had one undoubted piece of St. 23 (TR. 2:33). Most likely, these are also pieces of St. 23. SEQUENTIAL POSITION: At any time from TS. 7 to 2 or 3 of Plat. 7F-1 (Table 2.9), when St. 23 was reset.

105

monument fragment (TR. 33A:36). It was checked for a fit with St. 23, for it was thought that it might be a part of the belt of the figure portrayed on it, but no fit could be found. Another possibility, suggested by Jones (pers. comm.), is that MS. 145 is the missing tassel end to the left of the man’s knee on St. 26. This has not been checked, however. Despite lack of fit, St. 23 remains a strong possibility as its origin. SEQUENTIAL DATA: Most, if not all, of LG. 2 was placed as fill in TS. 15 of Plat. 7F-1 (Table 2.9), but there could be contamination by material placed as late as TS. 7 (when St. 23 likely was reset).

Miscellaneous Stone 150 LOCATION: From Plat. 7F-1:LG. 2 (Table 5.1).

Miscellaneous Stone 134 LOCATION: From Plat. 7F-1:LG. 3b (Table 5.1). DESCRIPTION: See TR. 33A:94, fig. 67j. DISCUSSION: This is surely a fragment from a stela or altar (TR. 33A:94), possibly even St. 23 (TR. 33A:50). The material in LG. 3b, with which it was found, is unsealed fill for Plat. 7F-1-1st. The possible significance of this piece is discussed below. SEQUENTIAL DATA: Most of LG. 3b was placed as fill in TS. 7 of Plat. 7F-1 (Table 2.9), in Late Classic times.

Miscellaneous Stone 145 LOCATION: From Plat. 7F-1:LG. 2 (Table 5.1). DESCRIPTION: See TR. 33A:95, fig. 67ff. DISCUSSION: Originally classified as a possible barkbeater fragment, it was examined by Coe, who pointed out that the lines, curvature, and stone indicate that this is surely a

DESCRIPTION: See TR. 33A:95, fig. 68b. DISCUSSION: This likely is a piece of a stela with insets on corners (TR. 33A:87); LG. 2, in which it was found, is unsealed fill for Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D. The possible significance of this piece is discussed below. SEQUENTIAL DATA: Most, if not all, of LG. 2 was placed as fill in Intermediate Classic TS. 15 of Plat. 7F-1 (Table 2.9), although there could be contamination by Intermediate or even Late Classic material placed as late as TS. 7.

General Discussion Ignoring St. 23 for the moment, the abundance of monument fragments from Gp. 7F-1 (23 were found) calls for comment. Such fragments are sometimes present in artifact collections from small residential groups. For example, two were found in trash from Str. 7C-62 and another was found in Gp. 6E-1 (TR. 20A). The great abundance of fragments from Gp. 7F-1, though, is in marked contrast to most residential groups. One exception to this is Gp. 4F-1, where several monument fragments were found near Str. 4F-3 (TR. 19:175). Although later rejected, this led to speculation that 4F-3 was occupied by specialists at monument carving (Haviland 1974). This raises the question, was Gp. 7F-1 a center of monument production? The answer is probably not, as the “tools of the trade” have not been found. These tools include rectan-

106

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

gular/oval bifaces and greenstone celts, and only one of the former and none of the latter have been found in Gp. 7F-1. This contrasts with Gp. 4F-1, which produced 22 rectangular/oval bifaces (2 from Str. 4F-3 alone) and 12 greenstone celts (4 from Str. 4F-3 alone), not to mention a “miniature stela” of pottery. If the fragments from Gp. 7F-1 are not by-products of monument production, then what are they? Four of them (MS. 63, 95, 96, and 97) were found in debris that may derive from the final occupation of the group. Hence, they may relate to activities that might not have been tolerated during Classic times. Three others (MS. 134, 145, and 150) may have been present by chance in material used as fill, as sometimes happened in small domestic groups. These were from the same fill that produced MS. 133, however, which as found was represented by 15 fragments. In this case, the presence of so many pieces of a single monument (and MS. 96 and 97 conceivably are redeposited pieces of the same one) suggests that the stone from which they originated was broken up in Gp. 7F-1, rather than elsewhere. It is unlikely that so many fragments from one monument would be found in one place, if they were brought in, by chance, as the occupants of Gp. 7F-1 were out scouring the neighborhood for fill to use in the construction of Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D. Instead, one would expect to find only one or two fragments in any particular fill, as is sometimes seen in small domestic groups. If MS. 133 does represent a monument that was broken up in Gp. 7F-1, it raises the question as to whether this was a second monument erected here. Once seriously considered, this hypothesis has been rejected on three grounds. As already noted, the type of stone and finished surfaces allow the possibility that they are pieces of St. 23, as do surviving design elements (TR. 33A:94). Furthermore, the pieces were found near this stela. That most were lower than the projected level of Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-12nd is no obstacle to concluding that they are fragments of St. 23, as one known piece of the stela was recovered at the same depth. Besides MS. 133 (with MS. 96 and 97), two other pieces, MS. 134 and 145, also are likely from St. 23 (TR. 33A:50 and 95). The conclusion is that all but three of the miscellaneous stones were broken from this monument, most probably at the time of its resetting. The presence of three stray chunks of other monuments is not dissimilar to finds from small residential groups elsewhere at Tikal. Another issue is the possible relationship of St. 23 with St. 25, a large fragment of which was found lying 244 m SE of Gp. 7F-1 (see TR. 1:17; TR. 3:68, 71–72, 75–75, 77, 82; TR. 4:113–115). Noting a strong unity in style and design between this and St. 23, Jones and Satterthwaite

(TR. 33A:51, 57) regarded their having been dedicated as a pair a likely possibility. Support for this comes from a linkage of the individuals portrayed on St. 23 and 25 with one on St. 12 (Martin and Grube 2000:38). Earlier (in part III), the argument was made that these two people were the ones whose corpses were in Bu. 160 and 162. Interesting in this connection is that the main figure on St. 23, like the body in Bu. 162, was severely mutilated. With one stela found in, and the other near, Gp. 7F-1, so far from epicentral Tikal, serious consideration was given to Satterthwaite’s suggestion (in TR. 3:74) that there may have been two centers of original monument erection at Tikal, raising the possibility that these two were originally set in Gp. 7F-1. This now seems unlikely, as the 9.4.3.0.0 dedicatory date on St. 25 falls at least six years before “New Gp. 7F-1” was founded. Thus, it is no surprise that a search in front of Str. 7F-30 of the floor for Plat. 7F-1-4th, the one with which they would have been set, failed to find any sign of pits to receive them. Moreover, as Satterthwaite noted (TR. 33A:74–75), the Maya were capable of dragging monuments the size of the St. 23 and 25 fragments distances comparable to the distance from the Great Plaza to Gp. 7F-1. Actual hints that this was done consist of MS. 147, possibly a piece of St. 23 or 25 (TR. 33A:50, 56, 95), found at the base of Str. 5D-32; St. 14, possibly the base of St. 25 (TR. 33A:35), reset in front of the N Terrace; and Alt. 4, found on the N Terrace, may have been paired originally with St. 23 (TR. 33A:79). Consequently, a likely scenario is that St. 23 and 25 were at some point removed from original settings in Gp. 5D-2, probably following the apparently violent death of Lady of Tikal (see discussion of Bu. 162) ca. 9.4.14.0.0 (AD 528). At the same time they were broken up and the figures on the front of the largest fragments mutilated. Presumably, they were unceremoniously abandoned like earlier St. 29 and 28 and later St. 17 (TR. 33A:60, 61 and 39). Ultimately, the large top fragments were retrieved and dragged to Gp. 7F-1 for reerection, probably sometime in the reign of Jasaw Chan K’awiil (9.12.9.17.16– ca. 9.15.0.0.0; AD 682–ca. 731). It was also during his reign that St. 14, the possible base of St. 25, was reset (TR. 14). That the top of St. 25 was intended for resetting is indicated by the squaring of its otherwise pointed base and smoothing of the jagged right side (TR. 4:113). On the other hand, hollowed-out portions in the center of its back might suggest secondary use as an altar (TR. 33A:56). Although it cannot now be proven, we believe St. 25 was reset either as a monument or altar with its companion St. 23, in front of the temple in which the man on St. 25, Kaloomte’ Bahlam, was entombed (as were St. 4 and 18 in front of the temple in which Yax Nuun Ahiin I, portrayed on them, was entombed; TR. 33A:14, 126). The

MONUMENTS AND MISCELLANEOUS STONES

position of St. 25 where found in 1957 may be the result of very late activity when, for reasons now unknown, it was dragged from its reset position in Gp. 7F-1, presumably sometime after 10.2.0.0.0.

Provisional Conclusions Reasonably certain is that St. 23, probably with St. 25, was reset in Gp. 7F-1 following Jasaw Chan K’awiil’s rise to power. Suggested by this is that descendants of the woman portrayed on St. 23, and who had been buried in Gp. 7F-1, were still living there. If St. 25 was reset then,

107

it was later removed from the group, probably after Late Classic times, in connection with the social, cultural, and political collapse of Tikal. Neither St. 23 nor 25 stood originally in Gp. 7F-1, for they were carved at least six years before “New Gp. 7F1” was founded. Evidence indicates they probably were first erected by the co-rulers Lady of Tikal and Kaloomte’ Bahlam in or near the Great Plaza, the public space where monuments to the kings of Tikal always stood until that time. Thus, they link the people who lived in Gp. 7F-1 with the ruling dynasty. The two stones were probably broken not long after 9.4.13.0.0, when a new ruler seized power.

This page intentionally left blank

VII

Conclusions

Preliminary Comments In the introduction to this report, the hypotheses were stated that Gp. 7F-1 was an elite residential group that included houses, ceremonial structures, and perhaps servants’ quarters; “New Gp. 7F-1” was founded upon the death of one of the Early Classic rulers of Tikal by his survivors, who moved here when he died and buried him in an elaborate tomb; their descendants continued to live here well into Terminal Classic times, and during this period of residency their fortunes waxed and waned, perhaps partially in response to political developments at Tikal. Following a description of the construction history for each architectural member of Gp. 7F-1, the burials, caches, problematical deposits, artifacts, and monument fragments were reviewed to see what light they might shed on these and corollary hypotheses, and a number of provisional conclusions were reached. What remains to be done is to pull together those provisional conclusions in a final attempt to address the hypotheses just stated. The best way to proceed is to start with the question of function, about which reasonably secure conclusions can be drawn. Building on these, the question of just who lived in Gp. 7F-1 may be dealt with, following which, it should be possible to attempt a reconstruction of how these people lived, and how they may have been affected by political events at Tikal. Before doing any of this, though, a dated sequence of group time spans must be established, in order to control chronology.

Group Time Spans Time spans for the individual structures, plazas, and chultun of Gp. 7F-1 have already been presented in

Tables 2.1 through 2.12. These have been correlated in terms of the group time spans defined in Table 7.1 from stratigraphic interrelationships between structures and platforms, supplemented by dates for ceramic and censer complexes. Here, their basis, content, and dating are discussed.

Time Span 25 It was in this time span that “New Gp. 7F-1” as defined in part I came into existence (Fig. 30); at the same time, earlier unrelated construction of “Old Gp. 7F-1” (discussed below) was abandoned and largely demolished. On the basis of stratigraphy, new construction surely included Str. 7F-30-5th, Plat. 7F-1-4th, Plat. 7F-3-2nd (with Ca. 207), and Str. 7F-Sub.1. Inaugurating it all was Bu. 160 (Table 3.3), which therefore dates TS. 25. Structure 7F-32-2nd-C almost surely was part of this building activity, on the basis of the following evidence: (1) the lack of a finished S wall in association with the floor of Plat. 7F-14th where it was seen beneath Str. 7F-32-2nd-C, suggesting a floor-structure relationship similar to that between Plat. 7F-1-4th and Str. 7F-Sub.1; (2) the material in LG. 1 of Str. 7F-32 (Table 5.1) should date construction of 2ndC (the identification of Ik sherds in this lot group is quite dubious, and the building masonry certainly indicates Early Classic construction); (3) the inclusion of sherds in the floor of Str. 7F-32-2nd-C, though not precisely the same, is at least suggestive of the sherd mosaic in the floor for Plat. 7F-1-4th (TR. 2:31). This practice of pressing sherds into floor surfaces before they hardened has not been seen in any other floors of Gp. 7F-1, implying that the two where this was done were laid at about the same time. One peculiarity of this construction is that Str. 7F-322nd-C faced S, rather than N onto Plat. 7F-1, suggesting

110

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TABLE 7.1 Group 7F-1: Time Spans Group Time Span 1

Str. 7F-29

1

Str. 7F-30

1

Str. 7F-31

1

Str. 7F-32

Str. 7F-35

Str. 7F-36

Str. 7F-Sub.l

Str. 7F-Sub.2

2

3

3

4

4

5

5

6

2

6

7

3

7

8

4

9

5

Plat. 7F-2

Plat. 7F-3

Ch. 7F-8

Approximate Long Count Date

1

1

2

Plat. 7F-1

1?

1?

1?

1?

1?

1? 2

1?

1?

3

5-2

4

1?

10 ° 0 0 0

5

10

2

6

2

8

2

6

2

11

3

7

3

9

3

7

3

12

4

4

10

8

13

5

5

11

9

14

8

6

12

10

15

9

7

13

11

16

10

14

12

17

11

15

13 14

18

6

12

16

19

7

13

17

20

8

14

21

9

15

-9.14.0.0.0-9.15.0.0.0

— 9.13.10.0.0-9.14.0.0.0

— 9.12.10.0.0-9.13.0.0.0

—9.7.10.0.0-9.8.0.0.0

15

1

18

16

2

19

17

3

18

4

19

5

22

20

23

21

1

24

16

22

2

25

17

23

3

1

_ 9.7.0.0.0-9.7.10.0.0

— 9.6.0.0.0-9.7.0.0.0

1

26

2

2

27

3

3

O A 10 AA

CONCLUSIONS

111

there was more to the S than an empty plaza, in which case Str. 7F-33 may have been built in TS. 25. (This must remain speculative, until further excavation is conducted.) A second peculiarity is the apparently great westward extent of Plat. 7F-1-4th, the reason for which may be that another structure, known now only by a wall and tamped earth floor (Plat. 7F-1:U. 9 and 10) was built here. In the face of such slim information, it is impossible to know what such a structure looked like, but the only ones ever built on the W edge of the plaza in later times were small (Str. 7F-35 and 36), so perhaps this earlier one was as well.

small interior platform could be earlier than TS. 21, but if that were so, there would be no modification of this structure to go with these others. In sum, TS. 21 apparently saw the addition of Str. 7F-29 to Gp. 7F-1, at the same time that Plat. 7F-1 was altered and Plat. 7F-3 was enlarged (Fig. 31). The other structures continued in use as before, although 7F-32 underwent minor modification. Use of all this architecture continued through TS. 20.

Time Spans 24–22

Time Span 19 saw extensive alteration (Fig. 32), including elimination of Plat. 7F-3 and Str. 7F-Sub.1, as the elevation of Plat. 7F-1 was raised (Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D; Bu. 2, 3, and probably 4 were associated with this). Structure 7F-30-4th must have been built at this time, for the succeeding 3rd stood in part on the floor of Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D (Fig. 7:59). As if to compensate for elimination of Plat. 7F-3, which had extended at least as far S as Bu. 162, Str. 7F-30-4th was lengthened in this direction, positioning its end due E of that grave. The interment and offerings that were initial to its construction (Bu. 140 and Ca. 1, 162) were placed on the old Bu. 160 axis, however, rather than the new centerline of 4th. Burial 140 provided the date of this construction (Table 3.3). Since the pavement of Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D seems to have incorporated portions of Str. 7F-29-3rd, and since 7F-29-1st-B was intruded into the floor of Plat. 7F-12nd-D and seems to postdate Plat. 7F-1-2nd-B (see TS. 13, below, and Table 5.1:LG. 3a-c of Str. 7F-29), it is likely that Str. 7F-29-2nd was constructed in TS. 19. It also appears that the floor of Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D ran up to a new stairway for Str. 7F-32, thereby eliminating the old midden by covering it with this new construction. Hence, Str. 7F-32-1st-H, which was a major piece of construction and which could for the first time be entered from Plat. 7F-1, is assigned to TS. 19. Consistent with this is the dating for the various fills of Str. 7F-32-1st-H (cf. Table 5.1:LG. 2a–i of 7F-32 with the above discussion).

These time spans constitute a period of relative quiescence, so far as construction is concerned. It was a period of at least one and a half, if not two and a half katuns, based on the dating of TS. 25 and 21. The only known construction activity (TS. 23) was the walling up of the doorway in Str. 7F-32 that defines 2nd-B; typical Early Classic masonry was used for this, like that seen in the earlier building walls. The structure evidently continued to be occupied, for trash was discarded from the back, accumulating against its N wall. One wonders if closure of the doorway had something to do with this, blocking as it did easy access from Rm. 3 to the entrance of the building. This may have been sufficient to cause occupants to throw some of their refuse out the back, rather than carry it around through Rm. 2 to Rm. 1, and then out. The resultant midden, which eventually reached a depth of over 1 m, must have begun to accumulate some time prior to the replacement of Manik by Ik pottery, which happened ca. 9.6.0.0.0. (AD 554), for Manik types are well represented in the debris, even though Ik sherds predominate, and are present in deep layers.

Time Spans 21 and 20 Time Span 21 is defined for construction of Plat. 7F-3-1st, which is dated by Bu. 134 (Table 3.3); probably, construction of Str. 7F-29-3rd and the alteration that produced Plat. 7F-1-3rd were carried out at the same time, an interpretation consistent with the fill ceramics (Table 5.1; LG. 1b and 1c of Str. 7F-29 and LG. 2 of Plat. 7F-3). More particularly, these two constructions precede Plat. 7F-12nd-D, which is stratigraphically linked to abandonment of Str. 7F-29-3rd and elimination of Plat. 7F-3-1st. Given the quiescence just noted for TS. 24–22, it seems unlikely that Str. 7F-29-3rd and Plat. 7F-1-3rd predate Plat. 7F-31st. This also seems a likely time for construction of the small interior platform that defines Str. 7F-32-2nd-A, an event that predates Str. 7F-32-1st-H, linked stratigraphically as it is to construction of Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D. This

Time Spans 19 and 18

Time Spans 17 and 16 After use of 4th, Str. 7F-30 was altered by an expansion of its front to the W, thereby reducing slightly the expanse of Plat. 7F-1 (Str. 7F-30-3rd and Plat. 7F-1-2nd-C). As this was done, an important interment and offering were once again placed on the old Bu. 160 axis (Bu. 132— which dates TS. 17—and Ca. 161), while a child’s body (Bu. 194) was placed beneath the NW corner of the structure. Contemporaneously, a small interior platform may have been added to Str. 7F-32 (1st-G), which was the first of two such modifications that predate Imix pottery (Ta-

112

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

ble 5.1:LG. 3 and 4 of 7F-32). Similarly, Str. 7F-30 was modified one more time prior to the end of the transition from Ik to Imix ceramics (in TS. 15, below). Thus, a oneto-one correlation of 7F-30-3rd and 7F-32-1st-G is logical, even if not provable. No other alteration is known for TS. 17; apparently, Str. 7F-29-2nd and whatever others were in Gp. 7F-1 continued in use with the two modified structures 7F-32 and 7F-30 through TS. 16.

Time Spans 15 and 14 Initial construction of Str. 7F-31 (2nd) and reconstruction of 7F-30 (2nd) may be assigned to TS. 15; 7F32 (1st-F) was probably modified as well, but there is no evidence for alteration of 7F-29 (Fig. 33). On stratigraphic grounds, the southern portion of 7F-30-3rd was torn down to be replaced by 7F-31-2nd, which was built against a new S face of 7F-30 located farther N than the old one. This shifted the centerline of 30 back to the axis of Bu. 160, and on this, a new burial (150) and offerings (PD. 98 and 103) were placed. Where the S end of 7F-303rd used to be (due E of Bu. 162), on the front-rear axis of the new Str. 7F-31-2nd, a burial (159) was placed that in many ways resembles 150. Both inaugurated construction of their respective structures, and so date TS. 15. The only other construction that may relate to TS. 15 is Str. 7F-32-1st-F, defined by construction of yet another interior platform; its assignment follows from the discussion of Str. 7F-32-1st-G (TS. 17 and 16, above). Although Str. 7F-29 apparently escaped alteration, it continued in use through TS. 14 with those just discussed, as well as with whatever other structures may have stood in Gp. 7F-1.

Time Spans 13 and 12 The next known construction was that of Str. 7F-311st-B and 7F-29-1st-B (Fig. 34), a correlation based on the fact that both postdate the disappearance of Ik-Imix transitional ceramics (Table 5.1:LG. 3a–c of Str. 7F-29, and see below), yet predate (on stratigraphic grounds) Plat. 7F-1-1st-C. Initial to Str. 7F-31 is the axial Bu. 193, which dates this construction (Table 3.3). Because these structures are the first known after Imix pottery came into vogue, it is likely that the first such construction in Str. 7F-32 (a large platform in Rm. 1, and the conversion of another into a thronelike affair; Str. 7F-32-1st-E; see Table 5.1:LG. 5 of 7F-32) was also a part of TS. 13, but it could be later (TS. 11).

Time Span 11 Time Span 11 (Fig. 35) once again saw a major al-

teration of Plat. 7F-1: its floor level was raised, and its N edge was extended considerably (Plat. 7F-1-1st-C). Its S wall, which runs W from Str. 7F-32, appears to have been built at the same time as Str. 7F-35 (see Fig. 20:1, 5, and U. 7 of Plat. 7F-1), indicating that Str. 7F-35 originated in TS. 11. At the same time, whatever structure had previously stood on the W edge of Plat. 7F-1 (represented by Plat. 7F-1:U. 9 and 10, built in TS. 25) must have been eliminated (see Fig. 21:B-B’). Floor associations show clearly that modifications were carried out in both Str. 7F-29 (1st-A) and 7F-30 (1st-C). Burials were placed in both structures, but for the first time, those in 7F-30 were not placed on the Bu. 160 axis; instead, a woman and a teenager were interred (apparently contemporaneously) on either side of the axis immediately in front of the supplementary platform (Bu. 190 and 191). Nor is an offering known for 7F-30-1st-C (such as accompanied all earlier architectural developments), unless Ca. 2 served. The cache was placed W of 7F-30, where 7F-Sub.1 once stood. Structure 7F-32-1st-D is thought to date from TS. 11, solely because it is the last modification prior to the appearance of Eznab ceramics (Table 5.1:LG. 6 of Str. 7F-32). It seems more likely, even if unproven, that this would have been a part of the large-scale alterations of this time span, rather than the later small-scale alterations of TS. 9.

Time Spans 10–8 The last large-scale construction in Gp. 7F-1 was that of TS. 11, even though occupation continued for more than 100 years, as indicated by the debris that continued to accumulate, particularly near Str. 7F-35, and in front of Str. 7F-29 (as discussed previously in part V). It is indicated as well by several small-scale modifications (Fig. 36), the first of which may have been the second small structure (7F-36-2nd) that was built on the floor of Plat. 7F-11st. Also built on this floor is the extension to the bottom step of Str. 7F-30-1st(B). Both constructions may belong in TS. 9, as suggested in Table 7.1, or perhaps Str. 7F-361st is the one contemporary with 7F-30-1st-B.

Time Spans 7–1 The last-known modification of Str. 7F-30 (1st-A) was carried out in TS. 7 (Fig. 36) and is dated by Bu. 1, which, like the earlier burials in 7F-30, was placed on the old Bu. 160 axis, as was an offering (PD. 100). Since Bu. 1 is probably Terminal Classic, Str. 7F-30-1st-A likely postdates construction of Str. 7F-36-1st (Table 5.1:LG. 2 and 3 of Str. 7F-36). Indeed, Str. 7F-35 and 36 may already have been abandoned; if not, they surely were before long. Identifiable Eznab sherds, such as were strewn in some

CONCLUSIONS

abundance in Str. 7F-29 and 32, as well as on Plat. 7F-1 between them, were not found near either 35 or 36 (Table 5.1:LG. 2a and 2b of 7F-35 and LG. 3 of 7F-36). Although Str. 7F-29 probably did remain in use through TS. 2, it was last modified, so far as is now known, in TS. 11. Structure 7F-32, by contrast, underwent three minor alterations (of the same sort as those carried out in TS. 23, 21, 17, 15, 13, and 11) subsequent to the appearance of Eznab ceramics (see Table 5.1:LG. 8 and 10a of Str. 7F-32). So it appears that even though Str. 7F-35 and 36 may no longer have continued in use after TS. 7, Str. 7F-29, 30, and 32, if not 31 as well, did continue to be used in much the same ways as previously. The architecture of 32 continued to be modified as before, and an important alteration of 30 was carried out in the traditional manner. Finally, total abandonment came with TS. 1.

Time Spans 27 and 26 The earliest-known construction at this locus, consisting of Str. 7F-Sub.2 (Fig. 23a) and Ch. 7F-8 (Fig. 8 and 11), predates the founding of “New Gp. 7F-1.” Both were abandoned when work on “New Gp. 7F-1” began in TS. 25, for they were then altered and buried beneath fill that was sealed by the floors of Plat. 7F-1-4th and 7F-3-2nd. Other construction at the locus of Str. 7F-29 may also have been abandoned at this time (see Fig. 23b). Structure 7F-Sub.2 was certainly built sometime after the appearance of Manik ceramics (Table 5.1:LG. 1 of Str. 7F-Sub.2), while Ch. 7F-8 could have been constructed at the same time, or even earlier. The presence of Preclassic sherds in the fills of Plat. 7F-1 suggests that the group of which the structure and chultun were a part had its origin in Preclassic times (probably late).

Functional Assessment With chronology under control, the next step is to assess the function of each structure. Since one of the hypotheses here is that Gp. 7F-1 was residential, the basic criteria used to assess function are those that have been used in the case of other potentially residential groups. Although some of these have been touched upon in earlier sections of this report, their systematic exposition will be found in TR. 19, with further amplification in the concluding section of TR. 20B.

Structure 7F-29 Since detailed architectural and other data exist only for this edifice in its final forms (1st-A and B), it is best to begin the discussion with them, before considering earlier versions. Architecturally, these show a striking re-

113

semblance to several small, range-type structures, some of which were houses and some of which were residential adjuncts. In basal dimension and plan, they show a particularly close resemblance to Str. 4E-16 (cf. Fig. 2 with TR. 20A:fig. 77), which quite probably was a house. Vaulted Str. 7F-29-1st-A and B, however, were more elaborate than 4E-16, which was constructed in part of pole-andthatch. In this, 29-1st-A and B are reminiscent of Str. 3F-12 and 4E-50 (cf. Fig. 3 with TR. 20A:fig. 54, 82), although neither 3F-12 nor 4E-50 is as large as 7F-29-1st-A or B (cf. Fig. 2 with TR. 20A:fig. 53, 81). As discussed in TR. 20B, Str. 3F-12 probably was never intended to serve as a house, but 4E-50, while likely not constructed originally as a dwelling, does seem to have been converted into one in its final form. From the standpoint of architecture, therefore, one may state that Str. 7F-29-1st-A and B could have served as houses, and even show close resemblances to other structures that probably did. Although architecture alone is not sufficient to prove that Str. 7F-29-1st-A and B were dwellings, other lines of evidence quite strongly suggest that they were. For one, the known burial has been provisionally classified (in part III, above) as a household one, and for another, the two problematical deposits have been provisionally classified (in part IV, above) as living debris or, in the case of PD. 166, possibly an exposed offering not unlike those known from a number of houses elsewhere at Tikal. Coupled with this is the lack of any kind of axially placed cache like those associated with small, range-type structures that were not built to be dwellings, such as Str. 4E-31 (TR. 19:179), 3F-12, and 4E-50-B (both in TR. 20B:135–136; 138–139). Finally, as discussed in part V, evident household debris was found in some abundance inside and just outside 7F-29-1st-A. Combining all lines of evidence including the architectural, it is reasonable to conclude that Str. 7F-29-1st-A and B almost certainly served as houses. Given the conclusion that Str. 7F-29-1st-A and B were dwellings, it is more than likely that 7F-29-2nd and 3rd were as well, for several reasons. The first is that at Tikal, most small structures were built initially for the purposes for which they were used in their final forms (TR. 20B:145); although 7F-29 was not exactly small, functional continuity at least is suggested by architectural continuity. In fact, there is a good possibility (already discussed in part II) that 2nd and 3rd, like the two versions of 29-1st, were range-type structures, though further hints of functional continuity are provided by the artifact collections (discussed in part V). A lack of special deposits (caches and problematical deposits) is at least consistent with the proposition that Str. 7F-29-2nd and 3rd were houses, and finally, since Str. 7F-32 seems to have served from first to last as a house (see below), 7F-29 probably did as well.

114

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

Structure 7F-30 Architecturally, Str. 7F-30 in all of its versions was of sufficient size to have served as a house, but unlike most known dwellings at Tikal, there seems to have been an emphasis on height. Data on the height of those major structures of Gp. 7F-1 that have been excavated are presented in Table 7.2 and Fig. 37. What they show is that 7F-30, never significantly shorter than the other structures, from Gp. TS. 19 onward was significantly taller. This emphasis on height is suggestive of temple architecture, as is its location on the E edge of a plaza (TR. 21). Not all structures on the E edges of plazas are temples (e.g., TR. 19:Str. 4F-4 and 7), however. Moreover, despite uncertainties about the location of their rear walls, Str. 7F-30-5th and 4th seem to lack the squareness in substructure plan expected of temples, although 3rd through 1st do approach squareness (Table 7.3 and Fig. 37). It is therefore fair to conclude that the architecture suggests 7F-30 was a temple, rather than a house, but certainly does not prove it. As noted in parts II and III of this report, each important alteration of Str. 7F-30 was accompanied by a burial, and as argued in part III, these were probably residential burials of special significance of the sort known elsewhere at Tikal from small temples always located on the E of a plaza. The burials here, however, tend to be more elaborate than those known from other residential groups at Tikal, while the earliest (Bu. 160) is matched only by the major chamber burials at Tikal, which are invariably beneath, in, or near, temples (see, for example, TR. 14).

As noted in part IV of this report, all of the ceremonial deposits from Gp. 7F-1, excepting some material redeposited in fill, were placed in or in front of Str. 7F30. Indeed, each important alteration of 30 seems to have been accompanied by special ritual activity. Coupled with this, the artifacts scattered on the surfaces of the structure, as well as those in its fills (see part V, above), suggest a ceremonial function. Finally, St. 23 (probably with St. 25) was reset in front of 7F-30-1st, rather than in front of any known or probable house in Gp. 7F-1. Implied again is that Str. 7F-30 was a temple. In sum, the evidence convincingly indicates that Str. 7F-30 served, from first to last, as a temple, and not as a dwelling. Its position on the E side of a plaza, on other sides of which were houses, recalls other residential temples at Tikal (TR. 21).

Structure 7F-31 The architecture of Str. 7F-31 suggests that it almost surely was a temple. Like 7F-30 and temples in other residential groups, it was built on the E edge of a plaza, and from Gp. TS. 15, when it was built, to the end of TS. 2, when it was abandoned, its height was apparently second only to that of 7F-30 (Table 7.2; see also Fig. 37). In squareness, it outdid even 7F-30-2nd and 1st, the squarest versions of that temple (Table 7.3 and Fig. 37). Like 7F30, its construction and important alteration were inaugurated by burials of special significance (see part III), but unlike 7F-30, no ritual deposits are known from 7F-31. Nevertheless, the few artifacts collected recall those from 7F-30 and (as discussed in part V) do suggest a ceremonial

TABLE 7.2 Height in Meters of Building Floors Above Nearest Contemporary Surface of Platform 7F-1: Structures 7F-29, 7F-30, 7F-31, and 7F-32 Group 7F-1 Time Spans

Str. 7F-29

Str. 7F-30

Str. 7F-31

Str. 7F-32

5-2

0.60

4.90

2.90

1.80

11-5

0.60

4.90

2.90

1.70

13-10

0.60

3.95

3.22

1.70

15-12

0.36?

3.95

2.48

1.70

19-14

0.36?

2.85

--

1.70

21-20

0.55?

2.68

--

2.78

25-22

-

2.68

-

2.78

CONCLUSIONS

115

TABLE 7.3 Platform Indices Compared: Structures 7F-29, 7F-30, 7F-31, and 7F-32 Index* Structures

.28

.31

7F-29-lst-B

7F-29-lst-A

.47

Ca. 50

7F-30-4th

7F-29-3rd? 7F-32-2nd 7F-32-lst

.40

7F-30-5th

.64

7F-30-3rd

.83

7F-30-2nd 7F-30-lst

.84

7F-31-2nd 7F-31-lst

*See Tikal Report 19A: table 17 for definition

function. The lack of caches or other offerings may be accounted for if 7F-31 was a temple of less importance than 7F-30, which may have been the case, considering that it was always overshadowed (architecturally) by the grander 7F-30 (compare Fig. 33–36). In sum, on the basis of its architecture, coupled with resemblances to Str. 7F-30 with respect to burials and artifacts, it seems almost certain that 7F-31 served as a small temple.

Structure 7F-32 Architecturally, 7F-32 in all of its manifestations resembles major range-type structures both at Tikal and Navahuelal that may have been houses (Fig. 12–16; TR. 15, 24B). For example, its plan is similar to that of the central core of Str. 5D-46, a Central Acropolis “palace” which, based on inscriptional evidence, was built as the house of Chak Tok Ich’aak I, 14th in the line of Tikal kings (Harrison 1999:77–78; Martin 2003:table 1.1). When first constructed, 7F-32 (2nd-C) shared about equal prominence with the temple Str. 7F-30-5th; both were rectangular (Table 7.3), of comparable basal dimensions (Fig. 30), and of almost equal height relative to Plat. 7F-1 (Table 7.2). As they were modified over time, however, the height of 7F-30 was emphasized more and more (Table 7.2), and there was a tendency to make it squarer in plan with each successive alteration (Table 7.3). By contrast, the height of 7F-32 decreased relative to Plat. 7F-1 (Table 7.2), and its rectangular plan was retained (Table 7.3). Thus, though more elaborate, Str. 7F-32 had more in common with 7F29, a house, than it did with 7F-30, a temple (see Fig. 37). Given this it is important to note that artifactual evidence (discussed in part V) very strongly suggests that 7F-32 served from first to last as a dwelling. In particular, a huge midden full of household debris indicates that 32-2nd-C, B, and A were dwellings, and abundant trash in Str. 321st-A indicates the same for it. Similar material from other deposits hints at the same function for other manifestations of 7F-32. Moreover, there is a complete absence of special ceremonial deposits on the front-rear axis, or in any of the structure floors (all of which were examined except in the E half of Rm. 1).

The absence of household burials in 7F-32 might seem at odds with the judgment that it served as a house, but there are two ways around this difficulty. One is that there has been little excavation beneath the stairs of the structure, or in areas immediately S, E, and W. Such excavation might produce some household burials, as might further excavation in Rm. 1. More to the point, though, is the observation that those buried beneath the two temples (7F-30 and 31) had to have lived in some other structure or structures. Since interment beneath temples appears to have been rather special, it is reasonable to suppose that those so-buried were among the most important residents of Gp. 7F-1. The size and elaboration of Str. 7F-32 seem to mark it as the house of the most important residents, and so it is they who most probably were buried in 7F-30, if not 7F-31, rather than 7F-32. The possibility will be discussed later in this report. The weight of the evidence, therefore, clearly favors Str. 7F-32 as a dwelling, from its initial construction to its final abandonment. Since all of the platforms within its rooms were of adequate size to have functioned as sleeping platforms (Harrison 1970:173), most may have served this purpose. Some, however, may have served other, possibly domestic-related functions; for example, the thronelike appearance created by the construction of end screens on U. 11, which was centered against the back wall of Rm. 1 facing its doorway, conjures up visions of a headman seated upon it, running the affairs of his household (cf. Harrison 1970:173).

Structure 7F-33 Obviously, without more than minor test excavation, it is impossible to know how this structure was used, but for what they are worth, there are some hints that it may have been a dwelling. The first is that it was not built on the E edge of a plaza, where temples usually stood in residential groups. The second is that its ruin mound can be interpreted as that of a range-type structure, larger than Str. 7F-29, possibly as large as 7F-32, but more likely a bit smaller. Finally, the artifact collection suggests a similarity to those from Str. 7F-29 and 32, rather than 30 and 31

116

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

(see part V, above). For these reasons, it is at least a viable hypothesis that Str. 7F-33 was a house.

Str. 7F-35, in view of which the functional possibilities for Str. 7F-35 apply here as well.

Structure 7F-35

Structure 7F-Sub.1

Architecturally, this resembles a number of others in which people are known to have lived (see part II herein, and TR. 19:101–122), including one that is almost identical, Str. 3D-10-1st (TR. 20B:table 2.12). Coupled with this, the artifact collection strongly points to a domestic function, with perhaps some special emphasis on textile working (see part V). No ceremonial deposits are known from the structure, nor are they usually found in ones like this (TR. 19 and 20B). Hence, while some could remain to be found in unexcavated portions, this seems unlikely. More likely is that burials, which are also unknown from 7F-35, may be found in unexcavated portions (see, for example, TR. 19:141). On the other hand, deceased householders may have been buried elsewhere, a suggestion to be followed up below. Also possible is that 7F-35 was an outbuilding, rather than a house, in which case it is unlikely that burials would be present. In favor of the outbuilding hypothesis are the following points: (1) historically, the Maya built utility buildings that were much like houses (TR. 19:101), and (2) Str. 7F35 is dramatically simpler than 7F-29 and 32, which we can accept as dwellings. Indeed, those residences that Str. 7F-35 does resemble were relatively low-class ones, which 7F-29 and 32 certainly were not (see below). Although 7F-35 is more elaborate than known outbuildings at Tikal (see, for example, TR. 19:fig. 41a,e, and TR. 20A:fig. 99, 149), this may be relative. Outbuildings at Tikal, as far as is known, seem always to have been smaller and less elaborate than the houses with which they were associated. Since the houses of Gp. 7F-1 were more elaborate than most, so may the outbuilding have been more elaborate than most. In sum, a compelling case can be made that Str. 7F35 served a residential function, either as a house or associated outbuilding. It is impossible to be certain which, although the domiciliary hypothesis is favored here, for reasons to be presented later in this section.

Since this was an open platform, without any sort of building on top, it could not have been a house, and its function is unknown. There are no real artifactural clues, although its relatively “clean” fill recalls the two temples, 7F-30 and 31 (see part V). This may be significant, for Sub.1 does face 7F-30-5th, and a westward projection of the centerline of that temple (also the axis of Bu. 160) comes to about the midpoint of the stairway of Sub.1 (Fig. 30). All in all, it seems likely that Sub.1 was built for some ceremonial purpose specifically connected with 7F-30-5th.

Structure 7F-36 Little can be said about this structure, since it has only been tested at one end. Appearances suggest that Str. 7F-36-2nd resembles some relatively lower-class houses at Tikal, and the same is probably true for 1st. Moreover, the artifacts are at least consistent with a residential function. An absence of household burials is not significant, given such limited excavation. In short, the case of Str. 7F-36 strikes one as an imperfect copy of that just reviewed for

Structure 7F-Sub.2 As noted in part II, this structure is thought to have closely resembled 4F-42, which has been identified as some sort of outbuilding in the residential Gp. 4F-2 (TR. 19:183). Those who lived in Gp. 4F-2 were, among other things, specialists at obsidian working, and although Str. 4F-42 itself was not an obsidian workshop, it was in back of a building that included one. Thus, Str. 7F-Sub.2 may have been some sort of outbuilding in a group of small residential structures, a hypothesis bolstered by the presence of a chultun that was in use at the same time (Gp. TS. 26), if chultuns were used for food storage (TR. 19:101), or for the fermentation of alcoholic beverages (Dhalin and Litzinger 1986:734). Furthermore, there is possible evidence for obsidian working at this locus before the major structures of “New Gp. 7F-1” were built (discussed in part V), such as took place in Gp. 4F-2. This brings up another possible resemblance: the knoll on which Str. 7F-Sub.2 was built is of sufficient size to have sustained a multiplaza-residential unit similar to that represented by Gp. 4F-1 and 4F-2 together on their knoll (TR. 19:185). This would help account for the quantity of Early Classic midden material available for use to fill Ch. 7F-8 when it was converted into the chamber for Bu. 162, as well as for the abundance of Manik sherds in other fills of Gp. TS. 25. Structure 7F-Sub.2, therefore, probably was an outbuilding in a multiplaza-residential unit not unlike Gp. 4F-1 and 4F-2. Some of its occupants, like those of Gp. 4F-2, may have been specialists at obsidian working.

Platform 7F-1:Units 9 and 10 As noted in part II, a tamped earth surface and wall may relate to an early structure at the locus of Str. 7F-36. On the basis of such slim evidence, this is bound to be

CONCLUSIONS

speculative, but a small structure may have been built here on the W edge of Plat. 7F-1-4th, in which case the same functional possibilities should be allowed as for Str. 7F-35 and 36.

Summary The conclusions from the functional assessments presented above may now be summarized in the framework of the time spans established for Gp. 7F-1 as a whole. Prior to TS. 25, there probably existed a multiplaza-residential unit of small structures at this locus, one of which, Str. 7F-Sub.2, was probably some sort of outbuilding. Some of those who lived in the houses themselves may have been obsidian workers. In TS. 25, this multiplaza-residential unit was abandoned and largely demolished to make way for construction of a new Gp. 7F-1, which consisted of a temple (Str. 7F-30), an associated ceremonial platform (Str. 7F-Sub.1), a large residence (Str. 7F-32), possibly what may have been another large house (Str. 7F-33), and perhaps some sort of small structure that could have been a small house or outbuilding, located on the W edge of Plat. 7F-1 (Plat. 7F-1:U. 9 and 10). The temple and at least one house (7F-32) (both houses probably) continued to be used, with various modifications, until TS. 1, when Gp. 7F-1 was abandoned. The ceremonial platform, though, with a terrace in front of the temple were done away with in TS. 19, while the small house or outbuilding was eliminated by TS. 11. The next additions to Gp. 7F-1 comprised another large house (Str. 7F-29) in TS. 21, and a second temple (Str. 7F-31) in TS. 15. Again, with some modification, these buildings continued in use probably until TS. 1. With TS. 11 came the addition of a small house or outbuilding (Str. 7F-35) on the W edge of Plat. 7F-2, perhaps as a replacement for the earlier small building posited for the W edge of Plat. 7F-1. Possibly, those who made use of 7F-35 did more than the usual amount of textile work. A second small dwelling or outbuilding (Str. 7F-36) was added, on the W edge of Plat. 7F-1, in TS. 9; both small structures may have been abandoned as early as TS. 7, or as late as TS. 1.

Evidence for Upper-Class Status Accepting that Gp. 7F-1 was residential, including both dwellings and residential adjuncts, the question logically arises: what sort of people called it “home”? In this section, it is argued that, from TS. 25 on, Gp. 7F-1 was home to people of elite or upper-class status in Tikal society, but that some lower-ranking people may have lived here too. In preceding parts of this report, there has already been some discussion as to how the presumed high status of occupants might be indicated by the archaeo-

117

logical data, but for a more general discussion, the reader should consult part VI of TR. 20B (see also Haviland and Moholy Nagy 1992).

Architectural Indicators of Class The structures for which function could be established with greatest certainty are the two houses, Str. 7F29 and 32, and the two associated temples, Str. 7F-30 and 31. The two houses are, architecturally, far more elaborate than any dealt with in either TR. 19 or 20 (cf. Fig. 2, 3, and 12–17 with fig. 2, 3, 5–16, 19–22, and 24–38 in TR. 19; compare also total volume of the building platform of Str. 7F-32-2nd alone—see Appendix D—with volumes of all structures of Gp. 4F-1 and 2 in fig. 43 of TR. 19). Moreover, Str. 7F-29-1st-A and B may be no less imposing than the moderately elaborate dwellings of Gp. 4G-1, 4H-1, 4, 5, 5G-1 or 2 (TR. 21), while Str. 7F-32, in all its manifestations, certainly outshone any of them. Indeed, it is reminiscent of the house built by Chak Tok Ich’aak I on the Central Acropolis (Str. 5D-46), and resembles as well a structure at Navahuelal that could have housed individuals of more wealth and prominence than any others in that region. Since upper-class members of stratified societies usually live in more imposing houses than do lower-class people (Barber 1957:144; Rapaport 1969:11, 26, 58), those who lived in Str. 7F-29 and 32 were probably of upper-class status. Of the temples located on the E edge of plazas in residential groups studied by Becker (TR. 21), the most elaborate is Str. 5G-8, located in Gp. 5G-1. The sketchy knowledge of Str. 7F-30 makes architectural comparisons difficult, but 30-4th, 3rd, 2nd, and 1st appear to have been somewhat larger than Str. 5G-8. Structure 7F-30-5th, which seems to have had elaborate stucco ornamentation, may have been slightly narrower from front to back, but probably much longer from end to end than Str. 5G-8. Indications are, therefore, that the people living in Gp. 7F-1 were of equal, and perhaps greater social prominence, than those who lived in Gp. 5G-1. Since they ultimately constructed a second temple to serve with the first, while those who lived in Gp. 5G-1 did not, higher, rather than equal, social prominence for the people of Gp. 7F-1 seems even more probable. Although the function of 7F-33 is not known for sure, and architectural knowledge of it is next to nonexistent, it is still worth bringing the structure into the discussion at this point. There are two possibilities here, the most likely being that 7F-33 was a house nearly as imposing as 7F-32, and more imposing than 7F-29-1st-A and B; the other being that it was a temple. If the latter, the size of the ruin mound suggests that it could not have been much less imposing than Str. 7F-30, but either possibility

118

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

is consistent with the arguments just presented, that those who lived in Gp. 7F-1 enjoyed upper-class status. The architecture of Str. 7F-35 and 36 also lends support to the hypothesis that those who lived in Str. 7F-29, 32, and 33 (if it was a house) were people of prominence. If these small structures were outbuildings, they were far more imposing than most known at Tikal. In fact, they were as substantial as some, and more substantial than many lower-class dwellings (and compare, too, the total volume of the construction of Str. 7F-35—see Appendix D—with figures for the various structures of Gp. 4F-1 and 2; TR. 19:fig. 43). A reasonable supposition is that people able to afford such impressive outbuildings must have been of greater positions than lower-class standing in society. On the other hand, Str. 7F-35 and 36 may actually have been dwellings themselves, in which case the question arises, why were houses comparable to those of lower-class people at Tikal part of a group that seems to include upper-class dwellings? Two possible answers come to mind, one being that 7F-35 and 36 were houses of poor relations of those who lived in the more elaborate ones. Although such a possibility cannot be disproved, it is unlikely, in the face of evidence that the basic Tikal residential unit was the extended family (TR. 19:185 and TR. 20B:section VI). Each such family usually occupied a single plaza-residential unit, with the constituent nuclear families occupying the individual houses around the plaza. As extended families grew in size, however, new single plaza-residential units could be added to the original one (discussion of this can be found in TR. 20B:146– 148; see also Haviland 1972). Such a model fits “New Gp. 7F-1” very well; as an elite residential compound, it may have been founded by two related nuclear families, whose houses were Str. 7F-32 and 33. Later, the extended family grew to include yet a third house (7F-29) as some descendant of the founder married and established his or her own nuclear family. What is important here is that in stratified societies in which extended families are common, individuals are so firmly tied to their particular family that if someone’s class-standing is to change in any way, up or down, that of the entire extended family must change as well (Barber 1957:361–63). Given this, it is unlikely that the kind of marked differences in class status could develop within one extended family such as are implied by the architectural contrasts between Str. 7F35 and 36, on the one hand, and 7F-29 and 32 (and 33?) on the other. The other, more likely, possibility is that Str. 7F-35 and 36 housed families, members of which provided domestic service for those who lived in the larger dwellings (Haviland 1992). Certainly, it is expected that upper-class families would have servants at their disposal, and that those people would rank considerably below those whom

they served in a stratified society (e.g., Tumin 1967:24–38).

Indicators of Class from Burials In earlier discussions, it was proposed that the individual in Bu. 192 lived in Str. 7F-29-1st-B, while some or all of those in Bu. 1, 132, 140, 150, 190, 191, and perhaps 134 may have lived in Str. 7F-32. Here, one might argue that those in Bu. 159 and 193 probably lived in Str. 7F29 or 33, the reason being that the temple beneath which they were placed is much less impressive than 7F-30, and the burials themselves are less resplendent than their contemporaries (or near contemporaries) Bu. 150, 190, and 191 beneath 7F-30. If those buried beneath the most impressive temple lived in the most impressive house, then those buried beneath the less impressive temple probably lived in a somewhat less impressive house. Evidence from these burials has been presented in part III, which indicates that those interred in them probably ranked quite high in Tikal society, thereby confirming the architectural evidence for upper-class status on the part of those who lived in the large houses of Gp. 7F-1. In the discussion of the Gp. 7F-1 burials, the relative simplicity of Bu. 2, 3, 4, and 194 was noted, as well as skeletal evidence that their subjects did not live as well as did those whose burials were just discussed, suggesting that these people were of subordinate status to those in the more impressive interments. This takes on added importance in view of the architectural evidence just presented that Str. 7F-35 and 36 could have been lower- class dwellings. The four burials in question predate construction of both 7F-35 and 36, but as already noted, there is some evidence that these two were preceded by an earlier small structure that may have had the same function as those that replaced it. The individuals in Bu. 2, 3, 4, and 194, therefore, could have lived in this earlier structure— again hinting that this and its successor structures were lower-class houses, rather than elaborate outbuildings.

Artifactual Indicators of Class Artifactual evidence for upper-class status on the part of the residents of Gp. 7F-1 has already been presented in part V, and is both negative and positive: nothing indicates that low-status occupations were pursued, at least after Gp. TS. 25, but on the other hand, the overall artifact inventory is a relatively rich one. Of the known or possible houses, adequate artifact collections exist for only three: the large Str. 7F-29 and 32, and the small Str. 7F-35. As already pointed out, the collection from the latter differs from those of the former two in ways as to suggest that the occupants of 7F-35 performed some service functions for those who lived in the larger structures.

CONCLUSIONS

Thus, the artifactual evidence is consistent with that from architecture and burials.

Class Status and the Earliest Occupation of Group 7F-1 Evidence was presented above that, at this locus, an earlier multiplaza-residential unit was supplanted by a later one. The architecture of the one known structure of the original occupation resembles that of an outbuilding in Gp. 4F-2, which was occupied by people of relatively low-class status (TR. 19:184–85). Artifactual evidence (reviewed in part V) is consistent with this, and so it is probable that the earliest occupants of this locus were of lower social class status than the residents of Gp. 7F-1 who replaced them.

Summary The combination of architectural, mortuary, and artifactual evidence leads to the firm conclusion that Gp. 7F-1 came to be the “home” of people of elite, or upper-class, status. They lived in Str. 7F-29, 32, and probably 33, and some of them were buried in the temple Str. 7F-30 and 31. Somewhat less firm, but still compelling, is the conclusion that the upper-class residents of “New Gp. 7F-1” were not its sole occupants. Lower-class people, some of whom were probably buried in Plat. 7F-1 in front of Str. 7F-30, likely lived in Str. 7F-35, 36, and an earlier small structure that 7F-35 replaced. Their presence in Gp. 7F-1 is most reasonably explained by the theory that they performed service functions for the elite residents of the group. Before Gp. 7F-1 emerged as an elite-class residential compound, it was occupied by people whose class status was almost surely much lower than that of the people who replaced them.

Ties to the Ruling Aristocracy Owing to the nature of the data, and the large role played by chance in determining what survives in the archaeological record (not to mention what the archaeologist discovers of what survives), the hypothesis that the elite residents of Gp. 7F-1 were descendants of one of the Early Classic rulers of Tikal is more difficult to test than those so far discussed. Here, we will review proposals made in earlier sections to see if they fit together in a consistent manner: “if a statement forms an integral part of a comprehensive, coherent system, it is considered verified” (Gjessing 1975:338).

119

Burial 160 and the Founding of “New Group 7F-1” If the hypothesis is correct, then it stands to reason that “New Gp. 7F-1” was founded, if not by the Early Classic ruler himself, then by his immediate survivors. In part III, the case was made that Bu. 160 contained the body of Kaloomte’ Bahlam, the 19th ruler of Tikal (see its discussion). With his demise, a plausible (but not provable) scenario is that a usurper seized power and would not allow Kaloomte’ Bahlam to be entombed at the political and ceremonial heart of Tikal. Given his posthumous exile, it is not unexpected that his surviving queen with whom he shared rule (she was the daughter of the 18th ruler) would have been driven out of their living quarters, and forced to live at some distance from the seat of power, thus accounting for the presence of an elite residential group so far from the city center. Usually, such groups were located at no great distance from the center (TR. 13:24–25), but Gp. 7F-1 is one of the very few exceptions. It would account as well for the replacement by “New Gp. 7F-1” of what appears to have been a lower-class residential group (“Old Gp. 7F-1”) at the same locus, and the resemblance of Str. 7F-32-2nd-C to Str. 5D46 in the Central Acropolis, the residence built by Chak Tok Ich’aak I. Being forced to move so far from the seat of power, resettlement in a formerly lower-class residential locality would be a likely outcome. Here, the family would have buried the deceased king in a manner in keeping with his former status, and built themselves a house that recalled their former living quarters. In the process of resettlement, it may have been necessary to evict residents of lower-class standing.

Burial 162 and the Ceremonial Architecture Not long after the man in Bu. 160 died, and before the original construction of elite Gp. 7F-1 was completed, the woman died who was the subject of Bu. 162. As noted in its discussion, various aspects of this suggest that she could have been the murdered partner of Kaloomte’ Bahlam, the man probably entombed in Bu. 160, an hypothesis in accord with the skeletal data, and one that also helps explain three peculiarities of Gp. 7F-1. One of these is the asymmetry of Plat. 7F-3, relative to Str. 7F-30-5th and 7F-Sub.1 (the front-rear axes of the two ceremonial structures 7F-30-5th and 7F-Sub.1 seem to have been oriented to Bu. 160, while Plat. 7F-3 clearly had a different orientation; see Fig. 4, 5, and 30). The second is the peculiar elongation of Str. 7F-30-4th (built when Plat. 7F-3 was eliminated), so that its S end fell directly E of Bu. 162 (Fig. 6, 7, and 32). What makes this unusual is that instead of

120

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

placing burials and offerings on the new front-rear axis of Str. 7F-30, they continued to be placed on the old one of Bu. 160. The third peculiarity is the addition of a second temple, 7F-31, to the group (Fig. 8, 9, 33, 34, 35, and 36), since two such structures together on the E edge of a residential group plaza are unusual at Tikal. The centerline of 7F-31 was located precisely E of Bu. 162, and at the time of its construction, the S end of Str. 7F-30 shifted back to the N. It is also worth remembering that the woman buried beneath Str. 7F-31-1st when it was built (Bu. 193) is the only woman at Tikal beside the one in Bu. 162 known to have had a Spondylus shell (fragmentary, in the case of Bu. 162) included in her grave. If the woman in Bu. 162 was as prominent as proposed, then it would not be surprising if her final resting place remained an important force in planning the architecture on the E edge of Plat. 7F-1. In earlier sections, it was argued that the asymmetry of Plat. 7F-3 relates to this burial; if so, then the southward elongation of Str. 7F-30 may be viewed as a kind of compensation for the loss of Plat. 7F-3. This odd lengthening of Str. 7F-30, however, was no longer required once Str. 7F-31 was built, at which time the centerline of 7F-30 was restored to its ceremonial/burial axis. Structure 7F-31, therefore, may well have been conceived of as the temple of the woman in Bu. 162, as 7F-30 likely was considered that of the man in Bu. 160.

Continuity of Occupation As noted in the general discussion of burials, a number of features of those beneath Str. 7F-30 and 31 suggest that they contain descendants and/or spouses of the founders of “New Gp. 7F-1”; strong additional support for this comes from the skeletal data. Continuity of occupation is implied as well by the orthodox nature of some of the ceremonial deposits made in Gp. 7F-1 (see part IV), and a few decorated sherds discussed in part V at least hint at the same thing. Finally, the architecture itself suggests continuity of occupation, most clearly in the case of Str. 7F-32, where there is a long history of interior doorway closure and small-scale modification of interior platforms from late Early Classic until well into Terminal Classic times. It also seems indicated in the case of Str. 7F-30 by the continued preoccupation with the original front-rear axis for burials and ceremonial deposits, regardless of where the actual centerline was located at a given time. The final Terminal Classic alteration of 7F-30, too, recalls all previous significant alterations of the structure, but on a smaller scale. Implied is adherence to an old tradition by people who no longer had the resources to carry out a larger-scale alteration of the structure. A last hint—it is no more than that—of continuity from the architecture is the apparent reservation of the W edge of the group,

from first to last, for structures built mostly of pole-andthatch. At least one seems to have been present here all along, while such structures were never built elsewhere in the group.

The Periods of Ceremonial Activity and Inactivity The proposition that Gp. 7F-1 continued to be occupied well into Terminal Classic times by members of a family that had lived there since the end of Early Classic times has important implications. It has long been assumed that Terminal Classic occupants of the Central Acropolis were squatters, rather than members of the royal family living on in reduced circumstances following their loss of power (Martin 2003:34). Perhaps this was so, but thought needs to be given to a scenario not unlike that in Gp. 7F-1. Perhaps the “royals,” abandoned by their subjects, hung on as best they could in their old quarters. The hypothesis that descendants of the woman in Bu. 162 continuously occupied Gp. 7F-1 is useful in explaining other peculiarities, providing that our understanding of the Intermediate and Late Classic dynastic history of Tikal is essentially correct (see also Fig. 38). These peculiarities are that, once “New Gp. 7F-1” came into being in Gp. TS. 25, there was a period of between 27 to 35 years (based on the dating of Bu. 162 and 134) during which no cached offerings or burials were made in or near the ceremonial Str. 7F-30, nor was that structure modified in any noticeable way. There followed a period of at least 10 but no more than 39 years (Gp. TS. 21–17) during which Str. 7F-30 was significantly altered three times (counting Plat. 7F-3-1st as an alteration of Str. 7F-30), in the course of which special ceremonial deposits and three burials were placed in or near 7F-30. This was followed by another period of 90 to 110 years (Gp. TS. 16), more or less, with no special ceremonial deposits or burials made in, nor significant alterations of, Str. 7F-30. After this lull, 7F-30 was altered twice again, each time with ceremonial deposits and burials, and Str. 7F-31 was built and subsequently altered, again each time with a burial. All this took place within a period of no more than 50 years (Gp. TS. 15–11). There followed another period, this time of ca. 138 years (Gp. TS. 10–8), with no special deposits in, or rebuildings of, the two temples. Then, the last burial and ceremonial deposit were made in a small addition at the base of the Str. 7F-30 stairway (Gp. TS. 7). The first “burst” of renewed activity involving Str. 7F-30 began with the events surrounding Bu. 134. This was in the reign of Wak Chan K’awiil, the 21st ruler of Tikal and younger brother of Lady of Tikal. As discussed in Appendix A, Bu. 134 could well be a son of Lady of

CONCLUSIONS

Tikal, whose body is thought to have lain in Bu. 162 (see discussion in part III). As proposed in discussion of his burial, her son may have been murdered by Wak Chan K’awiil, in order to remove a potential challenger to his rule, or the death may have occurred in the “Star War” with Calakmul, in which Wak Chan K’awiil lost his life. The former may be ruled out, as a son of Lady of Tikal could have been at most about 18 years old at the time of his uncle’s accession (in AD 537), but the body in Bu. 134 was that of an adult. His age at the time of the “Star War” would have been about 40, consistent with the remains in the grave. The condition of the bones and lack of impressive “grave goods” probably reflect the disastrous turn of events on the part of the survivors. The next burial, 140, reflects an improvement in the fortunes of the family, as does the next, Bu. 132. Both date from the reign of Animal Skull, the 22nd ruler of Tikal. Evidently, the new ruler did not regard these people as a threat to his position, given the major revision they made to Str. 7F-32 (1st-H). No longer was its back turned symbolically on the plaza (7F-1) associated with the deceased queen and her co-ruler, but now faced directly on that plaza. It appears that, following the death of Animal Skull, no special burials were made in Gp. 7F-1 during the reigns of his two successors, nor were alterations made to Str. 7F-30. Although it is pure speculation, this could reflect continued good relations with the city rulers, to the extent that male heads of the family were permitted to be buried somewhere near the center of power. It probably does not reflect a decline in economic circumstances, as this was a time of widespread prosperity at Tikal (Coe 1965:41–53; Coggins 1975:397–399; Jones 1977; Schele and Freidel 1990:212; Moholy-Nagy 2003:104). The second “burst” of ceremonial activity in Gp. 7F-1 took place in the reign of Jasaw Chan K’awiil I, who restored strong central control after a period of seemingly weak dynastic rule (Martin 2003:25–30; Moholy-Nagy 2003:105). With more autocratic rule, we find once again adult males placed in special graves in their home group (Gp. 7F-1). Concurrently, the existing temple was altered and a new one added, so it appears that homage to the ancestors was still permitted. None of the burials that followed were of adult men, so once again they may have been interred somewhere near the seat of power. Their wives, though, seem to have been buried in graves in their home group (Bu. 191, 192, 193). The last burials in the reign of Jasaw Chan K’awiil I may have been caused by the unexpected death of at least three, and possibly four members of the household in Gp. TS. 11. Those who died included a youth (in Bu. 190), a young woman—possibly his mother—(in Bu. 191), a second, possibly older woman (Bu. 192), and perhaps an old-

121

er man. The latter is suggested by alterations of Str. 7F-29 and 32 reminiscent of those in other household groups that seem to signal residential changes triggered by the death of a male household head (Haviland 1987 and TR. 20B:150–151); in this particular case, though, the deceased household head would have been buried outside of his home group. Just what caused so many deaths at one time is unknown, but some sort of severe illness seems likely. In any event, the deaths were followed by even more activity than the small-scale alteration of Str. 7F-29 and 32 already noted: enlargement of Plat. 7F-1, major alteration of Str. 7F-30, and reerection of St. 23, perhaps with St. 25 as well (see below). Yet, no grave was placed on the axis of Str. 7F-30, although the youth and his presumed mother were placed on either side of it. A possible explanation for all this is that survivors interpreted the disaster that had removed so many members of their household as punishment for carelessness towards the memory of their ancestors, K’aloomte Bahlam and Lady of Tikal, whose monuments had not yet been retrieved and reerected. The logical way to correct this situation—and to ward off future disaster—was to reset the monuments, thereby showing proper respect for the ancestors. Speculative though this is, the notion that improper observance of ritual can have disastrous consequences is deeply ingrained in at least some native people of the lowlands today (see Reina 1965), and it may have been the same for the Classic Maya. The second period of ceremonial inactivity in Gp. 7F-1 came to an end with Bu. 1, PD. 100, and the alteration that produced Str. 7F-30-1st-A. This happened in Terminal Classic times, probably after the old Tikal ruling line had once again lost power. Thus, if the previous reconstruction is correct, adult men of Gp. 7F-1 would once again be buried in their home temple.

The Carved Monuments One last unusual feature of Gp. 7F-1 is its association with carved monuments: at least one (St. 23) is known to have been reerected here, and a second (St. 25) may have been. As has been noted (in part VI), there is a good probability that St. 23 was reset when Plat. 7F-1-1st-C was built, apparently in the reign of Jasaw Chan K’awiil I. One could interpret its retrieval and reerection, then, as a reflection of the fact that relatives of the people who lived in Gp. 7F-1 once again held power at Tikal. If the woman on St. 23 was linked to Jasaw Chan K’awiil’s dynasty, and was the subject of Bu. 162, it would suggest that her posthumous honor had been fully restored following the consolidation of power of her later collateral relative, Jasaw Chan K’awiil I. If St. 25 was reset with St. 23, a likely possibility, the implications would be similar.

122

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

Summary When the 1965 excavations in Gp. 7F-1 began, the hypothesis that it was a “minor ceremonial center” in Bullard’s sense of this term (discussed in part I) seemed quite reasonable. The previous excavations of Coe and Broman (restricted to a small area in front of Str. 7F-30) and those of Becker (restricted to the front-rear axes of Str. 7F-30 and 31) produced clear evidence for important ceremonial activity, which could be “explained” in terms of this hypothesis. The 1965 excavations, which concentrated on structures not previously investigated, provided clear evidence that people of high social status lived here. Although this did not rule it out as some kind of “minor center,” it did suggest an alternative hypothesis, which is that Gp. 7F-1 was no more than an “upper-class” residential group, and the ceremonial activity that took place in it was simply an elite version of what took place in numerous Tikal households having their own temples. A critical test of any hypothesis, if it is to be considered verified, is that it must account for observed phenomena in a coherent, or logically consistent manner (Gjessing 1975:338); any hypothesis that leaves loose ends dangling, so that they do not form parts of a comprehensive, coherent system, must be regarded with suspicion. Thus, the trouble with these hypotheses was that both left a number of loose ends dangling. One had to accept as idiosyncratic various features of Gp. 7F-1: the sudden replacement of an apparently lower-class residential unit by “New Gp. 7F-1,” the presence of a chamber burial like those of epicentral Tikal, the peculiar nature of Bu. 162, the asymmetry of the W terrace (Plat. 7F-3) of Str. 7F-30, the precise

alignment of Str. 7F-31 to Bu. 162, the restriction of ceremonial activity to very specific periods of time, and the presence of carved monuments in and near the group. It was not until 1974, by which time an understanding of Tikal dynastic affairs was beginning to emerge, that Coggins (pers. comm.) pointed out epigraphic and other evidence linking St. 23 and 25 to Bu. 160, a chamber burial rich in the glyphic and iconographic vocabulary used by Maya lords to describe the half of their lives spent in the underworld (Coggins 1986), which seemed to indicate that Bu. 160 was the tomb of a one-time ruler of Tikal. Unlike the others, the hypothesis that Gp. 7F-1 was occupied by the descendants of a ruler entombed in Bu. 160 provided a means of explaining those features just noted (and some new ones pointed out by Coggins, e.g., the epigraphic and stylistic features of Bu. 190, 191, and 193 suggestive of links to Tikal royalty) in such a way that they become parts of a comprehensive, coherent system. Thus, this new hypotheses was verified in a way that the others were not. Group 7F-1, then, was not a minor center; rather, its primary purpose was to house people of high social status. Ceremonial activity did take place there, but was intense only during periods of time (very roughly, 9.6.0.0.0– 9.8.0.0.0, and 9.12.10.0.0–9.15.0.0.0), when important changes in dynastic affairs took place (Martin 2003:25, 30; Martin and Grube 2000:40, 44). The first period saw the accession of a king not of the royal patriline, the second a revival of the power of the old patriline. Conversely, ceremonial activity in Gp. 7F-1 all but ceased in those periods following restoration of a measure of dynastic stability, when its occupants likely were integrated into a Tikal-wide political and religious organization.

Appendix A Kinship and Residence in Group 7F-1: A Trial For mulation

Building on all of the data and arguments presented in this report, it is possible to offer a tentative reconstruction of kinship and residence in Gp. 7F-1. Because any such reconstruction is bound to be somewhat speculative, I have chosen to place it in an appendix, rather than in the main body of the report; nevertheless, there are a number of controls that prevent it from falling in the category of unbridled speculation. Therefore, it may serve as a model for understanding Gp. 7F-1 until such time as someone is able to develop a more useful one. To begin, it should be recognized that a reconstruction must meet the following criteria: 1. It must be consistent with the construction history of Gp. 7F-1, including the dating of the various time spans, so far as this is known (see part VII). 2. It must be consistent with the age at death, so far as this can be determined, of the individuals in Bu. 1, 132, 134, 140, 150, 159, 160, 162, 190, 191, 192, and 193 (see part III). 3. It must be consistent with expectable demographic statistics related to human reproduction. The following figures, reported by Steggerda (1941:204–216) for Maya women from Yucatan some 70 years ago may serve as a guide: mean age for menarche, 12.91 years; mean age for birth of first child, 17.89 years; average interval between first and second birth, 25 months (with longer intervals thereafter); mean length of childbearing years, 17 (maximum length is 27 years). Steggerda (1941:209) suggests that Landa’s information—average age at marriage prior to the Spanish conquest was around 20 years—was likely an error caused by the unavailability of more accurate records until later; he found mean age at marriage to be

16.85 years, although earlier ones at 12, 13, and 14 are not uncommon. The possibility that Lady of Tikal was a “child bride” (see discussion of Bu. 162) lends credence to Steggerda’s opinion. 4. It must be consistent with an apparent emphasis on patrilocality and patrilineality at Tikal in Classic times (see TR. 20B:151–153, and Haviland 1972 and 1997). 5. It must be consistent with usual residential practices at Tikal (see TR. 20B:149–151, and Haviland 1988). The usual household group seems to have been the extended family, with constituent nuclear families occupying separate houses, the most imposing being the home of the senior nuclear family, that of the oldest man. When he died, the member of the extended family who had been second in seniority normally moved into the abandoned house, along with the members of his own nuclear family. 6. Given the conclusion that the occupants of Gp. 7F-1 were relatives of the traditional rulers of Tikal, the genealogy must show a consistency with available information on the legitimate dynasty. This would include its genealogy (Fig. 38), the dates for dynastic overthrow and restoration (see part III), as well as vital statistics on Lady of Tikal and her co-ruler. To sum up these dates from earlier sections of this report: Lady of Tikal was born in 9.3.9.13.3 (AD 504) and was dead soon after 9.4.13.0.0 (AD 527) at the latest; therefore, she was 24 years old at most, but may even have been dead by age 23. She is unlikely to have given birth before about 9.4.7.0.0–9.4.8.0.0 (AD 521–522), in her 17th or 18th year (close to the expected age for a mother to bear her first child). This child would have been 5 or 6 years old when its mother

124

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

died. A second child would probably have been born ca. 9.4.10.0.0 (AD 524), making it about 3 or 4 years old at the time of its mother’s death. Although kingship at Tikal commonly passed from father to son, it is apparent that the 19th ruler, Kaloomte’ Bahlam (the man in Bu. 160), was not succeeded by his son. Instead, a poorly known ruler held sway over the city for perhaps 10 years, while the brother of Lady of Tikal, Wak Chan K’awiil, remained away from the city (Martin 2005; 2003:21; Martin and Grube 2000:39). Not until 9.5.3.9.15 (AD 537) was Wak Chan K’awiil able to return to Tikal and assume his rightful place as ruler. Following his demise in 9.6.8.0.0 (AD 562), a man not of the royal patriline came to power, followed by men (the 23rd and 24th rulers), who were probably his descendants. By AD 657, the 25th ruler, Nuun Ujol Chaak (aka “Shield Skull”) had assumed power. Evidently, he was of a different lineage than his three predecessors, as his son, Jasaw Chan K’awiil I, explicitly linked his reign back to those who preceded Lady of Tikal. Thus, his accession in 9.12.9.17.16 (AD 682) implies a restoration of the old dynasty of the city. 7. The genealogy should be as parsimonious as possible, by which is meant that the fewest possible people should be postulated beyond those actually known from burials in Gp. 7F-1. It is necessary to postulate some individuals, however, for as discussed in part IV, it is probable that not all those who lived in the group were buried there. Furthermore, burials may remain to be found in unexcavated portions of Gp. 7F-1.

Kinship Patterns in Group 7F-1: 9.4.10.0.0–9.12.10.0.0 (AD 527–682) Turning now to the hypothetical genealogy (Fig. 38), some further explanation is required. It is unlikely that Lady of Tikal had more than two surviving children, considering that her childbearing years numbered no more than 6. Her first child would have been 16 or 17 years old by the time of his uncle, Wak Chan K’awiil’s inauguration in 9.5.3.9.15. Presumably, as previously argued, this child grew up to be the man in Bu. 134. Lady of Tikal appears to have lived long enough to give birth to a second son, about 9.4.10.0.0 (AD 524). If he lived until the age of 59 years, this could put his death about 9.7.10.0.0. This is the upper-limit date for Bu. 140, which contained the body of a man who was 55 years or older when he died. The body in Bu. 132 was that of a youth who died sometime between the ages of 12 and 21, perhaps older rather than younger; interment could have been no

later than about 9.8.0.0.0 (AD 593), or earlier than ca. 9.7.10.0.0 (AD 583). An assumption that this youth was about 20 years old at death gives a birth date of AD 563– 573, probably too late for him to be a son of the man in Bu. 134. The man in Bu. 140, by contrast, would have been in his forties, unusually old but not too old to have sired a son. Untimely though this youth’s death may have been, he probably lived long enough to have married and sired a son himself. Burial 132 is the last in Str. 7F-30 until about 9.12.10.0.0–9.13.0.0.0 (AD 682–692), the date for Bu. 150 and 151 in neighboring Str. 7F-31. Both contained the bodies of men aged between 35 and 55 years of age. They could have been born anytime between AD 627 and 657, perhaps between 637 and 647 (highest mortality for Tikal males was when they were in their forties; TR. 30). To fill the time gap between their births and Bu. 132, we must suppose that two generations of men lived and died in Gp. 7F-1, but their bodies lie elsewhere (Fig. 38:1, 2). One could have been a son of the youth in Bu. 132 or an older brother of that youth who survived into older age and, like his son and grandson, was buried elsewhere. In any event, the men in Bu. 150 and 159 “fit” as probably great, great grandsons of the man in Bu. 140. Given the similarity between the two burials, they are diagrammed in Fig. 38 as brothers. Burial 159 impresses one as a scaleddown version of the other, suggesting that the two men were brothers, with the one in Bu. 150 the older of the two. The possibility cannot be ruled out, however, that the two men were close cousins. Possibly, the man in Bu. 159 was married to the woman whose body lies in the later Bu. 193, the placement of her remains in the temple originally built over his, implying a close connection between the two. She probably was not a consanguineal relative, for under patrilocal residence any girl born and brought up in Gp. 7F-1 would usually go somewhere else to live with her husband, and so would not be available for burial in the household of her birth. Given her dental inlays, it is tempting to view the woman in Bu. 193 as a “blood relative” of men in power at the time of her youth. (The men in North Acropolis Bu. 195, 23, and 24 all had inlaid teeth.) If so, it would reinforce the argument previously made that the residents of Gp. 7F-1 were in the good graces of the 23rd and 24th rulers. If the woman were of the same age as her husband, and if he were born ca. 9.10.4.0.0 (AD 637), then she would have been 55 years old in 9.13.0.0.0 (AD 692), which dates the final disappearance of Ik-Imix transitional pottery, and which her burial probably does not long postdate. Unfortunately, age at death could not be determined from the bones of the woman in Bu. 193, other than that it certainly was some time after she reached adulthood.

APPENDIX A

Residence Patterns in Group 7F-1: 9.4.10.0.0–9.12.10.0.0 Before proceeding further with the subject of kinship, it is necessary to relate what has been said thus far to the subject of residence: who was living in what structure, and when? The reason is that any further reconstruction of kinship requires knowledge of preceding residence patterns. As with the discussion so far, we are operating in the realm of reasonable possibilities, rather than known facts, and this must be kept in mind.

Group Time Span 25 In the year 9.4.13.0.0 the man in Bu. 160, 19th ruler of Tikal, died, whereupon his surviving co-ruler was forced to entomb him at some distance from the seat of power. There she established a new residence, with a temple and related ceremonial platform on one plaza and one or possibly two large houses on a neighboring one. Of these houses, Str. 7F-32 seems to have been the most imposing, and it apparently remained so right through Gp. TS. 2. It is probable that it was built for Lady of Tikal herself, while Str. 7F-33 may have been built for her son, who would have been very young in 9.4.13.0.0 (10 years old at the most, in the unlikely event that he was born within a year of her reaching menarche), but there is no other obvious candidate for occupant of 7F-33. Perhaps it was built in anticipation of the day when her son would be old enough to move out of his mother’s house, or perhaps it was not built until later (lack of firm knowledge of this structure is a major handicap in this attempt to reconstruct kinship and residence). Along with at least one large dwelling, a small one for this family’s personal servants may have been built. It was during the construction of Gp. 7F-1 that Lady of Tikal died. Being a woman of royal blood, she was given a burial near her co-ruler’s tomb, and the architecture associated with his temple was altered so as to include her grave beneath it. With this her young son would have become the important occupant of Str. 7F-32, at which point 7F-33 may have served as the house of whoever became responsible for the child’s care.

Group Time Span 24–22 When Wak Chan K’awiil became ruler of Tikal, his nephew living in Gp. 7F-1 was close to the average age appropriate for marriage. Undoubtedly, the newlyweds lived in Str. 7F-32, the man’s younger brother perhaps taking up residence in Str. 7F-33. This change in tenancy could be marked by closure of the doorway between Rm. 1 and

125

3 of 7F-32, and the family of the man in Bu. 134 may be responsible for much of the trash that accumulated against the N wall of the structure. Their use of the plaza associated with the graves of their ancestors as a dump of sorts, although it gives the appearance of desecration, may not have been viewed in that way; instead, what may be reflected is a desire to “keep a low profile” so as not to antagonize Wak Chan K’awiil by too much attention to the co-rulers (in Bu. 160 and 162) who, prior to their deaths, stood in the way of him becoming king.

Group Time Span 21–20 Major events were the death of the man in Bu. 134 and initial construction of Str. 7F-29; by this time, the man in Bu. 140 was probably in his late thirties and was likely living in Str. 7F-33. With his brother’s death, as new senior man in the household, one would expect him to have moved back into 7F-32, and perhaps he took the opportunity to construct the first “bench” that was built in Rm. 1 of his new home. Although his son (who would ultimately be interred in Bu. 132) had yet to be born, it is doubtful that either the man in Bu. 140 or his brother had been celibate up to this time, in which case both are likely to have had sons (Fig. 38:3 and 4), one of whom could have moved into Str. 7F-33, while 7F-29 was built for the other. By the time of their deaths, they may have made their peace with the rulers who succeeded Wak Chan K’awiil, which may be why no burials can be identified as belonging to these hypothetical sons of the men in Bu. 134 and 140. By the time of their deaths, they may have been participants in the royal court, and accorded burials elsewhere.

Group Time Span 19 The next major events in the history of Gp. 7F-1 were the death of the senior man (who probably lived in Str. 7F- 32), the major alteration of the structure (7F-30) in which his burial (140) was placed, and the major alterations of Str. 7F-29 and 32. The new senior man may have been the very young one who was subsequently interred in Bu. 132. Upon taking over 7F-32, he changed its orientation to face N across Plat. 7F-1 towards 7F-29, which he may have renovated in anticipation of the birth of a son of his own (what became of its previous tenant is unknown). Not only did he provide access to 7F-32 from Plat. 7F-1 for the first time, but he made Rm. 2, 3, and 4 into the main living quarters by cutting them off from southerly Rm. 1 (see Fig. 32). Thus, access to Str. 7F-32 from Plat. 7F-2 on the S (on which Str. 7F-33 was located) became less important than access from Plat. 7F-1. Certainly, the scale of all this construction suggests that the family no longer had to hide their relationship to the deceased 19th

126

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

ruler and his queen. Evidently, the headman of the household had reason to be optimistic about the future.

Group Time Span 17–16 Whatever optimism the youth in Bu. 132 felt, it was short-lived, for he died within a short time after becoming head of his household. There is no indication of any major shifts in residence associated with his death; presumably his widow continued to live with whatever children she had in Str. 7F-32. Or perhaps an older brother moved in, which raises a question as to why a younger brother was acting as senior man. For this we have no answer, unless the “richness” of Bu. 132 relates to something other than the man’s seniority.

Group Time Span 15–14 Following the death of the youth in Bu. 132, we have no evidence of what occurred in Gp. 7F-1 until Gp. TS. 15, when dynastic instability was once again the “order of the day.” This time, it was the resumption of power by Nuun Ujol Chaak, tenuous until its consolidation under his son, Jasaw Chan K’awiil I. In Gp. 7F-1, two men presumed to be great, great grandsons of the man in Bu. 140 died and were buried in Str. 7F-30 and new 31. The elder of these two—presumed to be the man in Bu. 150—once old enough to marry, would have brought his wife to Str. 7F-32 to live, while his younger brother—the man in Bu. 159—would have moved into Str. 7F-29 or 33. As a guess, it was 33; construction of a temple over the grave of the man in Bu. 159, S of the temple over the man in Bu. 150, might reflect residence of the former on the plaza S of the one on which stood the house of the man in Bu. 150. The death of the men in Bu. 150 and 159 occasioned new alteration of Str. 7F-30 and 32, and construction of the new Str. 7F-31. A surviving son (Fig. 38:5) of the man in Bu. 150 probably moved into his father’s house (7F32), presumably from Str. 7F-29 (if the man in Bu. 150 became father to a son at age 17, that son would have been in his late twenties, and would probably have been living in a house of his own). Similarly, a son of the man in Bu. 159 may have moved into Str. 7F-33 with his widowed mother, but from where is not known. Possibly, he had been living in Rm. 1 of Str. 7F-32, which was walled off from all others in that building, and which was entered off the plaza on which his father’s house stood. The construction of the second temple, 7F-31, is of particular interest. As already noted, the two brothers (if that is what they were) buried beneath it and the neighboring Str. 7F-30-2nd are seen as having taken up residence on two separate plazas, the older brother and heir on Plat. 7F-1. This, along with placement of his burial in

the temple containing the graves of his ancestors, while his younger brother was buried beneath a new temple, suggests that the extended family occupying Gp. 7F-1 was showing some tendency to fission. The result, if carried to completion, would have been the creation of two such families where there had been but one, each centered on its own plaza. Presumably, construction of the second temple next to the original one reflected the close relationship between the two families, and the smaller size of Str. 7F-31 reflected the junior status of the family formed by the man in Bu. 159, which was essentially an offshoot of the original one. Its direct line was perpetuated by the man in Bu. 150 and his descendants.

Group Time Span 13 Aside from Bu. 193, which may contain the widow of the man in Bu. 159, and which occasioned modification of Str. 7F-31, the only major event in Gp. 7F-1 was construction of Str. 7F-29-1st-B, suggesting an important change in its tenancy. It may have been a grandson of the man in Bu. 150 for whom 7F-29-1st-B was prepared, for he was probably close to marriageable age by Gp. TS. 13. This grandson of the man in Bu. 150 (Fig. 38:6) will receive further discussion in the next section.

Kinship and Residence in Group 7F-1 after 9.12.10.0 (AD 682) The inauguration of Jasaw Chan K’awiil I ushered in a new era of dynastic stability and a second period of ceremonial inactivity in Gp. 7F-1, during which no fully adult men were buried in either Str. 7F-30 or 31. Hence, the only burials available for reconstructing kinship are those of women (Bu. 191 and 192) and a juvenile male (Bu. 190), excepting the Terminal Classic Bu. 1. This adds to the difficulty not only of reconstructing kinship, but of reconstructing residence patterns as well. The women in Bu. 191 and 192, like the one in Bu. 193, were probably wives of men who were born and raised in Gp. 7F-1, and the reason for this assumption is basically the same: under patrilocal residence, women who were born and raised in Gp. 7F-1 would usually have lived elsewhere after marriage, and so would be unavailable for burial in their natal household. It has also been suggested that the woman in Bu. 191 (see its discussion) was the mother of the youth in Bu. 190. The relative “richness” of the latter in terms of grave goods, and its association with the temple beneath which the senior men of Gp. 7F-1 were previously buried, are clues that this youth might himself have succeeded to this position, had he not died a premature death, which would mean that his mother was the wife of a senior man

APPENDIX A

of Gp. 7F-1. As noted earlier, the man in Bu. 150 is estimated to have been born as early as 9.10.4.0.0 (AD 637). Assuming that he married at age 17, that his wife’s age was the same as his and that her reproductive life was complete, then any sons he had were probably born between about 9.10.18.0.0 (AD 650) and 9.11.13.0.0 (9.12.3.0.0 or AD 675 at the latest). A reasonable guess for the birth of a son (Fig. 38:4) who survived to become senior man in Gp. 7F-1 (Fig. 38:2) is 9.11.5.0.0 (AD 657). Upon marriage, this son may have moved (in Gp. TS. 16) into Str. 7F-29. In Gp. TS. 15, when the man in Bu. 150 died, his son (then in his early twenties), would have moved from Str. 7F-29 into 32. If the man in Bu. 150 became father of a son in 9.11.5.0.0 (AD 657), if that son (Fig. 38:4) married at age 17 a woman whose age was about the same as his own, and if her reproductive life was complete, then this son could himself have become a father any time between 9.12.3.0.0 and 9.13.0.0.0 (AD 675–692), or even as late as 9.13.10.0.0 (AD 702). This date range becomes significant with respect to Bu. 191. As already noted, there are reasons to suppose that this woman married a man who became head of Gp. 7F-1, and who therefore should be a direct descendant of the man in Bu. 150. The woman in Bu. 191 was about 30–35 years old when she died, which was sometime after 9.13.0.0.0. If she married the grandson of the man in Bu. 150 (Fig. 38:5), and if she and her husband were of about the same age, her death date is unlikely to have been earlier than 9.13.3.0.0 (AD 695), but could have been as late as 9.14.16.0.0 (AD 727), acceptable for Bu. 190 and 191. The woman in Bu. 192, who died at the same time, may have been older at death than the one in 191, so she could be the wife of the son of the man in Bu. 150. This, then, makes the woman in Bu. 192 mother of the man (Fig. 38:6) whose wife was the woman in Bu. 191 and whose son—the great grandson of the man in Bu. 150—was the youth in Bu. 190. If the son of the man in Bu. 150 (Fig. 38:5) became father of a son (Fig. 38:6) ca. 9.12.5.0.0–9.13.0.0.0 (AD 677–692), that son would have been of marriageable age by Gp. TS. 13, at which time there was a major rebuilding of Str. 7F-29, probably to serve as his residence. The identification of the woman in Bu. 192 as this man’s mother is based on age considerations, as well as the association of her burial with abandonment of Str. 7F-29-1st-B. At the time of her death, probably after 9.14.0.0.0 (AD 711), she would have been in her late fifties or early sixties, if her age were about the same as her husband’s. If her husband died at about the same time, as sometimes happens, their son would have moved into Str. 7F-32, burying his mother in the house he just left and his young wife and

127

son in front of the old family funerary temple, Str. 7F-30. Among the survivors of whatever catastrophe caused so many deaths was probably a younger son of the woman in Bu. 191 (Fig. 38:6), for some male must have survived to perpetuate the patrilineal descent line in Gp. 7F-1. At the time of his mother’s death, he would have been in his early teens, and he may be the one for whom Str. 7F-291st-A was prepared. The start of his father’s tenancy of 7F-32 may be marked by the substantial changes that were made to its S room in Gp. TS. 11. What happened in Gp. 7F-1 between TS. 11 and 7 is impossible to know. If the brother of the youth in Bu. 190 was born ca. 9.13.11.0.0 (AD 703), he might have had a wife who was bearing children between 9.14.10.0.0 and 9.15.7.0.0 (AD 721–738). Assuming birth of a son (Fig. 38:7) ca. 9.14.19.0.0 (AD 730), and assuming a 21-year interval between each succeeding generation, would make the man in Bu. 1, who was past the age of 50 when he died, something like a 6th generation descendant of the woman in Bu. 191 (Fig. 38). Since the man in Bu. 1 was the first adult male to be interred in Str. 7F-30 since Bu. 150, he must have been the first one to die after loss of power by Jasaw Chan K’awiil I’s descendants. The last of those descendants to rule may have been the man portrayed on St. 11 (Martin 2003:34) in 10.2.0.0.0, in which year the father of the man in Bu. 1, had he been alive, would have been in his late seventies. Since few Tikal men lived to such a ripe old age, it is doubtful that he was still living, hence, he was probably the last adult man in Gp. 7F-1 to die before his collateral relatives lost power for good at Tikal.

Conclusions This reconstruction of kinship and residence in Gp. 7F-1 is, of course, hypothetical; like any model, it is an approximation of reality rather than reality itself. Just how good an approximation may never be known, but at least it appears to fit available data and theoretical expectations reasonably well, thereby enhancing the plausibility of the interpretations presented in the body of this report. Still, problems remain, not the least of which are the near total lack of knowledge about Str. 7F-33, lack of assurance that few, if any, burials remain to be found in the group, and the imprecision of available dates for the known burials. One could, of course, have refrained from this exercise, in order to avoid having what are for the most part “educated guesses” taken as gospel truth. It is my hope, however, that what I have attempted here will stimulate others to get beyond the stones, bones, and sherds of prehistoric Maya households to the social dynamics involved.

Appendix B Operation 3 Lots Assigned to Lot Groups

Op/Lot:

Assigned to:







3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

(See PD. 98) (See Bu. 132) (See PD. 100) Str. 7F-30:LG. 6 (See Ca. 161) (See Bu. 134) Plat. 7F-1:LG. 1a (See Ca. 162) Str. 7F-30:LG. 4 Plat. 7F-3:LG. 2 Str. 7F-30:LG. 2 (See Bu. 140) Plat. 7F-3:LG. 1a (See PD. 103) (See Bu. 150) (See Bu. 160) (See Bu. 190) Plat. 7F-3:LG. 2 (See Bu. 191) (See Ca. 207) Plat. 7F-3:LG. 1a Plat. 7F-3:LG. 1b Plat. 7F-1:LG. 1a Plat. 7F-3:LG. 1b Plat. 7F-3:LG. 2 Plat. 7F-3:LG. 2 Plat. 7F-3:LG. 2

3C

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Str. 7F-31:LG. 1 Str. 7F-31:LG. 2 Plat. 7F-3:LG. 1a Plat. 7F-3:LG. 1a Plat. 7F-3:LG. 1a Plat. 7F-3:LG. 1a (See Bu. 162)

3A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

Plat. 7F-1:LG. 4b Plat. 7F-1:LG. 4b Plat. 7F-1:LG. 3b (Not assigned) (See PD. 37) Str. 7F-30:LG. 5 Plat. 7F-1:LG. 2 (See also PD. 37) Plat. 7F-1:LG. 3b Str. 7F-30:LG. 5 Plat. 7F-1:LG. 3b Str. 7F-30:LG. 5 (See Bu. 1) Plat. 7F-1:LG. 5a Plat. 7F-1:LG. 2 (See Bu. 3) Plat. 7F-1:LG. 3b Plat. 7F-1:LG. 5b Plat. 7F-1:LG. 4a Plat. 7F-1:LG. 3d Plat. 7F-1:LG. 2 (See Ca. 1) (See Bu. 4) Plat. 7F-1:LG. 1d Plat. 7F-1:LG. 5a Plat. 7F-1:LG. 2 Plat. 7F-1:LG. 5b Plat. 7F-1:LG. 5a (See Ca. 2) Plat. 7F-1:LG. 3b

3B

Str. 7F-30:LG. 6 Str. 7F-30:LG. 6

1 2



APPENDIX B



8 9 10

Str. 7F-31:LG. 1 (See Bu. 159) (See Bu. 193)

3D

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Str. 7F-Sub.1:LG. 1 Plat. 7F-1:LG. 4a Plat. 7F-1:LG. 4a (See PD. 233) Plat. 7F-1:LG. 5a Plat. 7F-1:LG. 2 Plat. 7F-1:LG. 3a Plat. 7F-1:LG. 1a Str. 7F-Sub.2:LG. 1

3E

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Str. 7F-29:LG. 3c Str. 7F-29:LG. 3a Str. 7F-29:LG. 1b Str. 7F-29:LG. 1a Str. 7F-29:LG. 1c Str. 7F-29:LG. 3b Str. 7F-29:LG. 3a Str. 7F-29:LG. 4b Str. 7F-29:LG. 4a Str. 7F-29:LG. 4e Str. 7F-29:LG. 4e Str. 7F-29:LG. 3c Str. 7F-29:LG. 4c Str. 7F-29:LG. 4c Str. 7F-29:LG. 1c Str. 7F-29:LG. 4d Plat. 7F-1:LG. 1b Str. 7F-29:LG. 3c Plat. 7F-1:LG. 4a Plat. 7F-1:LG. 4a Str. 7F-29:LG. 4c Str. 7F-29:LG. 1b Str. 7F-29:LG. 2 (See PD. 166) (See PD. 167) Str. 7F-29:LG. 1a (See Bu. 192)

3F

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Str. 7F-35:LG. 1a Str. 7F-35:LG. 2a Str. 7F-35:LG. 3 Str. 7F-35:LG. 2a Str. 7F-35:LG. 2a Str. 7F-36:LG. 3 Str. 7F-35:LG. 1a Str. 7F-35:LG. 1a Str. 7F-35:LG. 1b Str. 7F-35:LG. 1b Plat. 7F-1:LG. 1e

3G

129

12

Str. 7F-35:LG. 1a

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35a 35b 36 37 38 39

Str. 7F-32:LG. 11c Plat. 7F-1:LG. 4c Str. 7F-32:LG. 11c Str. 7F-32:LG. 11c Str. 7F-32:LG. 11c Str. 7F-32:LG. 2a Str. 7F-32:LG. 2b Str. 7F-32:LG. 2b Str. 7F-32:LG. 10b Str. 7F-32:LG. 2b Str. 7F-32:LG. 2a Str. 7F-32:LG. 2b Str. 7F-32:LG. 2b Str. 7F-32:LG. 2c Str. 7F-32:LG. 11d Str. 7F-32:LG. 2b Str. 7F-32:LG. 2b Str. 7F-32:LG. 11b Str. 7F-32:LG. 11a Str. 7F-32:LG. 2d Str. 7F-32:LG. 11c Str. 7F-32:LG. 8 Str. 7F-32:LG. 10a Str. 7F-32:LG. 11a Str. 7F-32:LG. 9 Str. 7F-32:LG. 1 Str. 7F-32:LG. 2g Str. 7F-32:LG. 2f Plat. 7F-1:LG. 1c Str. 7F-32:LG. 2i Str. 7F-32:LG. 5 Str. 7F-32:LG. 11b Str. 7F-32:LG. 4 Str. 7F-32:LG. 3 Str. 7F-32:LG. 2h Str. 7F-32:LG. 4 Str. 7F-32:LG. 6 Str. 7F-32:LG. 2e Str. 7F-32:LG. 11e Str. 7F-32:LG. 7

3H 1 Plat. 7F-2:LG. 1 2 Plat. 7F-2:LG. 1 3 Plat. 7F-2:LG. 1 3I 1 Str. 7F-36:LG. 2 3J

2 3 1 2

Str. 7F-36:LG. 1 Plat. 7F-1:LG. 3c Str. 7F-33:LG. 1 Str. 7F-33:LG. 1

Appendix C Miscellaneous Texts from Group 7F-1

Listed below are the Miscellaneous Texts known from Gp. 7F-1, with brief notes on provenience, medium, where discussed in this report, where illustrated, and previous references to them. Although they will be analyzed with all others from Tikal in forthcoming TR. 33C (TR. 12:59), in the interim this will assist those interested in Tikal texts. Misc. Texts

Provenience

Figure References

98 99 100 166 167 168 169 208 210 214 290 292 293 327 342 347 357a

Bu. 159 Bu. 159 Bu. 160 Bu. 190 Bu. 190 Bu. 190 Bu. 191 Palace Midden Palace Midden Palace Fill Bu. 132 Bu. 150 Bu. 150 Temple Fill Bu. 140 Bu. 160 Bu. 160

TR. 25A:fig. 48a TR. 25A:fig. 48c TR. 27A:fig. 225 TR. 25A:fig. 81c TR. 27A:fig. 211c TR. 25A:fig. 81a TR. 25A:fig. 82a4 Coggins 1975:fig. 68 Coggins 1975:fig. 71a Coggins 1975:fig. 71b TR. 25A:fig. 45 TR. 25A:fig. 47c TR. 25A:fig. 47a Coggins 1975:fig. 71c TR. 25A:fig. 46c3 TR. 27A:fig. 224a1–5 TR. 27A:fig. 90, 91a,b

a

Note that MT 357 as labeled in TR 27A is now MT 361.

Appendix D Estimates of Total Volume of Best-Known Constr uctions within Group 7F-1

Ideally, one would like to quantify volumes of all architectural entities in Gp. 7F-1 as one measure of effort involved. Unfortunately, so much of our knowledge of Str. 7F-30 involves broken-line reconstructions that estimates of volume are bound to be highly speculative, and are not attempted here. The other structures, however, are better known, at least with respect to their substructures and interior platforms. Yet the buildings themselves are another matter; the upper zone of Str. 7F-32 is completely collapsed, as are most of the walls of 7F-29 and 31. Thus, the following calculations omit buildings and any other architectural elements for which there are insufficient data. In all cases, the volume of any earlier architecture, reused or incorporated in the new, is subtracted from the total. Structure 7F-29 Substructure of 3rd Substructure of 1st-B Interior Platforms of 1st-B: Rm. 1 Rm. 2 Rm. 3 Rm. 4 Rm. 5 Total Substructure of 1st-A Interior Platforms of 1st-A Structure 7F-31 Substructure of 2nd Substructure of 1st Structure 7F-32 Substructure of 2nd (without stairs) 2nd-A:U. 3 2nd-A or U. 16 1st-H 1st-H: N stairs U. 4 and 5 stairs U. 10 U. 11 U. 20

Volume (m3) 85.50 100.37 4.66 3.88 3.88 2.98 2.98 18.38 2.42 1.71+ 13.54 20.94 385.59 0.86 0.95 58.72 4.26 1.00 2.25 1.66

Volume (m3) U. 25 5.17 Total, 1st-H 73.06 or 74.01+ 1st-G:U. 17 0.51 to 1.20 1st-F:U. 18 2.44 1st-E:U. 12 0.70 1st-D:U. 13 3.46 1st-C:U. 6 and 7 stairs 12.42 U. 21 2.16 1st-B:U. 8 1.15 U. 22 1.62 1st-A:U. 23 1.86 U. 24 2.93 1st-G, F, E, D, C, B, A? U. 26 0.18 to 0.70 Structure 7F-35 Substructure 109.44

This page intentionally left blank

References

Barber, Bernard 1957 Social Stratification. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World. Bullard, William R. Jr. 1960 Maya Settlement in Northeastern Peten, Guatemala. American Antiquity 25:355–372. Chase, Arlen F., and Diane Z. Chase 1985 Postclassic Temporal and Spatial Frames for the Lowland Maya: A Background. In The Lowland Maya Postclassic, edited by A. F. Chase and P. M. Rice, pp. 9–22. Austin: University of Texas Press. Coe, William R. 1965 Tikal: Ten Years of Study of a Maya Ruin in the Lowlands of Guatemala. Expedition 8:5–56. ———. 1967 Tikal, A Handbook of the Ancient Maya Ruins. Philadelphia: The Univeristy of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. Coggins, Clemency C. 1975 Painting and Drawing Styles at Tikal, an Historical and Iconographic Reconstruction. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International. ———. 1986 “There’s No Place Like Hom: Variation in Metaphors of Death and Birth Expressed in the Excavated Tombs of the Early Classic Maya”. Paper prepared for School of American Research Advanced Seminar, Santa Fe, October 1986. Dahlin, Bruce H., and William J. Litzinger 1986 Old Bottle, New Wine: The Function of Chultuns in the Maya Lowlands. American Antiquity 51:721–736. Danforth, Marie Elaine 1989 A Comparison of Childhood Health Patterns in the Late Classic and Colonial Maya Using Enamel Microdefects. Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms. Freidel, David A. 1985 New Light on the Dark Age: A Summary of Major Themes. In The Lowland Maya Postclassic, edited by A. F. Chase and P. R. Rice, pp. 285–309. Austin: University of Texas Press. Gjessing, Gutorm 1975 Socio-archaeology. Current Anthropology 16:323–341.

134

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

Guenter, Stanley P. 2000 The Murder of the Queen of Tikal? Precolumbian Art Research Institute Journal 1:22–24. Harrison, Peter D. 1970 The Central Acropolis, Tikal, Guatemala: A Preliminary Study of its Structural Components during the Late Classic Period. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms. ———. 1999 The Lords of Tikal. London: Thames and Hudson. Haviland, William A. 1963 Excavation of Small Structures in the Northeast Quadrant of Tikal, Guatemala. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms. ———. 1972 A New Look at Classic Maya Social Organization at Tikal. Ceramica de Cultural Maya 8:1–16. ———. 1981 Dower Houses and Minor Centers at Tikal, Guatemala: An Investigation into the Identification of Valid Units in Settlement Hierarchies. In Lowland Maya Settlement Patterns, edited by W. Ashmore, pp. 89–117. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. ———. 1985 Population and Social Dynamics: The Dynasties and Social Structure of Tikal. Expedition 27:34–41. ———. 1988 Musical Hammocks at Tikal: Problems of Reconstructing Household Composition. In House and Household in the Mesoamerican Past, edited by R. R. Wilk and W. Ashmore, pp. 121–134. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. ———. 1992 Status and Power in Classic Maya Society: The View from Tikal. American Anthropologist 94:937–940. ———. 1997 The Rise and Fall of Sexual Inequality: Death and Gender at Tikal, Guatemala. Ancient Mesoamerica 8:1–12. Haviland, William A., and Hattula Moholy-Nagy 1992 Distinguishing the High and Mighty from the Hoi Polloi at Tikal, Guatemala. In Mesoamerican Elites: An Archaeological Assessment, edited by D. Z. Chase and A. F. Chase, pp. 50–60. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Jones, Christopher 1969 The Twin Pyramid Group Pattern: A Classic Maya Architectural Assemblage at Tikal, Guatemala. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms. ———. 1977 Inauguration Dates of Three Late Classic Rulers of Tikal, Guatemala. American Antiquity 42:28–60. Krogman, Wilton M., and Mehmet Yaşar Işcan 1986 The Human Skeleton in Forensic Medicine, 2nd ed. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. Laporte, Juan P. 2003 Thirty Years Later: Some Results of Recent Investigation in Tikal. In Tikal: Dynasties, Foreigners, and Affairs of the State, edited by J. A. Sabloff, pp. 281–318. Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research Press.

REFERENCES

135

Lewis-Williams, J. David 1992 Vision, Power and Dance: The Genesis of a Southern African Rock Art Panel. Gehouden voor de Stichting Nederlands Museum voor Anthropologie en Praehistorie te Amsterdam, Amsterdam. Martin, Simon 1999 The Queen of Middle Classic Tikal. Pre-Columbian Art Research Institute Newsletter 27:4–5. ———. 2003 In the Line of the Founder: A View of Dynastic Politics at Tikal. In Tikal: Dynasties, Foreigners, and Affairs of State, edited by J. A. Sabloff, pp. 3–46. Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research. Martin, Simon, and Nikolae Grube 2000 Chronicle of the Maya Kings and Queens: Deciphering the Dynasties of the Ancient Maya. London and New York: Thames and Hudson. Moholy-Nagy, Hattula 2003 Beyond the Catalogue: The Chronology and Contexts of Tikal Artifacts. In Tikal: Dynasties, Foreigners, and Affairs of State, edited by J. A. Sabloff, pp. 83–110. Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research. Proskouriakoff, Tatiana 1961 Portraits of Women in Maya Art. In Essays in Pre-Columbian Art and Archaeology, by S. K. Lothrop and others, pp. 81–99. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Rapaport, Amos 1969 House Form and Culture. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Reina, Ruben E. 1965 Cultural Duality and Behavioral Integration: The Human Skulls Ritual among the Lowland Maya of Northern Guatemala. In Context and Meaning in Cultural Anthropology, edited by M. E. Spiro, pp. 225–239. New York: Free Press. Romero, Javier 1960 Ultimas Hallazgos de Mutilaciones Dentarias en Mexico. Sobretiro de los Anales del INAH 12:151–215. Schele, Linda, and David Freidel 1990 A Forest of Kings: The Untold Story of the Ancient Maya. New York: William Morrow. Spence, Michael W. 1974 Residential Practices and the Distribution of Skeletal Traits in Teotihuacan, Mexico. Man 9:262–273. Steggerda, Morris 1941 Maya Indians of Yucatan. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Publication 531. Thompson, J. Eric S. 1960 Maya Hieroglyphic Writing: An Introduction. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Tozzer, Alfred M. 1941 Landa’s Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatan: A Translation. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Vol. 18. Tumin, Melvin M. 1967 Social Stratification: The Forms and Functions of Inequality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

136

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

Tikal Reports (see TR. 12): TR. 1: Shook, Edwin M. 1986 Field Director’s Report: The 1956 and 1957 Seasons. In Tikal Reports 1–11. Facsimile Reissue of Original Reports Published 1958–1961, pp. 1–21. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. TR. 2: Coe, William R., and Vivian L. Broman 1986 Excavations in the Stela 23 Group. In Tikal Reports 1–11. Facsimile Reissue of Original Reports Published 1958–1961, pp. 23–60. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. TR. 3: Satterthwaite, Linton 1986 The Problem of Abnormal Stela Placements at Tikal and Elsewhere. In Tikal Reports 1–11. Facsimile Reissue of Original Reports Published 1958–1961, pp. 61–82. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. TR. 4: Satterthwaite, Linton 1986 Five Newly Discovered Carved Monuments at Tikal and New Data on Four Others. In Tikal Reports 1–11. Facsimile Reissue of Original Reports Published 1958–1961, pp. 85–150. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. TR. 8: Satterthwaite, Linton, Vivian L. Broman, and William A. Haviland 1986 Miscellaneous Investigations: Excavation Near Fragment 1 of Stela 17, with Observations on Stela P34 and Miscellaneous Stone 25; Excavation of Stela 25, Fragment 1; Excavation of Stela 27; Excavation of Stela 28, Fragment 1. In Tikal Reports 1–11. Facsimile Reissue of Original Reports Published 1958–1961, pp. 149–170. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. TR. 11: Carr, Robert F., and James E. Hazard 1986 Map of the Ruins of Tikal, El Peten, Guatemala. In Tikal Reports 1–11. Facsimile Reissue of Original Reports Published 1958–1961, pp. iii–26. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. TR. 12: Coe, William R., and William A. Haviland 1982 Introduction to the Archaeology of Tikal, Guatemala. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. TR. 13: Puleston, Dennis E. 1983 The Settlement Survey of Tikal. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. TR. 14: Coe, William R. 1990 Excavations in the Great Plaza, North Terrace and North Acropolis of Tikal, Vols. 1–4. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology.

REFERENCES

137

TR. 15: Harrison, Peter D. n.d. Excavations in the Central Acropolis of Tikal. TR. 16: Jones, Christopher 1996 Excavations in the East Plaza of Tikal, Vols. 1, 2. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. TR. 17: Harrison, Peter D. n.d. Excavations in the West Plaza of Tikal. TR. 19: Haviland, William A., with Marshall J. Becker, Ann Chowning, Keith A. Dixon, and Karl Heider 1985 Excavations in Small Residential Groups of Tikal: Groups 4F-1 and 4F-2. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. TR. 20A: Haviland, William A. 2014 Excavations in Residential Areas of Tikal: Non-elite Groups without Shrines: The Excavations. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. TR. 20B: Haviland, William A. 2014 Excavations in Residential Areas of Tikal: Non-elite Groups without Shrines: Analysis and Conclusions. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. TR. 21: Becker, Marshall J., with contributions by Christopher Jones 1999 Excavations in Residential Areas of Tikal: Groups with Shrines. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. TR. 23A: Loten, H. Stanley 2002 Miscellaneous Investigations in Central Tikal. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. TR. 24B: Puleston, Dennis E., with Robert E. Fry, Ernestine L. Green, and William A. Haviland n.d. Excavations and Other Investigations in Peripheral Tikal. TR. 25A: Culbert, T. Patrick 1993 The Ceramics of Tikal: Vessels from the Burials, Caches and Problematical Deposits. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. TR. 27A: Moholy-Nagy, Hattula, with William R. Coe 2008 The Artifacts of Tikal: Ornamental and Ceremonial Artifacts and Unworked Material. Part A. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology.

138

EXCAVATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF TIKAL

TR. 27B: Moholy-Nagy, Hattula 2003 The Artifacts of Tikal: Utilitarian Artifacts and Unworked Material. Part B. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. TR. 29: Feree, Lisa n.d. The Pottery Censers of Tikal. TR. 30: Monge, Janet, with William A. Haviland n.d. The Skeletal Series of Tikal. TR. 32: Puleston, Dennis E., and William A. Haviland n.d. The Chultuns of Tikal. TR. 33A: Jones, Christopher, and Linton Satterthwaite 1982 The Monuments and Inscriptions of Tikal: The Carved Monuments. Edited by W. R. Coe and W. A. Haviland. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. TR. 33C: Jones, Christopher n.d. The Monuments and Inscriptions of Tikal: The Miscellaneous Texts. TR. 34A: Loten, H. Stanley 2007 Additions and Alterations: A Commentary on the Architecture of the North Acropolis, Tikal, Guatemala. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. TR. 35: Coe, William A., and William A. Haviland n.d. The Burials, Caches, and Problematical Deposits of Tikal.

Illustrations

Str. 7F-29-2nd and 3rd: Plan (scale 1:100). Pertinent to Str. 7F-29-3rd: 1, Hypothetical W platform wall. It is assumed that this was located the same distance from the W wall of Str. 7F-29-1st as the E wall of Str. 7F-29-3rd relative to that of 29-1st. This wall must have extended N at least as far as U. 2. U. 2, Platform pavement, laid over a compact, light-colored earth that overlies a darker earth fill. Seen in two exposures, it runs N from U. 3. Its N limit is unknown, owing to later demolition of the N wall of 29-3rd. Later, it is thought to have been incorporated into the floor for Plat 7F-1-2nd. U. 3, Wall that retains the same fill over which U. 2 was laid. The part shown here was later buried beneath the front wall of Str. 7F-29-1st-A. West of the westernmost stone, it was ripped out, apparently when Plat. 7F-1-2nd was built. U. 7, Wall that retains the same fill on which U. 2 was built. It relates to the first stage (CS. 3) in the construction of Str. 7F-293rd. Pertinent to Plat. 7F-1: 2, Reconstructed N edge, Plat. 7F-1-4th through 2nd. It is based on a projection W of the N edge as seen by Str. 7F-30 (see Fig. 2:4–2:8). For section A-A', see Fig. 3.

FIGURE 1

Str. 7F-29-1st-A and B: Plan (scale 1:100). Pertinent to Str. 7F-29: 3, Front wall, supplementary platform, Str. 7F-29-1st-B. The reconstruction is based on remains seen in the axial trench (Fig. 3). Here, the masonry was set on fill for 29-3rd where Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 (which incorporated Str. 7F-29:U. 2) had been cut away. The wall retains a gray earth fill to the N that is overlain by a floor (Fl. 2) that abuts the top of the wall masonry. 4, E wall, supplementary platform, Str. 7F-29-1st-B. Seen only in one trench, Plat. 7F-11st:Fl. 1 turns up to its base on the E. Unit 9 of Str. 7F-29 is at the same elevation as the top of the wall, and must have run to its top. Presumably, this wall was lengthened and continued in use for 29-1st-A. 5, Building platform, Str. 7F-29-1st-B. All but the E and (probably) W walls served 29-1st-A as well. The walls are based on the gray earth fill of the supplementary platform, and retain a fill of rubble and earth. The outset portions of the building platform are reconstructed on the assumption that the S end walls of Rm. 3 and 5 were the same thickness as other building walls. 6, Building walls, Str. 7F-29-1st-A and B. Built on the fill of the building platform, they were set back 2 to 4 cm from the building platform wall for 29-1st-B. They were built of thin, rectangular stretchers of masonry facing a rubble core. Corners were not all bonded (Fig. 39a). 7,8, Interior platforms, Rm. 1 and 4. Built as parts of Str. 7F-29-1st-B, their walls sit on fill of the building platform and abut room-end walls. The upper course of their masonry forms a cornice over the lower course. Floor 2 of 29-1st abuts and turns up to their base. Presumably, there was a similar interior platform in Rm. 2. 9, Interior platform, Rm. 5. Built as part of Str. 7F-29-1st-B, its walls rest on the fill of the building platform and abut the room-end walls. Unlike the platforms in Rm. 1 and 4, there is no cornice. Floor 2 of 29-1st abuts and turns up to its base. Presumably, there was a similar interior platform in Rm. 3. 10, E wall, building platform, Str. 7F-29-1st-A. Built on U. 9, this floor was patched to turn up to the new wall. Presumably, a matching alteration was carried out W of Rm. 3. 11, Front wall, supplementary platform, Str. 7F-29-1st-A. Built on Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1, the wall ran the length of the structure as shown, with Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1 abutting and turning up to its base. Over much of the front of the supplementary platform, a new floor (Fl. 1) must have been laid so as to cover the top of the older wall (3) of 29-1st-B. In places, though, parts of the older Fl. 2 may have been incorporated in the new floor (see U. 9, below). 12,13, High, room-end platforms in Rm. 1. The walls, which have a slight cornice, were built directly on the original floors of the room (Fl. 2) and interior platform. Floor 1 turns up to these walls. U. 5, Plastered masonry block on the surface of the interior platform in Rm. 4. It abuts the room wall, and its purpose is unknown. U. 7, Fill-retaining wall, built for Str. 7F-29-3rd (see Fig. 1). U. 8, Apparent posthole, penetrating Fl. 1 and 2 of Str. 7F-29-1st. U. 9, Supplementary platform floor E of the building platform. It turns up to the building platform wall (5) for Str. 7F-29-1st-B. The building platform wall (10) for 1st-A was built on it, with a secondary turnup from U. 9. Apparently, U. 9 represents Fl. 2, but here was incorporated into the subsequent Fl. 1. Fl. 1 of 1st-A, In Rm. 1, 4, and 5 it overlies Fl. 2 and turns up to all building and interior platform walls. In Rm. 5, it seals Bu. 192, but was intruded by the pit for PD. 166. No trace of this floor survives over the supplementary platform, but a new floor was required upon construction of the new wall (11) for 1st-A. On the evidence from U. 9, this may have made use of portions of Fl. 2. Fl. 2 of 1st-B. In the rooms, it overlies earth fill and turns up to the room walls and all interior platforms save those in the ends of Rm. 1 (12,13). In Rm. 5, Bu. 192 was intruded through it when Fl. 1 was laid. On the supplementary platform, Fl. 2 runs N from the top of the supplementary platform wall (3) to abut and turn up to the building platform wall (5). Pertinent to Plat. 7F-1: Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-2nd, plaza floor that overlies a fill of masonry blocks put in place when the front of Str. 7F-29-3rd was torn out. The floor ends at the base of the supplementary platform of Str. 7F-29-1st-B, which was intruded into it (see text). Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-1st, laid on fill over Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1, which abuts and turns up to Str. 7F-29-1st-A. For section A-A', see Fig. 3.

FIGURE 2

Str. 7F-29: Section A-A' (scale 1:50), as located in Fig. 1 and 2. Pertinent to Str. 7F-29: 3, Front wall, supplementary platform, Str. 7F-29-1st-B (see Fig. 2:3). 5, Front wall, building platform, Str. 7F-29-1st-A and B (see Fig. 2:5). 6, Building walls, Str. 7F-29-1st-A and B (see Fig. 2:6). 7, Interior platform (see Fig. 2:7). 11, Front wall, supplementary platform, Str. 7F-29-1st-A (see Fig. 2:11). 14, Chop-line, N and S of which the floor and fills of Str. 7F-29-3rd have been removed. On the N, the removal was connected with construction of Str. 7F-29-1st-B; on the S, with construction of Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D. U. 1, Floor (off-section), Str. 7F-29-2nd (see Fig. 1). Not shown is the turnup of this floor to the N. U. 2, Floor, Str. 7F-29-3rd (see Fig. 1). U. 4, Pause-line, separating the fills for CS. 4 of Str. 7F-29-1st-B. U. 6, Base surface on which Str. 7F-29-3rd was built. It overlies a fill of dark-gray earth, small stones, and cultural material for CS. 3. Composed of compact, light-colored earth, the southern part of U. 6 where it continues out into the area of Plat. 7F-1 is particularly hard. This is thought to have been part of a floor for Plat. 7F-1-3rd (see Fig. 22:Plat. 7F-1:U. 14). U. 7, Fillretaining wall, built for Str. 7F-29-3rd and used in succeeding structures (see Fig. 1 and 2). Fl. 1 of 1st-A (see Fig. 2). Over the supplementary platform, Fl. 2 may have been incorporated into Fl. 1. Fl. 2 of 1st-B (see Fig. 2). Pertinent to Plat. 7F-1: U. 2, floor for Plat. 7F-1-4th. The N portion of this floor was destroyed when Str. 7F-29-3rd was built. Fl. 1 of 2nd (see Fig. 2), Note the similarity of its fill to that of the same floor W of Str. 7F-30 and 31 (Fig. 10:47 and 11:47). Fl. 1 of 1st (see Fig. 2).

FIGURE 3

Str. 7F-30-5th and Plat. 7F-3-2nd: Plan (scale 1:100). Pertinent to Str. 7F-30-5th: 48, Reconstruction of substructure; its basis is discussed in the text. 49, Hypothetical building, evidence for which consists of masonry and carved stucco placed on Plat. 7F-1:U. 5 when 30-4th was built. The reconstruction here is based on the building walls for the contemporary Str. 7F-32-2nd (Fig. 12). That structure was vaulted, however, whereas 7F-30-5th probably was not (see also Fig. 10:26). U. 6, Wall that could be the rear of the substructure, or a core wall within its fill (see text for discussion). U. 14, Substructure floor (see also Fig. 10). U. 16, Retaining wall, constructed as part of CS. 3, and abutted by the walls of Plat. 7F-3-2nd and Plat. 7F-3:U. 4 (Fig. 10). U. 17, Retaining wall, constructed as part of CS. 3. Like U. 16, it is abutted by Plat. 7F-3:U. 4 (Fig. 11). Since U. 16 extends N of the N wall of Plat. 7F-3-2nd (U. 7), U. 17 may have extended S of the S wall of Plat. 7F-3-2nd. U. 18, Stairs; reconstruction of their width is explained in the text. U. 19, Interior platform, built on U. 14. Its rear portion was destroyed at the time of construction of 4th; it may have extended to the rear wall of the building. Unknown is N-S dimension. Pertinent to Plat. 7F-1: U. 5, Floor for Plat. 7F-1-4th (the break E of the NW corner of Plat. 7F-3-2nd was caused by the later intrusion of Bu. 191). On the N, U. 5 ends in line with the N wall of Str. 7F-30. Pertinent to Plat. 7F-3-2nd: 50, Line of the front wall (U. 2) in the S tunnel. On the N side of the tunnel, the stratigraphy clearly shows that the wall was ripped out here, probably at the time of interment of Bu. 190. 51, Reconstruction of U. 2, based on its projection from the N. The presence of Plat. 7F-3:U. 1 and 5 E of this point indicates that U. 2 once ran this far S; it was apparently torn out here when Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 was laid. 52, Hypothetical wall analogous to U. 7. Its position is based on the assumption that Ca. 207 was placed on the axis of Plat. 7F-3-2nd. As U. 7 abuts Str. 7F-30:U. 16 (which continues on beyond), so may this wall abut Str. 7F-30:U. 17. Like Str. 7F-30:U. 16, Str. 7F-30:U. 17 may have run 4.50 m beyond this wall. U. 2, Front wall, built on top of Plat. 7F-1:U. 4 (see Fig. 10). U. 5, Floor, which runs from the fill of Str. 7F-30 beneath 18 of 30 over the top of U. 2 and 7, ending at their outer faces. Unit 5 was eventually penetrated by Bu. 190, 191, and 193 (see Fig. 9). U. 6, Fill-retaining wall for Plat. 7F-3-2nd:CS. 2. Built on U. 1 (see Fig. 10), it abuts Str. 7E-30:U. 16. Plat. 7F-3:U. 4 (see Fig. 10) abuts the top of this wall to the S. U. 7, N wall. Plat. 7F-1:U. 5 runs up to its base, and Plat. 7F-3:U. 5 ends on its top, in line with the N face of the wall. For section A-A', see Fig. 10; section B-B', see Fig. 11.

FIGURE 4

Str. 7F-30-5th and Plat. 7F-3-1st: Plan (scale 1:100). Pertinent to Str. 7F-30-5th: 48, Substructure (see Fig. 4:48). 49, Building (see Fig. 4:49). U. 6, Possible rear wall (see Fig. 4). U. 14, Substructure floor (see Fig. 4). U. 16, Retaining wall (see Fig. 4). U. 18, Stairs (see Fig. 4). U. 19, Interior platform (see Fig. 4). Pertinent to Plat. 7F-1: U. 5, Floor for Plat. 7F-1-4th (see Fig. 4). Pertinent to Plat. 7F-3-1st: 53, Line of the front wall (U. 9) in the S tunnel. Evidence that the wall was ripped out here, probably in connection with the intrusion of Bu. 190, consists of the straight chop-line of Plat. 7F-1:U. 5 at precisely this point. 54, Reconstruction of U. 9, based on its projection from the N. Presence of U. 8 E of this point indicates that U. 9 once ran this far S; it was apparently torn out here when Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 was laid. 55, Hypothetical wall analogous to U. 10. Assumed is that when the old U. 7 (Fig. 4) was replaced by U. 10, a similar early wall (Fig. 4:52) was replaced here. It is possible that, as Str. 7F-30:U. 16 continued in use N of U. 10, so a part of Str. 7F-30:U. 17 (Fig. 4) may have continued in use S of this wall. U. 8, Floor, turns up to Str. 7F-30:U. 18, and covers U. 9 and 10, terminating in line with their outer faces. Unit 8 was eventually penetrated by Bu. 190, 191, and 193 (see Fig. 9), and although not directly observed, Str. 7F-30:U. 25 (Fig. 6) must have been intruded through it as well. (This is based on the presence of a floor S of Str. 7F-30, identified as U. 8 on the basis of its elevation; see also Fig. 11.) U. 9 and 10, W and N walls, built on Plat. 7F-1:U. 5; U. 10 abuts Str. 7F-30:U. 16. They replaced the older U. 2 and 7 (Fig. 4). U. 11, Posthole in U. 8 that may be a later intrusion, associated with Plat. 7F-1:U. 13 (see Fig. 6). For section A-A', see Fig. 10; section B-B', see Fig. 11.

FIGURE 5

Str. 7F-30-4th: Plan (scale 1:100). Pertinent to Str. 7F-30-4th: 56, Reconstructed end walls, supplementary platform (see text for explanation). 57, Reconstructed end walls, building platform (see text for explanation). U. 6, Possible rear wall, supplementary platform, reused from 5th (Fig. 4; see text of 5th for doubts about this reconstruction). U. 20, Stairs (see text for explanation of length). U. 21, Upperstair riser, thought to be in line with the front wall of the building platform. U. 22, Substructure floor, at some point heavily burned. U. 23, Rear wall, building platform. U. 24, Floor, supplementary platform, runs from the top of U. 6 to the base of U. 23. U. 25, Front wall, supplementary platform. Intruded through Plat. 7F-3:U. 8 (see Fig. 5), it rests on Plat. 7F-3:U. 5 (see Fig. 4). Pertinent to Plat. 7F-1: U. 12, Wall, built on the N edge of U. 5 (Fig. 4). From the top of this wall, Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 runs S; evidently, this is the N edge of Plat. 7F-1-2nd. U. 13, Posthole in Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 2. It and Plat. 7F-3:U. 11 seem to relate to some kind of pole-and-thatch construction by the NW corner of Str. 7F-30-4th. Fl. 1, Plat. 7F-1-2nd, incorporates portions of Plat. 7F-3:U. 8 (Fig. 5) and the floor of Str. 7F-Sub.1 (TR. 2, “Floor 2,” pp. 28, 32-34). In the N tunnel, it runs N from the top of Plat. 7F-3:U. 10 (where Plat. 7F-3:U. 8 ends) to Plat. 7F-1:U. 12. Floor may at one time have sealed Bu. 4, or the burial was placed when the floor was ripped up prior to construction of Str. 7F-30-1st-C. Pertinent to Plat. 7F-3: U. 8, Floor for Plat. 7F-31st (Fig. 5), which was incorporated into Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1. U. 11, Posthole, probably related to Plat. 7F-1:U. 13. For section A-A', see Fig. 10; section B-B', see Fig. 11.

FIGURE 6

Str. 7F-30-3rd: Plan (scale 1:100). Pertinent to Str. 7F-30-3rd: 32, Hypothetical lowest riser for stairway (see Fig. 10:32). 56, Reconstructed end walls, supplementary platform; thought to be the equivalent walls for 4th (Fig. 6:56), which were extended to the W (as U. 26 seems to extend U. 22). 57, Reconstructed end walls, building platform; like (56), these are thought to be the equivalent walls for 4th, which were extended to the W. 58, Hypothetical front wall, supplementary platform; assumed is that it was positioned where U. 26 now terminates, and that it resembled the other walls (57 and U. 23) for the building platform. 59, Hypothetical front wall, supplementary platform, assumed to be positioned as far W of the building platform wall (58) as U. 6 is E of U. 23. It must have been built on Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1. Note that in the S trench (B-B'), Fl. 1 is broken just where such a wall would have stood; suggested is that the floor was weakened here when the wall was later removed (Fig. 8) for construction of Str. 7F-31-2nd. Because of this, it later deteriorated here, but not immediately E and W. U. 6, Possible rear wall, supplementary platform, reused from 5th (Fig. 4). See reservations expressed in text for 5th about this wall. U. 22, Substructure floor for 4th, thought to have been incorporated into that for 3rd. U. 23, Rear wall, building platform reused from 4th (Fig. 6). U. 24, Floor, supplementary platform, reused from 4th (Fig. 6). U. 26, Floor W of U. 22 at identical elevation, thought to represent an extension of that floor for 3rd. U. 27, Stairs that surely served 2nd, but which are thought to have been constructed originally for 3rd. The basis for their reconstruction is discussed in the text (see also 32, above). Pertinent to Plat. 7F-1: U. 12, N wall, built with Str. 7F-30-4th (Fig. 5), and incorporated into the wall for Str. 7F-30-3rd. Fl. 1, Plat. 7F-1-2nd, originally constructed with Str. 7F-30-4th (Fig. 6). Note that the reconstruction of the W substructure wall for Str. 7F-30-3rd shown here would mean that the eastern portion of Fl. 1 was buried beneath the new Str. 7F-30-3rd. Burial 194, which was intruded into Fl. 1, most likely was placed at the time of construction of Str. 7F-30-3rd. Pertinent to Plat. 7F-3: U. 8, Floor for Plat. 7F-3-1st, later incorporated as part of Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 (Fig. 6). For section A-A', see Fig. 10; section B-B', see Fig. 11.

FIGURE 7

Str. 7F-30-2nd and 7F-31-2nd: Plan (scale 1:100). Pertinent to Str. 7F-30-2nd: 32, Hypothetical lower step for U. 27 (Fig. 7:32). 35, Reconstructed stairs to the upper level of the building platform (see text for explanation of reconstruction). 56, Reconstructed N end wall, supplementary platform, reused from 3rd (Fig. 7:56). 57, Reconstructed N end wall, building platform. For this, the comparable wall of 3rd (Fig. 7:57) probably had new courses of masonry added in order to bring its eastern portion up to the elevation of U. 28. 58, Hypothetical front wall, lower level, building platform, reused from 3rd (Fig. 7:58). South of the stairway, the wall of 3rd was shortened for construction of Str. 7F-31-2nd. 59, Hypothetical front wall, supplementary platform, reused from 3rd (Fig. 7:59). The S portion of the original wall must have been removed for construction of Str. 7F-31-2nd; the break in Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 in line with it in the trench through Str. 7F-31 is thought to have occurred later as a result of a weakening of this floor caused first by the weight of the wall and accentuated by the later demolition of the wall. 60, New S substructure wall, its location reconstructed on the assumptions of symmetry relative to the stairway (U. 27) and that Str. 7F-31-2nd had the same lateral dimensions as 31-1st. 61, Front wall, upper level, building platform, reconstructed on the basis of the location of U. 30 and the W edge of U. 28. U. 6, Possible rear wall, supplementary platform, reused from 5th (Fig. 4); see caveat in text of 5th. U. 23, Rear wall, building platform, for which the comparable wall of 3rd (Fig. 7) probably was increased in height. U. 24, Floor, supplementary platform, reused from 4th (Fig. 6). U. 26, Floor, building platform, lower level, reused from 3rd (Fig. 7). U. 27, Stairs, the width of which is known from the lowest surviving step; thought to be the N portion of a stairway built originally for 3rd (Fig. 7). U. 28, Floor, building platform, upper level. U. 30, Upper riser of the stairs (35) to the building platform summit. Pertinent to Str. 7F-31-2nd: 62, Reconstructed W substructure wall, from a projection of the stairs, height of the fill, and known location of the W wall of Str. 7F-31-1st (see text). 63, N wall 2nd, reconstructed from the known location of the N wall of 1st and assumed symmetry of the building platform of 2nd relative to its stairs (see text). 64, S wall of 2nd, reconstructed on the assumption that the structure was symmetrical relative to its front-rear axis, which probably runs through Bu. 159. This falls on the same location proposed for the S wall of the supplementary platform of Str. 7F-30-3rd (Fig. 7); hence, a part of that wall may have survived in the new one for Str. 7F-31-2nd (see text). U. 1, E substructure wall of 2nd. U. 2, Stairs of 2nd, reconstructed from dimensions of known steps and assumption of similar proportions relative to the structure wall (62) as the stairs of Str. 7F-30-2nd have to its building platform wall (58). (Consistent is what is known of the steps for Str. 7F-31-1st; Fig. 9.) Pertinent to Str. 7F-32-1st-H: U. 2, First riser, N stairs (Fig. 16). Pertinent to Plat. 7F-1: 65, Hypothetical SE corner, Plat. 7F-1-2nd, from a projection E of Str. 7F-32:U. 2 and S of the front wall of Str. 7F-31-2nd. U. 12, N wall, built for Plat. 7F-1-2nd and later incorporated into the wall for Str. 7F-30-3rd (Fig. 7) and 2nd. Fl. 1, Plat. 7F-1-2nd, originally constructed with Str. 7F-30-4th (Fig. 6). Pertinent to Plat. 7F-3: U. 8, Floor used as part of Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 (Fig. 7). For section A-A', see Fig. 10; section B-B', see Fig. 11.

FIGURE 8

Str. 7F-30-1st-A, B, C, and Str. 7F-31-1st-A, B: Plan (scale 1:100). Pertinent to Str. 7F-30-1st: 56, Reconstructed N end wall, supplementary platform, reused from 2nd (Fig. 8:56). 57, Reconstructed N end wall, building platform. For this, the height of the E portion of the comparable wall of 2nd (Fig. 8:57) presumably was increased, bringing it to the elevation of U. 31. 58, Hypothetical front wall, lower level, building platform, reused from 2nd (Fig. 8:58). The reason for supposing that this wall continued in use is discussed in the text. 59, Hypothetical front wall, supplementary platform, reused from 2nd (Fig. 8:59). 60, S substructure wall, reused from 2nd (Fig. 8:60). The height of part of this wall must have been increased, bringing it to the elevation of U. 31. 66, Front wall, upper level, building platform, reconstructed by a projection upwards of the structure stairway (U. 32), and westward of the summit floor (U. 31), to a point of intersection. 67, Hypothetical building walls, the existence of which is indicated by the mass of debris, particularly to the rear of the structure, and quantities of modeled stucco found throughout the overburden on the ruin mound. The reconstruction here is purely speculative, and assumes walls much like those of Str. 7F-29-1st (Fig. 2). U. 6, Rear wall, supplementary platform, reused from 5th (Fig. 4). U. 23, Rear wall, building platform. For this, the comparable wall of 2nd (Fig. 8) must have been increased in height. U. 24, Floor, supplementary platform, reused from 4th (Fig. 6). U. 27, Stairs, reused from 2nd (Fig. 8). The lowest step of the original stairway is thought to have been torn out when 1st-C was built (Fig. 8:32). U. 31, Remnant of the substructure floor, 1.30 m higher than the comparable pavement for 2nd (Fig. 8:U. 28). U. 32, Upper addition to the U. 27 stairway, giving access to the floor represented by U. 31. Now in an advanced state of ruin, the stairs are reconstructed from what is known of U. 27. U. 33, Western extension of the lowermost step of U. 27, built on Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1. Construction defines 1st-B. U. 34, Platform built on Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1, Str. 7F-30:U. 33, and the second step of Str. 7F-30:U. 27. Excavated by Coe and Broman in 1957 (“Feature 1,” TR. 2), its construction defines Str. 7F-30-1st-A, and PD. 100 was included in its fill (above U. 27). Pertinent to Str. 7F-31-1st: 63, Reconstructed N wall, reused from 2nd (Fig. 8:63). 64, Reconstructed S wall, reused from 2nd (Fig. 8:64). 68, Hypothetical southern counterpart of U. 5, assuming bilateral symmetry for 1st. 69, Hypothetical southern counterpart of U. 6, thought to be a building wall. U. 1, E substructure wall, reused from 2nd (Fig. 8). U. 4, Stairs, built directly on the older ones for 2nd (Fig. 8:U. 2). The lowest step is shown in broken line, since it must have been covered when Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1 was laid (see Fig. 11; this defines Str. 7F-31-1st-A). Width of the stairs is reconstructed on the assumption that they were as wide relative to the structure as U. 27 and 32 are relative to the building platform of Str. 7F-30-1st; such a reconstruction fits well with what is known of the doorway for Str. 7F-311st. U. 5, Apparent plinth in front of U. 6. U. 6, Apparent building wall, as indicated by height, presence of a break in it E of U. 4, and the absence of stairs that could have led to a surface at its top. U. 7, Stairs inside the building. Their width is unknown; they could be as wide as the building, or they could be inset into its floor (see text). Pertinent to Str. 7F-32: 72, First riser of the stairway associated with Plat. 7F-1-1st (Fig. 16:13). Pertinent to Plat. 7F-1: 70, Hypothetical SE corner, Plat. 7F-1-1st, from a projection E of the lowest riser (72) of the Str. 7F-32 stairway and a projection S of the front wall of Str. 7F-31-2nd. 71, Chop-line beneath Str. 7F-30:U. 34, where Bu. 1 was intruded into Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1. U. 6, Floor remnant, identified as part of Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1 (Fig. 16). Fl. 1, Plat. 7F-1-1st, positioned 0.34 m above Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1, it turns up to the lowest surviving step of Str. 7F-30:U. 27 and Str. 7F-30:U. 33 and 34 were built on it. It must have sealed Bu. 190 and 191, and almost surely Bu. 4 (the latter may have been placed when the floor was laid, but it could be earlier; see Fig. 6). Burial 1 and St. 23 were intruded into the floor, which must have eliminated the lowest step of Str. 7F-31:U. 4, and must have extended N of Str. 7F-30 to provide access to Str. 7F-29-1st-A (see Fig. 2:Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-1st). For section A-A', see Fig. 10; section B-B', see Fig. 11.

FIGURE 9

FIGURE 10

Str. 7F-30: Section A-A' (scale 1:50), as located in Fig. 4–9. Pertinent to Str. 7F-30: 1, Masonry block wall closing the entrance to the chamber of Bu. 160; the lower three courses are plastered on the inside face. 2, Fill of CS. 12 of 5th: large masonry blocks, retained by the wall (1) in the entrance to the burial chamber. These, with a gritty red quartzite sand and some white, yellow, and red quartzite spheres fill the shaft outside the chamber to the level of bedrock surface to the W, slightly above to the E. 3, Fill of CS. 11 of 5th: masonry blocks with lime powder and red quartzite sand, all placed above the pause-line (U. 1) marking the end of CS. 12. To the W, fill is retained by the lower three courses of U. 2; to the E, probably by the base of U. 6. 4, Fill of CS. 10 of 5th; similar to that of CS. 11 (3), it is based on the pause-line (U. 3) marking the end of CS. 11, and is retained on the W by the second three courses of U. 2. To the E, it is probably faced by several courses of U. 6. 5, Fill of 5th, CS. 9; similar to that (4) of CS. 10, it rests on the pauseline that marks the end of CS. 10 (U. 4), is retained by part of U. 2, and probably part of U. 6. 6, Fill of 5th, CS. 8; based on U. 5, which marks the end of CS. 9, it is similar to the preceding fill, is retained by the upper two courses of U. 2, and probably a portion of U. 6. 7, Fill of CS. 7 of 5th: loose rubble, with some marl, all placed above a layer of white lime powder (U. 7). The lower five steps of U. 13 were part of this construction stage. 8, Fill of 5th, CS. 6: rubble, with a lens of black earth, ending at U. 6 on the E and the 5th, 6th, and 7th stair blocks of U. 13 on the W. It overlies the fill of CS. 8, the top of U. 2, and a pause-line (U. 9) on top of the fill of CS. 7. Unit 10 is a pause-line that overlies a portion of the CS. 6 fill. 9, Fill of 5th, CS. 5: rubble that lies directly on the similar fill of CS. 6, except where U.

10 separates the two. It extends E to U. 6, is retained on the W by an upper portion of the stairway (U. 13), and is topped by several thin strata of light and dark soil, with U. 11 the final pause-line. 10, Fill of CS. 4 of 5th; a combination of rubble, gray powder, and very dark soils such as appear particularly in the fill of CS. 5 (9). This ends on the E at the top of U. 6, but on the W is retained by a wall, U. 12, against which the upper steps of U. 13 were built. The lines of fill suggest that the steps, U. 12, and rubble immediately E of U. 12 were put in place, then the steps were used to carry containers of earth and debris up, which were dumped working from the W over to the E. The fill is topped by the remains of a floor, U. 14. 11,12, Fill of 5th, CS. 3 and 2; brown earth, rubble, and mortar, continuous behind U. 15 and 18, implying that the four steps of U. 15 were built, the W terrace was then completed, following which U. 18 was built. 13, Projection of measurements of known treads and risers for the U. 13 stairway (note especially where it meets U. 12, relative to U. 14). 14, Brown, gritty earth, apparently a natural accumulation. 15, Packed, light-colored earth, placed in conjunction with the U. 13 stairway. 24, Projection of known treads and risers of the U. 20 stairway. (Stairs between U. 20 and 21 are missing on account of later intrusion of Bu. 132.) 25, Chop-line, E of which 5th was removed to 0.20 m below floor level, for construction of 4th. 26, Destroyed floor of 5th; destruction the result of activity when 4th was built (see Fig. 4:49). 27, Change in fill in the shaft over Bu. 140; shaft and fill above this point are thought to be associated with Bu. 150, below with Bu. 140. 28, Block fill for stairway of 4th. Note that it reaches almost the same elevation as U. 24; proposed is that these blocks were intended to retain supplementary platform fill that was then dumped behind the steps and wall. 29, Light- (top) to gray-brown earth (below) fill for 4th; sherds in it are no later than early Ik. 30, Light- (below) to dark-gray fill (above) for 3rd. 31, Apparent chop-line beneath PD. 98, suggesting intrusion into fill for 3rd. 32, Hypothetical lowest riser for the stairway of 3rd; its height is reconstructed as identical to that of the second surviving (3rd original) riser, producing a perfect “fit” with a tread about where Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1 was later laid, and about the same distance below the next stair block as the next tread is below the block above. 33, Top of fill for CS. 3 of 2nd; surface shows evidence of extensive burning. 34, Top of fill for CS. 2 of 2nd; like 33, this surface shows evidence of extensive burning. 35, Reasonable reconstruction of stairway to the upper level of 2nd, given the lateral distance between U. 26 and 30, the elevation of the base of U. 30, and the known height of U. 30. 36, E extent, fill for 2nd, which is continuous with that for 4th, ending at the top of U. 23. This suggests that U. 23 was built up as reconstructed here, but subsequently collapsed, except for its basal course, leading to erosion of fill. There is no evidence for later fill, associated with a now-collapsed wall, E of U. 23. 37, Floor (U. 31), off-section, for 1st. Poor preservation does not permit precise reconstruction of its juncture with the U. 32 stairway; assumed is that, on the E (like the floors of 2nd through 4th), it terminated at a wall based on the old U. 23. 38, Fill of 1st, light-colored earth, with some rubble. 39, Rubble, either fill for E exterior wall, from collapse of such a wall, or even from a building that was a part of 1st. U. 1, 3, 4, 5, Pause-lines, marking the end of CS. 12–9 of 5th. U. 2, Fill wall of 5th, built as part of CS. 11–8. U. 6, Possible rear wall (but see reservations expressed in text), built for 5th; if its back face, it was reused in all later versions of 7F-30. U. 7, Light-colored earth beneath fill of 5th:CS. 7, thought to have been placed to provide access to the construction surface above U. 4. U. 8, Dark fill, probably part of the same operation as U. 7. U. 9–11, Pause-lines, marking the end of CS. 7–5 of 5th. U. 12, W retaining wall for the fill of CS. 4 of 5th. U. 13, Construction stairs for 5th. U. 14, Summit floor for 5th; lack of any evidence for a turndown over U. 12 suggests that pavement ran farther W, as reconstructed (26) here. It probably also ran E as far as U. 6 or beyond (depending on location of the rear wall), but was later ripped out for new construction represented by U. 23 and 24. U. 15, Construction stairway for CS. 3 of 5th, thought to have been necessitated by construction of two retaining walls (U. 16 and 17, Fig. 4) that blocked access to U. 13. U. 18, Finished stairway for 5th; its bottom tread, which differs from the rest, is thought to be a replacement of an original one associated with the laying of Plat. 7F-3:U. 8. Note that the top of U. 18 is roughly in line with U. 2 (as the later U. 30 is with U. 29). U. 19, Remnant of a summit platform, based on U. 14. U. 20, Remnant of stairway for 4th. U. 21, Upper stair riser of 4th. U. 22, Substructure floor for 4th, later heavily burned (and the two problematical deposits contain much ash and carbon), which may account for its destruction E of PD. 103. Almost surely, the floor ran to the top of U. 23. U. 23, Rear wall, upper platform level of 4th; portions of 5th (U. 14 and 19) were ripped out when this wall was built. U. 24, Floor of the supplementary platform for 4th. U. 26, Substructure floor for 3rd; it probably ran up to the older U. 22, which continued to serve as part of the new pavement, and PD. 98 represents a later intrusion through it. U. 27, Stairs, thought to have been built for 3rd, and which, in altered form, served later versions of 7F-30 (see also 32). U. 28, Substructure floor for 2nd, laid as part of CS. 1; it runs E from the top of U. 30, and probably ended at an addition to the top of U. 23. U. 29, Fill wall built as part of CS. 3 of 2nd on U. 22, against which an upper stairway (35) is thought to have been built. U. 30, Upper riser, upper stairway of 2nd, built as part of CS. 2. (Note that, though closer together vertically, U. 30 has the same relation to U. 29 that the earlier top of U. 18 had to U. 2.) U. 32, Upper addition to the U. 27 stairway, for 1st-C. U. 33, Addition to the lower tread of the U. 27 stairway (“Feature 2” in TR. 2:36, 47); defines 1st-B. U. 34, Frontal platform that defines 1st-A (“Feature 1” in TR. 2:28). Pertinent to Plat. 7F-1: 40, Dark earth (cont.)

(Figure 10 caption cont.) beneath Plat. 7F-1:U. 5, similar to the dark earth fills of Plat. 7F-3-2nd (19, 23) and Str. 7F-30-5th (parts of 6, 9, 10), as well as that beneath Plat. 7F-1:U. 3 (Fig. 17:28). 41, Thin, packed, white stratum that overlies bedrock, on which Plat. 7F-1:U. 4 and 11, with Plat. 7F-3-2nd (see 19) were built. 42, Unevenly laid limy material, seen only at the N end of the burial cut; elsewhere, burial fill is continuous with that of U. 34. 43, Chop-lines, caused by removal of fill for Plat. 7F-1-1st and 2nd for Bu. 1. 44, Mud plaster, Bu. 1. 45, Top of loose, gray material that seeped into burial chamber after it was sealed. 46, Fill, Plat. 7F-1-1st. 47, Fill, Plat. 7F-1-2nd (see TR. 2:32). U. 4, Wall for Plat. 7F-1-4th that retains plaza fill (40) to the W, against which fill (19) for Plat. 7F-3-2nd:CS. 3 was dumped on the E and from the top of which the plaza floor (U. 5) runs W. Platform 7F-3:U. 2 was built on Plat. 7F-1:U. 4, after Plat. 7F-1:U. 5 was laid (see text). U. 5, Floor for Plat. 7F-1-4th (see Fig. 4); Str. 7F-Sub.1 was built after it was laid, with a secondary turnup to its stairs. U. 11, Wall (off-section) built on the same stratum as U. 4; plaster of U. 5 turns down over its W face. Fl. 1, Plat. 7F-1-2nd (Fig. 6). Fl. 1, Plat. 7F-1-1st (Fig. 9). Pertinent to Plat. 7F-3: 16, First fill, CS. 3 of 2nd: light-brown earth. 17, Second fill, CS. 3 of 2nd: light-gray earth with dark lenses. 18, Third fill of CS. 3 of 2nd: light-colored earth. 19, Fourth fill, CS. 3 of 2nd: black earth, dumped from Plat. 7F-1. 20, Fifth fill, CS. 3 of 2nd: light-gray earth with rubble. 21, Final fill, CS. 3 of 2nd: light-gray earth. 22, Fill, Plat. 7F-3-2nd:CS. 2: limestone powder. 23, Fill, CS. 2 of 2nd: black earth, as seen also in other apparently contemporary construction (see 6, 9, 10, 19, 40). U. 1, Pause-line, marking the end of CS. 3 of 2nd; abuts E face of Plat. 7F-1:U. 4. U. 2, W wall, Plat. 7F-3-2nd, built as part of CS. 2 (Fig. 4); though built on Plat. 7F-1:U. 4, its W face is not in line with that of the lower wall, expectable if U. 2 was built after the laying of Plat. 7F-1:U. 5, which would have hidden the W, but not the E, face of Plat. 7F-1:U. 4. U. 3, Thin pause-line in the fills of CS. 2 for Plat. 7F-3-2nd. U. 4, Pause-line marking the end of CS. 2. U. 5, Floor for Plat. 7F-3-2nd (Fig. 4). U. 8, Floor for Plat. 7F-3-1st (Fig. 5). U. 9, W wall, Plat. 7F-3-1st (Fig. 5). Figure 11 (facing page) Str. 7F-30 and 7F-31, Section B-B' (scale 1:50), as located in Fig. 4–9. Pertinent to Str. 7F-30: 1, Fill of light-brown earth, small stones, and masonry for Str. 7F-30-4th; rests on Plat. 7F-3:U. 8, and Bu. 159 was later intruded into it. 2, Chop-line, where fill of Str. 7F-30-4th was removed as CS. 3 for Str. 7F-31-2nd (see text). 3, Top of supplementary platform of 4th, projected from elevation of Str. 7F-30:U. 24 in Fig. 10. 4, Reconstructed front wall for building platform of 4th (Fig. 6:U. 21). 5, Reconstructed floor of building platform of 4th, projected from elevation of U. 22 (Fig. 10) and the surviving height of the fill (1) seen here. U. 17, Retaining wall, Str. 7F-30-5th:CS. 3 (Fig. 4). U. 25, Front wall, supplementary platform of 4th (Fig. 6). Pertinent to Str. 7F-31: 6, Mud plaster on walls of Bu. 159. 7, Substructure fill of medium-brown earth for 2nd. 8, Hard, gray earth fill for stairs of 2nd. 9, Hard, gray earth and masonry in the shaft that was dug into the stairs of 2nd for placement of Bu. 193. The similarity of the earth to undisturbed fill for U. 2 suggests that spoil from excavation for the burial was redeposited, probably with masonry from the disturbed stairway. 10, Reconstructed stairs for 2nd, from knowledge of surviving U. 2. 11, Reconstructed floor for 2nd (see text for explanation). 12, Masonry, probably fallen from the top of U. 6. 13, Masonry, thought to have fallen from building walls. 14, Reconstructed floor for 1st (see text for explanation). 15, Reconstructed floor level, between U. 4 and 7 (see text). 16, Lightgray to tan-earth fill for 1st. U. 1, Rear wall, built for 2nd against the fill for Str. 7F-30-4th. The upper part of the wall is reconstructed here from the known size of masonry blocks used in it, and the known surviving height of the fill for Str. 7F-30-4th. The wall was probably increased in height to serve Str. 7F-31-1st. We have no explanation for the packed masonry E of U. 1. U. 2, Stairs for 2nd (Fig. 8). U. 3, Layer of small stones that caps the brown earth fill for Bu. 159, evidently providing a foundation for the floor of Str. 7F-31-2nd. U. 4, Stairs for 1st (Fig. 9). Note that Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1 would have eliminated the basal step (this constitutes the only difference between Str. 7F-31-1st-A and B). U. 5, Wall, discovered N of the stairs, thought to be a plinth (Fig. 9). U. 6, Wall, seen N of the stairs, thought to be a building wall (see text and Fig. 9). The stone (12) probably fell from the top of this wall. U. 7, Upper flight of stairs for 1st (Fig. 9). Pertinent to Plat. 7F-1: 19, Break in Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-2nd, thought to be the result of a weakening of the pavement first by construction of the supplementary platform wall for Str. 7F-30-3rd (Fig. 7:59) and later its destruction when Str. 7F-31-2nd was built. 47, Masonry block fill similar to that for Plat. 7F-1-2nd elsewhere (Fig. 10:47). Fl. 1, Plat. 7F-1-2nd. Its identification here derives from its elevation relative to that of the floor W of Str. 7F-30, the similarity of their fills, and the similarity of their relationships to U. 1

and 8 of Plat. 7F-3. The latter was eventually incorporated into this pavement, but the precise point of juncture here is unknown. Fl. 1, Plat. 7F-1-1st. No traces of this were found W of Str. 7F-31, but it must have extended here (see Fig. 17:Plat. 7F-1:U. 6). Its reconstructed elevation here is based on knowledge of its elevation above Fl. 1 of 2nd W of Str. 7F-30 (Fig. 10). Pertinent to Plat. 7F-3: 17, Fill for CS. 3 of Plat. 7F-3-2nd. Here, this consists of earth rich in sherd and artifactual material, probably largely redeposited midden. 18, Quarried bedrock face, off-section. U. 1, Pause-line marking the end of CS. 3, Plat. 7F-3-2nd (Fig. 10). U. 4, Pause-line marking the end of CS. 2, Plat. 7F-3-2nd (Fig. 10). U. 5, Floor, Plat. 7F-3-2nd (Fig. 4). U. 8, Floor, Plat. 7F-3-1st (Fig. 5). As shown here, the pavement seen beneath Bu. 159 on which the fill (1) of Str. 7F-30-4th rests seems too high for Plat. 7F-3:U. 5, but about right for U. 8.

FIGURE 11

Str. 7F-32-2nd-C, B, and A: Plan (scale 1:100). Pertinent to Str. 7F-32: 1, Apron moldings, central zones of N and E walls (W wall is assumed to have resembled the E one). 2, Top of basal molding; seen only in the tunnel along the W end of the N side, a comparable molding is assumed on the E. Molding extends around the NW, and probably NE, corners. 3, Apron molding on the end portions of the N and E walls (W wall is assumed to have resembled the E one). 4, Top of building platform, apparently higher in the center sections of the N and S walls than elsewhere (see Fig. 18a,b). 5, Reconstructed stairway, from poorly preserved remains; steps may not have been significantly wider than the doorway to which they led, for the fill beneath the E jamb of the doorway to Rm. 1 shows a distinct break between the E and W halves of the tunnel there. 6, Vent at floor level; a comparable one may exist into the E portion of Rm. 1. 7, Vaulted doorway between Rm. 1 and 2 of 2nd-C; for 2nd-B, this was closed off with masonry similar to that used in the building walls (see Fig. 19a and 39b). U. 3, Interior platform, built on Fl. 1 of 2nd against the masonry (7) in the doorway to Rm. 3. There is a secondary plaster turnup from the floor to the two platform walls (Fig. 19a), and the plaster surface of the platform (later ripped out) turned up to the room walls. (Construction of this interior platform defines Str. 7F-32-2nd-A.) Fl. 1 of 2nd: hard, plaster pavement laid on packed, white mortar at least 0.40 m. thick. In Rm. 2, several sherds were pressed into the floor, and traces of red paint survive on it in all rooms. To the N and S, the floor extends beyond the building walls, which were built on it. To the E and W, Fl. 1 ends at a step-down in line with the outer wall face. For section A-A’, see Fig. 17; section B-B’, Fig. 18a; section C-C’, Fig. 18b.

FIGURE 12

Str. 7F-32-1st-H, G: Building Plan (scale 1:100). Pertinent to Str. 7F-32: 6, Vent (Fig. 12:6). 7, Doorway, closed off for 2nd-B (Fig. 12:7). 8, Vaulted doorway between Rm. 1 and 2, blocked (except upper 0.50 m) with masonry for 1st-H. The E face of this masonry rests on fill continuous with that of U. 10; the W face rests on Fl. 1 of 2nd in Rm. 2 (see also Fig. 39d). 9, Wall built on the floor of 2nd, retains fill of U. 25 and forms a slightly raised threshold above its floor (see Fig. 19f and 42b,c). U. 10, Room-end interior platform, built by extending the E face of U. 3 (Fig. 12) S to meet the building wall. Its masonry rests on the pavement of 2nd, and Fl. 1 of 1st turns up to it (and the surviving wall of U. 3, see Fig. 19a). The fill of U. 10 (earth, stones, and sherds) is retained by the lower portion of the W face of the masonry blocking the doorway to Rm. 2. The plaster surface of U. 10 turns up to the base of the E face of the masonry in the doorway. U. 11, Interior platform, built on the floor of 2nd, to which Fl. 1 of 1st turns up (see Fig. 19a). The E end of the platform is assumed to be the mirror image of the W end. U. 16, Interior platform, built on Fl. 1 of 2nd, from which there is secondary turnup (see Fig. 19d). The wall masonry of U. 16 resembles small bricks. U. 17, Room-end interior platform, built on Fl. 1 of 2nd, with its battered face abutting the room walls. Largely destroyed for construction of the later U. 18, its original height is unknown, but its floor must have abutted the masonry (8) in the doorway to Rm. 1 (see also Fig. 19c). U. 20, Interior platform, built on Fl. 1 of 2nd, with a secondary turnup from that surface. All but its W end (Fig. 41a) was later torn out; it is assumed to have been symmetrical. U. 25, interior platform, with high end sections and lower central section (see Fig. 19b). Its walls rest on Fl. 1 of 2nd, with secondary turnup, and its fill in the doorway to Rm. 3 is retained by masonry (9; see Fig. 19f and 42b,c). Fl. 1 of 2nd, original structure pavement (Fig. 12). Fl. 1 of 1st; in Rm. 1, laid directly on the original floor, turning up to U. 10 and 11. For substructure plan, see Fig. 16.

FIGURE 13

Str. 7F-32-1st-F, E: Building Plan (scale 1:100). Pertinent to Str. 7F-32: 6, Vent (see Fig. 12:6). 7, Doorway, sealed for 2nd-B (see Fig. 12:7). 8, Doorway, blocked for 1st-H (see Fig. 13:8). 9, Wall constructed with U. 25 (see Fig. 13:9). U. 11, Interior platform, built for 1st-H (see Fig. 13), on the W end of which a wall was added, with a vertical W face, but battered E face (see Fig. 19a). A comparable wall is posited for the E end, creating a “thronelike” appearance. U. 12, Room-end interior platform, built over the partially razed U. 10 (Fig. 13). Its wall rests on Fl. 1 of 1st, from which there is a secondary turnup (see Fig. 19a). U. 16, Interior platform, built for 1st-H or 2nd-A (Fig. 13). U. 18, Room-end interior platform, built over the partially razed U. 17 (Fig. 13, 19c). Based on Fl. 1 of 2nd, its floor abuts the masonry (8) blocking the doorway to Rm. 1. U. 20, Interior platform, built for 1st-H (Fig. 13). U. 25, Interior platform, built for 1st-H (Fig. 13). Fl. 1 of 2nd (Fig. 12). Fl. 1 of 1st, laid in Rm. 1 for 1st-H, on which U. 12 was built (Fig. 13). For substructure plan, see Fig. 16.

FIGURE 14

Str. 7F-32-1st-D, C, B: Building Plan (scale 1:100). Pertinent to Str. 7F-32: 6, Vent (see Fig. 12:6). 7, Doorway, closed off for 2nd-B (see Fig. 12:7). 8, Doorway, blocked for 1st-H (see Fig. 13:8). 9, Wall constructed with U. 25 (see Fig. 13:9). 10, Vaulted doorway between Rm. 2 and 3, sealed with masonry for 1st-C. The E face of the masonry rests on fill continuous with that of U. 21; its W face rests on Fl. 1 of 2nd, and Fl. 2 of 1st turns up to it. A niche, later plugged up, was left at the top of the doorway in Rm. 3, with a vent at the top (see also Fig. 41b). 19,20, Raised sections of U. 13 incorporating the raised ends of the earlier U. 11 (Fig. 14, 19a, and 40d). U. 13, Final interior platform in Rm. 1, replacing U. 11 and 12 (Fig. 14, 19a, and 39b). The E-W face was built especially for this on Fl. 1 of 1st and abuts, on the W, the old U. 12 (part of which continued in use S of this new masonry for U. 13). Patches on Fl. 1 turn up to the new wall. The symmetry of U. 13 shown here is assumed. U. 18, Room-end interior platform, built for 1st-F (Fig. 14). U. 19, Room-end interior platform that replaced U. 16 (Fig. 19c,d, and 13). Its front was built by extending the old S wall of U. 16 E to abut the room wall; this extension rests on Fl. 2 of 1st, which was then ripped out S of U. 19. Floor 1 of 1st turns up to the base of U. 19, and the floor on top of the platform abuts the masonry (10) in the doorway to Rm. 3. U. 21, Room-end interior platform, built on Fl. 1 of 2nd, from which there is secondary turnup (see Fig. 19e). The fill for U. 21 (large blocks of stone and living debris, including carbon) extends into the doorway to Rm. 2, up to the W face of the masonry (10) that blocks the doorway (see Fig. 41c). The E face of the doorway masonry rests on this fill, and the platform pavement runs up to its base, with a turnup. The floor also abuts the masonry (7), blocking the doorway to Rm. 1 (see also Fig. 41b). U. 22, Interior platform that replaced U. 20 (Fig. 13), built on Fl. 1 of 2nd around what was left of U. 20; Fl. of 1st turns up to it. U. 25, Interior platform, built for 1st-H (Fig. 13). Fl. 1 of 1st; in Rm. 1, laid for 1st-H, with U. 12 and 13 built on it (Fig. 13); in Rm. 2, laid over the remains of Fl. 2 of 1st (part of 1st-C), turning up to U. 18 and 19; in Rm. 3, laid over Fl. 1 of 2nd, turning up to U. 21, 22, and the masonry (9) in the doorway to Rm. 4. For substructure plan, see Fig. 16.

FIGURE 15

Str. 7F-32-1st-A: Plan (scale 1:100). Pertinent to Str. 7F-32: 3, Apron molding on the building platform walls of 2nd, still visible in 1st. 4, Top of building platform of 2nd, which continued in use in 1st; may have been elongated at either end, but was not built that way originally. 6, Vent into Rm. 1 (see Fig. 12:6). 7, Doorway, closed off for 2nd-B (see Fig. 12:7). 8, Doorway, closed off for 1st-H (see Fig. 13:8). 9, Slightly raised threshold constructed with U. 25 for 1st-H (see Fig. 13:9). 10, Doorway, closed off for 1st-C (see Fig. 15:10). 11, Top riser of N stairway, constructed as part of 1st-B; top of riser is at the same elevation as Fl. 1 of 1st in Rm. 3, and its base was set slightly into the building platform wall of 2nd. Prior to this, the stairway is reconstructed as having abutted the original building platform wall to form the top riser. This new riser is assumed as having been as long as the others. 12,13, Second and first risers of the N stairway for 1st-C, B, and A; originated as third and second risers of a stairway built originally for 1st-H (see U. 2). Plat. 7F-1:U. 6 runs up to the base of the lower riser; the upper one is now totally destroyed, but its position is indicated by the configuration of the remaining fill. End walls of the stairs are known; the E one extends below the level of Plat. 7F-1:U. 6. 14–18, Reconstructed risers for a S stairway, built originally for 1st-H. They are known only from badly preserved chunks of masonry and floor remnants, but mound configuration suggests that their length was the same as the stairway on the N. 19,20, Raised portions of U. 13 (Fig. 15:19, 20). U. 2, Wall, covered by Plat. 7F-1:U. 6, the base of which rests on fill, and the top of which is at the same general elevation as the floor of Plat. 7F-1-2nd. These, and a spacing of the wall relative to the step (13) of 1st-C (comparable to that between steps 12 and 13) suggest that U. 2 was the lowest riser of the stairway of which 12 and 13 are parts, and which served 32-H, G, F, E, and D. U. 5, Plaster surface for a deep treaded step built onto the end of 7F-32, probably for 1st-H. Its riser was U. 4, shown in Fig. 18a. U. 6, Riser for an enlargement of the W step (see U. 5), built probably for 1st-C (see Fig. 18a). U. 7, Plaster floor for the step associated with U. 6 (see Fig. 18a). U. 8, Apparent stair riser, built on the surface of U. 7, seemingly for 1st-B. Its position relative to the original building platform of 2nd is roughly analogous to the upper riser (11) of the N stairway (compare Fig. 17 and 18a). U. 9, Wall, thought to belong to a stairway built against the E end of the structure. As reconstructed here, the stairway was about as wide as the old central outset for the wall of 2nd. U. 13, Interior platform, built for 1st-D (Fig. 15). U. 18, Room-end interior platform, built for 1st-F (Fig. 14). U. 19, Room-end interior platform, built for 1st-B (Fig. 15). U. 23, Final interior platform in Rm. 3, formed by joining together the surfaces of U. 22 and 21 (Fig. 15 and 41b). The new wall for this is based on Fl. 1 of 1st, and abuts the front of older U. 22. U. 24, Room-end interior platform in Rm. 3; like U. 23, built on Fl. 1 of 1st. Its plaster floor abuts the wall in the doorway into Rm. 4, leaving a threshold (9) 9 cm high. U. 25,26, Final interior platform in Rm. 4 (see Fig. 15). Unit 26 abuts the front of the older U. 25, and could have been added any time from 1st-G on. Fl. 1 of 1st, laid in Rm. 1 for 1st-H (Fig. 13) and in Rm. 2 and 3 for 1st-B (Fig. 15). The floor in Rm. 1 probably extended S to the same point (4) as its earlier predecessor. In Rm. 3, its thickness (0.10 m) required alterations to the masonry outside the N doorway (11). Units 23 and 24 were later built on this pavement, which was heavily burned at some time N and E of U. 22. Pertinent to Plat. 7F-1: U. 6, Remnant of plaster pavement, thought to be part of Fl. 1 of 1st, since it lies at approximately the same elevation. For section A-A', see Fig. 17; section B-B', Fig. 18a; section C-C', Fig. 18b.

FIGURE 16

Str. 7F-32: Section A-A' (scale 1:50), as located in Fig. 12 and 16. Pertinent to Str. 7F-32: 1, Apron molding, central zone of the N building platform wall of 2nd (Fig. 12:1; note the large header masonry here). 4, Top of building platform of 2nd (Fig. 12:4). 5, Stairway for 2nd (Fig. 12:5), apparently constructed so that stair masonry was laid in the body of floor material for the tread below, but the hard plaster surface was restricted to the tread in front of the riser (see most clearly for 4). 11, Top stair riser built for 1st-B when Fl. 1 of 1st was laid in Rm. 3 (Fig. 16:11). 12,13, Stair risers, built for 1st-H and in use thereafter (Fig. 16:12, 13). 14–18, Reconstructed stair risers, thought to have been built for 1stH (Fig. 16:14–18). 21, Fill for CS. 4 of 2nd: light-colored, compact earth, masonry, and stone placed concurrently with construction of the N wall and U. 1. 22, Packed marl pause-line in the fill of CS. 4. 23, Stratum of small stones, possibly marking a pause in fill operations for CS. 4. 24, Packed surface marking a pause in fill operations for CS. 4. 25, Large masonry blocks placed as CS. 3 of 2nd. Seen only in the E half of the tunnel, they may represent fill for the stairway, which may not have been significantly wider than the doorway to which it led, for W of these blocks, fill consists of stone blocks randomly placed, earth, and quantities of small stones. 26, Specially cut monolithic spring stones (Fig. 41b), seen in place at the W end of Rm. 3, indicate the height and projection of the spring shown here. 27, Vault, reconstructed from the bevel angle seen on fallen vault stones. U. 1, Fill-retaining wall of rough-cut masonry, built as part of 2nd:CS. 4. U. 2, Basal riser for original N stairway (Fig. 16). U. 11, Interior platform, built for 1st-H (Fig. 13). Note its distinctive stone fill. U. 13, Interior platform, built for 1stD (Fig. 15). Note its distinctive stone fill. U. 20, interior platform, built for 1st-H (Fig. 13). (The plaster surface shown belongs to U. 22.) U. 22, Interior platform, built for 1st-B (Fig. 15). Fl. 1 of 2nd (see Fig. 12), the body of which is virtually as deep as the excavation in Rm. 3. Fl. 1 of 1st (see Fig. 16). Pertinent to Plat. 7F1: 28, Black earth, below the lowermost floor, identical to fill below Plat. 7F-1:U. 5 W of Str. 7F-30 (Fig. 10). 29, Line of stones at which the deep plaza floor ends; these rest on the same fill (28) over which the floor was laid. 30, Top of lowest stratum of a primary Intermediate Classic midden (Table 5.1:Str. 7F-32, LG. 2b). 31, Top of upper stratum of a primary Intermediate Classic midden (Table 5.1:Str. 7F-32, LG. 2b); appears to have been purposefully leveled off some time after accumulation, at approximately the same elevation as Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-1-2nd. Note that this is the same level upon which Str. 7F-32:U. 2 was built. 32, Reconstructed level of Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 (from 31, above). U. 3, Deep plaza floor, thought to be part of that for Plat. 7F-1-4th (it overlies the same kind of fill, and is approximately the same depth below U. 6 as the floor of Plat. 7F-1-4th is below the floor of Plat. 7F-1-1st elsewhere; see Fig. 10). U. 6, Thought to be part of Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1, which has approximately the same elevation.

FIGURE 17

Str. 7F-32: Sections B-B' and C-C' (scale 1:50), as located in Fig. 12 and 16. Pertinent to Str. 7F-32: 1, Apron molding, central outset of building platform for 2nd (off-section; see Fig. 12:1). 4, Top of building platform for 2nd (Fig. 12). This is almost 0.30 m below the level of the room floors, a contrast with the N and S walls (Fig. 17:4). U. 4, Riser (off-section) for a deep-treaded step that probably abutted the W end of 7F-32, thought to have been built for 1st-H. U. 5, Remnant of the tread associated with U. 4 (Fig. 16), thought to have abutted the structure in the manner of later U. 7. U. 6, Riser for enlarged step, thought to relate to 1st-C (Fig. 16). U. 7, Tread associated with U. 6 (Fig. 16). U. 8, Stair riser, thought to have been built for 1st-B (Fig. 16). U. 25, Interior platform, built for 1st-H, showing low central portion (Fig. 13 and 19b). Fl. 1 of 2nd (Fig. 12).

FIGURE 18

Sections and Wall Elevations within Rooms of Str. 7F-32. a. W end of N wall, Rm. 1 (see also Fig. 39c). 1, Niche, in masonry that seals doorway to Rm. 3 (see Fig. 12:7). U. 3, Interior platform, built for 2nd-A (Fig. 12); the turnup from Fl. 1 of 1st dates from the time that U. 3 was incorporated into U. 10 (Fig. 13). U. 11, Interior platform, built for 1st-H, onto which raised end portions were added (Fig. 13). U. 12, Interior platform that replaced U. 10, for 1st-E (Fig. 14). U. 13, Interior platform that replaced U. 11 and 12, for 1st-D (Fig. 15); its pavement abuts the masonry blocking the doorway into Rm. 3, as must the floors of U. 12, 10, and 3 before. U. 14,15, Ceramic inserts, added to the N wall some time after original construction; ceramic analysis indicates general contemporaneity with fill sherds of U. 12 and 13. Fl. 1 of 2nd (Fig. 12). Fl. 1 of 1st (Fig. 16). b. Section through U. 25 in Rm. 4 (Fig. 13), showing junction of the low central portion with the high S portion. c.,d. Sections through the interior platforms of Rm. 2. U. 16, Earliest interior platform (Fig. 13). U. 17, Interior platform, built for 1st-G (Fig. 13). U. 18, Interior platform, built for 1st-F (Fig. 14). U. 19, Interior platform that replaced U. 16 (Fig. 15). Fl. 1 of 2nd (Fig. 12). Fl. 2 of 1st, laid on the floor of 2nd, after the latter had been deliberately roughened; it turns up to U. 16, U. 18, and the masonry in the doorway to Rm. 3 (see Fig. 15:10). When U. 19 was built, much of Fl. 2 was destroyed. Fl. 1 of 1st (Fig. 16). e. Section through U. 21, an interior platform in Rm. 3, built for 1st-C (Fig. 15; for a wall elevation, see Fig. 41d). f. Elevation of the E wall of Rm. 3 (see also Fig. 42b,c), showing the rear of the interior platform (U. 25) in Rm. 4 that extends into the doorway between the two rooms (see Fig. 13:9). Built on the floor of 2nd, Fl. 1 of 1st abuts the masonry, as does the later pavement of U. 24 (Fig. 16). Notice the large headers in the vault masonry; similar stones were used in the ceiling vaults.

FIGURE 19

Str. 7F-35 and 36: Plan (scale 1:100). Pertinent to Str. 7F-35: 1, E (front) wall, built as part of CS. 4, and based either on Plat. 7F-2:U. 1 or fill for CS. 5 (base of wall was not excavated). Its N end is abutted by the lower course of Plat. 7F-1:U. 7 (the upper course of which runs on to the W); from mound configuration, and since it runs as far E, the wall is reconstructed to be the same length as the rear one (2). 2, W (rear) wall, begun as part of CS. 3, built in part on Plat. 7F-2:U. 1 against rubble fill of CS. 5 and 3. Its total length is reconstructed from exposures of its N portion and S end. 3, E (front) wall, second platform level, built as part of CS. 3 on fill of CS. 4; retains brown earth fill to the W and its N end abuts the upper course of Plat. 7F-1:U. 7. On the basis of mound configuration and known length of the rear wall (2), its southern extent is reconstructed as shown here. 4, Reconstructed S end wall, from mound configuration and known location of the SW corner. 5, N end wall, runs E to abut SW corner of Plat. 7F-1:U. 7, and is based on fill at the same elevation as the base of the rear structure wall (2). 6, E (front) of upper platform level, built on the fill for CS. 3; since it runs as far as the N wall of the structure (5), it is assumed that it ran as far as the S wall (4) as well, a reconstruction consistent with mound configuration. Pertinent to Str. 7F-36: 7, S wall, built on Plat. 7F-1:U. 8; mound configuration suggests its reconstruction as shown here. A floor (U. 1; see Fig. 21) at the same elevation as the wall top is a part of the structure pavement. U. 2, Wall, based on U. 1, thought to relate to an upper platform level added to original 7F-36. At least the central portion of the upper platform level was inset relative to the S portion. Pertinent to Plat. 7F-1: U. 7, Wall, runs W from Str. 7F-32 (see Fig. 16); lowest course abuts front wall of Str. 7F-35, and upper course continues S for another 2.80 m. Here, where the N wall of Str. 7F-35 joins it, U. 7 runs N as a multiple-course wall, evidently continuing beneath the rear face of Str. 7F-36. Elevation of the top of U. 7 is close to that of Plat. 7F-1:U. 6 and 8 (Fig. 16, 17, and 21), and Plat. 7F-2:Fl. 1 turns up to the S face of the lower course of U. 7. U. 8, Pavement on which the original Str. 7F-36 was built, its elevation approximating that of Plat. 7F-1-1st:Fl. 1 by Str. 7F-30 (Fig. 10), Plat. 7F-1:U. 6 by Str. 7F-32 (Fig. 17), and the top of Plat. 7F-1:U. 7. Pertinent to Plat. 7F-2: U. 1, pavement above which Str. 7F-35 was built; lies directly on bedrock, or gray earth fill where this is low, and ends on the top of a wall, U. 3, on the W. Because U. 1 falls within the known range of variation in elevation for the floor of Plat. 7F-1-4th, it is interpreted as part of that surface (and see text). U. 2, Floor on which U. 3 was built, and which runs W from it; interpreted as contemporary with U. 1 and 3 (see text). U. 3, Wall, built on the E edge of U. 2, from the top of which U. 1 runs eastward. Fl. 1 of Plat. 7F-2 abuts, and turns up to, Str. 7F-35 and Plat. 7F-1:U. 7. For sections A-A' and B-B', see Fig. 21.

FIGURE 20

Str. 7F-35 and 36: Sections A-A' and B-B', as located on Fig. 20. Pertinent to Str. 7F-35: 1, E (front) face (Fig. 20:1). 2, W (rear) wall (Fig. 20:2). 3, E (front) of second platform level (Fig. 20:3). 6, E (front) of upper platform level (Fig. 20:6). 8, Fill, CS. 5: light-gray earth, overlies the floor (Plat. 7F-2:U. 1) that was probably part of Plat. 7F-1-4th. 9, Fill, CS. 4: gray earth, dumped behind the E wall of the structure (1). 10, Rubble fill, CS. 5 and 3. 11, Fill, CS. 3: brown earth, dumped inside the structure walls up to the surface of the second platform level. Pertinent to Str. 7F-36: 7, S wall, 2nd and 1st (Fig. 20:7). Its height for 1st must have been increased, as reconstructed here. U. 1, Summit pavement for 2nd, overlies brown earth fill inside the S wall (7). U. 2, Wall for upper platform level of 1st (Fig. 20), from which floor must have run S about as reconstructed here. Pertinent to Plat. 7F-1: U. 8, Floor, at about the same elevation as the top of U. 7 (Fig. 20), interpreted as pavement for Plat. 7F-1-1st-C (see Fig. 20). Overlies tamped marl and the top of U. 9. U. 9, Wall remnant apparently associated with U. 10, and thought to be the remains of a small structure on the S of Plat. 7F-14th (see text, Plat. 7F-1). U. 10, Thin stratum of tamped marl, runs S from the base of U. 9 beneath brown earth and above gray earth with Manik sherds. Pertinent to Plat. 7F-2: U. 1, Pavement (probably for Plat. 7F-1-4th) that predates Plat. 7F-2 (see text). U. 2, Floor apparently associated with U. 1 and 2; all three overlie or retain similar fill. U. 3, Wall (off-section) built on U. 2, at the top of which U. 1 terminates on the E. Fl. 1, runs up to Plat. 7F-1:U. 7 (Fig. 20) and the E wall (1) of Str. 7F-35.

FIGURE 21

FIGURE 22

Str. 7F-Sub.1: Plan (scale 1:100). Pertinent to Str. 7F-Sub.1: 2, Stairs, built on Plat. 7F-1:U. 5, with patches of plaster to provide secondary turnup. 3, N portion of front. Contrary to Coe and Broman's description (TR. 2:31), there is no inset corner; they were misled by extensive demolition of all but the very base of this wall, probably when Plat. 7F-1-2nd-D was built. 4, Chop-line in the summit floor, S of which Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1 was laid over the remains of Str. 7F-Sub.1 (Table 1.1; TR. 2:fig. 2). 5, NW corner; here the structure floor was well preserved, turning down over the wall faces. Note the absence of any posthole. 6, Reconstruction of the S wall; assumes that the stairs were axially placed relative to the front and that the S wall is parallel to the N one, as suggested by the reconstructed wall (7) of Plat. 7F-1. Hence, the walls of Str. 7F-Sub.1 would form a parallelogram, a likely result if the structure plan was laid out initially using lines of given length, and the corners “eyeballed.” Pertinent to Plat. 7F-1: 1, Reconstructed N wall, Plat. 7F-1-4th and 3rd, on the basis of the known northern limit of U. 5 at Str. 7F-30 (Fig. 4, 5). 7, Hypothetical S wall for the upper level of Plat. 7F-1-3rd (represented by U. 14 and Str. 7F-29:U. 6). The necessity for such a wall is discussed in the text (see Plat. 7F-1), and its most probable location is in line with the S wall of Str. 7F-Sub.1 that, as reconstructed here, would suggest a wall essentially parallel to the front of Str. 7F-29-3rd. U. 1, Deepest floor W of Str. 7F-Sub.1, thought to relate to U. 2 (Fig. 3) and 5 of Plat. 7F-1-4th. U. 5, Floor for Plat. 7F-1-4th and 3rd between Str. 7F-30-5th and Str. 7F-Sub.1 (see Fig. 4). U. 11, W wall for U. 5, beneath Str. 7F-Sub.1; U. 5 runs to the top of this wall and then turns down over its face (Fig. 10). Note that a straight projection S of this wall would emerge from beneath the S end of the stairs for Str. 7F-Sub.1, yet, U. 5 runs at least to the structure wall here. Hence, some adjustment in U. 11 must have been made prior to construction of the structure. U. 14, Floor that overlies U. 1, thought to be a remnant of a surface for Plat. 7F-1-3rd, represented elsewhere by Str. 7F-29:U. 6. For section A-A', see Fig. 10 (see TR. 2:fig. 3 for a composite section).

FIGURE 23

Str. 7F-Sub.2, Plan (a) (scale 1:100); quarried bedrock beneath Str. 7F-29 (b), Plan (scale 1:100). a. 1, Break in structure floor (see text). 2, Outer wall, reconstructed from floor turnup and traces of rubble. 3, Hypothetical entrance, suggested by the extension of floor E of apparent wall line, and analogy to Str. 4F-42 (see text). Fl. 1, laid on fill 0.30 m thick above bedrock; outer edges turn up, except in the area of the reconstructed doorway and along the central break (1). b. Quarried bedrock, as seen in the axial trench through Str. 7F-29. Note the three apparent postholes; since floors seen above were intact, they probably indicate the existence of a structure here prior to any of the known construction above them.

Burial 160: Plan (scale 1:20), as located in Fig. 4. 1–13, Pottery and other vessels as described in text; 14, Stucco fragments painted with glyphs (MT. 347) from wooden vessel (TR. 27A:fig. 224a); 15, Shell, jade, and hematite mosaic head; 16, Chert eccentrics; 17, Obsidian eccentrics; 18, Obsidian prismatic blade cores; 19, Simple form worked shells; 20, Scarcely altered Spondylus shell; 21, Shell flares; 22, Greenstone, jade, and shell mosaic mask; 23, Jade bead; 24, Jade ring and bead; 25, Jade bead and two shell pendants; 26, Scarcely altered Spondylus shell, stingray spine, and jade bead; 27, Unmodified shell and jade bead; 28, Two scarcely altered Spondylus shells and textile fragments; 29, Three unmodified shells and coral; 30, Imitation stingray spines; 31, Jade bead and two scarcely altered Spondylus shells; 32, Two scarcely altered Spondylus shells and jade bead; 33, Scarcely altered Spondylus shell and jade bead; 34, Scarcely altered Spondylus shell and jade bead; 35, Bird skeleton; 36, Cinnabar, textile fragments, and impressions, and unidentified organic material; 37–39, Soot smudges on walls; A, glyphs on wall. For section through the grave, see Fig. 10; for elevation of E wall, see Fig. 25; for photograph of painted inscription, see Fig. 43a; for photograph of Sk. A in situ, see Fig. 43b,c.

FIGURE 24

FIGURE 25

E wall of Bu. 160: Elevation (scale 1:20), as located in Fig. 24. 37–39, Soot smudges; A, painted inscription (see Fig. 43a for photograph).

FIGURE 26

Intermediate Classic burials on the axis of Bu. 160: Plans (scale 1:20), as located in Fig. 5. a. Bu. 134. 1, Broken pottery vessel; 2, Patellae; 3, Right shoulder. b. Bu. 140. 1–4, Pottery vessels as described in text; 5, Jade bead; 6, Stingray spines; 7, Shell (beneath pelvis); 8, Probably either coral or hematite mosaic elements (see text). c.,d. Bu. 132, before and after removal of stones over grave. 1,2, Pottery barrels; 3, Cache vessels; 4, Small mammal skeleton; 5, Unidentified organic material.

Transitional and Late Classic burials on the axis of Bu. 160: Plans (scale 1:20) and section of Bu. 150 (scale 1:50), as located in Fig. 8 and 9. a,b. Bu. 150. 1–4, Pottery vessels, as described in text; 5, Shell. Section looks N (compare with sections of Bu. 140 and 159 in Fig. 10, 11); plan shows stones sealing entrance in broken line. c, Bu. 190. 1–4, Pottery vessels, as described in text; 5, Chert chip; 6, Inscribed bone with glyphs (MT. 167); 7, Two shell rosettes; 8, Bivalve shells; 9,10, Shell sewn-on ornaments; 11, Charcoal fragments. Shown in broken line is a masonry block placed beneath the upper body. d, Bu. 191. 1–5, Pottery vessels, as described in text; 6, Shell beads.

FIGURE 27

Burials on the axis of Str. 7F-31: Plans (scale 1:20), as located in Fig. 8 and 9. a. Bu. 159. 1–4, Pottery vessels, as described in text; not shown are the stones that covered the burial (see Fig. 11). b. Bu. 193. 1, Carved stone; 2, Vertically set stone 5 cm long; 3,4, Pottery vessels as described in text; 5, Perforated Spondylus shell; 6, Inlaid tooth; 7, Rodent skeleton; shown in broken line are stones that covered the burial (see Fig. 43d for photograph).

FIGURE 28

Burials from Ch. 7F-8 and Str. 7F-29: Plans (scale 1:20), as located in Fig. 2 and 4. a. Bu. 162. 1, Pottery vessel; the skeleton to the right of the human remains is that of a spider monkey or opossum. b. Bu. 192, 1–3, pottery vessels, as described in text; 4, Obsidian core; 5, Shell fragments; 6, Spindle whorl; 7, Red stucco fragment; shown in broken line are two stones placed over the burial.

FIGURE 29

FIGURE 30

Gp. 7F-1 as constructed in TS. 25. (Not shown is Str. 7F-33, which may have been built at the same time.) Plat. 7F-1:U. 9 may be all that remains of a structure built mostly of pole-and-thatch on the edge of Plat. 7F-1.

FIGURE 31

Gp. 7F-1 as it appeared in TS. 20 after the alterations of TS. 21. Not shown is the W edge of Plat. 7F-1 or Str. 7F-33 (see Fig. 30).

FIGURE 32

Gp. 7F-1 as it appeared in TS. 18 after the alterations of TS. 19. Not shown is the W edge of Plat. 7F-1 or Str. 7F-33 (see Fig. 30).

FIGURE 33

Gp. 7F-1 as it appeared in TS. 14 after the alterations of TS. 15. Not shown is the W edge of Plat. 7F-1 or Str. 7F-33 (see Fig. 30).

FIGURE 34

Gp. 7F-1 as it appeared in TS. 12 after the alterations of TS. 13. Not shown is the W edge of Plat. 7F-1 or Str. 7F-33 (see Fig. 30).

FIGURE 35

Gp. 7F-1 as it appeared in TS. 10 after the alterations of TS. 11. Not shown is Str. 7F-33, which probably was in use on the S edge of Plat. 7F-2.

FIGURE 36

Gp. 7F-1 as it appeared in TS. 2 after the alterations of TS. 9–3. Not shown is Str. 7F-33, which probably was in use through some or all this span of time (see Fig. 35).

FIGURE 37

Height (m)

0

1

2

3

4

5

.20

.30

.40

.50

.60

.70

Str.7F-29 and 32 Str.7F-30 and 31

Index

.80

Str.7F-29 and 32 Str.7F-30 and 31

Height and platform index of Gp. 7F-1 compared: Probable ceremonial and residential structures, based on data from Table 7.2 and 7.3.

Hypothetical genealogy of the residents of Gp. 7F-1 from Gp. TS. 25 to TS. 1, also showing reigning kings. For explanation, see Appendix A.

FIGURE 38

Chak Tok Ich'aak 18th ruler Wak Chan Kawiil 21st ruler, from 9.5.3.9.15 (AD 537) -N to 9.8.0.0.0 (AD 562), -^ entombed in Bu.200?

Lady of Tikal )born 9.3.9.13.3 (AD 504, dead by 9.4.14.0.0 (AD 528)? entombed in Bu.162?

Kaloomte Bahlam, 19th ruler Entombed in Bu. 160

Adult of unknown age vjn Bu.134; dead by 9.6.8.0.0 (AD 562)?

Adult aged 55 or older in Bu.140; dead by 9.7.10.8.0 (AD 583)?

Moved away?

Dynastic Overthrow

Youth aged between 12 and 21 in Bu.132, dead ^ by 9.8.0.0.0 (AD 593)

22nd ruler,L entombed inBu.195 23rd ruler, entombed in in Bu.23? 24th ruler, entombed in Bu.24?

Period of ceremonial inactivity Dynastic Restoration

Jaguar Seat

Nuun Ujol Chaak 25th ruler Adults aged between 35 and 55 in Bu.150 and 159, both dead ^ by 9.13.0.0.0 (AD 692)

Adult of unknown age in Bu.193, dead by 9.14.0.0.0 (AD 711)

Adult of unknown agej in Bu.192, dead by 9.15.0.0.0 (AD 731)

Jasaw Chan Kawiil 26th ruler entombed inBu.116

Lady Kalajuun } une Mo

Yik'in Chan Kawiil 27th ruler

Adult aged 30-35 in Bu.191, dead by 9.15.0.0.0 (AD 731)

28th ruler

Yax Nuun /\. " Ayiin, 29th ruler entombed in Bu.8? Nuun Ujol K'inich

Periods of ceremonial inactivity

Youth aged 15 1/2 to 16 1/2 in Bu.190, dead by 9.15.0.0.0 (AD 731)

"Dark Son" Jewell Kawiil Jasaw Chan Kawiil E End of Dynasty

Adult, aged 50 or older in Bu.l;deadby 10.2.0.0.0 (AD 869)?

Details in Rm. 1 of Str. 7F-29 and 32 (continued in Fig. 40). a. Str. 7F-29: masonry of E doorjamb. b. Str. 7F-32: W end of Rm. 1, showing sealed doorway to Rm. 2 (Fig. 13–16:8), sealed doorway to Rm. 3 (Fig. 12–16:7) and U. 14 and 15 (see Fig. 19a,d). Scale rests on the surface of U. 13 above its E face (Fig. 15 and 16). c. W end of N wall, Rm. 1, showing sealed doorway to Rm. 3 of 7F-32 (Fig. 12–16:7), and ceramic inserts U. 14 and 15 (see Fig. 19a). d. View of the partially sealed doorway to Rm. 2 of 7F-32 (see “b” above, and Fig. 13–16:8). The scale rests on the surface of U. 13.

FIGURE 39

Details in Rm. 1 of Str. 7F-32 (continued). a. Niche in the masonry sealing the doorway to Rm. 3 (Fig. 19a, 39b,c). b. U. 14, Scale W of insert (Fig. 19a, 39b,c). c. U. 15, Scale W of insert (Fig. 19a, 39b,c). d. View from S of U. 13 showing raised portion W of center surface (Fig. 15 and 19a).

FIGURE 40

Details in Rm. 3 of Str. 7F-32 (continued in Fig. 42). a. W end of U. 20. b. W end; in the foreground is the wall of U. 23 (Fig. 16), the floor of which has been removed so that the wall of U. 21 (Fig. 15) can be seen behind it. In the background is the sealed doorway to Rm. 2 (Fig. 15–16:10); note the stone in the niche in the top of the doorway (Fig. 42a), and the spring masonry in the wall above the doorway (see Fig. 17:26). Removal of U. 21 and 23 surfaces permits one to see how the door masonry in Rm. 3 does not continue below the pavement of U. 21 (see Fig. 41c for close-up). c. Close-up of base of masonry blocking doorway to Rm. 2. Shown is Fl. 1 of 2nd running through the doorway, empty space above where U. 21 fill extended, top of U. 21, and masonry blocking doorway above. d. Inner (fill) side of the masonry for U. 21 (Fig. 15).

FIGURE 41

Details in Rm. 3 of Str. 7F-32 (continued). a. Stone, 6 cm thick, found in vent above the masonry blocking the doorway to Rm. 2 (see Fig. 41b). b,c. Doorway, looking into Rm. 4 (see Fig. 19f). The scale in “b” is plumb, resting at 0 m on Fl. 1 of 2nd; note masonry in the doorway that rests on this floor; it retains the fill of U. 25 (Fig. 13–16) to the E and forms a raised threshold above the surface of U. 25 (Fig. 13–16:9).

FIGURE 42

a. Bu. 160, photograph of the painted inscription (see Fig. 25 for drawing). b. Bu. 160, Sk. A in situ. Note the three sets of three Spondylus shells along the body. c. Head of Sk. A with Spondylus “skull cap.” d. Bu. 193, photograph before removal of grave roof (see Fig. 28b for plan).

FIGURE 43