Upcoming Maya Field Workshop at Tikal, Uaxactun, Yaxha

UPDATE: A few remaining spaces are left in the upcoming Maya Field Workshop at Tikal, Guatemala, running from March 21 – 27 (just after the 2010 Maya Meetings in Antigua). During our workshop experience we’ll get to know Tikal’s archaeology and history in detail, and make side trips to the nearby related centers of Uaxactun and Yaxha.

Please check out the Maya Field Workshops website for more information.

http://mayafieldworkshops.com

Notes on Accession Dates in the Inscriptions of Coba

Mesoweb has recently posted a short piece I’ve written on vague hints at history in the very eroded texts of Coba, Quintana Roo, Mexico. Thanks to Joel Skidmore for his great help.

Notes on Accession Dates in the Inscriptions of Coba

STUART, DAVID
2010  Notes on Accession Dates in the Inscriptions of Coba.
Mesoweb: www.mesoweb.com/stuart/notes/Coba.pdf.

Reunited?: Yaxha’s Stelae 1 and 2

Maler's photographs of Yaxha Stelae 1 and 2, as presented in his 1908 report.

Years ago while perusing Teobert Maler’s 1908 report on the ruins of Yaxha, Petén, Guatemala, I took extra notice of his photographic plate showing Stela 1 and 2 (see above).  To me, Stela 1 looked like the top portion of a monument depicting an elaborate royal headdress. Stela 2, a taller stone similar in style, was missing much of its upper half. Naturally — and probably others have noticed this — it seemed a good possibility that these were one and the same monument. The two stones were found next to one another, and the relative scales of the two pieces as recorded by Maler would lend support to the idea (the photographs above were published at different scales).

Yaxha Stela 1 with reunited top

Maler indicated that Stela 1 was erected into an ancient floor slightly behind Stela 2 — no doubt the reason behind their separate numeration. He did not see the imagery on Stela 1 as a headdress, nor was he of course aware that the ancient Maya often re-erected old monuments or parts of them, sometimes centuries after they were originally carved. Yaxha Stela 1 (as the reunited pieces should now be called) is likely to be an example of a monument broken in ancient times, with its pieces later re-set into the plaza floor, perhaps in the Terminal Classic or Post-Classic. It must be said that I have no direct knowledge of any physical archaeological evidence that would support or reject this notion, so it might be interesting to someday confirm on-site with a minor excavation.

Stela 1 was originally paired with Stela 4, each monument flanking the main stairway of structure on the east side of Plaza C, a so-called “E Group.”

Stela 1 is an Early Classic monument, late fourth-century in style. It shows a ruler standing and facting to the right, cradling a ceremonial bar in one arm and holding a deity head or glyph in his upraised hand. His elaborate headdress (assuming these are parts of the same monument) incorporates glyphic elements, no doubt for a personal name. Prominent among these is the head of the rain deity Chahk. A small text caption next to the headdress has three incised glyphs: U-BAAH / YAX-a / AJAW, for u baah Yaxha’ Ajaw, “(it is) the image of the Yaxha’ Lord.” In the basal register we find a larger hieroglyphic text that seems to specify a location for the portrait. These three glyphs read: YAX-TI’-K’UK’-HA’ / YAX-a / CHAN-CH’E'N, “(at) Yaxti’ K’uk’ha’, (in) Yaxha’, (in) the mundo (literally ’sky-and-cave’).” The first of these, Yaxti’ K’uk’ha’, may name a ritual space within the large Yaxha site — perhaps, one might suppose, Plaza C itself.

REFERENCE:

Maler, Teobert. 1908. Explorations in the Department of Peten, Guatemala, and Adjacent Regions: Topoxte, Yaxha, Benque Viejo, Naranjo. Memoirs of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. IV, No. 2. Peabody Museum, Cambridge.

CPN 217: A Stone Vessel from Copan

Among the many inscribed objects found at Copan are a number of so-called stone “incensarios” – small lidded vessels bearing elaborate iconography that served as containers for ritual incense burners of ceramic. The ancient Maya of Copan called these small monuments sak lak tuunoob’, “white dish stones.” Many remain poorly published, unfortunately, although in the coming months I hope to present some of these here on Maya Decipherment.

One of these intriguing vessels is CPN 217, found during excavations near the Hieroglyphic Stairway in the 1930s or 40s, when it was was photographed by archaeologist Edwin Shook (decades later, in 1990, Ed kindly gave me a copy of his snapshot, which I reproduce here). At some point its pieces were taken to a storage area near the entrance of the ruins, where in 1986 I photographed and made the accompanying field drawing. Today most of these fragments are in safe keeping at the storeroom of the Centro Regional de Investigaciones Arqueologicas (CRIA) at Copan.

The short inscription is beautifully carved in crisp fashion, reading:

TRANSCRIPTION:
[7]-LAMAT-16-SUUTZ’
U-3-LAJUUN-na
U-HAAB

TRANSLITERATION:
Wuk Lamat Waklajuun(-te’) Suutz’
u (y)uxlajuun
u haab

TRANSLATION:
(On) Seven Lamat, the Sixteenth of Sotz’
the thirteenth
(is) his year

There are two U- signs used here. One in the second glyph block is the so-called “xok” fish head variant (a beautiful example of the very same head sign in the photo banner of this blog).  In the same middle glyph block the number “13″ (uxlajuun) is written is a somewhat unusual manner, with the three dots for 3 (ux) above the skull for 10 (lajuun).

Overall, the simple text marks the thirteenth vague (360-day) year anniversary of the crowning of Copan’s famous king, Waxaklajuun Ubaah K’awiil (otherwise known by the misleading nickname “18 Rabbit”). Its dedication date corresponds to 9.13.16.6.8 in the Long Count (26 April, 708), or precisely 13.0.0 after the king’s accession, recorded prominently on the Hieroglyphic Stairway as well as on Stela J.

9.13.3.6.8 7 Lamat 1 Mol (accession date)
add 13.0.0
9.13.16.6.8 7 Lamat 16 Sotz’

CPN 217 is among the earliest of the stone vessels known from Copan.  The majority date from a century or so later, to the reign of the last king Yax Pahsaj Chan Yopaat.

Q & A about 2012

Seems the whole “end of the world in 2012” brouhaha is stirring again with the upcoming release of the special effects disaster film, 2012. While topics on this blog are often meant to be pretty scholarly and technical, I thought it useful to offer a simple run-down of important points about what the ancient Maya really had to say — or not — about the “end” of their calendar.

Does the Maya calendar end in 2012?

No it doesn’t. What will happen is a recurrence, an anniversary of sorts, of a key mythological date in the distant past. The Maya wrote this as 13.0.0.0.0 in their “Long Count” calendar (an abbreviation of a much bigger number), which fell on August 11, 3114 B.C. (some correlations of the two calendars say August 13, but I don’t really care). This “creation date” was not the beginning of everything, however. Maya mythological texts tell us that plenty was happening long, long before this starting point of the current era. On December 21, 2012 (some say December 23) we come again to a numerological recurrence of 13.0.0.0.0. The Long Count calendar continues well beyond this date, too. In fact, the numerology of the calendar demands that there will be other similar recurrences of this same date in the far distant future, on a scale of octillions of years. The scale of Maya time reckoning dwarfs anything in our own cosmology by many orders of magnitude.

What did the Maya say about 2012?

They actually said very little, if anything. Only one ancient inscription refers to the upcoming 13.0.0.0.0 date in 2012, from a now destroyed site named Tortuguero. The question we scholars have struggled with is whether the final few hieroglyphs of that text describe anything about what will happen. A few years ago I put forward a very tentative and incomplete reading of these damaged glyphs, including a possible use of a verb meaning “descend” and a name of a god, Bolon Yokte’. Much of it was iffy and remains so; I’m not sure I believe much of what I wrote back then. More recently my colleague Steve Houston has pointed out the glyphs may not even pertain to that date anyway. So there’s considerable ambiguity just in the reading of the glyphs and the rhetorical structure of the Tortuguero passage. What we can say with confidence is that the ancient Maya left no clear or definite record about 2012 and its significance. There is certainly no ancient claim that the world or any part of it will come to an end.

Who came up with this crazy idea?

New Age hacks and, now, Hollywood producers. The idea can be traced largely back to the novelist and mystic named Frank Waters, who in the 1960s and 70s wrote a number of novels and cultural treatises on Native Americans of the American southwest, including his 1963 work, Book of the Hopi (he was not an anthropologist). One of Waters’ last works was Mexico Mystique: The Coming Sixth Age of Consciousness (1975), an odd pastiche of Aztec and Maya philosophies wherein he proposed that the “end” of the calendar would somehow involve a transformation of world spiritual awareness. Waters’ ideas got picked up and expanded upon by Jose Arguelles in his insanely misguided but influential book The Mayan Factor: Path Beyond Technology (1987). Many different writers have followed with their own strange books and essays on the “meaning” of 2012, mostly contradicting one another.

What about the astronomy?

The Maya were fine astronomers, but the 2012 date has little if anything to do with astronomy. Despite claims about the appearance of a “galactic alignment” in late December three years from now, modern scientific astronomers reject this notion pretty much out of hand. Besides, no ancient Maya text or artwork makes reference to anything of the kind.

What do the present-day Maya have to say about 2012?

Although the 260-day round of the ancient calendar system survived in a few areas of highland Guatemala, the 2012 date has nothing to do with it. It’s only associated with the Long Count, which ceased being used well before the conquest. So, any mention of 2012 by modern Maya peoples is probably an example of media or New Age influence.

So, in sum, what’s been widely circulated in the popular imagination about 2012 has little to do about true ancient Maya belief or notions of prophecy.

My brief comments will probably instigate even more endless 2012 discussion and debate, but I respectfully request that such exchanges be taken elsewhere. What more I have to say on the subject, mostly on the nature of the ancient calendar as a whole, will appear in my upcoming book about Maya time, appearing sometime next year.