February 18, 2011

Arlen F. Chase and Diane Z. Chase

University of Central Florida

The 2008 field season of the Caracol Archaeological Project ran from the end of January through the middle of March. Twenty-four individuals were formally involved in the production of the archaeological data reported on within this report (Table 1). The research undertaken at Caracol during the 2008 field season was designed to build on the results of the 2007 field season in which significant ritual variation was uncovered in both epicentral Caracol and in an outlying residential group. While appearing to be a fairly normal residential compound before investigation, excavations in the GRB Group proved otherwise. The southern building, Structure I5, was a finely constructed stone building, which had once been vaulted. Rather than a rubble-filled platform supporting a perishable construction, a formally constructed stone room (Structure I1) was situated on the western side of the northern pyramid (Structure I2). Usually only associated with eastern buildings, a face cache was found within the steps of the northern pyramid. Excavations in the eastern building, Structure I5, uncovered a series of stratified face caches, many of them associated with eccentric obsidians and other small items; both the number of face caches and their associated artifacts presented an anomalous situation in comparison to the vast majority of other residential compounds that had been excavated. All of these ritual and construction features were interpreted as being related to the status and/or occupation of the residents of the GRB Group. Given the fact that other patterned cache variation also had been documented in residential groups to the northwest of the epicenter, the 2008 field season sought to determine whether other unusual residential complexes existed elsewhere in close proximity to the epicenter. Towards this end, two residential groups in close proximity to the South Acropolis were tested during 2008 in order to ascertain if other ritual and/or household variation could be defined for Caracol. These two groups were nicknamed the “Culebras Group” and the “Palmitas Group.” Both groups did produce archaeological materials that amplified known residential group patterns for the site (e.g., D. Chase and A. Chase 2004a).

Background: Excavation of Maya Residential Groups

The characterization and composition of Maya households has comprised a basic research question for Maya archaeologists for more than half a century. While the archaeological identification of Maya residential units as small platforms distributed over the landscape was established on the basis of the principle of abundance at the turn of the twentieth century (Thompson 1897), only limited excavations of house mounds were undertaken by the Maya archaeologists (e.g., Wauchope 1934) until the onset of more formal settlement pattern studies by Gordon Willey in the Belize Valley (Willey et al. 1965). Most early archaeological programs of excavation in the Maya area focused on the large structures and buildings that comprised the centers of most Maya sites. This initial focus on central monumental Maya architecture led to equivocation over the nature of Maya settlement. Were the temples and palaces at the center of vacant ceremonial centers (Willey 1956)? Or, were these constructions the nucleus of true urban settlements (Becker 1979)? The block mapping of 16 square kilometers of settlement surrounding the center of Tikal, Guatemala (Carr and Hazard 1961) eventually tipped the balance toward a general agreement that the Maya had urban centers, but debate about the nature of Maya cities is still ongoing (A. Chase and D. Chase 2007; D. Chase et al. 1990; Fox et al. 1996; Sanders and Webster 1989). Archaeological investigation of Maya residential groups has grown exponentially since the publication of the Tikal map, but exactly how such groups are constituted and situated in terms of an urban center is poorly defined. The research undertaken during 2008 sought to gather data that, when conjoined with previous investigations, helps refine our understanding of Maya residential settlement at the urban site of Caracol.

The site which has seen the most amplification of settlement pattern definition is perhaps Tikal, Guatemala. There, Marshall Becker (2003) analyzed the 2,500 mapped residential structures and defined some 690 residential groups. He then analyzed these 690 groups for repetitive architectural patterning and was able to define a series of 10 distinct plaza plans (Becker 1971, 1982). Becker (2003, 2004) has argued that each of these plaza plans can be identified through both architectural arrangement and material archaeological signatures. While Becker (2004) frames the discussion of residential groups at Tikal in terms of an “architectural grammar” for 10 plaza plans (PPs), only four of his plaza plans relate to residential groups and these can be recast in terms of two dichotomies. These contrastive features are, first, formal (PP2, PP3, PP4) and informal (PP5) layout based on group integration and directionality. These arrangements are then further differentiated based on the presence of ritual (PP2, PP4) and non-ritual (PP3, PP5) architectural features (Becker 2003:258-264). The ritual features consist of either a central altar (PP4) or an eastern shrine / mausoleum (PP2). At Tikal, 14-15% of the recorded groups exhibited eastern shrines (Becker 2003:259); less than 1% exhibited a central altar.

Thus, the most common residential layout for Tikal is a formal non-ritual residential group. At Caracol, in contrast, the formal ritual residential group comprises the most common layout. The limited ritual focus found at Tikal contrasts with settlement data from Caracol, which demonstrates that the east-focused residential groups constitute over 60% of all recorded plazas (A. Chase and D. Chase 1996). As at Tikal, central shrines occur infrequently at Caracol. Given the widespread distribution of east-focused shrines groups at Caracol (A. Chase and D. Chase 1987, 1994; D. Chase and A. Chase 1998), it may be expected that archaeological data would permit elaboration on the diversity in the “architectural grammar” that can be seen in such groups.

Archaeological investigations into these eastern shrines at Caracol have helped define patterning in the general function and use of these structures. Similar to Tikal, the eastern structures in Caracol’s residential groups generally functioned within a mortuary realm; but, there are significant differences from the Tikal sample. Becker (2004:129) speaks of a “grammatical rule” at Tikal “involving an ‘intrusive interment and covering’ dyad” where the initial interment was placed into bedrock and then covered by the shrine – with each subsequent refurbishment “preceded by the intrusion of another high status burial” through the existing architecture. Whereas excavation into the Tikal PP2s primarily yielded burials, the Caracol east-focused groups contain a mix of both burials and caches. The Caracol interments were usually not placed into bedrock, but instead were situated in tombs in the cores of the eastern shrines. Many Caracol tombs were additionally associated with entryways that permitted easy access to the chambers for an extended period of time. Even without a formal entryway, Caracol’s tombs were re-entered, sometime accidentally, but also presumably for both social and political purposes (D. Chase and A. Chase 2003).

For Caracol it also has been possible to define both a generalized pattern of deposition and a temporality for these deposits (D. Chase and A. Chase 2004b). A tomb was placed first in the core of the building and then may have been used for the temporary placement of interments that were eventually buried elsewhere. Eventually, one or more bodies were placed within a tomb and re-entry was denied to the chamber through engulfment in a subsequent rebuilding. Once the tomb was inaccessible, the next interment would be placed at the base of the frontal step. Later, another burial may have pierced the frontal step and/or have been placed in the associated plaza on axis to the eastern construction. The sequencing of these events in Caracol eastern structures indicates that they followed a rhythm that was not tied to individual life cycles, but rather to Maya temporal cycles (D. Chase and A. Chase 2004b:220-221), indicating that these eastern constructions functioned to integrate Caracol’s residential groups into broader ritual arenas (D. Chase and A. Chase 2009). They were not simply individual ancestral shrines. While ancestors may have been buried in these buildings, only a small percentage of a group’s inhabitants actually were interred within the residential group (D. Chase 1997).

Of even more interest in terms of the architectural grammar of these groups is the conjunction of the eastern interments with caching practices at Caracol. Special cache containers, termed “finger bowls” and “face caches” (D. Chase and A. Chase 1998) were often placed to the front of the eastern shrines. Occasionally, the caches were incorporated into the building itself by being placed beneath front steps. And, in unusual circumstances caches were placed in the core of constructions, but this was not the normal practice. However, in at least two cases, face caches were located within the core of an eastern construction and in one case multiple caches were placed without the expected tomb. Thus, differences occur in the patterning associated with some of Caracol’s eastern buildings. But, why? And, are these differences patterned? And, can such differences be predicted from surface remains?

The Problem: Variations in the Pattern

Over the past twenty-three years, a number of residential plazas have been investigated in the immediate vicinity of the Caracol epicenter. For the most part these residential units have exhibited patterns traditionally associated with east-focused residential units, although informal structure groupings (2000 field season) and non-ritual residential groups (2006 field season) have also been purposely excavated. Two epicentral acropolis groups have also been tested, the Northeast Acropolis and the Central Acropolis. Both of these architectural complexes may be considered to be high status residential groups; and, investigations in both groups replicated site-wide ritual patterns, emphasizing the shared nature of the rituals by Caracol households of varying statuses. In the Northeast Acropolis, the single eastern pyramid, Structure B34, contained face-caches, burials, and tombs (D. Chase and A. Chase 2003). The Central Acropolis mimicked the summit of Caana in having both northern and eastern pyramids. While the northern building in the Central Acropolis revealed a royal tomb beneath its stairway, excavations into the eastern buildings in this residential group revealed tombs, caches, and burials that reflect patterns found in residential groups throughout Caracol (D. Chase and A. Chase 1996).

While there is widespread uniformity in ritual patterning throughout Caracol in east-focused structural groups, variability does occur in some of the residential groups in the immediate vicinity of the epicenter. Several of these groups display variations from the repetitive archaeological signatures found in the eastern buildings within the outlying settlement. For instance, although associated with burials, Structure D9 lacked both a tomb and caches. Structure I5 was similarly lacking the axial tomb that is typical of Caracol eastern shrines, but this construction had a series of caches and eccentric obsidians deposited within its core. The eastern construction Structure F4 contained neither tomb nor cache; instead, its western counterpart, Structure F2, contained a tomb that was the locus of a complex re-entry and re-deposition event (D. Chase and A. Chase 2003). While Structure J8 exhibited both a tomb and caches, this residential group was also associated with a low central altar that yielded over two dozen lip-to-lip “finger” caches. Thus, distinct archaeological variations do exist within Caracol’s east-focused residential groups and it should be possible to gain further information on (and, perhaps, “understand”) these variations by contextually examining proximate groups.

Research Undertaken During 2008

Toward the goal of understanding the compositional differences in ritual patterning, two residential groups were selected for excavation during the 2008 field season, the C20 or “Culebras” group and the D29 or “Palmitas” group (Figure 1). The groups are neighbors, being divided from each other by the Pajaro-Ramonal Causeway. Both groups are also close to the South Acropolis, which has witnessed considerable investigation, and their proximity to this complex may be taken to imply that some interaction took place between these units. Thus, the archaeological data recovered from these two groups can be situated in terms of information from the South Acropolis (www.caracol.net ). As a result of the 2008 investigations, five structures were investigated within the Culebras Group and three structures were excavated within the Palmitas Group. The ritual deposits that were recovered fit other residential patterns recovered from Caracol – except for the Early Classic Period cache recovered in association with Structure C21. Importantly, certain architectural constructions within these two groups also indicate that there was significant variability when compared to general residential groups elsewhere at the site: Structure C17 yielded a well-constructed frontal shrine room; Structure D32 produced a vaulted-room building complete with an exterior façade decorated with stucco pseudo-glyphs; and, Structure D27 appears to have been a formally constructed sweatbath. Thus, while the research goals of the field season were met in terms of finding variability within residential groups in the immediate vicinity of the Caracol epicenter, the features that were encountered have raised new questions about the composition of residential groups that need to be tested in the future.

Culebras Residential Group: Structures C17-C23 and D22-D26.

The first residential group selected for investigation is set amidst terraces approximately 150 meters east of the South Acropolis and was nicknamed “Culebras” (see Figures 1, 2, and 3). The western side of this group is set on a higher terrace level than the eastern side. Single buildings define the southern and northern edges of the lower eastern plaza. What was originally thought to be a possible plain monument located at the southwest corner of Structure C17 was shown to be a cornice stone from a vaulted building (although no vaulted buildings are in evidence in this group as a result of the 2008 investigations). The eastern edge of the Culebras Group is bounded by four separate constructions, two of them (Structures C20 and C21) resembling small square raised shrines; both of these buildings were excavated during 2008. A small “altar” construction (Structure C22) is set in the center of the lower plaza on axis with the northern building but intermediate between the two eastern shrines. This small platform was also excavated. Thus, the 2008 field excavations within Culebras focused on all three constructions that were considered to have had ritual usage based on surface considerations. The western (Structure D25) and northern (Structure C17) buildings in Culebras were also investigated during 2008.

Structure C20 (Figure 4)

Structure C20 is the northernmost eastern shrine building in the Culebras Group. It rose just some 1.10 meters above the plaza. Very badly defined base-walls and a possible door jamb were visible on the summit of the structure (Figure 6). The latest frontal stair or stair-balk could also be discerned without excavation.

Operation C179B (Figures 4, 5, 6, 7, and 12) was assigned for an axial trench placed over Structure C20. This excavation was 1.50 meters wide and was eventually 8.40 meters long. As a result of this investigation, it is possible to define at least two different phases of construction for Structure C20. The latest upper phase consisted of a single room construction that was bedded on large dry-core boulders. This upper construction was placed over an earlier construction that included finely cut stone facings and plastered floors (Figure 7). This earlier construction apparently sealed S.D. C179B-5, S.D. C179B-6, and S.D. C179B-7; vessels recovered in S.D. C179B-6 date to the transition between the Early and Late Classic Periods. As S.D. C179B-6 is stratigraphically the latest deposit associated with the earlier version of Structure C20, S.D. C179B-5 and S.D. C179B-7 should precede it in time. The earlier version of Structure C20 was pierced by S.D. C179B-3, which can be dated to the early Late Classic Period. S.D. C179B-2 is located almost directly above S.D. C179B-3 and is probably of a similar date. Thus, the earlier version of Structure C20 antedates the early part of the Late Classic Period, as this is the time when the later version of the building was constructed. Construction fill for the latest version of Structure C20 includes pieces of painted stucco decoration stripped from a stone building, indicating that such a construction may once have existed in the Culebras Group or that these decorations were carried in from presumably demolished epicentral construction. The latest deposits recovered in Operation C179B were S.D. C179B-1 and S.D. C179B-4; these were placed in front of the final stairway and date to the late Late Classic Period. Of the seven special deposits recovered in this trench, two were caches and five were burials. The rear tomb shown in Figure 5 was neither excavated nor formally entered; it will be dug in 2009. At the end of the field season, the entire excavation was backfilled, including the area above the uninvestigated tomb.

S.D. C179B-1 (Figures 5, 9, and 10) was located at a level below the lowest basal level of the front step, but squarely on axis to the structure. The deposit was badly crushed, but consisted of a lidded face cache (Figure 10a) and a lip-to-lip cache (Figure 10b) that had presumably been placed within the face cache. A total of 8 human phalanges can be associated with S.D. C179B-1; two of them were found within the lip-to-lip cache and the other six were intermixed with and under the sherds that made up the face cache. Additionally, two slate bars (Figures 8e and 8f) and a slate pendent (Figure 8b) were found in the general area and same level of the face cache and possibly may be associated with this deposit. The barble decoration associated with the S.D. C179B-1 face cache is generally associated with caches from within and near the epicenter; barbled face caches have only been recovered in this Culebras deposit, in the GRB Group dug in 2007, in the Central Acropolis, and in the Northeast Acropolis. Thus, this decorative mode may be taken to be indicative of the status of the individuals who occupied this group in the Late Classic Period.

S.D. C179B-2 (Figures 5 and 11) was located approximately 50 to 60 cm directly above the capstones for S.D. C179B-3. It consists of the skull of a single individual and could possibly be referred to as a “skull cache.” The atlas and hyoid were present along with 1 cervical vertebrae; no axis recovered. There are no clear cut marks on vertebrae. The sex of the skull cannot be determined; the mandible resembles a female, but the skull characteristics are more like a male. Some carries are in evidence in the associated teeth. The individual would have been approximately 25 years of age at death. Below the skull in the fill above the captstones for S.D. C179B-1 were faunal remains (small and large, including deer), a ceramic pipe (Figure 8d), and an obsidian tool (Figure 8j). All of this material may be associated with S.D. C172B-2 and some kind of ritual activity for the deposition of S.D. C179B-3.

S.D. C179B-3 (Figures 5, 13, 14, 15, and 16) was an interment placed within a small crypt covered with capstones. The crypt penetrated an earlier floor. The skeletal remains of a single individual, probably and older male, were recovered in the crypt. As the bones were not articulated, this was certainly a secondary burial that was re-interred in this location. The shape of the mandible is consistent with that of a male; however, teeth were not present because of ante-mortem tooth loss and resorption in the mandible. There was also an extra growth on the left fibula, indicative of a potential pathology. Artifactual materials in S.D. C179B-3 included two complete vessels and a jadeite earring assemblage. The vessels have been used to date this interment in the early Late Classic Period. The single jadeite earring assemblage (Figure 16c and 16d) is more expectable from a cache than a burial (for instance, see earlier deposits in Structure A2 and A8; A. Chase and D. Chase 2006) and may indicate the broader ritual roles of these deposits (Becker 1992; D. Chase and A. Chase 2004b).

S.D. C179B-4 (Figures 5, 17, 18, and 19) consisted of an interment placed in a crypt constructed just above bedrock in front of and below the front steps for Structure C20. S.D. C179B-1 was located directly above this burial. The crypt contained two individuals and two pottery vessels. Both of the individuals were determined to be males based on an in situ examination of preserved sciatic notches. Along the north-south axis of the crypt, a fully articulated, older adult male had been placed in a prone position with his head to the north. No teeth were recovered with this individual; his mandible had complete ante-mortem tooth loss and resorption. Arthritic lipping appeared on this individual’s vertebrae. In the extreme southeastern corner of the crypt a secondary interment had been placed. This individual was disarticulated and had probably been placed into S.D. C179B-4 as a bundled burial. This male individual was approximately 21 years of age based on the 6 teeth that could be associated with him. Filing was noted on his left lower lateral canine and incisor; hypoplasia and tartar were also in evidence on two lower premolars. The vertebrae with the secondary individual were billowed. Artifactual materials included in the interment were two pottery vessels. A small footed plate had been located northeast of the primary individual’s head and a polychrome figural cylinder had been located east of the primary individual’s lower leg and above the secondary individual’s long bones. The part of the cylinder that protruded from the dirt matrix covering much of the burial was well-preserved (Figures 20 and 21); however, the back of the cylinder that was embedded in the lower dirt matrix had largely disintegrated.

S.D. C179B-5 (Figures 5, 10, and 22) was designated for a lip-to-lip cache that had once been set on the western edge of the capstones that covered S.D. C179B-5. This cache was sealed by a floor in the core of the earlier version of Structure C20.

S.D. C179B-6 (Figures 5, 23, 24, 25, and 26) was assigned to a collapsed tomb that probably constituted the latest deposit intruded within the earlier version of Structure C20. The large boulder fill for the final version of Structure C20 had caused the roof of the chamber to collapse on its northern end, resulting in the infilling of the chamber. The floor of the chamber does not appear to have been disturbed; the tomb’s contents are still in situ. The southern end of the chamber had not collapsed and still exhibited an intact capstone (Figure 24). On the floor of the chamber the remains of a single adult individual were recovered; the sciatic notch was identified as being male in the field. The full interment could not be exposed because of the large collapsed boulders that filled the northern end of the tomb. This unexcavated section of the chamber probably contained the skull and torso of the individual as well as additional artifacts. Two ring-based ceramic dishes (Figure 26a and 26b) were recovered in the southern part of the chamber and a complete mano (Figure 26c) was positioned to the west of the body.

S.D. C179B-7 (Figure 5) was the appellation given a tomb that was found in the eastern extent of Operation C179B. The chamber was not excavated during 2008 because of time constraints. The exposed capstones were drawn (Figure 12) and a central one was lifted to obtain dimensions for the chamber. The chamber is minimally 1.1 meters wide by over 2.2 meters long; 0.70 meters of airspace runs the distance of the chamber and there may be an entryway at the chamber’s southern end. After measurements were taken, the capstone was replaced, the capstones were covered with a tarp, and Operation C179B was backfilled. This chamber is scheduled for excavation during the 2009 field season.

Operation C179C (Figures 27 and 28) was assigned for an areal excavation of the alley between Structures C20 and C21. The excavation measured 3.1 meters north-south by 3.5 meters east-west. It was hoped to be able to define the corners and building sides of the two shrine constructions, but this did not prove to be the case. Nor was intact trash recovered. The excavation was backfilled at the end of the field season.

Structure C21 (Figure 29)

As part of the attempt to understand the ritual patterns in the Culebras Group, the second eastern shrine building, Structure 21, was also investigated. Like its companion Structure C20, the southern Structure C21 rose 1.10 meters above the Culebras plaza. However, Structure C21 was far less defined in terms of surface architecture. As a result of investigations into Structure C21, two versions of the building were found and two deposits were recovered.

Operation C179D (Figures 30 and 31) was designated for the 1.50 meters wide (north-south) by 6.20 meters (east-west) long axial trench that penetrated Structure C21. The construction fill for the latest building was continuous from the ground surface down to an earlier plaza floor. Within the upper core of the latest building, a spondylus valve (Figure 38a) was recovered; it is believed to have been redeposited within Structure C21 as a result of earlier demolition activity. That such demolition took place at the Operation C179 locus was clear from the recovery of a formally constructed step on the southern side of the excavation, resting directly on the lowest plaza floor recovered in the core of the building. Thus, it appears that an earlier construction at this locus had been removed when the latest construction was erected. The removal of this earlier building had also disturbed the upper portions of an earlier burial, S.D. C179D-2, dating to the later part of the Early Classic Period. Excavation in the western portion of Operation C179D also recovered three stones (one forming a corner) of an even earlier construction that had had been engulfed in the plaza. Refuse, including carved bone (Figure 34d, 34e, and 34f) and potentially reconstructible ceramics, abutted these stones; the ceramics were all Early Classic in date. A green obsidian blade fragment and point (Figure 38l) were found in the same fill level, but south of the wall. Also encountered in the core of the plaza at the same level as the Early Classic trash and adjacent to it was a very impressive cache, S.D. C179D-1, which contained the first flint eccentrics recovered at Caracol after 24 seasons of excavation. The two deposits recovered in association with Structure C21 clearly establish this locus as important during the Early Classic Period and indicate that the earlier version of the demolished building likely preceded the use of the Structure C20 locus in terms of ritual.

S.D. C179D-1 (Figures 32, 33, and 34) was a very impressive cache deposit placed within the earlier plaza fill in front of Structure C21. Even though placed directly into the dirt plaza fill, the artifacts were embedded in what is colloquially referred to as “cache dirt;” this cache dirt was full of small chips of valuable materials. In the case of S.D. C179D-1, the cache dirt consisted of 747 jadeite chips and 4751 spondylus chips. Also recovered within the cache dirt were 23 chert chips, 32 quartz chunks, 4 obsidian blade fragments, 2 unworked shells, and 138 slate mirror pieces; the scattered distribution of the slate mirror pieces suggests that they did not constitute a single artifact. The central elements of the cache consisted of a jadeite bead (Figure 34aa), a hard stone ball (Figure 34z), and a lump of brain corral (Figure 34g) overlaid by 3 chert eccentrics (Figure 34a-c). Distributed about the chert eccentrics were 8 obsidian eccentrics, 2 obsidian lancets, 6 complete spondylus shells, and 3 stingray spines. As 52 “fish vertebrae” were also recovered, it may be that the 3 stingray spines really represented 3 complete rays, as is noted for other caches at Caracol (Teeter and Chase 2004). S.D. C179D-1 dates to the Early Classic Period and contains the first chert eccentrics recovered at Caracol in 24 years of research.

S.D. C179D-2 (Figures 35, 36, and 37) was designated for a burial that was found intruded into the lowest floor recovered in the Operation C179D locus. This floor level had possibly once sealed S.D. C179D-1, thus making the interment slightly later in date than the plaza cache, but still Early Classic. The upper portion of the burial had clearly been disturbed by renovation activities, probably accounting for some of the missing skeletal bone and certainly for the missing olla rim from one of the two vessels placed in the burial. A single supine individual with head to the north had been placed within the cist grave. The individual was probably a young adult aged 18 to 21; no third molars are present and all epiphyses are joined. Sex was indeterminate, even though the mastoid processes suggested the possibility of a male. Slight cribra orbitalia was present on the skull. The recovered mandible was only partial. The upper left central incisor was inlaid with jadeite and is either very worn on nearly filed flat; no inlays were recovered from the mandibular teeth or from the upper premolars or molars (other upper incisors were not present). The lower right second incisor is also either worn or filed. Two Early Classic ceramic vessels (Figure 37) were set above the individual’s feet. No other artifacts were associated with this interment.

Structure C22 (Figure 39)

Structure C22 was the designation given to a low line-of-stone platform that had been mapped in the center of the Culebras plaza. The platform was originally selected for investigation as a possible ritual structure; as mapped, the group appeared to conform to Tikal Plaza Plan 4, designating residential groups with low central shrines; investigations in such constructions at Tikal had recovered skull caches (Becker 1982). As a result of the 2008 investigations in the Culebras Group, it does not appear that Structure C22 was on axis to any of the buildings in the plazeula. The construction proved to be almost equidistant from the Structure C20 and Structure C21 central axes – and, although initially thought to possibly be on axis with Structure C17, the investigation of Structure C17 resulted in the recovery of architectural features that make this unlikely. Exactly what purpose Structure C22 served is unclear, although a single interment was recovered in its southern core.

Operation C179E (Figures 40 and 41) was designated for the areal excavation that largely encompassed Structure C22. The investigation measured 3.75 meters (north-south) by 3.25 meters (east-west). The humus was removed within this excavation and then a deeper 1.50 meter wide trench, running east-west, was placed over the center of the structure and excavated down to an earlier plaza floor (Figure 39). The central part of the platform that comprised Structure C22 was made up of fire-stone that had been encased within a single line of formally cut limestone that made up the edges of the platform on all sides. The formal platform facing was not well preserved. The rear stones of a buried facing that rested on the earlier plaza floor was recovered on the southern side of the excavation. A single burial was recovered in the upper core for Structure C22 in the deeper axial penetration.

S.D. C179E-1 (Figures 42 and 43) was designated for a secondary human interment that had been placed directly within the core of the western end of Structure C22. The recovered bones were not articulated, but the long bones and skull were located within a relatively small area, indicating that they may have once been bundled together. While it was initially believed that all of the skeletal material related to a single individual, analysis showed otherwise. Only four teeth were recovered; the teeth represent 1^st and 2^nd molars for an 8 years-old individual. The mastoid on the skull was also very small. However, all the post-cranial remains appear to come from an adult male. The epiphyses on the long bones are fully fused and the pelvis was identified as male in the field based on an intact sciatic notch. Thus, analysis demonstrated that the remains of two individuals had been placed within the interment, the postcranial skeleton of one adult male and the skull and teeth of a subadult. Since these bones had been re-interred within the fill for Structure C22 from another location and assuming that the intent had been to re-deposit the bones of a single individual, this would indicate that the wrong skull was selected for re-interment with the adult bones.

Structure D25 (Figure 44)

Structure D25 was set at the western extent of the Culebras Group, atop a 2 meter high terrace that bisected the residential area and was probably accessed by a stairway that once existed over this terrace. A series of smaller constructions were to the north of Structure D25. Structure D25 was selected for excavation because of its dominant western position in the group and because of a continued interest in western buildings at Caracol to determine if they held Terminal Classic burials in accord with patterns from the southeastern Peten of Guatemala (Laporte 1994, 2004). While isolated human bones were recovered in the excavation, no formal burials were found on the axis of Structure D25.

Operation C179F (Figures 45 and 46) was assigned to an axial excavation through Structure D25 that measured 9.00 meters (east-west) by 1.50 meters (north-south). At its western extent, the trench was set directly over a terrace facing composed of large boulders. Before excavation, it was possible to discern the outlines of the structure that had once been set on the platform (Figure 46). The basal extent of the building platform was evident on its northern side, but the southern side probably had been uprooted by a large collapsed tree. More central facings indicated that the building rose from above the plaza in three distinct levels. Excavation confirmed that Structure D25 had been built in a single effort and that it was set directly upon bedrock; no earlier constructions were recovered. Human remains were encountered in the plaza fill east of Structure D25, but were not given a burial designation because they were not recovered in association and isolated human bone is quite frequent in Caracol fills and on the floors of Terminal Classic palaces at the site. In the eastern end of the trench, a single tibia (set east-west) was found beneath a laja, a patella was recovered near bedrock (not in association with the tibia), and pieces of a human skull were also recovered over a meter away from the tibia in plaza fill. Although both the front and rear of Structure D25 were excavated to bedrock, no formal deposits and only a few artifacts were recovered. Recovered artifacts of interest included a green obsidian blade fragment (Figure 48j), a partial limestone bar (Figure 48i), and pieces of an effigy burner (Figure 47), possibly of Terminal Classic date. The burner pieces were recovered in the fill immediately above bedrock in the eastern structure core. Two drilled oliva shells (Figure 48a) and a broken shell artifact (Figure 48c) were recovered to the rear (west) of the building. A series of chert artifacts were found in the various building fills (Figure 48h, k, m, o, and p) and a large chert biface (Figure 48g) was recovered in the humus on the structure summit.

Structure C17 (Figure 49)

Structure C17 is the most massive construction located in the Culebras Group. The building rises 2.20 meters above the lower plaza and dominates the northern end of the plazuela group (Figure 3). Even before excavation, a lower frontal terrace was in evidence for the building platform. Structure C17 was selected for excavation because of its size and in order to gain comparative data to excavated northern buildings in other residential groups (e.g., Structure B40 excavated in 2005 and I2 excavated in 2007).

Operation C179G (Figures 50, 51, 52,and 53) was designated for the excavation that penetrated Structure C17. The trench was centered on the lower frontal terrace and succeeded in bisecting a doorway feature for what appears to have been a basal shrine room (Figure 52). The excavation measured 10.45 m (north-south) by 2.00 m (east-west) and was dug to bedrock in the center of the construction and beneath the shrine room. In an attempt to define the eastern side of the frontal feature, an additional areal excavation was made. It was located 0.80 m north of southern excavation and ran 1.08 m north-south by 0.80 m east-west; it exposed the interior of the shrine room, but did not encounter the eastern doorjamb. At minimum, two different construction phases were found in Operation C179G. The earliest consisted of a stone paving running north and raised approximately 60 cm above the shrine room floor. An earlier floor was found in the core of the building at approximately the same level as the paving surface. An earlier southern facing was also encountered, which had been covered over by the walls to construct the shrine room (at least on the western side of the excavation). The latest version of Structure C17 was associated with the basal shrine room and must have had a stairway that rose an additional meter above the earlier paving to a raised plaster floor. This floor was associated with features at the summit of the building, which may have included a bench (Figure 51). No formal deposits were associated with Structure C17, although a ceramic lens in dark soil was found immediately above bedrock in the center of the excavation; these pottery materials dated to the early Late Classic Period. A figurine fragment (Figure 48f) in the fill immediately above the interior stone paving may date the latest construction episode to the late Late Classic Period; also found in this fill were a thick-walled jar (Figure 54a) and a broken point (Figure 48r). Another figurine fragment (Figure 48b) was found to the front of the shrine doorway and a worked shell (Figure 48d) and partial bowl (Figure 54b) were to the side of the upper bench.

Summary of Culebras Group

The Culebras Group appears to have been established in the Early Classic Period. A buried platform that was used at this time was found in front of Structure C21 and the initial construction of Structure C21 dates to the Early Classic Period based on the single burial on that building’s axis. The cache found in plaza fill in front of Structure C21 is one of the most elaborate located at Caracol for this temporal era. It is likely that other low platforms dating to the Early Classic Period remain buried within the lower plaza fill of the Culebras Group. Based on the series of burials deposited on the axis of Structure C20, this edifice became the most important ritual structure in Culebras during the Late Classic Period. All of the excavated buildings on the lower plaza of Culebras were minimally modified, if not totally rebuilt, during the late Late Classic Period. The single building investigated in the upper plaza appears to have been constructed directly on bedrock during this same time, if not later, based on the ceramic burner recovered in its fill. In summary, Culebras appears to have founded in the Early Classic Period and to have peaked it terms of architecture and use during the late Late Classic Period. The archaeological data demonstrate that this residential group was occupied for at least 400 years.

The entire group was backfilled during the last week of the field season.

Palmitas Residential Group: Structures D27-D35.

The second residential group selected for investigation during 2008 is located approximately 100 meters southeast of the South Acropolis and 100 meters southwest of the first group (see Figure 1). The largest construction in the group is the western building (Figure 56). A small squarish pyramid forms the east side of the plaza (Figure 55). Two long and low constructions are located on both the northern and southern sides of the plaza. Three “outbuildings” also appear to be associated with the group, one slightly south and two off the southwest corner of the plaza. Investigations in this residence group focused on Structures D27, D29, and D32, as well as a stone feature in the center of the plaza. Excavations revealed that Structure D27 had been a vaulted stone building with exterior stucco decoration that included a pseudo-hieroglyphic text (that likely ran along the exterior cornice of the edifice). Structure D29 was demonstrated to be a shrine building and produced deposits consistent with those found in other east-structure-focused residential groups. Structure D27 proved to be a small sweat-bath, located slightly behind and northwest of the larger Structure D28 that anchored the northern side of the Palmitas plaza.

Structure D29 (Figure 55)

Set in isolation on the eastern edge of the plaza, Structure D29 could be identified as a ritual construction even before excavation demonstrated this fact. The substructure platform for the building rose slightly more than a meter above its associated plaza, had a squared plan, and had good evidence for a frontal stairway. Two single course summit facings for a construction were in a bad state of repair (Figure 66). They were located on either side of an open and looted chamber that crowned the summit of Structure D29. The chamber had been re-excavated by the Tourism Development Project prior to 2003, but no associated artifacts had been recovered. The TDP had, however, left a blue tarp covering the chamber. This tarp had subsequently fallen into the tomb and clearly demarcated the extent of their investigations. A constructed screen was also recovered on the southern side of the substructure. Based on the investigations undertaken in 2008, Structure D29 appears to have been built in a single construction effort on top of plaza flooring bedded on dry-core fill. The recovered artifactual materials indicate that the building was constructed and used in the Late and Terminal Classic Periods.

Operation C180B (Figures 56, 57, 58, and 59) was designated for an axial trench that was placed over Structure D29. The trench measured 7.50 meters east-west by 1.50 meters north-south. It encompassed the looted chamber, which was designated as S.D. C180B-3. A thin overlay of humus was cleared in the excavation to the east of the open tomb. The humus on top of the stair and summit of the structure was also cleared. No new deep penetration of the building itself was undertaken during 2008, primarily because of the time involved in excavating a tomb, S.D. C180B-2, which was discovered immediately in front of and below the stairs for Structure D29. The plaza area in front of (west of) the lower step for Structure D29 was more intensively investigated. The removal of the humus from in front of the building resulted in the recovery of six partial vessels (Figure 61a-f) that can be dated to the Terminal Classic Period. It is suspected that the rest of the reconstructable vessels that are illustrated, as well as additional ceramic pieces, would have been recovered if the front of the building to either side of the stairway had been cleared. Clearing beneath the level of the plaza floor associated with the lower step of Structure D29 resulted in the discovery of capstones in front of this step and of a cache, C180B-1 (Figure 59). Fill material from below the plaza floor included a human incisor and premolar in the vicinity of the capstones, burnt faunal material, an obsidian inlay (Figure 76c), a large chert biface (Figure 76i), and a stalagtite (not illustrated) presumably from a local cave.

S.D. C180B-1 (Figures 58, 59, 60, and 61) was assigned for a “finger cache” located in the southwestern corner of Operation C180B. Two small lip-to-lip bowls (Figure 61g) had been placed directly into the plaza fill and had once presumably been covered by a plaster floor. The contents of this sealed cache consisted of two human finger digits (Figure 60). The association of a finger cache with an eastern shrine building is consistent with other Caracol contexts (D. Chase and A. Chase 1998).

S.D. C180B-2 (Figures 58, 59, 62, 63, 64, and 65) was assigned for a tomb that was located in front of and partially under the front step for Structure D29. The lower half of the open-air chamber was filled with a densely packed matrix that resembled a soft concrete. This hard matrix completely enveloped 33 vessels that were not warped or crushed, suggesting that the matrix had been purposefully deposited around the ceramics, artifacts, and bone in the chamber. That the bone and ceramics had been placed in a single depositional effort is strongly suggested by the context of a Belize Red footed dish (Figure 64t); half of it is located on the very bottom of the deposit (Figure 63 Plan 4) and half of it is located on the very top of the deposit (Figure 63 Plan 1). Additionally, one of the large dishes (Figure 64z) rested near the top of the deposit (Figure 63 Plan 1) and on the floor of the burial chamber (Figure 63 Plan 3). The vessels (Figure 64) included in the tomb are all of Late Classic date, although some can be seriated into the early part of the Late Classic (Figure 64d, q, s, u, ee) and others may actually be Terminal Classic (Figure 64a, g, m, o, w). That the vessels forms indicate some temporal span in terms of their use suggests that they – and the mixed human bone – in the chamber may have been stored elsewhere before final deposition at the Structure D29 locus. This is also suggested by the concentration of cylinders along the western wall of the chamber (Figure 63 Plan 1). Sherds in the surrounding matrix from a partial cache vessel (Figure 64aa) and from a face cache (not illustrated) also suggest some movement. Thirteen cylinders and thirteen plates/dishes were recovered in this deposit, suggesting a paired relationship between these items, in which one individual would have been accompanied by one cylinder and one plate/dish. The seven additional bowls recovered in the chamber could represent another component form for this pairing. Haviland and his colleagues (1985) have noted that single individuals buried at Tikal were frequently accompanied by one cylinder, one plate, and one bowl in the Late Classic Period.

Artifactualy materials accompanying S.D. C180B-2 include two limestone spindle whorls (Figure 65a, b) and two shell labrets (Figure 65c, d). At least three sets of shell earrings (Figure 65k-p) were recovered in the tomb, as well as one set of small jadeite earrings (Figure 65q, t). The jadeite earrings suggest that at least one of the individuals within the tomb was of fairly high status. Jadeite (Figure 65r) and shell (Figure 65f-h, s, x) beads were also encountered. Careful screening of the tomb dirt also recovered malachite and three jadeite inlays (Figure 65u-w).

Incoming search terms:

• Mayan symbols
• ceremonial and sacrifice in the maya
• aztec laws
• Ancient AZTEC SCHOOLs
• aztec law
• Caracol stela
• aztec mayan
• twenty digits AND palenque
• household items Mayan and Aztec
• special cache

• Maya Prehistory and Caracol
• Interpreting the Maya Collapse 2009
• About Caracol
• History of Caracol

October 30, 2010

Maize, a type of corn was the main source of Aztec food. The Aztecs also ate tomatoes, avocados, atole (a kind of porridge), tortillas and tamales, a kind of wrapper steamed maize stuffed with vegetables or meat.

Aztecs also ate chocolate. In their culture chocolate was reserved for warriors and nobles. A drink of cacao mixed with ground corn is believed to provide stamina and was used in sacred rituals. The chocolate was a drink for the elite.

The Aztecs ate twice a day and the main meal is eaten during the hottest hours of the day. Some edible things available in an Aztec market were fruit, vegetables, spices, flowers, edible dogs, and birds.

The Aztecs had an alcoholic drink called octli. A combine octli take the sap of the maguey plant and put it in a large pot. Then let the putrefaction of the sapwood, then they drink it. Octli was strictly reserved for nobles, royalty, and warriors. All the nobles who have been abused (drunk) the divine drink of the Aztecs would be sentenced to death. A good vendor of agave sap is boiled until it is like honey to a bad seller would be diluted.

Incoming search terms:

• pictures of mayan food
• pictures aztec food
• mayan rituals
• octli drink
• pics of aztec food
• picters of mayan food
• photos of octli plant
• picture of their food & drink-aztecs
• images of of mayan foods
• mayan food pics and what it is called

• Aztecs, Military Life
• The Aztecs, Laws and Politics
• Aztecs, Schooling
• Kiyomizu Temple – ( Kiyomizu dera ) Kyoto, Japan

October 25, 2010

International Conference in Vienna (Austria), 28-29 September, 2006: SCOPE II Themes: Sites and Subjects, narrating heritage.

Incoming search terms:

• caracol vienna
• caracol wien
• canal caracol conf
• mayan history intangibles
• report on scope of heritage tourism
• scope of conference in tourism

• Blue Shield Committee concerned about threatened Cultural Property in the Middle East
• Historical Value & Traditions Of The Southwest On Jewelry — Albuquerque Jewelry
• For the archaeological work in and around Caracol
• Kiyomizu Temple – ( Kiyomizu dera ) Kyoto, Japan

May 18, 2010

For a quarter of a century, two archaeologists and their team slogged through wild tropical vegetation to investigate and map the remains of one of the largest Maya cities, in Central America. Slow, sweaty hacking with machetes seemed to be the only way to discover the breadth of an ancient urban landscape now hidden beneath a dense forest canopy.

Even the new remote-sensing technologies, so effective in recent decades at surveying other archaeological sites, were no help. Imaging radar and multispectral surveys by air and from space could not “see” through the trees.
Then, in the dry spring season a year ago, the husband-and-wife team of Arlen F. Chase and Diane Z. Chase tried a new approach using airborne laser signals that penetrate the jungle cover and are reflected from the ground below. They yielded 3-D images of the site of ancient Caracol, in Belize, one of the great cities of the Maya lowlands.
In only four days, a twin-engine aircraft equipped with an advanced version of lidar (light detection and ranging) flew back and forth over the jungle and collected data surpassing the results of two and a half decades of on-the-ground mapping, the archaeologists said. After three weeks of laboratory processing, the almost 10 hours of laser measurements showed topographic detail over an area of 80 square miles, notably settlement patterns of grand architecture and modest house mounds, roadways and agricultural terraces.
“We were blown away,” Dr. Diane Chase said recently, recalling their first examination of the images. “We believe that lidar will help transform Maya archaeology much in the same way that radiocarbon dating did in the 1950s and interpretations of Maya hieroglyphs did in the 1980s and ’90s.”
The Chases, who are professors of anthropology at the University of Central Florida in Orlando, had determined from earlier surveys that Caracol extended over a wide area in its heyday, between A.D. 550 and 900. From a ceremonial center of palaces and broad plazas, it stretched out to industrial zones and poor neighborhoods and beyond to suburbs of substantial houses, markets and terraced fields and reservoirs.
This picture of urban sprawl led the Chases to estimate the city’s population at its peak at more than 115,000. But some archaeologists doubted the evidence warranted such expansive interpretations.
“Now we have a totality of data and see the entire landscape,” Dr. Arlen Chase said of the laser findings. “We know the size of the site, its boundaries, and this confirms our population estimates, and we see all this terracing and begin to know how the people fed themselves.”
The Caracol survey was the first application of the advanced laser technology on such a large archaeological site. Several journal articles describe the use of lidar in the vicinity of Stonehenge in England and elsewhere at an Iron Age fort and American plantation sites. Only last year, Sarah H. Parcak of the University of Alabama at Birmingham predicted, “Lidar imagery will have much to offer the archaeology of the rain forest regions.”
The Chases said they had been unaware of Dr. Parcak’s assessment, in her book “Satellite Remote Sensing for Archaeology” (Routledge, 2009), when they embarked on the Caracol survey. They acted on the recommendation of a Central Florida colleague, John F. Weishampel, a biologist who had for years used airborne laser sensors to study forests and other vegetation.
Dr. Weishampel arranged for the primary financing of the project from the little-known space archaeology program of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The flights were conducted by the National Science Foundation’s National Center for Airborne Laser Mapping, operated by the University of Florida and the University of California, Berkeley.
Other archaeologists, who were not involved in the research but were familiar with the results, said the technology should be a boon to explorations, especially ones in the tropics, with its heavily overgrown vegetation, including pre-Columbian sites throughout Mexico and Central America. But they emphasized that it would not obviate the need to follow up with traditional mapping to establish “ground truth.”
Jeremy A. Sabloff, a former director of the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology and now president of the Santa Fe Institute in New Mexico, said he wished he had had lidar when he was working in the Maya ruins at Sayil, in Mexico.
The new laser technology, Dr. Sabloff said, “would definitely have speeded up our mapping, given us more details and would have enabled us to refine our research questions and hypotheses much earlier in our field program than was possible in the 1980s.”
At first, Payson D. Sheets, a University of Colorado archaeologist, was not impressed with lidar. A NASA aircraft tested the laser system over his research area in Costa Rica, he said, “but when I saw it recorded the water in a lake sloping at 14 degrees, I did not use it again.”
Now, after examining the imagery from Caracol, Dr. Sheets said he planned to try lidar, with its improved technology, again. “I was stunned by the crisp precision and fine-grained resolution,” he said.
“Finally, we have a nondestructive and rapid means of documenting the present ground surface through heavy vegetation cover,” Dr. Sheets said, adding, “One can easily imagine, given the Caracol success, how important this would be in Southeast Asia, with the Khmer civilization at places like Angkor Wat.”
In recent reports at meetings of Mayanists and in interviews, the Chases noted that previous remote-sensing techniques focused more on the discovery of archaeological sites than on the detailed imaging of on-ground remains. The sensors could not see through much of the forest to resolve just how big the ancient cities had been. As a consequence, archaeologists may have underestimated the scope of Mayan accomplishments.

Incoming search terms:

• mayan terraces
• mayan cities
• lidar in agriculture
• caracollidar
• terraces in mayan culture
• picture of the caracol ruin in belize
• remote sesning caracol
• mayan terraces about
• mayan tropics
• measurements of caracol

• Maya Prehistory and Caracol
• Description of Words
• About Caracol
• History of Caracol

April 18, 2010

Altar : Usually a round, flat stone, these may have pictures or hieroglyphs carved into them.

Archaeology : The study of the past. It often involves digging up the remains of ancient people.

Caana : The tallest set of buildings at Caracol; Caana in Maya means “sky place.” It is made up of palaces and temples.

Caches : Something hidden, usually a pottery container with special things inside, such as jadeite or carved shell.

Caracol : An ancient Maya city; it is located just south of modern Belize, in the Yucatan in Mexico. Over 1,400 years ago (A.D. 650) the city of Caracol was the home of over 100,000 people.

Excavation : Digging to uncover the remains of buildings and artifacts.

Hieroglyphs : Also known as Glyphs; these are the Maya way of writing.

Intensive Farming : Farming that takes more work, but allows farmland to be used every year.

Jadeite : A hard green stone valued by the Maya. It was often made into jewelry.

Katun : 20 Maya years = 7,200 Kins(days)

Kin: A day.

Maya : People native to parts of Mexico, Guatemala, Belize, El Salvador and Honduras. From archaeology we know that they were in this area by 3000 years ago (1000BC); they are still living today.

Milpa:Also called Swidden farming. A kind of farming in which the land is cleared by burning. Land cannot be used every year with this type of farming.

Palace : A building with many different rooms; these were probably the places where wealthy people and members of the royal family lived

Santa Rita Corozal : Ancient Maya capital city located in northern Belize. It reached it height approximately 500 years ago.

Stela : A tall stone, usually carved with pictures of rulers and hieroglyphs that tell about them.

Temple : A pyramid that usually has a building on top and was used primarily for religious reasons.

Terraces : Stone walls that hold soil for farming.

Tun : A Maya year = 18 Uinals or 360 Kins(days).

Uinal : A Maya month = 20 Kins (or 20 days).

Incoming search terms:

• el salvador royal family
• ancient mayan artifacts
• mayan food artifact
• l words and belize
• is there a royal family of el salvador
• el salvador royal Families
• decripton l words
• cooking aztecs artefacts
• buildings or artifacts in el savador
• aztec cooking artifacts

• History of Caracol
• Maya Civilization
• About Caracol
• For the archaeological work in and around Caracol