“…Excavations into Fosa Y revealed amphitheater-like stone terraces composed of large limestone rubble. A 40-cm thick deposit of ritual refuse including large sherds of reconstructable vessels (Middle Preclassic period; Figure 6), fauna, and various other artifacts covered the terraces (Rice and Pugh 2017; Rice et al 2019). Many of the objects, including the ceramics and a jade mask fragment, mentioned below, had been purposefully destroyed.…”
Section: Nixtun-ch'ich’mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We excavated four meters of this clay, below the terraces, without reaching bedrock, though we did encounter a cache with a large plate containing part of a human skull. The fossa was also used in the Late Preclassic period, when two polished manos and several limestone disks, likely beehive covers, were deposited (Rice et al 2019). Figure 6.Ceramic sherds in Fosa Y, Nixtun-Ch'ich’.…”
Societies vary in how they approach the challenges of increased population, inequality, and occupational specialization. The city of Nixtun-Ch'ich’ and its satellite, T'up, in Peten, Guatemala exhibit orthogonal urban grids—a trait absent from all other known Maya cities. Such grids require extensive planning and the ability to mobilize the population. The present data suggests that Nixtun-Ch'ich’ was substantially larger than any of the surrounding settlements and was, therefore, a primate center during the Middle Preclassic period. The extensive urban planning of the site, as well as that of T'up suggests centralized planning. Yet, we have not encountered evidence of a central ruler propagated as a unifying symbol of the polity. The gridded public streets and lack of a rulership cult suggest that Nixtun-Ch'ich’ had a more collaborative social system.
“…Excavations into Fosa Y revealed amphitheater-like stone terraces composed of large limestone rubble. A 40-cm thick deposit of ritual refuse including large sherds of reconstructable vessels (Middle Preclassic period; Figure 6), fauna, and various other artifacts covered the terraces (Rice and Pugh 2017; Rice et al 2019). Many of the objects, including the ceramics and a jade mask fragment, mentioned below, had been purposefully destroyed.…”
Section: Nixtun-ch'ich’mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We excavated four meters of this clay, below the terraces, without reaching bedrock, though we did encounter a cache with a large plate containing part of a human skull. The fossa was also used in the Late Preclassic period, when two polished manos and several limestone disks, likely beehive covers, were deposited (Rice et al 2019). Figure 6.Ceramic sherds in Fosa Y, Nixtun-Ch'ich’.…”
Societies vary in how they approach the challenges of increased population, inequality, and occupational specialization. The city of Nixtun-Ch'ich’ and its satellite, T'up, in Peten, Guatemala exhibit orthogonal urban grids—a trait absent from all other known Maya cities. Such grids require extensive planning and the ability to mobilize the population. The present data suggests that Nixtun-Ch'ich’ was substantially larger than any of the surrounding settlements and was, therefore, a primate center during the Middle Preclassic period. The extensive urban planning of the site, as well as that of T'up suggests centralized planning. Yet, we have not encountered evidence of a central ruler propagated as a unifying symbol of the polity. The gridded public streets and lack of a rulership cult suggest that Nixtun-Ch'ich’ had a more collaborative social system.
“…However, the sites of Buenavista-Nuevo San José, Caobal, Ceibal, El Mirador, El Palmar, and Nixtun Ch'ich' possess evidence for sedentary occupation that is more ephemeral. At these sites, early surface preparation atop cleared bedrock consisted of layers of clay/clayey soil and crushed limestone that was eventually covered by plaster surfaces (Castellanos and Foias 2017;Doyle 2017;Hansen 2016;Inomata et al 2013Inomata et al , 2015Rice 2009Rice , 2019Rice et al 2019). Although lacking the evidence for actual houses, radiocarbon dates or ceramics from the clay deposits at these sites in Guatemala suggest occupation around the beginning of the early ceramic period.…”
Section: Settlements and Villagesmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…By this time, several ceramic complexes had appeared, including Xe and Real in the Pasión River Valley (Adams 1971;Willey 1970;Willey et al 1967) and the Middle Usumacinta (Inomata et al 2020), Eb in the north and central Peten (Culbert 1993;Culbert and Kosakowsky 2019), Swasey and Bolay in northern Belize (Kosakowsky 1987;Kosakowsky and Pring 1998;Kosakowsky et al 2018;Valdez 1987Valdez , 1994Valdez et al 2021), Cunil (Awe 1992;Sullivan and Awe 2013;Sullivan et al 2009), Kanocha (Garber et al 2004), and early facet Jenney Creek in the Belize River Valley (Gifford 1976;Sharer and Kirkpatrick 1976), as well as Ek and Ch'oh Ek in the Yucatan (Andrews et al 2018), Ch'ok in Campeche (Robert M. Rosenswig, personal communication 2020; see Ek 2015 for Champotón 1A), and Macal in the central Karstic uplands (Debra S. Walker, personal communication 2021;Walker et al 2017). Rice (2019:2) has recently identified two "Pre-Mamom" complexes at Nixtun-Ch'ich' in the Peten, with the earliest, K'as, dating to 1300/1200-1100 b.c. based on two AMS radiocarbon assays.…”
Section: Early Potterymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(Awe et al 2021a;Awe and Healy 1994;Ebert and Awe 2018;Johnson 1991), with similarly early obsidian appearing as flakes and blades in northeastern Guatemala (Aoyama 2017;Aoyama and Munson 2012). In Early to Middle Preclassic Belize and Guatemala, the obsidian originated in highland Guatemala, with the El Chayal and San Martín Jilotepeque sources being dominant (Aoyama 2017;Aoyama and Munson 2012;Aoyama et al 2017b;Awe and Healy 1994;Awe et al 2021a;Brown et al 2004;Castellanos and Foias 2017;Ebert and Awe 2018;Hammond 1991b;Inomata et al 2020: Supplementary Material 3;Kersey 2007;McAnany 2004b;Rice et al 2019;Stemp et al 2018a). Many of these trade items made from exotic materials have been recovered from some of the earliest dedicatory and termination deposits/caches in the central Maya lowlands, often in association with one another (Awe 1992;Aoyama et al 2017aAoyama et al , 2017bBrown et al 2018;Garber et al 2004;Healy et al 2004;Powis et al 2016).…”
Section: Socioeconomic and Ideological Complexitymentioning
This introduction to the Special Section provides a summary of our current understanding of the first humans and the first Maya in these regions and presents seven articles that examine these critical periods from varied, intersecting perspectives. The Introduction begins with a brief history of early preceramic research (primarily in northern Belize) and provides a current chronology for the Paleoindian, Archaic, and Early Preclassic periods. The Paleoindian and Archaic (ca. 11,500–900 b.c.) periods are discussed in terms of the origins of the first peoples in these regions, lithic technology, subsistence, and early ritual. Next, a summary of archaeological evidence for the transition to the first villages (ca. 1200–800 b.c.) is provided, with examinations of a horticultural lifestyle, the earliest ceramics, increased socio-economic complexity, new ideology and ritual practices, and developing social inequality. Proto-Mayan and Mayan languages—their dating, origin, and early lexicon—are discussed in relation to the first Maya. Material culture and language are explored with regard to conceptions of Maya culture.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
