Early Urban Planning, Spatial Strategies, and the Maya Gridded City of Nixtun-Ch’ich’, Petén, Guatemala

Pugh, Timothy W.; Rice, Prudence M.

doi:10.1086/693779

Cited by 37 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Modular grids composed of perpendicular roads forming blocks were unknown in pre-Columbian Maya settlements until the remapping of Nixtun-Ch'ich’ in the Department of Peten, Guatemala (Pugh and Rice 2017). Nixtun-Ch'ich’ was the largest Middle Preclassic period (800–400/300 b.c. )…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Faceless Hierarchy at Nixtun-Ch'ich’, Peten, Guatemala

Pugh

Nieto²,

Zygadło

2019

Ancient Mesoam

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Middle Preclassic Nixtun-Ch'ich’ seems to have been built according to a preplanned diagram (Pugh and Rice 2017:585; Rice 2018). Recent work, presented here, has revealed that the site's axis urbis was much larger than recorded by earlier work.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Faceless Hierarchy at Nixtun-Ch'ich’, Peten, Guatemala

Pugh

Nieto²,

Zygadło

2019

Ancient Mesoam

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…), burials (Baires ; Paris et al. ), sites (Cobb and Butler ; Pugh and Rice ; Rice ), and landscapes (Fitzhugh ; Ling and Cornell ). The ways that archaeologists today are investigating ritual and meaning are increasingly diverse, both conceptually and methodologically.…”

Section: Individuals and Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Finding Archaeology in 2017: What Is Archaeology and Why Are We Doing It? Why Should We Be Doing It?

Lewis

2018

American Anthropologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

These annual review essays focus on what we as archaeologists are doing year by year. Many themes continue on from review to review, waxing and waning, not unlike the bell curves of a traditional pottery seriation.Each year, themes are highlighted and presented in varied ways according to the orientation and aims of the reviewer. All do a masterful job of curating the vast range of what archaeologists were, in each annual period, currently producing. My review follows in the footsteps of its predecessors, summarizing an array of new and exciting research, and describing how agendas presented in 2017 cluster around sets of related questions and aims. It will also look at the growing literature that asks, in one way or another, fundamental questions about what archaeology really is and why we pursue it. In this time when the value of academic pursuits and scientific perspectives are being highly scrutinized in politics and popular culture, archaeologists are faced with the uncomfortable question of "What is it, really, that we should be doing?" [archaeology, current issues, public archaeology, digital archaeology] RESUMEN Estos ensayos de revisión anual se enfocan en lo que como arqueólogos estamos haciendo año tras año. Muchos temas continúan de revisión en revisión, creciendo o menguando, no muy diferente de las curvas en forma de campana de la seriación de la cerámica tradicional. Cada año, temas son enfatizados y presentados de varias maneras de acuerdo a la orientación y metas del crítico. Todos hacen un trabajo magistral de organizar un rango vasto de lo que los arqueólogos estaban, en cada período anual, realmente produciendo. Mi revisión sigue los pasos de sus predecesores, resumiendo una colección de nueva y emocionante investigación, y describiendo cómo las agendas presentadas en el 2017 se agrupan alrededor de juegos de cuestiones y metas relacionadas.También examina la creciente literatura que pregunta, de una manera u otra, cuestiones fundamentales acerca de lo que la arqueología realmente es y por qué nos dedicamos a ella. En este tiempo cuando el valor de los empeños académicos y las perspectivas científicas están siendo altamente escrutados en política y cultura popular, los arqueólogos se enfrentan a la pregunta incomoda de "¿Qué es lo que realmente deberíamos estar haciendo?"[arqueología, cuestiones actuales, arqueología pública, arqueología digital] ARCHAEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTATION?While the theme of what such a diverse discipline should be subtly undergirds much of the literature, a number of 2017 articles, each in a very different way, directly address the very nature of what archaeology is and why we practice it. In the Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, Assaf Nativ (2017, 55) asks us to reconsider our notions of the

show abstract

“…Teotihuacan was not the only Mesoamerican city to exhibit orthogonal planning. During the Late Preclassic period, the Maya town of Nixtun-Ch'ich' exhibited orthogonal planning, with a series of straight streets aligned at angles within several degrees of 90 degrees (Pugh & Rice, 2017). Many of the residences at the Pacific Maya site of Ujuxte (Love, 2011) were built with a common orthogonal orientation.…”

Section: Planning Innovations At Teotihuacanmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Teotihuacan Anomaly: The Historical Trajectory of Urban Design in Ancient Central Mexico

Smith

2017

Open Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The ancient Mexican city of Teotihuacan had the most aberrant design of any city in ancient Mesoamerica. I examine similarities and differences between the design of Teotihuacan and other Mesoamerican cities. During the Preclassic period, a set of common Mesoamerican planning principles emerged. The designers of Teotihuacan rejected most of these principles in favor of a new and radical set of planning concepts. After the fall of Teotihuacan, subsequent urban planners ignored the Teotihuacan principles and returned to ancient Mesoamerican planning ideas. Elements of the Teotihuacan plan did not resurface until the Mexica of Tenochtitlan revived them for a specific goal. The historical sequence of central Mexican city layouts highlights the anomalous character of Teotihuacan's principles of urban design within the canons of ancient Mesoamerican urbanism.

show abstract

Early Urban Planning, Spatial Strategies, and the Maya Gridded City of Nixtun-Ch’ich’, Petén, Guatemala

Cited by 37 publications

References 74 publications

Faceless Hierarchy at Nixtun-Ch'ich’, Peten, Guatemala

Faceless Hierarchy at Nixtun-Ch'ich’, Peten, Guatemala

Finding Archaeology in 2017: What Is Archaeology and Why Are We Doing It? Why Should We Be Doing It?

The Teotihuacan Anomaly: The Historical Trajectory of Urban Design in Ancient Central Mexico

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About