searchable PDF - Association for Mexican Cave Studies

searchable PDF - Association for Mexican Cave Studies searchable PDF - Association for Mexican Cave Studies

amcs.pubs.org
from amcs.pubs.org More from this publisher
12.07.2015 Views

140AMCS Bulletin 12 — Chapter 7ancient inhabitants were clearly intent on locating,marking, and transforming water sources. Thesefindings provide convincing evidence for the cosmologicalsignificance of water.Despite their individual morphologies, all cavesappear to have embodied part of a widespread systemof cultural meanings. However, research in the Yalahauregion demonstrates that natural characteristics suchas entrance shape, the presence of water, and cavernsize appear to have been factors in the selection andappropriation of certain subterranean spaces for particularuses. The size of three of the most voluminouscollapse domes in the study area appears to have beenone of the principal factors in the selection of thesecaves for substantial elaboration. Entrance form wasclearly significant as well. Narrow, vertical portals likethat of Actun Tacbi Ha concealed and controlled entryinto these massive chambers.The investigation of a large number of caveswithin a single region is important in presenting a rangeof cave morphologies that provide insights into ancientemic categories. Archaeologists typically makea distinction between caves and rockshelters but theevidence suggests that the latter were fully integratedinto the Maya concept of “cave.” All rockshelters containedarchitectural modifications, several containedincensario fragments and evidence of speleothembreakage and removal. While they functioned as moreopen and accessible sacred places, rockshelters wereclearly perceived as caves.Viewing a large number of caves also suggestsnew interpretations of the interplay between thesubsurface replication of terrestrial domains and theinclusion of caves into the controlled realm of the builtenvironment. Clearly, architectural modifications onthe scale of Actun Toh make strong political and socialstatements as to the cave’s relative importanceand its specialized and restricted use. Perhaps moreimportantly, these investigations provide compellingevidence for the conceptual and physical transfigurationof caves into ordered environments.It was also noted that the Maya were extractingresources from caves. However, the principles of economicefficiency do not adequately fit the cases ofcave mining, speleothem extraction, or water drawing tomake a plausible case that these were utilitarian activities.Once again, the sacred origin of these objectsor materials transcends their physical properties.The study of caves within their greater regionalcontext, which includes surface sites and all caveliketopographic features, facilitates the identificationof such cultural patterning across time and space.Moreover, caves can be exposed as diverse in theirphysiography and use, yet retain their place in theunifying concept of sacred underground domains.Through research in the Yalahau region, caves are realizedas geographically and ideologically integratedenvironments that are linked physically and symbolicallyto the cosmic and terrestrial realms of the ancientMaya.

AMCS Bulletin 12 — References 141REFERENCES CITEDAdams, Richard E. W., 1971. The Ceramics of Altarde Sacrificios. Papers of the Peabody Museum,Harvard University, 63, no. 1. Cambridge.Agar, Michael, 1998. The Yucatán’s FloodedBasement. Smithsonian 29(1):94–106.Amador, Fabio Esteban, 2001. El Proyecto RegionalYalahau de Ecología y Humana: InvestigacionesArqueológicas. Paper presented at the CongresoInternacional de Cultura Maya, Mérida.Andersen, Bente Juhl, 2001. Wetland Managementin the Yalahau Region of Mexico. Paper presentedat the 66 th Annual Meeting of the Societyfor American Archaeology, New Orleans.Andrews, Anthony P., 1985. The Archaeology andHistory of Northern Quintana Roo. In Geologyand Hydrogeology of the Yucatan and QuaternaryGeology of Northeastern Yucatan Peninsula,edited by W. C. Ward, A. E. Weidie, andW. Back, pp. 127–143. New Orleans GeologicalSociety, New Orleans.Andrews, Anthony P. and Robert Corletta, 1995. ABrief History of Underwater Archaeology in theMaya Area. Ancient Mesoamerica 6:101–117.Andrews, Anthony P. and Fernando Robles Castellanos,1986. Excavaciones Arqueológicas en ElMeco, Quintana Roo, 1977. Instituto Nacionalde Antropología e Historia, Mexico.Andrews, E. Wyllys IV, 1961. Excavations at theGruta de Balankanche, 1959. Appendix to:Preliminary Report to the 1959–60 FieldSeason, National Geographic Society–TulaneUniversity Dzibilchultun Program. TulaneUniversity Middle American Research Institute,Miscellaneous Series, No. 11:28–40, NewOrleans.———, 1965. Explorations in the Gruta de Chac.Middle American Research Institute Publication31:1–21. Tulane University, New Orleans.———, 1970. Balankanche, Throne of the TigerPriest. Middle American Research Series,Publication 32. Tulane University, New Orleans.Andrews, E. Wyllys IV and Anthony P. Andrews,1975. A Preliminary Study of the Ruins ofXcaret, Quintana Roo, Mexico: With Notes onOther Archaeological Remains on the CentralEast Coast of the Yucatán Peninsula. MiddleAmerican Research Institute, Publication 40.Tulane University, New Orleans.Andrews, E. Wyllys IV, Michael P. Simmons,Elizabeth S. Wing, E. Wyllys Andrews V, andJoann M. Andrews, 1974. Excavation of anEarly Shell Midden on Isla Cancun, QuintanaRoo, Mexico. Middle American ResearchInstitute, Publication 31:147–197. TulaneUniversity, New Orleans.Andrews, E. Wyllys IV and George Stuart, 1975.The Ruins of Ikil, Yucatan, Mexico. In ArchaeologicalInvestigations on the Yucatan Peninsula,edited by Margaret Harrison and RobertWauchope, pp. 69–80. Middle American ResearchInstitute Publication 31. Tulane University,New Orleans.Andrews, E. Wyllys V, 1988. Ceramic Units fromKomchén, Yucatán, Mexico. Cerámica deCultura Maya 15:51–64.———, 1989. The Ceramics of Komchén, Yucatán.Manuscript on file, Middle American ResearchInstitute, Tulane University, New Orleans.Antochiw, Michel, 1999. Cenotes y Grutas deYucatán. In Cenotes y Grutas de Yucatán, editedby Luis Armando Ruíz Sosa, pp. 11–47. CEPSA,Mérida.Apostolides, Alex, 1987. Chalcatzingo Painted Art.In Ancient Chalcatzingo, edited by David C.Grove, pp. 171–199. University of Texas Press,Austin.Awe, Jaime J. (editor), 1998. The Western BelizeRegional Cave Project: A Report of the 1997Field Season. Department of AnthropologyOccasional Paper No. 1. University of NewHampshire, Durham.Ball, Joseph W., 1977. The Archaeological Ceramicsof Becan, Campeche, Mexico. MiddleAmerican Research Institute, Tulane University,Pub. 43. Tulane University, New Orleans.———, 1978. Archaeological Pottery of the Yucatan-Campeche Coast. Middle American ResearchInstitute, Tulane University, Pub. 46, part 2.

140AMCS Bulletin 12 — Chapter 7ancient inhabitants were clearly intent on locating,marking, and trans<strong>for</strong>ming water sources. Thesefindings provide convincing evidence <strong>for</strong> the cosmologicalsignificance of water.Despite their individual morphologies, all cavesappear to have embodied part of a widespread systemof cultural meanings. However, research in the Yalahauregion demonstrates that natural characteristics suchas entrance shape, the presence of water, and cavernsize appear to have been factors in the selection andappropriation of certain subterranean spaces <strong>for</strong> particularuses. The size of three of the most voluminouscollapse domes in the study area appears to have beenone of the principal factors in the selection of thesecaves <strong>for</strong> substantial elaboration. Entrance <strong>for</strong>m wasclearly significant as well. Narrow, vertical portals likethat of Actun Tacbi Ha concealed and controlled entryinto these massive chambers.The investigation of a large number of caveswithin a single region is important in presenting a rangeof cave morphologies that provide insights into ancientemic categories. Archaeologists typically makea distinction between caves and rockshelters but theevidence suggests that the latter were fully integratedinto the Maya concept of “cave.” All rockshelters containedarchitectural modifications, several containedincensario fragments and evidence of speleothembreakage and removal. While they functioned as moreopen and accessible sacred places, rockshelters wereclearly perceived as caves.Viewing a large number of caves also suggestsnew interpretations of the interplay between thesubsurface replication of terrestrial domains and theinclusion of caves into the controlled realm of the builtenvironment. Clearly, architectural modifications onthe scale of Actun Toh make strong political and socialstatements as to the cave’s relative importanceand its specialized and restricted use. Perhaps moreimportantly, these investigations provide compellingevidence <strong>for</strong> the conceptual and physical transfigurationof caves into ordered environments.It was also noted that the Maya were extractingresources from caves. However, the principles of economicefficiency do not adequately fit the cases ofcave mining, speleothem extraction, or water drawing tomake a plausible case that these were utilitarian activities.Once again, the sacred origin of these objectsor materials transcends their physical properties.The study of caves within their greater regionalcontext, which includes surface sites and all caveliketopographic features, facilitates the identificationof such cultural patterning across time and space.Moreover, caves can be exposed as diverse in theirphysiography and use, yet retain their place in theunifying concept of sacred underground domains.Through research in the Yalahau region, caves are realizedas geographically and ideologically integratedenvironments that are linked physically and symbolicallyto the cosmic and terrestrial realms of the ancientMaya.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!