Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-6grmk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-05T13:59:28.247Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Site of Noh K'uh, Chiapas, Mexico: A Late Preclassic Settlement in the Mensäbäk Basin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 February 2019

Santiago Juarez ,
Sebastián Salgado-Flores  and
Christopher Hernández
Santiago Juarez*
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Colgate University, 13 Oak Drive, Hamilton, NY 13346, USA
Sebastián Salgado-Flores
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of Texas at San Antonio, College of Liberal and Fine Arts, One UTSA Circle, San Antonio, TX 78249, USA
Christopher Hernández
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois at Chicago, 1007 West Harrison Street, Chicago, Illinois 60607, USA
*
(sjuarez@colgate.edu, corresponding author)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this report we introduce the site of Noh K'uh, a Late Preclassic (400 BC–AD 250) community in the western frontier of the Maya Lowlands. This new body of data contributes to the study of how complex societies emerged both within the Usumacinta River region and the Maya area overall.

En este informe se presenta el sitio de Noh K'uh, una comunidad del Preclásico tardío (400 aC-250 dC), localizado en la frontera occidental de las tierras bajas mayas. Ofrecemos nuevos datos para el estudio de sociedades complejas tanto en la región del río Usumacinta como en el área maya en general.

Keywords

Late PreclassicNoh K'uhsettlementPreclásico tardíoNoh K'uhasentamiento

Information

Type
Report
Information
Latin American Antiquity , Volume 30 , Issue 1 , March 2019 , pp. 211 - 217
Copyright
Copyright © 2019 by the Society for American Archaeology 

We introduce the recently documented Late Preclassic (400 BC–AD 250) site of Noh K'uh (17°06'N, 91°36' W), near the Usumacinta River region of Chiapas, Mexico (Figure 1). Population growth and an increase in complexity was thought to be a gradual process, in which the village societies of the Preclassic developed into Classic period (250–900 AD) cities such as Yaxchilan and Piedras Negras (Houston et al. Reference Houston, Hector Escobedo, Golden, Muñoz and Smith2003). Noh K'uh developed away from trade and travel routes along the Usumacinta River (Golden et al. Reference Golden, Scherer, Muñoz and Vasquez2008, Reference Golden, Scherer, Muñoz and Hruby2012) in what is referred to as a peripheral zone (López Bravo Reference López Bravo2005; Lowe and Agrinier Reference Lowe and Agrinier1960). Here, we will describe a 200 ha site with a monumental core and an estimated 400 structures, which reached its peak construction phase between 395 and 1 BC. Research at Noh K'uh highlights the variation in the rise of social complexity, showing how different sites waxed and waned at variable times and rates across the region surrounding the Usumacinta.

Figure 1.

Location of Noh K'uh in Chiapas, Mexico. Left: Map of the Preclassic region. Right: Map of the intermontane Mensäbäk Basin.

Research on Preclassic occupations within and near the Usumacinta River Basin has revealed scattered villages and diminutive ceremonial centers. For example, Houston and colleagues (Reference Houston, Hector Escobedo, Golden, Muñoz and Smith2003:222) describe the region around Piedras Negras as a small-scale “village society” that constructed public (not monumental) platforms. However, the ubiquity of Preclassic materials, along with large-scale land modification, suggests the presence of a larger population within the Usumacinta Region. The sites of Yaxchilan, Piedras Negras (Houston et al. Reference Houston, Hector Escobedo, Golden, Muñoz and Smith2003), El Cayo (Lee and Hayden Reference Lee and Hayden1988), El Kinel, La Técnica (Scherer et al. Reference Scherer, Golden, Vásquez, Scherer, Golden and Vásquez2006), and Zancudero (Arroyave et al. Reference Arroyave, Pérez, Quiroa, Marzahn-Ramos, Meléndez, Golden, Scherer and Vásquez2006) are characterized by large earthen and stone construction works associated with small habitations. Similarly, several sites within and near Palenque contain small concentrations of Preclassic material underneath Classic period remains (López Bravo Reference López Bravo2005).

Noh K'uh is located 30 km west of the Usumacinta in what others have referred to as a “peripheral zone” due to the distance of the area from Classic period (AD 250–900) sites that followed the riverine trade route (López Bravo Reference López Bravo2005; Lowe and Agrinier Reference Lowe and Agrinier1960). Noh K'uh was also in close vicinity to societies in the southern Pacific coast of Mexico and Guatemala (Clark Reference Clark1981; Kappelman Reference Kappelman2004; Lesure Reference Lesure1997; Love Reference Love, Love and Kaplan2011; Rosenswig Reference Rosenswig, Burger and Rosenswig2012; Rosenswig and Mendelsohn Reference Rosenswig and Mendelsohn2016), and Chiapa de Corzo (Clark and Pye Reference Clark, Pye, Love and Kaplan2011; Dixon Reference Dixon1959). According to Inomata (Reference Inomata, Freidel, Chase, Dowd and Murdock2017:216), central Chiapas and the Pacific coast of Mexico may have inspired the spatial plan of many Preclassic Maya sites. Noh K'uh is found within the boundaries of the Isthmian sphere (see Inomata Reference Inomata, Freidel, Chase, Dowd and Murdock2017) and the Maya Lowlands.

Methods

The authors conducted archaeological surveys of Noh K'uh between 2010 and 2013, combining opportunistic and systematic survey techniques (Figure 2). Opportunistic methods is defined here as a set of survey methods that worked in tandem with modern Lacandon agricultural practices that clear plots of land through slash-and-burn methods (i.e., swidden agriculture). Transect cutting methods were systematic, maintaining lines of sight 700 m long, with a 100 m long traverse line set every 50 m. In all cases, we used a combination of handheld GPS units, laser theodolite, Brunton compass, and handheld data collectors to record findings.

Figure 2.

All known structures at Noh K'uh.

Twenty-nine 2 x 2 m test-pit excavations located at the center and the northern, eastern, and southern edges of the site revealed Late Preclassic materials, with minor evidence of Postclassic (AD 950–1539) intrusions (Salgado-Flores Reference Salgado-Flores, Deeb, Kestle and Palka2011). Test-pits were excavated in 10 cm arbitrary levels. To date, no evidence of Classic period materials has been identified within Noh K'uh. Carbon samples collected from architectural context and middens (Table 1) suggest that the site reached its peak construction phase towards the early half of the Late Preclassic (400 BC–AD 250), between 395 and 1 BC.

Table 1.

Absolute Dates from Excavations in 2011. Processed by the Arizona Accelerator Mass Spectrometry Laboratory.

Findings

Noh K'uh had an aggregated but low-density settlement pattern, with earthen and stone plaza areas and an open-air ceremonial center referred to as an E-Group (see Freidel et al. Reference Freidel, Chase, Dowd and Murdock2017). We recorded 10 large ceremonial constructions (superstructures not counted separately) and 118 mound structures within a survey area measuring 50 ha (Figure 2). Mounds were defined as round or elongated formations of earth, rock, and debris that appeared artificial in their construction. Basal platforms that supported these mounds are not included in this count, as their size and extent were not clear from surface reconnaissance alone. Based on exploratory field walking, and the information from our interlocutors, we estimate that 25% of Noh K'uh has been recorded in our current map, and that the site covers an area of 200 ha, containing approximately 400 structures. We emphasize caution with this rough estimate, because little is known about the unmapped structures. Furthermore, our data indicate that constructions were diverse in form and size, suggesting that not all mounds were habitations.

In 2010, a survey team mapped the site's tallest pyramids, revealing the E-Group (Palka Reference Palka2010; Salgado-Flores Reference Salgado-Flores, Deeb, Kestle and Palka2011), which was characterized by a plaza that includes the combination of an elongated and rectangular structure, oriented to a taller, square-based pyramid (Blom Reference Blom1924; Ricketson and Ricketson Reference Ricketson and Ricketson1937). In most cases, the elongated mound is located on the eastern end of the plaza, whereas the taller pyramid is found on the western side (Chase and Chase Reference Chase, Chase and Grube1995:93; Doyle Reference Doyle2012:358). The mapping concentrated in the area located directly southeast of the site's largest construction, a 20 m tall mound (Structure M13) within Noh K'uh's ceremonial core (Figure 3). In the southern corner of the plaza, a large, smooth stone is a remnant of a stone altar or uncarved stelae (Es 1; Figure 3).

Figure 3.

Top: Ceremonial E-Group complex. Bottom: Elongated structures and associated mounds.

Noh K'uh's E-Group orientation and layout demonstrates a confluence of traditions when contextualized within the broader Preclassic region. “Isthmian sphere” E-Groups in the Gulf Coast and Central Chiapas were part of larger processional spaces arranged on a north-south alignment, whereas Maya E-Groups tended to follow an east-west alignment (Inomata Reference Inomata, Freidel, Chase, Dowd and Murdock2017:217). Noh K'uh's E-Group is not part of a larger processional space, which is a pattern typical of the Maya (Sullivan Reference Sullivan and Evans2016). Yet, the E-Group does not follow an east-west alignment. At Noh K'uh the plaza follows a southeast-northwest axis at almost 135 degrees southeast, which matches the orientation of the surrounding basin. The center of the plaza is equidistant from several mountain tops, including mountain ridge tops to the northeast and southwest, placing the plaza of the E-Group almost perfectly in the center of this basin (Juarez Reference Juarez, Millhauser, Morehart and Juarez2017). This orientation indicates that the site was constructed in reverence of the natural landscape, which Inomata (Reference Inomata, Freidel, Chase, Dowd and Murdock2017:217) states was typical of the Isthmian sphere and demonstrates how Noh K'uh emerged out of traditions found within and outside of the Maya region. Estrada-Belli (Reference Estrada-Belli, Freidel, Chase, Dowd and Murdock2017:305–307) similarly finds landscape-focused orientations in the region surrounding Cival, illustrating that Noh K'uh was not alone in this practice. The east-west relationship is common in E-Groups (Aimers and Rice Reference Aimers and Rice2006:79; Estrada-Belli Reference Estrada-Belli2011:67), but orientations vary across the Maya lowlands (Aveni and Dowd Reference Aveni, Dowd, Freidel, Chase, Dowd and Murdock2017; Chase et al. Reference Chase, Dowd, Freidel, Freidel, Chase, Dowd and Murdock2017:15; Estrada-Belli Reference Estrada-Belli, Freidel, Chase, Dowd and Murdock2017).

Beyond the ceremonial core, the residences of Noh K'uh are equally complex with smaller ceremonial areas, many of which follow the orientation of the E-Group (Juarez Reference Juarez, Millhauser, Morehart and Juarez2017:93). Some combinations of tall mounds and elongated structures resemble separate, but smaller E-Group formations (Figure 3). Similar patterns existed in Cival (Estrada-Belli Reference Estrada-Belli2011:68; Reference Estrada-Belli, Freidel, Chase, Dowd and Murdock2017:295). It is common to have a dozen or more mounds congregated on the same hill, and each are oriented at right angles of each other. Denser concentrations and larger mounds tend to be located along the tops of low-rising hills and include the construction of earthen platforms that can range anywhere between 20 and 100 m in length and width. In all cases, the aggregation of house-mounds appears to have had a substantial impact on the environment, as the outdoor spaces between mounds was artificially flattened (Juarez Reference Juarez, Millhauser, Morehart and Juarez2017). All hills associated with domestic structures have demonstrated signs of modification through terracing, infilling, and ancient excavation.

Conclusions and Discussion

Noh K'uh adds to an increasingly complex image of the Preclassic past, where the process of expansion and abandonment may have been interlinked. When small communities along the Usumacinta initiated Early Classic (AD 250–550) expansion towards large-scale polities, such as Yaxchilan, Piedras Negras, and Palenque, other important centers like Noh K'uh were abandoned by the end of the Late Preclassic Period. At the broader level of the Maya region, Noh K'uh's construction pattern also demonstrates influences from multiple Preclassic traditions including the lowland Maya and Isthmian sphere cultures.

Acknowledgments

This research was conducted with the permission of Mexico's Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia (INAH), and the town of Metzabok in Chiapas. This research was part of the much larger Mensäbäk Archaeological Project (MAP), directed by Joel Palka (Arizona State University) and Fabiola Sanchez, Chief Executive Officer of Xanvil A.C., and was supported by the National Endowment for the Humanities (#196404) awarded to Palka. This research was also funded by a Dissertation Fieldwork Grant (#8446) from the Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research, and a National Science Foundation Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grant (#1141371) awarded to Juarez.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this report can be found in informes archived at Mexico's Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia (INAH). Copies of all data are available from the same institution and the authors.

References

Aimers, James J., and Rice, Prudence M. 2006 Astronomy, Ritual, and the Interpretation of Maya ‘E-group’ Architectural Assemblages. Ancient Mesoamerica 17:79–96.Google Scholar
Arroyave, Ana Lucía, Pérez, Griselda, Quiroa, Fabiola, Marzahn-Ramos, Betsy, and Meléndez, Juan Carlos 2006 Análisis Preliminar de Cerámica, Temporada 2006. In Proyecto Regional Arqueologico Sierra de Lacandon, edited by Golden, Charles, Scherer, Andrew K., and Vásquez, Rosaura, pp. 75–82. Informe presented to La Dirección General de Patrimonio Cultural y Natural, Guatemala City.Google Scholar
Aveni, Anthony, and Dowd, Anne S. 2017 E Groups: Astronomy, Alignments, and Maya Cosmology. In Maya E Groups: Calendars, Astronomy, and Urbanism in the Early Lowlands, edited by Freidel, David A., Chase, Arlen F., Dowd, Anne. S., and Murdock, Jerry, pp. 75–94. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Blom, Fans 1924 Report on the Preliminary Work at Uaxactun Guatemala. In Carnegie Institution of Washington Yearbook, Vol. 23, pp. 217–219. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Chase, Arlen F., and Chase, Diane Z. 1995 External Impetus, Internal Synthesis, and Standardization: E Group Assemblages and the Crystallization of Classic Maya Society in the Southern Lowlands. In Emergence of Maya Civilization: The Transition from the Preclassic to the Early Classic, edited by Grube, Nikolai, pp. 87–101. Saurwein, Schwaben, Germany.Google Scholar
Chase, Arlen F., Dowd, Anne S., and Freidel, David A. 2017 The Distribution and Significance of E Groups: A Historical Background and Introduction. In Maya E Groups: Calendars, Astronomy, and Urbanism in the Early Lowlands, edited by Freidel, David A., Chase, Arlen F., Dowd, Anne S., and Murdock, Jerry, pp. 3–30. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Clark, John E. 1981 Early Preclassic Obsidian Industry of Paso de la Amada, Chiapas, Mexico. Estudios De Cultura Maya 13:265–284.Google Scholar
Clark, John E., and Pye, Mary E. 2011 Revisiting the Mixe-Zoque: A Brief History of the Preclassic Peoples of Chiapas. In The Southern Maya in the Late Preclassic: The Rise and Fall of an Early Mesoamerican Civilization, edited by Love, Michael and Kaplan, Jonathan H., pp. 24–45. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
Dixon, Keith 1959 Ceramics from Two Preclassic Periods at Chiapa De Corzo, Chiapas, Mexico. Papers of the New World Archaeological Foundation No. 4. New World Archaeological Foundation, Orinda, California.Google Scholar
Doyle, James A. 2012 Regroup on “E-Groups”: Monumentality and Early Centers in the Middle Preclassic Maya Lowlands. Latin American Antiquity 23:35–379.Google Scholar
Estrada-Belli, Francisco 2011 The First Maya Civilization: Ritual and Power before the Classic Period. Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
Estrada-Belli, Francisco 2017 The History, Function and Meaning of Preclassic E Groups in the Cival Region. In Maya E Groups: Calendars, Astronomy, and Urbanism in the Early Lowlands, edited by Freidel, David A., Chase, Arlen F., Dowd, Anne S., and Murdock, Jerry, pp. 293–327. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Freidel, David A., Chase, Arlen F., Dowd, Anne S., and Murdock, Jerry (Eds.) 2017 Maya E Groups: Calendars, Astronomy, and Urbanism in the Early Lowlands. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Golden, Charles, Scherer, Andrew K., Muñoz, A. René, and Vasquez, Rosaura 2008 Piedras Negras and Yaxchilan: Divergent Political Trajectories in Adjacent Maya Polities. Latin American Antiquity 19:249–274.Google Scholar
Golden, Charles, Scherer, Andrew, Muñoz, A. René, and Hruby, Zachary 2012 Polities, Boundaries, and Trade in the Classic Period Usumacinta River Basin. Mexicon 34:11–19.Google Scholar
Houston, Stephen, Hector Escobedo, Mark Child, Golden, Charles, and Muñoz, René 2003 The Moral Community: Maya Settlement transformation at Piedras Negras, Guatemala. In The Social Construction of Ancient Cities, edited by Smith, Monica L., pp. 212–253. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Inomata, Takeshi 2017 The Isthmian Origins of the E Group and Its Adoption in the Maya Lowlands. In Maya E Groups: Calendars, Astronomy, and Urbanism in the Early Lowlands, edited by Freidel, David A., Chase, Arlen F., Dowd, Anne S., and Murdock, Jerry, pp. 215–252. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Juarez, Santiago 2017 Maintaining Social Bonds during the Preclassic: An Incipient Urban Landscape. In Uneven Terrain: Archaeologies of Political Ecology, edited by Millhauser, John K., Morehart, Christopher T., and Juarez, Santiago, pp. 83–98. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, Vol. 29, Christopher Pool, general editor. Wiley, Hoboken, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Kappelman, Julia Guernsey 2004 Demystifying the Late Preclassic Izapan-Style Stela-Altar “Cult.” RES: Anthropology and Aesthetics 45:99–122.Google Scholar
Lee, Thomas A. Jr., and Hayden, Brian 1988 San Pablo Cave and El Cayo on the Usumacinta River, Chiapas, Mexico. Papers of the New World Archaeological Foundation No. 53. New World Archaeological Foundation, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah.Google Scholar
Lesure, Richard G. 1997 Early Formative Platforms at Paso de la Amada, Chiapas, Mexico. Latin American Antiquity 8:217–235.Google Scholar
López Bravo, Roberto 2005 El Preclásico Tardío en la región de Palenque: Perspectivas de investigación y datos recientes Mayab 18:45–55.Google Scholar
Love, Michael 2011 Cities, States, and City-State Culture in the Late Preclassic Southern Maya Region. In The Southern Maya in the Late Preclassic: The Rise and Fall of an Early Mesoamerican Civilization, edited by Love, Michael and Kaplan, Jonathan H., pp. 47–77. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
Lowe, Gareth W., and Agrinier, Pierre 1960 Mound 1, Chiapa de Corzo, Chiapas, Mexico. Papers of the New World Archaeological Foundation No. 7. New World Archaeological Foundation, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah.Google Scholar
Palka, Joel 2010 Informe al INAH de la Temporada 2010. Informe on file at the Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico City.Google Scholar
Ricketson, Oliver Garrison, and Ricketson, Edith Hill Bayles 1937 Uaxactun, Guatemala: Group E, 1926–1931. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Publication 477, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Rosenswig, Robert M. 2012 Agriculture and Monumentality in the Soconusco Region of Chiapas, Mexico. In Early New World Monumentality, edited by Burger, Richard L. and Rosenswig, Robert M. pp. 111–137. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Rosenswig, Robert M., and Mendelsohn, Rebecca R. 2016 Izapa and the Soconusco Region, Mexico, in the First Millenium A.D. Latin American Antiquity 27:357–377.Google Scholar
Salgado-Flores, Sebastián 2011 Operación NK-1: Excavaciones en el Sitio Noh Kuh, Operación 1 (NK-1). In Informe Temporada 2011, Proyecto Arqueologico Mensabak, Chiapas, Mexico, edited by Deeb, Rebecca, Kestle, Caleb, and Palka, Joel, pp. 81–89. Informe on file at the Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico City.Google Scholar
Scherer, Andrew K., Golden, Charles, and Vásquez, Rosaura 2006 Introducción a la Cuarta Temporada, 2006, del Proyecto Regional Arqueológico Sierra del Lacandón. In Proyecto Regional Arqueologico Sierra de Lacandon, edited by Scherer, Andrew K., Golden, Charles, and Vásquez, Rosaura. Informe presented to La Dirección General de Patrimonio Cultural y Natural, Guatemala City.Google Scholar
Sullivan, Timothy D. 2016 Processional Ceremonies in the Formative Period Chiapas Central Depression, Chiapas, Mexico. In Processions in the Ancient Americas, edited by Evans, Susan Toby pp. 27–51. Occasional Papers in Anthropology No. 33. Department of Anthropology, Penn State University.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Figure 1. Location of Noh K'uh in Chiapas, Mexico. Left: Map of the Preclassic region. Right: Map of the intermontane Mensäbäk Basin.

Figure 1

Figure 2. All known structures at Noh K'uh.

Figure 2

Table 1. Absolute Dates from Excavations in 2011. Processed by the Arizona Accelerator Mass Spectrometry Laboratory.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Top: Ceremonial E-Group complex. Bottom: Elongated structures and associated mounds.