The Platform Group

In 1999, test excavations began at the Platform Group because of its unusual spatial arrangement (Figure 14). A very large platform with numerous visible structure foundations and surface levels, the group did not seem to be arranged in the typical Maya pattern of being oriented along cardinal directions around a central plaza. The Platform Group also has no vaulted architecture, which is unusual considering its proximity to the monumental core of Chac. In addition, the Platform Group excavations have yielded a large group of human burials, summarized here, containing numerous complete vessels, including many tripod dishes. A more in-depth treatment of all Chac burials is the subject of a forthcoming article. Unusual mortuary patterns as well as artifact forms and decoration typical of Teotihuacan, including an extraordinary candelero-like vessel, a cylinder tripod, and numerous atlatl dart tips, were found in association with the substructure. According to Irwin Rovner and Suzanne Lewenstein (1997:27–28), atlatl, arrow, and spear points can be differentiated according to the width of the point, with a 95% confidence interval. In addition, points from Becan and Dzibilchaltun with a mean maximum thickness of 8 mm were classified as dart points. Based on their classification, many points at Chac, particularly from the Platform and Sacta Groups, are identified as atlatl darts. Given that dart points are typically found in Late or Terminal Classic-period contexts in the region (Rovner and Lewenstein 1997:28, 79), their appearance in earlier contexts at Chac might be significant because Teotihuacan warriors are almost always depicted as wielding spear throwers. These data suggest tangible evidence of a possible foreign group of merchant-warriors living at the site.

Schematic plan of the Platform Group showing the location of the Early Classic substructure beneath Structures 1 and 2 and various other platform superstructures dating to the Late Classic period. Thirteen Early to Middle Classic burials were found within the substructure, and three additional Late Classic burials were recovered from Structure 5. North is at the top; scale = 1:400.

At the Platform Group, the room interiors of three stone foundations (braces) for perishable buildings (Structures 1, 2, and 3) were tested by excavation and exposed horizontally. A round structure and two additional foundation braces were also tested. Based on ceramics, radiocarbon assays, and architectural stratigraphy, all surface structures are now dated to the Late Classic period. Horizontal exposures beneath and around Structures 1 and 2, however, revealed a substantial substructure that was leveled and filled with large stones. Then, the substructure was used as the building platform for the later structures. This explains the spatial orientation of the more typical Maya houses of the later phase: the last occupants used the substructure to build on and thus were restricted to its general form and placement. The substructure shows the remains of multiple rooms, interior corridors, and a possible interior patio area with a relatively thick stucco floor and boulder wall foundation (Figure 15). In fact, the lower building's large, rough-cut boulder stones are likely to have been used as foundation walls for a perishable (possibly flat) roof. There was no clear evidence of any vault stones. Only fragments of a stucco floor were preserved; however, in some locations, unbroken patches were 2–3 cm thick. The substructure was built on a layer of relatively sterile construction fill used to level the bedrock. The most intriguing aspect of the substructure was that it did not seem to follow traditional Maya spatial conventions. Typical Maya residential constructions consisted of small range structures (like those found in the later phase of the Platform Group) oriented along cardinal directions around a central plaza area. This substructure seems to consist of multiple rooms articulated with one another, some kind of interior corridor, and possibly an interior patio space. As a whole, the excavated portion is oriented between 15 and 20 degrees east of north, an angle very similar to the major axis of construction at Teotihuacan. Spatially, the substructure is very similar to central Mexican residential compounds at contemporaneous sites such as that of Teotihuacan and Matacapan.

Plan map of the Platform Group substructure showing the various wall alignments defining a multi-unit compound and circular foundation, stucco floor remains (dark shaded areas), and the locations of 12 of the 13 subfloor burials (small rotated squares).

Of the 13 human burials (11 actual and two probable) located at the Platform Group, all were found sealed below the substructure's stucco floor and therefore must date to the Early to Middle Classic periods. With one exception, all burials were primary ones interred in seated or tightly flexed positions (perhaps as part of burial bundles) within circular to oval-shaped stone-lined cists or crypts. Four subfloor burials were associated with worked animal bones, and two burials had jade beads associated with the cranium or cranium area, which suggests that they were placed within the mouth of the deceased (e.g. Cabrera Castro 1999b:516, 518). Skeletal analysis of 11 individuals with preserved diagnostic attributes identified six adult males, four adult females, and one adult whose sex is indeterminate (Tiesler 1999b, 2000). The male individuals appear very robust, indicating physically demanding labor; one male survived severe cranial trauma. Several individuals showed both dental mutilation and cranial deformation, suggesting positions of rank but not elite status (Tiesler 1999a). Based on trace-element analysis, one male individual and maybe one female showed a divergent nutritional pattern of a non-Puuc region origin, possibly outside the Maya area altogether. The complex mortuary patterns of multiple floor burials, small oval-circular crypt chambers, seated body positions, and non-Maya style artifact offerings imply significant contacts from outside the region. Some of these mortuary patterns, such as multiple floor burials and vessels interred with building walls, are similar to those identified at the Gulf Coast center of Matacapan (Mound 61) where Teotihuacanos are argued to have been living in Middle Classic times (a.d. 450–650; Santley 1989:136; Santley et al. 1985).

Other unusual burial elements rarely recovered from Puuc sites include pyrite plaque fragments, red cinnabar found either as small nodules or paintings on the stones of burial cists, and small flakes of mica. Of the 28 complete ceramic vessels recovered, most were early slate wares found in clear association with polychrome sherds (including Dos Arroyos polychromes) or orange-ware bichrome vessels stylistically dated to the Early Classic. Virtually all vessels were stucco-coated, with many showing resist painting, a decorative technique typical of Teotihuacan ceramics. One early slate-ware vessel shows a stylized image of a fanged deity with a flowing headdress and goggle eyes that closely resembles the central Mexico storm god (Tlaloc; Figure 16). This image was painted on the bottom of a tripod dish in red specular hematite. Another unusual vessel is an incised thin-walled, black-ware (unidentified) cylindrical vase with an out-flaring rim emulating vessel forms from Teotihuacan (Figure 17). Also, fragments of five bifacially worked projectile points, identified as atlatl dart tips, were recovered from early contexts within the substructure. These points are similar to a complete atlatl biface of dark gray Highland Mexican (Otumba?) obsidian retrieved from the bottom of a striated jar that was part of a cached ceremonial offering within the Great Pyramid Plaza in 1996 (Figure 18). A small charcoal sample associated with the atlatl point is radiocarbon dated to a.d. 620 (uncalibrated) The obsidian point, however, is likely to be earlier, because it shows evidence of reworking near the tip before being interred as an offering, suggesting that the point was curated or taken from an earlier context.

Tlaloc-like image with bird-of-prey? headdress painted in negative resist and red specular hematite on the bottom of a tripod dish with outflaring walls. The black oval in the central represents a “kill” hole. Scale = 10 cm.

Central Mexican–style vessels recovered from various burials of the Platform Group. Clockwise from left to right are a slate ware tripod dish (Chemax) with a storm god (Tlaloc) image, a black ware (unidentified) cylinder tripod with nubbin supports and incised decoration in the form of triangular elements with zones of punctate and skull-like or medallion appliques, a thin gray ware cylinder vase with an outflairing rim, and a black-on-orange single-hole box-like candelero. Scale = 13 cm.

Two bifacially worked obsidian dart points showing probable non-Guatemalan obsidian and workmanship similar to bifaces known for Teotihuacan. Scale = 10 cm.

A stucco-coated, black and brown-on-orange, single-hole, box-like ceramic receptacle, apparently for burning incense, in the form of a temple with a three-part cornice molding and sloping lower wall (Figure 19) may be a candelero. This unusual vessel was found with a pair of fine jade ear flares below the substructure floor in 1999. These artifacts were interred along with a seated adult male (Burial 3) inside a circular stone-lined chamber with red cinnabar painted on several stones. Although it has been suggested that this ceramic receptacle is a venenera (poison bottle)—a folk classification reserved for a rare group of miniature vessels whose function is unknown—this classification is dubious for the following reasons. First, similar square, smooth-surface candeleros and even modeled candeleros have been found in burial contexts dating to the Early–Middle Classic periods in central Mexico, Veracruz, and the Maya area (Gamio 1922; Kidder et al. 1946; Linné 1934; Müller 1978; Santley 1989:137; Sempowski and Spence 1994; Zabé 1999:22). Second, inside the single-holed receptacle from Chac and directly below the vessel opening there are dark, patchy areas beneath a stucco coating that appear to be residue from burning. The most likely conclusion is that these kinds of miniature vessels found at selected sites in the northern Maya area are candeleros that were manufactured as Mayanized renderings of this distinctive central Mexican culture diagnostic.

Black-on-orange, single-hole, box-like vessel that was covered with stucco believed to be a Mayanized rendering of a single-chamber Teotihuacan candelero. Scale = 10 cm.

Five small ceramic receptacles called veneneras were directly associated with five early burials recovered in 1999 (Figure 20). All are oval-shaped with annular supports, straight-walled necks, direct rims, and smoothly finished surfaces and are decorated with red resist-painted circles, small applique knobs along their sides, and perforations at the base for suspension by a small cord or string, likely from around the neck. Traditionally identified as receptacles for holding antivenin for snakebites or as bottles for fragrances, these identifications are highly unlikely. These vessels also have been suggested as receptacles for cinnabar (Varela and Braswell 2003:266). What we know for sure, however, is that they were burial offerings. They also may have been portable incense burners, considering that burned residue appears on the bottom of two bottles. Long-distance traders may have employed these items as objects for personal ritual as part of a merchant's traveling gear. Bishop Landa, for example, spoke of the nightly rituals of traveling merchants that involved the burning of small amounts of incense offered to Ek Chuah, the Postclassic God of merchants and travelers (Tozzer 1941:107). Karl Taube (1992:80) has argued convincingly that during the Classic period, God L was regarded as a form of the merchant god in western Yucatan, often appearing with merchant bundles and accompanied by the exotic quetzal or other long-feathered birds. God L figures appear on two similar ceramic bottles believed to be from Honduras and Guatemala (Anton 1970:Plate 48, Figure 56). Also, the absence of status, or vaulted, architecture at this large platform with its substantial substructure near the center of the site is certainly unusual. Together with the evidence of cranial deformation, tooth mutilation, and physically rigorous activity (including head trauma), one gets the impression of an economic group of long-distance traders at Chac. This group may have had little actual political power and was engaged in hazardous duty, perhaps on behest of powerful overlords locally and abroad.

Five “poison” (veneneras) bottles recovered from early burials within the substructure of the Platform Group. The black pen is 15 cm.

In 2000, excavations uncovered three additional human burials (14, 15, and 16) within the room interiors of a three-room foundation brace building (Structure 5) located on the extreme south side of the Platform Group. Judging from the building's stonework and ceramics recovered, Burials 14 and 15 appear to date to the Late Classic period and were interred in flexed but not seated positions as part of burial bundles—strands of cotton fiber were found in Burial 14. Bone fragments from Burial 16 were radiocarbon dated to the sixteenth century, and if this date is correct, it suggests limited activity at the site during the Contact period. However, a nearly complete black-ware (unidentified) cylinder tripod with nubbin supports was recovered showing typical Teotihuacan-style decoration such as a lower zone of decoration with alternating incised triple-lined triangular frameworks and punctate design (feathered frames) in addition to small skull-like inverted appliques (stylized medallions) set on the frame corners (Figure 21). This decorative imagery shows strong parallels to mural paintings at Teotihuacan, especially from the Ateteleco compound, but also resembles the Frieze of the Dream Lords at Tonina (Martin and Grube 2000:185). Also, a partial fine-orange tripod plate with hollow rattle supports and mica temper or inclusions has been identified as Type 30 from Matacapan (Christopher Pool, personal communication 2001), a Fine Buff ware dated to the Middle Classic period. The center interior of this vessel is also decorated with an incised skull design and sun motif similar to grater (molcajete) vessels from central Mexico (Figure 22). The form of the tripod plate is characteristic of the southern Gulf Coast and not the Maya lowlands (George Bey, personal communication 2002). In fact, both of these vessels appear to be foreign imports and must have been heirlooms because they were not directly associated with any burial and were recovered from within two separate rooms. These heirloom vessels must have been curated long before they were intentionally broken and deposited within this Late Classic building.

Brown-black ware (unidentified) cylinder tripod with nubbin supports and incised decoration in the form of triangular elements with zones of punctate and skull-like or medallion appliques. Scale = 10 cm.

A portion of an orange tripod dish with mica inclusions identified as Fine Buff ware from Matacapan showing an incised skull-like decoration on the bottom (molcajete form). Scale = 10 cm.

The Sacta Group

Excavations also took place at another substantial platform with two visible surface structures, a foundation brace and a bare platform, located atop a high hill west of the Great Pyramid. Dubbed the Sacta Group, a typical Late Classic Maya two-room foundation brace (Structure 1) located near the east edge of the basal was tested in 2000 (Figure 23). Extensive excavations in 2001 below the late-phase architecture in the Sacta Group revealed a sizable substructure extending over most of the platform surface (Figure 24). As with the Platform Group substructure, it appears that the buildings of the late phase of occupation were constructed on top of the early structure once it had been filled and leveled. Evidence from beneath the west room of Structure 1 indicates that one individual and one animal (Sacta Burials 6 and 7) were buried in the early structure at the time of leveling. Then the burials and the early structure were covered with stones and sealed with a thick layer of unsmoothed stucco. Probably because of its location at the top of a hill, the Sacta substructure remains more intact than the Platform Group substructure, despite the leveling process.

Reconstructed schematic plan of the Sacta Group showing the Early–Middle Classic substructure. Structure 1 to the northeast (above the circular depression) and a bare platform to the west (with hatched line border) were superstructures dating to the Late Classic period. Eleven Early–Middle Classic burials were found within the substructure, recovered from different substructure contexts. North is at the top; scale = 1:300.

Plan map of the Sacta Group showing the layout of the early substructure, the stucco-lined depressions beneath the Late Classic Structure 1, and locations of stucco floor segments, burials, and cached offerings after excavation. The apartment-compound–style substructure shows three room blocks, multiple interior rooms, an altar, corridors, interior patios, a possible subfloor drain conduit, and the remains of an outer wall segment that may have encircled the platform.

The Sacta substructure was constructed from large, rough-cut boulder stones of which some appear to have been roughly faced. Two features deviate and use a different style of stonework. A small step or platform edge on the south side was constructed of an alignment of smaller, well-faced stones underlying the large, rough-cut walls. Therefore, it seems to be associated with the early structure rather than any late occupation. The inclusion of spalls (cuñas) does, however, differentiate the smaller faced stones from the later faced walls, leading to the conclusion that this feature is a step or platform edge that split the interior patio area into two levels. A second stone alignment to the northwest is similarly constructed and consists of a small line of faced stones that parallel and underlie the large rough substructure wall. This appears to be a remnant of some kind of drainage system because it follows the slope of the bedrock and leads in the general direction of two stucco basins and a chultun farther to the southeast (see later).

Several areas of preserved floor were associated with the substructure. The most intact area was located underneath the east room of Structure 1—a thick, unbroken stucco floor very similar to that found in association with the Platform Group substructure. Two unusual subfloor features were found under the substructure floor and walls. The features consisted of two pits in the bedrock plastered with stucco to form subfloor basins. One of them (Stucco Basin #2) was rather small and contained little besides rocks and debris. The other (Stucco Basin #1) was a very large feature, both in diameter (approximately 2 m) and in depth (about 1 m). This larger basin contained three circular stone cists and the remains of five subadult burials (Sacta Burials 1–5; Tiesler 2000, 2001). Three, or perhaps four, of the burials were sandwiched between partially complete Early–Middle Classic vessels. One such vessel was a Chimbote Cream polychrome bowl from Campeche. On this bowl, one stylized Maya glyph was repeated multiple times around the rim, and two bands were painted in red specular hematite above a brilliant sunburst decoration on the interior and exterior basal surfaces.

Burial 5 was recovered from a tripod dish covered by a large Chemax water jar fragment. On the bottom of the tripod dish a decoration was painted in resist representing a stylized speech scroll (Figure 25). A similar tripod vessel, from the 2000 season, contained another child burial (Burial 4) with a stylized Tlaloc face and a bird of prey headdress. These mortuary patterns strongly suggest a ceremonial offering that involves ritual sacrifices perhaps dedicated to the rain gods. The question is, which rain gods? Interestingly, at Teotihuacan young children were often sacrificed to Tlalocs, the Mexican rain gods, and infants who died at birth were placed on large fragments of pottery or intentionally broken plates (Cabrera Castro 1999a, 1999b:529; Sanchez Alaniz and Gonzalez Miranda 1999:402–403; Serrano and Lagunas 1974). The similarities to the Sacta burials are striking. These contextual data indicate that the child remains and associated ceramics may have been dedicatory sacrifices.

Tripod dish (Chemax) showing a stylized speech scroll in negative resist. This lower of two intentionally broken Early Classic vessels held the remains a child or infant (Burial 5) placed on the floor along the east wall of Stucco Basin 2.

Burial 3, a well-preserved sub-adult interred in a flexed position lying on its right side, was thought to be intrusive postdating the substructure since it was superimposed above the other burials. Radiocarbon dating of the actual bone fragments place this burial in the late Terminal Classic to early Postclassic periods (a.d. 1130 ± 40 and a.d. 1250 ± 40), considering the wide standard deviations. The late radiocarbon dating of bone samples from the Sacta Group Burial 3 (and Platform Group Burial 16) may be inaccurate, since numerous burned roots penetrated near the burial and the large striated jar covering Burial 3 appears to be an early-style unslipped ware and vessel form. The burial was also found underneath an intact early stucco floor from the early phase of occupation. Direct radiocarbon dating of bone can be problematic, especially in contexts with noticeable root activity (Beta Analytic, personal communication 2000).

The walls of the substructure clearly overlie both basins. The floor of the substructure over the basins was also notable because of how thick and intact it was, possibly indicating that the basins were sealed with some care. The basins may have been created and utilized prior to the construction of the building or just before the one room was constructed.

Excavations in 2002 explored the west half of the Sacta Group, including a Late Classic-style platform with visible facing stones found to overlie a substructure at a higher surface level than the other substructure remains. These data show that this sector was one of three connected room blocks or apartment clusters adjacent to three interior patio spaces. The entire complex appears to have been surrounded by a high stone wall about 1 m thick, based on the finding of footing stones on the south platform edge and numerous boulder stones almost certainly from a fallen wall now lying off-platform around the perimeter of the Sacta Group. There were also possible entryways or wall openings aligned with staircases on the north and east sides and another opening leading to a large chultun on the west. On the northwest edge of the platform, a circular stone alignment was cleared of boulders and tested. At 50 cm below the surface, a 1 m thick boulder wall with abobe-like mortar was encountered running north–south and connected to the nearby substructure below the Late Classic platform. About 20 cm farther down, two perpendicular boulder walls running east appeared and defined two adjacent rooms areas. At 1.5 m below surface, a red-brown stucco floor was found in the north room area and continued east toward the platform edge; the south room floor was destroyed by considerable root action. These rooms were clearly integrated with the nearby substructure to form an L-shaped building and adjacent patio area on the platform's northwest side.

Abundant Early Classic pottery, including a cached thin orange-ware bowl placed over a red-ware bowl (Cache 1), came from a small stone cist built into the wall of the substructure room block near the south-center of the platform. This particular vessel, provisionally identified as Kinich Naranja, a poorly known orange ware found in early contexts at Edzna and Becan, shows surface finishing characteristic of San Martin Orange ware from Teotihuacan (Figure 26). This includes spot burnishing over striated surfaces by scraping with a serrated tool and a pocked surface near the base (Rattray 2001:265). Burial 9 was found east of Cache 1 beneath the floor of the central room block below an inverted ring-stand bowl set inside a striated water jar that was stuccoed in place. Fragments of an unidentified bichrome red-on-natural dish and a substantial number of thin orange-ware sherds were also recovered. These ceramics are highly unusual and show little resemblance to the standard pottery known for the Puuc region (George Bey, personal communication 2002). Bifacial points for atlatl darts (N = 7), a weapon emblematic of Teotihuacan, were also recovered, and part of a pyrite encrusted slate disk with two perforations was associated with one of two seated burials (Burials 10 and 11) found near three circular stone-lined cists with slab lids in the room areas of the northwest substructure. These cists once contained burials because fragments of human long bone, tripod dishes, and one burial bottle were recovered, but rodent activity and perhaps pre-Hispanic looting disturbed the original contexts.

Cached orange-ware bowl placed over an early-style red-ware bowl in a cist feature near Burial 9 of the central room block of the Sacta substructure. The orange-ware bowl, provisionally identified as Kinich Naranja, shows spot burnishing over a scraped striated surface and pocked surfaces near the base.

The Sacta substructure possesses very unusual spatial characteristics. These features are more typical of contemporaneous central Mexican domestic structures than of those from the Maya area. Horizontal excavation revealed a substructure of extraordinary size and unusual configuration. What initially appeared to be stone alignments for platform retaining walls turned out to be multicourse stone walls with a single east entryway delimiting an estimated 600 m² of interior residential space. Excavation shows that this interior space was organized as multiple rooms or room blocks with the remains of stucco floors with interior patios, corridors, a rectangular altar, and a sub-floor drain conduit. The substructure clearly covers nearly the entire surface area of the Sacta Platform oriented between 15 and 20 degrees east of north. The sheer size and non-Maya residential characteristics in addition to abundant early-style pottery, including a substantial number of thin orange-ware sherds and numerous dart points for atlatls, strongly indicate a Teotihuacan-like residential structure dating to the Middle Classic period (Linné 1934; Manzanilla 1993; Millon 1973).

Two charcoal samples from the Sacta Group apartment compound substructure were submitted for radiocarbon dating. Only one sample produced a viable date. The other sample was dated to historic times and came from a flexed child burial (Sacta Burial 8). This burial was found within a large Chemax triple-handle water jar and large rim sherd from a Chemax urn placed upside down underneath a substructure wall. The charcoal sample came from between the vessels and must be intrusive. This other C-14 sample was dated to a.d. 660 ± 40 (uncalibrated) and came from within the stucco covering Sacta Burial 6. This important terminal date for the substructure corresponds to the Early–Middle Classic pottery and complete vessels. The Sacta Group apartment compound must have been constructed and occupied by a.d. 550, if not earlier.

In summary, the current data suggest the following construction sequence for this important and unusual residential structure for the Maya area. In the Middle Classic (approximately a.d. 550), stucco basins are constructed and then utilized in a ritual manner. They could have been built before or at the same time as the larger structure. The interment of four, or perhaps five, child burials is probably a dedicatory offering for the construction of the building or perhaps just the overlying room, since the sub-floor drain conduits seem to be associated. Dedicatory sacrifices and the burial of children between ceramic vessels were both central Mexican ritual behaviors at the time. The stucco basins are filled in and sealed, and walls are built directly above them. The substructure floor over the basins was particularly thick and intact, which may indicate that special care was taken in laying down the floors to seal the basins. Immediately after, the substructure was either constructed or expanded by using large, rough stones walls at least three courses high, with some form of perishable superstructure. The large interior space of this building is divided into multiple rooms, articulating onto patio areas.

In the Late Classic, the substructure was leveled and ritually terminated. As part of this event, an adult female accompanied by an animal, such as a dog (Burial 8), is buried in a stone cist, and the cist is sealed with a thick stucco mixture. Several chunks of charcoal were mixed in with the stucco; a charcoal sample has given an uncalibrated C-14 date of a.d. 660 date for this terminal event. Subsequently, most walls were knocked down, including the surrounding wall, especially in what would become the plaza areas south of the typical Maya foundation brace and bare platform. This is why the early room remains are more fragmentary in these areas. A large Chumayel slateware jar was clearly intrusive in the east substructure at this time. The large boulder stone walls from the substructure were then used as the retaining walls for building platforms across the surface of this impressive hilltop group.

The recovery of 24 human burials beneath of the floors of two large multi-unit residential substructures resembling Teotihuacan-style apartment compounds show mortuary patterns and burial furniture strongly suggestive of central Mexican traditions. Although the early burial patterns for the Puuc region are poorly known, the available data from Oxkintok and Xkipche suggest that extended body position was the preferred manner of interment (López Vázquez and Fernández Marquínez 1987:42–43; Reindel 1997:203, 237; Rivera D. and Ferrándiz Martín 1989:69–70). The largest pre-Hispanic burial population for northern Yucatan comes from the northern coastal site of Xcambo, where more than 500 burials where recovered between 1996 and 2000 (Sierra Sosa and Martínez Lizarraga 2001). Xcambo had a significant population in the Early Classic period, and the most common methods of burial interment at that time were flexed in a fetal position lying on the right site, partially extended lying on the back with the legs flexed, and fully extended (Sierra Sosa and Martínez Lizarraga 2001:8). Burial patterns at Dzibilchaltun seem also to favor extended burials, especially during the Early Phase II (Andrews IV and Andrews V 1980:319, Table 8). At Chac, in contrast, there are no extended burials, most are seated, and some are flexed in a tight fetal position on the left side more than the right placed within apsidal or circular stone-lined cists. Perhaps not coincidentally, seated and flexed burials within circular pits (fosas) are the most common form of skeletal position at Teotihuacan, while extended burials are rare (Cabrera Castro 1999b:506–507).

The presence of high quantities of obsidian (N = 92, 52% of site total), most of which are prismatic blades of gray obsidian, are visually sourced to El Chayal, Guatemala (following Braswell et al. 2000). The significance of this is debatable. Green Pachuca obsidian is often interpreted as an indicator of Teotihuacan influence, and a lack of it might be taken to mean that the residents of Chac did not have a strong relationship with central Mexico. However, if the El Chayal obsidian source was under the control of the site of Kaminaljuyu during the Early–Middle Classic period, then it is quite possible that a reliance on El Chayal obsidian is a component of the Teotihuacan influence at Chac. Twenty-one obsidian samples were tested by elemental neutron activation in 1996; 20 were from El Chayal, and 1 was from the San Martin Jilotepeque source (Smyth 1998:Table 2). A chemical analysis of all remaining obsidians from Chac is currently planned. However, seven gray samples based on color, opacity, and texture do not appear to be Guatemalan obsidians and are likely highland Mexican imports. In addition, the base of a bifacially worked obsidian point (atlatl) or short laurel-leaf knife recovered from early contexts of the Sacta substructure shows workmanship typical of Teotihuacan and visually appears to be a highland Mexican source, possibly Otumba gray obsidian (Figure 18; Michael Spence, personal communication 2003). Also, the atlatl dart point of probable Mexican obsidian mentioned earlier and seven green Pachuca obsidian blade fragments came from elite contexts in the Pyramid Plaza. Pachuca obsidian is from construction fill, and it is unclear whether those fragments are early or late. Numerous other projectile points from atlatl darts (N = 31), virtually all from the Platform and Sacta Groups, are mostly manufactured from local chert but also support the presence of resident foreigners who were familiar with central Mexican military weaponry. The combined data from both monumental and domestic contexts suggest an intense relationship with Teotihuacan and/or with one of its surrogates that probably went well beyond mere long-distance trade and influence.

The possibility of residential architecture organized as an ethnic enclave at Chac is supported by the archaeological data presented here. This interpretation requires a discussion of what precisely is meant by the term ethnic enclave and the range of archaeological correlates that can be expected to be associated.

Matacapan

Located within the Tuxtla Mountains of southern Veracruz, Mexico, the site of Matacapan has provided extensive archaeological materials that suggest strong ties to Teotihuacan. Santley and colleagues (1987:45) describe the Teotihuacan presence at the site as “a complex of ritual-ceremonial, culinary, and various special-function artifacts that consistently occur together both in refuse middens adjacent to domestic structures and in contexts near public buildings.” The majority of the central Mexican–style materials can be stylistically related to artifacts present at Teotihuacan during the Tlamimilolpa, Xolalpan, and Metepec phases (a.d. 400–700). Almost all of the Teotihuacan-related material at Matacapan consists of locally made copies and imitations of Teotihuacan types rather than imports from the Basin of Mexico. The assemblage consists of cylindrical tripod bowls, single- or double-chambered subrectangular candeleros, marionette figurines, princess figurines, braseros, incensarios, adornos, effigy vessels, rectangular seal stamps, metates with talud-tablero tripod supports, Tlaloc figurines, floreros, and a few sherds of Thin Orange pottery. Matacapan also possesses Teotihuacan-style architecture (Ortiz 1990). Mound 2 was built in a typical Teotihuacan style, with two tiers of talud-tablero construction, a frontal stairway with balustrades, and a red painted clay exterior. Mound 1 likely had a similar talud-tablero style and was associated with deposits of Teotihuacan-style artifacts at its base. Matacapan is also noted for the presence of Teotihuacan-style residential architecture. Mound 61 is a complex of domestic structures organized into room groups around patios and separated from one another by corridors. The wall orientations on Mound 61 were also within one degree of the standard Teotihuacan orientation (Figure 27). The burials in Mound 61 were located beneath the house floors, with the bodies in the flexed position. Perinatals were buried in vessels, and grave goods associated with adults were mainly cylindrical tripod vessels and imitation copaware (Santley et al. 1987:46). These burial patterns are very similar to mortuary customs at Teotihuacan. The full complex of Teotihuacan-style artifacts appears mainly in a spatially restricted area known as the Teotihuacan Barrio, although Teotihuacan-style artifacts are found in every excavation with a Middle Classic occupation and extend well into the countryside (Santley and Arnold 1996). The broad participation in a foreign tradition, mortuary patterns, pervasive foreign-style artifacts, and Teotihuacan-style architecture (monumental and domestic) all fit the criteria for an enclave.

Detailed plan of Operation IV from Mound 61 at Matacapan (after Santley et al. 1985).

Santley and colleagues (1987) suggest that there was a Teotihuacan enclave that persisted at Matacapan during the Middle Classic period. They argue that two levels of ritual behavior appear to have been present. First, talud-tablero architecture and incensarios are present in public contexts, perhaps indicating a supra-household ritual complex. Second, candeleros, figurines, cylindrical tripod vases, and seal stamps generally occurred in private contexts with domestic refuse suggesting a family or household ritual complex. Central Mexican burial style of household members is also a component of this behavior. Santley and colleagues (1987:46) argue that the ritual complexes visible in the architectural record reflect a multilevel ritual ideology crucial to maintaining the ethnic identity of the enclave. In addition to a household-level ritual complex, the variety of Teotihuacan-style artifacts indicates that food was being prepared and consumed in a central Mexican manner. It was therefore important for the enclave to perpetuate non-local traditions internally, as well. Spence (1996:344) notes that enclave residents were concerned with the enculturation of the young. Inherent in this argument is that the enclave had a male-to-female ratio of residents that was amenable to endogamy. Otherwise, local spouses would be likely to bring their own traditions into the enclave. These factors were integral to the maintenance of the population as a distinct ethnic group.

Kaminaljuyu

The Guatemalan site of Kaminaljuyu also provides evidence of Teotihuacan influence during the Esperanza phase (a.d. 500). While excavations at the site have been somewhat curtailed in recent years because of the expansion of Guatemala City, earlier work at Kaminaljuyu showed that Teotihuacan-style structures were built in several localities of the site. Many central Mexican–style artifacts have also been discovered with large concentrations in burials.

Several structures at Kaminaljuyu incorporate talud-tablero architecture: the later phases of Mounds A and B (A-7, A-8, B-4, and B-5); Structures A, E, J, G, F, and K at C-II-4; and Structure E3 at the Palangana. Other structures that are probably executed in the talud-tablero style include Structures D, P, and D2 at the Monument Plaza; Roosevelt Mound (F-VI-3, excavated by Morales and Tercero); and the small mound south of the Palangana (excavated by Espinoza; Cheek 1977:133). It is important to note that the ratio between talud and tablero is different at Kaminaljuyu from that at Teotihuacan. At Teotihuacan, the tablero is at least three times as large as the talud, while at Kaminaljuyu the ratio is roughly one to one. The latter is also found at Matacapan (Robert Santley, personal communication 2003), and there is considerable variability in the talud-to-tablero ratio at Teotihuacan (Cowgill 2003:321–322). A further architectural similarity between the two sites is the inclusion of balustrades on the staircases of Middle Classic structures at Kaminaljuyu (Cheek 1977:133).

Many of the construction techniques used at Kaminaljuyu are similar to those used at Teotihuacan. The most noted similarity is the use of concrete to surface structures. Called piedrine at Kaminaljuyu, it is a mixture of clay, lime, and small angular stones. The structural fill of monumental buildings at both Kaminaljuyu and Teotihuacan consists of a distinctive type of volcanic material called talpetate at Kaminaljuyu and tepetate at Teotihuacan. However, many of the construction techniques were different. Structures at Kaminaljuyu do not use the same “honeycomb matrix” pattern found in the Temple of Quetzalcoatl, nor do they use vertical tree trunks to redistribute weight and transmit stress directly into the ground (tableros were inherently unstable). The lack of these features may, however, be due to the fact that the structures at Kaminaljuyu were smaller and did not require such techniques. It is equally possible that the builders were familiar with the form of talud-tablero architecture but not with the specific construction techniques. This scenario would imply that talud-tablero structures at Kaminaljuyu were built by local architects and not by central Mexicans (Cheek 1977:132).

There are two possible Teotihuacan-style residential compounds at Kaminaljuyu, called “Multi-Chambered Rectangular Structures” by Cheek (1977:137). The first was uncovered beneath a Late Classic ballcourt (F-V-1) north of Mounds A and B. Enough of the structure remained to indicate that it was a secular building used for housing, administration, or storage. Edwin Shook and A. Ledyard Smith (1942:265) described it as a “multi-chambered affair without supporting platform. In its piedrine floor were postholes and on it were butts of several free standing walls of mold made adobes faced with pumice blocks and piedrine.” This structure may have been similar to a Teotihuacan apartment compound but smaller in scale (Cheek 1977:137; Kidder et al. 1946:249). The second possible structure is located in the C-II-4 complex. It was constructed and surfaced with mud, and it contained built-in furniture. Interior walls were constructed of adobe bricks. Obviously, the evidence for Teotihuacan-style residential structures at Kaminaljuyu is very fragmentary and not well documented.

The burials from Kaminaljuyu are primarily from elite contexts (within public structures). The mortuary pattern for the Esperanza period, as seen in Mounds A and B (except for A-I and A-II) and in Tombs VI and III at the Palangana, is to place the body seated upright in “tailor fashion” facing south (Kidder et al. 1946:88). All of the bodies faced south, even when the major axes of the buildings did not. This is a continuation of an earlier local burial practice; however, the style of positioning the bodies is not continued from the Terminal Formative period. At that time, burials at Kaminaljuyu were placed extended on their backs, with their heads to the north and their hands either at the sides or together at the groin (Cheek 1977:143). The typical form of burial architecture was a pit-like shaft. Sacrificed attendants were often placed within the burial, as well.

Oxygen-isotope analysis of a sample of skeletons from Kaminaljuyu indicates that a significant number of the Middle Classic-period burials were foreigners. The study shows that, with one exception, there are no direct ties to Teotihuacan based on comparison to a sample from Tlajinga 33 (White et al. 2000). However, this does not necessarily rule out the possibility that the Teotihuacan state did not politically control the site. Christine White and colleagues have suggested that perhaps the other foreign group present at Kaminaljuyu was from the Peten. It should be noted that the Early Classic Peten (centered on Tikal) is beginning to look increasingly like a power base for Teotihuacan and, in fact, may have been a base for interactions with Copan (Fash and Fash 2000; Stuart 2000). Therefore, it is still possible that foreigners at Kaminaljuyu were Teotihuacan-affiliated elites from Tikal.

Mortuary offerings from the aforementioned tombs included cylindrical tripod vessels, “cream pitchers,” obsidian blades, jade, and shells. Ring-stand bowls were extremely common, as were pyrite plaques. A mano and a metate were included in all tombs except for A-III and B-VI. Also, a crude pottery bowl with some kind of burned material within it was often found in the burial (Cheek 1977:144). Many of the artifacts found in the tombs were almost certainly imported from Teotihuacan or made locally in a Teotihuacan style. The orientation, positioning, burial architecture, and artifact styles are all quite different from lowland Maya practices (Kidder et al. 1946:255–256).

Tikal

The earliest appearance of Teotihuacan-style artifacts and architecture occurs at the beginning of the Early Classic period in the Mundo Perdido complex of the site. Specifically, there are several talud-tablero buildings, a “ballcourt” marker (dubbed the “Marcador”) identical to one found at La Ventilla in Teotihuacan (but with a Maya hieroglyphic inscription), and several burials associated with Teotihuacan-style ceramic vessels (Fash and Fash 2000:440; Laporte and Fialko 1995). Further, the Manik 2 phase (a.d. 300–400) elite group 6C-XVI (from which the Marcador came) was constructed with many of the spatial conventions of Teotihuacan-style apartment compounds. These conventions include multiple rooms grouped around small plazas, talud-tablero facades, a small talud-tablero altar, porticos, and narrow passageways (Laporte and Fialko 1995:65; Spence 1996:346–347). However, Spence (1996:348) notes that the domestic materials, some of the murals, and some of the ritual behavior seem to be mainly Maya in character. While the group seems to have been constructed by those familiar with Teotihuacan symbols and conventions, it is difficult to ascertain from the archaeology alone what the ethnicity of the resident group was. The North Acropolis also shows evidence of a relationship with Teotihuacan. Highland ceramic forms similar to those from Kaminaljuyu are abundant. Elite tombs were found that included foreign ceramics—some a mix of highland and Maya styles; some in a pure Teotihuacan style. Many of these ceramics were of local manufacture, but some were also probably imported from central Mexico (Stuart 2000:468).

Tikal is also extraordinary in the wealth of information that can be gleaned from its epigraphic record. The famous event of 8.17.1.4.12 11 Eb 15 Mac (a.d. 31 January 378) has been studied exhaustively for decades because of its importance in helping to elucidate the relationship between Tikal and Teotihuacan. Recent work by David Stuart (2000) and Simon Martin and Nikolai Grube (2000) has reinterpreted the event as an entrada by Teotihuacanos who subsequently usurped the dynastic line of Tikal before establishing a power base among numerous other sites of the Peten heartland (Uaxactun, Bejucal, and Rio Azul; Harrison 1999). The new ruler of Tikal, Nun Yax Ayin, was in fact the son of Spear-thrower Owl, who may have been the ruler of Teotihuacan. Numerous stelae depict Siyah K'ak' (probably a central Mexican general) and Nun Yax Ain wearing full Teotihuacan-style regalia. An important ceramic vase from 6C-XVI seems to actually depict the journey of these prestigious Teotihuacanos from their city to Tikal (Martin and Grube 2000:29). Interestingly, they seem to be leaving their families behind. This may be the reason that they married local Maya women. If so, it could be that the Teotihuacano group became increasingly acculturated as time passed. This would explain the lack of extensive central Mexican domestic artifacts in 6C-XVI, for example (Schele and Friedel 1990:161; Spence 1996:348). The archaeological and epigraphic evidence from Tikal seem to support the idea that a group of male Teotihuacanos arrived in a.d. 378, established themselves as the rulers of the area, took Mayan wives, and became increasingly acculturated over time.