2018
DOI: 10.1080/00934690.2018.1438690
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Maya “Protoclassic” from the Perspective of Recent Research at Nakum, Peten, Guatemala

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…1), as revealed by the recent investigations by the Jagiellonian University (Źrałka et al . 2011, 2018). Unlike most centres in the region, which were abandoned toward the end of the Preclassic period, Nakum experienced continuous occupation and growth.…”
Section: Archaeological Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…1), as revealed by the recent investigations by the Jagiellonian University (Źrałka et al . 2011, 2018). Unlike most centres in the region, which were abandoned toward the end of the Preclassic period, Nakum experienced continuous occupation and growth.…”
Section: Archaeological Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2006; Źrałka et al . 2018: 236). In the Central Maya lowlands, some of the more noticeable and drastic changes that occurred during the Protoclassic period include the decline of El Mirador and other major Preclassic centres, the disruption of existing trade routes and exchange networks, and the emergence of new socio‐political orders that paved the way to royal kingship—an element epitomising Classic Maya civilisation (Reese‐Taylor and Walker 2002: 87–88).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(Hammond 1999:Figure 1; Hammond et al 1992:Figure 5) and a probable early Middle Preclassic burial from Ka'kabish, Belize (Haines 2012). Related objects probably kept as heirlooms include those from Chacsinkin, Yucatan (Andrews 1986:Figures 4–5, 7a, and 8c; Andrews 1987:Figure 1b), a large tadpole spoon from Uxbenka (Healy and Awe 2001), a tadpole spoon from the Cenote of Sacrifice at Chichen Itza (Proskouriakoff 1974:Plate 38a7), as well as an oval spoon found in the Late Classic Burial 1 at Nakum (Źrałka et al 2011a:Figure 7, 2012:Figures 15 and 17) and an oval spoon from Burial PNT-042 from the Mundo Perdido complex at Tikal (Laporte and Fialko 1995:Figure 28). Greenstone spoons are generally attributed to the Gulf Coast Olmec (Andrews 1986; Parsons 1993; Pohorilenko 1996), and they are also found on the southern Gulf Coast (Benson and de la Fuente 1996:Cat.…”
Section: Development Of a Ceremonial Complexmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A limited number of ritual deposits with comparable stone spheres have been found in the Maya lowlands. Examples include the Early K'atabche’ (Late Preclassic) Burial 1–32 and Terminal K'atabche’ (Protoclassic) “Triadic cache” from K'axob (McAnany 2004:72), Nakum Ofrenda 8 dating to the Protoclassic period (Źrałka et al 2011b:Figure 6, 2012:Figure 24), Protoclassic caches from Caracol (Arlen Chase and Diane Chase, personal communication 2013), deposits from Yaxuna (Travis Stanton, personal communication 2013), a niche in the front face of Structure H-XVI at Uaxactun associated with probable Protoclassic lip-to-lip vessels, ceramic disks, and stone disks (Götting 2011), and stone spheres placed in front of Structure 2A-Sub 4, dating to a.d. 50–100, at Cerros (Robin Robertson, personal communication 2016). In different time periods, Cache 5 of Cahal Pech dating to the early Middle Preclassic Cunil phase contained 20 limestone spheres (Garber and Awe 2006), and quartz pebbles were deposited in some caves during the Classic period (Brady et al 2005; Brady and Rissolo 2006).…”
Section: Development Of a Ceremonial Complexmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Early Middle Preclassic ceramics from the Maya lowlands outside of the Pasión region include the followings: (1) the Swasey and Bladen complexes and related materials reported from Cuello (Kosakowsky 1987; Kosakowsky and Pring 1998), Colha (Valdez 1987), K'axob (López Varela 2004), San Estevan (Cruz Alvarado and Rosenswig 2009; Rosenswig 2008), and Ka'Kabish (Haines et al 2014); (2) the Cunil and Early Jenney Creek complexes and related materials from Cahal Pech (Awe 1992; Cheetham 2005; Healy et al 2004b; Sullivan et al 2009), Blackman Eddy (Brown and Garber 2005; Garber et al 2004a, 2004b), Pacbitun (Healy 1990; Healy et al 2004a; Powis et al 2009), Xunantunich (LeCount and Mixter 2016), Actuncan (LeCount and Mixter 2016), and Holmul (Callaghan and Neivens de Estrada 2016; Estrada-Belli 2012; Neivens de Estrada 2014); (3) the Eb complex from Tikal (Culbert 1977; Laporte and Valdés 1993), Uaxactun (Cheetham 2005), Nakum (Źrałka et al 2012), and the Ah Pam complex or Eb-related materials from the Peten Lake region (D. Rice 1976; P. Rice 1979, 2009, 2015); (4) the Chiuaan complex from the Middle Usumacinta region (Rands 1987, 2002); and (5) the Ek complex and related materials from Komchen and Kiuic (Andrews et al 2008) (see Figure 2). Among them, Cuello, Cahal Pech, and Blackman Eddy provide a substantial number of early radiocarbon dates, and have been foci of chronological discussion.…”
Section: Early Lowland Maya Ceramicsmentioning
confidence: 99%