Living on the Edge: Core/Periphery Relations in Ancient Southeastern Mesoamerica
Author(s): Edward M. Schortman and Patricia A. Urban
Source: Current Anthropology, Vol. 35, No. 4 (Aug. - Oct., 1994), pp. 401-430
Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological
Research
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2743992 .
Accessed: 29/01/2011 10:39
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress. .
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
The University of Chicago Press and Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research are collaborating
with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Current Anthropology.
http://www.jstor.org
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY Volume 35, No. 4, August-October I994
? I994 byThe Wenner-Gren
forAnthropological
OOII-3204/94/3504-0003$2.50
Research.All rightsreserved
Foundation
Living on the Edge
Relationsin
Core/Periphery
AncientSoutheastern
Mesoamerica'
by EdwardM. Schortmanand
PatriciaA. Urban
at KenyonCollege(Gambier,Ohio 43022, U.S.A.).Bothreceived
theirPh.D.'s fromtheUniversity
ofPennsylvania
)Schortman
havingdonehis undergraduate
workat theUniversity
ofDelawareand Urbanhersat CornellUniversity).
Theyhave directed
researchin the LowerMotaguaValley,Guatemala,and Middle
Rio Ulua drainageand theNaco Valley,Honduras.Schortman's
researchinterestsareprehistoric
intersocietal
interaction
processes,ancientpoliticaleconomies,and identity
formation
in the
ancientand modernworlds.Urban'sincludesettlement
pattern
studies,long-term
demographic
processes,ceramics,ancientcraft
specializationand manufacturing
processes,and world-systems
theory.Amongtheirjointpublicationsare The SoutheastMaya
ofTexas Press,i986), "Modeling
Periphery
(Austin:University
Interaction
in Prehistory"
Interregional
Method
(Archaeological
and TheoryII :37-9 5), "The Southeastern
Zone Viewedfromthe
East: LowerMotagua-Chamelecon,"
in The SoutheastClassic
Maya Zone, editedbyE. Booneand G. Willey,pp. 223-67 (Washington,D.C.: DumbartonOaks),and the collectionResources,
Power,and Interregional
Interaction(New York:PlenumPress,
in finalform2i X 93.
i992). The presentpaperwas submitted
Prehistoriccultural,sociopolitical,and economic developmentsin areas outsiderecognized"highcivilizations"
have traditionallybeen viewed as pale reflectionsof,or
reactions to, events occurringin complexlyorganized
states. This distinction has been enshrined in such
termsas "core" and "periphery."Nowhere is this tendency clearer than in adjoining eastern Guatemala,
westernHonduras,and El Salvador,the southeastMaya
periphery(hereafter,the Southeast; fig. i). Archaeologistshave oftenconductedresearchhereon the assumption that, at least duringthe Classic period (A.D. 200950), Southeasterncultural and political forms were
dilutedextensionsoftheircounterpartsamongthe lowland Maya to the west and north(Schortmanand Urban
I986; see papers in Boone and Willey I988, Lange and
Stone I984, Robinson I987, Urban and Schortman
i986). Consequently, investigationshave overwhelminglyfocusedon the "hearth" of sociopoliticaland culturalcomplexityin the lowland Maya "core" at the expense of systematic research in the "periphery."
Excursionsinto the latterarea, until recently,concenM. SCHORTMAN
and PATRICIA A. URBAN arebothAsEDWARD
tratedon definingthe bordersof Classic-period"Maya
in theDepartmentofAnthropology/Sociology
sociateProfessors
on themarginsof"highcivilizaArchaeological
investigations
beenguidedbytheassumptionthatpolitions"have traditionally
ties in suchzones wereperipheral
to corestates.This paperarguesthatthisassumptionobscuresthemultipledimensions
distinctions
can be measuredand igalongwhichcore/periphery
noresthepossibilityofmutualinfluenceand interdependence
societiesat all size and complexity
levels.
amonginteracting
evidentin thestudyofsoutheastThis confusionis particularly
ernMesoamerica(adjoiningportionsofGuatemala,Honduras,
and El Salvador),usuallyviewedas peripheral
to lowlandMaya
corestatesduringtheLate Classic period(A.D. 600-95o). In an attemptto advancethe studyofpolitiesbordering
complexand extensivesociopoliticalsystems,a generalmodelis outlinedwhich
sets out to identify
thedifferent
and
dimensionsofperipherality
specifythe conditionsunderwhichvarioussortsofcore/peripheryrelationsare likelyto develop.Late Classic political,ecoand culturalpatternsfromtheNaco Valley,
nomic,demographic,
northwestern
Honduras,are thenexaminedto determine
how
thisarea was linkedto lowlandMaya corestates(represented
hereby Copan and Quirigua)and whateffects
theseties had on
The essayconcludeswithan overview
indigenousdevelopments.
ofLate Classic lowlandMaya/non-Maya
interactions
in the
Southeastand some generalsuggestions
forfutureresearch.
culture" (e.g., Longyear I947, Lothrop I939). Despite a
i. The Naco researcheshave been generouslysupportedby th
following
agencies:theNationalScienceFoundation(GrantsBN'
89I9272, BNS 9022247, and BNS 9I2I386), the National Endowv
mentfortheHumanities(GrantRO-2i897-89), theNationalGec
(i988) and Wenner
graphicSociety(Grant4208-89), theFulbright
Gren (I988 and 1992) Foundations,the MargaretCullinan-WraAssociation(i 99.2
grantprogram
oftheAmericanAnthropological
andKenyonCollege.Our workin Hondurashas beenconsiderablde Antropologia
aided by the staffof the InstitutoHondurefno
Historia,especiallyVictorCruz and JoseMaria Casco (directors'
Vito Veliz, GeorgeHasemann,and GloriaLara Pinto.The Naci
investigations
have been carriedout by a largeand talentedstaf
ofwhomwe wouldlike to singleout M. Ausec,E. Bell,V. Clark
J.Douglass,T. Neff,N. Ross, C. Siders,S. Smith,L. True,and S
Yates forparticularthanks.The people of the Naco Valleyhavy
extendedeverycourtesyto us duringour fieldseasons and havy
expendedconsiderablecarefullaborin thefieldand thelaborator
to ensuresuccessfulcompletionof the research.To all of these
peopleand groupswe are deeplyindebted.We ofcoursetakeful
creditforall errorsand omissions.
recentspate of large-scaleresearchprojectsdesignedto
redressthis imbalance (e.g.,Ashmoreet al. I987; Henderson I983; Hirth,Pinto, and Hasemann I989; Joyce
I99I;
Nakamura, Aoyama, and Uratsuji I99I;
Schort-
man I993; Schortmanet al. I986; SharerI978a; Sheets
I984, i992; Urban I986a, b; Walters i980), a consider-
able informationgap still separates this area fromits
lowland Maya neighbors.
There are several problems with the application of
distinctionsto the Southeast and other
core/periphery
such zones. First,theytend to combine several dimensions of marginalityand treatthem as coincident.On
the one hand, most Southeasternsocieties are seen as
residingoutsidethe bounds ofthe lowland Maya "Great
Tradition"definedby criteriaof monumentalarchitecture,art,and hiereoglyphicinscriptions.While the behavioral significanceof such lowland Maya traits is
rarely considered (but see Freidel I979, I986; Schortman
401
| CURRENT
402
Volume 35, Number 4, August-October I994
ANTHROPOLOGY
~~~~~~~~~~~~~N
MAG
_j
100
0
lA
<~~~~~~~~~L
p-
,
/
p-
KAMINALJUYU
PACIFIC OCEAN
E
OPAN"O~CRIBEN
=~QIRGU
WOS
~GU
0
/ /
V
_
f
QOUIT
<
MUERT6
NARANO rI
t ?
9
~~~~~~LTRO
N
,
200 KM
X
JU
<
A
SoutheasternMesoamerica, showingthe location of the Naco Valley along the Rio Chamelecon
(marked by the Late Classic valley capital, La Sierra).
FIG. I.
I989), the assumptionseems to be that "non-Maya" so
cietieswere excludedfromparticipationin high-prestige
lowland ideologies. There is at least an implicationo
the peripherycan be
Alternatively,
aestheticinferiority.
viewed in political and economic terms sensu Wal
lerstein (II974,i980). Core states, in this scenario, politi
cally dominatetheirless complex neighbors,extractinE
surpluses from them throughunequal exchange rela
benefitingcore elites. Peripher
tions disproportionately
ies are, then,underdevelopedand economicallyimpov
erished as a result of interregionalexploitation (e.g.
Champion I989:5-Io, I4). Cores, in contrast,use im
portsfromthe periphery(usuallyraw materials)to sus
taingeneraleconomicgrowthand elevatedconsumptiot
namic, peripheralsocieties are passive. Core initiatives
are seen as the engine of change in peripheries.Core
state expansion resultsin the incorporationof smaller,
innovamoresimplyorganizedperipheries.Alteratively,
tions emanatingfroma centerspur reactionsalong its
margins.The possibilitythat core and peripherysocieties are embedded in networks of mutual interdependence and interinfluenceis rarelyconsidered(but see
andNakamuraI99
Kohli 992, Schortman
andUrbani987).
2,
Schortman
The core/periphery
distinctionas currentlyemployed
in the Southeastand elsewherethereforetendsto lump
societies which do not exhibitthe hallmarksof a "high
civilization"in oppositionto those which do, to see the
formeras aesthetically,ideologically,politically, and
levels (e.g., Algaze i989:572-73; Austen I978:2; WelL
distinctionsmay,there economicallyunderdevelopedvis-a-viscore states, and
ig80a, b, i984). Core/periphery
fore,be definedalong political, economic, and/orideo
to attributepatternsof change to core initiatives.What
logical dimensions. There is no reason to believe tha we will argue here is that these statementsare not so
these or other possible variables coincide. AssuminE much wrongas unproven.In orderto evaluate them,a
relathat theydo only servesto obscure a complex picture. theoreticalframeworkfordefiningcore/periphery
distinctioi tions is needed, along with data againstwhich to meaA second problemwith the core/periphery
is the presumptionthat whereas core states are dy sure the "peripherality"of specificpolities (see Chase-
SCHORTMAN
AND
URBAN
Dunn and Hall iggia). Afterpresentingsuch a general
model we will focus on developmentswithin one portion of the Southeast where we have been conducting
research,the Naco Valley in northwesternHonduras.
The Naco Valley is not necessarilytypical of Classicperiod Southeasternregions;no one area is. The Naco
data are highlightedhere because we are familiarwith
them and valley developmentsare relevantto the present topic. This is no more than a firststep in unraveling
complex processes of intersocietalinteraction,and we
look forwardto the inputofotherresearchersinterested
in core/periphery
relations.
Core and Peripheryin SoutheasternMesoamerica | 403
cal consumptlonanctexport(Austen I978; Wells ig8oa,
I984; Winterand Bankoffi989:i6i,
I70).
As employmentin the artisanal sector grows,additional bureaucratsare needed to administerproduction,
and ever-greater
foodsurplusesare requiredto feedboth
craftworkers
and administrators.
Additionalfoodcan be
extractedfrom farmersby coercive means, but such
means seem rarelyto be employedin earlycomplex societies. Rather,elites tend to monopolize extraregional
contacts,using the goods acquired therebyas political
currencywhich passes down the local hierarchyin "exchange" forsubsistenceresourcesand labor (e.g.,Dupre
and Rey I973; Ekholm I972; Frankensteinand Rowlands I978; Freidel I986; Friedmani982; Friedmanand
Rowlands I978; Gledhill I978; Kristianseni982, i987;
A Core/Periphery
McGuire i987). Local paramountsalso move to monopFramework
olize the productionand subsequent intrapolitydistriWe will attemptto formulatea hypothesiswhich speci- butionofgenerallyneeded itemsthrough"attachedartifies the conditionsunderwhich different
sortsof core/ sans" directlyoverseenand supportedby the elite (e.g.,
peripheryrelationsare likelyto develop.The focushere Brumfieland Earle i987). Objects fashionedby these
are usually those which requireconsideris on the domain of interactionsituations which in- craftworkers
cludes hierarchicallyorganized societies of different able skill and/or importedraw materials to fabricate.
sizes and levels of sociopoliticalcomplexity.This situa- Both conditionsmake it relativelyeasy to monopolize
tion best approximatescurrentunderstandingsof Clas- the manufacturingprocess (e.g., Clark I987; Friedsic-period Southeast interrelations.We argue that man i982:i83-84;
McGuire
Haselgrove i982:8i-82;
withinthis class patternsofpolitical and economic un- I987:I30
Shennan i982). The more food surplus is
derdevelopmentare unlikelyto occur if core states (the needed, the more deeply elites must invest in longlargest,most complexlyorganizedinteractionpartners) distanceexchangesand the supportofspecialized workdo not monopolize (i) the pooling of exportsand distri- shops to attractfarmer-clients
and stimulatetheirprobution of importswithin the boundariesof otherinter- duction. The long-termeffect is the creation of a
actionpartners,(2) technologiesofproductionand trans- centralizedpolitical economy integratinglocal producport,and (3) a militarythreateffectiveover broad areas tion with intra-and intersocietalsystemsof exchange
(AustenI978; BoutilierI989; Champion I989:I4; Kohl (Austen I978:8-9). An expandingeconomyalso encourI987; Wilkinsen i987).
ages demographicgrowthas rulersseek to acquire more
The firsttwo conditionsensurethat intersocietalex- clients to intensify artisanal and food production.
changeswill stimulateindigenouseconomic and politi- Households under these conditions will also perceive
cal developmentresultingin larger,more complexlyor- advantagesin expandingtheirlabor pools to meet tribganizedand integratedlocal systems.Interactionamong ute demands (e.g., Renfrewi982, Webster i990). This
polities,perhapsinitiallystimulatedby representatives demographicupward spiral exacerbates the need for
of core states in search ofneeded commodities,will en- morenonfoodproducers,elite administrators,
and craftlarge the marketforgoods generatedin any one area, workersfashioningitems to rewardclients and acquire
encouragingintensificationofproduction.This process, imports.A positive feedback system has been set in
in turn,selects forthe developmentof hierarchicalso- motion.
The existence of multiple core states competingfor
ciopolitical structuresto organize extraction,production, and transportationof goods in polities adjoining controlover relationswith peripheriesalso contributes
established states (e.g., Algaze I989; Austen I978:I.2; to the unencumbereddevelopmentof the latter (Kohl
Schortmanand Urban i987). These effectswill be espe- i987:i6). This situation undercutswhateverorganizacially pronouncedwhere the primitivenessof the trans- tional and size advantages core states may have over
port system,the long distances,and/orthe dangersof peripheralsocieties, reducingthe ability of the former
areas thatmustbe traversedmake it impossibleforcore- to monopolize crucial productionand/ortransportation
staterulersto dominateand incorporatetheirneighbors. processes. Elites in the peripherycan play one core off
These same transportationconditionsfrustratethe at- against anotherand have a freerhand in dictatingthe
to inundatemarkets termsof exchange.Anythingwhich short-circuits
temptsof core-statemanufacturers
these
outside the core with inexpensivefinishedgoods (e.g., political/economicrelationswill discouragethe develAusten I978, Upham i992). Ifcoreproducerscould flood opmentof complex political economilesthroughoutthe
peripheralmarkets,this would effectively
undercutlo- interactionnetwork.Monopolization of coercive force
cal economic development,in particularcraftspecializa- withinthe interregionalweb gives a core state the abiltion.Instead,each polityis freeto developits.ownpoliti- ity to enforceunequal exchangerelations,perhapssubcal organizationand workshopsproducingitems from stitutingtributeexaction for equal transactions.Any
foreignand immediatelyavailable raw materialsforlo- circumstance,however, which permits core states to
404
1 CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
Volume 35, Number 4, August-October I994
monopolize some crucial aspect of interregionalexchange relations,whetherit be the productionof finished goods,the transportsystemitself,and/ormilitary
force,gives the monopolista decidedadvantagein accumulating capital which can fund core expansion and
peripheralunderdevelopment(Abu-Lughod I989:37I).
Core preeminenceis furtherenhancedwhen severalperipheralsocietiesproduceor extractthe same goodsused
by a singlecore statewhich alone fashionsitemsneeded
in all parts of the network (e.g., Abu-Lughod i989:
364-65, 368-69; Algaze i989:588; Champion i989:I4I 5; Kohl I 987: I 6). Core elites,not theirperipheralcounterparts,now can dictate the termsof exchange.These
conditionsmake it possibleforcore statesto forgebonds
ofdependencywhich a fewcentralparamountsmanipulate for their own advantage. Peripheralsocieties give
up moreresourcesthantheyreceivein return,local economic developmentis undercut,and capital is steadily
depleted. Here we can speak of real political and economic underdevelopment.
Cores and peripheriescan also be definedin ideological terms.This situation is markedby a flow of innovations primarilyfrom core states to less complexly
as in the poorganizedpolities.The primaryinteractors,
litical and economic discussion,are elites,who have the
greatestfreedomand opportunityto develop and maintain contacts beyond theirhome societies (e.g.,Barnes
i986; Renfrewi986). Here we focus on the adoptionof
symbolsdevelopedin the contextofelite coreideologies
by peripheralrulerswho may restricttheiruse within
the populace to varyingdegrees.
There is considerablevariationin the freedomperipheral leaders can exercise in selectingand adaptingforeign symbols and their meanings to fit within preexisting cultural systems. At the one extreme, exotic
ideologies may be imposed in the course of conquest,
of symbolsoccurringcovertly(e.g.,
any reinterpretation
Gailey I987; Spicer 196I). More commonlyin prehistoric and early historicsituations,distantelites select
those symbols and preceptswhich suit theirown purposes, changing meanings as they see fit. Hinduism
spread throughmuch of coastal Southeast Asia during
the sth to 7th centuriesA.D. as rulerssoughtto increase
theirlocal preeminencethroughassociationwitha hierarchical religion stressingdivine associations of kingship (Hall i985:6, 7I-72; Wolters i967:246-47). The
spreadofCatholicismin westernand centralEuropefolof the Roman empirecan be
lowing the fragmentation
accountedfor,to some extent,as partof elite strategies
to enhance their local power; Catholic doctrine supportedhierarchicalsociopoliticaldistinctionswith control centralizedin the hands of an anointed monarch
(Havlik i989, Sawyer I979, TriggerI978). Hinduism in
Southeast Asia and Catholicism in Europe were also
linked in the minds of converts with distant, highprestigerealms. Manipulation of foreignsymbolsby local elites transmittedsome of the sacrednessassociated
with such places to the rulers (Helms I979, i988; see
ideological hierarchiesinstitutedand supportedby differentdegreesof coercion.It may well be thatthe maintenance of any intersocietal interactionnetwork requiresthatparticipantssharea symbolicsystemto some
degree (Schortman I989; Schortman and Nakamura
i992;
and UrbanI987). Peoplethuslinked
Schortman
will findit easier to establishthebondsoftrustessential
to goods exchangeand to communicatewith and understand each other.Wheremonopolies over the local distributionof foreigngoods are importantfoundationsof
elite power,access to intersocietalcontactsis oftenrestrictedto factionsdisplayingthe appropriatesymbols
(e.g.,Cohen I969; Curtin I975, I984; Donley i982). Exunfrequently
tensiveexchangenetworksare,therefore,
derlain by commonly held symbolic, especially reliAusten
gious, systems (e.g., Abu-Lughod I989:I6-I7;
I978:7; Cohen I969; Curtin I984; Donley i982; Hall
Santley, Yarborough, and Hall I987;
I985:36-38;
SchortmanI989; Schortmanand Urban i987). That the
ideologylinkinginteractorsusually derivesfroma core
state could reflectthe high esteem in which the most
complexly organizedparticipantin the net is held. It
by peripheralrulmay also resultfromcalculated efforts
ersto legitimatenovel hierarchicalrelationsbyadopting
new, frequentlysacred rationales developed for much
the same purposeselsewhere.
Ideological,political,and economic intersocietalhierarchiesare not necessarilycoterminous.Certainlya society may be an ideological peripheryof a core state
while showingno signs of political or economic underdevelopment.The conditionsfavoringpolitical and economic dominationof a networkby a single or fewpolities also make possible enforced adoption of core
ideologies.This developmentis not inevitable,however.
Forciblereligiousconversionmay or may not be a componentofelite dominationstrategies.Much researchremains to be done beforewe know the circumstances
underwhich core political and economic expansion is
accompanied and supportedby ideological subordination.
The Naco Valley
OVERVIEW
The Naco Valley,encompassing96 km2in northwestern
Honduras, is watered by the Rio Chamelecon and
bounded by the steep escarpments of the Sierra de
Omoa. The valleyflooris
ioo-2oo
m abovesea level,
and annual precipitationhoversaround I, 300 mm (Anwere spodradei990). Investigationsof local prehistory
radic priorto I975, when J.Hendersonof Cornell Universityinitiatedthe Naco Valley ArchaeologicalProject
NVAP [Hendersonet al. I9791). We took over
(hereafter
this work in I978 and have since directedsix seasons
of fieldresearchthere(Schortmanand Urban i99ia, b;
Urban i986a, b; Urban et al. I988; Wonderleyi98i).
Overall, NVAP studies have definedan occupation sequence stretchingfromthe Middle Preclassic (800-400
also AlgazeI989:585).
We may be able to speak, therefore,of intersocietal B.C.) throughto the Spanish conquest in the i6th cen-
SCHORTMAN
AND
URBAN
turyA.D. During this long intervaltherewere at least
three periods of political centralization. The most
markedof these occurredduringthe Late Classic (A.D.
600-950), when the entire valley and immediately sur-
roundingzones were under the controlof rulersliving
at the large centerof La Sierra.
The Late Classic also witnessedculturaland sociopolitical florescencethroughoutthe Southeast,including
the lowland Maya polities of Copan and Quirigua and
such "non-Maya" regionsas the Sula Plain, ca. I5 km
north of Naco (Henderson I98I, Joyce i99i), the La
Venta and Florida Valleys, 6o km southwestalong the
Rio Chamelecon (Nakamura, Aoyama, and Uratsuji
i99i), the Sulaco and Humuya drainages 50 km to the
east (Hirth,Pinto,and Hasemann i989), and the middle
Ulua drainage40 km to the south (Ashmoreet al. I987,
Schortmanet al. i986). The contemporaneityof these
developmentsand Naco's strategiclocation on potential
communication routes leading to five of them (the
Lower Motagua Valley [includingQuirigual,Copan, the
La Venta and FloridaValleys,the Sula Plain, the middle
Ulua drainage)suggestthatthe Late Classic valley is an
appropriate"laboratory"in which to evaluate thenature
and significanceof intersocietalcontactsin the prehistoricSoutheast.
POLITICAL
ECONOMY
We began our Naco investigationswith the assumption
that the Late Classic valley would exhibit a relatively
decentralizedpolitical and economic organization.This
fitwith prevailingnotions of Naco's "peripheral"location. Presumably,it was an area exploited by much
largerneighbors,specificallyCopan and Quirigua.At the
end of fieldworkin I988 we suspected that this was
wrong, and the i990-92
seasons only confirmed our
(Tier 2 sites have 4I-44
constructions). This primate
error.
A near-totalgroundsurveyof the valley coupled with
excavationsin Late Classic settlementsof all sizes and
locations (259 structuresexcavated in 35 sites, representingapproximatelyI3% of all known Late Classic
buildings)revealeda farmore complexpicture.The Late
Classic apparentlywitnessed a tremendousgrowthin
populationthroughoutthe region(fig.2). The three-anda-halfcenturyspan also saw the developmentof a fivetiersettlementhierarchydominatedby the centrallylocated capital of La Sierra.La Sierraitselfcontains 468
surface-visibleconstructionscrowded within 0.7 km.2
Thirty-sevenmonumentalplatforms(i.5 m or higher),
arrangedin a rough D shape around several adjoining
plazas, definethe site core (fig.3). La Sierrais largerby
a factorof ten than centersin the next settlementtier
distributionstronglyarguesfora concentrationofpower
as well as people at the capital.
Supportingthisview is the overalldistributionofLate
Classic population. Sites of this period are found
throughoutthe valley, but roughly37% of all recorded
coeval platformsare located at La Sierraand in a densely
settledzone within a i-km radius of it (the latterarea
Core and Peripheryin SoutheasternMesoamerica | 405
is referred
to hereas La Sierra's"near periphery").There
is no obvious concentrationofphysicalresourceswhich
mightaccount forthis settlementpattern.In fact,the
La Sierrazone did not supportsizable populationsprior
to A.D. 6oo and was largelyabandoned afterA.D. I200.
Settlementnucleation in and around the capital must
be related to the establishmentof the political center,
possiblyto elite strategiesof centralizedcontrol.It has
been arguedelsewhere(MontmollinI987, I989; Roscoe
that it is in the best interestsof paramountsto
I993)
concentrateas manysupportersas possiblein theimmediate environsoftheircapitals.Nucleation reducescosts
of supervising"dependents,"collectingtribute,distributinggoods and services,and exactingsanctions.Population concentrationalso undercutsthe abilityof subordinateelites to competeeffectively
withparamountsfor
commonerlabor and surpluses.Comparablepatternsof
populationpacking,albeit on a largerscale, have been
as symptomaticofpowerful,centralizedbuinterpreted
reaucracies(e.g.,Tzacualli-phase [A.D. i-iool Teotihuacan in the Valley of Mexico and Monte Alban Early I
in the Oaxaca Valley [Blanton et al.
B.C.J
[500-350
Parsons I974; Sanders,Parsons,and SantI98I:66-75;
ley I979). There is no reason to doubt that the same
processeswere at workin the Late Classic Naco Valley.
La Sierra's rulers administered the Naco Valley
throughI7 subsidiarycenters(Tier 2-4 sites). Each of
these loci contains some monumental architecture
pointingto the existenceofresidentelite subordinateto
the La Sierraparamounts.Investigationsalong potential
communicationroutes exitingthe valley to the north,
east, south, and west indicate that each passage was
dominated by a sizable Late Classic center. None of
these settlements approaches La Sierra in size (the
largest contains ioo constructions).Extensive excavations at La Sierra, 5 near-periphery
sites, and io rural
settlements,along with more limited probesin i9 primarilyrural loci, provide some insightsinto how this
settlementhierarchywas maintainedand relatedto productionand exchangeprocesses.
The Late Classic capital and its environssupporteda
largenumberofworkshopsprocessinga diversearrayof
goods fromboth locally available (e.g., clay) and imported(e.g.,polyhedralobsidiancores)rawmaterials.Everyone of the I4 patio-focusedstructuresgroupslaterally cleared here in I988 and I990 yieldedevidence for
activities.Prismaticobsidianblades,potmanufacturing
terycensers,and kiln-fired
ceramics,in particular,were
fashionedin large quantities at La Sierra (table I). Dependent on importedraw materials (polyhedralcores)
and/orspecialized skills requiringconsiderabletimeand
effortto learn and maintain (blade knapping,censer
manufacture,kiln firing),these craftswould have been
relativelyeasy forLa Sierra's rulersto control.Access
to foreignraw materials,presumablyacquired by the
valley paramounts,and knowledgecould have been restricted(e.g.,Clark I987: 280-8I).
Althoughevidence formanufacturingof these items
is primarilylimited to La Sierra, the products were
widely distributed.Obsidian prismaticblades are com-
i CURRENT
406
Volume 35, Number 4, August-October I994
ANTHROPOLOGY
0-1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0
03
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~302
2
c;
WO ~~~~~
2335
0
126~~~~~~~
~~zz9i7130
.12~~~~34
99
-.
48
-.
n426
t2
424
41
/,~~~og
33
1241
6'
-
24
1
A
8
183
1~~~83
.
4-*
SITE
WITH MONUMENTAL
ARCHITCTURE
N
FI.2.
~
itiuino
olI
28
-3
~
3 2
415
*Q
26
2478
~
27
86
0 -
~
~
2
10cfIIi33A
2
1
8
18
~~~~~~~~~~~267
270
i\ ~
~
01
46i0
29
8*
13
o0
149
aeCascstlmnsi
monly found in Late Classic household assemblages
throughoutthe valley, despite the need to importthe
cores fromwhich these implementsare made and the
locally availabilityof chertand small nodules ofperlite
(a volcanic ejecta very similar in appearance and chipping propertiesto obsidian). Similarly,censers and all
ceramictaxa are recoveredin most excavatedLate Clas-
h
aoVle
n
m eit
nios
sic Naco sites. Blades, censers,and potteryvessels of all
typeswere apparentlyused by membersof everysocial
stratumwithin the La Sierra polity but producedin a
few centrallylocated areas.
Marineshell (mostlyconch)artifactsdivergefromthis
pattern.A total of i,256 pieces of shell debris,primarily
conch,have been recoveredfroma singlepatio groupat
AND
SCHORTMAN
in Southeastern
and Periphery
Mesoamerica 407
Core
URBAN
FV~~~~~~~~~1A4
lA-li
1
A~~~39<
~
1A-38
~
~~~~
1A-47
~
1-4
~
~
lA7 A-8
FVA
Lt-J4l-7
1~izzIIIIk\~l-A
lA-A
~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
MAG~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A
1A
-19-4
1A-17
1A-15
4
I1~1
lA-lA
lA-l11
1A
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~05
OP3L-SeraAit
FG.7.Th
01
02~
cre
La Sierra (Operation i9) in association with a distinc- generally believed, then its residents may have excherttool suitableforheavycutting changed Ixtepeque obsidian for shell objects manufactive,sturdy-pointed
and engraving
tasks (Schaferi990). No othermarine turedby artisansat La Sierra.
shell workshophas been identifiedin the Late Classic
Polychrome-decorated
ceramics have been found in
valley. Despite the large volume of productionattested varyingproportionsthroughoutthe Late Classic Naco
at Operationi 9, onlyone finishedshell artifacthas been Valley. Given theirfrequencyand the presenceof local
unearthedin all our excavations. Marine shell items antecedents,some are almost certainlyof indigenous
may have been interredin depositsnot encounteredby manufacture.Using the same criteria,others,however,
theNVAP, such as elite burials.It is equally likely,how- are of foreignderivation (ongoing neutron activation
ever,that much of the output was destinedforexport. studiesofrelevantsherdsshould place the local/foreign
One possible recipientis the Copan polity,which in- distinctionon firmerground).Importedvessels tend to
vested shell artifacts,including those made of conch, be concentratedat La Sierra, where they comprise
with considerable symbolic significance(e.g., Baudez 2.8-4.6% of all Late Classic ceramicsfromnine exteni989). Nevertheless,the singleshell workshopidentified sivelyexcavated groups.Five comparablycleared strucin-the Late Classic Copan Valley yielded only small ture clusters in the near peripheryyielded somewhat
ofimported
containers
quantitiesof debris,includingconch, and no tools suit- reducedpercentages
(I.I-4.0%).
able forthe cuttingand shapingneeded to convertraw More remote,rural loci have even smaller propertions
shell into finishedartifacts(RandolphWidmer,personal ofimported
ceramics(0-4.2%), most(I6 outof23 cases)
Despite some
communication,i992). Marine shell apparentlyarrived yieldingless than 2% of foreignpottery.2
at Copan afteralreadyhavingundergonesignificantini- overlap in the numbers, it appears that exotic polytial shaping elsewhere, Copanec artisans carryingout chromeswere acquiredby the La Sierrarulers,who subonlysmall-scalemodificationsoftheimports.The Oper- sequentlydistributedthem down the regionalsociopoation i9 workshop,with its sturdytools and significant litical hierarchy.
The ubiquity of prismaticblades, censers, local cequantitiesofshell fragments,
could have been one ofthe
places where such preliminarysteps took place. Obsid- ramicsof all taxa, and foreignpolychromesimplies that
ian may have moved fromCopan to Naco in returnfor these commoditieswere needed by everyhousehold in
ir%*
l
lATP
shell artifactspassingin the oppositedirection.Roughly tIhk TIn CZirrn mnrli4-'Dn,rn
73% of the 55 Late Classic obsidian artifactssourcedto
P
date are fromIxtepeque(Boueyi99i).
If Copan con-
trolledaccess to these flowswithinthe Southeast,as is
n%ATpr
l-
ATAI
2. Only sitesfromwhich I,ooo or moreLate Classic sherdswere
recoveredand analyzedare includedhere.
408
1 CURRENT
TABLE
ANTHROPOLOGY
Volume 35, Number 4, August-October 1994
I
Specialized Productionin the Late Classic Naco Valley
Location
Operation
II
I2
I9
La Sierra,North
Cluster
La Sierra,North
Cluster
La Sierra,North
Cluster
Tier
Figurines
Obsidianblades
Obsidianblades
I3 stamps,6.6% ofstampassemblage
stones,8% ofgroundstoneassemblage
6o grinding
as4.5% offigurine
i mold; ii 5 figurine
fragments,
semblage
i5 stamps,7.6% ofstampassemblage
i2 coralpieces,i2 disi,256 marineshellfragments,
used in fabricating
tinctivecherttoolspresumably
shellartifacts
2 molds; i52 figurine
as5.9% offigurine
fragments,
semblage
534 censersherds,iI.9% ofcenserassemblage
corefragments
I4 polyhedral
ofstampassemblage
I4 stamps,7.I%
densesherdconcenfacility,
Possibleceramicfiring
trations
to clayborrowpits,
At least one kiln,proximity
densesherdconcentrations
769 censersherds,I7.I% ofcenserassemblage
2 molds;26 I figurine
asfragments,
IO. I % offigurine
semblage
i i polyhedral
fragments
cores/core
35 stamps,I7.8% ofstampassemblage
slag
facility,
Possiblefiring
stones,5.7% ofgroundstoneassemblage
43 grinding
2 polyhedral
corefragments
7 polyhedral
corefragments
7 stamps,3.6% ofstampassemblage
as4.9% offigurine
i mold; i25 figurine
fragments,
semblage
296 censersherds,6.6% ofcenserassemblage
i2 stamps,6.I% ofcenserassemblage
2 polyhedral
corefragments
corefragments
58 polyhedral
asI mold; 92 figurine
3.6% offigurine
fragments,
semblage
I 3 stamps,6.6% ofstampassemblage
oflargebifaces;spokeshavesand
Concentration
scrapers
3 polyhedral
corefragments
i mold
8 stamps,4.I% ofstampassemblage
4 polyhedral
corefragments
stone
5 celts,i2.8% ofcelt assemblage;i smoothing
possiblyused in celt manufacture
3 molds
4 polyhedral
corefragments
3 polyhedral
corefragments
Obsidianblades
2 polyhedral
corefragments
Obsidianblades
Figurines
3 polyhedral
corefragments
i mold; go figurine
asoffigurine
I.9%
fragments,
semblage
ii stamps,5.6% ofstampassemblage
38 grinding
stones,5% ofgroundstoneassemblage
i mold
4 celts,IO.3% ofcelt assemblage
i celt blank
I
Textiles
Food(?)processing
Figurines
I
Stamps,textiles
Ornaments
I
Figurines
Censers
Obsidianblades
Stamps,textiles
Pottery
3I
La Sierra,North
Cluster
I
La Sierra,North
Cluster
I
33
La Sierra,westofthe
Main Group
La Sierra,North
Cluster
I
La Sierra,southofthe
Main Group
I
36
38
Pottery
Censers
Figurines
32
I
Obsidianblades
Stamps,textiles
Pottery
Food(?)processing
Obsidianblades
Obsidianblades
Textiles
Figurines
Censers
Stamps,textiles
Obsidianblades
Obsidianblades
Figurines
Textiles
Woodworking(?)
39
La Sierra,southofthe
Main Group
I
79
2oo m southofLa Si-
3
8i
m northofLa Si3
erra,near-periphery
300 m southeastofLa
5
Sierra,near-periphery
ofLa
440 m northwest
5
Sierra,near-periphery
ofLa
320 m northwest
5
Sierra,near-periphery
84
92
96
erra,near-periphery
300
IOI
5 km northofLa Si-
IO8
3.3
erra,ruralzone
ofLa Sikmnorth
I 12
erra,ruralzone
3 km southwestofLa
Sierra,ruralzone
II3
2.4
123
km east ofLa Sierra,ruralzone
ofLa
7.5 km northwest
Sierra,ruralzone
3
5
Evidence
Workshop(s)
Obsidianblades
Figurines
Textiles
Obsidianblades
Celts
Textiles
Food(?)processing
Figurines
Woodworking(?)
Celts
Figurines
I
mold
mold
5
Pottery(?)
Limestonequarry
Chertquarry
5
Figurines
Locatedon a goodsourceofclay stillused today
ofrawmaterial
Proximity
of
Numerouschertflakes,tools and cores,proximity
rawmaterial
I mold
5
Figurines
I
SCHORTMAN
TABLE
AND
Core and Peripheryin SoutheasternMesoamerica 409
URBAN
I
(Continued)
Operation
i68
I20
262
335
337
338
386-Grp.I
386-Grp.2
386-Grp.4
4i8
423-SWGrp.
423-Centl.Grp.
423-NE Grp.
426
428
462
NOTE:
Location
4.5 km southwestof
La Sierra
8.5 km northwest
ofLa
Sierra,ruralzone
5.4 km southwestofLa
Sierra
7.3 km northwest
ofLa
Sierra,ruralzone
7.5 km northwest
ofLa
Sierra,ruralzone
6 km east ofLa Sierra,
east side ofvalley
6.i km northwestof
La Sierra
6.i km northwestof
La Sierra
6.i km northwestof
La Sierra
5.5 km southwestof
La Sierra
5.2 km southwestof
La Sierra
5.2 km southwestof
La Sierra
5.2 km southwestof
La Sierra
5.8 km southwestof
La Sierra
5.8 km southwestof
La Sierra
8.4 km south-southeast
ofLa Sierra,rural
zone
Tier
Evidence
Workshop(s)
2
Obsidianblades
i
corefragment
polyhedral
5
Figurines
i
mold
5
2 incompletemanos,3 incompletemetates
3
Groundstone
Paper/cloth
Celts
Paper/cloth
Figurines
Pottery
Figurines
barkbeater
unfinished
celt,i celtblank
barkbeater
29 molds
3 bowlmolds
i mold
5
Obsidianblades(?)
i
5
i mold
Figurines
i polyhedral
Obsidianblades(?)
obsidiancore
Figurines
4 molds
Wood/hideworking)?)4 drills,i spokeshave
i smoothing
stone,possiblyforfinishing
Masonry)?)
cut blocks
5
5
5
5
i
i
i
obsidiancore,reused
polyhedral
Figurines
Obsidianblades
Woodworking)?)
Figurines
Celts
Figurines
4 molds
5 polyhedral
obsidiancores,3 reusedas tools
4 celts,I0.3% ofceltassemblage
i mold,i lumpofunfired
clay
i celtblank
2 molds
5
Figurines
Stamps
Pottery)?)
Drilledstones(?)
Sculpture
Obsidianblades
Figurines
mold
Possiblesmallkiln (Str.426-3)
i i examples,I7.7% ofdrilledstoneassemblage
i incomplete
example,a possibletenonedsculpture
2 polyhedral
obsidiancores,i reusedas a tool
2 molds
5
Groundstone
2 incompletemanos,2 incompletemetates,fromsur-
5
5
5
4
i2 molds
i
facecollections
Onlyevidenceofspecializedproductionconductedto meettheneedsofa social unitlargerthanthehouseholdis included
here. All of the ahbove
designations
remain tentative
nendine
fu-rther testinO
based on monopolies over the acquisition, production,
and distributionof such generallyneeded goods. Potentates could "exchange" foreignand centrallymanufactureditems with commonersforsubsistenceresources
and labor, thus maintainingthe fictionof reciprocity.
Because La Sierra'srulerswere the sole source of these
items, closely supervisingproductionand intersocietal
contacts,commonersand secondaryeliteshad no choice
but to take partin this unequal exchangesystem.
Reinforcingthe preeminenceof La Sierra's monopolists was theirabilityto exclude intrapolitycompetitors
fromparticipationin intersocietaltransactionsthrough
which valued commodities,such as polyhedralobsidian
cores, were acquired. We will probablynever be able
fullyto reconstructthe strategiesdeployedin thiseffort.
One elementof them,however,seems to have involved
the marineshell artifactsfashionedsolelyby the Operation I9 residents.The shell industryis unique among
lk
wATith
dditirn1l
pn-ruig
c
A
e.lAT-lrk
known valley craftsin that its sizable outputwas destined primarilyfor export. It may well be that shell
items functionedas essential "currency"in interpolity
exchanges.The possible use of conch artifactsto secure
obsidian cores has alreadybeen suggested.By localizing
the manufactureof shell items in one patio-focused
structuregroup,and that within 45 m of the La Sierra
site core,valley paramountscould have effectively
controlledproductionand guaranteedthat theyalone took
part in the transactionsthroughwhich highlyvalued,
locally needed goods were obtained.
This top-downview ofthe La Sierrapoliticaleconomy
glosses over the extentto which centralizingstrategies
were resistedby the Naco populationin general.A wide
range of crafts,including the manufactureof ground
stone tools, figurines, whistles, ocarinas, ceramic
stamps,masonryblocks, and sculpturealong with textile decoration,were widely dispersedthroughoutthe
4IO
I CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
Volume 35, Number 4, August-October 1994
La Sierrapolity.These productionprocesses employed
locally available raw materials and relativelysimple
techniques outside centrally controlled monopolies.
Productionintensity,as measured by the amounts of
tools, debris,and/orspecialized facilitiesused in or resultingfromartisanalactivity,variedamongsites (compare, forexample, the 29 figurine,whistle,and ocarina
molds recoveredfromOperation337 with the singleexample unearthedat Operation96). The numberand distributionof Late Classic workshopsdo, however,point
to widespreadinvolvementin craftactivities,a veritable
economic "boom" measuredby totaloutputand theproportionof the polity'spopulationcommittedto specialized manufacture(only one thoroughlyexcavated Late
Classic site lacks any evidence of craftactivities).Rural
artisansmay have been spurredto become involvedin
at craftmonopospecializedmanufactureby elite efforts
lization.Local economic autonomycould have been preserved to a limited extentby producingto meet some
immediateneeds. The materialconditionsof ruralproducers mightalso have been simultaneouslyenhanced
throughthe generationof surplusesexchangedwith rural and urban populations within the Naco Valley. La
Sierra'srulersapparentlysoughtto establishdomination
througheconomic means while their subordinatesresistedsuch centralizationby contestingparamounteconomic monopolies.
Political and economic processes,then,were in a dynamic relationshipthatbothmaintainedand threatened
the preeminenceof regionalparamounts.The above reconstructionmeets the specificationsfor autonomous
peripherydevelopmentoutlinedin the previoussection.
The Late Classic Naco Valley does not seem to have
been undergoingeconomic and political exploitationresulting in underdevelopment.Instead, we see demoof elite administrators
graphicincreases,a proliferation
and artisans, and increasing political centralization.
fashionedobjectsfromimmediatelyavailCraftworkers
able and importedraw materialsforlocal use and export.
Some of these items flowed down the hierarchy,presumably stimulatingsurplus food production.Others
moved laterally among households, contributingto
some degree of local independence.The Late Classic
Naco economy was undergoinga regionallyunprecedentedexpansionwhichwas neverto be repeatedprehistorically.In part,this synergismwas stimulatedby contacts with lowland Maya core states. We have already
mentioned the possible exchange between Copan and
Naco ofobsidianformarineshell artifacts.Small quantities of distinctiveLower Motagua Valley ceramicshave
been recoveredfrom Naco contexts,though whether
theyultimatelyderive fromQuirigua or fromits nonMaya contemporariesin that regionremainsunknown
is veryuncommon
(SchortmanI993). Copanecpottery
and does not seem to have constituteda significantexthat Cochange item. There is no evidence, therefore,
pan, Quirigua,or any othersinglepolitydominatedthe
exchangenetworkin which Naco was embedded.Quite
the linkedpolitical,demographic,and ecothe contrary,
nomic changes attestedhere seem to indicate that La
Sierra'srulersenjoyedgreatfreedomin manipulatingextrasocietal exchanges for their own benefit.The Late
Classic Naco political systemwas certainlysmallerand
possibly less complexlyorganizedthan lowland Maya
examples.It was not,however,economicallyand politically exploitedby them.
IDEOLOGICAL
HIERARCHIZATION
There is a greatrangeof variationin the spreadof lowland Maya symbolic elements within the Southeast.
Neighboringareas at times exhibit markedlydifferent
material and cultural patterns (Quirigua shares the
Lower Motagua Valley with at least nine otherhierarchically organizedpolities, but they adopted virtually
none of its lowland Maya ideological trappings[Schort-
man I993; Schortman
and Nakamurai992, Urbanand
Schortman I988]). Other zones manifest remarkable
similaritiesin architecture,sculpture,and hieroglyphic
inscriptions(Los Higos and El Abra in the La Venta Valley share sufficientmaterialand behavioralsimilarities
with Copan, ca. 40 km to the southwest,to be classed as
lowland Maya sites [Nakamura,Aoyama, and Uratsuji
I99I,
Schortman and Nakamura igg21). Late Classic
Naco fallsbetweenthesetwo extremes;evidenceoflowland Maya symbolicintrusionsis restrictedto La Sierra.
StructuresIA-so and 5I at La Sierradefinea ball court
which mimics in certain telling details a similar constructionat Copan. Both are orientedroughlynorthsouth and backed on the south by terracedeminences.
The massive artificialacropolis providesthe backdrop
at Copan; a 3-m-highnaturalrise mountedby I 3 stonefaced terracesperformsa similar functionat La Sierra.
There is no reason to believe that the ball game or its
facilitieshad a long historyat La Sierra.Rather,it appears thatthis rituallychargedactivitywas modeled on
lowland Maya prototypes,most likely the Copan example.
Excavationsinto a low platformconnectingLa Sierra
site-coreStructuresiA-i6 and I7 uneartheda sizable
ritual deposit the west end of which was buried by as
much as i m of ash. This limitedwork (only97 m2 was
cleared) yielded roughly25% of the censer fragments
found anywherein Late Classic valley contexts (n =
4,504 total). Uncoveredalong with the censerswere locally rare,rituallysignificantobjects such as Spondylus
shells (whole bivalves and broken, frequentlyburnt,
fragments)and a cache of six small cups. Intermixed
with these esoteric objects were pieces of some of the
onlystone sculpturerecordedin the Late Classic valley.
One ofthemis a tenonedportraithead wearinga turban
and earplugs,its face purposelydisfiguredin antiquity
by batteringthe nose and mouth.
This locally unprecedentedconcentrationof ritual
items implies that the religious dramas enacted here
were conductedon a large scale, possiblyforthe entire
polity.The unusually largenumberof modeled censers
recoveredfromthis deposit (75.3% of the Late Classic
SCHORTMAN
AND
URBAN
Core and Peripheryin SoutheasternMesoamerica I 4II
assemblage,n = 788 total) supportsthis interpretation; Instead of such clear patternsof incorporationin or
modeled censershave been linkedto the performance
of exclusion fromthe lowland Maya identitysystem,most
public rites in lowland Maya (Quirigua [Benyo I978])
Southeasternsocieties exhibitthe selective adoptionof
and other Southeasterncenters(Las Quebradas, Lower aspects ofthataffiliation.Late Classic Naco fallsin this
Motagua Valley [SchortmanI993]). The deposit's loca- last category.WhatLa Sierra'srulerschose forincorporation,deep within the site core and associated with two tion was elements of lowland Maya ideologyrelatedto
ofLa Sierra'slargestbuildings,also pointsto paramount elite-associatedreligiousdevotions.Ball courtsare cencontroloverthe rites.The intermentofan apparentpor- tral componentsof lowland monumental centers.The
traitsculpturein this contextmay in factindicatethat "game" itselfwas an importantprerogativeofthe nobilelite personageswere themselvescentralplayersin site- ity (Schele and Miller I986). Turbans distinguishedCocoredevotions.Monopolizingthe performance
ofrituals panec lords, Spondylus shells functionedin rites conwithpolitywidesignificancewould have servedto legiti- ducted by lowland Maya ahaws, and ritually potent
mate centralizedrule, giving paramountsa privileged sculpturelinked to rulers was terminatedat lowland
centersby defacementin a manner similar to that rerelationshipto the supernaturalrealm (BalandierI970;
Gledhill I978:277;
Kristiansen i982; Swartz, Turner, portedat La Sierra.We would arguethattheseselections
and Tuden I966).
were not haphazard,nor were theyforcedon Naco paraA closer examination of the ritual paraphernaliain- mounts by rulersof hegemoniclowland Maya polities.
cluded in the deposit suggestsa foreigninspirationfor They reflect,instead, a strategycalculated to enhance
at least some ofthe ritesperformed
in the site core. The the power of La Sierra's rulers within the polity. By
headdressadorningthe tenonedsculptureappearsto be clearlyassociatingthemselveswith the symbolsof disa simplifiedversion of the distinctiveturbansworn by tantrulers,Naco paramountscould partakeofwhatever
Late Classic Copanec monarchsor ahaws (Baudez I986).
supernaturalaura was associated with those remote
Several censers are decoratedwith modeled cacao-pod realms (e.g., Helms I979, I988). Elite monopolies over
effigiespendant fromthe rim, stronglyreminiscentof theseassociations and symbolswithinthe La Sierrapolexamples from contemporaryCopan (e.g., Longyear itywould also serveto differentiate
rulersfromsubordii952: figs.Io5b, Iogf, ii2n-q,
nates. It is also possible that lowland Maya models of
II4a). Use of Spondylus
shell in sacredcontextshas antecedentsamongthe low- political centralizationand the ideology which legitiland Maya, as does the purposefulburyingof ritualde- mated themprovidedthe Naqueiios with a blueprintfor
posits with ash or some formof white soil; the inten- dominationlackingin theirlocal tradition.Exposureto
tional defacingof the tenoned head and, perhaps,the such an organizationmighthave been a catalystforlocal
fragmentationof the other sculpturemay hint at the sociopoliticalchange (e.g.,FlanneryI968).
conductof terminationritessimilarto those attestedin
It may well be, therefore,that there is a restricted
the Maya lowlands (Schele and Freidel I990). Elements sense in which Naco can be seen as peripheralto a Late
in the StructureiA-i 6/I7 ritualdeposit,taken together Classic lowland Maya core. Whereas the flow of goods
with the La Sierra ball court, reflectthe adoption of between Naco and its lowland Maya contemporaries
some elements of lowland Maya ideologyand symbols may have been balanced,the spreadofideologicalinnoby valley paramounts.
vations was more one-sided. The latter featuresseem
The behavioralsignificanceof these ideological "bor- to have emanatedfromCopan (and,possibly,Quirigua).
rowings"is farfromclear. The case has been made else- There is no good evidence forthe adoptionof symbolic
where that many of the traitsused to definelowland elements originatingin the peripheryby core states.
Maya "culture" (such as hieroglyphicinscriptionsand Residents of centerssuch as Copan and Quirigua may
carvedstelae) were symbolsof a spatiallyextensiveso- therefore
have enjoyeda "prestigeadvantage"overother
cial identitysharedamong potentatesfromdifferent
so- Southeasternpolitieswhich stimulatedemulation.This
cieties (e.g.,Freidel I979, I986; JoyceI99I; Schortman advantage did not translateinto an economic edge or
I989, I993;
Schortmanand Nakamura i992). Participa- political domination.
tion in this common identitymade intersocialcommuEven withinthe ideologicaldomainit would be a misnication and goods exchangepossible among occupants take to see peripheralsocieties as passive recipientsof
of the highestsocial echelons. Restrictingparticipation lowland Maya innovations.La Sierra'srulers,forexamin intersocietaltransactionsto holders of this identity ple, purposefullychose those core symbolsforadoption
also facilitatedthe creationofelite monopoliesoverthe whichwould best servetheirpoliticalinterestsat home.
acquisition and distributionof foreignitems withinin- Lowland Maya elites may have seen an advantage in
dividual polities. The extensionof lowland Maya traits disseminatingsome components of their ideology to
to political units in which they did not appear previ- Naco, if only because the spread of a common symbol
ously would, then, be symptomaticof political/eco- system "greased the wheels" of intersocietaltransacnomic alliances linkingrulinghouses. Alternatively,
was not accidental
the tions.Ideologicaldiffusion,
therefore,
absence of definitivelowland Maya material formsat or inevitable. Instead it was guided and channeled by
Southeasterncenters may reflectcompetitionamong the shiftinginterestsand goals of elite interactors,
their
polities,each stressingits distinctivenessthroughdiffer- decisions now preservedin the imperishablematerial
ent materialsymbols(e.g.,Hodder I978, I979).
symbolsexcavatedfromNaco Valley sites.
4I21
CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
Volume 35, Number 4, August-October 1994
Discussion
Maya polities than elsewherein the Late Classic Southin subjueast, thereis reason to doubt its effectiveness
The Naco data have provideda basis forarguingthat gatingor threateningdistantrealms.Hieroglyphictexts
does not fromCopan and Quirigua recountthe secession of the
whatwas assumedto have been a periphery
of such societies.We are latterfromthe controlof the formerin A.D. 737 (Jones
to our expectations
conform
thatas moreresearchis publishedthe same and SharerI986; Riese I986, I988; SharerI990; Stuart
confident
when Quirigua,a much
conclusionswill be drawnforotherregions.The Late I990; StuartI99-2:I75-77),
interac- smaller center,was able to engage and defeatCopanec
Classic Southeast,in sum,best approximates
development. forces,capturingthe rival monarch,I8 Rabbit.Even at
conduciveto autonomous
tionconditions
on Copan the heightof its Late Classic power and demographic
LowlandMayapolitiessuchas thosecentered
controltheproduction growthCopan could not controlan unrulysubordinate
andQuiriguadidnotexclusively
the area. Workshopsare located a scant 50 km to the north.Withinthe Lower
of goodsneededthroughout
foundat bothlowlandMayacapitalsandin theirimme- Motagua Valley,Quirigua,in its turn,was unwillingor
repre- unable to conquer contemporarypolities situated as
but the levels of production
diate hinterlands,
How
I993).
itemsfor closeas 25 kmfromthecenter(Schortman
senteddo not seem equal to manufacturing
in theperipherycould Copan and Quirigua have posed serious military
largenumbersofdispersedconsumers
(Ashmore I98I;
Baudez I983; Sanders I986; Widmer, threatsto more remotepolities such as Naco (roughly
i992). Evenmoretothepoint, ii 5 km and go km distant fromCopan and Quirigua
personalcommunication,
were respectively)?
LateClassicNaco Valleyworkshops
thenumerous
capableofmeetinglocal demandsas well as producing The presenceof two competinglowland Maya politiLackinga mo- cal units within the Late Classic Southeast also raises
forexport(e.g.,marineshellornaments).
of neededgoods,lowland the possibilitythatnon-Mayapolities such as La Sierra
nopolyoverthe production
Maya eliteswouldhave beenunableto createtheun- mighthave played one offagainstthe otherin an effort
to depen- to achieve the most favorableexchange relations.Evithatcontribute
equal exchangerelationships
of goods withinthe dence forcontactbetween Naco and Copan has already
dency.Similarly,transportation
Southeastwas by means availableto all societies- been noted. In addition to the ceramic links between
canoes.It is possible Naco and the Lower Motagua Valley cited earlier,a few
humancarriersand,presumably,
politieswithlargepopu- fragmentsof Naco obsidian derivefromthe El Chayal
organized
thatmorecomplexly
lationsto drawon could have held an organizationalflows (4%, n = 55 Late Classic pieces sourced).These
distances. blades may have arrivedin thevalleybymeans ofLower
in movingitemsoverconsiderable
advantage
thereareno datato suggestthatpolities Motagua entrepreneurswho apparentlycontrolledacNevertheless,
suchas CopanandQuiriguaexercisedexclusivecontrol cess along the riverto the El Chayal source (Hammond
exchangesin the Southeast.More I972). It is possible, therefore,that the La Sierrapolity
overlong-distance
a numberofelitehandsto maintained relations with both Southeasternlowland
likely,goodspassedthrough
Maya states and was not exclusivelydependenton one
theirfinaldestinations.
or the otherforwhatevergoods/ideastheyprovided.
at
is
most
for
militarism
Copan
prominent
Evidence
What we are left with is a picture of Late Classic
and Quirigua,and comparablebellicosedisplaysin art
and sculptureare not clearlyattestedelsewherein the Southeastern prehistoryin which political and ecoSoutheast(e.g.,BaudezI986; Fash I988; Fashand Fash nomic patternsof developmentand underdevelopment
It is possible, are not clearlyattested.There is evidence ofideological
I989; SharerI990; StuartI99-2:I75-77).
thattheselowlandMayacentershelda coer- hierarchization,with core lowland Maya states serving
therefore,
cive edgewhichcould have been used to enforceun- as sources of inspirationforaspiringperipheralelites.
equal exchangerelations.It is equallylikely,however, Even here,however,thereis no sign ofinterregionalextradi- ploitation.Innovatorsand recipientstogetherseem to
andartistic
thatQuirigua'sandCopan'ssculptural
mili- have used long-distance ties to advance their own
mediaforexpressing
tionsprovidedimperishable
tarythemesnot availableor emphasizedamongother agendas.Core rulerswere unable to monopolize crucial
in- production,transportation,and militaryprocesses and
Southeastern
recently
deciphered
polities.Similarly,
autonomoussocietiesinto
could not transform
fromlowlandMaya centersprovideinsights therefore
scriptions
intomilitary(as well as other)behaviorwhichare not dependentperipheries.One indicationof persistentredata alone (Schele gional autonomyis the time lag separatingprocessesof
easilyobtainedfromarchaeological
at Copan and in theNaco Valley.
politicalfragmentation
artand hieroglyphic
and FreidelI990). Monumental
textsin factprovidemostoftheavailableinformationPolitical centralizationin the latterarea seems to outconflictand its impor- last the disappearanceof similar institutionsat Copan
intersocietal
on Southeastern
databearing by at least 2oo years.The situationat Quirigua and in
tancein eliteaffairs.
archaeological
Strictly
and a proliferationother Southeasternregionsremains uncertain.In genon thistopic,such as fortifications
dis- eral, however, non-Maya polities may well have surfew.We cannot,however,
ofweapons,arerelatively
missthenotionthatmilitary
exploitswerecommonly vived the demise of Copan and Quiriguaby a centuryor
theLate Classic Southeastbutare more.
pursuedthroughout
This is not to say thatsystemsofmutual interdepenin onlya portionofit.
enshrined
durably
in lowland dence did not develop amongall participantsin theLate
was morepronounced
Evenifmilitarism
SCHORTMAN
AND
URBAN
Core and Peripheryin SoutheasternMesoamerica 14I3
Classic Southeasterninteractionsystem(see also Kohl amine the relevance of world-systemsconcepts to the
I987:I6). A wide range of polities were linked by the studyofearlierand smallerintersocietalinteractionnetexchangeof goods and ideas. It is also truethat,despite works (fora review, see Hall and Chase-Dunn I993).
the aforementionedtime gap, political fragmentation The conceptual apparatusemployedby Schortmanand
was widespreadamong Southeasternsocieties afterA.D. Urban contributesto an explicitlycomparativeframeIOOO,suggestinga "domino effect"bornofclose interso- work for understandingsimilarities and differences
kindsofworldsystems.'Schortmanand
cietal ties (HirthI989). It is even possible thatindividual amongdifferent
polities monopolized the distributionof crucial items Urban use concepts of core and peripherythat are gensortsof sysover long distances (e.g., Copan controllingaccess to eral enough to be applied to verydifferent
Ixtepeque obsidian). The importantpoint, however,is tems without assuming that all systemsare the same.
that no entity,wasable to manipulate resourcecontrol Their investigationof intersocietalrelations between
to the detrimentofits partners.In the examplefollowed Mayan states and the Naco Valley polityis a greatadhere,Copan may have monopolizedthe exchangeof Ix- vance overabstractdebatesbetweenfunctionalists(who
tepeque obsidian,but othersources were available (e.g., see all hierarchyas servingsystemneeds) and conflict
El Chayal), and Copan's rulerswere themselvesdepen- theorists(who see all inequalities as based on exploitadent on Southeasternpolities foressential goods (e.g., tion or domination).Some systemsreally are based on
exploitationthat produces the developmarineshell objects). This networkis one we have de- core/periphery
scribedelsewhere (I987) as coevolutionary:individual ment ofunderdevelopmentin peripheries,while in othpolitiesare embeddedin interactionnetworks,each one ers coevolution and "peer-polityinteraction" spread
losingits abilityto reproduceitselfwithoutinputs(ideas developmentmore evenly. Schortmanand Urban conrelations clearly and specify
ceptualize core/periphery
and/orgoods) fromits partners.
It seems clear thatwhen consideringcoresand periph- general conditionsunder which core societies can exeries we must be clear about the dimensions along ploit and dominateperipheralregions.This is scientific
which attributesof "coreness" and "peripherality"are progress.
Schortmanand Urban findlittle directevidence that
measured. We have suggested that there are at least
threesuch variables,politics,economics, and ideology, La Sierrawas a dominatedand exploitedperipheryand
and that they do not necessarilycoincide. More atten- some indirectevidencethatthe emergenceofa complex
tion should now be paid to determiningthe conditions and hierarchicalsocietyin the Naco Valley was stimurelations lated by the adoptionofpolitico-religiousideas fromthe
underwhich different
typesof core/periphery
develop. We have offereda hypothesiswhich is but a Mayan states.I would, however,raise severaladditional
firststep in this direction.Whateverits defects,thisfor- questions about the Mayan-centeredworld system of
mulation suggestshow we mightprofitablyunpack (or SoutheasternMesoamerica. Whetherthe Copan/La Sidefuse)such loaded termsas "core" and "periphery"and errarelationshipwas typical of the systemas a whole
better understand their interconnections.Finally, it is an importantquestion for the project of comparwould probablybe best to jettisonthephrase"southeast ing world systems.It has been hypothesizedthat chiefto the area discussed dom and earlystate world systemshave less stable and
Maya periphery"when referring
here(cf.Schortmanand Urban I986). Such a designation less exploitativecore/periphery
hierarchiesbecause the
conjuresup an image ofhegemoniclowland statesdomi- "techniquesofpower" requiredforextractingresources
natinga politicallysimple, culturallyhomogeneouspe- fromdistant peripherieshave not yet been developed
riphery.It also encouragesus to overlook the complex (Chase-Dunn and Hall I993). The Schortmanand Urban
interactionprocesseswhich once linkedpolities within findingsabout the Copan/La Sierrarelationshipsupport
thiszone. Ifwe cannotdislodgethe label fromthe litera- this hypothesis,but what ifthis relationshipis atypical
ture,it would be well to use it skeptically.Perhaps,in of the largerMayan-centeredwhole? What if the Naco
the long run, futuregenerationsof archaeologistswill Valley was an atypicalupwardlymobile semiperiphery
similar to South Korea or Taiwan in the contemporary
learn to appreciateits irony.
global system?Testinghypothesesabout differences
(or
similarities) across systems requires that we study
whole systemsor at least explicitlydiscuss whetherthe
particularrelationshipthat is the focus of analysis is
typical or atypical of the system. Should we conclude
that the whole Mayan-centeredsystem was without
CHASE-DUNN
CHRISTOPHER
core/periphery
exploitation?Even if most regions IOO
Departmentof Sociology,JohnsHopkins University,
km fromCopan were not exploitedor dominatedby it,
Baltimore, Md. 21I21I8, U.S.A. 8 III94
what about regionsthatwere closer and so moresubject
to directmilitaryinfluence?And what about the relaThe comparativestudy of world systems is yet in its tionshipbetweenLa Sierraand its neighbors?Schortman
infancy.The world-systemsperspectivewas developed
primarilyas a tool forunderstandingthe rise of Euro- I. Some have arguedthatthe contemporary
systemis a continuapean hegemonyand the contemporaryglobal political tion of a Eurasianworldsystemthat has been in existencefor
economy.In the past decade scholarshave begun to ex- millennia(e.g.,FrankI993, Frankand Gills I993).
Comments
4I41
CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
Volume 35, Number 4, August-October I994
the spaand Urbanprovidesome clues forunderstanding
tial hierarchywithin the Naco Valley, but what about
relationsbetween the valley and immediatelyadjacent
regions?
The world-systemsperspectiveencouragesus to examine the interconnectionsbetween local structures,
both short-distanceand long-distance.It is not an a priori assumption that long-distanceinteractionsare always determinantoflocal social changeorreproduction.
In fact, spatially bounding a world system means determiningthe spatial nature of systemicprocesses of
structuralreproductionand change. In some systems
this onlyinvolvesinteractionsoververyshortdistances
(and thus they are very small), while in othersgreater
distances are involved. The fact that importantinfluences linked Copan and La Sierra demonstratesthat
theywere partsofthe same system.The question ofthe
spatialscale ofa systemis logicallypriorto the question
relations. A core (or a periphery)to
of core/periphery
anotherregionmust be systematicallyconnectedwith
it. It is certainlydifficultto studywhole systems,but
this goal needs to be acknowledgedifworldsystemsare
to be compared.
GARY
M.
FEINMAN
DepartmentofAnthropology,Universityof
Wisconsin,Madison, Wis. 53706, U.S.A. 7 III 94
In archaeology,theoreticalchange is oftencumulative
and gradualratherthan revolutionaryor Kuhnianin naConsequently,it is not surture (Triggeri989:4-I2).
prisingthat when the concepts "core" and "periphery"
have been employedin connectionwith recentapplications of world-systemsor macroregionalapproachesto
Mesoamericanarchaeology(Blantonand Feinman I984,
Whitecotton and Pailes I979), "real Mesoamerican ar-
chaeologists" oftenassociate these termsmore closely
with broadly similar culture-centerconcepts and the
age-areaprinciplethan with the writingsofWallerstein
(I974) or Chase-Dunn and Hall (I99Ia; Chase-Dunn
i992). Thus, formany archaeologists,"cores" and "peripheries"are envisioned as ratherstatic entities,with
cores servingas cultural donors that uniformlytransmittedthe economic,political,and ideologicaltrappings
ofdevelopmentto theirreceptive,less developedperipheries. Given this simple and undynamicperceptionof
intersocietalrelations,it is little wonder that,as Hall
and Chase-Dunn (I993) note, many archaeologistsare
doubtful of the utility for their research of worldsystemsframeworks.
Schortmanand Urban show that, despite the aforementionedmisconceptionsin theoreticalusage, a blanket rejection of currentmacroregionalframeworkis
premature.Througha carefulexaminationofthe southeasternperipheryof Mesoamerica, theydocumentthat
the long-termhistoryof the Naco Valley cannotbe unbetween
derstoodwithoutconsideringtheinterrelations
the people of that regionand those of the Late Classic
Maya centersto the west. Yet, this point can be made
since formuch (ifnot all) of theirpremore forcefully,
Columbian historythe political boundariesofthe Maya
were markedlysmallerthan the domain thatsharedtraditionsof politics,religion,ritual,and writing(Culbert
I988,
MarcusI993, Yoffeei99i).
broad
By definition,
questions concerningthe pre-HispanicMaya must be
framedin termsthat extendbeyondsingle polities and
regions.
At the same time,throughempiricalanalysis,Schortman and Urban demonstratethat a meaningfulmacroscale approachmust riditselfofthe terminologicalskeletons that have lingered in archaeology's analytical
closet since midcentury.The Late Classic interchanges
between La Sierra and Copan were neither static nor
unidirectional.The Maya "Great Tradition"did not radiate uniformlyas blanketingwaves of "culture" from
a beacon in distantPeten to Copan and theneventually
to the Naco Valley. The processesof interregionalcommunication were farmore selective and complex, and
the authorsmake an importantcontributionby describing the particular ideological trappingsand prestigerelated behaviors that were adopted by the Classicperiodlords of the Naco Valley.
this analysisgoes beyondillusEven moresignificant,
tratinghow the peoples of La Sierra and Copan were
interconnectedduringthe Late Classic to the difficult
question of why those relationstook the specificforms
that theydid. The impact on the Naco Valley was one
of selective "spread" ratherthan intenseexploitationor
(Chase-Dunn and Hall IggIa: 26-32).
underdevelopment
These consequences are not surprisingconsideringthe
multicenteredpolitical landscape ofsoutheasternMesoand politiamericaand the constraintson transportation
cal power that were faced by local lords. Likewise, the
apparentabsence ofthe grosseconomic effectsofunderdevelopment should not be seen as a general refutation of macroregionalapproaches. In fact, explications of the diversityof intersocietalrelationsprovide
the grist for comparative world-systemsperspectives
(Chase-DunnandHall I99 Ia:26-3o).
Althoughthis paper offersmany significantlessons,
several avenues appear open forfurtherconsideration
and investigation.In this largelysynchronictreatment,
one is left to wonder about interregionalrelations in
SoutheasternMesoamerica before and afterthe Late
Classic. How importantwere obsidianand shell to these
were these goods distribnetworks,and how differently
uted and consumed in otherphases? While I agreewith
Schortmanand Urban that the relationsbetweenLa Sierra and Copan did not engenderunderdevelopment,
these links also may have constitutedmore than just
cultural emulation by the La Sierra elite. In ancient
Mesoamerica,shell ornamentmanufacturewas a laborintensivecraftthatinvolveda special inventoryofstone
implementsas well as considerabletime and labor to
process the durable shell (e.g., Feinman and Nicholas
I993). If most of the shell fashionedby La Sierracraft
workers(in Operation i9) was siphoned offto Copan
SCHORTMAN
AND
URBAN
(throughthe emergentLa Sierraelite) in returnforless
labor-intensiveproducts,then the Copanec elite may
have achieved a net gain. Such an advantageexemplifies
the economic relationshipthat Gills and Frank (i99i)
have termed"interpenetrating
accumulation."
It may also prove instructiveto examine the specific
behaviorsthatwere borrowed(as well as thosethatwere
not) by the inhabitantsof the Naco Valley. As Schortman and Urban argue,local elite emulationof the symbols of power seems to be key. But is it significantthat
the specificborrowingsat La Sierra included turbaned
headgearand an interestin marineshell but apparently
few exotic servingbowls, ballcourtsbut not the Maya
script,and an association with attachedspecialistsbut
little clear emphasis on militarypower? Many of the
transmitted
trappingswere not simplyelite symbolsbut
associatedwith individuallyfocusedrituals,elementsof
personal ornamentation,or related to the production/
exchange of goods (e.g., shell ornaments) that were
linkedto thoseelite ritualsor adornments.In sum,these
elements seem to point to underpinningsforsouthern
Maya Classic-periodelite power thatwere enmeshedin
the networksand the personal aura of specificruling
individualsratherthan in more corporateor communal
bases (see Drennan I99I). If this is borneout by future
research,the implications of such differencesin the
bases ofpowerforintersocietalrelationswill remainto
be determined.
Core and Peripheryin SoutheasternMesoamerica 14I5
modern world system makes the study of the factors
thatshape the typeand degreeofperipheralization
more
fruitful.
The utility of such an approach is illustrated in
Schortmanand Urban's observationon the lack ofcorrespondenceofpolitical,ideological,and economic factors
in the La Sierra core/periphery
relation. Chase-Dunn
and I have distinguishedat least threenetworksofcore/
peripheryrelations, correspondingto trade in bulk
goods, political/military
interactions,and tradein lux-
ury(high-value,
low-weight)
goods(i99i,
I993).
What
seems to be unique about the modernworld systemis
the coincidenceofthe three,which in the late 2oth centuryhave become trulyglobal. The paucityofstudiesof
I500 core/periphery
systemsmakes it difficult
pre-A.D.
to know whether the modern world system is truly
unique in thisrespector onlyunusual. Clearly,however,
the systemwhich contains Copan, Quirigua,and La Sierra is connected at the luxury-goodslevel. As ChaseDunn has suggested,the evidence presentedby Schortman and Urban does not rule out possible military/
political or even bulk-goodsconnections,thoughonly
withina narrowrangewhich does not include La Sierra.
This, in turn,suggeststhat this may be an inchoate
was just beginning.
systemin which underdevelopment
It could be thatthe systemdisintegrated
beforeunderdevelopmentstabilized.Ifso, thiswould raise the question
whetherthis was an accident or due to some aspects of
the systemitself.Schortmanand Urban's discussion of
the role of monopolizationsuggestsways in which this
question might be pursued empirically.However, the
D. HALL
THOMAS
study of this question will require comparisonswith
Departmentof Sociologyand Anthropology,
other systems in addition to furtherstudy of the CoDePauw University,Greencastle,Ind. 46I35, U.S.A.
pan-La Sierrasystem.
28 III 94
One of the more intriguingcontributionsto the comrelationsin this paper
Concurringas I do with Chase-Dunn's commentsabove, parativestudyof core/periphery
ratherthan repeatingthem I will extend and elaborate is the analysis of ideology.Could it be that in ancient
upon them. Schortmanand Urban's paper is a welcome core/periphery
systemswhat Mann (i986) calls "techcontributionto the comparativestudyofworld-systems nologiesofpower" (e.g.,ideologies)must,or at least typor core/periphery
relations(Hall and Chase-Dunn I993), ically, precede the developmentof underdevelopment?
that they did not frametheiranalysis Again,comparativestudiesofentiresystemsare needed
notwithstanding
in those termsor studyan entiresystem.I endorsethe to address this question, but an affirmative
answer to
firsttwo of theirthreeconclusions: thatpolitical,ideo- it would suggestthat the emergenceof capitalist core/
logical,and economic variablesdo not necessarilycoin- peripheryrelationstransforms
the processin which idecide in this systemand thatthe conditionsunderwhich ology facilitatestrade which enables political control
different
typesof core/periphery
relationsdevelop need and may lead to underdevelopmentinto a process in
furtherstudy.To the latterconclusion I would add that which economic incorporationis oftenfollowedby pothe conditionsshapingthe directionand degreeofhier- litical incorporationand subsequent ideological hegearchy in various types of core/periphery
relations are mony.One case studyis fartoo flimsya basis forsuch
also in need of examination. I demur,however,from a claim, but it is suggestiveof a need forfurtherstudy.
theirsuggestionthatthe term"periphery"be jettisoned. It also highlightsotherways in which the modernworld
Peripheralityshould be conceptualizedas a broad class systemdiffersfromancient core/periphery
systems.
of relationshipsof varyingtypesand intensities.Thus,
That one can even generatesuch speculations from
as defined
Schortmanand Urban's studyunderscoresits value. By
peripheralization,
byWallerstein
(I 974, I 980),
is one extremeof a rangeof core/periphery
relationsin couchingtheiranalysis in generalterms,theybroaden
the modern (poSt-A.D.
world system (Hall I986, a detailed case studyinto an importantcontributionto
I500)
i989)-a rangethatrepresentsonlyone ofseveralpossi- the comparativestudyofcore/periphery
relations.In doble typesofperipheralrelations.Decoupling the concept ing so they achieve one of the loftiestof the aims of
ofa peripheralrelationfromits limitedexemplarsin the archaeology,using the past to understandthe present.I
4I6
i CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
Volume 35, Number 4, August-October I994
hope that other archaeologistswill elaborate on their maintain ascendancy for any extendedperiod of time.
work and recognizethat in doing so theynot only con- The devastationvisitedon the entireeasternMediterratributeto the understandingof ancient core/peripherynean seaboard by the "Sea Peoples" also demonstrates
ofthe mod- the inabilityof Bronze Age societies to dominatetheir
relationsbut also expand our understanding
less sedentaryneighborson the peripheriesof civiliernworld system.
zation.
Anotherkey issue that Schortmanand Urban raise is
distinctions.
the multidimensionalityof core/periphery
KARDULIAS
P. NICK
While it is truethatthe political and ideologicalcompoThe CollegeofWooster,
in Archaeology,
Program
nents deserve greaterattention,the economic dimenOhio 4469I, U.S.A. I IV 94
Wooster,
sion has not yetbeen fullyexplored.I findit encouraging
theory,in its various guises, has proved that Schortmanand Urban place significantstress on
World-systems
to be a remarkablyflexibleconstruct.As in theirprevi- production,an element to which the original worldous writingson this topic, Schortmanand Urban dem- systems formulationgave insufficientconsideration.
onstratethat, with some reworking,many of Waller- They effectivelydemonstratehow theirconceptual restein's concepts are useful. However, they also point finementsarticulatewith the archaeologicalrecordof
thatseveralconceptsrequirea com- the Naco Valley,but thereare a fewpointsthatrequire
out,quite correctly,
plete overhaul. The value of this article is twofold: additionalclarification:(i) How do the goods thatelites
exchangeserve
(i) it demonstratesthe weakness of the core/periphery obtainfromtheircontrolofinterregional
dichotomyin the precapitalistworld and (2) it exhibits as "political capital"? What does this phrase mean in
a patternofsocial dynamicsthatcharacterizesstatepol- real terms? (2) If the mechanism for the exchange of
ities in non-Westernsettingsin the past. On the first certainpreciosities(e.g., worked shell) was the succesofmaterialamongelites (an elite down-thepoint, Schortmanand Urban have identifiedone key sive transfer
contributionthat archaeologycan make to the world- line trade),would not some inequalityhave developed
systems debate-that historic and prehistoricstates as those nearer the sources siphoned offmore of the
lacked the mechanismsto dominatethe distant(and in material?It mightbe interestingto examine the distrisome cases, even nearby)societies with which theyin- bution of such goods in intermediateareas and sites.
teracted in order to procure various resources. Hall (3) If political fragmentationoccurred widely in the
"domino
A.D. IOOO, thepostulated
(I986), among others,has pointed out the problem of Southeastonlyafter
the
and
decline
rather
may be
seems
attenuated,
effect"
unidirectional.
as
incorporation
effect
of
the
depicting
He has stressedthe need to discuss culturecontactas a due to other,perhapsmore local, factors.
In summary, Schortman and Urban offera very
dialoguein which both partieshave at least some say in
events and attemptto implementtheir own agendas. thoughtfuland useful reexaminationof world-systems/
This point bears repeating,especiallyin an archaeologi- interactiontheory.Betterstill, theytie the conceptsto
cal context.The issue also becomes clearerin the role an appropriateset of archaeologicaldata to demonstrate
playedby elites in the periphery.As Schortmanand Ur- how such a systemworkedon the ground.
ban note, such elites "can play one core offagainst another"; they display considerable flexibilitythrough
theirabilityto negotiatea betterdeal (whatone can call
negotiated peripherality,unlike the mandated condi- PHILIP L. KOHL
tionsespousedbysome dependencytheorists).The peer- DepartmentofAnthropology,WellesleyCollege,
politysituationoperativeamongthe Maya in peripheral Wellesley,Mass. 02I 81, U. S.A. I III 94
regions such as Honduras is similar to the conditions
thatmanyothercity-statecivilizationsfaced.In the Ae- Schortmanand Urban have presenteda thoughtfulregean, for example, the small Late Bronze Age states, considerationof the conceptsof "core" and "periphery"
the develand complexity, as applied to interregionalprocessesaffecting
while capable ofsubstantialrefinement
rarelydominatedother societies at theirmargins.The opment of early agrariancomplex states. They insist
geographicdispersalofvariousresourcesprecludeddom- that interregionalinteractionmay occur for political,
ination of vital commodities. Even when certain re- economic, or ideological reasons and that these prosourceswere concentrated,the polities oftenlacked the cesses must be distinguishedand analyzed separately.
ability,and perhapsthe incentive,to regulateaccess to Their model predictswhen political and economic unthe material. For example, Torrence (I986) has argued derdevelopmentin peripheralareas will not occur and
that the town of Phylakopidid not controlMelos's ob- emphasizesthe social effectsofthe adoptionofideologisidian quarries,majorsourcesformost ofeasternGreece cal elements and practices fromthe core area by the
and the Aegean islands.Instead,she suggeststhatpeople emergentelite in the periphery.It displaysa nice sense
open to emmade individual procurementtrips to the island from ofhistoricalcontingencyand is refreshingly
throughoutthe region. Furthermore,the internecine pirical investigation.There clearly is much to praise
warfarethat led to the fall of Mycenaean civilization here, but I want to focus on some of the implications
reflectsthe inabilityof the Late Bronze Age states to of theirinitial theoreticaldiscussion and then respond
SCHORTMAN
AND
URBAN
brieflyas a non-Mayan/Mesoamerican
specialist to the
evidencepresentedin theircase study.
One greatvirtueofSchortmanand Urban's discussioi
of the problematicconcepts of "core" and "periphery'
is their unwillingnessto abandon them entirelyevei
in the absence of convincingevidence forpolitical an(
economic underdevelopmentin peripheralareas. We dc
not findourselvesin a neoevolutionistworldwith eaci
littlevalley evolvingindependentlytowardsstatehood
despitethe factthattheydeliberatelyeschew any refer
ence to world systems-a decision that must reflec
theirunease with the overzealous applicationof world
systemstheoryto prehistorictimes. In general,I share
theirskepticism,thoughI would arguethat,ifcriticall,
employed,the world-systemsmodel (and even its cum
bersome terminology!)may occasionally prove illumi
nating(see EdensandKohl I992:30-3I).
Anyattemptto understandthe natureofinterregiona
interactionrunsup againstseriousmethodologicalprob
lems, such as estimatingthe scale of long-distanceex
changein the absence ofwritteninformationand docu
mentingthe movementsof "invisible" perishableitems
(a problem not discussed in their review of the Nacc
Valley materials).Aside fromthese nearlyinsuperable
difficulties,
the theoreticalquestion remainsthe degree
ofsystemicarticulationbetween core and peripheralar
eas under precapitalist conditions of the production
consumption,and distribution(i.e., transportation)o
materialgoods. On the basis of evidence fromwesteri
Asia duringthe Early Bronze Age, I would argue tha
conditionsof real dependencya la the modern world
systemsmodel are extremelyrareforantiquityand prob
ably short-lived;sustained underdevelopmentis alsc
rarelyif ever achieved. The concept of the interdepen
dence of core and peripheralareas is thereforemore ap.
propriate,thoughone need not assume a level playinE
field or despair of distinguishingthe principal actors
fromthe supportingcast. Continued recourse to the
distinctionhas the advantageoffocusing
core/periphery
discussion on the unequal power relations that musi
have characterizedinterregionalinteractionever sinc(
states firstarose.
Whetherthe formof this interactionmay be mosi
convincinglydocumented in the ideological arena, as
Schortmanand Urban suggest,depends, of course, or
the evidence considered.Theoretically,thereis nothing
surprisingabout this,my pointbeingthatit is still pref.
erableto conceive of such ideological interactionas oc.
curringbetweenunequal partners("cores" and "peripheries") and probablylinked to political and economic
considerationsas well, even if the latter are not well
understood.In other words, I congratulateSchortman
and Urban fornot adoptingearlierunsatisfactoryconcepts such as stimulus diffusionto explain their evidence, but I would also insist that there are limits tc
the disentanglingofpolitical,economic,and ideological
componentsof activitieswithinor betweensocieties.If
and primitivisthistorithesubstantivistanthropologists
ans are correct,separatingthese spherescleanlyforthe
Core and Peripheryin SoutheasternMesoamerica 14I7
ancientworld is much more difficultthan forthe modern. There may even have been an economic aspect to
theadoptionoftheMesoamericanball game in theNaco
Valley-though, admittedly,I am unable to articulate
it.
The authors' review of their archaeological record
generallysupportstheirinitial theoreticaldiscussion. I
am hopeful,however,thatthe criticalreactionofsomeone not familiarwith thisprimaryevidencemay be constructive.Despite theirextensiveinvestigations,Schortman and Urban rarelystress the limitations of their
work and the problemsassociated with interpreting
essentiallynegative evidence. Can one assume that marineshell artifactswere "fashionedsolely by the Operation I9 residents,"or does this centerrepresentthe only
such productioncenteryet documented?My own experience with ideologicallychargedartifactssuch as the
widely distributedcarved stone vessels fromwestern
Asia (Kohl I978) suggeststhatborrowingand emulation
are not one-sided,with peripheriespassively adopting
thesymbolsand ritualparaphernaliaoftheirsocial superiors.Ancientbeliefsystemswere notablysyncretic,assimilatingand refashioningsymbols and tales adopted
fromexotic barbariansocieties. The ball game seems
indisputablylowland Mayan/Mesoamerican,but what
of the Spondylus shells or otherritual-ladenartifacts?
Did they originally function in rites conducted by
Mayan ahaws, or were they adopted fromtheirneighbors to the southeast and transformed?
Attributionof
originis oftenmade solely on the basis of where the
initial materialswere found.Given the relativelyshort
distances(ca. IOO km) involved,I findsurprising
thelack
ofrecordedinteractionbetweentheNaco Valleyand Copan/Quiriguaareas. Perhaps this absence relates to the
nature of the terrain and vegetation cover, but one
would still expect more contact via the coast between
the Motagua and the Chamelecon. Is this too a problem
of research?One is, afterall, workingin a borderarea.
Ideally,it would have been helpfulto have a more explicit statementof the contrastbetweenthe interaction
in Late Classic times and that documentedforearlier
periods. Withoutthis comparativerecord,I do not see
why the evidence presentedcannot be interpretedto
supportthe idea of political incorporationof the Lower
Naco Valley into an expandingMayan polity immediatelyto the northwest.Finally,a minorpoint: the presence of perlitenodules in the valley may suggestthat
obsidian also is present,since the latterunder proper
conditionscan be transformed
into the former;the perlite depositsprobablydeserverigorousscrutiny.
JOYCE
MARCUS
Museum ofAnthropology,UniversityofMichigan,
Ann Arbor,Mich. 48IO9-IO79, U.S.A. 7 III 94
Schortmanand Urban's work in the Naco Valley will
make many archaeologistsrethinkthe natureof "core"
vs. "periphery."For a long time archaeologistsfound
4I8
i CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
Volume 35, Number 4, August-October I994
these conceptsveryusefulin dealingwith complexsocieties. Now, with new data being collected in so-called
peripheries,we are seeing problemswith them. From
my perspective,one of the biggestproblemsis that the
model is static; it implies that the core
core/periphery
was always a core and the peripheryalways peripheral.
Once such labels are imposed on specificgeographicareas, all futureanalyses are influencedand constrained.
It is very difficultto view an area we have labeled a
''periphery"as independentor innovativeor as a "core"
in its own right.
If a "periphery"is actuallyindependent-which I believe is the case with the "Southeast" of Mesoamerica-it is its ovn core and should not be understoodas
an impoverishedor dilutedversionof the Classic Maya
states. The Southeast is only on the edge if we view it
fromCopan's or Quirigua's perspective;however,if we
view thingsfromLa Sierra's perspective,Copainis on
theperipheryofLa Sierra'ssystemofexchangepartners.
Accordingto Schortmanand Urban,the Naco Valley
(96 km2) duringthe Late Classic displays a five-tiered
settlementhierarchydominatedby one site, La Sierra,
a site that was ten times largerthan settlementsin the
next tier. Furthermore,La Sierra served as a magnet,
pulling in rural population around it. This packing of
populationarounda new capital also occurredat Monte
Alba6nshortlyafterit was foundedas theregionalcapital
forthe Valley of Oaxaca. The two cases may,in fact,be
responsesto similarneeds, such as defenseor the controlof labor,workshops,and tribute.The presenceof a
multitieredhierarchyofsettlementsin theNaco Valley,
evidence of population nucleation around the primate
capital,and the appearanceofso manyworkshopsat the
capital and dispersedthroughoutthe valley all suggest
thatLa Sierraadministeredits own autonomouspolity.
Most archaeologistshad underestimatedthe political
complexityin the area, partlybecause many persisted
in calling it a periphery.Such complexityis not wholly
unexpected,because many regions throughoutMesoamericaand CentralAmericahad highpopulationdensitiesbetweenA.D. 6oo and 8oo. Whatis unexpected,however,is the mountingevidence that the Southeast area
was much more in chargeof its own destinythan was
imagined.
formerly
All the data presentedby Schortmanand Urban sughad greatfreedomin
gestthatLa Sierra'sadministrators
exchangingtheir goods and productswith other areas
and that theywere not dominatedor exploitedby centers such as Copan. For part of the Classic it appears
that,unlike La Sierra,Quirigua was dominatedand politicallycontrolledby Copain(Marcus I992:409). Quirigua broke away fromCopan afterfightinga "battle of
inA.D. 738 (MarcusI976:I36-38; Sharer
independence"
I978b). AfterA.D. 738 we mightbe justifiedin calling
it a kind of periphery,since it had once been incorporatedinto the Copan polity.At present,thereis no evidence to suggestthat La Sierrawas everpartof the Copan polity,but thereis a lot of evidence to suggestthat
it was a tradingpartner.
ROBERT
J. SHARER
UniversityMuseum, 33rd and Spruce Sts.,
Pa. I9104-6324, U.S.A.29 III 94
Philadelphia,
"Core" and "periphery"referto a typologywith meanings that vary accordingto the investigator'sperspective. For instance,they have spatial (geographical)and
behavioral(cultural)meaningsthat overlap.The spatial
meaningsrefersimplyto centerand edge of a givengeographicalarea. The behavioralmeanings,which Schortman and Urban emphasize here,referto the donorand
the recipientof particularsets of behaviors (and symbols). On the basis oftheirNaco Valley data, Schortman
and Urban are able to demonstrate,within the usual
limits of inferenceavailable fromarchaeological data,
thattherewas no appreciabledominationof the SoutheasternMaya area fromthe Maya lowlands duringthe
Late Classic period. Rather,the lowland Maya, represented by the polities of Copan and Quirigua, and the
Southeasternarea, as seen fromthe Naco Valley and its
capital, La Sierra,were part of an interdependentnetwork of diversepolities sustainedby a web of political,
economic, and ideological interaction. Because they
have givenus such an excellentand thoughtfulanalysis
issue as seen fromthe Southeastof the core/periphery
ern area, it is possible to considersome factorsthat are
beyondthe scope of theircontributionbut relevantto
continuingdialogue on this subject.
First,because of the limitationsof data availability,
the analysispertainsto one periodofMesoamericandevelopment,the Late Classic. This providesresearchers
an excellent foundationfor expandingthe analysis to
the precedingand subsequenteras and thus achievinga
interactionin
dynamic perspectiveon core/periphery
the Southeasternarea. Furtherinvestigationadoptinga
behavioral frameworkfor core/peripheryinteraction
would probablyreveala variedand complexsituationin
which otherpolities in both the Maya lowland area and
the SoutheasternMaya area manipulatedpolitical,economic,and ideologicalpowerin a varietyofwayswithin
environment.Dura constantlyshiftingcore/periphery
ing certainintervalsit is verylikely that the verydefinitionsof "core" and "periphery"shiftedand networks
fromthose ofthe Late
ofinteractionwere verydifferent
Classic. In the Preclassic and the Postclassic therewere
no nearbylowland Maya statessuch as Copan and Quirigua to serve as role models forthe elites in the Southeasternarea. The role models (orsources)at these times
may have included the Gulf Coast and Chalcatzingo
(Middle Preclassic), Kaminaljuyu and El Mirador (Late
Preclassic),Teotihuacan, Kaminaljuyu,and Tikal (Early
Classic), and Chichen Itza (TerminalClassic and Early
Postclassic),but these polities were only the most conspicuous nodes withinshiftingcoreareas. Otherpolities
surelyparticipated,just as otherpowerfulpolities (such
as Tikal and Calakmul) were part of the Late Classic
core of the Maya lowlands but,beingmore distantfrom
the SoutheasternMaya area, probablyplayed less conspicuous roles therethan did Copan and Quirigua.
SCHORTMAN
AND
URBAN
Core and Peripheryin SoutheasternMesoamerica 14I9
Schortmanand Urban suggestthat we abandon the wheels, etc.), as they were throughoutpre-Hispanic
label "SoutheasternMaya periphery,"concludingthatit Mesoamerica.
My perspectiveis increasinglyout of fashion,especonjuresup images of a core of "advanced" Maya states
This image cer- cially in view of the currentvogue of "world-systems"
dominatinga farless complexperiphery.
implications.The artainlyhas been implicitor explicitin the literature-in models,with theircore/periphery
essence as a loaded variantof the behavioral(donor/re- chaeologicalapplicationsofsuch models thatI have read
typology.But a generallystrikeme variouslyas (i) boring,in the sense
cipient)meaning of the core/periphery
relationshipneed not mean domination/ that new labels are being attached to interactionprodonor/recipient
subordination.The area of originof a set of behaviors cesses that archaeologists have long been concerned
(or symbols)does not necessarilydominateareas where with,(2) misguided,because attemptsto extendmodels
thosebehaviors(orsymbols)are emulated,as Schortman developedto explain the historicaloriginsof capitalism
prehistoricsituationsare laboredand
and Urbanhave shown. "The SoutheasternMaya periph- to quite different
ery" should referonly to a spatial concept-the south- unconvincing,and (3) premature,because the archaeoeasternedge of the area definedby ancient and modern logical recordoftendoes not jibe with the models (just
importsthat supoccupation by Mayan-speakingpeoples-but since the where are all those Syrian/Anatolian
term "periphery"has several meanings and implica- posedly fueled the Uruk-period "core" in southern
tions,perhapswe should use "SoutheasternMaya area" Sumer?).
Schortmanand Urbanhave done a nice job ofshowing
instead. This would be comparable to similar neutral
geographicallabels such as "Maya highlands"or "Maya that on detailed examination specific purportedcore/
lowlands."
peripheryinteractionsoftenfail to fitour expectations.
Finally,we still need to explorethe behavioralmean- I particularlyappreciate their effortbecause I have
thatcan be applied to this workedat Copan, the major "core" centerin the southings (such as donor/recipient)
and otherareas-keeping in mindthatthe Southeastern easternMaya lowlands, since i980 and findit increasMaya area may not be on or even near the "edge" of inglydifficultto arguefromthe available evidence that
otherspatial units definedby other criteria,as in Me- it exerted any strongpolitical or economic influence
soamerican interactionwith Central America (Sharer overregionsor polities outside its immediatedomain in
I984). Thus, in some instances it is obvious that the western Honduras. The question is why we ever beSoutheasternMaya area was the recipientof sets of be- lieved it did. The answer lies, of course,in the impreshaviors (and symbols) from other areas, so it can be sive monumentalart,architecture,calendrics,and epigviewed as beingperipheralto one or morecore (ordonor) raphyfoundat Copan and otherMaya centersbut largely
areas. But it was just as clearlythe donorof sets of be- lackingon the "peripheries."That these thingsmay not
haviors(and symbols)thatwere acceptedin otherareas, be symptomaticofthe projectionoftangiblepolitical or
so it can also be viewed as a core (donor)area forone economic influence over great distances (or even of
or more peripheries(Demarest and SharerI986, Sharer stronginternalpolitical centralization)is a lesson we
I989).
are just beginningto internalize.As Schortmanand UrIn sum, the importantissue is not terminologyper se ban point out, disseminationof culturologicalprestige
but how best to pursue a betterunderstandingof the and symbolsmay be anotherstory.
prehistoryof the SoutheasternMaya area. The research
What if we could ignoreall the fancyroyaltrappings
designedby Schortmanand Urbanis a majorstepin this and just compare the rest of the archaeologicalrecords
direction.
fromCopan and Naco? I findit fascinatingthat,despite
manyyearsof work at Copan, includingexcavationsin
the largelyelite urban core, much more evidence for
DAVID
WEBSTER
specializedproductionand forthe centralizationofsuch
PennsylvaniaState
DepartmentofAnthropology,
productionseems to be presentat La Sierrathan at CoUniversity,UniversityPark, Pa. I6802, U.S.A.
pan. Few sites show signsofspecialized production,and
20 III 94
the ones we know best are ruralones. During the Penn
State excavations at Copan, which include sites of all
I stronglyagreewith the basic thrustof Schortmanand social ranksin all partsof the valley,I have been struck
Urban's arguments,both in generaltermsand in their by how scarce importedobjectsfromanywhereseem to
specific observations concerning interactionson the be, althoughthey are certainlypresentin the formof,
southeasternfrontierof Mesoamerica. My own opinion among otherthings,shell, ceramics,and exotic stone.
has long been that the most significantof the forces
Importedobsidianis as obtrusiveas at Naco and found
that stimulatethe emergenceof culturalcomplexityin in all households,but its apparentabundanceis deceivpreindustrialsocieties and thereaftermaintain and re- ing. Blade inventoriesof Ixtepeque obsidian recentlyreshape it are usually quite localized. This is especially coveredfromsuperbcontextsat Ceren,El Salvador,sugtrue where the cultures or societies in question are gest that commonerhousehold blade consumptionwas
"low-energy"ones (i.e., lackingin nonhumansourcesof on the orderof 5-I5 blades peryear(PaysonSheets,perenergyand technologicalinnovationsthatrenderhuman sonal communication,I994). Discard samples fromCoenergyexpendituremore efficient,such as metal tools, pan rural sites indicate similar levels of use. Copan's
420
1 CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
Volume 35, Number 4, August-October I994
peak populationrangedbetweenabout 22,000 anc
20-30 annualporterloads oi
28,000 at A.D. 750-800;
obsidianwould easilyhave suppliedit. Obsidianwas not
"expensive"enoughor its procurementcomplexenough
for elites to have made much political hay out of its
control.I stronglydoubt that Copan servedas any significant"gateway"forthe controlofobsidianforexport
elsewhere.
Turningtheeconomic argumentaround,what else did
Copan export in large amounts? Apparentlynot the
polychromeCopadorpotteryforwhichthe Copan Valley
is sometimessaid to be a majorcenterofproductionand
distribution.
I disagreethat militaryinfluencewas a factor.Maya
politieswere probablymilitarilymuch too demographically and logistically feeble to project coercive force
againstpolities as distantas Copan is fromNaco.
The political decline of Copan was moregradualthan
Schortmanand Urban suggestand less out of syncwith
the Naco sequence. Copan elites held on in some sense
forabout two centuriesafterthe royalcollapse at about
A.D. 85o. Hydrationdates froma work-kitof obsidian
blades recoveredby Widmerat the 9N-8 shell workshop
to by Schortmanand Urban clusterbeautifully
referred
in the mid-ioth century.Obsidian continuedto be importedin seeminglyundiminishedamountsafterthe demise ofCopan's kingsand afterA.D. iooo, bywhich time
the elites were largelygone. One begins to wondernot
only if "core" economies much affectedthose of "peripheries"but also if royaltyor elites exertedmuch direct controlover internaleconomic productionand exchangein polities such as Copan.
PETER
S. WELLS
DepartmentofAnthropology,Universityof
Minnesota,Minneapolis,Minn. 55455, U.S.A. 3I
III
94
This paperis a timelycontributionto a growingbodyof
information
indicatingthatthe centersthatwere fociof
archaeologicalresearchin the I95os, i96os, and I970S
fromcommunitiesin their
were oftennot as different
peripheriesas was thoughtand did not exert as much
political and economic controlover those communities
as the currentmodels suggested.This change in thinkinghas come about largelybecause manyarchaeologists
have turnedfromconcentrationon largesites to investigationof smaller sites and of whole culturallandscapes
(see, e.g.,Milner's [I990] reviewof the systemofwhich
Cahokia was part and Kenoyer's[I99I] summaryof research in the Indus Valley). For Iron Age temperateEurope recent investigationsshow that the trade centers
from
of the Late Hallstatt period were not as different
othercommunitiesas earlierstudies had suggestedand
that even the Late Iron Age oppida did not have the
monopolies on large-scaleironsmithing,productionof
ornate bronze objects, or coin mintingthat had been
assumed. Results fromthe past decade ofresearchshow
that smaller, oftenunfortifiedcommunitieswere carryingon the same economic activities (Wells 199o).
These examples make it clear that the core/periphery
dichotomywhich once servedthe fieldwell is too simplisticforcurrentunderstanding.
Communitiesthought
to be peripheraloftenprove similar to the centersin
significantways. As Schortmanand Urban argue, we
need to move away fromthe core/periphery
dichotomy
to develop models that accommodate all interacting
communitiesas interrelatedpartsof largersystems.
The authors' treatmentof the adoption of symbols
and rituals by elites is particularlyinteresting.As they
observe,this process is highlyselective-elites choose
those elementsthat theythinkwill best suit theirpurposes. The adoptionofthewine-drinking
ritualfromthe
Greek and Etruscanregionsof the MediterraneanBasin
by EarlyIron Age elites northof the Alps in temperate
Europe is a well-documented example. Because we
know about the Greek and Etruscanwine ritual from
textualand iconographicsources,we can judgefromthe
archaeologicalevidence in temperateEurope which aspects of the ritual were adopted and which were not
(Wells I985, DietlerI990). A numberofquestionsarise
fromthis much-studiedcase, and they apply to the issues raised by Schortman and Urban. Why do elites
choose some elements to adopt and not others?What
can we learn about the values and ideologies of those
elites by addressingthis question of selection? Under
what circumstancesdid the borrowingelites become familiar with the behaviors and symbols-through visitingcentersand observingor participating
in the rituals
or throughsome othermechanism?
Schortmanand Urban's stimulatingarticleraises two
otherissues. First,we need to take into account change
over time. In the manipulation of symbols by elites,
change in fashioncan take place quickly.It will be importantto ascertainwhetherthe elites in theperipheries
were so closely linked with the core elites that they
employedthe borrowedritualsand symbolsat the same
time or whethertherewas some time lag. Second, we
need to investigatethe originsoftheritualsand symbols
in orderto be certain about who was copyingwhom.
We cannot assume thatritualsand symbolsthat spread
throughinteractionnecessarily originatedin the centers; there are many familiarexamples of cores' borrowingpowerfulsymbolsfromperipheralcontexts.
MICHAEL
E. WHALEN
DepartmentofAnthropology,Universityof Tulsa,
Tulsa, Okla. 74I04-3 I89, U.S.A. I Iv 94
Schortmanand Urban have alreadydone valuable and
stimulatingwork in interactionstudies (see Schortman
and Urban I992). Their premiseis thatextraregionalinteractionsare powerfulforceswhich shape societies and
importantelementsin culturechange.The problemfor
archaeologists,then,is to develop generalparadigmsof
the ways in which societies interactand of the significance of these interactionsto sociopolitical evolution.
This paperpursuesthe issue further
by examiningsome
ofthe traditionalassumptionsin one frequently
encoun-
SCHORTMAN
AND
URBAN
teredkindofintersocietalinteraction:core/periphery
re
lations, or interactionsbetween developed areas anm
theirsimplerneighbors.
Schortmanand Urban argue that our understanding
of core/periphery
interactionshave long been shaped b'
imperial or hegemonisticperspectives,the core beini
viewed as the primemoverand principalconsumeranm
the peripheryas the passive and exploitedrecipient,anm
raise some cogentquestions about the universalvalidit,
of this model. They rightlycontendthat,amonghierar
chical societies ofdifferent
levels ofcomplexity,autono
mous neighborsare transformed
into exploitedperipher
ies onlyunderspecificcircumstances,viz., when strong
directcontroland coercivepower can be exerted.Hege
monistic systems exist, but this is not the inevitable
shape of core/periphery
relations.
The articlemakes a useful distinctionbetween wha
mightbe termed"attached" and "autonomous" periph
eries. Attached peripheriesfollow the classical model
beingclosely bound to the core by a web of ideological
economic, and political ties. These areas suffervarious
formsofpolitical and economic dominationby the corn
polity,resultingin decentralizationand underdevelop
ment of theirown economic and political systems.Ih
contrast,autonomousperipheriesinteractwith cores ii
looser, less comprehensiveways without sufferingei
thereconomic and political exploitationor diminishec
development.Schortmanand Urban go on to arguethat
despite the lack of political and economic domination
the peripherymay use some ofthe ideologyor symbolic
systems of the more developed core, and we ofter
see traces of this in the archaeological record in th(
formof symbolsand ceremonialfacilities.Finally,they
assert that this can be a coevolutionarysituation ir
which interactionsare mutuallybeneficial.Mesoamer.
ican archaeologicaldata serveas an illustrationof these
thought-provoking
concepts.
The Naco Valleywould in traditionalusage be consid.
ered a less-developedsouthernperipheryof the Classic
lowland Maya world. The picturepresentedhere,how.
ever, is of an autonomous area marchingmuch to its
own tune.The authorsuse archaeologicaldata to model
a situation in which the elite of La Sierra engagedir
only limited kinds of interactionswith the developec
polities of Copan and (perhaps)Quirigua. The exotica
movingin these exchangenetworkswere importanttc
thepolitical ambitionsofthe elites ofbothLa Sierraanc
its more developed tradingpartners,and the aspects o:
Classic Maya ritualsymbolismwhich the La Sierraelite
adoptedfurtherservedto distinguishthemwithintheii
local context.
Insteadofone largepowerfulpolitydraininga smaller,
weakerone, then,we have two largelyautonomouspolities at different
levels ofdevelopmentengagingin mutually beneficial interactionswhile pursuingtheir own
ends. This seems to me to be a verybelievable formol
interactionforearlycomplex societies,which oftendc
nothave the abilityto exertcomprehensivepoliticaland
economic controlor to extenddominationoverlongdistances. Imperialismand classic core/periphery
exploit-
Core and Peripheryin SoutheasternMesoamerica 142I
ative interactionscertainlyexistedin the ancientworld,
as in theAztec case, forinstance.Nevertheless,I believe
that Schortmanand Urban are illustratinga formof intersocietal contact and a motivation for that contact
which were probablyat least as common as hegemony.
In my own area of interest,their model might very
profitablybe applied to Paquime or Casas Grandes,located near the otherend of Mesoamerica and long consideredto have been a dependentperipheryof a central
Mexican core. Others are clearly thinkingalong the
same lines,writingabout prestige-goods
economies (e.g.,
Frankensteinand Rowlands I978), peer-polityinteractions (e.g.,Renfrewand Cherryi986), and intrasocietal
political motivations and factional competitions(e.g.,
andFox I994) whichcan stimuRoscoeI993, Brumfiel
late socioculturalevolution.
In sum, relationsbetweencores and peripheriesare of
considerableinterestin today'sarchaeology,but here,as
with most of our otherinterpretiveparadigms,we are
findingthat thingsare not reallyas simple as had been
initially assumed. Moreover,while labels like "core"
and "periphery"are sometimeshandythings,we should
bear in mind that everylabel covers,and therebysuppresses,a certainamount ofpotentiallysignificantvariability.This paperis an importantreminderofwhat we
maybe missingbyuncriticalcategorizationofintersocietal contacts.
Reply
EDWARD
PATRICIA
M.
SCHORTMAN
AND
A. URBAN
Gambier,Ohio, U.S.A.
I3
v 94
We thank all of the commentatorsfortheirthoughtful
remarks.Their statementsand questionsregarding
ideas
expressedin the essay and the Naco researchinvariably
advance discussion of core/periphery
relations.We will
tryto respondin kind,identifying
themesin thevarious
commentsand providingour own thoughtson theissues
raised.The remarkswhich follow are partof a dialogue
which we look forwardto continuingwith these and
otherscholarsformany yearsto come.
Two motifsseem to underliemost of the comments,
one dealingwith the natureofthe Naco data set and our
interpretationsof it, the other with broaderissues of
relationsand the mannerin which they
core/periphery
can be studied. We will begin with a considerationof
the former.
Kohl raises an importantquestionconcerningthelimitations of the Naco investigations.We take this to be
an inquiryinto the natureof our data sample,askingto
what extent the results of the Naco surveyand excavation are "representative"of material and behavioral
patternspertainingto any specific period. Given the
temporalfocus of the paper,we will restrictour answer
primarilyto sites and depositsdatingto theLate Classic.
422
CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
Volume 35, Number 4, August-October I994
All but approximatelyi. i km2of the 96 km2Naco Valley has been coveredby footsurvey,the uninvestigated
portionsscatteredin small, isolated segmentsover the
studyarea. In addition,the narrowcorridorcut by the
Rio Chamelecon as it exits the valley to the northeast
has been examined over a distance of 8.5 km, and a 5km2valley adjoiningNaco on the east was thoroughly
examined. Fully 374 sites pertainingto all known prehistoricintervalshave been recorded,3I 3 fromtheNaco
Valley and 6I fromthe immediate environs.Approximately7,I00 m2 ofLate Classic depositshave been excavated since I979 at settlementswithinthe Naco Valley,
resultingin the testing of 259 Late Classic buildings
(I3% of all recorded structuresdating to this span).
Work has progressedin all portions of the La Sierra
realm,with excavationsdistributedas follows:89 buildings dug at La Sierraitself(roughlyI9% of all surfacevisibleedificesat the capital,2,729 m2 cleared);33 structuresexcavated in the La Sierranear periphery(I3% of
known Late Classic buildings in this area, I,I5I m2
cleared); I 37 Late Classic constructionsexcavatedin rural portionsof the La Sierrarealm (areas outside a i-km
radius of the regional capital; ca. i i % of all edifices
dated to this interval,3,220 m2 cleared).
Researchhas tendedto concentrateat La Sierra,with
less attention to rural settlements.We are currently
workingto reverse this trendwith two planned field
seasons largelydevotedto expandedexcavationsin differentsegments of the rural zone. We are, however,
keenlyaware oftheproblemsencounteredin attempting
to make statementsconcerningthe organizationofvaried behaviorswithin a single polity,even one as small
and relativelyshort-livedas that focused on La Sierra
I980). New inforI988, Marcusi992, Webster
(Ashmore
mationunearthedeach fieldseason has requiredconsiderable reworkingof previous understandingsand forcibly remindedus of just how difficultit is to be sure
thatany sample,no matterhow large,is trulyrepresentativeofpast materialand behaviorpatterns(Kenti987).
All we can be sure of is that as data accumulate our
are increasinglyconstrainedby the new
interpretations
findingsto a plausible set ofviews and egregiouserrors
are easier to recognize. The more thoroughlya single
polityis studied,the more confidenceone can have in
the conclusions drawn.
Relatedto the above question,Kohl asks whetherresidents of the Operation i 9 workshopat La Sierrawere
the sole purveyorsof marine shell artifactswithin the
Late Classic valley. Ongoinganalyses ofNaco materials
now suggestthat items of marine shell were fabricated
at two patio-focusedstructuregroupsin additionto Operationi 9 (all withinLa Sierra)duringthe Late Classic.
Habitation at these other domestic units continued
throughoutthe Classic, but the manufactureof conch
artifactshad ceased in all areas save Operationi 9 by the
Production,in fact,
Terminal Classic (A.D. 950-Iioo).
may have intensifiedwith Operation i9 as the fashioning ofobjectsfromconch was restrictedto one location.
The TerminalClassic was also the intervalduringwhich
the apparentfocus of paramountelite residence,the La
Sierrasite core, was abandoned even as the rest of the
centercontinuedto supporta sizable population. This
suggests that craftproduction,even of fairlyesoteric
items,persistedafterthe decline ofparamountfortunes.
The significance of the above finding is uncertain,
thoughthereis an intriguingparallel,as Websternotes,
in the continued fabricationat Copan of elite status
markersfrommarine shell afterthe collapse of the Copan dynasty.Perhaps the fall of rulinghouses in Naco
and Copan duringthe waning years of the Late Classic
signaledless overall political decline than the shifting
fortunesof different
factionswhose members still requiredbadges of office.We are clearlystill a long way
fromunravelingthe complex relationsamong political
power,craftproduction,and intersocietalinteractionin
specificand generalterms.
Kohl's suggestionthatperlitemay be associated with
obsidianflowin theNaco Valleyis a good one. Extensive
geoarchaeologicalsurveys over the entire study area,
however,revealed no such flows, nor are they likely
giventhe local geology(AndersonI994).
Questions are also raised by Kohl concerningLa Sierra's political independence from Copan during the
Late Classic. We stronglyfeel that La Sierra was not
incorporatedwithin the Copan realm at any point,
thoughprovingthe case is difficultgivenproblemswith
recognizingconquest from archaeological data alone.
Rebuttinga Copanec captureof the Naco Valley would
rely heavily on negative evidence the significanceof
which is debatable (e.g., the absence of conflagrations
at La Sierra,the paucity of humans
and fortifications
[urried on theirway to the grave by wounds inflicted
with weapons, and so forth).More positive arguments
forLa Sierra'spolitical independencestresstwo points.
As is suggestedby Marcus, the degreeof political centralizationseen at Late Classic La Sierra seems out of
keepingwith what would be expectedin a provinceunler directCopanec control.Data available on Late Clas3ic political organization within southeasternMeso3merica also indicate that areally extensive states
Eormedby conquest are rare and never stable in this
zone. Research conducted at various points along the
mostlikely routes connectingCopan and Naco, forex3mple,revealsno clear evidencefortheforcibleincorporationof societies in these areas withinthe Late Classic
Copan realm; polities as close as 50 km fromthe lowLandMaya center in fact show few signs of Copanec
influencein behaviorand materialculture(Nakamura,
and Uratsuji I99I, Schortmanand Nakamura
ALoyama,
i992). The same case could be made forQuirigua, the
zthermajor Late Classic lowland Maya centerin south-asternMesoamerica. As we indicated,Quirigua shares
the Lower Motagua Valley in easternGuatemala with
3everalpolities the capitals of which evince explicitreiectionoflowland Maya elite behaviorpatternsand material forms (Schortman I993, Schortman and Naka-
mura
i992).
Transportationand communication
as Quirlifficultiescannotaccountforthesedifferences,
iguaand its neighborsare within an easy day's walk of
=ach other,separatedby no more than 25 km at their
SCHORTMAN
AND
URBAN
Core and Peripheryin SoutheasternMesoamerica 1423
links between La Sierraand Copan) typifyall network
ties; (2) focusingon a specific time span such as the
Late Classic gives a falseimpressionofstasis,projecting
structuralrelations among polities which may accuwas unstable, ratelydescribeone period onto otherintervals;and (3)
Shareri990). Evenheretherelationship
withQuirigua successfullysheddingits subordinatesta- it is onlyby studyingthe entirenetworkthatinterpolity
tus vis-a-visCopan in A.D. 737. Ifeven the largest,most relations can be reconstructedand the movement of
complexly organized Late Classic southeasternpolity goods which underwroteand created those ties detercould not effectivelycontrola center50 km distant,it mined.We would dispel any impressionthatour formuis doubtfulthatother,smallerpolitical units in the area lation,based primarilyon Late Classic Naco data,is anysuccessfullyemployed coercion to fashion suprapolity thing but a trial effortto model intersocietalties in
realms. None of this evidence is definitive.It does im- prehistoricsoutheasternMesoamerica. Concentration
ply,however,thatit is harderto accountforLate Classic on Late Classic La Sierra/Copanconnectionswas dedevelopments in places like Naco with a conquest termined in part by the relative wealth of material
model thanwith the view oflinkeddevelopmentamong available for the period and areas in question. Examiningthese relationswould, we hoped,providetestable
politicallyautonomous societies suggestedhere.
Karduliasasks fora betterdefinitionof"political capi- hypotheseswhich mightbe applied to otherportionsof
tal" than we provideand wants us to be more specific the networkand time spans as well as a spurto rethinkconcerningthe ways in which importsfiguredin elite ingofthenatureofancientcore/periphery
ties generally.
dominationstrategies.Once more,we confrontthelimi- The studyof entireinteractionnetworksthroughtime
tations of archaeological data. Political capital, as we must overcomesignificantlogisticalobstacles,however.
use the phrase,refersto centrallycontrolledresources Identifying
the boundariesof intersocietalsystems,deexploitedto forgedependencyrelationswhich serve to finingcores and peripheriesin economic, political,and
advance thepolitical agendasofthe monopolists.Obsid- ideological terms,and describingchangesin interpolity
ian blades, for example, were used (and presumably relationsthroughtime requireextensiveinvestigations
needed)by all segmentsofthe Late Classic Naco popula- in a numberofareas plausiblylinkedby communication
tion but seem to have been fashionedsolely at the re- routes. Given the problems encounteredin tryingto
gional capital. Exclusive controlover the fabricationof studya singlepolity,such interarealinvestigationswill
these items would have made valley paramountscapa- be well beyond the means of any single individual or
ble of extractinglabor and surplusesfromconsumersin project. Accomplishmentof the aforementionedgoals
returnforaccess to generallyneeded items. The same will thereforejrequire
close collaborationamongnumercase can probablybe made forcentralizedcontrolover ous researchers all attempting total-polityanalyses
potteryvessel and incensario production,though we withintheirrespectivezones and reporting
resultsusing
await the resultsof ongoingneutronactivationanalyses similarconventionsand terms.
to help distinguishclasses of containersmade at La SiKardulias's question concerningwhat happened to
errafromthose fashionedlocally throughoutthe valley preciosities as they moved throughthe Late Classic
and both of these taxa fromimports.In all cases, recon- southeasternMesoamerican exchange networkpoints
structingwhich itemsfunctionedas politicalcapital and up the importanceof such broad-scaleinquiriesand the
how theywere used depends on identifying
production difficultiesthey are likely to encounter.Kardulias realocales and determining
consumptionpatterns.Achieve- sonably asks whethergoods mighthave been siphoned
ment of these objectives requires extensive sampling offby intermediariesat each stop in theirexchangehisfromthroughouta polity,excavatingsignificantquanti- tories, resultingin inequalities as people closer to a
ties ofmaterialdatingto specificperiodsfromsites per- source amassed considerable quantities of esteemed
tainingto all hierarchicallevels. The tighterthe chrono- items. The answer to this queryis probablyyes and no,
logical control,the betterable one is to specifyrates of dependingon thevalue ofthe item to thepeople in quesproductionand consumptionand determinechangesin tion.Marine shell,forexample,seems to have had great
these variables throughtime (e.g., Arnold I99I, Pool significanceforCopanec magnates,who associated obAs notedabove,problemswithstudying
entire jects made fromthis material with rulership(Baudez
i992).
polities raise questions as to the representativeness
of i989). Such items may have been held in lower esteem,
any sample and the accuracy of these crude measures. however, in societies where shell artifactswere not
Betterestimates of productionand consumptionrates closely linked with high office.The utilitariansignififordifferent
commoditiesand moreprecisespecification cance of prismatic obsidian blades generally within
of chronologicalperiods are clearlymajor goals forthe southeasternMesoamerica may,however,have invested
archaeologicalstudyof ancient political economies.
these items with high value throughoutthe network.
Tuming to the second set ofthemes,most commenta- In this case, there may very well have been a strong
torsremarkon the need to studyentireinteractionsys- temptationto hold back some supplies for local contems at specificintervalsand to trace changes within sumptionat each stop in the exchangesystem.It is simsuch entitiesthroughtime.This issue is particularlyim- plistic to equate value-a complex, culturallydefined
portantbecause (i) it may be quite misleadingto assume attribute-with utility(AppaduraiI986). This example
that relations among segmentsof a network(e.g., the does suggest,however,thatthe political,economic,and
closest points. The only clear case forpolitical dominationofone southeasternMesoamericanLate Classic polity by another is that attested between the lowland
Maya centers of Copan and Quirigua (Marcus I 976,
424
CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
Volume 35, Number 4, August-October I994
ideological significanceof varied materialswill have to erra's rulers were apparentlylinked to Copan's lords,
be evaluated individuallyat different
points in a net- mayhave foundtheirpreeminenceweakenedwhen their
work.It also reinforcesthe call, voiced by the commen- allies sufferedreversals (see also Renfrewi982). Such
tators,for the study of production and consumption reversalsmayhave afforded
local competitorsthe opporpatterns of diverse goods within societies spread tunityto overthrowvulnerable opponents. The gains
throughoutancient interactionsystems.
employedbyvictoriousfactionsat the end ofthe Classic
Alongthe same lines, severalcommentatorsnote that in southeasternMesoamerica seem to have been shortthe temporalgap separatingthe fragmentation
of differ- lived, however. All known societies in the zone were
and some
ent southeasternMesoamerican polities at the end of experiencingmarkedpolitical fragmentation
the Classic may suggestthattheseeventsweredue more degreeofdemographicdecline afterA.D. iooo. Whatever
it is clear thatsociopoto local thanto intersocietalprocesses.Reactionsexperi- the fateof these interpretations,
enced by factionswithin specificpolities to changes in litical events occurringwithin any one segmentof the
thefortunesoftheirinteractionpartnersin anynetwork southeasternMesoamerican interaction system were
are undoubtedlycomplex, related to the local circum- complexlyrelated to circumstancesobtainingin other
stances ofthe polityand factionin question,and largely portionsof the network.Understandingthese indirect
inexplicablein the absence ofdetailedstudiesconducted connectionswill require considerablework conducted
in societies throughoutthe interactionnetwork.An ex- among polities throughoutthe putative intersocietal
ample of the complexitylikely to be encounteredin system.No matterhow greatthe obstacles,thereis no
such analyses is providedby the eventssurrounding
po- substituteforcollaborativeresearch;but collaborative
litical fragmentationwithin two southeasternMeso- investigationsmust begin with hypothesesto test,and
americanpolities at the end of the Late Classic. Cessa- that is what we attemptedto offerhere.
tion of what had been close ties between the rules of
Several commentatorsremarkon the significanceof
sets of elite interCopan and the Gualjoquito polity in the middle Rio the ideological ties linkingdifferent
Ulua drainage,ca. 40 km south of Naco, corresponds actors within Late Classic southeasternMesoamerica.
with a periodof political decentralizationat the former Wells and Feinman, for example, raise the important
center(FashandStuartI99I, Websteri992). Thereis no question why only some elements of foreignideologies
evidenceofdiminutionin thevitalityofthe Gualjoquito are adoptedby interactingelites. This queryhas imporpolityafterthis break.In fact,constructionwithinboth tant implications for the study of ancient interaction
monumental and other centers continued within the systems,because answeringit forcesus to considerhow
middle Ulu'a drainageover the next one to two centu- exoticideas figuredin thepoliticalstrategiesofrecipient
ries, followed only later by gradual population decline and donor and the circumstancesunder which the forand political decentralization(Ashmore et al. I987, mer became familiarwith the latter'sinnovations.One
Schortmanet al. I986). The elite cult practicedat La complicatingfactorin any attemptto addressthe politiSierraand derivedin part fromCopan was abandoned cal significanceof foreignideologies is our reliance on
sometimebetweenA.D. 8oo and 950, roughlycontempo- the mute material symbols throughwhich ideas were
rarywith the collapse of the Copan dynasty.This aban- expressedand createdin prehistoricsocieties. It is one
donmentof paramountreligiousriteswas dramatically thingto recognizesimilaritiesin cult paraphernaliabemarked by the systematicdismantlingof some of the tween two locales and identifyone as the source of incult's most impressivephysicalsymbols,the ball court spirationforthe other. Such interpretations
are based
and site coretemples.The capitalneverthelessremained on chronologicalsequences by means ofwhich the tema centerof residenceand craftactivityat least through poral precedenceof an innovationin one area may be
A.D. i ioo. The Naco and middle Ulua cases may repre- specifiedand on the different
degreesofelaborationthat
sent contrastingresponses to the same event, the fall cultic equipmentand structuresexhibitin various socifrompower of Copan's rulinghouse. Gualjoquito's rul- eties. It is quite anothermatterto specifythe meanings
ersseem to have maintained,fora time,theirlocal dom- these exotic materialtokens held forthose who experiinance despite the loss of what must have been an im- enced them. Interpretationsof ancient symbols may
among people dividedby class and/or
portantinteractionpartner.The Naco paramountswere well have differed
not so fortunate,abandonmentofthe La Sierrasite core ethnicitywithina polity.Similarly,foreignsymbolsand
as they
and destructionof paramount elite religious symbols practiceswere likely subject to reinterpretation
suggestingthatthisfactionlost out in competitionwith crossed political boundaries.These difficultiesare not
otherpowerblocs who continuedto residein and under- insurmountable.Fromwhat is known about the meanwritesome craftproductionat the regionalcapital. So- ing of objects and behaviorpatternsin the originating
ciopolitical changes experienced by some interaction society(helpedalongin the lowlandMaya case byrecent
partnerswithin the Late Classic southeasternMeso- advances in the deciphermentof hieroglyphicinscripamericaninteractionnetworkcould therefore
have had tions)and contextsin which materialsymbolsare recovdifferent
repercussionsthroughoutthe system.In some ered in the recipientcommunity,we should be able to
instances,at least, such shiftscreatedopportunitiesfor move towardsa more detailedunderstandingof the bethe advancementof particularfactionsat the expense havioralimplicationsofforeignideologiesand theirmaof others.Political blocs whose memberswere closely terialmanifestationsat various points in an interaction
associated with a specificinteractionpartner,as La Si- network.
SCHORTMAN
AND
URBAN
Core and Peripheryin SoutheasternMesoamerica 1425
Payingattentionto the kinds ofmaterialsymbolsdis nition. Copan and Quirigua may be "Maya," but what
seminatedamonginteractingpolitiesmay also, as Well
of societies in other areas, such as the Naco Valley?
suggests,provideinsightsinto the circumstancesunde: "SoutheastMesoamerica" is, we suggest,a moreneutral
which ideas are borrowed.For example, complex archi way to referto the adjoining portions of Guatemala,
tecturalarrangementssuch as the layout of ball courts Honduras, and El Salvador. By thus rechristeningthe
may have requiredfirsthandobservationof the original area we could removethe stigmaoftenassociated with
model to reproduceeffectively.
Otherinnovations,espe the word "periphery,"a stigmawhich,as Marcus notes,
cially those expressedon and throughportableobjects has tendedto constrainresearch.Even withoutthenega(such as stylisticelements of modeled censers),coulc tive associations conjuredup by the word "periphery,"
be successfullyreplicatedwithouttherecipient'shavinE relabeling the zone would serve as a reminderthat
traveledto theirsource. Several processes,each with its Southeasternsocieties were partofdynamicinteraction
own set of behavioral implications,may underlie the systems in which their structuralpositions changed
spreadofdifferent
ideological innovations.For example throughtime.We cannotassume that,howeverthe term
interelitevisitingimplies much closer relationsamonE is defined,SoutheasternMesoamericanpolitieswere alparamounts,with some mechanism(s)to ensurethe safe ways peripheries.Some, such as Chalchuapa in eastern
movementofpotentatesbetweenpolities,thandoes the El Salvador,may verywell have been cores duringcerexchangeof objects fromwhich ideologicalinformatior tain intervals(theMiddle and Late Preclassicin thisparcan be gleaned.Once more,we are remindedofthe vari ticularcase [SharerI978a]). Even if we carefullydefine
able ways in which interpolityties mightbe structurec our terms,we should probablynot label an area "core"
and the importanceofspecifyingthe behavioralimplica or "periphery,"therebyconsigningit to a particularrole
tions of materialgoods and patternsat different
places throughoutprehistory.
withina presumedinteractionnetwork.
With respect to definingcore/periphery
ties, Kohl
We have argued,withoutmuch elaboration,that the warnsof the difficultieslikelyto be encounteredin any
primarysource ofideologicalinspirationforLate Classic attemptto separatepolitical,economic,and ideological
Naco potentates was a lowland Maya ritual system. componentsofintersocietalcontacts.This pointis well
Commentson the articlehave led us to reconsiderthis taken. Distinctions outlined in the paper are intended
point. Specifically,we are remindedthat it is all too to advance analysis by sensitizingus to the different
easy to attributecertainbehaviorpatternsand material ways in which core/periphery
relationsmay be strucsymbolsto the lowland Maya when in facttheyhave a tured and the types of interchangesthat may occur
pan-Mesoamericandistribution.Ball courtscould qual- among partiesto contact.As long as the artificiality
of
ifyas a componentof a pan-Mesoamericanculturalpat- this divisionis recognized,the approachmay proveusetern,thoughin the case cited here detailed similarities ful.Dangers arisewhen analyticaltools are mistakenfor
in orientationand arrangement,
as well as temporalpre- reality-when we convince ourselvesthat behaviorsor
cedence, stronglyargue forderivationof this aspect of materialitems served purelyideological, economic, or
the ritual systemfromCopan. Stylisticsimilaritiesin politicalfunctions(Bell i992). Forexample,theLa Sierra
elite headdressand incensario decorationsalso point to ball court undoubtedlyplayed a central role in paraconnections between Naco and Copan. Ritual use of mountreligiousdevotions,devotionswhichwere strateSpondylusshells,however,may be an expressionofpan- gicallyused to advance a faction'spolitical agenda. ParMesoamerican religiouspractices,albeit those with an ticipationin the ideological system of which the ball
elite cast, rather than clear-cut evidence of lowland game was a centralelement may well have encouraged
Maya stimulation.We come back to the realizationthat contactsamongelites in different
polities,therebyfacilithe studyof intersocietalties requirescarefulspecifica- tatingthe exchange of commodities,such as obsidian
tion of the nature,sources, and sociopolitical implica- and shell, importantin the functioningoflocal political
tions of the materialused to reconstructlinkages.
economies. We must try,in short,to understandthe
There also seems to be generalconsensus concerning varied, interlinkedcomponents which contributedto
the advisabilityof keeping "core" and "periphery"in the meaning and use of any object or behaviorin and
the archaeologicallexicon. We agree with this view, if among ancient societies ratherthan pigeonholingthese
onlybecause continueduse of such termsaids the com- behaviorsand artifactsin discretefunctionalcategories.
parativestudy of interactionnetworks,includingcapiThe most generalremarksstimulatedby the essay are
talistworldsystems,past and present.As long as "core" those, again voiced by most of the commentators,conand "periphery"are definedpreciselyand thereis a will- cerningthe need fora comparativestudyof world sysingnessto employ the termsflexibly,shearingthem of temsfromall geographicareas and timeperiods(see also
thespecificconnotationstheyhave in commonparlance Hall and Chase-Dunn I993 and papers in Chase-Dunn
or in Wallerstein'sworld-systemstheory,theycan play and Hall iggib). It is only throughsuch wide-ranging
significantroles in encouragingthe examinationof di- investigationsthat regularitiesin the structuralrelaverse interactionnetworksand the inequalities which tions linkingpolities and the conditionsunder which
may developwithinsuch systems.We agreewith Sharer those regularitiesdevelop can be understood.The capithat the area covered in this article mightbest be re- talist world system analyzed by Wallerstein,as Hall
named, thoughthe phrase "Southeast Maya area" still notes,mightthen be seen as but one example of what
places lowland Maya "culture" at the centerof its defi- is actuallya diversearrayofinteractiontypescharacter-
426
CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
Volume 35, Number 4, August-October I994
degreesof inequality,dependencyrela
ized by different
tions,and coincidence of ideological,political,and eco
nomic ties (among otherdimensionswhich could serve
as the basis forcomparison).Inspiredby the comments
of Chase-Dunn, Hall, Kardulias, Marcus, Sharer,and
Whalen,we would elaborateour originalformulationa
bit more to contributeto this effort.The Late Classic
SoutheasternMesoamerican interactionsystemis, we
hypothesize,an example ofan unstablemultipolitynetworkcharacterizedby a largenumberofcoexistingcores
(e.g., La Sierra,Copan, and Quirigua at various points
in time). Each core depended on the exploitationof a
small peripheryin its immediatehinterlandto sustain
interlinkedprocesses of economic,political,and demographicexpansion.The failureof any one core to establish hegemonyover the othersmeant thatno polityenjoyed predictable,reliable access to sufficientresources
fromits peripheryto supportsuch growthforlong periods. Core elites thereforehad to relyforthe resources
neededto maintainlocal hierarchieson equal exchanges
with peers. Such relations were less certain to yield
needed inputs than direct (throughconquest) or indirect (throughintersocietalmonopolies over production or transportationtechnologies) exploitation ol
Squabbles
neighboringpolities (e.g., Spencer i982).
among interactorscould adversely affectthe flow of
needed goods and ideas (Gilman i987). As populations
and hierarchicalcomplexityincreased throughoutthe
network,the need forexotic items and concepts grew,
and the whole system of voluntaryexchangeswas increasinglyvulnerableto collapse. This may have been
what happenedgraduallyand indirectlythroughoutthe
SoutheasternMesoamerican networkfromA.D. 8oo to
phrased
i ioo. The above descriptionmightbe profitably
in the felicitousterms suggestedby Whalen-autonomous (the case describedabove) vs. attached peripheries-and in termsof Kardulias's concept of "negotiated
peripherality."In any event,hypothesessuch as those
evaluationbothbyprobing
proposedhererequirefurther
theirintellectualsoundness and throughfieldresearch.
The latter,as noted earlier,must eventuallyencompass
the studyof entireinteractionsystems.
ofparticWhateverthe fateof specificinterpretations
ular or generalscope, it is imperativethatwe recognize
the significanceof interpolityties. Even in situations
where cores may appear weak, at least when compared
to modern First/ThirdWorld distinctions,we cannot
discountthe developmentalimpactofintersocietallinkages. It is clear to us that events in Late Classic Naco
ifthe polityhad
different
would have been significantly
Levels of specontacts.
all
external
from
been estranged
cialized production,especially in industriesemploying
marineshell and obsidian,would neverhave existedin
the absence of extrapolitymarketsand suppliers.Local
processes of political centralization,reliant in part on
foreignsymbols and goods to underwriteparamount
domination strategies,might very well have nevei
reachedthe levels recordedin the Late Classic Naco Valley without interpolityties. As noted above, the Late
Classic SoutheasternMesoamericaninteractionsystem
was not effectivelydominated by a single core, and
the networklacked manyofthe featureschartherefore
acteristicofthehighlycentralizedworldsystemsassociated with empiresand moderncapitalism.This does not
mean that interpolityconnections were insignificant.
Instead,situationssuch as the one discussed here chalinteraclengeus to understandprocessesofinterregional
principlesand havingdiffertion operatingon different
ent political, ideological, and economic implica'tions
than those which obtain in the modernworld. In the
responsesto thispaperand in currentarchaeologicaland
anthropologicalresearch,the challengeis beingengaged
in a lively and veryproductivemanner.
ReferencesCited
J.I989. BeforeEuropeanhegemony:The world
Press.
New York:OxfordUniversity
I25o-I35o.
exchange
G. I989. The Urukexpansion:Cross-cultural
ABU-LUGHOD,
systemA.D.
ALGAZE,
in early Mesopotamian civilization. CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
30:57I-608.
ANDERSON, K. I994.
in Soinvestigations,"
"Geoarchaeological
and craftproduction:The economic
ciopoliticalhierarchy
bases ofelitepowerin a SoutheastMesoamericanpolity,pt. 3,
The I992 season oftheNaco ValleyArchaeologicalProject.EditedbyE. Schortmanand P. Urban,pp. 85-I25. Gambier:KenDepartment.
-yonCollegeAnthropology/Sociology
ANDRADE, E. I990. Los modalidadesde la lluvia en Honduras.
Tegucigalpa:EditorialGuaymuras.
Commoditiesand thepoliAPPADURAI, A. I986. "Introduction:
tics ofvalue,"in The social lifeofthings.EditedbyA. AppaPress.
durai,pp. 3-63. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
and spaARNOLD, P., III. I99I. Domesticceramicproduction
A Mexicancase studyin archaeology.Camtial organization:
Press.
bridge:CambridgeUniversity
occupationat Quirigua,
ASHMORE, W. I98I. Pre-Columbian
patternsin a Classic Maya center.
Guatemala:Settlement
Microfilms.
AnnArbor:University
at Classic Quirigua,"
. I988. "Householdand community
in theMesoamericanpast. Edin Householdand community
itedbyR. Wilkand W. Ashmore,pp. I53-69. Albuquerque:
ofNew MexicoPress.
University
P. URBAN, J. BENYO,
W., E. SCHORTMAN,
I987. Ancient society in Santa BarAND S. SMITH.
bara,Honduras.National GeographicResearch2:232-54.
commercewithoutEuropeans:The deAUSTEN, R. I978. African
ASHMORE,
J. WEEKS,
era.
velopmentimpactofintemationaltradein thepre-modern
KenyaHistoricalReview6:i-2i.
Middlesex:PenBALANDIER, G. I970. Politicalanthropology.
guinBooks.
Tonghao:Peerrelationsin East
BARNES, G. I986. "Jiehao,
Asia," in Peerpolityinteractionand sociopoliticalchange.Edpp. 79-9I. Cambridge:Camand J.Cherry,
itedby C. Renfrew
Press.
bridgeUniversity
a la arqueologiade CoBAUDEZ, c. Editor.I983. Introducci6n
pan, Honduras.3 vols. Tegucigalpa:SECTUR.
and historyat Copan,"in The
BAUDEZ, v. I986. "Iconography
EditedbyP. Urbanand E. SchortSoutheastMaya periphery.
ofTexas Press.
man,pp. I7-26. Austin:University
analy. I989. "The house oftheBacabs:An iconographic
sis," in The house oftheBacabs: Copan,Honduras.Editedby
D.C.: DumbartonOaks.
D. Webster,pp. 73-8i. Washington,
ritualpractice.Oxford:Oxford
BELL, C. I99.2. Ritual theory,
Press.
University
censersofQuirigua,Izabala,GuateBENYO, J. I979. The pottery
StateUnivermala. M.A. thesis,DepartmentofAnthropology,
sity of New York, Albany, N.Y.
SCHORTMAN
AND
URBAN
RICHARD
E., AND GARY M. FEINMAN.
I984. The
Mesoamericanworldsystem.AmericanAnthropologist
BLANTON,
86:673-8-2.
[GMFI
BLANTON,
G. FEINMAN,
R., S. KOWALEWSKI,
AND J. APPEL.
I98I.
AncientMesoamerica:A comparisonofchangein three
regions.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
Press.
E., AND G. WILLEY.
Editors.I988. The SoutheastClassic Maya zone. Washington,
D.C.: DumbartonOaks.
P. I99I.
"Sourcedetermination
BOUEY,
ofarchaeologicalobsidian specimens,Naco Valley,Honduras:Appendix4," in Sociopoliticalhierarchy
and craftproduction:
The economicbases of
elitepowerin a SoutheastMesoamericanpolity.Editedby
E. Schortman
and P. Urban.MS, InstitutoHondurefio
de Antropologiae Historia,Tegucigalpa,Honduras,submitted
to theNationalScienceFoundationand availablefromthe editors.
BOUTILIER,
j. I989. "Metropoleand margin:Dependency
theoryand thepoliticaleconomyofthe SolomonIslands,i88oI980,"
in Centreand periphery:
Comparativestudiesin archaeology.EditedbyT. Champion,pp. 2I-39. London:Unwin
Hyman.
BRUMFIEL,
E., AND T. EARLE.
I987. "Specialization,
exchange,
and complexsocieties:An introduction,"
in Specialization,exchange,and complexsocieties.EditedbyE. Brumfiel
and
T. Earle,pp. I-9. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
Press.
ELIZABETH
BRUMFIEL,
M., AND JOHN W. FOx. Editors.I994.
Factionalcompetition
and politicaldevelopment
in theNew
BOONE,
World. New York: Cambridge UniversityPress. [MEW]
T. I989. "Introduction,"
in Centreand periphery:
CHAMPION,
Comparativestudiesin archaeology.EditedbyT. Champion,
pp. I-92 I. London:UnwinHyman.
CHASE-DUNN,
CHRISTOPHER.
i992.
world-systems.Review I 5:3I3-33.
The comparative study of
C., AND T. HALL.
1991a.
"Conceptualizing
hierarchies forcomparative study," in Core/pecore/periphery
CHASE-DUNN,
riphery
relationsin precapitalistworlds.Editedby C. ChaseDunn and T. Hall, pp. 5-44. Boulder:WestviewPress.
. Editors.I99 ib. Core/periphery
relationsin precapitalist
worlds.Boulder:WestviewPress.
. I993. Comparing
world-systems:
Conceptsand working
Social Forces7I:85I-86. [CC, TDHJ
hypotheses.
J. I987. "Politics,prismaticblades,and Mesoamerican
CLARK,
civilizations,"in The organizationofcoretechnology.
Edited
and C. Morrow,pp. 259-84. Boulder:Westview
byJ.Johnson
Press.
A. I969. Customand politicsin urbanAfrica:A study
COHEN,
ofHausa migrantsin Yorubatowns.Berkeley:University
of
CalifomiaPress.
T. PATRICK.
CULBERT,
I988. Politicalhistory
and theMaya
glyphs.Antiquity62:I35-52.
[GMF]
P. I985. Economicchangein precolonialAfrica:SeneCURTIN,
gambiain the era oftheslave trade.Madison:University
of
WisconsinPress.
1984. Cross-cultural
tradein worldhistory.Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversity
Press.
DEMAREST,
ARTHUR
A., AND
ROBERT
J. SHARER.
I986.
"Late Preclassicceramicspheres,cultureareas,and cultural
evolutionin the southeastemhighlandsofMesoamerica,"in
The SoutheastMaya periphery.
EditedbyP. Urbanand
E. Schortman.
Austin:University
ofTexas Press.[RJS]
M. I990. Drivenby drink:The roleofdrinking
DIETLER,
in the
politicaleconomyand the case ofEarlyIronAge France.Journal ofAnthropological
Archaeology9:352-406.
[psw]
L. i982.
DONLEY,
"House power:Swahilispace and symbolic
markers,"in Symbolicand structural
archaeology.Editedby
I. Hodder,pp. 63-73. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
Press.
DRENNAN,
ROBERT.
I99I.
"Pre-Hispanicchiefdomtrajectories
in Mesoamerica,CentralAmerica,and northemSouth
America,"in Chiefdoms:Power,economy,and ideology.EditedbyT. Earle,pp. 263-87. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
Press.
DUPRt,
G., AND P. REY. I973. Reflections
on thepertinence
of
a theoryofthehistoryofexchange.Economyand Society
2:i3i-63.
Core and Peripheryin SoutheasternMesoamerica | 427
C., AND P. L. KOHL. I993. "Trade and world systems
EDENS,
in EarlyBronzeAgeWesternAsia," in Tradeand exchangein
held at the
prehistoric
Europe:Proceedingsofa conference
University
ofBristol,AprilI992. Editedby C. Scarreand Frances Healy,pp. I7-34. Oxford:OxbowBooks.[PLKI
EKHOLM,
K. I972. Power and prestige: The rise and fall of the
Kongokingdom.Uppsala: SKRIVService.
FASH, W. I988. A new look at Maya statecraftfromCopan, Hon-
duras.Antiquity62:157-69.
W., AND B. FASH. I990. Scribes, warriors,and kings: The
FASH,
lives of the Copan Maya. Archaeology 43:26-35.
W., AND D. STUART. I99I. "Dynastic historyand cul-
FASH,
turalevolutionat Copan,Honduras,"in Classic Maya political
and archaeologicalevidence.Editedby
history:Hieroglyphic
T. P. Culbert, pp. I47-79. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
FEINMAN,
GARY
AND
M.,
LINDA
M. NICHOLAS.
I993. Shell-
ornamentproduction
in Ejutla:Implicationsforhighlandcoastalinteraction
in ancientOaxaca. AncientMesoamerica
4:I03-I9.
[GMF]
FLANNERY, K. I968. "The Olmec and the Valley of Oaxaca: A
modelforinter-regional
interaction
in Formativetimes,"in
DumbartonOaks Conference
on the Olmec. EditedbyE. Ben-
son, pp. 79-IIO. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks.
FRANK, ANDRE GUNDER. I993. Bronze Age world system cycles. CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
34:383-430.
[cc]
FRANK, ANDRE
AND BARRY K. GILLS.
GUNDER,
I993. The
worldsystem:Fivehundredyearsorfivethousand?London:
Routledge. [cc]
FRANKENSTEIN,
D.,
AND
M. ROWLANDS.
I978. The internal
structure
and regionalcontextofearlyIronAge societyin
southwestern
Germany.BulletinoftheInstituteofArchaeol-
ogY I5:73-II2.
FREIDEL, D. I979. Culture areas and interaction spheres: Con-
trasting
approachesto theemergenceofcivilizationin the
Maya lowlands.AmericanAntiquity44:36-54.
. I986. "TerminalClassic LowlandMaya: Successes,failures,and aftermaths,"
in Late LowlandMaya civilization.EditedbyJ.Sabloffand E. W. AndrewsV, pp. 409-30. Albuquerque: University
ofNew Mexico Press.
FRIEDMAN, J.i982. "Catastrophe and continuityin social evolution,"in Theoryand explanationin archaeology:The Southamptonconference.
Editedby C. Renfrew,
M. Rowlands,and
B. Segraves, pp. I75-96. New York: Academic Press.
J., AND M. ROWLANDS.
I978. "Notes toward
RIEDMAN,
an
epigeneticmodeloftheevolutionofcivilization,"in The evolutionofsocial systems.EditedbyJ.Friedmanand M. Rowland,
PP. 20I-76. Pittsburgh:Universityof PittsburghPress.
C. I987. "Culture wars: Resistance to state formation,"
;AILEY,
in Powerrelationsand stateformation.
EditedbyT. Patterson
and C. Gailey,pp. 35-56. Washington,
D.C.: AmericanAnthropologicalAssociation.
;ILMAN,
A. I987. "Unequal development in Copper Age Ibe-
ria,"in Specialization,exchange,and complexsociety.Edited
by E. Brumfiel
and T. Earle,pp. 22-29. Cambridge:Cambridge
Press.
University
;ILLS,
BARRY
K., AND
ANDRE
GUNDER
FRANK.
years of world-system history: The cumulation
I99I.
"5,000
of accumula-
tion,"in Core/periphery
relationsin precapitalistworlds.Editedby C. Chase-Dunnand T. Hall, pp. 67-II2. Boulder:West-
view Press. [GMFJ
LED HILL, J. I978. "Formative development in the North Amer-
ican SouthWest,"in Social organisation
and settlement:Contributions
fromanthropology,
archaeology,
and geography.
Ed-
ited by D. Green, C. Haselgrove, and M. Spriggs,pp. 24i-84.
BritishArchaeological
ReportsInternational
Series,suppl.47.
[ALL, K. I985. Maritime trade and state development in early
SoutheastAsia. Honolulu:University
ofHawaii Press.
D. I986. Incorporationin the world-system:Toward a critique. American Sociological Review 5I:390-402.
[ALL, THOMAS
[TDH, PNK]
I989. Social changein theSouthwest,I3 50-I880.
rence:University
PressofKansas.
Law-
428
1 CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
Volume 35, Number 4, August-October 1994
laterEuropeanprehistory:
NorthernEurope,4000-5000
B.C.,"
in Theoryand explanationin archaeology:The Southampton
M. Rowlands,and B. Seconference.
Editedby C. Renfrew,
graves,pp. 24i-80. New York:AcademicPress.
GMF, TDH]
in BronzeAge Scandinavia,"
. I987. "Centreand periphery
N. I972. Obsidiantraderoutesin theMayanarea.
HAMMOND,
in Centreand periphery
in theancientworld.Editedby
ScienceI78:IO92-93.
M. Rowlands,M. Larsen,and K. Kristiansen,
pp. 74-85. CamHASELGROVE,
C. i982. "Wealth, prestige,and power:The dybridge:CambridgeUniversity
Press.
in south-east
namicsoflate IronAge politicalcentralization
.ANGE,
F., AND D. STONE.
Editors.I984. The archaeologyof
England,"in Ranking,resources,and exchange.Editedby
ofNew MexlowerCentralAmerica.Albuquerque:University
C. Renfrew
and S. Shennan,pp. 79-88. Cambridge:Cambridge
ico Press.
Press.
University
Culturesand peoplesofthesoutheastONGYEAR,
J., III. I947.
L. I989. "GreatMoraviabetweenthe Franconians,
ByHAVLIK,
ernMaya frontier.
(TheoreticalApproachesto Problems3.)
zantium,and Rome,"in Centreand periphery:
Comparative
D.C.: CarnegieInstitution
ofWashington.
Washington,
studiesin archaeology.EditedbyT. Champion,pp. 227-37.
Maya pot. i952. Copan ceramics:A studyofsoutheastern
London:UnwinHyman.
ofWashington
Publication597.
tery.CarnegieInstitution
M. I979. AncientPanama: Chiefsin searchofpower.
HELMS,
oftheMaya.
S. I939. The southeastern
frontier
OTHROP,
Austin:University
ofTexas Press.
AmericanAnthropologist
4I:42-54.
. I988. Ulysses'sail: An ethnographic
odysseyofpower,
periphery:
UnevendevelR. I987. "The Papaguerian
IC GUIRE,
knowledge,and social distance.Princeton:Princeton
UniverU.S. Southwest,"in Politiesand paropmentin theprehistoric
sityPress.
ofArtitions.EditedbyK. M. Trinkaus,pp. I23-39. University
J.Editor.I98I. Archaeology
in northwestern
HonHENDERSON,
izona Anthropological
ResearchPapers37.
duras:InterimreportsoftheProyectoArqueol6gico,Sula,
4ANN, MICHAEL.
I986. The sourceofsocial power:A history
vol. I. Ithaca:Intercollege
Program
in Archaeology.
to A.D. I760. Cambridge:Camofpowerfromthe beginning
A. WONDERLEY,
AND P. URHENDERSON,
J., I. WALLACE,
Press.[TDH]
bridgeUniversity
BAN. I979. Archaeological
in theValle de Naco,
investigations
4ARCUS,
J. I976. Emblemand statein the Classic Maya lownorthwestern
Honduras:A preliminary
report.Journal
ofField
organization.
lands: An epigraphicapproachto territorial
Archaeology6:i69-92.
D.C.: DumbartonOaks. [JM]
Washington,
K. I989. "Observations
aboutecologicalrelationships
HIRTH,
. i992. DynamiccyclesofMesoamericanstates.National
and culturalevolutionin a prehistoric
tropicalsubsistencesys[JM]
GeographicResearchand Exploration8:392-4II.
in theEl Caj6nregion,
research
vol.I.
tem,"inArchaeological
. I993. "AncientMaya politicalorganization,"
in Lowland
EditedbyK. Hirth,G. Pinto,and G. Hasemann,pp. 233-52.
Maya civilizationin theeighthcenturyA.D. Editedby
and Tegucigalpa:DepartmentofAnthropology,
UniPittsburgh
Washington,
D.C.:
J.Sabloffand J.Henderson,pp. III-83.
Hondurefio
de Antropologia
e
versityofPittsburgh/Instituto
DumbartonOaks. [GMF]
Historia.
G. R. I990. The late prehistoric
CahokiaculturalsysIILNER,
AND G. HASEMANN.
Editors.I989. ArHIRTH,
K., G. PINTO,
florescence,
chaeologicalresearchin theEl Caj6n region.Vol. i. Pittsburgh temoftheMississippiRiverValley:Foundations,
Journal
and fragmentation.
4:I-43. [Psw]
of WorldPrehistory
and Tegucigalpa:DepartmentofAnthropology,
of
University
DE. I987. Forcedsettlement
OLIVIER
andpolitiIONTMOLLIN,
Hondurefio
de Antropologia
e Historia.
Pittsburgh/Instituto
in a Classic Maya polity.Journal
cal centralization
ofAnthroI. I978. "The maintenance
ofgroupidentitiesin the
HODDER,
pological Archaeology 6:22o-62.
and settleBaringodistrict,
Kenya,"in Social organisation
Settlement
Ii989. The archaeology
ofpoliticalstructure:
ment:Contributions
and gefromanthropology,
archaeology,
analysisin a Classic Maya polity.Cambridge:CambridgeUniography.EditedbyD. Green,C. Haselgrove,and M. Spriggs,
versityPress.
pp. 47-73. BritishArchaeological
Series,
ReportsInternational
AND E. URATSUJI.
Editors.
S., K. AOYAMA,
suppl. 47.
JAKAMURA,
I99I.
Investigaciones
arqueol6gicasen la regi6nde La En. I979. Economicand social stressand materialculturepatde Copan y Santa Barbara,Honduras,
trada,departamento
AmericanAntiquity44:446-54.
terning.
C.A.: Primerafase. 3 vols. San PedroSula: InstitutoHonduinvestigaJONES,
C., AND R. SHARER.
I986. "Archaeological
e Historia/Servicio
de VoluntariosJareflode Antropologia
tionsin the site coreofQuirigua,Guatemala,"in The Southponesesparala Cooperaci6ncon el Extranjero.
EditedbyP. Urbanand E. Schortman,
east Maya periphery.
ofprehistoric
complexsociARSONS,
J. I974. The development
pp. 27-34. Austin:University
ofTexas Press.
fromtheValleyofMexico.Journal
ety:A regionalperspective
CerroPalenque: Powerand identityon the
R. I99I.
JOYCE,
ofFieldArchaeologyi:8i-io8.
ofTexas Press.
Austin:University
Maya periphery.
ceramicproduction
and distribuOOL, C. i992. "Integrating
ofPakistan
j. M. 1991. The IndusValleytradition
KENOYER,
An integrated
tion,"in Ceramicproductionand distribution:
and westernIndia.Journalof WorldPrehistory
5:33I-85. [psw]
Boulapproach.Editedby G. BeyIII and C. Pool,pp. 275-3I3.
theuse ofspace: An ethnoarKENT, S. I987. "Understanding
der:WestviewPress.
chaeologicalapproach,"in Methodand theoryforactivityarea
C. i982. "Polityand power:Interaction,
intensificaENFREW,
research.Editedby S. Kent,pp. i-6o. New York:Columbia
in An islandpolity:The archaeology
tion,and exploitation,"
Press.
University
in Melos. Editedby C. Renfrew
and M. Wagofexploitation
P. L. I978. The balanceoftradein southwestern
Asia in
KOHL,
Press.
staff,
pp. 264-90. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
millenniumB.C. CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
themid-third
Peerpolityinteraction
and socio. I986. "Introduction:
I9:463-83.
[PLKI
politicalchange,"in Peerpolityinteractionand socio-political
. I987. "The ancienteconomy,transferable
technologies,
and J.Cherry,
pp. i-i8. Camchange.Editedby C. Renfrew
and theBronzeAge worldsystem:A view fromthenortheastPress.
bridge:CambridgeUniversity
oftheancientNear East,"in Centreand periphery
ernfrontier
AND JOHN F. CHERRY.
Editors.I986. Peer
ENFREW,
COLIN,
in theancientworld.EditedbyM. Rowlands,M. Larsen,and
polityinteractionand socio-politicalchange.New York:Campp. I 3-24. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
K. Kristiansen,
Press.[MEW]
bridgeUniversity
Press.
betweenCopan and
IESE, B. I986. "Late Classic relationship
in theBronzeAge:
. i992. "The Transcaucasian'periphery'
evidence,"in The SoutheastMaya
Quirigua:Some epigraphic
in Resources,power,and interreA preliminary
formulation,"
EditedbyP. Urbanand E. Schortman,
pp. 94-IOI.
periphery.
EditedbyE. Schortman
and P. Urban,
gionalinteraction.
Austin:University
ofTexas Press.
pp. II7-37.
New York: Plenum Press.
ofthe Southeastzone in relationto
. I988. "Epigraphy
K. I9882. "The formationof tribal systems in
KRISTIANSEN,
HALL,
THOMAS
D.,
AND
CHRISTOPHER
CHASE-DUNN.
I993.
The world-systems
perspective
and archaeology:
Forwardinto
thepast.JournalofArchaeologicalResearchI: I2I-43.
[CC,
AND
SCHORTMAN
URBAN
otherpartsofMesoamerica,"in The SoutheastClassic Maya
zone. EditedbyE. Booneand G. Willey,pp. 67-94. Washington,D.C.: DumbartonOaks.
E. Editor.I987. Interregional
ROBINSON,
interactionon the
SoutheastMesoamericanperiphery.
BritishArchaeological
ReportsInternational
Series327.
P. I993. Practiceand politicalcentralization:
A new apROSCOE,
proachto politicalevolution.CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
34: I I I-40.
w. Editor.I986. Excavacionesen el area urbanade
Copan. Vol. i. Tegucigalpa:Secretariade Culturay Turismo/
InstitutoHondurefio
de Antropologia
e Historia.
SANDERS,
AND
SANDERS,
W.,
SANTLEY,
R., C. YARBOROUGH,
J. PARSONS,
R. SANTLEY.
I979.
The basin
ofMexico: Ecologicalprocessesin theevolutionofa civilization.New York:AcademicPress.
AND
B. HALL.
I987.
"En-
and the archaeological
claves,ethnicity,
record,"in Ethnicity
and culture.Editedby R. Auger,M. Glass, S. MacEachern,and
P. McCartney,
pp. 85-ioo. Calgary:Archaeology
Association
oftheUniversity
of Calgary.
P. I979. "Kingsand merchants,"
SAWYER,
in Earlymedieval
kingship.Editedby P. Sawyerand D. Wood,pp. I39-58. Leeds:
SchoolofHistory,University
ofLeeds.
D. I990. Procurement,
SCHAFER,
distribution
and
production,
use: An analysisofthechippedstoneartifacts
fromtheNaco
Valley,Honduras.Honorsthesis,Anthropology
and Sociology
Department,
AlbionCollege,Albion,Mich.
Core and Peripheryin SoutheasternMesoamerica 1429
R. J.Sharerand D. C. Grove.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.[RJS]
. I990. Quirigua:A Classic Maya centerand its sculpture.
Durham:CarolinaAcademicPress.
SHEETS, P. Editor.I984. Archaeology
and volcanismin Central
America:The ZapotitanValleyofEl Salvador.Austin:UniversityofTexas Press.
. i992. The Cerensite.New York:HarcourtBraceJovanovich CollegePublishers.
S. i982. "Exchangeand ranking:
SHENNAN,
The roleofamber
in the earlyBronzeAge ofEurope,"in Ranking,resources,and
exchange.Editedby C. Renfrew
and S. Shennan,pp. 33-45.
Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
Press.
C. I98 2. The Cuicatlan Cafnadaand MonteAlban: A
SPENCER,
studyofprimarystateformation.
New York:AcademicPress.
E. Editor.I96I. Perspectives
SPICER,
in AmericanIndian culturechange.Chicago:University
ofChicagoPress.
D. i992. Hieroglyphs
STUART,
and archaeology
at Copan.AncientMesoamerica3: I69-84.
SWARTZ,
M.,
V. TURNER,
AND
A. TUDEN.
I966. "Introduc-
tion,"in Politicalanthropology.
EditedbyM. Swartz,
V. Turner,and A. Tuden,pp. I-4I. Chicago:Aldine.
TORRENCE,
R. I986. Production
and exchangeofstonetools.
Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
Press.[PNK]
B. I978. "The inter-societal
TRIGGER,
transfer
ofinstitutions,"
in Timeand traditions:Essaysin archaeologicalinterpretation.EditedbyB. Trigger,
pp. 2 i6-28. New York:CornellUniversityPress.
SCHELE,
L., AND D. FREIDEL.
I990. A forestof kings. New
. I989. A historyofarchaeologicalthought.
York:Morrow.
Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversity
Press.[GMF]
SCHELE,
L., AND M. MILLER.
I986. The blood of kings: Dynastyand ritualin Maya art.New York:GeorgeBraziller/Kim-UPHAM, S. i992. "Interaction
and isolation:The emptyspaces
in pan-regional
bell ArtMuseum.
politicaland economicsystems,"in Resources,
E. I989. Interregional
power,and interregional
SCHORTMAN,
interaction
in prehistory:
interaction.
EditedbyE. Schortman
and P. Urban,pp. I39-52. New York:PlenumPress.
The needfora new perspective.
AmericanAntiquity54:52-65.
P. I986a. Systemsofsettlement
in thepre-Columbian
URBAN,
in thelowerMota.I993. Archaeological
investigations
Naco Valley,northwestern
Honduras.AnnArbor:University
gua Valley,Izabal, Guatemala:A studyin monumentalsite
Microfilms.
functionand interaction.Philadelphia:University
Museum,
. i986b. "Pre-Columbian
in theNaco Valley,
settlement
ofPennsylvania.
University
northwestern
EdHonduras,"in The SoutheastMaya periphery.
SCHORTMAN,
E., AND S. NAKAMURA.
i992. A crisis of idenitedbyP. Urbanand E. Schortman,
pp. 275-95. Austin:Univerand interaction
on the Southeast
tity:Late Classic competition
sityofTexas Press.
LatinAmericanAntiquity2:3II-36.
Maya periphery.
SCHORTMAN,
E.,
AND
P. URBAN.
I986. "Introduction,"in The
SoutheastMaya periphery.
Editedby P. Urbanand E. Schortman,pp. I-I4. Austin:University
ofTexas Press.
interaction
in prehistory.
I987. Modelinginterregional
Advancesin ArchaeologicalMethodand TheoryII:37-95.
. Editors.iggia. Sociopoliticalhierarchy
and craftproduction:The economicbases ofelitepowerin a Late Classic
Southeastern
de Antropologia
polity.MS, InstitutoHondurefno
e Historia,Tegucigalpa,Honduras,submittedto theNational
ScienceFoundationand availablefromtheeditors.
. Editors.iggib. Sociopoliticalhierarchy
and craftproduction:The economicbases ofelitepowerin a Late Classic
Southeastern
de Antropolity,part2. MS, InstitutoHondurefio
to theNapologiae Historia,Tegucigalpa,Honduras,submitted
tionalScienceFoundationand availablefromtheeditors.
. Editors.i992. Resources,power,and interregional
interaction.New York:PlenumPress.[MEW]
SCHORTMAN,
E.,
P. URBAN,
W. ASHMORE,
AND
J. BENYO.
in the SoutheastMaya periphInterregional
interaction
ery:The SantaBarbaraarchaeological
projectI983-I984 seasons. Journal
of FieldArchaeologyI3:259-72.
R. Editor.I978a.
Theprehistory
SHARER,
of Chalchuapa,El Salvador.3 vols. Philadelphia:University
ofPennsylvania
Press.
and historyat Quirigua,Guatemala.
. I978b. Archaeology
JournalofFieldArchaeology5: 5I-70. [JMl
I986.
. I984. "Lower Central America as seen fromMesoamer-
ica," in The archaeologyofLowerCentralAmerica.Editedby
F. Langeand D. Stone.Albuquerque:University
ofNew Mexico Press.[RJS]
. I989. "The Olmec and the Southeastperiphery
ofMesoamerica,"in Regionalperspectives
on the Olmec. Editedby
URBAN,
P., AND
E. SCHORTMAN.
I988. "The Southeastern
zone viewedfromtheeast: LowerMotagua-NacoValleys,"
in The SoutheastClassic Maya zone. EditedbyE. Boone
and G. Willey,pp. 223-67. Washington,
D.C.: Dumbarton
Oaks.
S. SMITH,
URBAN,
P., E. SCHORTMAN,
L. NEFF,
J. MILLER,
L. TRUE.
M. AUSEC,
S. KANE, H. MAHAN,
M. DALL,
C. EATON,
D. SCHAFER,
L. COLLINS,
P. REED,
P. WHOOLEY,
N. CONDON,
AND R. GOEBELS.
I988. Socio-
politicaldevelopments
in northwestern
Honduras:The I988
Naco ValleyArchaeological
Project.MS, InstitutoHondurefno
de Antropologia
e Historia,Tegucigalpa,Honduras,distributed
to granting
agenciesand availablefromtheauthors.
P. AND E. SCHORTMAN.
URBAN,
Editors.I986. The Southeast Maya periphery.
Austin:University
ofTexas Press.
L. I974. The modernworldsystemi. New
WALLERSTEIN,
York:AcademicPress.
. I980. The modernworldsystem2. New York:Academic
Press.
G. I980. The San AgustinAcasaguastlanArchaeologiWALTERS,
cal Project,1979 fieldseason. University
ofMissouriMuseum
ofAnthropology
MuseumBrief25.
D. I980. Spatialbounding
WEBSTER,
and settlement
historyat
threewallednorthern
Maya centers.AmericanAntiquity
45:834-44.
. i992. "Maya elites:The perspective
fromCopan,"in
Mesoamericanelites:An archaeologicalperspective.
Edited
by D. Chase and A. Chase, pp. I35-56. Norman: University
ofOklahomaPress.
G. 1990. Laborcontroland emergent
stratification
in
WEBSTER,
prehistoricEurope. CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
3I:337-66.
030
1 CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
Volume 35, Number 4, August-October 1994
P. ig8oa.
Culturecontactand culturechange.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
Press.
. ig8ob. Contactand change:An exampleofthefringeof
the Classicalworld.WorldArchaeologyI.2:I-IO.
. i984. Farms,villages,and cities:Commerceand urban
originsin late prehistoric
Europe.Ithaca:CornellUniversity
WELLS,
Press.
. I985.
"Italyand centralEurope:Materialculture,ritual,
in theIronAge,"in Papersin Italian arand communication
Editedby
chaeology,vol. 4, pt. 3. Patternsin protohistory.
C. Malone and S. Stoddart,
pp. 255-62. BritishArchaeological
Series245. [PSW]
ReportsInternational
research
. I990. IronAge temperate
Europe:Some current
issues. Journal
of WorldPrehistory
4:437-76. [Psw]
AND RICHARD
PAILES.
I979. MesoWHITECOTTON,
JOSEPH,
model.Paperpreamericaas an historicalunit:A world-system
Vansentedat the43d International
CongressofAmericanists,
couver,Canada.
WILKINSEN,
D. I987.
tionReviewI7:3I-59.
Centralcivilization.ComparativeCiviliza-
F., AND H. BANKOFF.
I989. "Diffusion and cultural
evolutionin IronAge Serbia,"in Centreand periphery:
Comparativestudiesin archaeology.EditedbyT. Champion,
pp. I59-72.
London:UnwinHyman.
o. I967. EarlyIndonesiancommerce:A studyofthe
WOLTERS,
originsofSrivijaya.Ithaca:CornellUniversity
Press.
A. I98I.
Late Postclassicoccupationsat Naco,
WONDERLEY,
LatinAmericanStudiesProHonduras.CornellUniversity:
gramDissertationSeries86.
NORMAN.
I99I.
YOFFEE,
"Maya eliteinteraction:
Througha
glass,sideways,"in Classic Maya politicalhistory:Hieroglyphicand archaeologicalevidence.EditedbyT. Culbert,
Press.[GMF]
pp. 28 5-3 IO. Cambridge:Cambridge
University
WINTER,
OF
JOJURNAVL
INTERNXlATIONJlAL
AMERICANLINGUISTICS
of
Foundedby FranzBoas in 1917,IJALexploresthedevelopmentand understanding
generallinguistictheoryand therelationsbetweenlanguageand culturein Native
Americanlanguages.Each quarter,IJALsubscribersreceiverigorousinvestigations
renownedscholarsin thefield.In
of textsand linguisticdata frominternationally
and other
of grammars,grammaticalfragments,
addition,theyreceivepresentations
documentsand discussionsrelevantto AmericanIndianlanguagesand theirspeakers.
Editedby David S. Rood
Publishedquarterlyby The Universityof Chicago Press
(withcopyof
Regularone-yearsubscriptionrates: $38.00 Individuals;$28.00 Students
OutsideUSA, pleaseadd $5.00 forpostage;Canadians
validatedID); $86.00 In$titutions.
pleaseadd 7% GST pluspostage.Visa andMasterCardaccepted.To order,sendcheck,
ofChicagoPress,
toThe University
purchaseorder,orcompletecreditcardinformation
2/94
Division,Dept.SS4SA, P.O. Box 37005,Chicago,IL 60637.
Journals