Like Water for Chocolate: Feasting and Political Ritual among the Late Classic Maya at
Xunantunich, Belize
Author(s): Lisa J. LeCount
Source: American Anthropologist, Vol. 103, No. 4 (Dec., 2001), pp. 935-953
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the American Anthropological Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/684122
Accessed: 29-09-2015 15:23 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
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].
Wiley and American Anthropological Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
American Anthropologist.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
LISA J. LECOUNT
of Anthropology
Department
Universityof Alabama
Tuscaloosa,AL 35487-0210
Like Water for Chocolate: Feasting and Political Ritual among the
Late Classic Maya at Xunantunich, Belize
in thecontextof feastingandmanners
canpointto underlying
Subtledifferences
of foodconsumption
levelsof civiland
in state-levelsocieties.Hautecuisineandhighstylesof diningarecharacteristic
socialcompetition
of societieswithfully
suchasRenaissance
Aztec.Competitive
developedcivilandsocialhierarchies
EuropeandthePostclassic
yetsociallycirsuchas theClassiclowlandMayamayhaveprepared
cumscribed
elaborate
diacritical
politicalandsocialorganizations
mealsthatmarkedstatus,butthenatureof feastingremained
AncientMayafeastingis recognizable
essentially
patriarchal.
discernible
througharchaeologically
potteryvesselformsthatwereusedto servefestivalfaresuchas tamalesandchocoof ceramicassemblages
acrosscivicandhousehold
contextsat thesiteof Xunantunich,
late.Comparison
Belize,demonstratesthatdrinkingchocolate,moreso thaneatingtamales,servedas a symboliccue thatestablished
the political
significanceof eventsamongtheClassicMaya.[feasting,ancientMaya,potteryanalysis,chocolate]
havelongrecognizedthatfeasting
Anthropologists
encompassesa complex dialecticthatdefines and
reifies an individual'sposition within the social,
economic,andpoliticalorder.'Feastingintegratesanddifferentiatesgroupmembersby providingthe public backdrop for the constructionand reproductionof social relations. Sponsoringa feast can benefit a host by creating
obligationsfor futurepaymentsin kind,oftenwithinterest.
Provisioningabundantfood anddrinkat publicgatherings
bolsterspartisanloyalty and crafts a stronggroup image
criticalin maintainingcivil power.The prominentposition
of feasting,as a settingfor the negotiationof social andpolitical relations,derives both from the symbolic associations of superiorityand inferioritywhen food is given and
receivedand from the economicrealitiesof food production anddistribution(Wiessner1996:6).
Forarchaeologists,the problemlies not only in grasping
the anthropologicalsignificance of feasting but also in
grapplingwith the issues of recognizingits ancientsignatures and differentiatingamong feasting's many roles in
past societies.2 While some feasts differ quantitatively
fromdailycommensalmeals,even withinmoderncomplex
societies they may remain qualitativelysimilar (Goody
1982: 78; Mennell 1996:32).Not surprisingly,archaeologists have foundthatfeastingmay best be identifiedin ancient societies that adoptedspecialty festival foods and
servingvessels or maintainedritualizedbanquetlocations
thatarehighlyvisibleandascertainablein the archaeological record.Dietlercalls suchhighcuisineandstylesof consumption a "diacriticalfeasting pattern"(1996:98) and
suggests that they are symbolic devices for naturalizing
conceptsof rankeddifferencesin social status.As exclusionaryevents,diacriticalfeasts arehostedby the wealthy
andpowerfulmembersof society,andcompanyis limited
to thosewho commandsocialandeconomicattention.
Diacriticalfeasts standin oppositionto the manykinds
of inclusionaryaffairsin which hosts attemptto promote
solidarityand equality by widely casting invitationsto
Dietler's(1996:92-97)
communitymembersandsupporters.
betweena
patron-rolefeasts,in whichfood is redistributed
centralizedauthorityand a supportingpopulace,and enfeasts, in which food exchangeis used as a
trepreneurial
meansto incurindebtedness,are good examplesof inclusionaryfeasts, as are Hayden's(1995:27) workparty,solicitation,and reciprocalfeasts. Althoughthe purposeof
inclusionaryfeastscan be significantlydifferent,they generally attemptto create supportby providingabundant
amountsof commonlyconsumedfoods.Inclusionary
feasts
can be very similarto daily commensalmeals regarding
the types of food and drinkserved and the style of consumption;however,they maybe morepublicin natureand
largerin scale.
The broaddichotomybetweenexclusionaryand inclusionaryfeaststhatI havejust describeddoes not adequately
explainthe intricaciesof ancientfeastingand the difficulties of finding feastingpatternsin the archaeologicalrecord.It does, however,allow archaeologiststo explorethe
commingledandnot necessarilylinearrelationships
among
feastingpatterns,social status,andpoliticalritual.The basic assumptionthatunderliesthis view is thatspecialized
AmericanAnthropologist103(4):935-953. Copyright@ 2001, AmericanAnthropologicalAssociation
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
936
AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST *
VOL. 103, No. 4
*
DECEMBER2001
serving paraphernalia,much like the foods they are intendedto hold and display,are politicalcurrency,and as
such they are used by individualsto create and maintain
this is not a new approach.
power.Althoughunderutilized,
Dietler (1996) traces political interactionbetween EuropeanBronzeAge societiesusingwine drinkingandstorage
vessels, and Brumfiel(1995) examines changes in Aztec
women's status by chartingpatternsof food preparation
using vessel forms.This studygoes one step further,however,placingfeastingpatternsintorecentmodelsthatshow
how political competitionstimulatesthe productionand
distributionof prestigegoods.3
The Late ClassicMayaserveas an excellentcase study
to investigatethe linkagebetweenfeastingpatternsandpoliticalcompetitionbecauseevidencefor these behaviorsis
readilyavailable.Basedon ethnographicandethnohistoric
data, Maya feasts are partitionedinto two, often overlapping components:the privatereligiousaspect thatis centered aroundfamily, gods, and ancestorsand the public
festivalaspectthatis morepoliticalin nature.This distinction is recognizablein the archaeologicalrecordthrough
specific vessel forms that were used to serve sacredand
festival foods. Comparisonof ceramicassemblagesacross
two sets of contexts--elite versuscommonandpublicversus private-at the Late Classic Maya center of Xunantunich, Belize, illustratessubtle variation in diacritical
feastingpatterns.The conclusionsuggestsfactorsthatmay
underliethe political significanceof eating tamales and
drinkingchocolateamongthe ancientMaya.
Diacritical Feasting Patterns and Political Ritual
Diacritical feasting patternsare not universal across
complex societies;nor do they assumea standardpattern.
Goody (1982:99) and Mennell(1996:32) link elaboration
and differentiationin the mannersof feasting to highly
stratified,hierarchicalsocietiessuch as Han-periodChina,
classical Rome, or RenaissanceItaly.They suggestthatin
these literatesocieties,innovationsin cuisine and styles of
consumptionwerepromptedby the escalatinglevels of social and politicalcompetitionin the upperstratumof society and the emulationof courtlyeatingby the lower stratum. Haute cuisine is characterizedby the utilizationof
prohibitivelyexpensive or exotic items, technologically
advancedmethods of food preparation,and, oftentimes,
privilegedor guardedinformationconcerningrecipes.Not
only is the food exquisite,the service and ambianceare
too. Haute cuisine is served on the finest possible tableware, and its outstanding,if not utterlyaudacious,display
denotesclass andprivilege.
Not all state-levelsocieties,however,are characterized
by diacriticalfeastingto marksocial status.In his classic
study of world cuisine, Goody (1982) found that nineteenth-centuryrulers of African kingdoms neither consumedhautecuisinenorownedspecialservingvessels. He
suggests that consumptionpatternsare relatedto differences in sociopoliticalorganizationandthe meansof production(1982:213). Intensificationof agricultureand the
emergenceof culturalhierarchiesin Eurasiansocieties led
to innovationsanddifferentiation
in food andstyles of consumption.In Africansocieties where the politicalhierarchy was based on divine rule,festivalfoods were used as
framingdevices, in Dietler's terms (1996:99), which establishthe ritualsignificanceof events.As symboliccues,
specialfoods, suchas beerforthe Gonjaof northernGhana
or weddingcakesforAmericans,areessentialcomponents
of ceremoniesthatmarkthe completionor consummation
of ritualaction.Participantsgreatlyanticipatethese foods,
andthe weight of traditiondemandsservingthem.In general,they aretimeconsumingor expensiveto makebutare
not so costly that they could not be eaten at daily meals.
More importantly,festival foods are not restrictedto the
elite class, nor are they regardedas haute cuisine that
marks status, althoughsome people attemptto impress
otherswith the size and grandeurof theirfeasts. Presumably,the stabilityof socialhierarchyandthe relativelylimited numberof noble rivalsfor politicaloffice in African
hieraticsocietiesdid not encouragethe innovationof high
stylesof food andservingvessels.
Goody's observationsconformto recentpoliticaleconomy models that attemptto understandthe role prestige
goods play in creatingand maintainingpolitical power.
Such models are based on threefundamentalpropositions
first outlinedby Douglas and Isherwood(1979:62) and
summarizedby Brumfiel(1987a:676).Consumptionfunctions to classify people;therefore,it providesan effective
meansfor validatingsocialstatus.Consumptionitself is inherentlycompetitive,therebymakingprestigegood display andexchangea meansfor airingconflictingclaimsto
politicalpositionsor socialstatus.Consequently,thedistributionof prestigegoods variesdependingon the openness
of competition,and it is sensitiveto changes in political
structure.Basedon thesepropositions,Brumfielconcludes
thatconsumptionof prestigegoods shouldflourishin competitivepoliticalsituationsandlanguishin structuredcontexts when social and politicalrightsare rigidly defined
andrelativelyuncontested.
This large and growing body of theory suggests that
variationin the distributionof prestigegoods reflectsancient political strategies.Exclusionarystrategies,such as
diacriticalfeasting,are associatedwith what Blantonand
colleagues (1996:5) call network-basedpolitical economies in which privilegedindividualsattemptto monopolize rightsto social standingand politicaloffices but also
contendwith powerfulpeers for such positions.In such
competitivesituations,ostentatiousconsumptionand exchangeareeffectivemethodsto recruitsupportandto craft
a strongimage (Cannadine1985; Hayden1995). In order
to gain influence, competitorsstimulate productionof
prestigegoods for use in rivalexchangenetworks.Luxury
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ANDRITUAL
AMONG
THEMAYA
LECOUNT/ FEASTING
items, however, may devalue rapidly if they can be imi-
tatedusing less expensiveraw materialsor moreefficient
technologies.To keep a competitiveedge, novel items or
new fashionsmustbe devised,ultimatelyinflatingtheproduction and diversity of prestige goods. This escalating
processcan be seen in the shift from medievalcookeryto
haute cuisine in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century
Europewhenit wouldhavebeenphysicallyimpossiblefor
the nobility to eat quantitativelymore than they already
consumedat feasts. Increaseddemandson chefs to create
elaboratemeals and service began in the city-courtsof
RenaissanceItaly and quickly spreadto the noble houses
of France.Later,the burgeoningbourgeoisieof England
who couldaffordsuchfineriesreadilyadoptedthe customs
of royalty(Mennell1996:33).
Blantonandcolleagues (1996:7) suggest thatin corporate political organizationsin which collective repreof govsentationandpowersharingformthe underpinning
ernance,productionof prestigegoods shouldbe reduced
overallwith a greaterequityin wealthdistributions.Leaders emphasizesolidarityandinterdependence
betweensocial and politicalgroups,and ritualscenteraroundbroad
themes such as fertilityand renewal. Goody (1982:207)
makes the case that in many Africanstates,marriageties
cut cross social strata,and there is a strongemphasison
culturalhomogeneityratherthan class. For Goody, however,the moreinclusivenatureof Africanfeastingis based
notjust on social relationsbut also in the relationsof production. Swidden agriculturelimits possibilitiesfor monopolizinglandandagricultural
productsandhas anequalizing effect on diet.Feastingamongthe Gonjaof northern
Ghana is thereforecharacterizedby the consumptionof
large quantitiesof commonfoods such as beer or beef by
the entirevillage.Nevertheless,the politicalprimacyof the
chief and his role in maintainingcosmological orderare
highlightedduringcommunalfeasts throughprotectingor
hidinghis eating(Goody 1982:77).
It is clear from this discussionthat distinguishingbetween diacriticalfeasts thatdemarcatesocial class andthe
diacriticaluse of festivalfoods thatsignalritualeventsrelies on demonstrating
boththe differentiationandthe contextualizationof feastingpatterns.It is also apparentthat
althoughserving paraphernalia
may easily be viewed as
prestigegoods and theirdistributionmay be operationalized to fit recent models, festival foods may not be. Festival foods range from commonly available dishes to exotic
meals and, therefore, do not conform to typical definitions
of prestige goods that emphasize the restricted nature of
their distribution.Archaeologists must consider the context
and ritual of eating in order to understand how ordinary
food is transformedinto festival fare.
937
The Late and Terminal Classic Maya of
Xunantunich, Belize
Xunantunich
is a medium-sized
centerlocatedatopa
high ridgeoverlookingtheMopanRiverjust threekilometers east of the modem-dayGuatemala-Belizeborderand
less than20 kilometersaway fromthe largeClassicMaya
stateof Naranjo(Figure1). The site grewin size andarchitecturalgrandeurduringthe Hats' Chaakphase (670-780
C.E.) of the Late Classicperiod,when much of the architecturevisible today was built.4The politicalclimax and
collapseof the polityoccurredduringthe TerminalClassic
in the early portionof the Tsak' phase (780-850 C.E.)
when Xunantunich'srulerproclaimedparamountauthority in the upperBelize Valley by dedicatingthreepublic
monumentsandmodifyingmajorcivic architecture.5
After
850 C.E.,the site appearsto have gone througha periodof
declineanddiminutionuntilit was abandonedsometimein
the tenthcentury.
Xunantunichis situatedon the easternperipheryof the
centralPet6n,wherelarge,centralizedstatessuch as those
centeredat TikalandCaracolarelocated.Smallkingdoms
like Xunantunichare often characterizedas decentralized
polities with political structuresredundantlyorganized
acrosscentersanddependencies.6
As such,integrationwas
relativelyweak both horizontallybetweenfactionsof the
same political rank and social standing and vertically
among ruling nobility, subordinateelites, and their supportingpopulace.Elite lineagesmonopolizedrightsto social standingandpoliticaloffice, yet individualscompeted
against intrafactionalchallengers for specific positions. At
the top of the political hierarchy the hereditary ruler assigned administrative offices to members within his own
noble lineage and other closely related ranked lineages.
Secondaryelites in turnreplicatedthis kingly model by
forming loyal factions of their own complete with collabo-
ratorsfromlowerrankedgroups.Supportfor politicalambitionsdependedon maintainingclose relationswith lineage membersandpersuadingdistantkin andforeignallies,
often of equalrank,to join forces.Internalcompetitionfor
kingship, tribute,and regional power is documented in his-
toricalinscriptionsthatdescribeintra-andinterpolitywarfare (Stuart 1993:332-336), social conflict (Fash 1991:
175), and the rapid succession of rulers(Pohl and Pohl
1994:149).
Public feasting realized the delicate task of simultaneously demonstrating group inclusion of the commoner
masses while celebrating elite prerogatives. Private negotiations, meanwhile, could fully engage exclusive strategies
such as diacritical displays of prestige items, particularly
specialty foods among the elite. Consideration of archaeological context is thus essential to understanding the political ramifications of ancient feasting. In order to elucidate feasting patterns, pottery samples are derived from
five contexts that crosscut elite and commoner households
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
938
AMERICANANTHROPOLOGIST * VOL. 103, No. 4
*
DECEMBER2001
Holmul
i
Barton
Ramie.
10 El Pilar
_
Tikal
ii
SNakum
Na
Naranjo i
o"a
Be\zeI- Ve
Blackman
Baking Pot
Cahal Pech
e
del Cayo
Buenavista
A
ctuncani * San Lorenzo
Actuncan
0• • -n - en . . XunantunichiA
Eddy
I
a
Yaxha
a
-Tipu
"
Pacbitun
LakeYaxha
.
'Guatemala
I
Sacul
I
0
20 km
Figure 1. Classic periodsites in the upperBelize Valley.
andpublicandprivatespacesat the regionalcenterof Xunantunich.Architectureis consideredthe most reliableindicatorof statusamongthe Maya;therefore,the sizes of
householdsand theirlocationsin the communityare used
to suggest ancient social status.The archaeologicalcontexts andinferencesconcerningthe functionof civic space
andthe statusof householdsaredescribedbelow.
StructureA-6 (known as El Castillo) was the primary
focus of ritualand civic life in the community(Figure2).
Encircling the roof of this multiplatformed,multistored
complex was an impressiveplasterfrieze, which still can
easily be seen acrossthe upperBelize Valley today. The
frieze widely publicizeda programof politicallegitimization by depicting acts of creationand ancestorworship
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
LECOUNT /
FEASTINGAND RITUAL AMONGTHE MAYA
GroupA
Residence
Royal
A-11
C
B
g
Area
A-24 & A-25
...Service
Group
o
A-12
PA-23,
A-II
A-10
o[
PaAA-13
A-I•
I
Sacbe
Plaza
A-I
o
El
A -21U/
Castillo
A-6
A -26
D-8
D-6
.
Q.
D-5
tICGroup
Xunantunich
Project
Archaeological
Unexcavated
Mound
Stela
m
Altar
Excavated
Floor Plan
Terrace or
Linear Feature
awAh
0
50
100lM
Figure 2. Classic periodarchitectureof Xunantunich,Belize. Map preparedby Angela Keller and modifiedby the author.
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
D
939
940
* VOL. 103, No. 4
AMERICANANTHROPOLOGIST
* DECEMBER
2001
(Fields 1994). Material from El Castillo derives from
StructureA-26, a six-roompalacestructurewithfourdoorways opening from the northand a single branchingentranceto the south.Situatedon the southernmedialterrace,
its restrictedand privatelocationwould have insuredthat
activitiesoccurringinsidewere limitedto residentelite individualsandto thosevisitorswith officialbusiness.
StructureA-11, located at the far northernend of the
compound,is generallyconsideredto have been the royal
residence. It consisted of a lower and upper gallery of
rooms that mirroredin the architecturallayoutand sculptural design the two-story building topping El Castillo
(Yaeger 1997:34).The remainingsides of the compound
were formed aroundPlaza A-III by the additionof an
audencia,StructureA-13, andtwo palacestructures,StructuresA-10 andA-12. CeramicsfromGroupA derivefrom
StructuresA-23, A-24, and A-25, a set of threelow platforms interpretedas a service areafor the royal residence
(JamisonandWolff 1994;LeCount1996). Staircasesconnectedthe ancillarygroupto StructureA-12, andthe alleyways between the two architecturalgroupscontainedthe
highest volume of utilitarianand highly decoratedpottery
at the site. I presumethatthis materialwas associatedwith
privateactivityinsidethe royalcompoundandthosepublic
events sponsoredby the royalfamily.
GroupD, a nonroyalresidentialgroup,was locatedon
the southeastperipheryof the site and linked to the civic
core by sacbeob,or raisedcauseways.Braswell(1998:30)
suggeststhatthe complexwas the home of a nonroyalelite
group because small pyramids(like StructureD-6) have
been interpretedas ancestorshrines and because range
structures,like those found aroundthe centralplatform,
have been interpretedas elite dwellings. Two uncarved
stelae, which may have portrayedpaintedimages of lineage leadersandpossiblydescribedtheirgenealogicalbackground,also attestto the elite statusof the GroupD occupants. Extensive excavations at 12 of the 14 mounds
recoveredoccupationandmiddenmaterialassociatedwith
domesticandritualactivities(Braswell1998).
San Lorenzo,situated1.5 kilometersnortheastof Xunantunich,is a spatiallydiscretesettlementclustercomposed of seven patio groups(plazuelas)and nine mounds
withoutpatios(moundclusters).The site sits on a set of ancient alluvialterracesoverlookingthe MopanRiverandits
rich floodplains (Figure 3). Yaeger (2000) proposes that
the community was composed of a group of related patrilineages not dissimilar to the pet kahob hamlets mentioned
in colonial period documents (Marcus 1983) or to the kin
groups that exist in many contemporary Maya communities (e.g., the sna of Zinacantan [Vogt 1983] or the aldea of
Chiquimula [Wisdom 1940]). Variation in the sizes of San
Lorenzo households and their locations in the community
can be linked to two ranked social statuses within the presumed commoner stratum.
Plazuelasareinterpreted
as homesto the descendantsof
the first families who foundedthe communityand established control over local resources.Lineage heads who
lived at these householdsheldthe highestsocial statusand
greatestauthoritywithinthe community.Moundclusters
were the residencesof new familiesrelatedby real or fictive ties to the founding families. Over time, gradual
growthandfissioningprocessesrelatedto the domesticdevelopmentalcycle createda communitycomposedof several intermarryinglocalized patrilineages(Goody 1958).
This developmentalmodelis confirmedby ceramicanalysis thatdates initialconstructionof many plazuelasto the
early portion of the Late Classic while mound clusters
were built later.By the TerminalClassic moundclusters
were alreadyabandoned,but some plazuelasunderwentat
least one furtherepisode of architecturalmodification.
Data derive from six residences:three plazuela groups
(SL-22, SL-24, andSL-25) andthreemoundclusters(SL20, SL-31, and SL-34) thatreceivedextensivehorizontal
strippingof the last occupationsurfacesto recover Late
andTerminalClassicartifactualmaterial(Yaeger2000).
Food and Ritual among the Maya
Cuisine is a rapidlychangingaspect of culture(Mintz
1985:122)and,like otherformsof materialculture,cannot
be expectedto remainstable.This is especiallytruefor the
Maya who, duringthe 1,000 yearsbetweenthe Late Classic period and the ethnographicpresent,lost substantial
portions of their once complex society. It is apparent
througha comparisonof ethnographiesandethnohistories
thatancientMayafeastingwas morecompetitive,largerin
scale, andbroaderin scope. This patternis to be expected
YucatecMaya, like their
given that the sixteenth-century
Classic ancestors,lived in morehierarchicalorganizedsocieties thanmodem groups.But, althoughscale and styles
of consumptionhave clearlychanged,examiningthe postcontactfeastingliteraturemayhelp to elucidatebasicritual
patterns,such as the distinctionbetweenritualandfestival
fare andthe contextof rituals,whichcan be used to create
hypothesesaboutancientMayafeasting.
Patterns of Modern Maya Feasting
Eatinganddrinking,processionsandprayers,andofferings and sacrificescomposethe basic set of recurringrituals that are combinedto form a modemrn
Maya ceremony
(Vogt 1993:30). The replicationof these ritualsegments
symbolicallyreproducesthe key propositionsconcerning
the natureof life anduniversefor the Maya.Ritualscommencewithrelativelyprivatesacramentalmealsthatestablish sacredconnectionsbetweenindividualsandancestors
or gods. They end in publicfestivalswherefeasts become
stages to materializesocial status and arrangepolitical
matters.These two core ritualsegments-the firstprivate
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
LECOUNT
/
FEASTING AND RITUAL AMONG THE MAYA
941
XunantunichArchaeologicalProject
San Lorenzo Settlement Cluster
1997
M
0
Rectified Structure
25
50
75
100
125
150m
CyD
SL-34
a
G
SL-31 I
SL-25
SL-24
Q
"SL-20
SL-20
SL-22
00
O
Figure 3. The communityof San Lorenzo,Belize. Map preparedby Jason Yaegerand modifiedby the author.
and highly religious,the second more publicandcelebratory-have remainedrelativelystabledespiteSpanishintervention(Vogt 1993:192).
The sacramentalaspect of Maya feasts can be divided
into threeparts:the invitationto gods or ancestorsto receive offerings,the actualdelivery of consecratedfoods,
andthe subsequentdiningon the food blessedfor the gods
(Bunzel 1952:226;RedfieldandRojas 1934:140;Wisdom
1940:305).Food is not merelyeatenin commemorationof
saints,gods, or the dead;rather,it is sacrificedand transformedinto a sacredelement,much like the sacramentof
the EucharistamongChristians.
The small-scale,relativelyprivatenatureof sacramental
meals is illustratedin the modern Yucatec Maya ChaChaac ceremony, where a series of consecratedfoods
marksceremonialactivitiesand ritualtime. Rain ceremonies demandthree full days of ritualactivities (Redfield
and Rojas 1934:140).On the first day, ritualspecialists,
calledh-men,erectanaltara slightdistancefromthepublic
plazawheremenof the villagewill congregateandpartake
in the ceremony.On the secondday, ritualistsarrangefood
on a mesa and offer the sacredmeal to the gods at dawn,
noon, threeo'clock in the afternoon,seven in the evening,
andtwice againbeforetwo in the morning(Figure4). After
each offeringa drinkis distributedto men "somedistance
fromthe altar,keepingcompletesilence so as not to interruptthe feastingof the gods" (Redfieldand Rojas 1934:
142). Afterthe gods are satiated,sanctifiedfoods areconsumed by ritual participants,and a small rack is constructedto hold minorfood offerings.Throughoutthe ritual an endless arrayof modestportionsof sacredfood is
presentedto the gods in smallindividualbowls, laterto be
consumeda shortdistancefromthe shrineby participants.
Morepublicfestivalsgenerallyoccurafterthe highlyreligious portionof the ritualends.Althoughfestivalsareappropriatelyheld on eitherholy or auspiciousdays and are
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AMERICANANTHROPOLOGIST *
942
000
o
S
00
0
VOL. 103, No. 4
*
DECEMBER2001
oo
o00
0
\OU1
0
000
1000
00
Soo
oo
?22ol
0
0(0
3
00
?o?
oz0
.
Figure 4. Illustrationof ritualmesa for Cha-chaacceremonydemonstratingprescribedarrangementof food offerings. Redraftedfrom Redfield
and Villa Rojas 1934: n. 14.
Key:
4. Two bolontz-uah(ritualbreadstuff)
1. Thirteenhoma (small bowls) and two shallow gourddishes of balchi
5. Two noh-uah (ritualbreadstuff)
2. Nine pails of soup
6. One holche-uah (ritualbreadstuff)
3. Thirty-sixyal-uah (ritualbreadstuff); those markedwith a cross
7. Fouryaxche-uah (ritualbreadstuff)
contain chicken meat
imbuedwithhighreligiousmeanings,essentiallytheyarea
time for renewingfriendships,engagingin sportandprofit,
and indulgingin food and drink.Families celebratemarriages (Wisdom 1940:300), funerals (Bunzel 1952:153;
Wisdom 1940:305), first fruit ceremonies(Redfield and
Rojas 1934:144), novenas or village festivals (Redfield
and Rojas 1934:150),and days of the dead (Redfieldand
Rojas 1934:202-203) by hosting public f8tes. The male
head of the householdorganizesthe feast while women
collaboratewithfemalekinfolkto preparethe foods.Every
family puts aside extrafood and drink,strivingto provide
the best fiesta they can, for suchpublicdisplaysreflectthe
prosperityof the household.Community-basedfestivals
such as saints'days andcargoceremoniesare moreelaborate and incorporategreaternumbersof people;however,
their organizationand structureare similar to those of
householdf8tes(Vogt 1990:127).The finalday of community-wide festivals can feature markets,bullfights, fireworks, maskeddances, and, of course, eating and heavy
drinking(Bunzel 1959:192;RedfieldandRojas 1934:153-
154; Wisdom 1940:433-436).Ultimatelythe responsibility of providingfor the festival lies with the principalorganizersanda greatdealof the food is purchasedby them.7
In orderto defrayexpenses, organizersmay solicit food
from communitymembersand sponsordances (Bunzel
1952:169, 255). In general,however, organizersabsorb
mostof the cost themselvesas thisis one of the primaryreof the
characteristics
sponsibilitiesandprestige-enhancing
office.
AlthoughlowlandandhighlandMayavarysubstantially
in theirrepertoireof ritualcuisine,bothgroupsmakea distinctionbetweensacramentalfoods andfestivalfare(Bunzel 1959:45;Redfieldand Villa Rojas 1934:128;Wisdom
1940:387).Among the YucatecMaya, a modem population closely relatedto ancient southernlowland groups,
sacramentalmeals center aroundzaca, a maize gruel in
which chicken may be addedto make kol; balch6,a fermentedhoney and tree barkdrink;and tuti-uah,a variety
of bakedbreads(Table 1). Tuti-uahare offeredas consecratedfood to the gods and are an essentialingredientin
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
LECOUNT /
FEASTING
ANDRITUALAMONG
THEMAYA
943
Table 1. Modem Yucatec Maya cuisine.
Name
Preparation
Atole
Pinole
Tortillas
Pozole
Beans
Meat
Tamales
Lime-soakedmaize is groundand boiled in water,sometimes with sugaror honey.
Toasted maize with cinnamonand otherspices is ground,boiled like coffee, and sometimesbeatenwith cacao.
Lime-soakedmaize is ground,shapedinto cakes, and toastedon a comal (griddle).
Coarsely ground,cooked maize meal mixed with cold water.
Boiled.
Boiled.
Nixtamalis strainedand cooked till thick, mixed with lardand meat, wrappedin bananaleaves, and steamedin chicken
broth.
Chicken soup with maize meal dumplings,heavily spiced with roastedpeppers.
Ground,cooked corn (withoutlime) stirredinto cold water.
Lonchocarpustree barkis pounded,placed in ajar with waterandhoney, and left for threedays to ferment.
Chicken soup seasoned and thickenedwith cornmealbread(uah) bakedin a pib (earthenoven).
Seven types of cornmealbreadsmade with groundsquashseeds bakedin a pib.
Cacao powder and water arebeatenup in a wooden vessel with a wooden beaterand sweetenedwith either sugaror
honey; milk is not used.
Relleno negro
Zaca
Balch6
Kol (yach)
Tuti-uah
Chocolate
Source: Redfield and Villa Rojas 1934:37-41.
zaca. Many small containersof zaca, balch6,and kol are
placed on the altaror sacrificialmesa (RedfieldandVilla
Rojas 1934:141, 145). According to Redfield and Villa
Rojas (1934:128-129), maize-basedfoods are suitablefor
gods, not simplybecausethey are traditionallycorrectbut
because they evoke rain-givingfunctionsof the gods and
signify purityanddivinity.
Festivalfoods also includemaize-basedfoods andmeat,
andinthoughthe dishesaredistinctin style of preparation
common
at
Yucatec
Festival
foods
Mayacelegredients.
brations include tamales, relleno negro, tortillas,atole,
boiled chicken, roasted pigs, chocolate, and rum. These
foods are considered"hot"ratherthan "cold,"like sacred
fare. Foods, like plants,diseases, and lands,thereforebelong to one of two fundamentalstates(hot or cold), a distinctionthe YucatecMayaassociatewith the dualityof nature(RedfieldandVilla Rojas 1934:130).
Cacao is consumedmore often at social and political
events than at religious meals. As a drink,the highland
Quich6 serve a special atole containingcocoa butterand
sapuyul,andnew alcaldesaretoastedwithchocolateduring
the Ceremonyof the Surrenderof Office (Bunzel 1952:41,
228-247). The Chorti mix chocolate into unsweetened
atole, a drinkthey call chilate, but they never sacrificeor
offer it to the gods (Wisdom 1940:387).Among the lowland Yucatec Maya, chocolateis consumedat weddings,
baptisms,andotherCatholicritesbutnotduringtraditional
rites (Redfield and Villa Rojas 1934:192). Cacao beans,
however,areconsideredsacred,andthe Quich6offerthem
to honoredparticipants(Bunzel 1952:44).Bunzel (1952:
44) suggests that cacao still retains its ancient role as
money in highlandsociety, for seeds are the first gift offered in negotiationsfor marriageand the last gift exchangedat the conclusionof initiationceremonies.Similarly,the highlandZinacantecostradein cacao beans,yet
thereis no mentionof chocolateas a ritualfood. Formodem Maya,chocolatedrinksareconsumedby high-ranking
officials or honoredindividualsin more privateritualsin
whichtoastingcementssocialandpoliticalrelations.
Reconstructing Ancient Maya Feasts
A review of sixteenth-century
Yucatecritualsobserved
de
Landa
by Bishop Deigo
clearly documentsthe broad
natureof postcontact
and
scale
and
differentiated
scope
Maya feasting.Especiallyrelevantare the descriptionsof
diacriticalmealsnot seen in the ethnographicliterature.In
additionto the private/public,small-scale/large-scaledimensions exploredin the previousethnographicsection,
the following ethnohistoricsection exams the inclusive
versusexclusivenatureof Mayafeasting.All theselines of
evidencearethenusedto reconstructClassicMayafeasts.
At small-scalefamily rites,such as Pocam and Ihcil Ix
Chel, Mayafamiliescelebratedlife passagesandpersonal
healthby hostingfeasts.At largerrites,communitiesplacatedgods thatgovernedbees, plants,or animalswithfood
offeringsat shrines.Tozzer(1941:163)suggeststhatthe altarsweretemporaryaffairserectedat the time of the ritual
and thatfew, if any, ceremoniestook place in civic buildings. At the end of these rituals,participants"all ate the
gifts andthe food, whichtheyhadbrought,anddrankuntil
they were sacksof wine"(Tozzer1941:154).Annualceremonies to deities such as Chac, god of rain,and Itzamna,
high god of the YucatecMaya,ended in communalfestivals to helpensurea good yearof rains(Tozzer1941:163).
Large-scalecalendricalandpoliticalceremoniesinvolved
manydays of commensalfeasting.Tonalamatl,which occurredevery 65 or 260 days and markedtun (year) and
katun (20-year) endings, lasted for three days with perfumings, offerings,and movablefeasts attendedby lords
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
944
* VOL. 103, No. 4
AMERICAN
ANTHROPOLOGIST
* DECEMBER
2001
andpriestsof lesser villages (Tozzer1941:162).Five days
of dancing,sacrifices,ceremonies,and feasts surrounded
the festivalfor the cyclical departureof Kukulcan,a preternaturalrulerof Chich6nItza.Thecelebrationculminatedin
separatevillagefestivalsthatlasteduntilthe monthof Pop.
The distinctionbetweeninclusive,communalfetes and
competitive,diacriticalfeasts was clearly recognizedby
Bishop Landa.Presumably,this dichotomyextendedback
into the Classic period,for throughoutthis largeperiodof
time the Maya were organized into competing states.
Bishop Landa stated that the sixteenth-centuryYucatec
Mayahadtwo typesof feasts:
Thefirst,whichis thatof thenoblesandof theprincipal
people, obligeseach one of the invitedgueststo give another
similarfeast.And to each guestthey give a roastedfowl,
andat theendof the
breadanddrinkof cacaoin abundance;
to givea mantato eachto wear,
repast,theywereaccustomed
anda littlestandandvessel,as beautifulas possible.Andif
orhisrelations
are
oneof theguestsshoulddie,hishousehold
of
the
invitation.
The
second
to
way giving
obliged repay
feastswasusedamongkinsfolkwhentheymarrytheirchildrenorcelebratethememoryof thedeedsof theirancestors,
exandthisdoesnotobligethegueststogivea feastinreturn,
he
an
to
a
if
have
invited
Indian
a
hundred
feast,
persons
cept
also invitesthemall whenhe givesa banquetor marrieshis
for
andtheyremember
children.Theyhavestrongfriendship
a longtimetheseinvitations,
althoughtheyarefarapartfrom
oneanother.
[Tozzer1941:92]
Based on this passage, feasting appearsto have been
widespreadacross social groups and not confinedto the
elite class. Both commonerand elite lineage heads were
expected to host festivals that markedgroup members'
rites of passagesand commemoratedimportantancestors.
McAnany(1995:8) suggeststhatfeasting,like otherMaya
rituals centered around ancestor worship, legitimized
statusand rightsto lands and propertythroughrepetitive
socialperformancesandoralhistory.Amongelites,household feasts were competitiveand diacritical.Nobles and
principallords sponsoredfestivals where they provided
lavish meals and exchangedprestigeitems such as cloth
andpotteryvessels with guests.Theseobligationswerethe
responsibilityof the lineagehead,possiblyeven thosefrom
less privilegedranks,whose duty it was to upholdthe social honorof the family.
Ancient festival foods described by Landa-"roasted
fowl, bread and drink of cacao in abundance"-are remarkably similar to those still being served among the
Maya today. Bread, in this situation, refers to tamales.
Taube (1989), working with epigraphic and iconographic
data, suggests that tamales, wa or wah (uah as cited in the
ethnographic literature), were the main daily and ritual
food in the central Maya lowlands. At least three different
types of tamales have been identified through hieroglyphic
texts: curled, notched, and loaf shaped (Taube 1989:42).
Presumably these various kinds differed in the context of
consumptionmuchlike the tamalevarietiesmadetodayby
the modemMaya who preparesome types solely for religious ceremonieswhilethey consumeothersin festivaland
secularcontexts.Eating meat, specifically deer, peccary,
turkey,anddog, was largelyconfinedto publicfestivalsin
the sixteenthcentury,a patternthataccordingto Pohl and
Feldman(1982:302)has Classicperiodprecedents.Sacred
foods also appearto have remainedremarkablystable,although some new foods, most notably coffee and wheat
bread,have been addedto the list of foods consumedat
contemporaryMaya sacramentalmeals. The continued
distinctionbetweenancientsacredandfestivalfoodsexists
partlybecausethese mealssymbolizethe essentialoppositions betweenindividualityand communalitythatcharacterizeMayadailyandspirituallife (Vogt 1993:42).
In contrast,everydayfareappearsto have changedsubstantiallysince the early historicperiod,and it is thusthe
most difficultaspectof the cuisineto reconstructin the archaeologicalpast, especially given the simple natureof
andthe lack of prehispanictextualinforfood preparation
mationconcerningdaily life. Whatwe do knowis thattortillas werenotcommonlyeatenin the centrallowlandsuntil the Postclassic(Taube 1989), althoughthey may have
been introducedto ancientelites by the Late or Terminal
Classic, for comals appearin the archaeologicalrecordat
largelowlandsites (Ashmore1981;Brainerd1958;Harrison 1970; Hendon 1987; Pendergast1979; Smith 1971),
includingXunantunich(LeCount1996:255),at this time.
Comals are generallyassociatedwith tortillapreparation,
althoughtheycan be used to toastcacao or otherseeds and
nuts (Hendon 1987:350). Because elite diets contained
greateramountsof meat than did commonerfare (Pohl
1990:167),it can be speculatedthatelites ate otherfestival
items suchas tamalesandchocolateon a moreregularbasis also. The ancientcommonerdiet, however,was probably very similarto that consumedby the contemporary
Maya whose daily diet relies heavily on tortillas,atole,
beans,andchile.Thesefood itemsarecookedby boilingor
or
toastingwith little additionalelaborationin preparation
ingredients.Tamalemaking,conversely,requireslabor-intensive preparation.Today women preparetamales on
Sundays or for special occasions, especially Christmas,
Easter,and birthdays.Likewise, in the past tamalesmay
have been considereda festival food, a patternalso suggested by Brumfiel (1995:239) for the Aztec. Daily food
for the Classic Maya most likely consisted of simple atole
and pinole.
Archaeological
Markers of Feasting
Variation in feasting patterns among the ancient Maya
of Xunantunich may be documented by the kinds of pottery vessel forms found in formal assemblages. Cooking
and preparationpots are less specific indicators of feasting
than serving ware because Maya cuisine, whether it was
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
/
LECOUNT
9
FEASTING AND RITUAL AMONG THE MAYA
945
-s~F~1-~~
gs~
I'I
F
Lr'f?~I-P
?
I
?~
?
~E~E~
IE~ I
E
~
1:
,- ,,
?1
ai
I
I
-
~
a
s
B
a
"
aa
I~
a
-- ??r,.
;A
$"i~a-a
I~
~"
; :?
i-:-s.-
-
-
ia;e
I
1~
~
~
~a
~ 15~~~
b
j;
I
Li~a~
D
"
~c~~0~
~i~~~
a
1
al-
-~
Figure 5. Late Classic polychromepaintedcylinder vase depicting the offering of food and drinkat the court of the Lords of Xibalbi. Rollout
photograph,copyrightJustinKerr 1976, file no. K504.
daily, sacred, or festival foods, essentially involved the
same set of cooking techniques:soaking,mixing,boiling,
and toasting.'Such fundamentaltasks could have been
adequatelyaccomplishedin most open-mouthedjars and
largebowls.Servingitems,on the otherhand,functionpredominantlyin the public domain and are more likely to
convey household wealth and status (Smith 1987:312).
The displayaspectof servingware makesit a moresensitive markerof diacriticalfeastingpatterns.
The ancientMaya appearto have distinguishedamong
vessel forms and favored particularstyles to serve ritual
foods. Hieroglyphictexts along the rims of Classicperiod
pictorialvessels make referenceto pre-ColumbianMaya
functionalcategories(Houstonet al. 1989; Reents-Budet
1994; Taube 1989). Some potteryvessels display hieroglyphs aroundthe rim in a format called the Primary
StandardSequence(PSS), an elaboratenametag thatgenerallyincludesthe methodof surfacedecoration,the name
of the vessel type,its contents,as well as the socialstatusof
the owner.Based on this epigraphicdata,Houston,Stuart,
and Taubetranslatean emic classificationof vessel types
identifyingvases as drinkingvessels for cacao andplates
anddishesas plattersto serve tamales.Smallbowls likely
containedmoreaqueousfoods such as atolethatthe Maya
wished to keep cool (Houstonet al. 1989:722).This hy-
pothesisis supportedby substantialindependentdata.Pictorial scenes on Classic period vessels depict elite individuals seated on palacebenches with vases in handand
plattersstackedwith wah (Figure5),9 and often they are
shown offeringfood or gifts to guestsor dignitaries.Close
examinationof these vessels reveals heavy wear patterns
on theirsurfaces;therefore,it can be assumedthattheirprimary function involved repeated use (Reents-Budet
1994:75), even those items found in burialcontexts.Finally, chemicalanalysesof organicresiduesfoundon the
interiorof vases from an elite tomb at Rio Azul (Stuart
1988) lend supportto the proposalthatvases werecontainers for chocolatedrinking.
Characterization
of ancientvessel formsis basedon rim
sherdsgiven thatarchaeologicaltypes aredefinedby a ratio of vessel heightto maximumdiameter(Table 2). Five
primary formal categories are defined: plates, dishes,
bowls, vases, andjars.Platesanddishes are lumpedinto a
single categorycalled plattersbecause the ancientMaya
appearnot to have distinguishedfunctionallybetweenthe
two eticallyderivedforms.Bowls are dividedsecondarily
into large(meanrimdiameter= 30 centimeters)andsmall
forms(meanrimdiameter= 18 centimeters),for the Maya
used them,unlikeplatesanddishes,for distinctlydifferent
purposes (LeCount 1996:251). Rims, ratherthan body
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
946
AMERICANANTHROPOLOGIST * VOL. 103, No. 4
*
DECEMBER2001
Table 2. Vessel form categories.
PrimaryForm FormalDescription
Plate
Dish
Bowl
Jar
Vase
Height is less thanone-fifth its maximumdiameter.
Height is more thanone-fifthbut less than
one-thirdits maximumdiameter.
Height is more thanone-thirdbut no more thanits
maximumdiameter;orifice may be restricted
(a rimmedbowl) or unrestricted.
Height is greaterthan maximumdiameter,and it
has a neck.
Height is greaterthanmaximumdiameterwith a
neck very narrowin comparisonwith its height
and width.
Source: Sabloff 1975:227.
sherds, were used for analysis because they exhibit the
criticalattributesthatdefine forms.Rims were refitbefore
analysis resultingin counts of the maximumnumberof
vessels perdeposit.In an attemptto controlfor brokenness
and completeness,only those rim sherdsfrom refuse depositsqualifiedfor analysis.Forthisanalysis,it is assumed
thatall vessels of similarformhave similarprimaryfunctions, even thoughsome vessels lack intricatelydecorated
surfaces.
The contextof consumptionmay be as importantas the
materialremainsof meals in distinguishingancientfeasting patterns.Evidence for diacriticalfeasting among the
ancientMaya may be documentedby the kinds of vessel
forms found in public and private contexts. Diacritical
feastingto marksocial statusshouldbe moreprevalentin
privatecontexts where sumptuousfoods and splendidtableware would have been reserved for honored guests.
Here elites could fully engage in the exclusive strategyof
diacriticalfeastingwithoutalienatingvaluablesupporters.
If Xunantunichelites engagedin diacriticalfeasting,high
frequenciesof vases and plattersshould be restrictedto
civic or elite households.If, however,formalassemblages
across the site appearfairly homogenouswith relatively
similarfrequenciesof vessel types, then it could be suggested thatfeastingin the Late andTerminalClassicperiods at Xunantunichwas more inclusive.Both elite rulers
and commoner lineage leaders may have presidedover
feasts, supplyingsacredmaize gruelin small bowls, serving tamaleson platters,anddistributingchocolatein vases.
Such inclusiveevents wouldhaveemphasizedcommonality ratherthandifferentiationby servingcustomaryfoods
in appropriately
autochthonousvessels.
Archaeologicalsamplesderive from single component
excavationlots foundin primarycontextssuchas middens,
floors, and occupationdebrisand not fromfill or collapse
material.Single-componentdeposits are criticalfor analytical comparisonsbecause they representa discretearchaeologicaltime frameanddo not introducetemporaler-
ror.The use of primarycontexts,ratherthansecondarydeposits,increasesthe likelihoodthatthe assemblagewas the
productof specific activitiesandnotthe resultof commingling materialsfrom many differentactivities.Such strict
samplingcriteriaresultedin small samplesizes for commoner habitations;however, I argue these samples best
representancientassemblages.Continuedexcavationsat
San Lorenzo (Yaeger 2000) and Chan N6ohol (Robin
1999) have yielded largersamplesfor plazuelaand small
mound groups associatedwith the greaterXunantunich
polity. These studies reporthighly comparabledata sets
with those presentedhere and indicatethe power of my
small samplesto draw conclusionsconcerningthe larger
populationof commonerhouseholds.
Analysis and Discussion
Analysis of potteryforms delineatesthe existenceof a
diverse set of potteryassemblagesthat reflectsignificant
variationin householdfeastingand importantdifferences
between public and privaterituals(Table3). The prerequisite domesticassemblagecan be reconstructed
by viewthe
relative
of
forms
at
Lorenzo
San
ing
frequencies
moundclusters.These small,commonerfamiliespresumablyownedthe mostbasicset of cookingandservingware.
Comparisonof the relativefrequencyof primaryformsusing the moundclusterassemblageas a base line illustrates
the complexityof feastingin LateClassicMayasociety.
Small bowls, proposedas individualfood containers,
exhibit distributionsthatappearto be heavily conditioned
by social status.The highestrelativefrequenciesof small
bowls are found within elite assemblages.Such forms
makeup 8 percentof the assemblageassociatedwithroyal
service areaat GroupA. El Castilloand GroupD assemblagescontainbetween5 and6 percent.Smallbowlsfound
on El Castillomay also be indicativeof cloisteredsacramental ceremonies performed there by priests during
calendriceventsor possiblyroyalfamilyancestorworship.
Theirpresencein elite householdscan also be used to suggest that individualsmay have extendedthe contexts in
which they could markstatus.This patternlendsevidence
to inferthatelites used small bowls for both daily dining
and sacredrituals.Commonerhouseholds,however,containedvery few small bowls constitutingless than3 percent of the formal assemblagesat plazuelasand mound
clusters.Basedon these data,it could be arguedthatsacramental ritualsrarelyoccurredat commonerhouseholds;
however, this negates ethnohistoricand ethnographicreports that clearly indicatethat such ceremoniesdid take
place among less privilegedfamilies. I suggestthatcommonersofferedsacramentalfoods to gods in smallgourds
just as theydo today.
Platesanddishes,proposedas servingplattersfortamales,
are surprisinglyconsistent across assemblages,whether
contexts are public or private,elite or common.Relative
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
LECOUNT /
FEASTING
ANDRITUALAMONG
THEMAYA
947
Table 3. Relative frequencyof forms withinritualand householdceramicassemblages.
El Castillo
Platters
Vases
Small bowls
Largebowls
Jars
Total rims
GroupA
GroupD
Plazuelas
MountClusters
n
%
n
%
n
%
n
%
n
%
18
37
13
90
113
271
6.64
13.65
4.80
33.21
41.70
50
39
76
324
409
898
5.57
4.34
8.46
36.08
45.55
16
2
15
139
62
234
6.84
0.85
6.41
59.40
26.50
5
1
1
58
62
127
3.94
0.79
0.79
45.67
48.82
0
1
2
44
28
75
0.00
1.33
2.67
58.67
37.33
Note: Derived from rims recoveredfrom occupationcontexts of the Hats' Chaakand early facet of the Tsak' phases.
X2 = 129.376,
df= 16,p = .001.
frequencieswithinelite assemblagesat El Castillo,Group
A, and GroupD clustertightlybetween 6 and 7 percent.
Similarly,plattersconstitute4 percentof the assemblage
associated with large commoner households living at
plazuelas.Only smallfamilieslivingat moundclustershad
no such serving items. Small families may have participatedin householdritualsat the home of the lineagepatriarchwho was responsiblefor arrangingfood andproviding
tablewarefor feasts, thus they did not needingto acquire
servingvessels untiltheirobligationsincreased.This basic
of ruralhouseholdsat hinassemblageis also characteristic
terlandcommunitiesin the upper Belize Valley (Robin
1999).Residentsliving at moundclustersmay have lacked
serviceware becauseit was costly to obtain.Based on the
widespreaddistributionof these platters,it can be suggested that serving tamales appearsto have been an accepted practicethat occurredat small family-basedfestivals, largepublicceremonies,andprivatefunctionsduring
LateClassictimes.
Vases, proposedas drinkingcontainersfor chocolate,
exhibit much more complex patterning.The highest relative frequencyis foundon El Castillowith nearly 14 percent of the assemblagecomposedof suchforms.Fewerare
foundin the serviceareaof the royalresidencewherethey
constituteless than 5 percentof the formal assemblage.
Householdassemblagesfoundat GroupD, plazuelas,and
moundclustersall containverylow relativefrequenciesof
vases,constituting1 percentof the formalassemblage.Patterningindicatesthat chocolatedrinking,like tamaleeating, was customaryat Maya rituals,yet it was morecommonlyassociatedwithelite events.
Based on these data, I suggest that chocolatedrinking
was a highly chargedpoliticalritualamongthe LateClassic Maya, a critical act that consolidatedpolitical allegiance and cementedcivic agreementsbetweenindividuals, bothelite andcommon.Thehighestfrequencyof vases
at Xunantunichis found in elite, nonresidentiallocations
removedfrompublicspace.StructureA-26, situatedon the
southernmedialterraceof El Castillo,is visuallyand spatially isolatedfrom the communalplazas.Here,elite men
would have gatheredin secludedroomsto conductaffairs
of state or lineage. At the royal service centervases may
also havebeenassociatedwithprivateevents,as mostwere
recoveredfromStructureA-25. Of the threeplatformsthat
formthe royalservicearea,StructureA-25 is farthestfrom
Plaza A-II. I have arguedpreviouslythatthe presenceof
vases at this structurecould be interpretedas markingthe
preparationof chocolatedrinksfor consumptionat large
festivalsin PlazaA-II (LeCount1996:268).Nevertheless,
it is also reasonableto assume that this preparationmay
have been for privateconsumptionby royaltyand their
guests in palace structureswithinthe royal compounditself. The consistent, yet extremely low frequencies of
vases acrosshouseholds,even thoseof the leastprivileged,
atteststo the fact thatall lineageheadsmayhave owned at
leastone vase.
This archaeologicalpatternappearsanalogousto that
describedin the ethnographicliterature,whichdocuments
chocolatedrinkingassociatedwith ritualsinvolving civil
functions,suchas the installationof new alcaldes(mayors)
or marriagearrangements.
Generally,theseritualsareperformedin privatehouses or offices, a patternconfirmedat
Xunantunichandalso seen depictedon Classicperiodpottery."'Accordingto Vogt (1993:35),a drinkmustaccompany any kind of crucial transactionamong the modem
Mayaof Zinacantanmen.
The scenarioabove leads to the conclusionthatchocolate drinkingwas a relativelyprivate,possiblyone-on-one
activitybetweenmen in power.Houstonet al. (1989) have
long arguedthat the PSS found along the rim of pottery
vessels makesproprietarystatementsthatidentifynot only
the ownerof the vessel but his or hersocial statusas well.
Further,scenes paintedon Classic vases may have depicted importanthistoricalevents thatoccurredduringan
individual's lifetime (Chase 1985). Vases, particularly
those prominentlydisplayingname and rank,could therefore be consideredinalienablepossessions(Weiner1992)
thatmaterializedan individual'srankat ritualevents.
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
948
AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST *
VOL. 103, No. 4
*
DECEMBER2001
Summary and Conclusions
I have attemptedto identifyvariationin ancientfeasting
patternsand link it to politicalritualsthatmaintainpower
in Late and TerminalClassic society. Interpretingthe archaeologicalpatterningfrom five contextsthatcut across
private,civic, elite, and commoncontextsat the Late and
TerminalClassic Mayasite of Xunantunichis challenging
becausethe distributionof formsis not arrangedintoneatly
defined sets of servingvessels. My approachto this complexity is to view individualvessel forms separatelybecause I assumethateachtype informsus aboutspecificritual foods andtheirrolein the religious,social, andpolitical
aspectsof ancientfeasting.Sacramentalmealsappearto be
the mostdifficultaspectto investigate,for smallbowls,the
archaeologicalmarkerused to identifyofferingsof sacred
food, also couldhavefunctionedas individualservingcontainersfor elite seculardining.Commonersmay have substitutedperishablegourdsfor small bowls, a patternseen
todayin modemMayarituals.Celebratoryfeasting,in contrast, is more visible in the Maya archaeologicalrecord.
The wide distributionof platesandvases lendsevidenceto
suggest that most elite and large commonerhouseholds
sponsoredlineage-basedfeastswheretamalesandat leasta
small amount of chocolate were consumed. Although
headmenmighthaveownedat leastone chocolatedrinking
vessel, the high concentrationof vases in StructureA-26
on El Castilloand elevatedlevels found in GroupA indicatethatdrinkingmayhavetakenon specialsignificance.
The political significanceof chocolate has long been
notedby Mesoamericanists,
especiallyepigrapherssuchas
Houstonet al. (1989), whosereadingof ethnohistorical
and
Classic periodtexts has shown thatchocolatedrinkswere
integralto dynasticceremoniesandto affirmingimportant
social contracts.The Xunantunichdata,whichfocuson excavationmaterials,addyet anotherline of evidenceto supBut whatmakeschocolatedifferent
portthis interpretation.
than otherMaya drinks,such as balchi or chicha (maize
beer),as a locus of value(Netting1964)?The significance
of chocolate stems partlyfrom its prominentplace in the
origin myth of the Maya, the Popol Vuh, in which gods
createdhumans from maize and chocolate found in the
Mountainof Sustenance.Chocolate,however, is unlike
maize in the ways it is raisedandprocessed(Coe andCoe
1996:42). Cacao trees are difficult to grow and require
year-round moisture and specific soil conditions, such as
those found in the Sosconusco area on the Pacific coast or
the Gulf Coast plain. Cacao beans themselves also demand
extensive processing which limited coca production until
1815, when a Dutch chemist invented a process for the
manufacture of powdered chocolate with a low fat content.
Therefore, ancient people could not have been fed chocolate, unlike beer, chicha, or other beverages made from
high-yielding crops at entrepreneurialfeasts, work parties,
or patron-role festivals. Presumably, the restricted nature
of cacao farmingallowedMayaelites at some pointin the
distantpastto seize controlof its meansof productionand/
or distribution.Such high-valueand cosmologically significantprestigegoods often servedas politicalcurrencies
(Earle1991:7).Forthe ancientMaya,cacaocondensedreligious, economic,and social meaninginto a single material referentand, as a drink,was the symboliccue for the
consummationof politicalrituals.
It could be arguedthatsuch strictinterpretations
of vessel functionsare misleading.Elaboratelypaintedand inscribedvasesandplatescouldhavefunctionedprimarilyas
tributeitems. Substantialarchaeologicalevidence shows
that some highly decoratedvase styles were exchanged
over long distancesanddid act as socialcurrency(ReentsBudet 1994).Text alongthe rimof cylindervases describe
how these vessels were gifts from paramountleadersto
lesser elites at smaller sites, presumablyto establish or
maintainsocial andpoliticalrelations(Ball 1993;Houston
et al. 1992; Schele andMathews1991).Otherresearchers
suggestthatcylindervases, plates,and dishes mighthave
also functionedfor other less utilitarianand more presti1999)
giouspurposes.JustinKerr(personalcommunication,
believes cylindervases were containersfor sacredofferings. He cites the text on vase no. K504 (see Figure5) that
reads"Inthe vessel are the seeds of the genitals"as evidencethatthe vaseheldcornkernelsforthe gods of the underworld.Coe (1978:11)has long arguedthatall pictorial
vases are funeraryin nature.Whensuch formsare viewed
solely as luxuryobjects,then it is clear from the Xunantunichdata that vases and small bowls may have moved
about society in limited elite circles. However, it is also
evidentthatall formswerefoundwidelydistributed,albeit
in small frequencies,at the site. I have concludedelsewhere(LeCount1999)thatpotteryas a prestigeitem was a
less specificindicatorof ancientsocialstatusthanotherexclusive statusmarkers,a conclusionelaboratedbelow.
If the functionalinterpretation
of vessels presentedin
this articleis accepted,what can be gleanedfrom the archaeologicalrecordconcerningthe natureof feastingand
its role as a markerof ancientpolitical strategiesamong
Late Classic Maya at Xunantunich?According to the
model, when political bureaucraciesare deeply stratified
andthe scale of competitionis great,emulationandimitation of feastingpatternsshould lead to the innovationof
haute cuisine and specialty serving vessels. On the other
hand, when levels of power are relatively shallow and
competition is restricted to a few elite lineages, feasting
patterns should be less differentiated. At Xunantunich, little evidence exists for diacritical feasting to mark social
status. Formal assemblages differed only in the quantity of
primary forms, a patterncharacteristicof inclusive feasting
where public displays of generosity and hospitality extended across broad sectors of society. Although elite
households clearly owned a greateramount of serving vessels and more highly decorated pieces, commoners also
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
LECOUNT / FEASTING
ANDRITUALAMONG
THEMAYA
possessedvases andplattersandprobablyservedthe same
basic fareat festivals.In fact,thereis morevariationin formal assemblageswithinsocial classes thanbetweenthem.
Studieselsewherewithinthe Mayaareaconfirmthatglyph
and figural serving vases were found in moderate-sized
plazuelagroups(Beaudry1987; Hansenet al. 1991),nonroyal tombs (Chase 1985), and domestic trashpiles (Fry
1979), illustratinghow prevalentdecoratedserving ware
hadbecomein the Classicperiod.
Based on these data,it can be suggestedthatLateClassic Mayalackeda sufficientlycomplex,civil hierarchythat
would have promotedtrulyhigh styles of food consumption. The relativesimplicityof Classic Mayafeastingis in
starkcontrastto thatof the far more hierarchicallyorganized PostclassicAztec. Accordingto conquistadorDifazdel
Castillo(1956:209-210),the dailycuisineof Motecuhzoma
II consistedof 30 differentdishesset on a low tablewithtableclothsof white fabricand napkins.He was attendedby
four women who erecteda gold-gildedscreen in frontof
him so thathis diningwas not seen by others.Sumptuary
laws also restricteddrinkingof cacao and eatingof exotic
foods to nobles.Diacriticalfeastingamongthe Maya was
clearly less developed,thus addingone more piece of informationsupportingthe relativelydecentralizednatureof
LateClassicMayaat smallprovincialcenters.
Notes
Acknowledgments.Supportfor this projecthas beenprovidedby theRichardCarleyHuntFellowshipof theWennerGrenFoundation;
of
FulbrightII-E;SigmaXi Grant-in-Aid
Research;andtheUniversityof CaliforniaatLosAngelesDepartmentof Anthropology,GraduateDivision, Latin American Center,andFriendsof Archaeology.Researchwas carried
out under a permitfrom the Belize Departmentof Archaeology, representedby HarrietTopsey, Allan Moore, and John
Morris. RichardLeventhaland Wendy Ashmore, codirectors
of the XunantunichArchaeological Project (XAP), provided
the opportunityto work at the site and supportfor my laboratory research.This undertakingcould not have been possible
without the assistance of XAP members, especially Jason
Yaeger, Tom Jamison,JenniferBraswell, and SabrinaChase,
who provided access to excavation materials.Angela Keller
and JasonYaeger suppliedmaps and CADD6 expertise.Justin
Kerrgraciouslyprovidedrightsto the rollout vase illustration.
I have benefited greatly from comments on ideas and earlier
draftsof this articleby Wendy Ashmore, Timothy Earle, and
my colleagues at the Universityof AlabamaincludingKathryn
Oths, William Dressler,JohnBlitz, and JamesKnight.Anonymous reviewers for American Anthropologist provided insightful comments, some of which contributedgreatly to this
article.I alone, however, am responsiblefor any inadequacies.
1. See Douglas 1966, Feeley-Harnik 1985, Goody 1982,
Hocart 1970, Mennell 1996, Mintz 1985, L6vi-Strauss1969,
Richards1960, Wiessnerand Schiefenhovel 1996, and Young
1971.
949
2. See Blitz 1993;Brumfiel1995;ClarkandBlake 1994;
Dietler1990, 1996;Hastorfand Johannessen1993;Hayden
1990,1995,1996;andWelchandScarry1995.
3. See Anderson1994; Blantonet al. 1996; Brumfiel
et al. 1996;BrumfielandEarle1987;
1987b,1994;DeMarrais
LeCount1999;andPeregine1991.
4. Xunantunichceramiccomplex names have recently
changed (LeCountet al. n.d.). The previous phase names of
Late Classic I, Late Classic II, andTerminalClassic have been
changedto Samal,Hats' Chaak,andTsak', respectively.
5. See Ashmore 1996; Ashmore and Leventhal 1993; LeCountet al. n.d.; Leventhalet al. 1993; and Leventhaland LeCount 1997.
6. For debateson the natureof Maya political organization
and social integration,see Chase and Chase 1996, Culbert
1991, Demarest1992,Freidel1992,Hendon1991,Pohl and
Pohl 1994, Marcus 1993, Sabloff 1986, Sanders 1989, and
Stuart1993.
7. Organizersare the cargador (Redfield and Rojas 1934:
157), the mayordomo(Wisdom 1940:450), and the cofradia
(Bunzel 1952:165). At the festival of Santiago, a group of
about 50 Chortiwomen are appointedby the mayordomosto
cook festival foods in large ovens and fireplaceslocated in the
cofradia courtyard(Wisdom 1940:450). Most foodstuffs are
contributedby individual families, but a great deal is purchased by mayordomos.
8. Cooking sacredmeals, with the exception of tuti-uah,is
similar to preparing everyday foods. Although tuti-uah is
painstakinglypreparedby men, who layer maize dough with
various special ingredients,wrapthe cake in leaves, and bake
it in an earth oven or pib (Love 1989; Taube 1989), little archaeologicalevidence would remainto signal its preparation.
9. See Coe 1978: fig. 7; Coe 1994; Kerr 1990: file no.
2573, 1992: file nos. 3813, 1599, 1728, 1775; Reents-Budet
1994: figs. 1.25, 2.20, 3.2; andTaube 1989: fig. 7.
10. Scenes on Classic periodvases depict elite men sitting
on palace benches and offeringdrinks,sometimes in conjunction with food, othertimes solely extendingcylindersof foaming chocolate to guests. For scenes in which drinking is divorced from eating, see Culbert1993: fig. 75; Kerr 1989: file
nos. 1563, 3827; and Reents-Budet1994: figs. 1.6, 3.14c.
References Cited
Anderson,D.
1994 FactionalCompetition
andthe PoliticalEvolutionof
MississippianChiefdomsin the SoutheasternUnitedStates.
In FactionalCompetitionand PoliticalDevelopmentin the
New World.E. M. BrumfielandJ. W. Fox, eds. Pp. 61-76.
Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversityPress.
Ashmore,W.
1981 Precolumbian
Occupationat Quirigua,Guatemala:SettlementPatternsin a ClassicMayaCenter.Ph.D.dissertation,
Departmentof Anthropology,Universityof Pennsylvania.
1996 Settlement
atXunantunich,
1996.InXuArchaeology
nantunichArchaeologicalProject:1996Field Season.R. M.
Leventhal,ed. Pp. 17-27. On file, Instituteof Archaeology,
Universityof California,LosAngeles,andBelmopan,Belize.
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
950
* VOL. 103, No. 4 * DECEMBER
ANTHROPOLOGIST
2001
AMERICAN
Ashmore,W., and R. Leventhal
1993 XunantunichReconsidered.Paperpresentedat the Belize Conference,Universityof NorthFlorida,Jacksonville,
March.
Ball, Joseph
1993 Pottery,Potters,Palaces,and Polities:Some Socioeconomic and PoliticalImplicationsof Late ClassicMayaCeramicIndustries.In LowlandMayaCivilizationin theEighth
CenturyA.D. J. A. Sabloff and J. S. Henderson,eds. Pp.
243-272. Washington,DC: DumbartonOaks ResearchLibraryandCollection.
Beaudry,M.
1987 Interregional
Exchange,Social Status,andPaintedCeon theSouthramics:TheCopanValleyCase.In Interactions
eastMesoamericanFrontier.E. J.Robinson,ed.Pp.227-246.
BAR International
Series,327. Oxford:BritishArchaeologicalReports.
Blanton,R., G. Feinman,S. Kowalewski,andP. Peregrine
1996 A Dual-ProcessualTheory for the Evolution of
MesoamericanCivilization.CurrentAnthropology37:1-14.
Blitz, J. H.
1993 Big PotsforBig Shots:FeastingandStoragein aMississippianCommunity.AmericanAntiquity58(1):80-95.
Brainerd,G.
1958 The ArchaeologicalCeramicsof the Yucatan.Anthropological Records, 19. Norman:Universityof Oklahoma
Press.
Braswell,J.
1998 ArchaeologicalInvestigationsat Group D, Xunantunich,Belize. Ph.D.dissertation,Departmentof Anthropology, TulaneUniversity.
Brumfiel,E. M.
1987a Consumptionand Politicsat Aztec Huexotla.AmericanAnthropologist89:676-686.
1987b Elite andUtilitarianCraftsin the Aztec State.In Specialization,Exchange,andComplexSocieties.E. M. Brumfiel andT. K.Earle,eds.Pp. 102-118.Cambridge:
Cambridge
UniversityPress.
1994 FactionalCompetitionandPoliticalDevelopmentin the
In FactionalCompetitionand
New World:An Introduction.
PoliticalDevelopmentin theNew World.E. M. Brumfieland
J. W. Fox, eds. Pp. 1-14. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
Press.
1995 WeavingandCooking:Women'sProductionin Aztec
Mexico. In EngenderingArchaeology:WomenandPrehistory.J. M. Geroand M. W. Conkey,eds. Pp. 224-254. Oxford:Blackwell.
Brumfiel,E. M., andT. K. Earle
1987 Specialization,Exchange,and ComplexSocieties:An
In Specialization,Exchange,andComplexSoIntroduction.
cieties.E. M. BrumfielandT. K. Earle,eds. Pp. 1-9. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Bunzel, R.
1952 Chichicastenango,a GuatemalanVillage. American
EthnologicalSociety Publication,22. Locust Valley, NY:
AmericanEthnologicalSociety.
Cannadine,D.
1985 SplendorOutof Court:Royal SpectacleandPageantry
in ModernBritain,c. 1820-1977.InRitesof Power:Symbol-
ism,Ritual,andPoliticssincetheMiddleAges. S. Wilentz,ed.
Pp.206-243. Philadelphia:
Universityof PennsylvaniaPress.
Chase,A.
1985 Contextual Implications of Pictorial Vases from
Tayasal,Peten.InFourthPalenqueRoundTable,1980.M. G.
RobertsonandE. P.Benson,eds.Pp. 193-210.SanFrancisco:
Pre-Columbian
ArtResearchInstitute.
Chase,A., andD. Chase
1996 MorethanKin andKing:CentralizedPoliticalOrganizationamongthe LateClassicMaya.CurrentAnthropology
37(5):803-830.
Clark,J., andW. Blake
1994 The Powerof Prestige:CompetitiveGenerosityandthe
Emergenceof RankSocieties in LowlandMesoamerica.In
FactionalCompetitionandPoliticalDevelopmentin theNew
World.E. M. BrumfielandJ. W. Fox, eds. Pp. 17-30. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Coe, M.
1978 Lordsof theUnderworld:
Masterpiecesof ClassicMaya
Ceramics.Princeton:TheArtMuseum,PrincetonUniversity
Press.
Coe, S.
1994 America'sFirstCuisines.Austin:Universityof Texas
Press.
Coe, S., andM. Coe
1996 The TrueHistoryof Chocolate.London:Thamesand
Hudson.
Culbert,T.
1991 Maya PoliticalHistoryand Elite Interaction:A SummaryView.InClassicMayaPoliticalHistory.T. Culbert,ed.
CambridgeUniversityPress.
Pp.311-346. Cambridge:
1993 TheCeramicsof Tikal:VesselsfromtheBurials,Caches
andProblematical
Deposits.TikalReport,25, partA. W.Coe
and W. Haviland,series eds. UniversityMuseumMonograph,81. Philadelphia:UniversityMuseum,Universityof
Pennsylvania.
Demarest,A. A.
1992 Ideologyin AncientMayaCulturalEvolution:TheDynamicsof GalacticPolities.In Ideologyand Pre-Columbian
Civilizations.A. A. Demarestand G. W. Conrad,eds. Pp.
135-158. Seattle:Universityof WashingtonPress.
DeMarrais,E., L. Castillo,andT. Earle
1996 Ideology,Materialization,and Power Strategies.CurrentAnthropology37:15-31.
Dfaz del Castillo,Bernal
1956 The Discoveryand Conquestof Mexico. New York:
Farrar,StrausandCudahy.
Dietler,M.
1990 Drivenby Drink:The Role of Drinkingin the Political
Economyandthe Caseof EarlyIronAge France.Journalof
Anthropological
Archaeology9:352-406.
1996 Feastsand CommensalPolitics in the PoliticalEconomy:Food,Power,andStatusin PrehistoricEurope.In Food
andthe StatusQuest:An Interdisciplinary
Perspective.Polly
WiessnerandWulf Schiefenhovel,eds. Pp. 86-126. Providence,RI:BerghahnBooks.
Douglas, M.
1966 PurityandDanger.London:RoutledgeandKeganPaul.
Douglas, M., andB. Isherwood
1979 TheWorldof Goods.New York:BasicBooks.
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
LECOUNT / FEASTING
ANDRITUALAMONG
THEMAYA
Earle,Timothy
1991 The Evolution of Chiefdoms.In Chiefdoms:Power,
Economy,andIdeology.TimothyEarle,ed. Pp.1-15. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Fash,W.
1991 Scribes,WarriorsandKings.London:ThamesandHudson.
Feeley-Harnik,G.
1985 Issues in Divine Kingship.AnnualReview of Anthropology 14:273-313.
Fields, V.
In XunantunichAr1994 The RoyalCharteratXunantunich.
R.
M. Leventhal,ed.
1994
Field
Season.
chaeologicalProject:
Institute
65-74.
On
of
file,
Archaeology,Universityof
Pp.
California,LosAngeles,andBelmopan,Belize.
Freidel,D.
1992 Ideologyin AncientMayaCulturalEvolution.In IdeolCivilizations.A. A. DemarestandG.
ogy andPre-Columbian
W. Conrad,eds. Pp. 115-134. Seattle:Universityof WashingtonPress.
Fry,R.
1979 The Economiesof PotteryatTikal,Guatemala:Models
of Exchangefor ServingVessels.AmericanAntiquity44(3):
494-512.
Goody, J.
1958 The DevelopmentCycle in Domestic Groups.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
1982 Cuisine,Cooking,and Class:A Studyin Comparative
Sociology.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Hansen,R., R. Bishop, andF. Fahsen
1991 Notes on Maya Codex-StyleCeramicsfrom Nakbe,
Pet n, Guatemala.AncientMesoamerica2:225-243.
Harrison,P. D.
1970 TheCentralAcropolis,Tikal,Guatemala:
A Preliminary
Studyof the Functionsof Its Structural
Componentsduring
theLateClassicPeriod.Ph.D.dissertation,
of AnDepartment
of
thropology,University Pennsylvania.
Hastorf,C., and S. Johannessen
1993 PrehispanicPoliticalChangeandthe Role of Maize in
the CentralAndes of Peru. AmericanAnthropologist95:
115-138.
Hayden,B.
1990 Nimods, Piscators,Pluckers,and Platers:The Emergence of Food Production.Journalof AnthropologicalArchaeology9:31-69.
1995 Pathwaysto Power:Principlesfor CreatingSocioeconomicInequalities.InFoundationsof SocialInequality.T. D.
PriceandG. M. Feinman,eds.Pp. 15-86. New York:Plenum
Press.
1996 Feasting in Prehistoricand TraditionalSocieties. In
Food andthe StatusQuest:An Interdisciplinary
Perspective.
Polly WiessnerandWulf Schiefenhovel,eds. Pp. 127-148.
Providence,RI:BerghahnBooks.
Hendon,J.
1987 The Uses of Maya Structures:
A Studyof Architecture
and ArtifactDistributionat Sepulturas,Copan, Honduras.
Ph.D. dissertation,Departmentof Anthropology,Harvard
University.
951
1991 StatusandPowerin ClassicMayaSociety:An Archae93:894-918.
ologicalStudy.AmericanAnthropologist
Hocart,A.
1970 Kings and Councillors:An Essay in the Comparative
Anatomyof HumanSociety.Chicago:Universityof Chicago
Press.
Houston,S., D. Stuart,and K. Taube
1989 Folk Classificationof ClassicMayaPottery.American
Antiquity91:720-726.
1992 ImageandTexton the"JauncyVase."InTheMayaVase
Book:A Corpusof RolloutPhotographs
of MayaVases,vol.
3. J.Kerr.Pp.499-512. New York:KerrAssociates.
Jamison,T., andG. Wolff
1994 Excavationsin andaroundPlazaA-I andPlazaA-II.In
XunantunichArchaeologicalProject:1994FieldSeason.R.
M. Leventhal,ed. Pp. 25-47. On file, Instituteof Archaeology, Universityof California,Los Angeles, andBelmopan,
Belize.
Kerr,J.
1989 TheMayaVaseBook:A Corpusof RolloutPhotographs
of MayaVases,vol. 1.New York:KerrAssociates.
1990 TheMayaVaseBook:A Corpusof RolloutPhotographs
of MayaVases,vol. 2. New York:KerrAssociates.
1992 TheMayaVaseBook:A Corpusof RolloutPhotographs
of MayaVases,vol. 3. New York:KerrAssociates.
LeCount,L.
1996 Potteryand Power:Feasting,Gifting,and Displaying
WealthamongtheLateandTerminalClassicLowlandMaya.
Ph.D.dissertation,Departmentof Anthropology,University
of California,LosAngeles.
1999 PolychromePotteryandPoliticalStrategiesin Lateand
TerminalClassic Maya Society. LatinAmericanAntiquity
10(3):239-258.
LeCount,L., R. Leventhal,J. Yaeger,andW. Ashmore
Belize:A Late
N.d. Datingthe Rise andFallof Xunantunich,
andTerminalClassicLowlandMayaSecondaryCenter.UnpublishedMS.
Leventhal,R., andL. LeCount
1997 The TerminalClassicSocialandPoliticalOrganization
of AncientXunantunich.
Paperpresentedatthe62ndAnnual
of
the
for
Meeting
Society AmericanArchaeology,Nashville,
March.
Leventhal,R., S. Zeleznik,T. Jamison,L. LeCount,
J. McGovern,J. Sanchez,andA. Keller
1993 Xunantunich:
A LateandTerminalClassicCenterin the
Belize RiverValley. Paperpresentedat PalenqueMesa Redonda,Palenque,Mexico,May.
Levi-Strauss,C.
1969 TheRawandtheCooked.J.WeightmanandD. Weightman,trans.New York:HarperandRow.
Love, B.
1989 YucatecSacredBreadsthroughTime.In WordandImagein MayaCulture:Explorationsin Language,Writing,and
W. HanksandD. Rice,eds.Pp.336-350. Salt
Representation.
LakeCity:Universityof UtahPress.
Marcus,J.
1983 LowlandMayaArchaeologyat theCrossroads.AmericanAntiquity48(3):454-488.
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
952
AMERICAN
ANTHROPOLOGIST
* VOL. 103, No. 4 * DECEMBER
2001
1993 AncientMayaPoliticalOrganization.
InLowlandMaya
C. RenfrewandJ. F. Cherry,eds. Pp. 109-116. Cambridge:
Civilizationin theEighthCenturyA.D. J.A. SabloffandJ. S.
CambridgeUniversityPress.
Henderson,eds. Pp. 111-184. Washington,DC: Dumbarton
Sanders,W.
Oaks.
1989 Household, Lineage, and State in Eighth-Century
McAnany,P.
Copan,Honduras.In The Houseof theBacabs,Copin, Hon1995 Living withthe Ancestors:Kinshipto Kingshipin Anduras.D. Webster,ed. Pp. 89-105. Washington,DC: DumcientMayaSociety.Austin:Universityof TexasPress.
bartonOaks.
Mennell, S.
Schele, Linda,andP. Mathews
1996 All Mannersof Food:EatingandTastein Englandand
1991 Royal Visits and OtherIntersiteRelationshipsamong
FrancefromtheMiddleAges to the Present.2ndedition.UrtheClassicMaya.InClassicMayaPoliticalHistory.T. P.Culbana:Universityof IllinoisPress.
bert, ed. Pp. 226-252. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
Mintz, S.
Press.
1985 Sweetnessand Power:The Place of Sugarin Modemrn Smith,M.
History.New York:PenguinBooks.
1987 HouseholdPossessionsandWealthin AgrarianStates:
Netting, R. McC.
Implicationsfor Archaeology.Journalof Anthropological
1964 Beeras a Locusof ValueamongtheWestAfricanKoyArchaeology6(4):297-335.
far.AmericanAnthropologist
66:375-384.
Smith,R.
D.
Pendergast,
1971 The Potteryof MayapanIncludingStudiesof Ceramic
1979 Excavationsat Altun Ha, Belize, 1964-1970, vol. 3.
MaterialfromUxmul,Kabah,andChichenItzia.Papersof the
Toronto:RoyalOntarioMuseum.
PeabodyMuseumof ArchaeologyandEthnology,66. CamPeregrine,P.
MA:HarvardUniversityPress.
bridge,
1991 Some PoliticalAspects of CraftSpecialization.World
D.
Stuart,
Archaeology23:1-11.
1988 The Rio Azul CacaoPot: EpigraphicObservationson
Pohl, M.
the Functionof a MayaCeramicVessel. Antiquity62:1531990 The Ethnozoologyof the Maya:FaunalRemainsfrom
157.
Five Sitesin Peten,Guatemala.In Excavationsat Seibal,De1993 HistoricalInscriptionsandthe MayaCollapse.In Lowpartmentof Peten, Guatemala.GordonR. Willey, ed. Pp.
land Maya Civilizationin the Eighth CenturyA.D. J. A.
143-174. Memoirsof the PeabodyMuseumof Archaeology
SabloffandJ. S. Henderson,eds. Pp. 321-354. Washington,
and Ethnology,17(3). Cambridge,MA: PeabodyMuseum,
DC:
DumbartonOaks.
HarvardUniversity.
K.
Taube,
Pohl, M., and L. Feldman
1989 The Maize Tamalein Classic Maya Diet, Epigraphy,
1982 The TraditionalRole of WomenandAnimalsin LowandArt.AmericanAntiquity54(1):31-51.
landMayaEconomy.In MayaSubsistence:Studiesin MemA.
Tozzer,
oryof DennisE. Puleston.K.Flannery,ed.Pp.295-312. New
1941
Landa'sRelacionde las Cosas de Yucatan.Peabody
York:AcademicPress.
Museum
of Archaeologicaland Ethnology Papers,4(3).
Pohl, M., andJ. Pohl
Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversity.
1994 Cycles of Conflict:PoliticalFactionalismin the Maya
Vogt, E.
Lowlands.In FactionalCompetitionand PoliticalDevelop1983 AncientandContemporary
Maya SettlementPatterns:
mentintheNew World.E. M. BrumfielandJ.W. Fox,eds.Pp.
New
A
Look
from
the
ChiapasHighlands.InPrehistoricSet1-14. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
tlement
in Honorof GordonR. Willey.E. Z.
Patterns:
Essays
Redfield,R., andA. Villa Rojas
Vogt and R. M. Leventhal,eds. Pp. 89-114. Albuquerque:
1934 Chan Kom: A Maya Village. CarnegieInstitutionof
Universityof New MexicoPress.
Washington,448. Washington,DC: CarnegieInstitutionof
1990
The Zinacantecosof Mexico:A ModernMayaWay of
Washington.
Life.
2nd edition.FortWorth:Holt, Rinehartand Winston,
Reents-Budet,D.
Inc.
1994 Paintingthe Maya Universe:Royal Ceramicsof the
1993 Tortillasforthe Gods:A SymbolicAnalysisof ZincanClassicPeriod.Durham:DukeUniversityPress.
tecoRituals.Norman:Universityof OklahomaPress.
Richards,A.
Weiner,A.
1960[1939] Land,LabourandDietin NorthernRhodesia:An
1992 InalienablePossessions: The Paradox of KeepingEconomicStudyof the BembaTribe.London:OxfordUniwhile-Giving.Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress.
versityPress.
Robin,C.
Welch, P. D., andC. M. Scarry
1995 Status-Related
VariationinFoodwaysin theMoundville
1999 Towards an Archaeologyof EverydayLife: Ancient
Chiefdom.AmericanAntiquity60(3):397-420.
Maya Farmersof ChanN6ohol and Dos ChombitosCikin.
Ph.D. dissertation,Departmentof Anthropology,University
Wiessner,Polly
1996 Introduction:
Food,Status,Culture,andNature.InFood
of Pennsylvania.
Sabloff, J.
andtheStatusQuest:An Interdisciplinary
Perspective.Polly
1986 InteractionamongMayapolities:A Preliminary
ExamiWiessnerandWulfSchiefenhovel,eds.Pp.1-19. Providence,
nation.InPeer-PolityInteraction
andSocio-PoliticalChange.
RI:BerghahnBooks.
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THEMAYA
ANDRITUALAMONG
LECOUNT / FEASTING
Wiessner,Polly, andWulf Schiefenhovel,eds.
1996 FoodandtheStatusQuest:An Interdisciplinary
Perspective.Providence,RI:BerghahnBooks.
Wisdom, C.
1940 The ChortiIndiansof Guatemala.Chicago:University
of ChicagoPress.
Yaeger,J.
1997 The 1997 Excavationsof Plaza A-IIIand Miscellaneous Excavationand ArchitecturalClearingin GroupA. In
XunantunichArchaeologicalProject,1997 FieldSeason.R.
M. Leventhal,ed. Pp. 56-75. On file, Instituteof Archaeology, Universityof California,Los Angeles, andBelmopan,
Belize.
2000 ChangingPatternsof Maya CommunityStructureand
Organizationat the End of the ClassicPeriod:SanLorenzo,
Cayo District,Belize. Ph.D.dissertation,Departmentof Anthropology,Universityof Pennsylvania.
Young, M.
1971 Fighting with Food: Leadership,Values, and Social
Controlin aMassimSociety.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
-AGBTMA'
953
TDE
LSI
Lettersfrom the Field,
margaret
meada
1925-975
IT
This volume stands not only as a
classic on the conducting of field
work, but also as a window on the
life and thoughts of one of the
century s most unique women
and scholars- from her
beginning explorations through
the peak of her career.
Introduction by Jan Morris
ISBN0-06-095804-9 paperback/ $15.00
($22.95 Can.)416 pp.
......
.
I~........
New Livesfor Old
Cultural TransformationManus. 1928--953
A record of a people's selftransformation, offering key
insights about a society's
capacity for change, with the
daring thesis that many of the ills
of the present world come not
from too much change, but from
changing too little, too late.
lilt
D
i
D
..
Ilive
neq,
e
Introductionby StewartBrand
ISBN0-06-095806-5 paperback/ $17.00
($25.95 Can.)592 pp.
Male and Female
An explorationof the
inherent meaningof
'maleness"and
"femaleness.
Introductionby
ComingofAgein Samoa
A PsYchologicalStudy oqfPrimitive
Youthfor WesternCivlisation
Fisher
Helen,
ISBN0-06-093496-4 paperback
$15.00 ($22.95 Can.)496 pp.
How individual growth
is shaped by cultural
demands and expectations.
Introduction by la.r Pipher
Sex and Temperament
In ThreePrimitiveSocieties
ISBN0-688-05033-6 paperback
$14.00 ($20.95 Can.)256 pp.
The study of gender and
culturalconditioningin
three NewGuineatribes.
Introductionby Helen Fisher
ISBN0-06-093495-6 paperback
$15.00 ($22.95 Can.)352 pp.
A ComparativeStudy of
PrimitiveEducation
Mead's 1928 study of adult
society's influence on the
ideas of children.
FOR INFORMATION ON
"M
GrowingUpin
NewGuinea
MEAD CENTENNIAL EVENTS.
Introduction by Howard Gardner
VISIT www.meadzooi
ISBN0-688-17811-1 paperback
$14.00 ($20.95 Can.)320 pp.
Perennial
i,
.org
impl tit
ii.ii-pcr(%N
%OiaIIII
f),,
This content downloaded from 128.148.231.12 on Tue, 29 Sep 2015 15:23:42 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions