ThePARI Journal

A quarterly publication of the Pre-Columbian Art Research Institute

Volume VI, No.2, Fall 2005

In This Issue:
The Captives of Dzibanche 1

The Captives of ERIK VELÁSQUEZ GARCÍA

Dzibanche Instituto de Investigaciones Estéticas, UNAM
by Erik Velásquez
García
PAGES 1-4 In mid-2001, I had just finished giving an his team had recovered in Dzibanche eight
epigraphy class at the Escuela Nacional de years before. These stones, now disordered,
• Antropología e Historia when a student had originally formed part of a stairway.
approached me. He said that he had been Each step bears a hieroglyphic text and a
Of Snakes and Bats: trying to understand the hieroglyphic text on scene with a captive (Figure 1). Sometimes
Shifting Identities a plate and wondered if I would mind tak- the names of these individuals, which can be
at Calakmul ing a look at it. Upon doing so, I concluded found in the inscriptions, are repeated in the
by Simon Martin that the text provided an example of the rare helmet of a mask they wear on their backs
PAGES 5-13
first-person plural pronoun, “we.” Because (Figure 2a), and occasionally the nominal
of this, I asked him for permission to draw clauses of the victims are followed by an
• the text and use it in my classes on Classic ordinal expression—like this one (Figure
Maya grammar. My student (Miguel Ángel 2b, glyph A3), which speaks of the sixteenth
La Corona Find Butrón) responded that the material was captive—suggesting that the hieroglyphic
Sheds Light on not his, but that it belonged to Dr. Enrique stairway had once contained an enumeration
Site Q Mystery Nalda’s project. A few days later, Miguel Án- of prisoners.
gel introduced me to Dr. Nalda. I explained What most drew my attention when I saw
by Stanley Guenter
my reading to him, and he told me that the the hieroglyphic steps of Dzibanche for the
PAGES 14-16 plate came from a burial at Kohunlich. En- first time was the presence of a glyph whose
rique then asked me if I would write a note principal element is a serpent’s head (see
Joel Skidmore for Arqueología Mexicana (Velásquez 2002), Figure 2a, glyph B3). In 1973, Joyce Marcus
Editor which seems to have been well received by proposed an association of this serpent’s
joel@mesoweb.com the epigraphic community. It was through head with the large Mexican site of Calak-
this exchange that I came to know Enrique mul, an idea that has since been endorsed
The PARI Journal Nalda and, without exactly meaning to, by many investigators, who now see the
202 Edgewood Avenue began my collaboration with the Proyecto
San Francisco, CA 94117 Arqueológico “Sur de Quintana Roo.” 1
An earlier version of this paper was read at the
415-664-8889 At this same time, Enrique told me about book launch for Los Cautivos de Dzibanché (Nalda
journal@mesoweb.com
a collection of hieroglyphic steps that he and 2004), on April 5th, 2005.

Electronic version
available at:
www.mesoweb.com/
pari/journal/0602

The PARI Journal is made

possible by a grant from
Mesoweb.

ISSN 1531-5398

Figure 1. Dzibanche Monument 12 (after Nalda 2004:45, photo by Jorge Pérez de Lara).

The PARI Journal 6(2):1-4. 1

 Velásquez

b
Figure 2. Two hieroglyphic steps from Dzibanche that contain the name of Yuhkno’m Ch’e’n I, divine lord of Kaan:
a) yu-ku-no-CH’EN-na K’UHUL-ka-KAN-AJAW, Mon. 5; b) yu-ku-no-ma-CH’EN, Mon. 11.

serpent-head emblem glyph as the principal title of the the Kaan emblem glyph. In 514 another lord of Calakmul
lords of Calakmul, k’uhul Kaan ajaw, “divine lord of Kaan” dedicated Stela 43 of his city, but it too does not display the
(in Proto-Mayan *kaan means “serpent”). For this reason, Kaan emblem. And in 623, Calakmul erected Stelae 28 and
upon seeing the Dzibanche steps, I commented to Enrique, 29—the earliest monuments of this site during the Late
“It’s the emblem glyph of Calakmul!” But he calmly told Classic period—yet the Kaan emblem glyph appears on
me, “No, it’s not the Calakmul emblem, at least not at this neither. By this time, various rulers who take the emblem
time, because we have it many years before it appears at glyph of the Kaan dynasty had been mentioned in the
that site,” which caused me a great deal of surprise. inscriptions of diverse Maya sites, but never in association
It is precisely around this theme that Nikolai Grube’s with the toponyms of Calakmul and its region: Uxte’ Tuun
paper in this book revolves. “The Origin of the Kaan and Chi’ik Naahb’.
Dynasty” (Grube 2004) presents arguments in support of The first time that the Kaan emblem glyph is clearly
a thesis that first saw print in Simon Martin and Nikolai associated with Calakmul is in the year AD 631, when
Grube’s Chronicle of the Maya Kings and Queens (Martin and the Kaan lord presides over a military attack against the
Grube 2000)—that Calakmul was not the original nor only ancient city of Naranjo, in Guatemala. The inscription sug-
capital of the Snake polity, and that the city was formerly gests that the Naranjo sovereign “was eaten or tortured”
ruled by a different dynasty. In light of the Dzibanche steps, under the supervision of Yuhkno’m Head, lord of Kaan,
Grube considers the possibility that this center was an an event which occurred in Uxte’ Tuun (Martin and Grube
Early Classic capital for the Kaan polity (Grube 2004:117). 2000:72, 106), an unequivocal reference to Calakmul. The
This idea is not supported exclusively by the evidence reign of Yuhkno’m Head coincides with the first foreign
from Dzibanche, but also by the lack of early inscriptions mentions of the Calakmul toponym, and it was during
associating the Kaan emblem glyph with the ancient city the reigns of his immediate successors that most of the
of Calakmul (Martin and Grube 2000:103). stelae of Calakmul were erected. This suggests that it may
The earliest Calakmul monument is Stela 114, with a have been Yuhkno’m Head who reconstituted the Kaan
long inscription including the period-ending date AD 435 kingdom in Calakmul (Martin and Grube 2000:106).
(Pincemin et al. 1998). On no part of the stela do we find To summarize, the emblem glyph of the Kaan dynasty

2
The Captives of Dzibanche

Dzibanche
Oxpemul
Calakmul

LaCorona Naachtun

Tikal
El Peru

Mesoweb Maps

is only clearly associated with Calakmul after AD 631, but the “cave Throne of Reeds” of his enemy, where “Throne
before this time it is still unclear where this important lin- of Reeds” (Pu[h] Tzam?[V]l) is a toponymical reference to
eage resided. As explained in this book, the hieroglyphic Tonina. According to Simon Martin, och[i] uch’e’n, “he en-
steps of Dzibanche constitute the earliest reference to the tered the cave of,” is equivalent to invading the settlement
rulers of Kaan. Their chronology is still somewhat prob- of the enemy and is therefore a metaphorical reference to
lematic, but the latest date at which they could be placed is warfare. The latter can be demonstrated by the fact that
518, which is to say at least 113 years before the first direct och[i] uch’e’n can be substituted, on some steps (Figure 3c),
mention of the Kaan emblem glyph in association with with the better known war expression chu[h]kaj-ø, “was
Calakmul. Two Kaan rulers are mentioned at Dzibanche, captured.” Finally, I must point out that on step number
Yuhkno’m Ch’e’n I (Figures 2a-b) and Yax ? Yopaat. The 15 one can see a previously unknown Maya hieroglyph
first of these is the agent of the Dzibanche wars, and the (Figure 3d). It is a human head wearing a bird helmet that
captor of the prisoners named on the steps. The manner in must, given its position (after och[i]), be a variant of the
which he is cited leaves little doubt that he, in early times, already understood ch’e’n glyph. This example is unique
was the sovereign of Dzibanche, since no other individual in the Maya world.
is mentioned as a local lord. Much more difficult to decipher is a hieroglyphic com-
It is worth asking where the captives of Dzibanche came pound whose function is to relate the name of a captive
from. None of the steps mentions a place of origin, yet with that of his captor—that is, with Yuhkno’m Ch’e’n, lord
one of the prisoners is named Yax K’ahk’ Jolo’m, a name of Kaan (Figure 4a). This expression begins with the syl-
which resembles that of a personage named on the hiero- lable ya and terminates with an agentive suffix -aj, whose
glyphic steps of El Resbalon: K’ahk’ Jolo’m (see Carrasco precise function is to link the name of one person with that
and Boucher 1987:Figs. 4, 6). El Resbalon is a site close to
Dzibanche and, although we deal here with two distinct
individuals with the same name, it should be mentioned
that many proper names obey a markedly regional distri-
bution, judging by which Yax K’ahk’ Jolo’m and the other
captives of Yuhkno’m Ch’e’n surely came from places close
to Dzibanche.
a b
Of crucial importance for any understanding of these
inscriptions is the interesting article by Simon Martin
(2004), which can also be found in this book. In it are
explained with great detail the difficulties presented for
the decipherment by certain unclear expressions which
appear on the steps. One of these, och[i] uch’e’n (Figure
3a), literally means “entered the cave of...,” but there
are so very few examples of this phrase in the corpus of c d
Maya inscriptions that its precise meaning proves rather
Figure 3. Some glyphic expressions for “war”: a) OCH-u-CH’EN-
unclear. As the reader of this book will see, ch’e’n, “cave,” na, och[i] uch’e’n, Dzibanche Mon. 18, A2; b) OCH-u-CH’EN-na pu-
is a metaphor for “settlement” or “city” in Mayan inscrip- TZAM?-la, och[i] uch’e’n Pu[h] Tzam?[V]l, Palenque T.XVII tablet, A17-
tions, just as it appears on the Tablet of Temple XVII of B17 (drawing by Nikolai Grube); c) chu-*ka-ja, chu[h]kaj, Dzibanche
Palenque (Figure 3b), where the local lord entered into Mon. 13, A2; d) OCH-CH’EN, och[i] [u]ch’e’n, Dzibanche Mon. 15, A2.

3
 The Captives of Dzibanche

References
Carrasco Vargas, Ramón and Sylviane Boucher
1987 Las Escaleras Jeroglíficas del Resbalón, Quintana Roo. In Primer Simpo-
sio Mundial sobre Epigrafía Maya, 1986, pp. 1-21. Guatemala: Ministerio de
Cultura y Deportes, Instituto de Antropología e Historia de Guatemala.
Grube, Nikolai
2004 El Origen de la Dinastía Kaan. In Los Cautivos de Dzibanché, edited by
Enrique Nalda, pp. 117-131.
a b Grube, Nikolai and Simon Martin
2001 La Historia Dinástica de los Mayas. In Los Mayas: Una Civilización Mile-
Figure 4. Glyphic expressions that connect the name of: a) a captive naria, edited by Nikolai Grube, pp. 149-171. Cologne, Germany: Köne-
with that of his captor, ya-T514-AJ, Dzibanche Mon. 18, B3; b) a captor mann.
with that of his captive, ye-T514, Yaxchilan L.35, C1 (drawing by Ian Houston, Stephen D., John Robertson and David Stuart
Graham). 2001 Quality and Quantity in Glyphic Nouns and Adjectives (Calidad y can-
tidad en sustantivos y adjetivos glíficos). Research Reports on Ancient Maya
Writing 47. Washington, DC: Center for Maya Research.
of another (Houston et al. 2001:6-7). The main sign (T514),
however, is undeciphered, although it seems to begin with Marcus, Joyce
the vowel “a” and, in other regions, with “e,” and includes 1973 Territorial Organization of the Lowland Classic Maya. Science
180(4089):911-916.
among its parts the sounds aht/eht. Since agentive suffixes
can only be added to nouns (ibid.), it can be gathered that Martin, Simon and Nikolai Grube
2000 Chronicle of the Maya Kings and Queens: Deciphering the Dynasties of the An-
this undeciphered collocation is an expression related cient Maya. London: Thames and Hudson.
to the concept of “captive(?)” or “prisoner(?).” Similar
Martin, Simon
expressions (although without the agentive) are found in 2004 Preguntas epigráficas acerca de los escalones de Dzibanché. In Los Cau-
other parts of the Maya world (Figure 4b) where, just as tivos de Dzibanché, edited by Enrique Nalda, pp. 105-115.
at Dzibanche, they are located between the name of the Nalda, Enrique (editor)
captor and that of his captive, suggesting that they serve 2004 Los Cautivos de Dzibanché. México: Consejo Nacional para la Cultura y las
to relate the one to the other. Artes, Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia.
In contrast to other epigraphy books, where the results Nalda, Enrique y Sandra Balanzario
of academic investigations are poured out in forms which 2004 Un estilo arquitectónico peculiar en Dzibanché y su posible correlato
territorial. Paper presented at La Quinta Mesa Redonda de Palenque: el
seem “secure” and “definitive,” the aim of Los Cautivos de Territorio Maya. Palenque, Chiapas, Mexico.
Dzibanché, and particularly of my article (Velásquez 2004),
Pincemin, S., J. Marcus, L. F. Folan, W. Folan, M. D. Carrasco and A. Morales
is to provide an initial epigraphic and linguistic analysis, Lopez
making the limitations of phonetic readings and transla- 1998 Extending the Calakmul Dynasty Back in Time: A New Stela From a Maya
tion apparent, but also providing multiple ideas that Capital in Campeche, Mexico. Latin American Antiquity 9(4):310-327.

might guide in the development of future inquiries. It is to Velásquez García, Erik

be expected that this might occur, because as soon as this 2002 Nuevo Glifo Maya en Kohunlich, Quintana Roo. Arqueología Mexicana
9(54):16.
book appeared for sale it began to inspire new reflections 2004 Los Escalones Jeroglíficos de Dzibanché. In Los Cautivos de Dzibanché,
among those epigraphers who had just acquired it. edited by Enrique Nalda, pp. 79-103.

Dzibanche Temple II viewed from the top of Temple I (photo: Stanley Guenter). The rear facade of Temple II is decorated with paired
columns framing plain panels. The beginning of this architectural style at Dzibanche coincides with the seating of the kalo’mte’
mentioned on the inscribed wooden lintel of Temple VI (AD 551), suggesting that the style is associated with the hegemonic ascent
of the lords of Kaan (Nalda and Balanzario 2004).

4
Of Snakes and Bats:
Shifting Identities at Calakmul
SIMON MARTIN
University of Pennsylvania Museum

Houston 1994:28-29). Most importantly, a text at Dos

Pilas gives “Nab Tunich”—actually read Chiik Nahb—
as the site of a Snake king’s accession (Martin 1997:851-
852). A further five examples of Chiik Nahb have turned
up at Calakmul, and it unquestionably names the site
and/or the area under its direct administration. Sim-
ilar evidence connects Uxte’tuun (the preferred form
Figure 1. The emblem glyph of the “Snake” polity: left, on Dzibanche for Oxte’tun today) with the polity and city.
Monument 13 (B3); right, from a codex-style vessel (K6751, L2). All Together with some key archaeological finds, this
drawings by the author unless otherwise stated. confirmed Calakmul as the seat of the well known
My first sight of the Dzibanche steps, in storage at Snake king Yich’aak K’ahk’ “Claw of Fire” (previous-
the regional INAH headquarters in Chetumal, Quin- ly Jaguar Paw Smoke), who reigned from AD 686 to at
tana Roo, was deeply impressive.1 It was just as they least 695.4 Moreover, new kings emerged, such as Yuk-
had been described: numerous limestone blocks finely noom Ch’een II (636-686) and Yuknoom Took’ K’awiil
carved in an early style, most bearing miserable cap- (>706-731>), Snake rulers who also used Calakmul as
tives struggling with their bonds, each of them near- their capital (Martin 1998, 2000a).5 It was these three,
naked with wild, tousled hair (Nalda 2004). Their most
compelling feature, for an epigrapher, was the accom-
panying texts with the array of emblem glyphs they
1
This visit was in 1995 and made together with Nikolai Grube,
who had earlier inspected the steps with Linda Schele.
contained—each of them the famed “Snake” title (Ve- 2
A feature of the Snake emblem long noted by epigraphers is
lásquez 2004:80) (Figure 1). The question was: did they the prefixed ka sign that cues the reading KAN in place of the nor-
reflect Dzibanche’s success in capturing lords subject mal CHAN. The spellings ka-KAN and KAN-nu in substitution
to the Snake kingdom—known as Kan/Kaan in an- for one another in the name of a particular deity suggests that the
cient times—or was Dzibanche itself a one-time seat of k- form is long-vowel kaan. Two rationales present themselves: ei-
the Snake polity?2 While there were serious challenges ther it is a very ancient form from Proto-Mayan (Martin in Grube
2004:119) or simply that it reflects a Yukatekan form.
to reading the relevant passages, it was clear that they 3
Heinrich Berlin isolated a snake’s head in his original 1958
had implications for my own work at the faraway ru- publication on emblem glyphs, although, unlike Tikal, Copan,
ins of Calakmul, Campeche. and half a dozen more, he could not link it to a specific Maya site.
I had joined the Proyecto Arqueológico de la Bios- Joyce Marcus first suggested Calakmul, based on its sheer size, in
fera de Calakmul, directed by Ramón Carrasco, in 1973, but for more than twenty years no surviving emblems could
1994 and had started to wrestle with the scoured and be positively identified at the site. This allowed competing claims
shattered remains of the site’s monuments—a vesti- to emerge, which were only silenced with the work of David Stu-
art and Stephen Houston (1994), who identified two toponyms
gial epigraphic record that had long proved jealous of with Calakmul and linked them to the doings of Snake kings. The
its secrets (Morley 1933; Denison 1943; Marcus 1987). first unequivocal Snake emblem emerged on a fragment of hiero-
But our large-scale investigation of the site promised glyphic stairway uncovered by Ramón Carrasco in 1994, and there
much in the way of new data. Combining information are some eight examples known today (Martin 1996, 2000a).
from fresh discoveries with those from the preceding 4
This ruler was first identified by Jeffrey Miller (1974:155, Fig.
Proyecto Calakmul, directed by William Folan, as well 5) and his birth date in 649 recognized on Calakmul Stela 9 by Peter
as relevant sources from across the Maya world, the Mathews (1979). The site of his accession was subsequently tied to
the Calakmul toponym Nab Tunich/Chiik Nahb (Stuart and Hous-
opportunity was ripe to fully situate Calakmul among ton 1994:28; Martin 1997:851-852), while excavations have produced
its peers and, in effect, to wake a sleeping colossus. his name on Stela 115 (Marcus and Folan 1994) and on a plate from
By that time, Calakmul had been a prime candi- Tomb 4 in Structure 2 (Carrasco et al. 1999; Martin 2000a).
date for the capital of the Snake polity for over two de- 5
The full name of the king I’ve called Yuknoom Took’ K’awiil
cades (Marcus 1973).3 David Stuart and Stephen Hous- includes at least one, more probably two, additional elements, but
ton published their work on Classic Maya toponyms their readings and sequence are in doubt. After Yuknoom comes a
human head with three cloth-like elements over its eye, seemingly
the same year and had provisionally linked two place-
complemented by syllabic li. The head is infixed by a probable
names, “Nab Tunich” and “Oxte’tun,” to Calakmul CH’EEN sign. This ruler employs a daunting variety of name
as well as to the activities of Snake rulers (Stuart and spellings on his monuments, with frequent omissions.

The PARI Journal 6(2):5-15. 5

 Martin

3 or more

300 400 500 600 700 800

Figure 2. Monument dedications at Calakmul (top) charted against references to the Snake dynasty at other sites in the Maya region (bottom).

but especially the last two, who commissioned a star- passages, but the form AJ-K’UH-BIH?-a is not known
tling proportion of its monuments—as many as forty- from other texts (Marcus 1987:68-69). The only visible
three stelae between them. title he carries is k’uhul chatahn winik “Holy Man of Cha-
But as I’ve learned more about the site and its in- tahn” (Martin 1996). Given the prevalence of this epi-
scriptions, problems with the easy equation of the thet on ceramics from the Mirador Basin, the heartland
Snake kingdom with Calakmul persisted. The invita- of the Preclassic Maya, it has been suggested that Cha-
tion accepted here, to contribute a Calakmul perspec- tahn names this region (Boot 1999; Grube 2004:122).
tive on the Dzibanche finds and the accompanying ar- The Early Classic inventory was doubled by the
ticle by Erik Velásquez García, allows me to discuss a Proyecto Calakmul’s discovery of Stela 114, also in
range of these issues. Fortunately, some of them may 1994. Like Stela 43, it was found in a secondary con-
finally be coming into focus. text, this time within a purpose-made niche low on
the front of Structure 2 (Marcus and Folan 1994; Pin-
cemin et al. 1998). It had suffered from some burning
A Missing History and spalling to its frontal portrait, but most of the text
Sylvanus Morley visited Calakmul in 1932—following on its sides and back remained legible. An initial analy-
up on Cyrus Lundell’s discovery of its extensive ru- sis established its Long Count date, 8.19.15.12.13 from
ins just a year earlier—and recorded a total of 103 ste- 431, as well as a later count linking to the Period End-
lae (Morley 1933). He noted the dearth of early monu- ing 9.0.0.0.0 in 435. Despite its reasonably complete
ments, with Stela 43 from AD 514 the only represen- state, the inscription supplies no sign of a Snake em-
tative (Morley 1933:199) (Figure 2).6 Similar vacuums blem glyph.
for the Early Classic appear at a number of other sites, We know a fair amount about the activities of the
and it was reasonable to imagine (and still is) that ear- Snake polity in the sixth and early seventh centuries
ly monuments lay buried in construction fill, or even and have names for many kings we might hope to
in special group deposits, like one found at Caracol find on Calakmul monuments: K’altuun Hix (formerly
(Beetz and Satterthwaite 1981:48). Tuun K’ab Hix) (>520-546>), Sky Witness (>561-572),
Stela 43 had been erected in a secondary context, Yax ?-Yopaat (>573>), Scroll Serpent (579-611>), Yuk-
within a roofed structure on the face of the massive tem-
ple platform Structure 2, the largest at the city. Its text 6
Morley, and Denison after him, doubted the date on Stela 43
was fairly well preserved except, that is, for a key sec- was contemporary (Morley 1933:199; Denison 1943:100). However,
tion where we would expect to find the ruler’s full name this view was rightly contested by Marcus (1987:70), since the style
and titles. The protagonist is mentioned in several later of the carving is entirely consistent with the early sixth century.

6
Of Snakes and Bats

noom Ti’ Chan (>619>), and Tajoom Uk’ab K’ahk’ (622- date to 633—a revision to Morley’s assessment (Mar-
630).7 The last of these, known from texts at Naranjo tin 1998).8 No further information can be gleaned from
and Caracol, held office during the same years covered them today, but their creation coincides with the first
by Calakmul Stela 28 and 29. Dedicated together in records of a Snake ruler, Yuknoom Head, that mention
623, these male-female portraits mark the very begin- Chiik Nahb and Uxte’tuun.9
ning of the city’s surge in monument production. Un- The very first monument I worked on in 1994 was
fortunately, close examination of their badly preserved Calakmul Stela 33, erected in 657 as one of eight on and
texts shows no emblem glyphs or recognizable names. around the south side of Structure 5. All were dedicat-
The chronology of Stela 29, depicting the lord, can be ed between 652 and 662 and were commissions of Yuk-
deciphered and covers the years 620-623. Troublingly, noom Ch’een II. A gratifying surprise was an account
however, it does not include a date found at Caracol dated to 579 giving the accession of Scroll Serpent, a
that seems certain to mark Tajoom Uk’ab K’ahk’s inau- Snake king who raided Palenque in 611 (Martin 1996).
guration in 622 (Martin 1998). This event is anchored to the Period Endings 9.7.10.0.0
The next monoliths at the city, Stela 76 and 78, in 583 and 9.8.0.0.0 in 593, celebrated by Scroll Serpent
and his presumed spouse. This retrospective history
is interesting for its sheer length—covering the whole
back of Stela 33—as well as its attention to calendri-
cal junctures not represented on extant monuments at
5 Ajaw
the city. Yuknoom Took’ K’awiil repeats the exercise on
Stela 8 in 721, counting back 128 years to recall 9.8.0.0.0
once again (Figure 3). Although barely recognizable to-
day, Scroll Serpent is again named as the celebrant. But
this time the text goes on to place the celebration at a
specific location, although not one we can fully read or
? recognize from any other inscription. Since the narra-
3 Ch’en
tive of Stela 8 then returns to the time of Yuknoom Took’
K’awiil and explicitly locates his actions at Uxte’tuun,
there seems to be a conscious attempt to contrast local
and foreign locales.
(U)-?-
? *CHAN The Short Dynastic Count
Unlike a number other major polities—Tikal, Naran-
jo, Copan, Yaxchilan, and Palenque, for example—the
Snake kingdom avoids lengthy “dynastic counts” or
“successor titles” in any currently known text. It was
4- a-*AJAW
not that Snake kings lacked interest in the antiquity of
“K’atun” their line: as many as eleven codex-style pots record a

7
The Scroll Serpent name shows a snake with a sound-scroll
*TAHN-na- emerging from its mouth (Martin 1997:861). This emission is pos-
U-ti-ya *CH’EEN-*na sessed by the pronoun U-, as if to represent the hiss or “voice” of
the serpent (see Houston 2002 for the similar sign K’AYOOM
“singer”).
8
Stela 76 features a fairly clear 1 Ajaw 8 K’ayab date on its
front face, equivalent to 9.10.0.0.0 AD 633. It is probable that Stela
78, with which it is aligned, joined it as part of a male-female pair.
The rest of the group, Stelae 75, 77, and 79 are later and probably
K’AHK’?/ all date to the 9.12.0.0.0 AD 672 mark seen on Stela 75.
wa?- 9
This reference comes in 631 on the Naranjo Hieroglyphic
?-a Stairway—a partial monument probably removed from Caracol
as a trophy of war (Martin 2000b:57-59). There is a slight possibil-
ity that Yuknoom Head is a variant, or pre-accession, name for
Figure 3. A location given for the 9.8.0.0.0 Period Ending of AD 593. Yuknoom Ch’een II, who took power in 636 (date supplied by
CLK Stela 8 (D3-C8): ho ajaw ux ik’ sihoom ? ? u ? chan chan ? ajaw uhtiiy David Stuart [personal communication 1997] from an altar at La
*tahn *ch’een ? “5 Ajaw 3 Ch’en ‘Period Ending’ ? ? ‘Scroll Serpent,’ Corona). While the same text makes Tajoom Uk’ab K’ahk’ a k’uhul
Four K’atun Lord, it happened at the center of the cave(town?) ?” ajaw “Holy Lord,” Yuknoom Head is given only as an ajaw.

7
 Martin

U-?-TE’?-?-
AJAW?
3-U-TZ’AK-
*bu-li-AJAW

K’AWIL ?-K’AWIL-la 3-TZ’AK-

*bu-li

Figure 4. “Successor titles” for two

[?]K’AWIL-la
5-“K’atun”-
AJAW Calakmul kings: a) CLK Stela 115 (A1-
A4): u ? te’? ? ajaw? k’awiil ho ? ajaw
“‘Successor’ of the lord, K’awiil, Five
K’atun Lord”; b) CLK 52 (H2-H3): ux
c
utz’akbuil ajaw ? k’awiil “Third placed
in order of the lord, ?-K’awiil”; c) CLK
Stela 89 (I1-3): ux tz’akbuil ? k’awiil
“Third placed in order, ?-K’awiil.”
a

sequence of nineteen Snake rulers, spanning some 400 The precise rules governing these “dynastic counts”
years or more (Martin 1997). For whatever reason, his- are unclear, but they are not restricted to direct father-
torical Snake kings chose not to (or could not) set them- to-son succession and may at times constitute simple
selves within this great series, and instead preferred sequences of office-holders (Martin 2003:29). Signifi-
counts of very truncated length. cantly, K’awiil/Yuknoom Ch’een is here given a status
Calakmul Stela 115—actually a doorjamb or other equivalent to a dynastic “founder.” He certainly seems
architectural element—provides the name of Yich’aak to have been the most powerful Maya ruler of his time,
K’ahk’ (Marcus and Folan 1994) (Figure 4a). Further in- the “overking” to a number of other polities and a one-
vestigation of the text shows that he is said to be the time conqueror of Tikal. Even so, this resetting of the
direct successor of a Five K’atun Lord (that is, an indi- “dynastic clock” to zero is without ready precedent,
vidual aged between seventy-eight and ninety-eight), and a little surprising in light of the great line celebrat-
here described simply as K’awiil. A foreign source, El ed on the codex-style vases.
Peru Stela 33, suggests that Yich’aak K’ahk’ succeed-
ed Yuknoom Ch’een II—who was indeed a Five K’atun
Lord, as he would have been eighty-six at his death in 10
Another case is probably to be found on Stela 8 (C10-D10),
686. This would argue that K’awiil is used as a posthu- where this king is the “third placed in order of (the) kaloomte’”
mous term for this long-lived king. Two similar state- (this positional transitive reading of utz’akbuil courtesy of Stephen
Houston, personal communication 2005). If we follow precedents
ments can be found for Yuknoom Took’ K’awiil, where
seen elsewhere (and Copan is especially clear on this), then the
he is named as the “third placed in order of the lord, “third” includes the “founder” as “first.” This raises further ques-
K’awiil.”10 On these occasions the K’awiil name for Yuk- tions about the Split Earth character named with a Snake emblem
noom Ch’een is elaborated a little, with some additional glyph on the bones from Tikal Burial 116 (Martin and Grube
term prefixed (Figure 4b) and infixed (Figure 4c). 2000:111).

8
Of Snakes and Bats

Enter the Bat

Thus far we have established certain anomalies and
inconsistencies in the epigraphic record. We will now
move to more concrete reasons for questioning an Ear-
ly Classic Snake-Calakmul link. The aforementioned
Stela 114 was re-examined in 2001 at the newly opened
Museo Fuerte de San Miguel, Campeche City, where
better access was possible than at either the site or in
storage. The ruler’s name appears on the back as the
protagonist of rituals celebrating his first K’atun anni-
versary, presumably of office, implying an unstated ac-
cession date in 411. His identity is confirmed by the
presence of key name components in the headdress of
the elaborate portrait on the front face. Moreover, close Figure 5. Early Classic ruler using the Bat emblem glyph. CLK Stela
inspection of the abraded sign directly in front of this 114 (C5-D6).
name reveals an emblem glyph (in early texts they can
precede rather than follow personal names, a position
which becomes fixed only after AD 500) (Figure 5). Its
main sign—the name of the socio-political unit under
this lord’s control—is not a snake head, as we would
expect, but the head of a bat (Figure 6a).11
This would prove important to two other monu-
ments at Calakmul. In the 1970s, Eric Von Euw made a
drawing of Stela 62, dated to 751, that showed an ap-
a b c
parent bat emblem. For a long time I took this to be
no more than an eroded snake head, but re-examina- Figure 6. The Bat emblem glyph at Calakmul: a) CLK Stela 114 (C5);
tion of the stone, now in the Museo Nacional de Antro- b) CLK Stela 62 (B4); c) CLK Stela 59 (C1)
pología, Mexico City, changed my mind. The ruler’s
name turns out to be a version of a deity we call the
“Waterlily Serpent,” whose final component, the head
of a snake, allows us to make a direct comparison to
the following emblem (Figure 7). The differences in
physiognomy are considerable, while the emblem’s
head closely follows bat representations in Maya art
and writing (Figure 6b). Meanwhile, I had studied
the sides of the re-erected Stela 59 from 741. Despite
its poor condition, in good light a bat emblem glyph
could be discerned high on its left side (Figure 6c).12 In
this position it would continue the near-illegible title
phrase of the king, seen low on the opposing right side.
Recent re-checking of photos taken when this monu-
ment was still on the ground provided additional sup-
port for this assessment.
While a pattern was forming, it was still hard to ex-
clude the possibility that the Bat was some additional

11
Coincidently, Pincemin et al. (1998:316) identify the previous
glyph, D4, as the head of a leaf-nosed bat. Although in some angles
this appears to be the case, I believe the sign is something different.
12
The apparent “stone” markings on the cheek of the bat
initially brought the emblem of Copan to mind—especially given
the proximity of the Quirigua-Copan war to which Calakmul Figure 7. Late Classic ruler using the Bat
may have had some connection, however notional, in 738. There emblem glyph. CLK 62 (B1-B4)
may still be a link between these two bat head emblems, but it is
important to note that the Calakmul versions lack the pi and/or
pu suffixes seen at Copan.

9
 Martin

(Pincemin et al. 1999:319), which makes better sense if

the elites of the time shared the identity of the ances-
tral Bat king they honored. The last known example of
the Snake emblem glyph at Calakmul comes in 731, on
Yuknoom Took’ K’awiil’s final stelae. Given the ruin-
ous state of the city’s monuments, caution is obviously
a required here. It has been assumed until now that lat-
er Snake emblems are simply eroded beyond recogni-
tion—and we must be open to what new excavations
could bring. All we can say at this point is that we have
two visible emblems after 731, and that both feature
the head of a bat rather than a snake.

Lords of Chiik Nahb

Returning to Stela 114, after a parentage statement
b
for the Bat king, we advance to a new date and event,
seemingly an accession earlier in 431. It features a char-
acter using, or acquiring, the title chi-ku-NAHB AJAW
“Lord of Chiik Nahb” (Figure 8a).15 This epithet is not
a common one, with just two other examples. One is at
distant Quirigua, recorded in 800 but referring back to
the 9.15.5.0.0 Period Ending of 736 (Looper 1999:270-
271; 2003:79) (Figure 8b). This time spelled chi[ku]-
NAHB K’UH-AJAW “Holy Lord of Chiik Nahb,” it
seems to place a Calakmul lord at Quirigua less than
c two years before the latter’s victory over its erstwhile
overlord Copan. Given that this text goes on to de-
Figure 8. Chiik Nahb Ajaw “Lord of Chiik Nahb”: a) CLK Stela 114
(C16-D16); b) QRG Stela I (C5-D5); c) CLK MT.6 (A2).
scribe details of the conflict, a Calakmul connection
would seem to be implied. The other example of this
title, chi[ku]-NAHB-AJAW, appears on a hieroglyph-
title used by Snake kings. The scales would be tipped,
ic block recovered from the fill of Calakmul Structure
however, by new data from the site of Oxpemul, a large
13 (Figure 8c). Dated to 751, it is carried by a character
“satellite” city 22 km to the north of Calakmul. Recent-
called Bolon K’awiil, known to be a ruler of the site by
ly relocated by Ivan Sprajc, it has been opened to its
771 (Martin 2000a). It is worth noting that the well pre-
first epigraphic investigations since the 1930s. Its mon-
uments show two royal titles. The first incorporates
an undeciphered throne/altar glyph not unlike a vari- 13
It could be argued that Stela 114 is mobile enough to have
ant of the witz “mountain” sign (Robichaux and Pru- been brought to Calakmul from Oxpemul, but this does not ac-
count for the Bat emblems on Stela 59 (a massive stone typical
ett 2004). At the most recent Texas Meetings, Nikolai
of Calakmul) or 62 (on which the ruler calls himself the “many”
Grube (2005) identified a second, based on the head of in line of K’awiil, plainly in continuation of the Snake dynasty’s
a bat. It carries the prestigious k’uhul “holy” prefix, and “short dynastic count” despite the switch in emblem). The latter
Grube views it as the true Oxpemul emblem—inter- stone shows ample signs of fresh political disturbance, since the
preting the throne/altar compound as a local toponym side texts were never completed. It is interesting that the bat
in titular form. emblem has also been noted at Naachtun (Grube 2005).
The three Calakmul examples indicate a wider sig-
14
Grube makes a more explicit statement to this effect
(2004:121-122). He sees Calakmul as subject to the Chatahn entity
nificance for the Bat emblem. Spanning at least 320 in the Early Classic, drawing on Stela 43’s use of this title as evi-
years at Calakmul, we have an entity of evident longev- dence. Yet the same epithet appears within scribal signatures on
ity that had regional or multi-center relevance.13 It ap- Stela 51 and 89, commissioned by Yuknoom Took’ K’awiil in 731
pears at the site at the very time Dzibanche is suspect- (Martin 1996), and it is used more widely by a range of polities on
ed of being the (or at least a) Snake capital (Martin and painted and carved ceramics (Boot 1999). The import of the k’uhul
Grube 2000:103; Grube 2004:117-118).14 Consequently, chatahn winik title seems broad indeed and plausibly refers to the
the Bat’s return in 741 and 751 must make us wonder people and territory of the Mirador basin and adjacent regions, a
claim to a largely defunct but once powerful region and polity.
if the Snake emblem was still in use at that time. Had 15
Grube (2004:121) refers to a yajaw “his lord” subordination
its seat had shifted once more? One thinks here of the statement on Stela 114. However, close examination reveals no
cherished resetting of Stela 114 in the Terminal Classic such term or relationship in this text.

10
Of Snakes and Bats

served passage describing Bolon K’awiil’s “scattering”

ceremony on Stela 58 contains no emblem glyph at all.
The appearance of the Chiik Nahb title on Stela 114
is most interesting. The implication is that one lord, an
ajaw, controlled Calakmul under the aegis of another,
a higher status k’uhul ajaw of the Bat entity. We should
note too that all known instances of Chiik Nahb Ajaw
fall outside the “three kings” era—just like those of the
Bat emblem glyph, with which it has a close temporal
correlation. It remains to be seen if further finds will
conform to this pattern, but at the moment we have a
distinctly local title used when the Bat emblem is also
evident at the site, but not when the Snake title is ap-
parent.

Discussion
So, what are we to make of these disparate lines of evi-
dence? How might internal data from Calakmul com-
plement, expand, or explicate that from Dzibanche?
The evidence that Calakmul served as the seat of the
Snake polity in the seventh and early eighth centuries— a
the era of the “three kings”—is clear. But as we have
seen, locating the Snake kingdom at Calakmul both be-
fore and after this century-long era presents difficulties.
While the rarity of Early Classic monuments at the city
is not in itself reason to question the association, the
lack of recognizable royal names or visible Snake em-
blems does leaves a vacuum into which the Dzibanche
proposition neatly sits. The retrospective recording of
past Period Endings smacks of introducing an absent
b
past—of recalling events not only from another time,
but another place. In this regard, it is noteworthy that a Figure 9. A Tikal-Calakmul conflict circa AD 736: a) TIK Altar 9 (drawing
Snake king (Yax ? Yopaat) is associated with the 9.7.0.0.0 by William R. Coe); b) Caption giving the name of the Snake king,
Period Ending from 573 on a block from Dzibanche (Ve- apparently Yuknoom Took’ K’awiil. TIK Altar 9 (D-E).
lásquez 2004:97)—just a decade before the 9.7.10.0.0 de-
scribed on Calakmul Stela 33. It is tempting to think If the Bat emblem defines the governing authority
that the location given on Stela 8 refers to Dzibanche or of Early Classic Calakmul, then it was itself a complex
some other Snake capital. arrangement that appears to see an “overking” preside
The “short dynastic count” indicates that Yuknoom over a lord with a more direct role in governing the site.
Ch’een exercised a pivotal place in the self-definition of It remains unclear if the Bat king was also based at Cal-
the dynasty and its time at Calakmul, consistent with akmul, but the implication is that he had importance
the idea that he was involved in a special “reconstitu- beyond the city and some kind of regional domain. The
tion” of the polity—apparently involving relocation of bigger question for us is: What historical processes un-
the royal seat to Calakmul by him or his predecessor. derlie the return of the Bat emblem in 741 and 751?
The conspicuous success of the Snake kings in extend- It is sobering to realize that, save for one example,
ing a network of patronage and military power in the the last contemporary Snake emblem in the Maya re-
sixth century may have made a more southerly loca- gion can be placed no later than 736. It appears on Ti-
tion advantageous—which is not to ignore the poten-
tial symbolic value of occupying an ancient site that
was once part of the Preclassic “heartland.” We cer-
16
The wooden lintel at Dzibanche (Harrison 1972) refers to
the 9.6.0.0.0 mark of 554, as well as an accession event in 551. It
tainly should not exclude the possibility that other is significant that this event is chumlajiiy ti kaloomte’, an elevation
sites were involved in the Early Classic make-up of the into the very highest office and so rare it is otherwise only known
polity, and that there might be more going on than a for Tikal. The Snake ruler Sky Witness could have been in office at
straightforward Dzibanche-Calakmul transfer.16 this time.

11
 Martin

kal Altar 9 (Figure 9a) in the caption to a bound cap- reminiscent of how Chiik Nahb Ajaw is used at Calak-
tive, where it identifies either the victim himself or his mul—implying that the Bat was an over-arching, es-
overlord (Jones and Satterthwaite 1982:48). This stone sentially non-local entity at Oxpemul as well. In the
is partnered by Tikal Stela 21, the first monument put limited sample at our disposal, we lack simultaneous
up by Ruler B (Yik’iniiy Chan K’awiil). Commemorat- use of the Bat emblem at both centers, holding out the
ing the 9.15.5.0.0 Period Ending of 736, it also recalls possibility that only one lord could use this title at any
his accession in 734, thus providing a probable time one time. The only Bat emblems at Oxpemul that can
range for the conflict. The name of the Snake ruler is be clearly dated come in 771 when, as we’ve seen, the
damaged, but bears so many similarities to one or an- contemporary Calakmul ruler called himself Chiik
other of Yuknoom Took’ K’awiil’s (very) varied nomi- Nahb Ajaw or used no title at all.
nals that there can be little doubt that it refers to him In conclusion, this scenario paints a dynamic, some-
(Figure 9b). what radical, view of Calakmul’s turbulent politi-
This inscription marks the end of a 194-year peri- cal history, yet one that finds parallels elsewhere in
od in which mentions of the Snake dynasty abound the Classic era. The shifting political identities hinted
on Maya monuments (Figure 2). With the exception at in past studies (Mathews 1985:32; Houston 1986:3)
of their only other recorded defeat—also at the hands has matured in our current understanding of the intru-
of Tikal in 695—it makes for a narrative of unblem- sive history of the “Tikal” emblem at Dos Pilas (Hous-
ished success. No state even approached the number ton 1993:100; Martin and Grube 2000:56-57). Through
of foreign rulers the Snake dynasty confirmed in office, such events we glimpse revealing political processes,
while at various points it conquered or sacked major demonstrating that Maya ideas of statehood and terri-
centers such as Tikal, Palenque, and Naranjo (Martin toriality could be more fluid than often supposed. Re-
and Grube 1995, 2000). The defeat of Yich’aak K’ahk’ searchers have long accepted geographical definitions
in 695 was plainly a serious setback, judging by the de- of Maya polities, which implicitly draw on the heritage
cline in foreign references that follows (Martin 1996). of Old World urban states, be they Greek polis or me-
However, Yuknoom Took’ K’awiil maintained notable dieval city-state. The main signs of the emblem glyphs
influence over El Peru, Dos Pilas, and La Corona, so have been taken to be the names of such territorial en-
Snake power was not entirely eclipsed. tities—a reasonable assumption given the strong corre-
After 736, however, the Snake polity disappears from lation between emblems and large population centers.
foreign mentions (see Figure 2), turning up again only But glyphic toponyms actually serve to undermine
in a single reference at Seibal in 849. (This instance is, in the strict “city-state” view, since the majority of polity
my view, from a mid- or post-political collapse era, in names are not derived from those of their core settle-
which Seibal held sway in the dying days of the Classic ments (see Stuart and Houston 1993:Fig. 107).
era. The lords who gathered to witness the Seibal king’s It may be our notion of the Maya “polity” that is at
Period Ending—that of Tikal among them—cannot be fault. We need a definition that sits comfortably with
equated to those who presided over the wealthy, popu- dramatic—if rare—shifts in location, and the transfer
lous states of half-a-century earlier.17) In the past, I had of identity and affiliation that affects not only plac-
assumed that the Snake polity retrenched to Calakmul es but whole populations. In essence, these emblem
and continued a stable, if greatly diminished, life until names seem to label royal houses whose connections
the general unraveling of Classic Maya civilization in to specific territories are less intrinsic than habitual.
the early ninth century. However, the Bat emblem’s re- Plausibly composed of a single extended family or lin-
appearance now raises the possibility that the decline eage, they may yet be closer to “house” communities,
was not restricted to the polity’s foreign reach, but went with idealized structures of kinship and descent (see
to its very heart. Conceivably, the defeat by Tikal was so Gillespie 2000:476).18 Across a range of other world re-
decisive that it ousted or even extinguished the Snake gions and time periods, aristocracies have acted as in-
dynasty, allowing an exiled or long-sublimated Bat en- dependent agents capable of uprooting themselves
tity to return in its place. But perhaps the relatively low- both from the lands they control and the populations
key record at Tikal hints at more complex processes in that support them in search of more favorable condi-
which Tikal benefited, but may not have been fully re- tions elsewhere, and it should not surprise us that the
sponsible.
The limited number of legible texts at Calakmul af-
ter 736 makes analysis of this later period and its re- 17
For the “witnessing” here see Stuart (in Houston 1992:66). If
gional relationships very difficult. Preservation is bet- we take this gathering of lords as factual—and there is no reason
ter at Oxpemul, where extant monuments begin only not to—a Snake polity existed at this time, but it is not specified
where its capital lay.
at the key juncture of 731—when, significantly, only 18
I am indebted to Robert Sharer for raising this issue in an
the throne/altar toponym title is used. Interestingly informal presentation of this paper at the University of Pennsyl-
enough, the high profile of this local ajaw title is rather vania Museum, October 2005.

12
Of Snakes and Bats

Classic Maya could do much the same. Marcus, Joyce, and William J. Folan
1994 Una estela más del siglo V y nueva información sobre Pata
Finally, I need to reiterate earlier cautions about the de Jaguar, gobernante de Calakmul, Campeche, en el siglo VII.
limited data currently available on this, as on so many Gaceta Universitria, Año IV, No. 15-16. Universidad Autonoma de
other questions at Calakmul. This immense site is sure Campeche, Campeche.
to produce exciting discoveries for many years to come, Martin, Simon
and we should expect further surprises and shifts in our 1996 Calakmul en el Registro Epigráfico. In Proyecto Arqueológico de la
Biosfera de Calakmul: Temporada 1993-94, by Ramón Carrasco V. et
perspective. That said, the hypothesis presented here al. Centro Regional de Yucatán, INAH, Mérida.
seems tenable and fits the evidence we have to hand. 1997 The Painted King List: A Commentary on Codex-style Dynastic
Vases. In The Maya Vase Book, Volume 5: A Corpus of Roll-out Photo-
graphs, by Justin Kerr, pp. 846-863. Kerr Associates, New York.
1998 Investigación Epigráfica de Campo: 1995-1998. In Proyecto Ar-
References queológico de la Biosfera de Calakmul: Temporada 1995-98, by Ramón
Berlin, Heinrich Carrasco V. et al. Centro Regional de Yucatán, unpublished report
1958 El Glifo “Emblema” en las Inscripciones Mayas. Journal de la to INAH.
Société des Américanistes 47:111-119. 2000a Los Señores de Calakmul. Arqueología Mexicana 7(42):40-45.
2000b At the Periphery: The Movement, Modification and Re-use of
Boot, Erik Early Monuments in the Environs of Tikal. In The Sacred and the
1999 North of the Lake Petén Itzá: A Regional Perspective on the cha- Profane: Architecture and Identity in the Southern Maya Lowlands,
TAN-na/cha-ta Collocation. Unpublished manuscript. edited by P. R. Colas, K. Delvendahl, M. Kuhnert, and A. Pieler,
pp. 51-62. Acta Mesoamericana 10, Markt Schwaben, Hamburg.
Carrasco Vargas, Ramón, Sylviane Boucher, Paula Alvarez Gonzaléz, 2003 In Line of the Founder: A View of Dynastic Politics at Tikal. In
Vera Tiesler Blos, Valeria Garcia Vierna, Renta García Moreno and Tikal: Dynasties, Foreigners, and Affairs of State, edited by Jeremy A.
Javier Vázquez Negrete Sabloff, pp. 3-45. School of American Research Advanced Seminar
1999 A Dynastic Tomb from Campeche, Mexico: New Evidence Series, School of American Research Press and James Curry, Santa
on Jaguar Paw, A Ruler of Calakmul. Latin American Antiquity Fe and Oxford.
10(1):47-58.
Martin, Simon, and Nikolai Grube
Denison, John H., Jr. 1995 Maya Superstates. Archaeology 48(6):41-46.
1943 Description of the Monuments. In Archaeological Reconnaissance 2000 Chronicle of the Maya Kings and Queens: Deciphering the Dynasties of
in Campeche, Quintana Roo, and Petén, by Karl Ruppert and John the Ancient Maya. Thames and Hudson, London and New York.
H. Denison, Jr., pp. 99-154. Carnegie Institution of Washington,
Publication 543. Washington D.C. Mathews, Peter
1979 Notes on the Inscriptions of “Site Q.” Manuscript on file, Depart-
Gillespie, Susan D. ment of Archaeology, University of Calgary, Alberta.
2000 Rethinking Ancient Maya Social Organization: Replacing “Lin- 1985 Early Classic Monuments and Inscriptions. In A Consideration of
eage” with “House.” American Anthropologist 102(3):467-484. the Early Classic Period in the Maya Lowlands, edited by Gordon R.
Willey and Peter Mathews, pp. 5-55. Institute for Mesoamerican
Grube, Nikolai Studies, Publication No. 10. State University of New York at
2004 El Origin de la Dinastía Kaan. In Los Cautivos de Dzibanché, edited Albany.
by Enrique Nalda, pp. 114-131. Instituto Nacional de Antropología
y Historia, Mexico City. Miller, Jeffrey
2005 Pots and Stones from Southern Campeche. Paper presented at 1974 Notes on a Stela Pair Probably from Calakmul, Campeche,
the 21st Texas Symposium, University of Texas, Austin. Mexico. In Primera Mesa Redonda de Palenque, Part I, edited by
Merle Greene Robertson, pp. 149-162. Robert Louis Stevenson
Harrison, Peter D. School, Pebble Beach.
1972 Lintels of Tzibanche, Quintana Roo. In Proceedings of the Interna-
tional Congress of Americanists (40th Session, Rome and Genova, 1972), Morley, Sylvanus G.
v. 1, pp. 495-501. Genova. 1933 The Calakmul Expedition. Scientific Monthly 37:193-206. Lan-
caster, Pennsylvania.
Houston, Stephen D.
1986 Problematic Emblem Glyphs: Examples from Altar de Sacrificios, El Nalda, Enrique (ed.)
Chorro, Río Azul, and Xultun. Research Reports on Ancient Maya 2004 Los Cautivos de Dzibanché, Instituto Nacional de Antropología y
Writing 3. Center for Maya Research, Washington, D.C. Historia, Mexico City.
1992 Classic Maya Politics. In New Theories on the Ancient Maya, edited
Pincemin, S., J. Marcus, L. F. Folan, W. Folan, M. D. Carrasco and A.
by E. C. Danien and Robert Sharer, pp. 65-69. University Museum,
Morales Lopez
University of Philadelphia, Philadelphia.
1998 Extending the Calakmul Dynasty Back in Time: A New Stela
1993 Hieroglyphs and History at Dos Pilas: Dynastic Politics of the Classic
From a Maya Capital in Campeche, Mexico. Latin American Antiq-
Maya. University of Texas Press, Austin. uity 9(4):310-327.
2002 Cantantes y Danzantes de Bonampak. Arqueología Mexicana
10(55):54-55. Robichaux, Hubert R. and Candace Pruett
2004 Las Inscripciones de Oxpemul. Paper presented at the XIVth
Looper, Mathew G. Encuentro Internacional: Los Investigadores de la Cultura Maya.
1999 New Perspectives on the Late Classic Political History of Qui- Campeche, Mexico.
riguá, Guatemala. Ancient Mesoamerica 10(2):263-280.
2003 Lightning Warrior: Maya Art and Kingship at Quiriguá. University Stuart, David, and Stephen D. Houston
of Texas Press, Austin. 1994 Classic Maya Place Names. Studies in Pre-Columbian Art and
Archaeology No. 33. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Col-
Marcus, Joyce lection, Washington, D.C.
1973 Territorial Organization of the Lowland Classic Maya. Science
180:911-916. Velásquez García, Erik.
1987 The Inscriptions of Calakmul: Royal Marriage at a Maya City in 2004 Los Escalones Jeroglíficos de Dzibanché. In Los Cautivos de
Campeche, Mexico. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michi- Dzibanché, edited by Enrique Nalda, pp. 78-103. Instituto Nacional
gan Technical Report 21. Ann Arbor. de Antropología y Historia, Mexico City.

13
La Corona Find Sheds Light on SiteQ Mystery
STANLEY GUENTER
Southern Methodist University

A perfectly preserved hieroglyphic panel discovered this Ak’aach Yuhk (Stuart, in Graham 1997:46), while a num-
past April in northwestern Peten, Guatemala (see map ber of altars revealed the ancient name of La Corona, Sak
on page 3) appears to be the final piece of the puzzle that Nikte’, as also pointed out by Stuart in communications
confirms the identification of La Corona as the mystery with fellow epigraphers. Some scholars, though, were
location designated Site Q. La Corona, situated in the skeptical of the link, as La Corona was a relatively small
northern portion of the Laguna del Tigre National Park site and the surviving monuments did not stylistically
and recently under considerable threat from invaders resemble the Site Q corpus. In fact, upon returning from
destroying the jungle, came to the attention of archae- La Corona in 1997, Ian Graham had declared, “...I doubt
ologists in 1997 when Ian Graham and David Stuart that La Corona is the source of the Site Q panels, since
visited and named the previously unknown site. Stuart, the sculpture remaining there does not match the style
who has been investigating the Site Q enigma for years, of those panels” (Graham 1997).
noticed that hieroglyphic texts at La Corona suggested The Site Q corpus is dominated by small hieroglyphic
it may have been the famous Site Q that has long fasci- panels, and while Stuart and Graham found blank stone
nated and mystified epigraphers. blocks of the same size and stone type as the Site Q
Site Q (based on the Spanish interrogatory ¿Que? monuments, no trace of actual carved Site Q-style carved
“which?”) was named by Peter Mathews more than panels was found at the site. In 2000, however, Stuart
a quarter century ago after he noted that numerous undertook a petrographic analysis of plain stone blocks
monuments in museums and private collections around from a stairway at La Corona. This analysis indicated
the world appeared to have been looted from the same that they matched geologically the stone from which the
site. The monuments of Site Q featured the well known Site Q monument in the Hudson Museum at the Univer-
“Snake” emblem glyph, which was later determined to sity of Maine had been carved. The preponderance of
be associated with the large Mexican site of Calakmul. evidence led Stuart (2001) to affirm that La Corona was
The Site Q monuments clearly did not derive from Cal- either Site Q, or one of sites from which Site Q monu-
akmul, however, and epigraphic research revealed that ments had been looted.
Site Q was a small polity directly under the authority of The Waka’ Project expedition to La Corona—under
the “Snake” kings of Calakmul. the auspices of the El Peru-Waka’ Project, directed by
The location of Site Q, however, remained a mystery. Dr. David Freidel of Southern Methodist University and
Graham and Stuart’s discoveries at La Corona made it Dr. Hector Escobedo of the Universidad de San Car-
the leading candidate; there clearly were intimate ties. La los—was designed among other things to test the idea
Corona Stela 1 bears the names of two rulers of the Site of La Corona as Site Q. The six-day expedition in April,
Q dynasty, K’inich Yook and his younger brother Chak 2005 involved the collaboration of a number of different

Photo by Stanley Guenter/El Peru-Waka’ Archaeological Project.

14 The PARI Journal 6(2):16-18.

La Corona Find Sheds Light on Site Q Mystery

organizations, including archaeologists from Southern the expedition left La Corona the panels were excavated
Methodist University and Yale University, officials from and removed to Flores and thence to Guatemala City,
the Guatemalan Instituto de Antropología e Historia where La Corona Panel 1 would be safe and available for
(IDAEH) coordinated by Salvador Lopez, and members further study.
of the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) who have Already as the monument was being exposed in the
been working in the area for a number of years monitor- ground it was clear that this panel provided confirma-
ing one of the few remaining nesting areas of the scarlet tion of David Stuart’s identification of La Corona as
macaw. Site Q. The new finds from La Corona were presented
While Damien Marken and Lia Tsesmeli mapped the at the XIX Simposium of Archaeological Investigations
central plaza of La Corona and its associated structures, in Guatemala in July, 2005, and the panel was presented
Marcello Canuto explored the other small sites in the publicly at a press conference in Guatemala City on
vicinity of La Corona and Stanley Guenter examined September 12 attended by Manuel de Jesus Salazar,
the hieroglyphic monuments. On the very first day of Minister of Culture and Sports, Salvador López, head
exploration two small carved tablets, each bearing a of the Department of Prehispanic Monuments, Hector
single hieroglyph, were found in looters’ debris on Escobedo, co-director of the El Peru-Waka project, and
structures surrounding the central plaza. A number of Marcello Canuto. These data will be published in full at
looted tombs were also found. Curiously, the looted a later date and are here briefly summarized.
tombs were entirely barren of artifacts, the floors having La Corona Panel 1 is of extreme importance to the
been swept clean by the looters. This prevented a quick question of the identification of La Corona with Site Q.
dating of these tombs by associated ceramics. There was The hieroglyphic text begins with an Initial Series date of
a general dearth of ceramics at the site, the reason for 9.12.5.7.4, 4 Kan 7 Mac (October 25, 677), the date of the
which is not clear. It is certainly unusual, as most Maya dedication of the panel and the temple in which it was
sites are littered with pottery sherds. found. The ancient name of the pyramid was wak mihnal,
Excavation of a latrine pit did uncover a fair amount or the “six nothing place,” the name of an otherworld
of ceramics, and a cursory and preliminary examination location relatively common in Classic Maya inscriptions.
of these indicated Early, Late, and Terminal Classic dat- The temple, according to the inscription, was dedicated
ing. Given that these came from only a single locality, to a god named apparently K’uhul Winik Ub’ and titled,
this evidence is not overly informative. In addition to rather unoriginally, the wak mihnal k’uh, or “god of the
sherds and monument fragments, a number of pieces of six nothing place.” The dedication of the temple, and
stucco decoration were found, indicating that the ruined this panel inside it, was carried out by K’inich Yook, one
structures surrounding the central plaza of La Corona of the most important kings of the Site Q dynasty.
were once brilliantly decorated with life-size human Following the discussion of this dedication, the text
figures modeled in stucco. of Panel 1 goes back in time to relate a similar dedication
The most remarkable find of the expedition, however, event carried out by K’inich Yook’s father, Chak Naahb’
was the discovery of La Corona Panel 1, a perfectly pre- Kaan—a Site Q personage thus far not identified on any
served monument bearing more than 140 hieroglyphs of the previously studied monuments from La Corona.
still covered by their original red paint. The monument In 658, according to Panel 1, Chak Naahb’ Kaan had three
was discovered by Marcello Canuto in a looters’ trench. stones “constructed” in honor of three deities. These are
On April 23, the second-to-the-last day at the site, Ca- named Yax Ajaw, K’an Chaahk and Yi...b’ Chaahk, and
nuto was taking GPS readings on various mounds on the “stones” dedicated in their honor are likely other hi-
the site’s periphery but the extensive tree cover was eroglyphic panels, as the same term is used in describing
interfering with the satellite signals. Leaving the GPS the dedication of La Corona Panel 1.
unit on a nearby rock to work on its own trying to con- The text then details a visit by K’inich Yook to
nect with the satellites, Canuto took the opportunity to Calakmul in November of 673. After a six-day journey
explore inside the looters’ trench, and at the furthest K’inich Yook arrived at the great Snake Kingdom capital
point within the hole he noticed a stone that appeared and visited Calakmul’s king, Yuhknoom Ch’een, the
to have lines upon it. A closer inspection revealed that most powerful Maya king of the Classic period. The
these were hieroglyphs carved onto a stone monument, central scene appears to show K’inich Yook performing
and Canuto proceeded to advise his companions of the a ceremony at Calakmul during this visit. Unfortunately,
find. while the name of K’inich Yook is clear, the name of his
Canuto, Guenter and Marken then exposed and companion is not, although he definitely appears to be a
cleared the monument, revealing its size and the perfec- lord of Calakmul.
tion of its state of preservation. The monument actually The date of this journey is quite interesting, as it
consisted of two separate panels that bore a single, long occurred less than six months after a burning event
hieroglyphic text (discussed below) and featured a mentioned on Dos Pilas Hieroglyphic Stairway 2. The
central scene of two lords facing each other, engaged object of this torching appears to have been El Peru (see
in a “scattering” ceremony. The monument was clearly Guenter 2003), and the perpetrator seems to have been
at extreme risk of being looted, and so early on the day Tikal, as part of its campaign against the king of Dos Pilas,

15
 La Corona Find Sheds Light on Site Q Mystery

B’ajlaj Chan K’awiil. If Tikal attacked El Peru, this would where a text concludes with a reference to a future Period
explain why B’ajlaj Chan K’awiil did not seek refuge in Ending. La Corona Panel 1 is unusual in the number of
Calakmul during his five-year exile from Dos Pilas but Period Endings it includes in this practice.
appears to have remained in Hix Witz, just to the south This new monument from La Corona is extremely
of El Peru. A Tikal occupation of El Peru would have put important, not only for its remarkable state of preser-
it in an excellent position to threaten La Corona, just to vation but also for the information it reveals. Not only
the north, and this may well explain K’inich Yook’s trip does Panel 1 refer to two well known Site Q kings, the
to Calakmul. text is carved in a style virtually identical to Site Q Panel
This theory is supported by the following passages 1 (see Mathews 1998). The carving is so similar that it
on La Corona Panel 1. These include an enigmatic lok’oy, is very likely that the same sculptor(s) carved the two
or “exiting” event by Yuhknoom Yich’aak K’ahk’ monuments. In addition, the figural scene on La Corona
(“Jaguar Paw”), heir and successor of Calakmul’s king Panel 1 is carved in the same style as Site Q Panel 3. The
Yuhknoom Ch’een. A similar event involving Yuhknoom La Corona monument features two male figures facing
Yich’aak K’ahk’ and K’inich Yook’s younger brother, each other, engaged in a scattering ceremony. Site Q
Chak Ak’aach Yuhk, is mentioned on Site Q Glyphic Panel 3 also features two individuals in this type of cer-
Panel D (for drawing see Mathews 1998), but the date is emony, but in this case they are a man and a woman. This
completely different. royal couple is Chak Naahb’ Kaan and Lady Chak Tok
The text continues by recording the accession of Chaahk, the parents of K’inich Yook, who it so happens
K’inich Yook in 675. This is most curious as Site Q Panel 2 is the left-hand figure on La Corona Panel 1. In other
mentions that K’inich Yook acceded in 667. The likely ex- words, this panel is the first monument recovered in situ
planation for this discrepancy is that the 675 accession is at La Corona that emulates the style, composition, and
actually K’inich Yook’s re-accession as king of La Corona size of the Site Q monuments now located in museums
after returning to that site from Calakmul. We know that and private collections. The new panel thus constitutes
in 677 Yuhknoom Ch’een fought a campaign against Tikal the exact type of evidence that Graham was looking for
that liberated Dos Pilas. An earlier phase of Calakmul’s in 1997.
reconquest campaign may well explain K’inich Yook’s Finally, it now seems extremely likely that Site Q
re-accession upon his return to La Corona. Panels 1 and 3 were taken from La Corona, and so the
La Corona Panel 1 also mentions two enigmatic taliiy discovery of La Corona Panel 1 goes a long way to al-
events that are connected with the dedication of the panel lowing us to demonstrate that many, if not most, Site Q
in 677. These taliiy events are much earlier, however, monuments were looted from La Corona. Sadly, there
falling in AD 314 and 3805 BC. The latter is clearly a is currently no way to conclusively prove this probable
mythological date while the former could be historical. connection. While it is extremely likely, the process of
The two taliiy events are clearly related to the panel’s looting destroyed the archaeological context that con-
dedicatory date as all three share the same tzolkin date, 4 nects the monuments to the structures in which they
Kan. “Coincidences” such as this usually signal “like-in- were found. However, further excavations at La Corona
kind” events, and thus the taliiy events should be some- are quite likely to uncover more information that will al-
how connected with the pat tuun event that dedicated the low us to connect more Site Q monuments with this site.
panel and the temple in which it was placed. Unfortunately, La Corona continues to be a site un-
Taliiy is a rare event in Maya inscriptions and appears der threat. WCS workers studying macaw populations
to refer to the start of a journey. Panel 1 seems to relate in and around La Corona continue to deal with illegal
that named gods journeyed, presumably before becom- invaders to the park. IDAEH has recently sent guards
ing associated with the temple in which the panel was to the site and hopefully this will alleviate much of the
placed. The god who embarked on a journey in 3805 BC pressure.
is specifically said to have left wak mihnal, and if this god
ultimately came to be associated with the Panel 1 struc- References
ture, it would have been a homecoming of sorts, given the Graham, Ian
structure’s identity as a real-world wak mihnal. The taliiy 1997 Mission to La Corona. Archaeology 50(5):46.
events remain poorly understood, as no clear toponym is Guenter, Stanley
present in the passage referring to the 314 event and the 2003 The Inscriptions of Dos Pilas Associated with B’ajlaj Chan
names of the actors are otherwise unattested. K’awiil. Mesoweb: www.mesoweb.com/features/guenter/
La Corona Panel 1 concludes by listing the hotuns DosPilas.pdf.
leading from the dedication of the panel until the next Mathews, Peter
Katun Ending. These are: 1998 Site Q Sculptures. Archaeology: www.archaeology.org/
9.12.10.0.0, 9 Ahau 18 Zodz (May 8, 682) online/features/siteq/index.html.
9.12.15.0.0, 2 Ahau 13 Zip (April 12, 687) Stuart, David
9.13.0.0.0, 8 Ahau 8 Uo (March 16, 692) 2001 Las ruinas de La Corona, Petén, y la identificacion del
“Sitio Q.” Paper presented at the XV Simposium of Archae-
This is a common pattern seen on Maya monuments, ological Investigations. Guatemala.

16