39 A TENTH CYCLE SCULPTURE FROM ALTA VERAPAZ, GUATEMALA. Brian D. Dillon In 1959 the site of Chinaja was discovered during the course of petroleum explorations by the Ohio Oil Company in northern Guatemala, and a sculpture bearing a short hieroglyphic inscription was removed from the site to Guatemala City where it was subsequently sold. The present owner acquired the piece with the intention of protecting it and keeping it from being sold outside the Guatemalan Republic; he plans to eventually donate it to the Museo Nacional de Arqueologia e Etnologia. Edwin M. Shook was notified of the existence of the sculpture and of the particulars of its discovery, information which he then communicated to R. E. W. Adams and to John A. Graham. Several years ago Adams was able to see the piece and to take photographs of it, from which Graham read the date. In spite of its recognized importance (Graham, n. d.: 15), this late monument has remained unpublished until the present time. During the summer of 1975 I was engaged in archaeological explorations in Northern Alta Verapaz, and Shook very generously placed at my disposal all information he had been able to accumulate concerning the sculpture. New photographs were taken by Edgar Luis Torres, and in September of that year an unsuccessful attempt was made by Mark Johnson and myself to reach the site of Chinaja on mule-back. The following year saw a second visit to Alta Verapaz, this time during the dry season, and we were able to effect a brief reconnaissance of the Chinaja area. The site is located on the natural frontier between the Southern Maya Lowlands and Guatemalan highlands, very near the boundary between the Departments of Alta Verapaz and El Peten. Chinaja is Kekchi for "small river" (Arriola 1973: 167), and the site correspondingly lies at the headwaters of the Quebrada Chinaja, a tributary of the Rio San Roman. The San Roman wends its way down a marshy, meandering channel to meet the Rio Salinas at a point only 36 kilometers upstream from the latter's confluence with the Pasion. The northernmost extension of the karstic range known locally as the Montana Tzululsechaj (Kekchi: "in the pine-forested mountain", Ibid: 634) rises to elevations of over four hundred meters above the level of the site only a kilometer to its south. The area surrounding Chinaja is only minimally known archaeologically, but the presence of important sites at no very great distance suggests that more are to be found: from Chinaja the site of Cancuen is only 21 kilometers east; Salinas de los Nueve Cerros 40 kilometers west; Aguateca, Tamarindito, and Dos Pilas lie between 40 and 50 kilometers to the north. When the Chinaja oil camp was built in 1959, an airstrip nearly two kilo- meters in length was cut through the jungle nearby. A number of artificial, stone-faced mounds were bulldozed, but one (albeit minus its cut masonry facing) was left on a small rise south of the southeast end of the landing strip. Workmen who were present during construction said that the sculpture described in this paper was removed from 40 the surviving mound, and that a second, very similar monument was also discovered in association with the first. This second sculpture was reportedly broken by bull- dozers, and its present condition and whereabouts are unknown. Atop the mound that escaped total destruction were found a few dressed, square-cut limestone blocks, but no other traces of sculpture or even of ceramics were encountered. The Chinaja sculpture is carved in low relief on one face, bearing a vertical column of nine large glyphs on the left and a human figure at the center and right. Carving is bounded by a peripheral raised border up to 5 cm. wide with rounded sides; this border is broken at the bottom and incomplete or eroded on the left side. The entire front of the sculpture is likewise eroded, and no fine-line incision or cross- hatchure can be detected. Portions of the front bear the marks of recent abrasion, which presumably occurred during its transport to Guatemala City, and these show up as white in the photograph. A horizontal brown stain crosses the figure's stomach above his belt. The sides of the slab are dressed, but its back is extremely pitted and eroded. Dimensions: length: 140 cm., width at top: 68.5 cm., width across broken bottom portion: 44 cm., thickness: 13 cm., maximum relief: 2 cm. A thin section examined by Dr. Garniss Curtis of the Berkeley Department of Geology and Geophysics revealed the stone to be anoolitic limestone with inclusions of organic origin and occasional fragments of feldspar crystals which are fairly well sorted as to size, probably windblown. Glyphs Al, A2 and A3 measure 13 by 13 cm. each; A4, A5, A6, A7 and A9, 14 by 14 cm. each; A8 measures 15 cm. high by 14 cm. wide. Glyph designations follow Thompson's (1962) numeration system: Al: 4 Lamat A2: 6 Xul A3: Main sign: 515; prefix: 87; suffix: 25. A4: Main sign: 764 (?); prefix: 1; suffix: 106. A5: Main sign: 751 with dot or hair bundle merged with forehead; suffix: 142. A6: Main sign: 501; prefix: 1; suffix: 87 (?). A7: Four-part glyph, unreadable: element at lower right may be 51Ob. A8: Main sign: 756 (?). A9: Composite glyph, Left: 32; Right: 1008 (?); suffix 142 (?). The inscription opens with the Calendar Round date 4 Lamnat 6 Xul, which would seem best placed at the Long Count position of 10. 2. 0.12. 8 owing to the stylistic simil- arities of the sculpture with other early tenth Cycle monuments from the Pasion River area. Proskouriakoff (1963; 1964) in her study of the Yaxchilan inscriptions, argues convincingly for the Identification of a glyph denoting "capture" and for a second glyph signifying "captor [of]" which is commonly inserted into the name clauses of individuals at that site. On the Chinaja monument, both "capture" (A3) and "captor" (A4) glyphs seem to be present, although A3 is lacking the postfix 181, and no cross-hatchure can be seen in A4. A6 is an lmix compound with unclear suffix. At Yaxchilan this compound 41 with suffix 102 "is intimately associated with names of captives" (Proskouriakoff 1963: 152), and if a similar situation prevailed at Chinaja a century later, then A5 might be interpreted as a name glyph or part of a name clause also including A4 and A6. A very tentative reading of at least the first part of the inscription produces the recording of the capture at 10. 2.0.12. 8 4 Lamat 6 Xul of the individual portrayed, possibly known as "captor of jaguar". The Chinaja sculpture portrays a nearly nude bound prisoner as its only subject. The figure is presented in left profile with his right leg fully extended and left leg bent slightly backwards. The left foot is missing, due to the damaged condition of the lower right corner of the stone, but the right foot and ankle are unadorned. The left arm is tightly doubled behind the back; the left hand is shown with palm forward and fingers clenched, thumb outermost. Although the right arm and hand are not depicted, the unnatural position of the left suggests most strongly that both arms were bound together behind the figure's back. In spite of the considerable erosion of facial features, the eye can be seen sunken back below a prominent brow ridge and projecting cheekbone, which gives the aspect of emaciation. The figure's nose is bulbous, and its bridge does not slope back to the forehead in a continuous line. The hair is quite long, and gathered in a tie behind the neck, after which it falls in distinct strands below the waist. A small "pompadour" curl frames the face from forehead to ear, and immediately behind and below the hair tie is a small hatchet-shaped projection, possibly a tassel. Issuing from the extended earlobe is a flare or tube in profile, and a necklace or collar of eight separate teardrop-shaped beads or possibly copper bells hang suspended from a thick cord around the neck and shoulders. The sole article of clothing worn, apart from the jewelry, is a loincloth tied at front and rear and supported by a wide belt with slashes in its lower edge that divides it into five sections. In front, the loincloth "tail" hangs to the knees, at which point it is knotted twice and then continues in three separate tassels to slightly above the ankles. The rear loincloth "tail" is shown in a rigid, unnatural fashion paralleling the bend of the left leg so as not to interfere with the latter's depiction. Other evidences of the somewhat limited technical ability of the sculptor are to be found as anatomical oversights; these include recurving the forehead outwards to meet the hair line, portrayal of the left hand, and in the poor joining of the neck with the shoulder. Proskouriakoff (1965: 488) notes that sculptures carved after 10. 2.0. 0. 0 exhibit a "definite decline in draftsmanship", and the Chinaja monument is no exception. Seibal Stela 1, with its positioning of the figure in profile, similar to the convention of the Early Classic period, is cited (lbid) as an example of the "relapse into archaic mannerisms" that also tend to characterize this time period and equally applies to the Chinaja sculpture. The Chinaja figure is similar to that within the central panel of Seibal Stela 3, 42 and to the figure on Seibal Stela 13; the former is also minimally dressed, has ankle- length hair, large beads and a projection from the hair tie behind the neck, while the latter also exhibits many of these characteristics plus the "pompadour" curl. John Graham (1971; 1973; n.d.) has described the non-Classic elements that set much of the sculpture of Seibal apart from the previous Maya tradition. Graham (1973: 213) suggests that Seibal Stelae 3, 13 and 17 all portray figures sufficiently destinctive to warrant their grouping together; the category offered is Seibal Non-Classic Facies B, dating to the second and third katuns of Cycle 10. The figures are "recognized by their waist- length or longer hair, by absence, with minor exceptions, of elaborate Classic Maya attire and accoutrement... the large bead necklace, and other features." Although prisoners on earlier stelae in the Pasion area (cf. Aguateca Stela 7 at 9.18. 0. 0.0) are similar to the Chinaja captive, the latter seems closer to the non-captive figures of Seibal Non-Classic Facies B and may even be a member of the same ethnic type characterized by them. The portrayal of captives or prisoners in positions of submission or disgrace is perhaps as old as the sculptural tradition of the Southern Maya lowlands itself. The Leyden plaque of the third quarter of the eighth Baktun provides us with an early example of a prone captive below the principal figure displayed. In sculpture of the ninth Baktun, prisoners may usually be identified by their smaller size relative to the principle figure, their lack of clothing, and especially by specific gestures of submission. For many captives, their status is also indicated by the suggestion of binding with rope or cord which does less to inhibit free movement than to symbolize captivity. An excellent example of this is to be found on the lower portion of Piedras Negras Stela 12 (9.18. 5. 0.0 ) where a series of prisoners are simply linked together by a single rope rather more "artistically" than practically, as their arms and hands are free. Less commonly encountered is the situation where prisoners are heavily bound and incapable of movement. Captives with both arms tied to each other behind the back are found at a number of sites during the last quarter of the ninth Baktun: Tikal Altars 1 & 8, Ixkun Stela 1, Aguateca Stela 7, and Yaxchilan Structure 44; S. E. doorway's upper and lower steps, N. W. doorway' s upper step. Unlike the Chinaja figure who stands upright, the captives with arms bound behind the back at these other sites are either kneeling, prone, or nearly prone. The exact function and precise context of the Chinaja sculpture is unknown. In its general composition and presentation of a single figure accompanied by an explan- atory text, the piece recalls the stela art of the late 9th and early 10th Cycles in the Pasion river area, and if it be regarded as a stela then it may be the first one known from this locality to portray as its sole subject a bound prisoner. Prisoners on Pasion area stelae are usually shown in quite subordinate positions in relation to the principal figure or figures, either within the same panel (Aguateca Stela 6) or in a separate and lower panel which the principal figure or figures stand upon (Aguateca Stelae 2 & 7, Dos Pilas Stelae 1 & 17, Seibal Stela 11, etc.). Examples of bound prisoners as the 43 sole subjects of sculpture seem at present to be limited to the "prisoner stairs?? of the Usumacinta (Yaxchilan) and Pasion (Tamarindito and Dos Pilas) river areas. Pros- kouriakoff (personal communication) is of the opinion that the Chinaja sculpture is an architectural panel. The relative thinness of the slab, the absence of a butt for socketing, and the report of a very similar counterpart from the same mound support this interpretation, as does the practice of placing carved panels (often in pairs) flanking stairways inthe Pasion river area. In light of our present lack of knowledge, recording the Chinaja piece as a "sculptured panel?? seems best. Hypotheses accounting for the non-Classic cultural intrusion at the sites of Altar de Sacrificios and Seibal have been advanced by Adams (1971; 1973) and Sabloff (1973; 1975) on the basis of ceramic evidence, and by Thompson (1970; n. d.) who makes use of ethnohistorical and other material. The best evidence for a foreign intrusion characterized by militarism is to be found in sculptural contexts (John Graham 1973; n.d.). Graham (1973: 217) poses the intriguing question of whether the people repre- sented by Seibal Non-Classic Facies A arrived at that site with those of Facies B, or whether they were not only separate groups but successive. Whatever the case, the presence -of an individual from the Facies B group on the Chinaja sculpture suggests that the invaders of the Pasion river area in Terminal Classic times were not content to control the sites of Altar de Sacrificios and Seibal but also engaged in warlike activities at the headwaters of the smaller streams at a considerable distance removed. The identity of the people in control at Chinaja In early Cycle 10 times remains a moot question. A military outpost at Chinaja would be admirably suited to command the upper reaches of both the Salinas and Pasion rivers if possessed of sufficient strength. Do we have here the southernmost extension of non-Classic Maya military power from Seibal, or, conversely, and as suggested by the depiction of the figure on the Chinaja sculpture as a captive, the failure of a non-Classic group to establish dominance in the area? Only further investigation can contribute answers to an historical problem such as this. 44 Bibliography Adams, R.E.W. 1971 The Ceramics of Altar de Sacrificios. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, Vol. 63, No. 1. Cambridge, Mass. 1973 Maya Collapse: Transformation and Termination in the Ceramic Sequence at Altar de Sacrificios. In: The Classic Maya Collapse, T. Patrick Culbert, ed. (pp. 113-163). University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Arriola, J. L. 1973 El libro de las geonimias de Guatemala. Seminario de Integracion Social Guatemalteca, pub. 31. Editorial "Jose De Pineda Ibarra", Guatemala C.A. Graham, I. 1967 Archaeological Explorations in El Peten, Guatemala. Middle American Research Institute, Publication 33. Tulane University, New Orleans, La. Graham, J.A. 1971 Non-Classic Inscriptions and Sculptures at Seibal. In: Papers on Olmec and Maya Archaeology. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility No. 13 (pp. 143-153). Berkeley, Ca. 1973 Aspects of Non-Classic Presences in the Inscriptions and Sculptural Art of Seibal. In: The Classic Maya Collapse, T. Patrick Culbert, ed. (pp. 207-219). University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. n. d. Some Final Moments of Lowland Classic Maya Art. Tulane University Symposium on Maya Art, 1972. (in press) Proskouriakoff, T. 1963 Historical Data in the Inscriptions of Yaxchilan, Part 1. Estudios de Cultura Maya, Vol. 3, pp. 149-167. UNAM, Mexico. 1964 Historical Data in the Inscriptions of Yaxchilan, Part 2. Estudios de Cultura Maya, Vol. 4, pp. 177-201. UNAM, Mexico. 1965 Sculpture and Major Arts of the Maya Lowlands. Handbook of Middle American Indians, Vol. 2, pp. 469-497. University of Texas Press, Austin. 45 Xabloff, J.A. 1973 ContinuityandDisruption during Terminal Late Classic Times at Seibal: Ceramic and oither Evidence. In: The Classic Maya Collapse, T. Patrick Culbert, ed. (pp. 107-131). University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. 1975 Excavations at Seibal, Department of Peten, Guatemala: Ceramics. Memoirs of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, Vol. 13, No. 2. Cambridge, Mass. rhompson, J. E. S. 1962 A Catalog of Maya Hieroglyphs. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. 1970 Maya History and Religion. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. n. d. Los Putunes en la Cuenca de la Pasion al Termino de la Epoca Clasica. Actas y Memorias, 41 Congreso Internacional de Americanistas. (in press) ,~~~~~~~~~ F- NC., 0,L % co l 0 lqt 46 Q a a. a L._ U - a -C a r- U) c CI -5 U)