FIGURES FORM REPERTORY The hundred-odd pages of illustrations presented here give a synopsis of pottery from the Yucatan col- lections. Five or six thousand individual specimens are illustrated out of an estimated original collection of somewhat under a million fragments. Chart 1 in- dexes these illustrations by site and by ware. Some indications of frequency of wares and forms are given in the graphs included in the sections on stratigraphy and seriation (charts 2-20). The ware descriptions should be consulted for detail whenever ware name s are capitalized in the captions. Uncap.talized terms are meant merely as descriptive. The use of line drawings as the sole medium of il- lustration has been dictated by the greater clarity and economy gained thereby. The great majority of mater- ial is sherd, and decoration if present is usually quite simple. Illustrative techniques are made simpler and comparison easier by a single method of presentation. Descriptions of surface appearances, never completely satisfactory when shown visually except possibly by color photographs, have been given verbally at times by reference to Ridgway color standards (Ridgway, 1912). Paste textures on fractures is shown photograph- ically on plate I. Reconstructions of vessel forms have been made when they were believed certain, and are indicated on the drawings. Drawings were made to full scale, save in a few in- stances. A camera lucida was used for some whole specimens; others were traced from project photo- graphic negatives. Sherd profiles were nearly all drawn, oriented, and their diameters measured by me in the field. I drew most of the reconstructions. Ink drafting and the arranging of the plates were done by various individuals, some seven in all, under my super- vision. I am thus directly responsible for any inaccura- cies in the illustrations. CONVENTIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS Scale is one-quarter throughout, unless otherwise indicated. Black, solid profiles indicate actual fragments; un- filled outlining indicates a reconstructed area of the profile. Reconstructions in some cases are made from fragments which may not have come from the same ves- sel. Radius of the vessel is shown by solid horizontal line with a vertical dash showing the center line. If there is no vertical dash, and the line end is dotted, radius is unknown but is longer than the solid line. Uncertain orientation is shown by a horizontally placed "V" between the radius line and the sherd pro- file. Slipped areas are shown in many drawings by enclos- ing commas. Painted areas are shown by hachure: orange by light diagonal hachure, red by heavier diagonal or cross ha- chure, black by black. Ware descriptions and captions often give closer color notations. Indicating the location of museum specimens: PM = Peabody Museum, Harvard University; MM = State Mu- seum, Me'rida, Yucatan; MR = Regil Collection, Me'rida, Yucatan. [109] FIGURE 1 Regional pottery from Coba', Yaxuna, and elsewhere including calcite and vegetal tempered unslipped wares, incised monochrome and dichrome, Thin Slateware. a b, 1-24, 28-_4 c: Unslipped jars. b, 25-27: Un- slipped bowls. d-f: Unslipped basins. g; i: incised Di- chrome. h: incised orangeware. j: Thin Slateware. k: incised Flaky Redware. . b; L. From Yaxuna. c-f: From Coba. g-i: MR of unknown provenience, Yucatan. k: MR Ghenes area. Notch rims a, 3 -.2, 25-27 occur plentifully in Yaxu- na III (late Regional) levels, cf. Thompson, 1939, fig. 66 (San Jose' IV), the other rims shown here are of this and later date save for a., 1, and b, L which are prob- ably Late Formative. Smith places b, 3, 4, 16 as of Tepeu form. b, 17 as Tzakol. The Yaxuna II Cenote de- posits yielded no unslipped jar rims and but few un- slipped fragments, and thus give us no clues to the striated jars of this period. L. This bowl technically belongs to the Thin Slatewares. It has a translucent slip of a dull orange color with painted red rim. It can be dated as probably Early Florescent from the finding of similar ware at Sayil (fig. 0O, k, .) and in Chenes site s. Coba: Unslipped jar rims as well as basin rims from Coba' are similar to those on Trickle on Flaky Red from the Yaxuna Cenote, cf. fig. 7,., b, suggesting an early Regional dating but cf. Thompson, 1939, fig. 4S (early San Jose' III). c 13 is of Yaxuna III type. A, 1-4 are large, but otherwise very similar to Late Formative monochrome bowl rims. Sherds shown under e are tempered with vegetal fibre. Vessels identical with this come from Ya- xuna, concentrated in the Cenote collection (Yaxuna II). The vertical loop handle is round in cross section. f: These sherds are tempered with coarse crystal- line calcite. g.: incised Dichrome jar. h: incised under orange slip. i: incised under cream slip with red paint. k: incised over red slip. Note that all three bowls are shouldered with deeply rounded bottom. g and k have flaky slips, h and i have adherent slips. [110] my b '9 6 f l I I I I I " t, ,, \ I ",\ N'' I O 17 -11 f ------- ------ ------ I i I I I I I , I IIIII k -) i 1 9 I - . . F-- - --.- - - I 10 FIGURE 2 Regional Coarse and Medium Redware from Coba'. Coba' Dichromes. a-e: Regional Coarse Redware. f g: Regional Me- dium Redwares. h: Coba' Dichromes. a; b: Platters are normally slipped interiorly and nearly to base exteriorly. Assignment of legs and bot- toms between plates and basins is uncertain. Note in- terior groove on plates and exterior fillet ridge, ex- tremely even, on both plates and basins, often thumbed on basins. Similarities with materials shown by Thomp- son (1939) from San Jos' are notable; cf. b , 37 with his fig. 38 (San Jos6 II), cf. many of these forms with his fig. 47 (San Jose III). ; d; e: c, 1-3 are jar necks, d, , 2 bear trickle paint and form a connecting link between the flaky red- wares and the slatewares in the use of trickle paint. Note that these basin rim forms are closer to the Ya- xuna late Trickle on Red than on early Trickle on Red, and they are similar to Medium Slateware of the Chenes area. For the thumbed fillets (L, 1-_5) cf. Thompson, 1939, fig. 59 (San Jose III-IV and IV) and Smith, 193T, fig. 10, , i, 9 (Tepeu). Basins are either exteriorly slipped, c, 4-22, 32-, or slipped only down to fillet, striated below, c, 25-28, e. g.-h: Slip covers basalmolding, g, 1, 15 bear scratched designs; nearly this whole group is recognized by Smith as Tepeu 1 type. L.g are red with cream mottling on a fine to medium textured paste, h has same paste, orange slip with red horizontal striping. Black on orange, and black on red are rare, basal moldings common. cf. f, zg with 8, h-k in Yaxuna collections which, however, lack the dichrome of h high frequencies of these types point to local manufacture. Shepard (1951, p. 243) has sug- gested, from temper determinations, that part of group h is imported, part native. [112] 1) *0,W0 V ;, - Al I - - - - - - s h w~~~~~~~~~d k l--T- - - - -- C- ss tJ \ t ,,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I w 7~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A w ' - 3 J.i _ : J b X\\ / Is - - -- - ^ w - 7 - 7m;MINI'M\g I \\\\X-\ -L--- I\N", M, 7" 71 I ( l'i FIGURE 3 Coba' Polychrome and two polychrome vases from Labna. a: This group from Coba', with possible exception of 21, is placed as Tepeu 1 by Smith. They lie well out- side the Yucatan ceramic tradition, but their frequency in rubbish suggests that they were made locally. Sur- faces badly worn and powdery, orange paste. For shapes, cf. Smith, 1936b, fig. 13. 12-14 (Tepeu 1). b, c: These two vessels from Labna, b excavated from under a chultun collecting basin, c from a tomb, are from their accompanying material probably Flores- cent in date. Smith cannot place them in his Uaxactun sequence. Excavated by E. H. Thompson (Thompson, 1897). Peabody Museum. [114] a 20 15 r 19 FA ri 5 F- F' - r- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I'VA '\?\\\ el, '91, -,W- !IX71,1111 ' ' "I Al "\M I 8 7 r- - - - - I= so ...6 " %A , 1% I?1? 14 1 J-8 FIGURE 4 Flaky Redware, monochromes and dichromes, from Coba', Formative Monochrome and Fine Slateware from Chichen Itza. a-c; e; g-k: From architectural groups at Yaxuna. d; f; 1: From Yaxuna Cenote. M n: From Coba. o; p: From Chichen Itza as follows: , 1, 5, j 11, 15, 7 19: From Caracol, o, 2, 4, 8, 9, 12-14: From Monjas, p, 1j4A, 47, 48, 50, 58-61, 7, 68: From Monjas, , 49: From Caracol, , 62-66: From Hacienda Cenote. a-c; e: Flaky Redware sherds, cf. fig. S, b, c for corresponding Yaxuna Cenote material. b, 1-7, 9, 10 probably jars, a, b, 8, c basin rims, d, 1-8, e, 5-15 bowls. f: Regional Medium Redware. g: Polished orange with dull black paint, probably cf. fig. 50, k, 10. h: Medium Slateware bowl foot. i: Regional medium mot- tled redware, 12 sherds of this shape came from the Cenote. .i Tepeu 2-style polychrome bases, accordlng to R. Smith. k: These sherds resemble the black variety of Gxkintok Thin Monochrome, cf. fig. 12, d, e, h. Smith classifies them as Chicanelhlike. 1: Thin Redware, a rare type. m-n: Coba' fine wares. m: Monochromes and dichrome bowls and jars. , 1: Red on coarse paste. n 2: Untem- pered grayish orange ware. n, 3.7: Medium blackware. o: Flaky Redware from Chichen Itza. , , 18 20: May be of Regional stage remainder Formative. p: Chiche'n Itza' Thin Slateware, This ware bears more resemblance to that from the Chenes than to the Puuc wares. Color is medium gray, with brownish to yellowish green tones on some pieces. It is Florescent in date. [116] <--//- ~~~~~~~~~1 ,/1 J J-*# S Moe i \\\ 0 ' 4 l; - 1t i i ' ,, ', it ----- - ?E:? =L !? - 1, --tj -Vo i ?E7 1:7- --l I I :=:- L I ?: ?F- - -0 I 4 _ __; _ I w A e / i/ t ~~~~~no- 40J- t 1/! U.T I-/-,Z_I ,J I 6/-} t R I). -- - - ___ __. }~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I ) I b -d i -- 1~~ M1 X?l 100i p I \\\\\I i-' I't) y IWIJ - I I I I p .i /I i I illigri A& FIGURE 5 Yaxuna and Dzibilchaltun Formative pottery. a-e: Formative Monochrome from Yaxuna. f: Form- ative Flaky Redware from Dzibilchaltun. a: Late Formative Monochrome bowl sherds, main- ly flare side, outbent rim, flat bottom. a, 3 and a, 5 are cream color, a, 8 buff, others red (Rufous to Car- nelian Red) shading to black. a, 4 is black, incised un- der slip. b: Bowls all with interior slip. All red save as fol- lows: b, 1 26 cream; b, 25, 37 black; b, 21 buff; b 33 has faint dark trickle paint; b, 3 9, 3 0 are unslipped ex- teriorly below the shoulder; b, 40 is decorated by gouged lunes made by a reed or similar implement. b, 41 is the only certain leg found; other cylindric frag- ments may have belonged to legs or spouts although no restorable spouts were found at Yaxuna. Smith calls b, 6, , 32 Chicanel-like. c: Jar sherds. All red except c, 4 black; c, 31 red interior, white exterior. Cuneiform pattern on ., 31 and , 32 made by an angled wedge-shaped tool; cL, 30 is incised on unslipped ground; c, 34 is gadrooned on exterior. Smith calls L i, 7, Q 21 Chicanel c 20 Mamom. d: All red save d, 8 white interior, red exterior; d I is deeply incised; d 20 incised on unslipped ground; d, 21, 22 incised before slipping; d, 18 red interior, white incised exterior. e: Formative Orangeware; i, 10 have trickle paint; 14 seems to be part of the leg of a cylindric vessel with unslipped interior. Leg cavity connects with vessel in- terior. Smith calls _, 12 Chicanel-like, 8, 10, 11 Chica- nel; 13 Tepeu. The Formative phase has unfortunately not yet yielded material allowing a complete and reliable re- construction of forms. The arrangement of sherds into vessel categories is at times uncertain. f: Formative Flaky Redware. Slip is red, paste gray save for I, 2 which have orange paste and may be Form- ative Monochrome. One fragment, not illustrated, seems an early Tzakol basal flange, surface color orange. These come mainly from the bottom of trench 2 (see map 7). [118] a -1 4 ^ w5 _ I ~~ j E ~ ~ z z ~ ~ ~ - W 8' 8 L IW 1 -T2 F . -_ _- I I A P 7 ~~~~~~~~~~~'I 1% qLw41 H - "~12 _______4 D~~~~ L i~~~~~ 2 8~~~~~ Y 9 _ _ _ _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J 192 7 1 N '~~~~~~~~~~~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 ~~26 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - -~~~~~~~*4 Us i,, -7 1 _____ Mist teJ - _ t O 3~~~~~~' --W tt~15 -- - ->-__- 1-2 r,w to I I ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~~--3Ml I d I r-- u- 1 .5 v--- I "*W0,-2W ,IV 4 , I I e , r m 1 14 - 14V , 41", bl5'Mbl6 r I I - - - - - - -- 23 ? 2?1 -if, - FIGURE 6 Flaky Dichrome and Flaky Redware with similar and associated wares from Yaxuna, Balam Ganche Cave, and Chiche'n Itza. Thin red on brown ware from Yaxuna. a, 1, 2, 4; d: Balam Canche Cave. a, 3 i e; f; : Chichen Itza. 6-16, 21-_9; _ k 1: Yaxuna Cenote. a, 17-_20; h; i: Yaxuna ruin._i: Unknown provenience. a, 8-15, 22-29; b; c: Flaky Redware. 1: thin red on brown ware. k: Unique piece. Remainder Flaky Di- chrome and similar wares. a: Note unslipped neck exteriors , 1, 4, 19, interi- or striation and bottle type dimpled bottom with dis- curvate bottom-side juncture, use of incision, puncta- tion, gouging to fill design areas. Surface alteration seems usually done before slipping, paint often crosses incised outlining, cf. figs. 63, 64 and Brainerd, 194w, for general discussion. Sherds not from Yaxuna Cenote are of less certain typology; note that they also pre- sent more variety of form and decoration. a, 3 is orange brown in color, atypical in shape, a, 17 is gouged, a, 18 shows the only twist design, a, 20 and a, 21 are curvilinear. b: Probably shows a mixture of jar and bowl rims, to judge by their radii. c 1-7: Basin rims, c, 8 bowl rim, , 2-16 bowl shoul- der s. b and c sherds bear allover red slip. Form of the bowl bottom is unknown. Note that both jar and basin rim shapes approximate the Trickle on Red from Yaxu- na Cenote (see fig. 7, a, b). d: Two bowl sherds. e f: Deeply incised through orange slip. h: Deep incising, black. i: Red used to ac- centuate incision, Smith identifies this as Chicanel. L. Orange below molding. k: Hand-modeled human face in brown clay, seems broken from a vessel side. This is the earliest anthropomorphic representation from Yuca- tan ceramics. 1: Thin red on brown ware. Appearance is not far from Thin Slate of which it may be a proto- type. 7 is cream colored with red paint. [120] I 3 s N- I FTL b ' --- I I I I I r- F?, ? I I ' '112 I I .1 1 06F 9 9, 10 I All, , 5e I/6 Q c I ? I , AM I "d' I '4 hr_,Y --- =__ I ,I k r//,/? ?' 22 MIDI 18 21 19 7`,?,, I FIGURE 7 Trickle on Flaky Redware from Yaxuna and Balam Canche Cave. a; b, 2-10, 12: Yaxuna Cenote. c: Yaxuna ruin. , 1, 11: Balam Canche Cave. a-b: Note similarity of jar neck form among the as- sociated Flaky Red and Dichrome wares, cf. fig. 6, a 8-15, 6, b. Also in basin rims between 7, b and 6, c. Basin bottoms were probably gently rounded, jar bot- toms as in the Dichrome jars (fig. 6, a, i). c-d: From trenches in Yaxuna north group (Yaxuna III). The jar necks, shoulders, and general shape in this group ap- proximate those on the associated Coarse and Medium Redware, cf. fig. 8, a, b. The one bottom found is also similar to the Yaxuna III redware. Basin rims, how- ever, are closer to slateware forms than to the local basins of their period, cf. fig. 8, e, f 7- g, 27, 28. The chief interest of these groups lies in their posi- tion between the trickle paint found in the Formative period and the Florescent slateware trickle paint which followed them. The paint of Formative times is often reversed in color and always faint, used over the rims of bowls. The pottery paint on this ware is stronger in color than any Florescent slateware paint save possibly for that on Holactun Slateware. Paint is also used in the same manner as in later times. The earliest Florescent basin, with bolster rims, and unslipped exteriors are close to these forms of group d (cf. figs. 10, ; 32, g). The only other examples of this ware yet found come from Acanceh (fig. 18, c I i) [122] a 1~ i \5 t.... b wI _1 "V 5 t::::: - 8 '7A /A--------- w ""'S,, j ,, ,, ,,,,S,',/'""'""" 1 \7/37 d ,,S',,, %__8 " w_< . t I I I - 4 1 6 19W 7 FIGURE 8 Coarse and Medium Regional Redware from Yaxu- na. a-c; e-g; 1: Coarse Regional Redware. d; h-k: Me- dium Paste Redwares. a-d: Jars. Types are close to Early Oxkintok Mono- chrome, fig. 11, a-c, which is Regional in date. Note notch rim, indented bottom, angular shoulder. e-f: Bowls and basins. Basin shapes are very like Early Oxkintok forms, cf. fig. 11, d-f, with sublabial flange, striated exterior, and ring base. Bowls, fig. 12, h and fig. 13, m, 1-8 also are near g, 12-22. Both basins and hemispheroid bowls also show similarities to Acan- ceh forms (cf. figs. 18, .; d g, 17-_2; 19, g, 5, .). i: .J k: Basal molding bowls are not duplicated in the Early Oxkintok collections, in which the base-side an- gle is sharper, the molding merely an extension of the basal angle. The Acanceh Coarse and Medium Redware bowls show much closer affinities with these (cf. fig. 18, i-k). These Yaxuna bowls are closer to Peten forms, the Oxkintok bowls to Puuc forms. On the basis of Smith's identification of this ware and of the accom- panying polychromes of the Coba collections as Tepeu 1, the Yaxuna Medium Redware must be dated later than the Early Oxkintok Monochromes. These collections seem to show considerable time lapse during their dis- position. The indications are that they were deposited during late Tzakol and Tepeu 1 times. The identifica- tions of Uaxactun types in the trenches bear this out. 1: Shapes of these approach those of Flaky Redware, bearing out the hypothesis of a long depositional period for these deposits. [124] 1) ( (I I - _ ---- - -- - vi f~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ St I~~~~~~~~/ t, 4,, / _ __ _ _ f :~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ -------- r- - V__ 00,0-4' / _J. 7/Kr f540pp , OF /h t -- k I k / ai, - ~ U. I-7EP 11 ----------------- - - I 2 - _j oo 4 , 11 I 11 r-- - -ionno, I F .i - - - .- - 1- r- ? I F?- IP j I ---------- I ------------ /I 5 k I I I I --------- --. -1 -1 --- --l I - O I I I r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4*" -W/, -*le,, 12 .1 L- FIGURE 9 Polychrome bowl sherds from Yaxuna, Acanceh, Oxkintok, Mayapan, Mani, and Chichen Itza. a, 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, j;j , 4, i, 7: Yaxuna ruins. , _, 4, 7, 9, X, 12--_17; b, j1-3, 6: Yaxuna Cenote. c; d: Acan- ceh. e: Oxkintok (low deposit). f: Mayapan. ?3 h: Mani. i: Chiche'n Itza (Monjas). Uncolored areas designate white or cream-colored slip, light tint is orange, dark tint is red, black is dark brown or black. a: R. E. Smith calls , i, 6 Tzakol. These, like most of the polychromes illustrated here, bear a glossy, brilliantly colored slip. b 4, i, 7: Bear a dull orange slip, waxy like that of the slatewares. Note that Yaxuna lacks the thin-walled hemispheroid polychrome bowls so common at Coba' (cf. fig. 3, a). c: Smith calls , 2 Tzakol 2 or 3; i, i, ? 1-10 Te.- peu 2; ._, 5 Tzakol 3. d: Smith calls d, 14 1, 17 1-2 Tepeu 2; d, 1- probably Tepeu 1; d, I 12 Tepeu 1 or 2; d, 18-20 probably Tepeu 2. d 9 belongs to a type found in Chenes site s. e: On grounds other than identification of these sherds, they should date Tzakol 3. f: Basal flanges probably date these with Tzakol. i: Bears a waxy slip like that of b, 4 5i 7 and fig. 60, k, 7. The small frequencies of these polychromes in the deposits, save possibly at Mayapan, suggest that they are southern imports. As such, R. E. Smith's identifi- cations provide valuable crossdatings with the Uaxactun chronology, which is in turn dated to the Maya calendar. It may be noted that a variable percentage, often high, from each site is not identifiable to Smith, suggesting origins other than the central Peten. For Yaxuna these polychromes do not give much aid in dating, but other sherds do. At Acanceh the samples are large enough to allow the placement of the period of dominance of Red on Thin Gray to be crosstied to Tepeu 2, thus also dating the main Dzibilchaltun occupation, in which poly- chromes are absent, presumably due to its northern position. At Mayapan the presence of Tzakol-like poly- chrome unaccompanied by Regional monochromes is discussed elsewhere. [126] a i s ~~~7 - 7 _ _ y S i!w - + 1 M _ | X3A iiii~~~~~ k, _ w,. A ds I :Nmmm mw d I -VI Y1 - L u %?, F I I 2 --so= - -W2r8W 33 w I e I_ f -F _F l i 10 9 1 h I I .......... ?1'471 19 . I Im/j/m j? 20illI > 12 -%w 'Aw 1 4 A 8 '09" u p-mm ANWIW,-"Ad f---- i i I 4 l 1 W15 1 1 i 14 dossEimemik L 16 6 1, 5 111111111111 p 'W 7,:-) .1 I i PRAim b 41- 3 _TIm"m 10 P", -- 9 PA WI' L-- - - Aga, MOML, Abhk. 12 A?l .W.,, 23 r 22 21 1 . -%Nevm- - ------ - --- ,r \\\l m ? ------ - - WOMMEMEN I / 4 1% 'A FIGURE 1 0 Florescent slatewares from Yaxuna. The forms of slateware found here differ in several respects from those of the Puuc sites. The jar forms, concave interior basin lips, and slab bowl legs all ar- gue for an early Florescent dating for most of this as- semblage, although sampling has thus far not been ex- tensive enough to completely rule out the possibility of regional variation rather than time as the major causal factor for these variations (see discussion, cap- tion of fig. 67). a-g: Medium Slateware. h: Thin Slateware. b, 6, 9-11, 30: This rim type occurs at Dzebtun, cf. fig. 35, a; and Mani fig. 32, a, , , , X, , 2, 32-37. c, 2-A, 15, 17: Basin rims with concave interior. This is the predominant form in Chenes, also occurs at Acan- ceh, b, 7-_j; Mani, g, 2-_Z, 12. c, 19 is of Yaxuna III form, cf. fig. 2, c, 5-2j; ., but in slateware. d-L: Thumb- nail decoration is frequent, also note flattened appliqued pellets and impressed circles. Note that all bowl legs found are slab. Cf. Chiche'n Itza' Florescent, fig. 67, Dzibilchaltun (fig. 15, a), Dzebtun (fig. 35, i-m), Coba (fig. 49, m, 1, 8). h: Thin Slate is more like that from Chiche'n Itza in color, than like that from the Puuc sites. [128] r- - rs~~~~~~~~~~W ,;to L - , %d ? _ -zzzzzzzzzj( Co J, N % ) ) N I I ) -AP Qw C ,,, r r , . --7-7---,, v 3 ",/ -)- I ??, I I -- ---- - -- - I ll?? I - I - - - I p FIGURE 1 1 Oxkintok Coarse Monochromes of Regional stage. a; b; c, 2-42: Jars ranging Cinnamon Buff to red. Paint when present is black. c, 23-26: Probably fit fragments like b, 10, i.& of these only 23 bears interi- or slip, lower exteriors are horizontally striated like c, 4 41. Note similarity of the jar form a to that of Yaxuna Regional Redware, fig. 8, a-c and trickle ware, fig. 7, dj and less strongly to Acanceh Regional Red- ware, fig. 20, c. d-f: Basins with sub-rim flange. Col- or mostly in buff range. Occasional black paint striping on rim. No flanges are thumbed. Cf. Yaxuna Regional Redware, fig. 8, e->, Coba' fig. 2, c-d Yaxuna Slate.- ware, fig. 10, , jj, Acanceh Regional Redware, fig. 18, c. Resemblances are closer between Yaxuna and Oxkintok: unthumbed flange, subangular bolster rather than rounded thumbed bolster rim as at Coba'. This assemblage (figs. 11-13) stands nearly unique in the Yucatan sequence. Its absence at all other sites (save for a trace at Acanceh) suggests a localized west- ern distribution. Its excellent stylistic development and high technical quality suggests a long-term tradition. [130] a r-----------__ r-------------------__- r - - - - - - - - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _I rIIIIIIIIII!1 ................. l> o .)' .. I, i N d f c I I -ft I L - - - - - FIGURE 12 Unslipped, coarse slipped, and thin monochrome wares. Oxkintok Regional. a-c: Unslipped. V: Coarse slipped ware. d; f; h-k: Thin Monochrome. a: Large jars. Smoothed, unstriated neck and lip. Some shoulders round, a few striated, several handles at shoulder-neck juncture. 28 bears vertical striations. The largest and heaviest of these jars (a, 1-12) likely belong to unstriated jars similar to the slipped jars of fig. 11, a-c. The remainder seenm to be from globular, striated jars; compare with notch necks froom Yaxuna, fig. 1, b, 1-7, from Coba', fig. 1, c, 13, Acanceh fig. 14, d, S-35, Mani, fig. 14, , 11-14, also cf. Smith and Kidder, 1943, figs. 17, e, 18 from the Motagua Valley. Notice occasional black painted rims in all these collections, which compare with painting on the Oxkintok slipped jars. b-c: These massive flare-sided basins are well out of the tradition shown by the other sites. Most bear ex- terior striation, some sherds may be from lids. Possi- ble similarities may be with Yaxuna, fig. 1, b, .2 Coba, fig. 1, d, 1 also cf. Smith and Kidder, fig. 18, c from the Motagua Valley. d e; g; h: Blackware bowls, exteriors of some are reddish. f: Blackware bowl floor with resist technique red circles. ., 3: In both shape and form seems Late Formative stage. If so, it is the only sherd of this hori- zon recognized at Cxkintok. i: Black very thin ware, striated exterior up to a slip extending 8 mm. below rim. Smith dates this Tzakol 3. ji k: Cinnamon Buff and Redware showing incised banding lines and design, vertical channeling, applied lozenges, and monkey faces (cf. whole specimen from Campeche, fig. 103, d). L 3, 14 18 are red with gray flecking. j. 18 is high polish blackware with preslip in- cising. A single blackware vessel from Kaminaljuyu (Kidder, Jennings, and Shook, 1946, fig. 70, e) is sug- gestively similar in form and decoration. [132] II X (1>77?7 ,~ "/1 19W /?=J A I a I r. r?? I I I I I 10 FIGURE 13 Slipped Regional monochromes from Oxkintok. a-.; j i: Oxkintok Coarse Monochrome. h: k-in: Oxkintok Thin Monochrome. a: Basins, either with flattened bottom or ring base. b-i: Basal break bowls, several with black painted border on interior of lip. Note variety of supports in- cluding in .g hollow perforated slab legs of oval cross section. Hollow slab legs are a Teotihuacan trait; this occurrence at approximately the same horizon is the only suggestion of cultural similarity recognized at Oxkintok; a leg which was probably similar comes from Holactun, see fig. 4S3, e, 9 a quite similar hollow slab leg comes from Piedras Negras (Cresson, 1937, fig. 47); I know of other rare specimens from Calakmul and Santa Rosa Xtampak. Color of the bowls ranges Cim- namon Buff to red. J. Shallow bowl and basin rims, with uneven blotchy gray to red firing color and rough slipped surface. k-m: Rounded bowls, red with fine, evenly distributed gray flecking, flecks average 1 mm. in size. Finish is highly polished, ware of excellent hard quality. [134] - - - -- -- - -h - I~~~~~~~02 _Wtjw@k==_ =, _ 244 39 \ 0j - - - 121 m A,~~~~~~~~~~~9 II ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~71 8~~~~~~~~~ I FIGURE 14 Unslipped pottery from Dzibilchaltun, Acanceh, and Mani. a; b: Dzibilchaltun. c d: Acanceh. e-i: Mani. All are striated body jars save b 4, 4 6-X; g and possibly a, 28-32 which may be bowls and incensarios. a; b: Nearly all Regional-Florescent date. Earlier types a, 1-4. Slab legs may belong either to jars or to the basin-like incensarios shown in b for which cf. fig. 19, a, b. Jar rims suggest certain Chenes and Rlo Bec area forms, and others, possibly of Chenes inspiration found in the Puuc cf. fig. 37, , 8-1; b, 30-36. a, , 27 are misplaced here; they come from Medium Slate- ware jars. c: Approach Puuc style of unslipped jar rim, cf. fig. 38. d, -10: are Regional. _d 2-5, -20-3 resemble Ox- kintok Regional, cf. fig. 11, b. Note use of black paint on rims of 4, 2 0, 35. 4, lo seems to have been made by impressing a cob of corn. 4, d may be Middle Mexi- can in type. e: Regional and Florescent stage forms. e 10-14 are certainly Regional. f 2-9: These forms, dating from the Middle and Late Mexican substages, were found associated with Coarse Slateware, cf. figs. 22, a, ; 93, a-c. [136] a d d IAi}iL? C (I I A 4 f (- ,E -- AP ^ All I I I, -, 4,- : wq Ii~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i FJKI _~~~~~~~~~~~~1 lwv;,- W ,,, w ' _,W I I -- - - -- I FIGURE 15 Slateware from Dzibilchaltun and Mayapan, un- slipped ware and slatewares from Chanpuuc. a-e: Dzibilchaltun. f-n: Chanpuuc. o-s: Mayapan. All Florescent save those designated below. a-_e; .-l o-r: Medium Slateware. i: r: Thin Slateware. m: Thin Redware .f-h' n: Unslipped ware. a: Basal break bowls. b-c: Rounded bowls; both these forms similar to Puuc and Chenes. d: Jars. d, 5 resembles Red on Thin Gray from same site, cf. fig. 20 e , 8 almost certainly Early Mexican stage, cf. fig. 71, c. The heavy rim jars, , 6-13, are commoner at Chenes than at Puuc sites. e: Basin rims. , 4, 8, 10 have the interior concavity at lip which character- izes Chenes form, , 9 is probably Early Mexican, cf. fig. 73, , 14, 24, remainder are Puuc style character- ized by angular lip, cf. figs. 43, 44. f-h: Jars, all prob- ably Florescent save for i, 5 and L o which appear to be Middle or Late Mexican. i: Thin Slateware..J: Jars. k: Basins. 1; Bowls; I 2 is basal break, others rounded. m: Bowls, m. 1 bearing black paint. n: Incensario, cf. figs. 19, a-_; 39, L 10. o: Medium Slateware basins, _o, Z Early Mexican, _1 3. unique, may not be basin rim. p: Jars; pE, I form is early, p, 7 is Early Mexican. W: Basal break bowls. r: Rounded bowls. s: Carved. [138] a I cV-~- l I I I1 I I * - ab mi, F r s --f " -a I " i 4?44 FIGURE 16 Holactun Formative Monochrome. The collections from Holactun show a higher fre- quency of surface alteration than any other Formative collections obtained. In all cases it seems to have been done before slipping. Slip adheres closely save in a few redware frag- ments, notably in b, j9 c, 6; d, 1, which show spalling and may be classifiable under Flaky Redware. Two types of paint occur: b, 4 shows marked similarity to later slateware painting technique. Painted areas are lighter than background. See fig. 31 for more Forma- tive Monochrome with paint of this character. b, 19 bears opaque Walnut Brown paint over a flaky red slip. This fragment may be intrusive, cf. fig. 13, i for similar material from the Regional stage at Oxkintok. All sherds are red, often showing buff or gray mot- lings save the following: 4, 3-? white; 7-2, 14 black; 13 dull red exterior, black interior; 15 23 black interi- or, white exterior; d, 2 red interior, white exterior; 18 black interior, red rim top, white exterior. These combinations seem to have been attained with two slips, a red and a white, with a greater or less degree of conr trolled smoke in the firing. It will be noted that when black slip occurs it is always interior; this could be obtained by inverting the bowl for firing and placing green fuel under it. Probably either red or white slip will permit a smoke black. Black, wherever appearing, shows crazing indicating slip shrinkage, white often shows dendritic discoloration, probably from roots dur- ing burial. Both white and red slips show dark mottling in areas as though from smoky firing. [140] a 2 L I AIF -I/ --N7?- - 6 1 i I I I 1 6 I ----a r _26 A 913 d ' I I 5 6 ZZ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I ? I2 _ _ _ _______ 21# 7 7 _' 717 1 i --3ff FIGURE 17 Formative Monochrome, Flaky Redware, and Di- chrome from Holactun, Mani, and Acanceh. a-d: Late Formative Monochrome from Holactun. e: Late Formative Monochrome from Mani (for re- mainder of Mani Formative, see figs. 30, c, 31). f-h: Flaky Redware from Acanceh, including Formative and early Regional forms and wares. a, 1, 7-13: Are blackware with preslip incision, all slips showing crazing. a, 2,. , 5, 6 are white slipped, 3 with white interior, orange exterior. b: Sherds are all redware save for 10 which bears a brilliantly pol- ished orange slip, and 5 which bears a buff slip. c: Formative Redware spouts, probably belonging to jars of fig. 16, .; all have oval cross section with no evi- dence of bridge to neck. d: 1. 3, 6 with black exterior, red orange interior slips, , 4, 5 black slip. , 5, shown as a lid, may be a sublabial flanged bowl rim. For fur- ther description of the above wares, see fig. 16 cap- tion. A single buff -colored, unslipped, thickened-lip bot- tle neck, similar to but thinner than those shown in fig. 30, c, 4-7, and identical with sherds found in Mid- dle Formative deposits at the Chenes sites sampled in 1949 came from these Holactun deposits. e: Formative Monochrome from Mani. 14-16 are black slipped, 16 bears incised lines, and spots of pink unfired paint. All remainder are red to buff in color. 1 2, 10, 18-20 show trickle paint design; 1, 10, 18 are slipped exteriorly only to the shoulder; 1 and 18 bear incised semicircles made by diagonally impressing a hollow cylinder. f; h- 12-.2: Flaky Redware save for f, ; 34 which are cream slipped ware. Slip of the Flaky Redware parts easily from gray to orange powdery surface. Coarse tempered paste. Note heavy Formative style flare and outcurve rims, also, i, 3.j-_4, basal break and basal flange rounded bottom bowls. The rim shapes of h. - 1, , 2-2& are characteristic of Flaky Redware and do not occur on Formative Monochrome at Holactun (see figs. 4, o., j-j; 65, .--, 8 for more of these shapes); they do, however, occur on the trickle painted Formative Monochrome of Mani (see fig. 31, , i, ?2,L i, X, 13_-X5, L)J. Compare these rim forms with early Regional forms on Flaky Redware from Yaxuna Cenote (figs. 6, 7) to which there seem to be stylistic similari- q ties. Trickle paint g, .10Q hi.L 31.. No exterior slip on .gL i; h,34 g 3, j-: Flaky Dichrome. All these rims have orange slip and an encircling red stripe on top of the lip, ex- tending variably over exterior or interior. Seem to be almost exclusively bowls and basins; some may be largq jars. [142] ai -- A liii ' IIW I '" I.uX , /K pi g -i#il>,X,M ff WI .f7 g~~~~~~~~~~~gr, i.A.. - . . 1 (1 b I - ---- r - - - - - I I V, PPA /.i I I I /I , #?"I'll I I d I---- C ! 1 2I fJ 1 . . -milli i 9 1 2 1 f ,- -, (L( 2 J, 44", 6 " I 4401, I)! --a I I I -- *- ,7-777777,. t ;,- I 18 1- - --- --- -- -- --- --- -- p 9 ?3 4 I L---?.A 11 35 34 FIGURE 18 Regional and Florescent slipped wares from Acan- ceh. a-i: Regional-stage wares. ii k: Florescent-stage war e s. a 1-7: Flaky Redware. c, 3 .: Trickle on Flaky Redware. Regional Coarse Redware: a, _-_l0 ., 2, 4-1 I ; e. Regional Medium Redware: d; g, 1-Lj h. f H 8: Cinnamon Buff slipped ware. i: Unusual decorated wares (see also fig. 61, c). j: Thin Slateware. k: Thin Redware. a Jars. . dj e 18: Basins. , 11-22: Basal break bowls. Lf g;i 2-14; k, 1-8: Rounded bowls.j 15-23; k, 9, 10: Beakers. The Coarse Redware shows considerable dark mot- tling, the Medium Redware shows pale mottling. f and g, 8 are like Oxkintok Thin Monochrome in color and finish, but shape, incision, and paint are distinctive. , 1 is incised blackware; iL 2 gesso over shinglelike ap plique'd surface (note a surprising similarity to a Chavin style sherd from Northern Peru, Bennett, 1944, fig. 30, b); L 3, 4 are probably incised Florescent Redware (cf. fig. 58); j, 6, ,7 bear a high gloss red slip over yellow paste, decorated by grooves and incised lines. [144] aII (I C ', In IrE (/, ,,_, E~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ b) I________- I _M .J i " 2#I-II NI _^^.wf _ _ R' I il ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - -- I ,i / 8 i~~ ~ ~ . {, -1 I\ t _~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4 - k MM-Ml I ? 2 Iii iI", ? I f, ;t'. S*1 \A - -00110 I ( ? -- -. 2 -..w- y , - I/ ,? ?- -?,-I 1. I I -- - - / ? I i I-,- - Ir---- ?\ ? 11 5 ? 2 - I i " 1-1 I ; I b:l 'I.,.- -:.- V- FIGURE 19 Acanceh incensarios and Stucco Fagade Temple ce- ramics, Mani Coarse Slate and unusual wares. a-c: Acanceh Regional-Flor e scent-stage transition incensarios. d-g: From Regional-stage deposit post- dating Acanceh Stucco Fagade Building. h: Unusual Regional-stage pottery from Mani Cenote. i: Coarse Slateware, Middle Mexican substage, from Mani Ce- note. a-c: Nearly all these sherds come from a concen- trated incensario deposit under a temple floor in trench 13, levels , , d. Forms, save c, more sphe- roid than Florescent-style incensarios, cf. figs. 39, 69, b. Plastic decoration on skirtlike encircling flanges and by applied conoid studs. Flanges vertical- ly grooved, thumbed, impressed by hollow cylinder, gouged into segments. Base usually a high, flaring ped- estal, , 13-18 also slab tripod, a, 12, 22. c is more similar to Florescent shape and decoration than are others, studded horizontal strap handles are unique. These incensarios all show evidence of a thick coat of white paint, applied after firing. d: Unslipped jars. For shape cf. fig. 12, a Oxkintok Regional. Irregular black rim smudging occurs in Chenes Regional stage (unillustrated) on unslipped lightly and heavily striated jars and may be related to these. e: 1-4 unslipped, remainder Flaky Redware bowl and basin fragments; for 4 cf. fig. 11, f. Also cf. figs. 6, , Early Regional Flaky Redware from Yaxuna Ce- note. Several of these forms appear Late Formative. e, 11 is probably a basal break bowl fragment, cf. fig. 13, ij L 2 also compares closely with black painted Ox- kintok Regional basal break bowls. g, 3: Unquestionably Tzakol polychrome basal flange Whole collection, which postdates Stucco Fagade Build- ing, contains nothing later than Early Oxkintok assem- blage. , 1: Medium Redware with black painted design;h, 2: Medium paste, high polished red-orange slip with delicate pressed vertical channeling, found as a rare type in Chenes; L, j medium paste red slipped ware with black paint and lug; h, 4 medium paste, red slip with black painted design; h, i, 6 Medium Paste Red- war e. i: Coarse Slateware, Middle Mexican substage, jars, basins, rounded bowls, grater bowls, cf. figs. 20, a, b; 24; 92. [146] I . . : .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -, i w X L-,,A -YA.I.ij, { - _ ,,.,,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~p __ s 9y c __@ < ~~~~~~~~~~~- -- - - - - - - -! - ( c __ w- _ ___ _ { d C . _ _ - - f * 2 v . _ 9 . 1 ' 1 - W _ . L 3 h~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Is ov= t7K7 h d0PI3 -Slo 29 'i \ A p 7=?.?-- ---- j?"4 ?.,e I 0 !,,., I r- I I 1( ---dP--- I I 5 I I I.i A / 1- A --A FIGURE 20 Coarse Slateware and Red on Thin Grayware from Dzibilchaltun and Acanceh. a: Middle Mexican subphase Coarse Slateware from Dzibilchaltun. b: Coarse Slateware from Acanceh. c: Coarse Regional Redware jars from Acanceh. d: Re- gional-Florescent Red on Thin Grayware from Acaln- ceh. e: Regional-Florescent Red on Thin Grayware from Dzibilchaltun. a; b: For comparative material see fig. 19, iL b: Note folded-back basin rims 14, 16, 18, 19; rounded heavy lips on rounded bowls, a, 10.12 , 33-37 cf, fig. 92, m; exclusive use of spheroid cascabels as tri- pod supports, flare-pedestal based cylinders, b, 22, 23, 35, cf. fig. 92, j, j. also greater elaboration of painted design than used in Early Mexican trickle paint decoration. c: Coarse Regional Redware. This ware shows red slip often darkened, firmly adherent to reddish paste. , 1, 17 bear striated areas below a groove at the keel, cf. fig. 8, a for similar groove. See bowls of same ware, fig. 18. R. E. Smith notes a marked similarity between these jars and those of Uaxactun Chicanel in both ware characteristics and form, a puzzling simi- larity since this pottery must date late Tzakol-Tepeu 1. Also note similarity to figs. 8, a-nj 11 a b 4; e; f: Red on Gray Ware. R. E. Smith marks simi- larity between these groups and Uaxactun Tzakol wares, although I believe this ware contemporaneous with Te- peu 2. The pottery of group c is stratigraphically lo-ver than that of group d and they are no doubt closely related; in fact, intergrading between the two wares is evident in slip, paste, and form, Note dent jar bottoms in common between these groups as wvell as with Yaxuna and Oxkin- tok Regional ware jars, figs. 8, a-d, 11, a-c. Although both these wares are associated with slateware in all samples dug thus far, some of the Coarse Redware oc- curs in nearly slate-free collections and likely precedes slateware in time at these sites. Note similarities in form between the Red on Thin Grayware bowls and Me- dium Slateware bowls, fig. 45, g, and between jars 4, 13-18 and figs. 10, a, bi 15, p, 7, 8, 9; 21, a 40, f{ 13. Dissimilarities between 4, Acanceh, and e, , Dzibilchal- tun, are presence in d of outcurved cylindrical jar rims, 4, 13-18, and of slab basal break bowl legs, d, 19, 22 at Acanceh, both features pointing toward Medium Slate- ware. These features suggest that the Acanceh sam- ples of Red on Thin Grayware represent a later-lasting occupation than those from Dzibilchaltun and suggest form criteria for distinguishing early Medium Slateware from late. Acanceh Coarse Redware seems to antedate the Red on Thin Graywares, and follow Oxkintok Region- al. [148] - 4 b It I rr uav' h 21 wh~~~~~ ~~~~'VvY~~~~2 e I J8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ , z ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7 / N,12 _ _ lty@7 , b z 1 7 t2 f 7 ' | w w ____~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I ; Er I I I I - 4 15 17 FIGURE 21 Medium Slateware and Thin Slateware from Acan- ceh. a 7 8:, 9: Early Mexican. e: Likely Early Mexican; remainder Florescent. a; ; f: Medium Slateware. d: Thin Slateware. a; e: Jars. b: Basins. c: Basal break bowls. d: Rounded bowls with taper lip. f: Rounded bowls with exterior bevel lip. Several of the Medium Slateware forms are rare in Puuc collections, common in Chenes collections, and thus suspected of being early. Examples: a, 1-i, 21-27 , 8-15. In the basal break bowls the slab legs are similar to Dzibilchaltun forms (cf. fig. 15, a), and to Florescent Chiche'n Itza forms (cf. fig. 67). The flat-bottomed, taper-lipped Thin Slateware bowls (4) are similar to Regional Redware forms (cf. figs. 18, ; 19, h, i, i) and to Thin Slateware forms in the Chenes, and therefore may be early. These bowls are also thicker and darker in color than most Puuc Thin Slatewares, closely resembling the associated Medium Slatewares and the Chenes Thin Slateware. Other forms on this plate approximate those of the Puuc collections save for e, which is likely Early Mexican (cf. fig. 72, For a fuller discussion of chronological and regiorn al variation in Medium Slateware, see captions for figs. 32, 67. [150] b , _ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~172 5 IW/, (Iiw I IF'P 2 FIGURE 22 Unslipped jars, cauldrons, and incensarios from Mayapan. Middle and Late Mexican substages. a; c: Jars. b: Cauldrons. d; &: Incensarios and bowllike forms. a: Save for a, 11. 39., 4; _, 1: Thin ware jar rims with vestigal to notch lip, characteristic of Late Mexi- can substage, cf. fig. 93, a-c. For the zo6morphic lugs a, 36-38, which come from jars of the above type, cf. Coarse Redware examples, figs. 94, f 21 26 96, c. a, 1; _j _, _9; , 29-33: Cauldrons with incurved rims, probably representing the beginnings of a tradition continued in the Colonial stage (see fig. 33, f-i) and which still survives in the modern, locally made pot- tery cauldrons. Rendon (1947, pp. 107-108) suggests that the modern Maya name for this form, kum may come from Nahua comitl. I have no judgment as to the validity of this derivation. If true, it suggests a plausi- ble origin for the form during this period. , 2-_, 10- 16, 24-28: Varied jar necks and rims, most of which are stylistically similar to the Early Mexican substage form (cf. fig. 68, a-c); on the basis of the absence of other wares of that horizon and presence of Coarse Slateware, they are probably Middle Mexican substage in date. a, 39-41: Regional-stage forms, cf. fig. 14, d. c, 17-23: These bottoms must belong to the shallower vessels shown in d and e. d: These medium-sized to small bowls seem to find their closest parallels in the unslipped bowls shown in fig. 96. Note a cascabel leg on 4, 17. Absence of basal angles is notable. Thickness of wall and large diameter of some of these makes them intergrade with forms in e. See fig. 70 for comparable material from Chiche'n Itza. e: Large shallow bowl or platter rims. The recon- struction of these vessels is uncertain. They may be. long with the trumpet bases shown in f and g, or may have ring bases or round bottoms, see c, 17-23. Some, at least, probably belong to hourglass incensarios, cf. figs. 69, 70 for examples. No comales can be docu- mented from the Mayapan collections. These forms are all too deep, diameters are not large enough, no lug handles were found. f: g: Incensario rims and trumpet bases. Possibly some of these fragments belonged to drums. Differen- tiation between tops and bottoms of vessels is uncertain in most cases. Trumpet-base vessel junctions belonging with these fragments are shown in fig. 23, d. Both hour- glass incensarios, see fig. 69, 70, and figurine incen- sarios, see figs. 29; 97, f.L a-9; 98-102, are probably included among the fragments shown here in f and Z. [152] a1 >(/ ]W /~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ s s ' / /,I I 41, V i i I i I 00-1,1111- I I ------ I 000,00 O 2 ,,v 'N' ----------- I -Al 071 FIGURE 2 3 Coarse Redware and unslipped ware from Mayapan, dichrome from Acanceh, Mani, and Mayapan. Late Mexican substage. a; b; c, 1-15, 29; d; e: Mayapan. , 16-., 26-28: Mani. c, 25: Acanceh. a: A miscellaneous assortment of Coarse Redware. 14 and 15 are probably bulbous jar necks, others dif- ficult to reconstruct. b: Also Coarse Redware. 1-3 seem to be incense ladle handles. 6-8 are secondarily ground fragments from jars. Remainder vessel legs. c: This Red on Orange painted pottery differs from the Tzakol polychromelike pottery of various sites in several particulars. First it bears no black paint. Most reliable diagnostic is the slip which is not glossy, and ranges toward a buff color much less vivid than the orange of the Regional polychrome. Pottery of this Red on Orangeware was also found at Chiche'n Itza, see fig. 94, A. One fragment of this pottery from Chichen Itza, fig. 94, _, 47, bears black paint. Note the distinc- tively Late Mexican leg forms of c, 11. Jars and a variety of bowl forms are shown. Somewhat similar to this Late Mexican subphase painted pottery in ware characteristics, but showing difference in its design, is the Colonial pottery shown in fig. 34, c, 8, 9. d: Incensario bottoms and pedestal junctions. Note evidence for perforation in bottoms and sidewalls in many specimens. See fig. 22, f .gfor matching rims. e: Cylindrical incensarios with trumpet bases and applied disc and fillet decoration, cf. fig. 97, a-_, from Chich6n Itza'. This form, because of its presence at Mayapan, where Early Mexican substage wares are nearly absent, is suspected to date Middle Mexican sub. stage or early Late Mexican substage. f: Incense ladles, which came into use during the Early Mexican substage, continued through Middle, per. haps into Late Mexican times. This group differs from the earlier form, fig. 68, f. in their heavier construc- tion and larger handle-bowl perforation. [154] I E mfn _ fl ~~~~ 2Q A,w rn '13 .m -f ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ mm mm25 , i 22s>> hIhhII~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~**4 I ,/7'W ' ,- \~~~~9 10 m qc - N 11 8 Ny U if IL. Ov lqw r- a FIGURE 24 Coarse Slateware from Mayapan. Middle Mexican substage. a: Basal break bowls and grater bowls. 7 and prob- ably 16-18 are grater bowls. b: Resist smudged, col- ors reversed on bowl floor. c: Jar necks and shoul- ders. d: Pedestal (see discussion of this form in fig. 71 caption). e: Basin rims, handles, and bottoms. f: Painted designs from jar shoulders (for positioning see fig. 92, a). This mnaterial is comparable to that sh-own froom Dzibilchaltun and Acanceh (fig. 20, a; b), and from Chi- che'n Itza' and elsewhere, fig. 92. A considerable carry- over in shapes and designs from the Medium Slate- ware of the Early Mexican substage, cf. figs. 71, 72; 73, a-d; 74, may be noted. Bowl rims seem to have be- come more complex, as have jar shoulder designs. The ware is thicker, perhaps due to the coarser paste. Neck grooving on jars is not found in the Coarse Slateware at Mayapan, but has carried over at Chiche'n Itza (fig. 92, f 11-13). The elaborate bowl floor design of b is reminiscent of those on X Fine Orange bowls, cf. fig. 81, a x. Several jar and basin rim shapes which carry over from Florescent to Early Mexican slatewares seem to have disappeared by the Middle Mexican sub- stage. All of the above trends are made uncertain by the small size of the samples. [156] a ba I,M I ~ ~ ~ ~ =Z~~I iiiiZiiiiijI _c I< 7- 7 9'n f T7 I _f 7 f -11 zZJ to I . r II I" I '9.I 0 -, qb(- ( b*^?,'',.~~~~ ,' I I., I I I . cht~ to q 'O Ilk Is @f d't l l II I , I .- 20 L%Z% r U U. - -,; .1, ,?. .414? .1, .1 8 17%pL*Wdt VCm,:4k.--- II 1- , I,( a is A/5 --------- ------ 0 0 * A -w 1.1 14 Vk-,? ? ? 19 8 -----2 ------------ P -Imr- - - __- - "I-4 , - -.11.1 ('z % .!_75.15-1 0 We a - m l In #,-" %I 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I !17 1 18 19 FIGURE 25 Coarse Redware jars from Mayapan. Late Mexican substage. a: Vertical incised grooves on jar necks are absent in Coarse Slateware, but present in the Florescent stage and Early Mexican substage (see figs. 40, e. , 20 72, k4-20). Remaining neck types continue the trends shown in Coarse Slateware toward lower, more notchlike neck profiles, less certainty of curvature. The internal horizontal grooving is new, ?, 1-i, and unique to this horizon. The exterior offset which leaves a hooplike band, c d, perhaps is a precursor to the Colonial bulbous lips; fig. 33, a, b, d, 1 might be con- sidered stylistically an intergrade. , 1-5 may not be- long to jars. s; x: Dented and inset bottoms continue in use through the Colonial period, and seem to have been in use in Middle Mexican times (fig. 24, e, 15). Early Mexican jar bottoms are not available for comparison. [158] I ~ ~ ~ nt7 I I Irr l'7 T(' 2 I twrttr~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 7~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ r / ( / f~~~~~~~~ I-1 p x I I a I I I I I f 8 9 PI la L . FIGURE 26 Coarse Redware bowls and grater bowls of the Late Mexican substage, from Mayapan. a: Grater bowls. b; c; d: Rounded and basal break bowls. The grater bowls have three rattle feet and an in- cised pattern on the floor, usually in an unslipped area. Note shallow open shape, as opposed to more incurved rim of Early Mexican grater bowls (fig. 74, i). For a discussion of this form, see fig. 74 caption. The bowls are smaller in diameter and deeper in proportion than most of those which preceded them. Note interior grooving (C, -15- 27-31) not unlike that on the necks of the accompanying jars. Rounded bowls are less common than basal break; all seem to have borne tripod legs. For further discussion of this form, see fig. 94 caption. The bowl skirts are of some interest. They may in- dicate influence from the imported Mayapan Fine Orange- ware (fig. 28, a-c), and their decoration seems definite- ly derived from it; but these seem more similar in form to skirts on barrel-shaped Medium Redware vessels of Early Mexican substage from Chiche'n Itza (see fig. 86, a, b, and caption). The legs of this group show both vari- ety and a series of distinctive characteristics. None have the constricted neck and spheroid form of the Early Mexican substage. Hollow and solid truncated cones are a major form; sometimes two perforations were placed vertically. Stepped slabs and effigy-head legs also oc- cur on bowls of this ware (see captions for figs. 94, 95). Note that several of these legs are set into a circular groove cut into the bowl bottom (see fig. 85 caption for discussion of this technique). [160] i i n-virJ M SSIDD19 2 b FIGURE 27 Figurine incensario fragments from Mayapan and Mani. Coarse Redware from Acanceh and Mayapan. All Late Mexican substage. b: Mani. h, 1: Acanceh. Remainder from Mayapan. a; b: Are unslipped, remainder of Coarse Redware. a: Hurnan head, from a figurine incensario, see Morley, 1946, plate 81, b for halftone. Paint in five colors applied after firing. For possible modern sur- vivals of this practice on figurines, see fig. 93, b , also Lacandon incensarios (Tozzer, 1907). Blue was the favorite color used on such postfiring painting and occurs on small bowls as well as on figurines (see Tozzer, 1941, pp. 117-118 for origin and significance of this color). b: Figurine incensario, cf. fig. 99, b. c, 1-3.: Orange slip color. Probably from a single vessel. No whole specimen with this postslip scraped background is known. d: This is unique in the Mayapan collection. Clas- sic-stage rectangular boxes are known. (See Smith and Kidder, 1943, p. 145, and Drucker, 1952, p. 112, for examples.) A Late Mexican bowl from the Chichen Itz4 Cenote is rectangular (fig. 96, o). e; f: Animal heads from effigy vessels. f is the up.. per jaw of a reptile and corresponds quite closely to a large carved stone fragment (as yet unpublished) from Mayapan. g: See caption of fig. 95 for a discussion of effigy- head vessel supports. h: Fragments from effigy vessels. Cf. fragments in figs. 79, 88, 89 of Early Mexican wares, and plumbate effigy vessels in Shepard, 1948, etc. i: Preslipped incised fragments, cf. fig. 95, a, 96, c. j. k: Basinfragments. Cf. fig. 94,g, 5-10, andthe simi- lar Coarse Slateware fragments in fig. 24, e. k, 1, 2, are unrestorable on present evidence unless they belong to pedestal-base bowls similar to the Colonial type shown in fig. 34, e. If this style of vessel is of Mexican mainland inspiration, as Rendon (1947) believes, it is more likely that it was introduced before rather than after the Conquest, but these fragments are certainly no proof that the form was present in aboriginal Yucatan, [162] j I a f xQ@'' b32 8iI:1 Z. white [ tan red bl . s ._u .......... ..... ....., ,., b ( greep c \-, \+ \-4~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ d e h 'I i k (,4;N I, I -P. -gm N lll? 6 1 .1 7 8 ---------------- A&I I I II .1 11 1--l I AMMI- I 5 FIGURE 28 Fine Orangeware from Mayapan and Uxmal, Fine Grayware from the Puuc, Chichen Itza, Acanceh, and Dzibilchaltun. a; b; c, 8-13, 15, 16, 18: Mayapan Fine Orangeware from Mayapan. c, 1-7, 14, 17: Chiche'n Fine Orange- ware from Mayapan. d: X Fine Orangeware from Ux- mal. e: Fine Grayware, e, 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 from Uxmal, e, 2 Kabah, e, 7, 8 Holactun, e, 9 Chiche'n Itza, Monjas. f: Fine Grayware from Acanceh. g: Fine Grayware from Dzibilchaltun. a: Basal break bowls and effigy-head tripod vessel supports. cf. fig. 89, t for whole vessel, similar save that it has close-spaced notching on the skirt. Note that a, 23 and fig. 26, d (Coarse Redware) show notched skirts. cf. fig. 103, k 1 for quite similar pottery from Cintla, Tabasco. Alberto Ruz has shown me many frag- ments of similar wares which he has excavated from the Campeche coast; Ruz (1945) mentions orange ves- sels with effigy legs from Xicalango (p. 68) and Tix- chel (p. 69), and with skirts and effigy legs at Champo- ton (p. 70). These three sites all have strong connec- tions in late pre-Conquest Yucatan history. Mayapan Fine Orange is almost certainly an import from the Campeche-Tabasco coastal area. Characteristics are the thickened lip with slightly concave profile interior- ly at lip, and irregularity of wall thickness coupled with extreme wheellike evenness of horizontal con- tours. The skirt is placed distinctly above the basal break; bottoms are quite flat, exterior decoration is by vertical incised lines and an incised banding line at the attachment of the skirt. Occasional interior line decoration in black paint links this group to c, 9-10. Effigy-head supports were made by pressing clay into a mold, then filleting legs to bowl bottom. cf. figs. 27, .g; 95, b; for such supports on Coarse Redware, fig. 103, k, 1 8, 9 on orangeware from Cintla, and Wau- chope, 1948, fig. 57, k, m-s for Zacualpa, Guatemala. Ruz (1945, p. 68) describes an orangeware from Xica- lango which bears anthropormorphic and zo6morphic legs, and thus establishes this (which he dates with Toltec Chichen Itza) as a Late Mexican deposit. See Wauchope, 1941, for closer description and for a dis- cussion of the general distribution of effigy-head ves- sel supports, and fig. 95 caption for a discussion of their dating. b, 1, 2: Rounded bowls with encircling red and white stripes; b, 3-9 cylindrical and pyriform vessel rims showing incised and plano-relief design. Cf. these forms with fig. 103, 1j 11-16 from Cintla, Tabasco. , 1: Jar rim; .,, 2, , 16 plano-relief fragments; c, 4-_i; _, 10 basal break bowl rims, resembling Tol- tec Chichen style (X Fine Orange), c, 5 incised through black slip, cf. c, 8 and fig. 81, a-v. It will be noted that vessel sides are heavier and lower than the ma- jority at Chichen Itza, and bottom is rounded rather than flat as are the majority at Chiche'n Itza. Speci- mens at Chiche'n most closely matching these are fig. 80, c, d, ij A hypothesis that these shapes are late at Chichen Itza is supported by the association of fig. 89, s with fig. 89, t of definite Mayapan style, at Uaxac Canal. Although no fine orange pottery has been found certainly associated with Coarse Slateware in the small samples from that horizon. These styles of fine orangeware probably belong to that horizon. -, 8-10: Rounded bowls with black painted decora- tion. a, 20 has similar rim shape. , 13 incised grater [164] bowl bottom, cf. fig. 26, a in Coarse Redware and fig. 80, 1; ; ; in Chichen Fine Orange. p, 18: Note that painted lines are approximately the thickness of those in c, 8-10 and are distinctive in design, whereas de- signs on c, 17 and d, 1 2 resemble the Fine Orange of Chiche'n Itza' both in thickness and design, cf. figs. 76- 81. These combinations of attributes allow the sorting into types listed at the beginning of the caption. The above suggests that the span of X Fine Orange- ware (Brainerd, 1941) outlasted the time span of Medi- um Slateware in Yucatan. The absence of plumbate at Mayapan suggests that this ware did not outlast Medium Slateware, although the evidence is not certain since plumbate never was as common in Yucatan as was fine orange, and our Middle Mexican samples are not large enough to make its absence definitive. Certainly, plum- bate did not last into the Coarse Redware horizon; our collections of that horizon at Mayapan are large enough to be significant for absence of plumbate. e-g.: For other samples of fine grayware, cf. figs. 35, bk; 36, b, d, e, g, i and possibly f which ranges to orange in color, and 53, k. Pottery related in both form and decoration, but probably not in ware, comes from Yoxiha, Chiapas (Blom and La Farge, 1927, pp. 226 et seq.) and from Piedras Negras (University Museum, Phila., coll.), and more generalized similarities may be seen in Mo- tagua Valley pottery (Smith and Kidder, 1943, figs. 27, a; 32). Tres Zapotes blackware (see Drucker, 1943, figs. 35, 36) shows enough form similarity to confirm the Piedras Negras and Yoxiha suggestion of western affiliations for this ware. Vessel shapes of fine grayware may be classified into several groups with correlated decorative tech- niques. Most numerous are beaker-shaped vessels having either a flat base, fig. 36, i a rounded base with spherical tripod cascabel legs, fig. 36, 4, or a double rattle base with flat floor and convex, perforated bottom, centrally flattened to allow firm placement. Cascabel tripod fragments like those of Yoxiha were not identified in excavations, but one specimen from a Yucatan collection is known (fig. 36, d). One annular base fragment, fig. 53, k, 5, was found; paste may be atypical. Wall form most commonly faintly outcurved from a nearly vertical juncture with base. This form group is most commonly decorated by incision, line bordering the lip on the exterior, and by more elaborate incised patterns; most distinctive design shows a mon- key incised in profile, enclosed by vertical panel form- ing lines, figs. 36, , c; 28, g; 37. Background is often relieved by punctation, some- times in linear patterns (cf. fig. 36, d and Blom and La Farge, fig. 189, Yoxiha specimens). See Thompson, 1939, pp. 121-122 for discussion of use of punctation and note that his specimens (San Jose III-IV) approxi- mate ours in time; also cf. his fig. 73 for similar shapes and incision in black ware. Also see Thompson, 1931, p. 227, pl. XL VIII, for a cylindrical vessel with markedly similar monkey design with rocker-stamped background and a glyph band resembling glyphs in fig. 57, b. This use of rocker stamping is later than most occurrences of this technique in the New World high culture area. Use of punctation within areas enclosed by incision is also found in Incised Flaky Dichrome which dates earlier than these wares, see figs. 6, a, 3 20 _ef 66, a 8. Incision is also found on beaker- BRAINERD: THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL CERAMICS OF YUCATAN shaped fine gray vessels in simple geometric patterns, fig. 36, g, L1 also in more elaborate curvilinear pat- terns including decorative glyph forms such as in figs. 28, pg; 34-36, which may be related to designs on the fine orange which is found associated with fine gray at Dzibilchaltun (see fig. 59, &g). A second vessel shape is very close to the Medium Slateware Flore scent-stage basal break bowls. Bottom is flat, rim is heavy with distinct outbend, e, 1, 6g 58-70. Evidence of cascabel supports show in e 68-70. Only decoration known on this form is incision as shown in fig. 36, , but this specimen may be either fine orange or a poorly fired fine gray. Other vessel shapes are flat-bottomed basal break bowls and beakers with no legs, and walls which are horizontally fluted or channeled, figs. 35, b; 28, g, 5 6 Rarer forms are .g, 2-4 pyriform or barrel shape, g 27 cylinder, g, 1 bowl with external overlap, figs. 35, e 103, j wide-mouth jars. 165 2~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 7 >~~~~--4-1 \#~~%# "I FIGURE 32 Florescent medium slateware and thin slateware from Mani Cenote. a; b: Jars. c d4 e: Rounded bowls. f; W: Basins. h: Basal break bowls. All this ware falls within the dark- er color range of slatewares, Ridgway colors run 1561111, 15|1, 1311 with areas showing high lustre 5"1". Black paint is sometimes dull, sometimes lustrous. For light-colored slatewares from Mani, see fig. 49, jL-. e: On basis of form is classified as Thin Slateware. Ware is identical with that of the other forms shown. a; b: Jars of two major types. a (also see figs. 35, a; 36, c; 49,.) is large, with loop handles arranged for carrying on the back by a line across the shoulders or forehead. A miniature jar of this form, which perhaps was part of a figurine (Regil collection, unillustrated), shows a cord passing through the handles. Neck is conic, emerging from a rounded body at a point well above the greatest diameter. Bottom is slightly con- cave. This jar full of water should weigh 30 to 50 lb., containing from 4 to 7 gallons, and is well adapted for carrying water home from a cenote. Modern jars are of less than half this capacity, cf. fig. 33, a-f and are carried on the hip. In modern villages, wells have prob- ably shortened the carrying distance, decreasing the advantages of a full capacity load. Modern practice is for women to carry the water; men often draw it if wells are deep. The second important Florescent jar type is much smaller, see figs. 40, a, g; 42, c, 4, capacity about two quarts, with either small, heavy, loop handles or pierced lug handles firmly set in the neck body junc- ture. Walls are thick, relative to size, and neck is us- ually heavy with a massive, thickened lip; bottom is usually flat. Area of greatest diameter of the body of- ten shows marked abrasion on this small form. This jar is well suited for drawing water from a cistern. It is compact, strong, with handles suited only for rope attachments; center of gravity when empty is high in the body; facilitating overturning it by releasing ten- sion on the drawing rope. Cisterns, or chultunes, were the sole water sources of many Florescent sites, par- ticularly in the Puuc area. These jars are very abun- dant there. Thus there seems good reason to hypothe- size different uses for the two types. Note that Thomp- son (1939, plate 21, a) finds one of each Yucata'n type in San Jos6 V. Unfortunately, these two jar types are not easily separated by rims alone, and we have nothing but rim sherds for the Puuc sites. The neck, shoulder, and handle fragments here show that the large type is com- mon at Mani, L ~j, 26 32-~j_., and many bottoms are too large and flaring for the small type, b, 3.9 -51. b, 1, i, 1(6, _2_, 21 show the characteristic small jar handles and~ 11, 13, 14, 17, , 29 are also prob- ably from small jars. c: Hemispheroid bowls with ex- terior bevel lip and annular bases (C, 1-_O) characteris- tic of Puuc sites. Also see figs. 21, f 35, g; 49, a-_f d: Hemispheroid bowls with taper lip, also see figs. 21, d; 35, 4; 49, 4, -13. Bottom often flattened, , 1 2, probably never with annular base. Body shape usu- ally shallower and wider than exterior bevel-lip bowls, strongly curved at base-wall junction. fL g.: Bolster rim basins. Note that all have interior lip angles, a differem. tiating characteristic between Florescent- and Mexican- stage basins. Medium Slateware basins may be divided into two main groups; one has a concave interior sub- lip profile, .g, 1- 12 sometimes with a perceptible inner ledge, g, _-, .5, 7. The bolster on this type is often deep and narrow with the mass greater toward its bottom, g, 7. Slip often extends only partly over the exterior, g, 2-i; bottom is often concave, f. l, 2 4 External flanges on slateware basins, .g, 13, 14 are very rare-the form is earlier, cf. Regional Oxkintok monochrome, fig. 11, e, f. A second type of Mediumx- Slateware Florescent-stage basin (f, 8-11), the one preponderant in the Puuc sites, has a straight to con- vex interior sublip profile, and slip extending exteriorly to the bottom, which is usually flat. h: Basal break bowls Note long, narrow slab legs, often terraced. Conoid legs, , 15, and truncated conoid legs such as , , 29 are found on Regional monochromes, cf. figs. 8, 13. Narrow slab legs are not. Hollow rattle legs also appear here, h, 2, _4. The large jars, concave interior profile bolster rim basins, and taper rim bowls described above are all commoner in our Chenes collections than in our Puuc collections. That this difference is not geographic seem likely, since Mani is on one side of the Puuc, Chenes on the other. Presence of these 'Chenes" forms at Acanceh and Dzibilchaltun in association with Regional wares, and of the jars and bowls at Dzebtun with fine gray which is a prominent part of the Dzibilchaltun Re- gional ceramic repertory, all point to the Early Flores.. cent placement of these three forms, as contrasted to a later Florescent-stage placement of their contrasting Puuc forms. There is, however, much evidence of over- lap. The analysis of Chenes collections, as yet incom- plete, should shed light on the exact interrelationships of these forms. For further Medium Slateware from Mani, see fig. 49, j k. [174] - - -V?.Jv 3 *,WI; ol i i r- 13 H FIGURE 33 Colonial unslipped and Coarse Redwares from the Mani Monastery and Cenote. a-e: Slipped jars. f: Slipped basins. i-i: Unslipped cooking vessels (ollas or calderones). a: Bulbous-lip necks. This neck form, dominant in these deposits, is still made in Yucatan but has been displaced to a great extent by the simpler outcurved lip form c, 1-4. Slip and body paste show little change between the Late Mexican substage and now. c, 5 is unique if a jar rim, but may have belonged to a form similar to fig. 34, g which also is unslipped interiorly. The concave cylindric jar neck, a, b, has been the pre- dominant type in Yucata'n from the Early Mexican sub- stage, cf. fig. 71, until the present. The large loop jar handles all seem to have been horizontally placed slightly above point of greatest diameter, as are the handles of modern jars. Diameters range 30-35 cm. The Colonial jars are slimmer in proportion to height than are the Mexican-stage jars. Our earliest docu- mentation for this type of handle is Oxkintok Regional, fig. 1 1, . 3 42, . The flat bottom with angular side junction, e, 1-13, 25, 27, 28, carries through from Florescent till now. Inset bottom, e, 14-_22, occurs in Late Mexican substage but has not been noted in mod- ern jars. Information on jar bottoms for earlier Mexican sub- stages is not available. The function of the perforated bottoms., e2, 25, is unknown; these were the only such specimens found. f: Red slipped basins, f 1-8 slipped on both sides, remainder slipped on outside only. Omission of slip on basin interiors is a new departure with the post-Con- quest stage, cf. fig. 27, k for Mayapan basins. g-j: These unslipped cooking pots probably had round bottoms with perhaps a small flattened zone. The shape has persisted to modern times. Most of them are un- decorated; only lips and thumb-pressed or cut fillets were added. Color was a medium brown with consider- able smudging, some of which must have resulted from use on a fire. At Becal and Maxcanu, Campeche, where similar vessels are now made, a harder, more crystal- lic quality of soft limestone is used for temper than that used in slipped water vessels; the relative quantity of temper used is also higher. Archaeological sherds have not been checked to see if these customs were current during the Colonial period. [176] a b f g ...... . ..I... ..... T,!,I 1 2 FIGURE 34 Colonial redware from Dzibilchaltun and Mani, modern redware from Becal and Ticul. b: Dzibilchaltun. g; h: Becal. Remainder Mani Mon- astery. a; b: Large wide-mouth jars or tinajars from a, Mani Monastery, b, Dzibilchaltun near curate's resi- dence with date of 1593 (?) A.D. These vessels may possibly have a parallel in vessels used ceremonially by the modern Maya of Xcacal, Quintana Roo, at the fiesta of the Virgin of the Conception (Villa, 1945). In these vessels, holes in the rim were used to hold sprigs of basil. The holes in the flange of this vessel may have been similarly used. c: Decorated wares. . ., 2 with white paint on red. Roys, 1943, p. 48, mentions an ear- ly Spanish description of a bowl "painted with small white pebbles," and called choo lac. This correspon- dence seems too close for coincidence. L, i, thumbed fillet at lowest extension of red slip. .c., 4 impressions of a hollow cylindric tool at edge of red slip. c, , 6, 7 black paint on buff ground, c, 6 also has red slip. , , 9 red painted floral designs on unslipped area, also red slip. d: Candlestick fragments. This general type was widespread in Spanish colonies; see Kidder and Shepard, 1936, pp. 276-277, figs. 237, 238; Montgomery, Smith, and Brew, 1949, fig. 30, especially i is probably from such a candlestick; Noguera, 1934, pl. XIII. John Griffin informs me that somewhat similar types have been found in Florida mission ruins. A similar fragment is illustrated by Noguera (1934) from excavations in Mexico City. The form may stem from a metal Islamic prototype. e and possibly ij 1, a 3: Pedestal-base bowl fragments. f: Miscellaneous jar and bowl fragments. g; h: Modern, gpurchased at Becal, h at Ticul, ghas a mold-pressed motto in relief in an unslipped band, no mi olvidas. It may be a modern version of the form above (e, 13. ) also cf. fig. 66, L All specimens of e and f 23, j, 30 3-45 bear a red slip of color more saturated and purplish than the rest, bearing minute specular granules (specular hematite?). This pigment was probably imported. [178] a 's I If= | . _mm~ f7 4't \N2'\i f g F' (AI 2 3 i 1 0430000 1 *%,lb t I - - I FIGURE 35 Collection of pottery from Dzebtun, near Cenotillo, Yucata'n. a; d; g; i;j m: Medium slateware. b: Fine grayware. c: Unslipped, striated. e: Thin slate with yellowish slip and black paint. f; h: Florescent Thin Redware of atypical orange hue. This group, including several near duplicates which have not been illustrated, reputedly come from a tomb or an associated group of tombs. A plumbate fragment of obviously later date was in the collection (see fig. 91, e). It is in the M6rida Museum (top views of basal break bowls are at 1/12 scale). It comes from a region and time span not well sampled by us. Although most of the vessels are easily classifiable as Florescent, there are various reasons why it should be placed very early in the stage. a: Shows similarity to fig. 32, a, see caption for discussion. b: Belongs to a ware com- monest at Dzibilchaltun (cf. fig. 28, g). d: See fig. 32, d and discussion. e: Is closer in color and thickness to thin slateware of the Chenes area than to that of the Puuc. f: h: Are similar to fig. 18, g and nearly identical with fig. 19, , , 5 in ware characteristics. These com parable sherds come from Regional or Regional-Flores- cent transition deposits. The basal break bowls i-l with slab legs and thumbed decoration are closest to those from Yaxuna, fig. 10, d-f. which occur in collections judged early Florescent or Regional-Florescent, also close to those from Dzibilchaltun (fig. 15, a). Thus there are several independent reasons to believe this collection comes from a relatively short time span in the early Florescent stage. This allows us to use it for reference in placement of other vessels, and for crit&- ria of form, ware, and decoration. Another mass of material from Actun Xkyc which may be of comparable date is shown in Brainerd, 1953a, fig. 1. [180] k =' m- L - -------------------------------------------- I h FIGURE 36 Medium slateware, fine gray, and fine orange ves- sels from collections. a d; i: MR. b ; g; h: MM. j.i Collection of Sr. D. Jesus Cervera, El Carmen, Campeche (after Maler, 1910). a; c: Medium slateware. b; _d; g; ; i and possibly f: fine grayware. h j (and possibly I) fine orangeware. All these vessels are of the Florescent stage or Regional-Flor escent. c: Has handles arranged as has fig. 32, a. For fine grayware vessels, see fig. 28, e-.Land caption. For shape of e, cf. Thompson, 1939, fig. 73, e in blackware. h: Bears glossy, incised white slip exteriorly and stripes of black paint on interior. Although unique in interior paint arrangement and in leg form, it resem- bles Dzibilchaltun Fine Orange, fig. 59, g, h, in body form and general decorative style. Incising is done with considerable virtuosity, superb finish, better workman. ship than any Dzibilchaltun specimens. Note similar profile and use of double circles within diagonal bands, also absence of cut out areas for background. j: Although texture of the paste is unknown, marked similarity in the style allows nearly certain identification with Z (Puuc) Fine Orange, cf. fig. 59, A Design and a band at the border have been cut through a white slip into the orange paste. [182] i : I., 10 O'? i : 11 V II . . . : 1. . . . . . . . . : 1. I I I . FIGURE 37 Unslipped jars and bowls from Holactun, Uxrnal, and Dzan. a: From Holactun. b; c: From Uxmal. d: From Dzan. a, 18, 19 28-30: Probably of Regional type. ,j, 12, 19-36, 40-42, 45-50 52-54: Of Dzibilchaltun Re- gional-Florescent type. Remainder of groups a and b Florescent. Note that the beginning of the occupations of Uxnal and Holactun at an earlier date than those of Kabah, Labna, and Sayil is suggested by comparison of the rims here and in fig. 38. c, 1-7, 20 are misplaced here; they are Medium Slateware with exteriorly stri- ated rim and probably belong to drums, cf. fig. 62, i, i c, 8-, 16-19, 25-29 may belong either to incensar- ios or to basins. d: Probably Florescent, less likely Early Mexican. In unslipped jars, reconstruction of a style succes- sion in the Regional-Florescent time sequence may be reasonably made. Oxkintok Regional rims are short, heavy, and flared, with a sharp break into a conoid shoulder zone. Yaxuna B. jar rims, of somewhat later period, are similar, with possible neck change to a more incurving form, fig. 1, a, 3-_ , ,2-7 These rims are paralleled at Acanceh, fig. 14, d -_40 and are also quite closely paralleled in the slipped mono- chrome jars of these three sites. Next in order comes Dzibilchaltun, Regional-Florescent, with high standing flare to outcurve rims, often with an exteriorly thick- ened lip area which is triangular in form, and ranges from round to angular cornered, see fig. 14, , 3-_1, and cf. Thompson, 1940, fig. 52, Benque Viejo IV. This rim retains the sharp, angular shoulder junction, the conoid shoulder zone having been entirely suppressed, leaving a spheroid body. Both this type and the above Regional type normally bear horizontal striations on the interior of the rim, readily differentiating them from the smooth interior Florescent type. Following these comes the major Florescent type which differs from the Dzibilchaltun type in having a much shorter neck; it is also inclined to have an unbroken or only slightly broken curve from body to lip. The Yaxuna forms, fig. 1, ^, j, I-L, 28-4, classified by Robert Smith as Tzakol (also cf. Thompson, 1939, fig. 36) are thinner than those from the Puuc. Their presence at Yaxuna confirms the strong Peten influence shown by their associated slipped wares. The three major rim forms described above are also present in the Chenes and Rlo Bec sites, suggesting that cultural homogeneity in the Yucatan Peninsula was not restricted to the re- ligious hierarchy. [184] I0 * 2 2 24_ FIGURE 38 Unslipped jars from sites of the Puuc area. a; b: Sabacche. c: Kabah. d: Labna. e: Sayil. f: Ox- kintok. a: Body shape and decorative pattern of unslipped jars are not known from the Puuc excavations since only rims are available from them. Pattern of the ex- terior decoration seems to have been in horizontal zones of diagonal striations. A slight break in curva- ture between the rounded bottom and the sides is nor- mal, cf. figs. 35, ; 37, d; 65, d; 68, a, d_, e. Bottom striations are irregularly placed. Interior is smoothed, as is exterior rim to a point just below neck-body break. Some unusual forms are listed below; remainder may be considered as typically Florescent. b., 3.: Regional. ., J: Atypical in form and black paint, probably Regior.. al. f: These Oxkintok specimens, although not fitting exactly any one of the three divisions of the time so- quence outlined (fig. 37 caption), seem closest to Re- gional-Florescent. See discussions on Oxkintok Slate- ware which seem to support this placement. [186] a C~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ c I7 A ~ 1 6 7 f I Nv ttrtZz' tE' oW/1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~r FIGURE 39 Incensarios and other unslipped pottery from Flo- rescent-stage deposits. a-d: Uxmal. e: Kabah. fj h: Sayil. &g: Labna. j: Ox- kintok. k: Holactun. ; b, c; d, 3-_I e, _5-30 f. 8-10, Li k, 5-11: From incensarios. , f. 1; gj h, 7: From incense ladles. , 1-3: Possibly ornamental incensario handles. , 2, 4, 7i, -14: Medium Slateware. f 7, g, 7 , 3: Misplaced here; are rims of slateware drums, cf. fig. 62, i, jL j, 6: Is probably of Middle or Late Mexican stage. Our earliest recognized incensarios are of the "hourglass" form typical of this collection and come from the Regional-Florescent deposits (fig. 19, a-c). This general form lasted through the Flore scent and part of the Mexican stage; see figs. 22, 23 for latest examples. Widest variety of decoration seems to have been attained in the Florescent stage. It includes: (1) encircling flanges often with various types of notching such as paired cuts, a; stepped (terraced) notching, c close-spaced triangular notching to produce a series of pyramids, d, i, i e, 16 f. 9. Flanges also may be thumbed as is , 29 or impressed either with a blunt rod, d 10, or with a hollow cylinder, f _ _ 3. (2) applied finger-pinched tetrahedrons showing a wide variety of form, cf. d, 4; , , and arranged in encir- cling bands, see j c, or vertical bands, a k . is a variant of the encircling pattern produced by over- lapping in the tetrahedrons to form serrated bands. No handles have been found certainly belonging to Flores- cent hourglass incensarios, though they occur on both earlier and later forms. This may possibly be due to the fact that our Florescent collections are incomplete, with body sherds discarded, but more likely represents an actual lack of handles. Cf. discussions on incense burners in Wauchope, 1948, p. llo et seq. for compari- sons. Incense ladles are a common type in the Mexican stage. The presence of several in Puuc deposits sug- gests that they may also have been used to a limited extent during the Florescent stage. None were found in the Florescent deposits sampled in the 1949 Chenes-Rro Bec survey. All types recognized in Yucatan have hol- low, tubular handles, some with open, some with closed end, set at a slight downslope from a flat-bottomed small bowl. There is often a perforation between bowl and handle. It seems quite possible that these were used to bear incense in ceremonies, allowing an additional draft of air on the incense by blowing air through the handle. Ladles of this type were found at Zacualpa in the pre-plumbate horizon, Wauchope, 1948, p. 126, and a seemingly related solid-handled type much earlier. See caption fig. 68 for further discussion. Vaillant (1927) reports a similar ladle from Tomb 10, Copan. That these vessels precede the Mexican stage in Yucata'n is made unlikely by lack of evidence for them in the deeper levels of Florescent deposits. All major ruins in Yuca- tan show evidence of the breakage of ceremonial pottery on them at late periods, and these ladles may possibly be of late date. j., 6: From Oxkintok is of the Mexican stage; cf. figs. 23, 4, j 97, a-c. A plumbate sherd also was found in debris of fallen buildings at Oxkintok. [188] 8 i *7 IItooooo s I I , I j- ,A?? .- 1 , w~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 7~7 441 _ 0 1 1 . _ I- m .5 FIGURE 5 0 Thin Slateware from sites of the Puuc region. a; f: Kabah. b: Labna. c-e; -_q: Uxmal. This ware is limited to the Florescent stage and seems to have grown both more frequent and more clearly defined toward the close of the stage. The dif- ficulty in sorting it completely from Medium Slateware is discussed in the text; vessel shape is the easiest criterion. Typical shapes are beakers and hemisphe- roid bowls. Beakers seem to have ranged from tub shaped to tumbler shaped in proportion, though little restorable material is available. The low beaker form is of course standard in the earlier Fine Gray and medium blackwares. Bowls are close to those of the contemporaneous Z Fine Orange in shape, see fig. 59, a-f, but the beaded lip, , 4-_5 k, 3l-49 is limited to this ware and to the closely similar Thin Redware. The deep rounded bowls, . 1-0, are similar in con- tour and wall thickness to Chenes Medium Slateware forms, and to fig. 73, , f from Chichen Itza, which are probably of Early Florescent date. The thick-walled, taper-lipped bowls a, 24-26; b, 8-14 are strikingly similar to Medium Slateware forms (figs. 21, d; 32, 4d 35, d; 49, d, .-_3) and are placed in Thin Slatem solely on basis of light slip and paste color. The trumpet base, c, .g, fig. 51, c, i, appea during this period, save for an exception in Mec Blackware at Dzibilchaltun (fig. 53, k, 2). This I confined to cylindric, barrel-shaped and pyrifor sels such as fig. 47, k. It is a frequently used fo base in the X Fine Orange and related local war the Early Mexican period. The occurrence of tri bases on tall, narrow vessels might be ascribed Mexican mainland influence more certainly wer for its relatively earlier occurrence at San Jose son, 1939, figs. 63, 67, 79). The cascabel trump( c;.gg, j-_, is found in Thompson's fig. 63, dated in San Jose' III-IV transition. Incised ornament is limited to bordering banc ually showing a two-strand twist, i, 2, 3_. i I wit allover incised design and cakepanlike central c is unique. Vertical preslip grooving as in f is ra widespread in collections. For a halftone reprod of d, see Morley, 1946, pl. 83, a. [210] a I r I IN I b - 6 . _ - -1 13 ' 1 131 l o 16 1 I ~~~~~~~~ A > h i 2 1 6 I I I I Mill I t, 1%% I % r-11 I \ ) 3 _. i 7A 15 24 36~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~; 23 3 _ 3~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~7 p Yq k Iq FIGURE 51 Thin Slateware and Redware from sites of the Puuc region. a b;j-k Sayil. b; i.i: Oxkintok. d: Sabacche. e: Ka- bah. f: Chunkatzin near Labna, PM. j: Labna, mound 6, PM. h: Labna. 1-n: Uxmal. a-c: Thin Slateware. d-h, 2j k-rn: Thin Redware. h, 3, i R: Medium Redware. All of Florescent stage. Redware, which grows increasingly more frequent in the later Florescent collections in the Puuc area, although it does not intergrade into the slatewares in surface characteristics, shows marked parallelism i forms. It shows the varieties of thin-walled hemisph( roid bowls and beakers which allow a subdivision intc Thin Redware. The thicker-walled basal break bowls and basins (fig. 52) and exterior bevel-lip hemispher, bowls (, n) are present, and closely parallel Medium Slateware in form (see fig. 52). Shape and design of.g is unique; grooves made prior to slipping occur on and 1. 20. [212] a b 1 2 2 3 71 1 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ . C 2--- 4 d m. M~~~~~~~~~~~ 71i- tt<\12 J la e 2 / 21 S77~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3 36 '9 26 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~ W~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ i3 s _~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3 - 3 27~~~~~~~~~~ 2 6 73 10 1112 1 / I ~~~A m 7- FIGURE 5 2 Redware from sites of the Puuc region. aj g: Sabacche. b- _f m: Uxmal. c; i; . Kabah. h: Labna , 1: Sayil. ; b: Jar fragments. _j ej f: Basins. d: Concurvate- sided bowls. vg-m: Basal break bowls. j1 j: Concurvate grater bowl fragment. All these specimens are classed as Medium Redware on basis of vessel shape save pos- sibly for d. All incising seems to have been done before slip- ping. d, 1-3 bear thin black slip exteriorly; 1. 16 bears a black painted design on its floor. h, 7 bears an appli- qued mold-pressed head, hollow cylinder impressions on bolster top, incised designs on exterior. 1. 11 with a cut skirt, 12 with thumb-pressed skirt. m. 3with slotted base, m, 39 with cut-terraced ring base. Since this type of redware is nearly absent from Chenes sites and seems to increase markedly in fre- quency in late Florescent stage Puuc deposits, the forms represented may logically be assumed late. Note sharp side-bottom angle of basal break bowls, marked outcurve sides, and relatively constant sidewall thick- ness as compared with Medium Slateware bowls, cf. fig. 45 and 46. Jar sherds a, 1-. may be of Regional stage, cf. figs. 11, , 20, ., jars b, 5-8 are probably Florescent, , _-4 of uncertain date. Florescent Red- ware jars are exceedingly rare. [214] 2~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 2 2 g h _ 13ui1Zi Zy7k1 2t J,I1 __________ i~~~* f W ~~~Z77~02 k _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ p~~~~~17~~~1 ~~ ~ 3 6 ~ 24 4' FIGURE Holactun Slateware from sites of the Puuc region. Fine Grayware and Thin Blackware from the Puuc, Holactun, and Dzibilchaltun. a-f: Uxmal. g: Labna. h: Sayil. i: Dzibilchaltun. j: Kabah. k: Holactun. a-b: Holactun Slateware jars. c-d: Holactun Slate- ware basins. f; h; k: Fine Grayware. e ; i; . Thin Blackwar e s. Holactun slateware differs in surface characteris- tics from Medium Slateware of Florescent stage. The predominant forms of Holactun Slateware are also distinctive, but there is considerable overlap of Holac- tun Slateware forms into the form range of Medium Slateware, and suggestions of overlap in the other di- rection. The jar rim form shown in a, 12-14, 17-_, and fig. 40, gis preponderant, with a, -10 b, 10-13 coming next. These forms are rare in Medium Slate- ware, cf. figs. 40-42. Although lid samples are small, the convex lid is possibly commoner in Holactun Slate- ware, the flat lid certainly in Medium Slateware. The basin rim form is m-iore constant than that of the jars. The tendency toward a T shape is preponderant, al- though occasional rims are quite close to Medium Slateware forms; cf. , -27 with figs. 43 and 44. Holactun Slateware probably is abundant at Etzna (see Ruz, 1945, pp. 50, 61), but was, surprisingly, nearly 53 absent in the Chenes region collections made in 1949. The placement of Holactun Slateware relative to the Puuc chronological sequence is of particular interest because of the 9.16.0.0.0 date found at Holactun. The Holactun collections were taken from locations near the dated temple. Stylistic criteria of form suggest that the basin rims may be of the same horizon as the Earl Florescent Dzibilchaltun, Acanceh, and Mani horizons; although the jar forms do not contradict this view they give but little reinforcement, and the prevalence of the chultun jar in Holactun Slateware argues against a ver early date. The Fine Graywares are duplicated by many whole vessels in the Merida collections, see fig. 36, b e g, but specimens from Puuc sites and Chenes sites are too rare to give a cross placement with those sites The Thin Blackwares from Dzibilchaltun stand near- ly isolated in the Yucatan collections but, surprisingly, seem to be nearly duplicated in ware by certain frag- ments in collections taken in 1949 from Xpuhil in the Rio Bec area. These Rlo Bec collections have not been worked up as yet. Thin Blackware, Fine Grayware, and' Dzibilchaltun Fine Orangeware all show suggestions of relationship and contemporaneity through similarity in forms and decorative techniques; low beaker forms and incised design characterize all three. [216] U9 W -11 _IZ 10 r L_____ O8 27 ~~~WS ,2 2 9 I19) ,2 Jib I~~~~~~~~I- _ _ _ _ _ _I_ _ _ I id, I 0&9~2JU k I llilm I AR& i 3 4 I . -. -77i?Al - 7 .- - ---=z - ?A 18 FIGURE 54 (ha Florescent anthropomorphic and zo8morphic frag- ments, mainly from the Puuc region. ;r; dd 11: Uxmal. j.i E ee: ij; mm: Kabah. k _ x y bb: Holactun. ; w; z ; i- kk: Sayil. ff: MM, re- constructed areas from Gates, 1937, p. 35. Remainder of specimens provenience Yucatan. I: fine yellow paste with white slip, ff: blackware; others seem to belong with Medium Slateware group. The faces and often the whole front of most of these fragments are mold-pressed; that is, the clay is pressed into a single-piece mold such as those shown as fig. 56, t and v. Usually the sides and backs have been hand-modeled, and the molded portion has often been improved by later sharpening of detail or by ad- dition of applique'd elements. The representations are in the round and show no dorsoventral flattening or simplification of the back of the figurine. Rarely a whole piece shows only hand modeling, see fig. 55, x. The paste seems usually the same as that used for the accompanying slateware; specimens are often slipped, sometimes left plain but with a very smooth surface. The following types of objects are recognizable with reasonable certainty: Flageolets, see 54, ff, and note that 56, m has a closed end. Whistles, single with ex- posed tongue, 55, dd, two-tone with exposed tongue, 55, aa, single with internal tongue, 55, cc, double with internal tongue. All of these whistles have closed sound chambers, though often with one or more stops thus making them ocarinas. Simple pendant, 56, a. Bead, 56, L Molds, 56, t. M. Bell-shaped objects, of unknown use, may be reconstructed without much cer- tainty from various fragments. 55, w shows an upper end which might be completed by such fragments as 55, g. If this reconstruction be favored, the consider- able number of heads which bear vertical perforations may be placed in this group. Any of the large number of heads with vertical perforation may have belonged to such objects. The possibility that these forms may be related to some of the objects which de Borhegyi (1952) has dubbed 'Duck-Pots" should be noted. There is no evidence of figurines used as jar-lid handles, or for any other use on vessels save for the head shown as fig. 52, h, 7. There is no evidence of wheeled toys. Evidence for jointed dolls is slim, see 54, k, 1. Hollow legs for basal break bowls may be included, cf. 54, p, r with fig. 58, e, h. These anthropomorphic and zoorrorphic heads seem to be confined almost completely to sites of the Puuc region, and others of the same horizon. We obtained no figurine material from the Chenes and Rlo Bec ex- cavations in 1949 and have seen few figurines in col- lections from those areas. In very late times in Yuca- tan the so-called figurine incensarios, see figs. 98- 102, occur commonly, preceded by such Mexican-stage animal figurines as those of fig. 93, d-h, and perhaps preceded slightly be the Santa Rita animals (Gann, 1900). The applique' hand-modeled human face, fig. 6, k, is quite surely of Early Regional date, the dissimi- lar appliqu6d monkey faces from early Oxkintok, fig. 12, k, 1, probably date somewhat later in the Regional stage. Incised monkey figures occur at Dzibilchaltun in Regional-Florescent transition deposits, see figs. 28, g; 36, j, d. Figurines on figs. 54-56 which may pre- cede Puuc times are 54, y, from Holactun; 55, w from Yaxuna and 56, p, probably from Labna, seem aberrant in style from the Puuc finds. [218] lf scale) One of the surprising results of the ceramic work in Yucatan has been the complete absence of figurines of Jaina type in the excavations. Even allowing for the sparse coverage inherent in a survey covering 35,000 square miles and two millenia, a few fragments were to be expected. The clay of the figurines from the Islan of Jaina is very like the clay characterizing the fine orange pottery found in sites dating from Regional-Flo- rescent transition (Dzibilchaltun) through Late Mexican (Mayapan), but so different from local clay that the smallest fragment would have been conspicuous. The Jaina figurines are of two general major types, one solid and largely or completely hand-modeled, the othe with mold-pressed front and a thin clay slab luted on for the back, forming a thin-walled, flattish slab shape with flat bottom. No Puuc figurine fragments found sug- gest stylistic similarity to either of these types. For the comparison in addition to an examination of the specimens on display in the museums at Campeche and Mexico City, I have examined photos of 40 furnished by Sr. Paul Pavon, Director of the Campeche State Muse- um, 140 from a private collection photographed and de. scribed by Mr. Hasso von Winning, and some 60 of Jaina type which I photographed in Merida collections. An examination of over 100 pounds of pottery from the 1942 excavations at the cemeteries at Jaina, kindly al- lowed me by Sr. Pavon, showed some 8 Medium Slate. ware sherds, all seemingly of early types, one sherd of Fine Gray, one Holactun Slate basin rim, one sherd of X (Early Mexican stage) Fine Orange, and no other Yucatan types. This assemblage, except for the single fine orange sherd, might well date not far from the time of the Jaina Initial Series stela, 9.11.0.0.0 as far as Yucatan tradewares are concerned. The local Jaina wares are made of an orange-colored clay, distinguishable even in small fragments from the Yucatan wares. The ab- sence, or practical absence, of this ware in the larger Puuc collections, as well as dissimilarities between the two figurine styles, argues against contemporaneity between the Jaina and Puuc deposits. The lack of con- temporaneity is made more likely by the fact that figu- rines from Uaxactun, Guatemala, and Tres Zapotes, Veracruz, show more stylistic similarity to the Puuc figurines than do the Jaina figurines of either type. The evidence for pre-Puuc dating is not contradicted by evidence from San Jose6, where Thompson places four figurines of hollow moldmade style, not unlike those from Jaina, in San Jos6 IV, which is roughly contempo- raneous to Tepeu 2, dated by Smith as 9.12.5.0.0 to 9.19.0.0.0 (Thompson, 1939, fig. 92, i, i pl. 22, b). Sr. Pavon told me in 1942 that no difference in horizon had been to that time discernible between the hollow molded and the solid modeled types; he believed that they seemed to be contemporaneous. Roman Pifta Chan (1948) also attempts no temporal division of the figurines, and states (p. 12) that no strat- igraphic relationships have been found among the tombs, Associations of objects within burials, unavailable from his report, might allow chronologic placements. Ruz in his summary report on the state of Campeche (1945, pp. 71-72), by comparison between the Jaina collections and stratified collections he has excavated in the city of Campeche and Etzna, dates the modeled Jaina figu- rines as apparently Tzakol-Early Tepeu, and believes the moldmade figurines follow the hand-modeled in BRAINERD: THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL CERAMICS OF YUCATAN time, and that they date before Early Mexican times. Although Ruz gives no evidence to support these figu- rine datings, his estimates may well be correct. The two styles seem mutually exclusive on single figurines, and this suggests that they were not contemporaneous; also, hand-modeled figurines in general precede mold- made in Mesoamerica. Although the mid ninth-cycle ceramic samples from western Yucatan are not large, the absence of Campeche coastal pottery in them, as well as in the Chenes collections, still seems surpris- ing. This absence must be taken as additional evidence of the isolationist tendencies already noted among hu- man groups of the Regional stage. The Jaina figurines are worth much more study than has thus far been given them. In addition to their high aesthetic merit, they are a real storehouse of detailed information on Maya costume and personal adornment. As has been said above, the Puuc figurine heads show resemblances to those from Uaxactun (R. E. Smith, 1936b, last two figures), and to certain figurines of San Marcos type from Tres Zapotes (Drucker, 1943, pls. 49, b-f. 52, ., h). Smith (personal communication) places the Uaxactun figurines of this type in Tepeu 3, the Tres Zapotes figurines are of the "Upper" period; both of these chronologically approximate the Puuc horizon, although Drucker's recognition of a stylistic transition between his San Marcos and later Lirios figurines is difficult to relate to the Yucatan sequence where the equivalents of these two styles are separated by some 500 years of figurine-free ceramic develop- ment (see caption fig. 98). The Uaxactun Tepeu 3 figurine material seems to correspond to the Puuc in technique of manufacture and in emphasis on whistle and flageolet forms, although the specimens of both collections are quite fragmentary. In both, the heads and faces are mold-pressed but sol- id, and are in full round with no dorsoventral compres- sion, and with allover modeled detail. On the other hand, one style is hand-modeled to a greater degree with full figurines rather than whistle or flageolet forms, the other usually being dorsoventrally flattened, with sur- face detail in low relief and undecorated back, always hollow and thin-walled, and generally in form of a rattle or ocarina. At Tres Zapotes all these variable forms and techniques seem represented in the Upper period, although Drucker states (1943, p. 82) that the majority are of low relief front-modeled style. This Upper period covers a long time span at Tres Zapotes, and all these styles may not have occurred contemporaneously there. A somewhat uncertain clue to interconnections among Puuc sites, Uaxactun, and Jaina may be afforded by a carved column from a Puuc-style building at Oxkintok (Shook, 1940, fig. 7), a figurine from Uaxactun (Smith, 1936b, last plate fig. 5), and a figurine from Jaina (Pifia Chan, fig. 12). These three representations are all of a fat man dressed in what may be quilted armor or a featherwork garment. The figure suggests the Mexiican Fat God. The Oxkintok and Uaxactun figures seem more similar to each other than to the Jaina specimen in head- dress and abdominal protrusion, but this distinction is slight and seems inconclusive. The presence of jointed figurines at Jaina (Piffa Chan, 1948, fig. 20, also in pri- vate collections) as well as various other Mexican High- land traits found in Jaina figurines by Hasso von Winning (unpublished manuscript at UCLA) strengthens the sug- gestion of cultural contact between the Mexican mainland and Jaina in pre-Mexican phase times, and suggests the possibility that both at Jaina and at Isla de Sacrificios, the people buried were brought by coastal water traffic from over considerable areas. 219 ~hh I I I I1 1 I ~i i II/ I'\ S - II I I I l r -r/ I l/ I l/ l1 I ' I I I II I vgXj I m u I1,f [OwZ aa cc ff I I I II II i II i II I I 4 N h i .( , 'A i I . , . I n t' 1. 0 FIGURE 55 (half scale) Florescent-stage anthropomorphic and zoomorphic fragments. Mainly from Puuc sites. a; c; e; f; h; vi g; g; x; y; j cc; dd: Uxmal. s: Dzi- bilchaltun. w: Yaxuna. bb: Kabah. Remainder general Yucatan. a; j cc: Highly glossy blackware, remainder of me- dium slateware paste, with or without slip. s and w may antedate the occupation of the Puuc sites; stylistically they are somewhat aberrant. For e, cf. Drucker, 1943, pl. 49, a-c, for p, cf. idem, pl. 62, e. x is thin-walled and hollow, hand-modeled save for hollow cylindrical punching of eyes. Details are appliqued fillets. Paste and slip are those of the gray- white thin slateware. The figurine may have been either a rattle or ocarinalike whistle. The internal-tongued whistle, cc, is probably found at Jaina (on appearance of photo of specimen furnished by Pavon) although evi- dence is not absolute. The type may be historically re- lated to the internal-tongued whistles which character- ize many of the whistling jars which are common in Peru (Steward, 1946, vol. 2, pl. 60) and are rare, but of early origin and long persistence, in Middle Ameri- ca (Kidder, Jennings, and Shook, 1946, pp. 190-191, list twenty Middle American specimens and discusses their typology and range. Brainerd, 195 lb, Digby, 1951, and Porter, 1953, p. 77, give further data and opinions on these vessel and whistle-type distributions which are among the most promising evidences of early Peruvian- Mesoamerican contact). [222] a X Oc~~~~~dlz A j (< s-' 9~~-7e St X -~~~~~~~~~ apX~~ X- <@t X~~~~~'' (4F , - I -' f ri) i" - 4G1 9 I I FIGURE 56 Anthropomorphic and zoomorphic fragments, molds, whistles, and a bead, all from Labna. All PM, collected by E. H. Thompson, All but n and v excavated from chultunes (vide Thompson, 1897). f.i g; h; j. o; _q with glossy black slip. Remainder seem to be of medium slateware paste. p is stylistically dis- tinct from all others, a conventionalized mask, in that the design is confined closely to a plain surface. The molds t and v demonstrate the local manufacture of figurines. v has no draft; the clay must have been al- lowed to dry before shrinkage would have allowed it to be drawn from the mold. [224] ~ b e r-" IP p St~ ,),,,4 J, / I 41 61" IN I1 JI;i A . .1. I v ,410 II k n ... I; it - zz ...11 -1 Ii? I .1 m . , , "tb 7 7 u M., I ??. ? I 1? !I il. v FIGURE 5 7 Basal break Medium Slateware bowls, showing in- cised underslip, grooved and thumbed designs. a: PM near Uxmal. b2 1, i; L 1 d L;fI 4 Uxmaal. b, 2; b, 8,d3 e -4 ; i: Kabah. b 3 i QJ~~7 14) 2 Z, 7 ;g2 Sayil. b, i, L; 2 4, 5: Labna. c. 3; e, j; , 1: Acanceh. The underslip incised designs of this group are in general coarser than those of fig. 58, i, 1-10. All are found on more or less typical Puuc-style basal break bowls save for b, _-_L where shape variability is matched by variation in style of the design element. These sherds may well date earlier than the others. Thumbed fillets occur on , 6; Land g, I and L, thumb- ing above the basal break in g, 1, which also bears trickle paint; the design on this specimen may have been mold-pressed, then smoothed over. The elongated, leftward-facing bird face which ap- pears often must be a decadent copy of a glyph, of which the proportions of b, 1-7 and fig. 62, a are closer to original form. For similar incised birdhead glyphs, see Thompson, 1931, fig. 14, p. 310. Double-cord, two-ply twists are shown, both right and left hand. This device is found on Thin Slate of the same period (cf. fig. 50, ., i ); apparently three-cord plaiting incised on pot- tery is limited to the Early Mexican stage (cf. fig. 77, a, d). [226] j .I I I I i I j I I '11, i j A I ?l b X- - I# I I I l71 7 C._ X 7 ,-.. M-.- - - --- 1 2~~~~~O @,t .; e , A X _ .4 , , .::: ::::::::, LZZd .. in .,;_: .. ..... . .... . . 12 1 ,,,-' ,....... #--. . -- ........ .......:__ 13 14 e g h I J(?2- ...... :: ...... 1:1.1 ... ttt= ..0 . -7 - I w 8 ....... I 1. .... - if ::- .................... " (L(M- ? --- i a vb2 FIGURE 58 Decorated Medium Slateware and redware basal break bowls. Florescent stage. a; b; d; i,I 5-_1_0; j 3, 4 - 8-10, 12: Kab ah. c: P M, Temax. , 1, 2; f h, 2: Dzan. g, 1, 2 4-_8 , 1: Uxmal. g, 3: PM, Yucatan Peninsula. i, 2 3: Acanceh. i, 4i j 7: Labna. jL 5, 13, 1, 17: Sayil.J 2, 2, 1 15: Chicheen Itza', Monjas Building. h, 1, 2~ i. 5, 7: Medium Redware, remainder are Medium Slateware. a; b d h, 4; L 1-15: Stamped fil- let. f: Thumbed fillet. jL 16: Applied tetrahedral bosses (cf. fig. 39, e, 19). j, 17: Plain fillet. aa; ; d; i: with fine-line postslip incised designs, , 4, iL 5-1Q0 with specular red paint, ; e; ; g; h mold-pressed designs on hollow rattle legs. A b; h, 4; Lj 1-_3 5-i0. 12, 14. 17 with cut skirts. ._; d: rim flange with incised design on upper face. The hollow legs with anthropomorphic decorations divide readily into two types: g, 1-3 is cylindric with a luted disc-form bottom, full-length human figures with a distinctive headdress appear, cf. fig. 62, R. Re- maining legs are round-bottomed, all showing obese faces and obese bodies when present. This "Fat God" figure appears also on a column at Oxkintok (Shook, 1940, fig. 7), on a Tepeu 3 whistle from Uaxactun (R. E. Smith, 1936b, fig. 17-5), and on a molded figurine from the Island of Jaina (prior to collection). Incising shown here is done through the slip, and through the specular paint where present (cf. fig. 44, a, 4). The fillets and skirts are very evenly made, suggesting kabal work. None have split or cracked off, suggesting that they were thrown from the original clay mass, not luted on. Fillet stamping is done with a hollow cylinder (reed?) in bj d, j 11. 12, 14 j, with a decorated stamp in other cases. The stamp in several cases bore two or three repeats of the design, see L 1, 2.. Cut skirts often show striations on the cut surface, almost certainly demonstrating the use of a shell tool. Cut ring bases and terraced slab legs often show this same patterning. To my knowledge, none of these decorative techniques are paralleled closely in pottery elsewhere. Their dis- tribution in collections, though scanty, suggests a late Florescent dating. [228] I 64 # _ __ i 4 C*..e~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 7 : # I(9J9p~Th d. w' h # ~JB 9JILI2JII2OIa I JO IIS a . , , ; ..* . - -a -a C00 o ooo m * r0@S@ 0 00 J ??? _ _0116 _ _i 0 0 0 0 ( 2 -I J - 4, I I 4J O9 % l a O O :---------"----; : I e ; a "- e .. ......... ... g II h l'7 -)-I -~~ i A 2 ,,, .11 19-01 f I '%',W 'W I % I M 61 VAWI Yl W , ? W 10. I -i X--i \.? \-? N 10 LqILOJ MIGIVIr. --f -.- --.: " ........: -C?d- - - -:-T" 4 FIGURE 5 9 Z (Puuc) Fine Orangeware from Puuc sites. Dzibil- chaltun Fine Orange from Dzibilchaltun. a: PM Yucatan. b c, 4 -6, 10- 15-_ Ad 12L 7- 9,l5,J7,j ,2.l,22~.,1-7e, 8 10 17, 2, 0 2, 4, 7, 11, 15-18, 23-25, 30: Uxnal. C, 2, 7, 14, 20; d, 3, 6; e, , , 19; , 3, 5, ., 21, , 26, 27: Kabah. , d, 14: Labna. 3, 2i, 1 f 20: Holactun. 4, 3, 12, ;Q3 ~, 9: Sayil. g: Dzibilchaltun. h, 1: Mani. h, 2-12: Acanc eh. a: Atypical specimen, possibly best classifiable as Dzibilchaltun Fine Orange. b-f: Z Fine Orange. l: Dzi- bilchaltun Fine Orange. h, _L: X Fine Orange. h, o: Dzi- bilchaltun Fine Orange. Remainder of h: all probably Z Fine Orange. a: Incised through black slip band. b: Incised through black slip band; rest of exterior and interior white slipped. Cf. Lothrop, 1936, fig. 78, a for a reclining figure similar to this. Very similar figures occur on orange paste pottery from Piedras Negras and in the Burkitt collections from Alta Vera Paz in the Univer- sity Museum, Philadelphia. Also cf. Smith and Kidder, 1943, fig. 19, e from the Motagua Valley. c: White slipped interior and exterior. d: Red slipped interior, white exterior; d, 2, 6, 11, 14 with black paint bands. e: Both interior and exterior red slipped, e, 5, 6 are probably from drums. e., 11 bears a gesso coating with rose-colored paint. f. 1-7 with scalloped border of un- evenly colored grayish-red slip, f. 7 with additional black painted dashes, f, 8-30 bear red slip or no slip. Smith, 1936b, pl. 11-19 is almost certainly the same type as f. For description and discussion of Z Fine Orange, see Brainerd, 1941. See also plate 103, m for an elaborately decorated vessel related to these. g: All interiors are red slipped, exteriors either red, black, or white slipped as shown. Incision, through slip and paint, is coarser and cruder in execution than in Z Fine Orange. g, 15 is similar in shape to fine grayware (cf. fig. 28, g, 58-1 ) with which it was associated. It may be misfired Fine Grayware. Ruz (n.d.) illustrates many fragments of these types of fine orangeware from sites along the Campeche Coast, notably from Los Guarixes. [23 0] a b j2~~7~/~ 7 A 777 __ 2> 77 b // jl b _________ 1 7=< 1Nff--'i _v / - - --- 18~~~~~~~~~~~1 f~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ol w /310 7 ~~-Lu 1, - ,, '1 M/'4'; 0 ,, _o,>~~~~~~~~~~1 4 - 21 g~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ $ ~ I ~ 'i 4 11 2 10 g ' iSX 17 ' R/u~~~~~~~~~~~~~~90 a , t X / 1> b0W lrkE2E 1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~S" W \,-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ FIGURE 6 0 Late Formative pottery from Puuc sites. Poly-. chrome ware from Kabah. Rare decorated wares from Puuc sites. a, 1-30, 32,.33 b, 1-4, 6-j0; k, 13: Kabah. c _ 6?, 7; d; h, 4; ivbI- 1U kU 1 2 X 11,14 15: Uxmal. a, 31; b i; -, 2, 3; k, 4-_ 9: Sayil. d, i ; 12: PM Labna. f: Oxkutzcab (private collection). a: Late Formative Monochromes were found wide- spread although rare in the Kabah trenches, suggesting a sizeable occupation of that subphase, smothered by extensive later occupation. R. E. Smith makes the fol- lowing assignments:_, 1-8, 11, 3-_17 _23- 28: Chi- canel-like; a., ., 12: Mamom-like. b: Polychrome specimens which seem Tzakol-like. c: Medium paste orangewares, some bearing black or white slips and paint. Incising, when present, is through slip. On evi- dence of colors, technique, and design, these may be imports from the same area as Z Fine Orange. d, _-3: Orange paste with grayish painted areas, d, 2 likely untempered as is a very similar sherd from Uaxactun (Smith, 1936k, pl. 11-8) and one from Xpuhil, 1949 col- lection. Figure 1C3, m seems nearly identical, and suggests that this sherd is classifiable to a type very similar to Puuc Fine Orange. e; f: Medium Grayware. f: is somewhat unusual in decorative style, constituting almost our only suggestion of Antillean interconnec- tion, and this is probably fortuitous, cf. Fewkes, 1907, pl. 79 (western end of Puerto Rico). Ware, shape, and incising technique are local, cf. fig. 53, f. g, h. g.: Me- dium Slateware probably from a grater bowl, likely Early Mexican (cf. fig. 74, ji j) though this shape seems present among Florescent-stage ceramics in the Chenes, and also occurs in Uaxactun during Tepeu times (Smith, 1936, p. 17). h, 1-6: Modeled applique decoration on Medium Slateware. For more squash rep. resentations like g, 3, cf. fig. 90, c, m. i, l:Sigmoid pierced lug, L 2 grooved fragment, both slateware. j, 3., 4: With incision bordered with precise, fine puncta- tion on brownish thin slipped ware. The punctations may have been made with a notched rocker stamp. I have observed similar rocker stamp decoration in simn ple straight lines on similar pottery from Palenque, on which Robert Rands plans to report. It is conceivable that these sherds are trade pieces; no direct compari- son was possible. j, 1-j.: Br.illiant, high-gloss orange slip exterior and interior save for sunken unslipped panels which seem to have been mold-stamped (some of these may have untempered paste). L I: Plano-relief incised through orange slip. 11: Carved redware; j, 8 postslip incised, remainder are slip covered and may be mold impressed rather than carved; cf. Thomp.. son, 1939, fig. 83, a, and Smith, 1936a, .j.;Lj which seen to show similar technique but different vessel shape. k, _-.: Medium texture red paste and slip with shallow incising. k., L A with black rim paint, L A with oyster gray exterior slip, cf. Smith and Kidder, 1943, fig. 42, i k.1 5, i: Orange-red slip with burnished grooves. i, 1: Translucent orange slip with red rim similar to fig. 9, bh _., i, L i. kL .9-j: Red slipped with black paint and incising. All sherds in k have medium red paste, and show similarities in shape and decoration to Puuc Fine Orange. [232] 1 19 AP 4 , r----- - ~~~~~~~~-- - , I _ s~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ s 1/ y~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ /s r~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I .. r-~~~~~ ~~~ -- . : -- A 12 ZI ,-'-,,Z ' v I' I 'I, J t' p --- I A ~~1 WA 1 1.1 d I h , s- , I ?1. " , -?-l ,? -?l -,.- - --- 'I " 'If, A , , V ",F-11 ---l 'ji i I ?f* ___ 7t t~ / gS6 } tn,,n.,1. 11z.. 4 e | rA_> i Q) t - - lu b W J I . t ,I I . . (A 'm'-4- <7''"?9: /71u 1. 4/ k __ .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 \I 1 ~12 I 'X, ''. ,, i fl.. Vi . . ~ , .~ . .. I II( f 99V i. Y _ \-- 7:, 7 A4 ,MM I'/_ 'Lt I 97_ 1. \ - - -- - , a _._. 2-'/ _ i'9>I C I ,, 17 I I | ' 51 I I -- 41 - -1 ?15? ? 11 .i L - I I I I 6 \ --- I.r*l -_4 2 ) f?l _11 ]l I \ - --J ? w 'AMMIM, 4 I I 0, W I 1 6 1- - - - - - - -- --- -- - - --- - --- - - / I / ?' ?i i I I/ ??, , Al 1 2 2 1 .......... "-? .ON , V-- -- , --- I I 14?? I FIGURE 61 Decorated medium slate and other Florescent-stage pottery from Yucatan. a: MM. b: MR listed 'Campeche." c: Acanceh, large pyramid. After Seler, 1915, vol. 5, pl. 10. d: Private collection. e: MR: Ake. f: Morley collection. Dzan. g: Morley collection. Ichmal, near Dzitas, Yucatan. h: MR, Uxmal. i: MR. j: MM. k: MM. 1: MM, Mayapan. m: MR, Acanceh. a; hd; _ k m: Medium Slateware, c is either Me- dium Slateware or medium grayware. b; j f j Thin Slateware. i: Medium blackware. 1: Thin deep-brownish slateware. d: Differs from such specimens as a and c in having been incised after, rather than before, slip- ping. Several beakers of this style and quality are known. One is illustrated by Stephens (1843, vol. 1, p. 275) from Ticul. One from Peto, PM, is shown by Spinden (1913, fig. 185) and by Morley (1946, pl. 83, ), two additional but somewhat variant specimens, both from Sotuta, are shown by Vaillant (1927, figs. 288, 291). Carving seems to be of top quality in all speci- mens, and unusually free in execution. Paste and slip of the PM specimen is typical for Thin Slateware of the Puuc type, and black, trickle-type paint is used for the spots of the feline. No sherds of this style were found in excavations, and trickle paint very seldom oo- curs on Thin Slateware. This type is unquestionably the highest development of the Florescent slateware pottery tradition. f and .g.: Cross-hatching was not found on ex- cavated incised slatewares, but on Fine Grayware, which is likely, but not certainly, somewhat earlier. For half- tone reproductions of f and g, see Morley, 1946, pl. 83, , c. 1; m: Unique. i: Cf. figs. 48, f; 62, a. The arrange- ment of elements suggests the Uaxactun wall painting (A. L. Smith, 1950, fig. 47) which is of Tzakol date. This piece does not seem to be of the Medium Black- ware which occurs in Regional-Florescent context at Dzibilchaltun. k: The recessed panels may be mold pressed. [234] ?2 JJJiiiJL]IJLIiL a ii-?K) j? (7 ,? N ? I 2 C ? ??>? I ?7 F?F ?, -? -? i?2?J I' -? Ii ?Jj _ - -? -? b?Y r -? -, J h m 9 FIGURE 62 Florescent-stage pottery from Labna. All specimens shown PM, excavated by E. H. Thompson (see manuscript in PM) from burials and rooms in mound 6, Labna, 1888-1891. Also included in this lot was fig. 3, c. d: Medium Redware. o: Highly polished red-orange with burnished vertical grooves (cf. fig. 60, k, i. b; c; h: Thin slate. Remainder all Medium Slateware. a: Very dark in color, cf. caption for fig. 61, i. bj c; h: Thickness, dark color, and lack of ring base sug-. gest that these Thin Slate pieces are Early Florescent. d: Shown by Vaillant, 1927, fig. 308. Form like Uaxac- tun Tepeu 3 specimens (Smith, 1936a_, p. 12) and San Jose' V (Thompson, 1939, figs. 83, a, 84) but on this vase decoration is limited almost completely to inci- sion; little background area is cut away. -.g; k.-_nj 2. r: Note the small teat legs and short, shallow slabs. These are probably the commonest early slateware leg form for the Puuc and Chenes regions, whereas to the north and east the large slab leg, often stepped, is early. Cf. figs. 15,; 35. i; j These are drums. Alber- to Ruz has excavated a nearly complete specimen from the building next to our trench 17 at Uxmal, see map 15. The drum excavated by Ruz stands upon a flare rim much like that which surmounts the top, save that the flare base, unlike the top rim, is slipped. The thumbed flange is common on these drums. Drum rims are comw mon in Puuc sites, see for example fig. 39 for exterior. ly striated drum rims, figs. 40, , 25, , 20; 41, b _16-18, 53 42, f 10-_12, g, 7 for more drum rims and bases. This style of drum occured in my Santa Rosa Xtampak (Chenes area) excavations, where it is believei to antedate stelae reading 9.16.0.0.0. See captions for figs. 69, , 1 and fig. 72 for probable carryovers of this form into the Early Mexican substage. [236] i , I a tI II-1 ' I I I gI p I - I I 0 ? I FIGURE 63 Incised and punctate dichrome and three-color poly- chrome. Regional stage. a: PM, collection of 12 sherds from "Mound near Merida" made by E. H. Thompson. b, 1-8: Sherds col- lected by E. M. Shook from "Chac" cave near Sayil (Stephens, 1941, vol. 2, pp. 31-35) which contains a spring 420 meters from the mouth through narrow pas- sages. c; d: Mani. a: The complete collection is illustrated. Exact provenience is unknown. Paste, slip, and paint seem similar in all fragments, a strong red on orange, save a, 7, the slip of which is cream rather than orange in color. , , 10, 11 are Incised Dichrome jar fragments, cf. fig. 64. Design ofj,j,2 and shape of_, 4 are sim ilar to Balam Canche specimens, fig. 6, d, and to Ya- xuna Flaky Redware bowls, fig. 6, , also to fig. 6,_g, L 63, a, , 3, i, i, 6 i, 12 are classifiable as typical Tzakol polychrome bowls according to R. E. Smith, who comments that lines of dots as fillers for rectan- gular areas, see , i, 6, _9, are confined to his Tzakol 1 subphase. Note that Incised Dichrome and the asso- ciated Flaky Redware bowls are shouldered or keeled, with sometimes a bulge just below the bottom-side angle (figs. 1, i k: 6, c, 8-16;d.,j, 1. ?_;b; 63, a. 1, 2, 1) and that the dichromes and polychromes of fig. 63, a grade from this conformation into a characteris- tic Tzakol basal flange, as shown in the Tzakol poly- chrome bowls illustrated by Smith (1936, pp. 13-21). The most economical hypothesis to explain this collec- tion is to assume the near contemporaneity of the Flaky Dichrome and Tzakol 1 horizons. The evidence for placing this material in the Early Regional sub- stage, contemporaneous to the disjunction at Uaxactun, is given in the text. Such placement would date the end of the Incised Dichrome horizon prior to 8.12.0.0.0, and to the Tzakol horizon, according to estimates of A. L. Smith (1950, p. 87). b-d: All fragments shown are from jars and bear a highly glossy, clear-orange slip, indistinguishable from the orange slip of the Incised Dichrome and from that of the Tzakol-style polychrome bowls (fig. 30, a) which accompanied these jars in the Mani Cenote trenches. The jar interiors are unslipped and striated as shown, cf. Incised Dichrome jar interiors fig. 64. The jar bot- toms, however, are different in shape from those of Incised Dichrome, rather resembling those of the large early Medium Slateware jars, figs. 32, a, 35, a, 36, b which have a low, vertically placed small loop handle. Note, however, that the jar handles, fig. 63,, b 8, d, , 34 have the form of pierced lugs, rather than of straps. This style of handle appears on Medium Slate- ware in the Chenes area and is presumably earlier than the strap handle. Note the single flanged basin fragment, d, 31, with slip extending exteriorly only over the edge of the flange (cf. fig. 2, c from Coba). The stylistic evidence may be taken to indicate the placement of this ware toward the middle of the Region. al stage, following the Incised Dichrome horizon, con- temporaneous with Tzakol in the Peten, and probably preceding the Regional redwares and the earliest Me- dium Slateware. [238] F- a r - t4 _I 5 I9ll 3 r-- r W --*Rz f / r-- /// orlm';;,z w ) f Ix FIMIM/I W Z /4/t WI/I//11 j LI u I V 7 I i . I z - 11 FIGURE 64 Incised Dichrome jar sherds from Balam Canche Cave. a-m: Incised after painting. n: Lacking incised out- line. This cave is described in Pearse, Creaser, and Hall, 1936. Spring is 170 feet in from cave mouth. Near the cave mouth is a small site, thus far unex- plored. Cave is about two kilometers east of the main ruin groups at Chiche'n Itza'. For more material from this cave see figs. 6, a 1 2 4 1 . i 7, b, I; 65, v; j It is not known whether this collection has been se- lected from a much larger mass of undecorated Flaky Redware pottery such as was found at the Yaxuna Ce- note. Note prevalence of step-feet figures, the earliest found in Yucatan. The chronological position and cul- tural affiliations of this ware are discussed in the text. [240] b p w g l E e , )gg W E! | R4 PF// I - I I "IN "' 7 INININ, p FIGURE 6 5 Formative and Early Regional wares from Chich6n Itza'. Puuc-style unslipped jar. Slateware from Balam Canche. a, 1; c, 1: Tenth scale, remainder quarter scale. a, 1-6, 8- b, 1-3, 15-_ 2l , 1-12, 23-50: Chul- tun west of Monjas, Chichen Itza. b, 14: Caracol. C, 20-22: Monjas. d: MR. e: Chultun west of Monjas. g: Trenches south of Southeast Colonnade. h: Caracol. i; L. Balam Canche Cave. a: Unslipped wares of Late Formative and Early Regional stages. ^, 1 is reconstructed from a 6 and b, 1. b c: All or nearly all are Flaky Redware. b 1-5 bear slip only as a stripe at the rim, and almost cer- tainly go with bottoms such as a 6, 7Z, 1 c: Flaky Redware. Many shapes are certainly Late Formative, for example c., Z. 4-1 (cf. fig. 17, f-h from Acanceh), others such as c, 31-36 are Early Regional. The Early Regional assignment is reinforced by the incised di- chrome sherds found associated and shown, fig. 6, d-f The clustering of early pottery about the Monjas, Cara-. col, and Hacienda Cenote suggests an early locus of occupation there. The unslipped ware as well as jars b, 1-5 are unusual enough to suggest an otherwise un suspected occupational phase which most likely could be placed early in the Regional stage, but our sample is too small and heterogeneous for definition of an as- semblage. The chultun west of the Monjas is probably the earliest chultun thus far located in Yucatan, althoug Uaxactun has produced earlier evidence of such fea- tures. d: Florescent stage unslipped; the neck is mark- edly symmetrical, body as markedly asymmetric. This jar must have been made on a kabal. e-j Medium Slate. wares. [242] Wt /W;X~~~~~~l\-- 11 VI. A ~~ p 3~ , ,\3 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _i' r t 5 1<\% I r~~~~--- t30 2010 ' t -/- b F ' S 2 43 A 7t 11m. o /'JE*- :~j, b ( (d _- I I I 11 I I I /I I i oto, iw A av; 0 , 7 of t i *#44 1----400 02? 1,? 3 '9 to#*O FIGURE Pottery from the Hacienda Cenote, Chiche'n Itza'. a, 1-22: Incised Dichrome and related wares, all with orange slip. Note variety of decorative techniques and forms. Probably only a, 13 comes from a bowl, remainder being from large jars. Note loop handle and dent-bottom bases. b: Jar fragments of a somewhat crudely slipped ware of Cinnamon Buff to yellow to white color range. Slip is opaque and matte in finish. The thinned lips and peculiar handle cross section (made as a pierced lug), as well as slip characteris- tics, place these outside the known Yucatan range; a few suggestively similar pieces occurred in the 1949 Chenes collections and those as well as these inter- grade into wares with slateware slips. The ware and forms show similarity to the Red on Thin Grayware of Dzibilchaltun and Acanceh (cf. fig. 20, A, .g) as well as to early slatewares. c: Holactun Slateware; typical. d: Probably Early Mexican Medium Slateware. e: Red slipped wares, e, 2 cream mottled, of dubious affilia- tion. Remainder probably Early Mexican Medium Red- ware. f: Appears to be a modern Yucatan Coarse Red- ware fragment, cf. fig. 34, g. g, 1: Unslipped shallow plate fragment. g, 2: Handle fragment, perhaps from a comal; if so, this is the only fragment of such a ves- sel I have seen in Yucata'n (but see Smith and Kidder, 1943, pp. 141-142, figs. 20, z, 21, c, d from the Mota- gua Valley; and Drucker, 1943, fig. 42, f from Tres Zapotes, Veracruz, which show similar comales of the Initial Series period, and Kidder, Jennings, and Shook, 1946, p. 208 for a discussion of their distribution, which includes Miraflores phase in highland Guatema- la). The fragment is also similar in form to modern basin-shaped vessels made in Yucatan. h: Fine orange paste, red slipped. Appears to be part of a modeled turtle plastron; no comparable vessels known, paste and finish very similar to that of X Fine Orange. i: Unslipped ware. i: Slateware with medium texture paste. j 1, 3, 5, 18-21 are probably Early Mexican; L 2, 9, 10, 12 are probably Florescent; j, 4 is likely Late Formative white-slipped monochrome. jL 11 bear s the rough slip characteristic of the jars shown in b. k: Medium redware, much of it Early Mexican, cf. figs. 85-88. However, cf. k, 2 with fig. 64, b, 16 with fig. 8, a-c, all of Regional date. k, 4-6 are probably drum fragments, likely of Regional date, k, 39 is unique in shape and manufacture. The collections come from trenches dug at the bot- tom of the Hacienda Cenote, a dry depression, the bot- tom of which is 15 feet higher than water level in the nearby Xtoloc Cenote. From Henry Roberts' notes, there were five trenches dug here. These produced a level-lying deposit which was defined by five recog- nizably different soil strata which extend over the whole bottom of the cenote, and which rest upon masses of large stones mixed with pottery. From a depth of over two meters, in the lowest of the five strata, came two animal teeth. These were found in two trenches, seem- ingly some 20 or more feet apart. Dr. Gerrit S. Miller, Jr., Curator, Division of Mammals, United States Na- tional Museum identified these (letter of May 16, 1932) as one of a bovid right lower third molar, the other an equid left third upper premolar. Dr. Miller emphasized that the material did not allow a closer identification than that given, and that Yucatan is within the range of Pleistocene bison and horse from which these teeth may have come, and further that extinction dates of these Pleistocene animals are unknown. On the other hand, there is no archaeological evidence for these ani- mals in American ceramic cultures until the European conque st. My tabulations of the Hacienda Cenote collections showed no significant ceramic change by level, and fig. 66, f, the most certainly post-Conquest fragment of the collection, came from the lowest level. If the teeth be assumed modern, it is difficult to imagine how they arrived at two widely separated low locations. Roberts' 1932 diary records a local story that a Maya well was located in the Hacienda Cenote. Maya wells usually have stone casings, and it seems unlikely that later material could have been introduced in filling such a well since no stone is reported from the excavations. It does seem possible, however, that in post-Conquest times an excavation may have been made in this deprei. sion in search of water. It is conceivable to me that the disturbance made by such an excavation might have up- set the stratigraphy of Lhe trenches, but still have left good stratigraphic profiles along parts of their walls. Soil stratigraphy is notoriously difficult to determine in Yucatan, doubtless due to the constant churning ac- tion of plant roots. Evidence of ceramic placement is well enough supported by other excavations in Yucatan to make virtually certain the identification of the depos& its in this trench as mixed. The ceramic evidence of mixed deposits is strong enough to invalidate the evi- dence for early dating of the teeth, and they may be assumed modern. [244] g 7 - 1 3 {-'g/. st i . SE~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ _ _ H i11 m kl////// I & t~~~~~~~~~~% 17 ; 12 ( 0V2 2 27 2 1 O ( I3 3K d 1 32 I1 e I C -02 'i "Y 1NJ ^ ,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A 4 - I I ---ik 'do__ -7: -- --- j--- 08o 2 _ _2W 5 2 0- i w - I~~~~~~0 17) 7 18 1 " ~33 ~P 3 a C f _ = 13 f^ 9 13 I I I -4 I a\\\\\\\\MA ------ F//, I. I I ..1 II1 111W 14 " *12 1%,I -90?- I .1 1 9 FIGURE 6 7 Florescent Medium Slateware bowls from Chiche'n Itza'. a: Caracol, covering jar illustrated as fig. 68, a. d: Near causeway leading to Sacred Cenote, with 87, w (leg form reconstructed as shown)., , 2: Trenches south of Southeast Colonnade. ; ;, 1, 2, 7-2: f 1-22; g 1-12; hL _1, 3-15: Monjas complex. e, -_ 6, 13-15, 18-22: Akadzib. g., Xfr, 17, 23, 24: Caracol. , , 17-19: Phalli group. b, l and b, 2: Florescent hemi spheroid bowl frag- ments of Puuc style from collections otherwise of pure Early Mexican subphase. c: Spout, unique, probably Mexican. a; d-h: These specimens have been selected as of Florescent stage, most of them from collections ob- viously of long period of deposition, or containing de- bris of more than one horizon. Criterion was sharp basal break as opposed to the curve characteristic of composite silhouette bowls of the Early Mexican sub- phase, see fig. 74, a b. Concentrations of this materi- al occur in the East Building, Monjas complex, mixed with Middle Mexican subphase debris; in the remain- der of the Monjas mixed with Early Mexican debris; in the trenches in front of the Akadzib in nearly pure Florescent, though small, deposits. The detail of these bowl shapes varies from those of the Puuc area (figs. 45, 46). Closest similarities are with Yaxuna (fig. 10, d-g.), with Dzebtun (fig. 35, i-m), and with Dzibilchaltun (fig. 15, a). These sites all show slab legs set flush with and curved to fit the bowl side. Those from Dzebtun and Yaxuna lack the cut terracing; at Dzibilchaltun the slab legs, although terraced, approach the small Puuc type more closely than do those from Chiche6n Itza'. Vertical thumbnail incised decoration is common to all these four groups of bowl legs, and is very rare in the Puuc; hollow cyl- inder stamping links Yaxuna and Chiche'n. Dzibilchal- tun, Acanceh (fig. 21, c), and Mani (fig. 32, h) also show curved, nearly flush, terrace-cut slab legs. In the Puuc sites only one characteristic Chiche'n-style slab (fig. 46, L 37), and one of intermediate type (fig. 45, i 10 ), were recorded out of the hundreds of leg specimens of this bowl shape collected. The Chiche'n Itza basal break bowls with terraced skirt are sugges- tive of Puuc style bowls (fig. 58, j.) which seem to date late in the occupation there. Such skirts are not found in the other sites which have slab-legged bowls. At Chichen Itza one skirted bowl (fig. 67, g, J) has slab leg s. At Dzibilchaltun, Dzebtun, Acanceh, Mani, slab-legg basal break bowls were found associated with jar and basin forms believed to date from a horizon covered by the main Chenes occupation, but preceding the main Puuc occupation. The Chenes bowl leg form of this hor zon, however, is close to that of the Puuc, and basal break bowls show marked increase in frequency towar the end of the Florescent stage. Regional-stage redwar bowls at all sites sampled show a preponderance of small solid conoid legs. As a generalization from these varied facts, it see1 that the stepped slab leg had a northern, perhaps north eastern, distribution in the Yucatan Peninsula at its earliest documented appearance in Early Florescent- stage deposits. It probably continued dominant at Chi- che'n Itza until displaced by the Mexican mainland leg forms introduced in the Early Mexican stage. Note that these legs were luted onto the flat base of the bowl (4, g, 2) and were probably cut to terraces by a fluted shell such as a Pecten. The walls were luted to the top of a flat bottom which had been roughened by deep incisions (., 16). [246] i a f INZI7 L-- y I s _^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-w E X RA i-m-, AW1-t) A V- I ip3lof I I h I- _ _ _ _ _ L I - 16 X A_ ____Ag__> < '~~~~E01 1 9 b I v g /J ?LI I - - - - jlljjjj?Wf2,0 - I 11- I C J:~ - - 1) N_ I 'Al L?? 6 - - 7 FIGURE 68 Florescent and Early Mexican unslipped jars, Flo- rescent Medium Slateware jars, and Mexican unslipped incense ladles from Chiche'n Itza'. a; d; e; , 6: Caracol. b, 3, 12-21, 23-_26 3 4- 10, 16-18, 20-; f, 5, 10-12: Monjas complex. b, 4i c, 1, 15; L , 1 14: Mercado. b, 5-3_ c, 7: Southeast Colonnade, Room B. b, 22, 27-0; f. i, 15: Trenches south of Southeast Colonnade. , 9-11: Group of Phalli. f, 8: Temple of the Wall Panels. c, 2: Zumpulche. a; b; d; e: Unslipped jars of the Florescent, Early, and Middle Mexican substages. c: Florescent-stage Medium Slateware jars. f: Incense ladles, Mexican stage. a; b; d; e: The lack of large pure collections of Flo- rescent and Middle Mexican stages at Chiche'n Itza' hampers the chronologic definition of unslipped jar forms there. Changes through time of the shapes seems to have been gradual. Florescent-stage jars of the Puuc area (figs. 37, 38) incline toward sharp neck-shoulder junction, and subangular, usually thickened, lip. Late Mexican unslipped ware is quite distinctive (see fig. 22, a, b) and the jars associated with Coarse Slateware at Mayapan (Middle Mexican subphase, fig. 22, c, 10- lo) show a neck form with a tight outward curve from the body, with rounded lip markedly thickened exteri- orly. Fragments 68, b, 27-30 are probably typical of the Early Mexican substage, as are likely b, 1-11. b j5, 17-20 are likely Florescent in date. The Early Mexican form seems to approach the Middle Mexican but to have a more gradual neck outcurve. Samples are not considered satisfactory, definitions only tenta- tive. c: The Flore scent Slateware sherds shown here have been chosen from the Early Mexican variety on the basis of translucency and darker color of slip. Most of them are distinctive from the Mexican phase concave cylindrical necked form, figs. 24, 25, 71, 92, by the absence of a sharp neck-shoulder junction and by a tapered lip. At the same time, beyond a general suggestion of similar size and shape of jars they are not close in form to the Puuc Florescent Slateware jar necks, figs. 40-42. The smallness of this sample emphasizes the scarcity of Florescent pottery in the Chichen Itza' collections. f: These incense ladles or censers are absent, save for stray finds such as fig. 39, d; ; , from the Puuc, Florescent collections. They are also probably absent in the Late Mexican substage in Yucatan; see fig. 23, f, 1-4 for the thicker, coarser later form from Maya- pan. They are illustrated in use in Mexican codices (see Codex Mendoza, fol. o3), occur in Monte Alban IV (Caso, 1935, fig. 55), and Ray Thompson points out to me that they seem to be shown in paintings at the Tem-1 ple of the Warriors (Morris, Charlot, and Morris, 1931, p1s. 157, c, 164, b.. fig. 322, e). Note that all but one specimen, L J~, has a perforation between handle and bowl, and thus could be used to blow clouds of in- cense smoke by applying the lips to the handle end. As far as I know, such ladles are absent from the central Maya area during Old Empire times. They occur during that period in the Motagua Valley (Smith and Kidder, 1943, fig. 41, J, , , 1) and Guatemala Highlands (Wau. chope, 1948, p. 126; Kidder, Jennings, and Shook, 1946, p. 209, fig. 201, a), but have trough-shaped rather than hollow cylindrical handles, at least nearly until the ef- figy plumbate horizon. The Chiche'n Itza examples pro ably demonstrate a Mexican mainland influence; cf. fig 75, , a slipped-ware example. [248] f~~?z4_ I~~~77 ~ a C e FIGURE 69 Trumpet-footed bowl incensarios from the Monjas Complex, Chiche'n Itza. b: Of Florescent style (cf. fig. 39, a-c). Remainder probably of Early Mexican substage. a: Quite similar in shape and decoration to a Tula specimen (Acosta, 1945, fig. 20, n). Two unpublished Tula specimens, of which photos have kindly been fur- nished me by Sr. Acosta, show shape similar to c save that they are proportionately much higher, with height 1 1/2 to 2 times rim diameter. One of these Tula spe- cimens bears stud decoration and thumbed fillets, the other bears vertical ridges and a human face composed of applique'd ridges. Neither has handles. It seems likely, though far from adequately demonstrated, that the incensario style change from Florescent to Early Mexican times may have been caused by Mexican main land influence. A notable increase in size characterizes the Chiche'n Itza specimens; the Tula incensarios are even larger. Absence of information on Veracruz coast line ceramics of this period is a major difficulty in tracing these forms. Loop handles, cut flanges, stud decoration, and the trumpet-footed bowl shape, all ap- pear in the Florescent stage and thus are holdovers, although decorative treatment seems to have declined in frequency and variety. e, 1: May be a drum fragment. If so, it is the only unslipped drum known to me. These fragments, in cons mon with all incensario fragments known from the Yuca tan phases, often show evidence of a crude coat of white stucco. [250] a b r- -'4 II rID ^ ^ - ? r 406rl - - - - - - - I 4 5 3 1 2 5 FIGURE 70 Unslipped incensarios, bowls, and basins from Chi- che'n Itza. Chiefly Early Mexican substage. a; c, 1, 3-14 16; h, i L 1-3, 8, 14: Trenches south of Southeast Colonnade. b: In eastern doorway of Tem- ple of Four Lintels; may date late; temple stood until modern times. c, 2, 15: Akadzib. h, 3; d: Unknown lo- cation. e; g, 1-5; h, 2 4t 5 i; 1-6; jL 4-7, 9j-13 15j_1.7 k, 1-9: Monjas complex. f: Temple of the Initial Series; subtemple, west room. a; c-ji Are Early Mexican sub- stage. b; k: Are probably Late Mexican substage. Several of the Early Mexican vessel forms are cer- tainly dated from the short-term deposits from the trenches south of the Southeast Colonnade. These forms include the incensario form of a with variants shown in c, 1, 3-14, 16 and the unslipped bowl sherds shown in jL 1-3, 8, 14. This bowl form, with which the legs shown, fig. 96, ?, 2, 8, _, and the perforated bra- zier necks, fig. 96, 12, 11, were associated, is thus of Early Mexican substage. The series a, c are discussed in caption of fig. 69. b in shape and clay approximates the vessel form of the late Figurine Incensarios, cf. figs. 99-101 and is probably of the same date. f: Bears postfiring red paint on the rim; it is unique, probably Early Mexican. The handle has been restored from a stub. e; g, 1-5: Are either Classic or Early Mexican. h, 1: Cross shaped perforations in incensarios are known from Tula (Acosta photo), and from Quen Santo, Guatemala (E. Seler, 1901). d; , -5: Fragments of appliqued faces, all but h, with evidences of a lyre-shaped ele- ment flaring outward under the eyes. This element is found painted on X Fine Orange, fig. 79, d; e; L and is generally considered an attribute of Tlaloc, the Mexi- can Rain God. A circular eye (likewise a characteristic, of Tlaloc) of applique'd filleting occurs on a Tula incen 3 sario, and a face of this general type on a red-painted slateware lid from Chiche'n Itza, fig. 75, d. i: This hol- low, tubular handle, with disc ornamentation may have come from one of the incensarios, similarly ornamentedi shown in fig. 97. Only other highly ornamented incenm sario handles are early Florescent, fig. 19, c. This handle is probably shown upside down by error. The unslipped, small bowls shown in_l are in about 50 per cent of occurrences painted with a red paint aft. er firing. Some, as 5 and6, bear a red-painted rim. This paint appears as a thin wash, not masking the rough, unslipped surface, much different from the lus- trous red slip which covers the otherwise similar Late Mexican Coarse Redware bowls, cf. fig. 26, c. Many sherds of this group bear white plaster, some show pale blue and black paint. These surface treatments suggest that the bowls were used for sacrificial pur- poses, as were their later counterparts found in the Sacred Cenote. Legs of the type shown in jL 17 supported some or all of these bowls. The similarity oI these legs to those known from "Mixtec braziers'" (cf. fig. 97, h-J) suggests that this form is Mexican mainland inspired, as are so many others of this substage. The unslipped basins shown in k are doubtless for the most part Late Mexican in date, cf. fig. 27, k the shape has lasted to modern times. , 3 is unique in form. [252] a d 3 .7i Ij i ___7jj OOOF' I 101 .dos FIGURE 71 Medium Slateware jars and pedestals from Chichen Itza'. Early Mexican and Florescent. a: MM. b i_-, 6 8-10, 12-_15, 19 X . . 12i 11-, 19-20, 4-26, 2-E3; , _-, -1, 16_ 23- 26: Monjas complex. b 5, 7, 26 - , 16, 27: Hacien- da Cenote. b, I , 1 1 2 22: Zumpulche. b, 16 20; ~, jj j,j ;., ~, 15: Mercado.~, 30: Akabdzib. J h: Temple of the Phalli. e; g; i: Chich6n Itza, unknown lo- cation. The sorting of the Medium Slateware at Chiche'n Itza' suffers, as does all sorting there, from lack of pure deposits of Florescent date. The Puuc collections were substituted for such a standard in the sorting and non-Puuc-like Medium Slateware assumed to be Early Mexican. The 1949 Chenes and Rlo Bec collections have turned up Florescent-stage forms not found in the Puuc, and which thus, by elimination, were classed as Early Mexican at Chichen Itza'. One of the most striking of these is the pedestal, e-i The jar rim shapes which must certainly belong to the Early Mexican subphase are (a) the high concave- cylindrical neck, c. 1-_., 19-26, and (b) the heavy in- cised necks, d. Both these forms continue through the Middle Mexican substage, (a) until modern times, and neither is known during Florescent times. It is rea- sonable to assume that (a) was introduced by copying from X Fine Orange jar necks, cf. fig. 76, a, , and this chronologically links the appearance of the two types. Smaller, usually squattier concave cylindrical necks such as b, 11-16, 23-30 may have the same ori- gin, and are nearly absent in the Puuc collections, but their similarity to Florescent forms from Yaxuna, fig. 10, a, , and to forms probably early from the Hacien- da Cenote, fig. 66, b, suggests that their assignment to the Early Mexican substage had been remain tenta- tive. Certain rims here shown are almost certainly earlier than Early Mexican. The series ., 2-37is probably all Florescent. For , 16, cf. fig. 3, b (Flo- rescent). The pedestals e-i (also see fig. 72, n, _-.j) are so called because the term is noncommittal as to function. These are not lids; they would be difficult to use as such. Only noticeable wear is on the tops, the incised designs on which would limit their usefulness as tor- tilla forming tables (the making of tortillas is uncer- tain for pre-Conquest Yucata'n). The absence of this form in the Puuc collections led us to believe it of Early Mexican age, but discovery of fragments in the Chenes area in sites free of other Mexican-stage ce- ramics makes a Florescent dating possible. A much more startling occurrence of this pottery form is from the Island of Marajoa, at the mouth of the Amazon (see Meggers, 1948, pp. 156-157; 1951, fig. 3, lower right). These Marajoa "offertorios" or "stools' resemble the Yucatan Peninsula specimens so closely in shape and size that it is difficult not to believe that they indicate cultural diffusion, even though the distan involved is so long (about 5,000 km. by coastal route). Miss Meggers has kindly furnished me with several additional references to the distribution of this form. It belongs to the Marajoara Phase which she dates 1200-1400 A.D., and it is also recorded from various locations in Ecuador. Lothrop (1942, pp. 254-255) give convincing evidence of ceramic design interconnection between Marajoa and the early period of Cocle, Panan Less similar to the Chiche'n Itza' form is a group of specimens from La Venta (Drucker, 1952, p. 121, fig. 40, c) which have a much higher base and a perforated disc. [254] 1. i I il w i a FIGURE 72 Medium Slateware, Early Mexican substage and Florescent stage from Chiche'n Itza. a; f4, 6-8; 1, 6-0 h, --1, i? 6, 8 j1, 1,6-1.8, 20, 1 1-8; m, 1-13 n i, o 4- 8 10: Monjas complex. 3, : Sacred Cenote. c; f. 1-; X, 1 i i ; 5: Phalli complex. c: MM, Maxcanu. f i, j _, 4 , j 1; n, _2, 3; -o, 1, , 3:Mercado. f,9M -L_5.2 1, 1 5 Trenches south of Southwest Colonnade. vL 1-3: PM "near Chichen Itza." , 2: Akadzib. n, 4: Zumpulche. g, 4: Temple of the Atlantean Columns and House of the Grinding Stones. &, 2: Caracol. b 1 2, 4 d h: Chiche'n Itza' general. a: Incised under black-paintedband. , 1-i; c; h: Incised before slipping with some background areas excised. i and jof probably Florescent stage, remain- der Early Mexican or indeterminate between Flores- cent and Early Mexican. d, 1-4: Scratched after firing. g, 1-5: Hand-modeled with incised details and punched basal face. e 1 1-8: With trickle black paint. 1-0 o, 10: Incised before dry upon an unslipped zone. a: Obviously copies X Fine Orange in design, but note that here, as on the local redware copies, the tra- ditional underslip incising technique is used rather than incising through the slip, which is the technique on both X and Z Fine Orange. The thin-walled spheroid feet with sloping perforation are also in X Fine Orange style, and the basal break area is thin, a foreign idea. c; f: h: Seem copied from X Fine Orange shapes, figs. 77, 78. d: The scratching was probably a form of doodling; it may have been done on sherds. ej k, 4-20: Neck area left unslipped. The use of painted S elements enters the Yucatan repertory at this time, and is ex- tensively used during Early and Middle Mexican sub- stages; cf. this figure with figs. 20, a; 24, f 74, .; 92, etc., where it often takes Z variants and is associated with U forms such as in 1 1 The U is found painted on X Fine Orange occasionally (see fig. 77, m), but the S element seems absent unless 76, a be considered re- lated. f. 9j 10: May be from drums. g: These pottery pestles are unique in Mesoamerica, so far as I know, to the Early Mexican phase at Chiche'n Itza. The punched working surface suggests their use with grater bowls, very likely in grinding chili. In addition to the speci- mens illustrated, others come from the Phalli complex, the Northeast and Southeast Colonnades. Stone pestles with naturalistic heads occur on Santo Domingo and other islands of the Antilles (Fewkes, 1907, pp. 99-105). Quite surprisingly, pottery pestles appear in Colombia in the Tairona culture (Mason, 1939, p. 373) with ap- proximately the same size and shape, roughened work- ing face, and animal head. The Colombia specimens figured seem not to have a curved stem, like those from, Chichen Itza. Grater bowls (fig. 74, i) are also found in the Tairona culture. I believe this similarity is too close for a chance parallelism, and I venture to suspect that similar artifacts will eventually be found over somir of the intervening territory. A single ornament of gold in Colombian style was found in the Chich6n Itza Ce- note (Lothrop, 1952, pp. 94-95). i. 1-3: Miniature jars of Florescent-stage form. i, 2: Is a copy of the large three handled form, cf. 35, a. i: Florescent-stage jar sherds; cf. figs. 40, 42, c-_; rims and handles are characteristic, walls rise more steeply than do the Early Mexican forms, cf. m. k, 1-3: Jar bottoms inde- terminate between Early Mexican and Florescent; the low handles suggest Florescent forms. , 4-20: Belong with the Puuc and Chenes fragments which are probably rims of drums, cf. figs. 37, c 39, e, j0-4 S2, _i L 1 The thinness and somewhat different form and slip col- or of these specimens suggest that this style of drum may have lasted into Early Mexican times. 1. 1-, 4., 8: cf. 71, 1. 6-7 with high vertical handles represent a vessel unknown from whole specimens. m, 1-13: From Early Mexican substage jug, cf. 71, a. n: cf. 71, e-i. Q, 2, 3: are likely from drums, remainder from varied forms of jars. [256] .j I I :1I I II ?iI i c 7' I -K 7/ . 7 1 4tS / /~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ f I~~~~~~~~~~~~ X X \ XN(' s sj _ v . AN A iaf I O I i { I I _-- -w_r } 2 == j - a.W,liV A <,kil~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ a dl t, I ---vmp ---19r FIGURE 73 Medium Slateware basins from Chich6n Itza, of Flo- rescent stage and Early Mexican substage. a., 7 -14 b; _, 14- 25-36 4, 17-30 .; f. Are prob- ably Florescent, remainder probably Early Mexican. a, 1: Akadzib. 1 2-6 19-26: c 1 2 4-23 25 30- i9.; 4, 1-8 10-1 15-35: Monjas complex. , 7-14: Sculptured Jambs. a, 15-18: Mercado. b; e; PM, Sa- cred Cenote. ., 3-6, 50-53: Caracol. c. 7-jl3; d, 9: Trenches south of Southeast Colonnade. c., 2 246-2: Phalli complex. 4, 14: Zumpulche. A considerable number of the sherds illustrated are indeterminate between Florescent and Early Mex- ican horizons. Groups of horizontal incised lines on rim exteriors are characteristic of the Mexican sherds, 8, -_L; 4, 14-26. Exteriorly thickened (bolster) rims with rounded lip, 4., 1-12, are also Mexican; this style of bolster usually has its outer surface flattened and parallel to the inner surface as opposed to such sherds as b, 14-17 which are in typical Puuc (Florescent) style, cf. figs. 43, 44. The Mexican type was formed by eversion of the rim during shaping; the Puuc type seems always to have been formed by the addition of a fillet and often fractures along the line where the fil- let was luted. The Mayapan Coarse Redware basins, fig. 27, j. demonstrate but little change from Early Mexican times. The slip of the thin-rimmed basins, which actually range closer to bowls in size, ; I.-_4 c, 25-_, is variable, some being quite close to that of the forms shown in fig. 4, Et, which somewhat resemble Florescent Thin Slateware in vessel form and thinness of wall. There are close resemblances in both form and ware characteristics with Red on Medium Slatewart of Early Mexican date, cf. fig. 75, ., and in form with the Coarse Redware of Mayapan, fig. 27, k. The verti- cal loop basin handle, c, 231 4, d .., i, 33 f. holds over from Florescent times, contrasting with the horizontal loop jar handles which seem to have lasted from Early Florescent times until now, with a single horizontal loop basin handle at Mayapan in Coarse Redware, fig. 27, b., 27. _e; ; f: From the Sacred Cenote; are all prob- ably Florescent. b seems to be a miniature of a basin similar to fig. 44, b, 43. f is nearly identical in shape and ware, though not in painted design, to a vessel found under a room floor in the 'palace" at Santa Rosa Xtam- pak, Campeche. [258] a I~~~~~~~~ 7 ~~~~~~9 t I _ _ 27 I 2 -FIGURE 74 Medium Slateware bowls and grater bowls from Chiche'n Itza'. a, 1-3, 10-13, 18-26 b, 1-3, 5-10, 14, 16, %, 24; c; e; &; h; i 1-6, 11: Monjas complex. a, 4-9, _1L, 15, 17; b, 15, 17, 20, 21, , 27: Trenches south of Southeast Colonnade, a 6, 11-13, 22, 26 d i 10: Phalli complex. f i 1-_ 9,L 1-3: Caracol. b, 26; h j; Have scored floors, remainder do not. Bowls of the Early Mexican substage show a divergence in form from those of the Florescent stage. This di- vergence may well have resulted from a change in the technique of construction. In a number of observed cases, Late Florescent basal break bowls were formed by first building a disclike bottom having a slight spherical curvature, then adding a flaring rim, prob- ably while the bottom was in the leather-hard stage, and, perhaps later, the tripod legs. The result is a marked angle, usually accompanied by a change in thickness, between side and bottom. The bowls illus- trated here, a, 1-_2 b, 1-17, 19-23 24, 25, , 2; ; 4; e; f. vary in profile from an unbroken curve to a curve showing a marked localized change of direction, but without a sharp angle, or change in wall thickness. b, 18, 23 are probably Florescent in date. The Early Mexican bowl form was probably produced during a single continuous forming operation, rather than by the two-stage technique of the Florescent basal break bowls. Florescent hemispheroid bowls are distinguish- able from this Mexican group by their greater depth (cf. fig. 50). Unfortunately, these criteria are not diag- nostic for all small fragments. Legs are also in sever- al criteria diagnostic between the bowls of these time stages. Grater bowls or molcajetes, defined here as bowls with roughened floors, do not seeni to be a part of the Puuc pottery repertory, and are almost absent from the collections. Accordingly, in the Chiche'n Itza' col- lections we had considered this form as a Mexican introduction. Molcajetes seem to have been absent from the Teotihuacan repertory (see for example Linne, 1942, p. 186). Sr. Acosta tells me that they oc- cur in the Mazapan horizon at Tula (probably Acosta, 1945, fig. 20, b reoresents a molcajete), and the type attains a major development during Aztec times, ex- hibiting mold-pressed floor designs. The situation is not completely clear for the Valley of Mexico Middle Cultures. Boas (1912, pl. 38, 3) shows an Archaic roughened bowl floor from Zacatenco; Tozzer (1921, p. 48) references this type as allied to his "cuneiform" from Coyatlatelco, which he believes is also Archaic. Vaillant (1930, p. 42) finds this type of roughened sur- face in his Middle Zacatenco period, but shows the roughened surface external. In the Rlc;atec, the molca- jete appears, seemingly as an abundant form, in all periods from Formative times on (Ekholm, 1944). It is present in X Fine Orange, fig. 80, L o, , , but seems absent in plumbate. It does not seem to occur in Highland Guatemala. At Uaxactun in the Peten, one grater bowl of form close to the Chiche'n Itza' specimens occurs, dated Tepeu 3 (Smith, 193sa, p. 17); this may be of the same horizon as our Early Mexican, since a Chiche'n Fine Orange bowl comes from the same sub- phase. Other than this occurrence I know of no molca- jetes from Initial Series period Maya sites, save for the quite disturbing discovery in 1949 of several in- cised-floor bowl sherds from Xpuhil, Campeche, two of them from near ground level within the substructure of Structure 1 (Ruppert, 1943, frontispiece). If this structure dates between 9.12.0.0,0 and 9.19.0.0.0, as we suspect at present, the molcajete distribution sug- gests an earlier Mexican mainland influence than we had suspected for the Yucatan Peninsula, and raises various puzzling questions, discussion of which had best be postponed until the Xpuhil pottery is published (in this connection, also see the caption of fig. 80). Grater bowls also occur from far south of the Maya area, for example in the Tairona culture of Colombia (Mason, 1939). The incised cross-bones, g, appear on the bottom exterior of a painted floored bowl. The incised patterns of grater bowls show considerable depth. They were done in wet clay, and have raised, ragged edges. The slip, applied later, does not always cover the entire pattern. is 10 with slab legs is unique. [260] a I r~- _ - I~~ I~~~~ I I I I _sI b I I I 7/{ I8 FIGURE 75 Red on Medium Slateware and similar pottery, and two imported bowls from Chiche'n Itza'. a . 1-i; L, kj , 1-5: Phalli complex. c d; e 1, 1 I_ L . ; k. 2 6, k 7; 1: o: Monjas complex. h: Caracol. n: MR. b; ; m: General, Chich6n Itza. This group is heterogeneous in slip and paint color, and quite possibly on careful analysis with more com- parative material than is yet available would prove to be a mixture of imported pottery and local copies. Slip color ranges from a lustrous orange, as in g, to a matte oyster gray. Paint colors range orange-red to purplish-red. o is quite certainly imported from the Mexican mainland, as must be m. The shape of these two, with the distinctive leg form and red leg decora- tion, resembles the Tula Mazapan style, cf. Acosta, 1945, figs. 20, b, 32, No. 1, ceramic table Pozo 3, "ro- jo sobre cafe'." The ware of this specimen is not Ma- zapan, but shows a high gloss surface, perhaps bur- nished over the paint. e also has a slip of orange cast and very markedly resembles the Tula 'sahumedores" in both shape and design (ibid., p. 37, fig. 20, _). Our reconstructed handle length is probably too short. It is very likely that these Chichen Itza' pieces are im- ported, perhaps from as far away as the Mexican high- lands, or perhaps to Tula and Chiche'n from an inter- mediate point. ?g is definitely of local manufacture and is probably the rim of a drum of similar shape to Flo- rescent-stage specimens. d seems also to be of local manufacture; in form it resembles a unique unslipped lid from Chiche'n Itza', fig. 70, f. The large decorated jar h is unique; the design is more naturalistic than any other found, the ware and shape are local. 1 is of particular interest because of its close similarity to a fine orange vessel from Isla de Sacrificios (Du Solier, 1943, p. 76, i1). This arrangement of animal limbs and head also occurs in plumbate ware (Shepard, 1948, fig. 14, bk. b, 1). The painting of slateware pottery with crudely drawn circles and bars of red paint seems likely to have come into Chich6n Itza' as a Mexican fashion. The marked similarity between c and the Tula specimen suggdsts this. This decorative technique seems to have been limited rather closely to small vessels, many of them probably for ceremonial usage. Mention should also be made of the similarity between various of these speci- mens and ceramics from Xochicalco (Noguera, 1947). Closest ware similarities are with Sr. Noguera's "Ana- ranjado B" and "Crema. " Striking similarity is evident in the use at Xochicalco of circular blobs of red paint and use of red border lines at the rims. In form, his period II shows greater similarities with the Early Mexican substage at Chiche6n Itza'. These are buttressed by similarities between Xochicalco I forms and the Puuc, and III and the Late Mexican substage in Yucatan.l These similarities are general, as might be expected due to normal diffusions of style over such a distance. Miss Anna Shepard has checked for technological simi- larities in materials between this Chichen Itza material' and a group of Xochicalco sherds which I selected for i similarity, and which were kindly furnished by Sr. No- guera. She reports no similarities close enough to docur] ment trade. It is of interest that the Xochicalco pottery supports, in a general fashion, the long-remarked Maya, similarity in the Xochicalco bas-reliefs. If the ceramicw similarities between Xochicalco and Yucatan ceramics claimed above be acceptable as evidence of cultural connection, a diffusion toward the mainland during Puuc", times is indicated, since the forms concerned seem to have been long indigenous to Yucatan. This hypothesis I consider far from verified on present evidence. [262] f 1 - 2- - - -- - - ' @ 1 / ' W t-2-\} 9///gX~~1 1111 I a 1 A ir fIx x ~ > -------- 7rll-\\M\ 'r - -4p]~ 4000 0 / k MI~ ?c?jZ I n At- I yi, I 1-1-1- A 1 1 2 I -I 5 m I ?,A ?41'1' 17 11 I I - -Z I 11 11- - - I I , -, FIGURE 76 Early Mexican fine orange jars and bulbous vessels fr om Chiche'n Itza. a; b, 2-8, 10-_3 , 2, 4, , 12 1 4, 2; . 2 1 4-10X ; j1, , 5, 6; m: Monjas complex. , 9; c, 3: Mercado. c, 7, 8 j 4: Caracol. , 3: Trenches south of Southeast Colonnade. n: Zumpulche. Remainder of unknown location at Chiche'n Itza'. a-e: Jar necks, sides, and bottoms, decoration in black painted designs alone. The tripod rattle feet of d may have belonged either to the jars in a and b which have a sharp neck-shoulder junction, or to the vessels shown as f-t. f-t: Bulbous vessels with re- stricted orifice, but without a sharp body-shoulder junction. Assignment of body and base fragments be- tween these two groups is uncertain. It may be noted, however, that no evidence for incised design on sharp angle neck-shoulder jars was found. Decoration: a c; f g; i; k-m: Black paint decora- tion. h; o p; p.Z r: Incised through allover red slip, with additional black-painted decoration. .; s: Incised through a black slipped band, with additional black painted design. The freely drawn designs under a and c have counterparts on the floors of flat-bottomed bowls (fig. 81, a, x) and are markedly distinct from the sym- metrically organized and largely abstract design which forms the bulk of fine orange decoration of this period. Certain similarities suggest design sources in Aztec I, rather than its neighboring chronological periods in the Mexican highlands. For this design repertory, cf. c, 11-13 with Brenner (1931) fig. 3; c, 10 with Brenner fig. 12; a with Brenner fig. 15; fig. 81, x, 6 with Bren- ner fig. 2 (these sherds all previously published in Boas Album). This dating is admittedly shaky, based on meager materials. If an Aztec I assignment be granted on this evidence, the Early Merican ceramic substage must be considered as lasting later than the Mazapan occupation at Tula, since there was no Aztec I occupation there (see Acosta, 1944, p. 153). This fine orange pottery was probably manufactured somewhere on the Veracruz littoral. For a description, see Brainerd, 1941. For a discussion of Mexican affili- ations of this ware, see Brainerd, 1953. [264] K' /1)LL51 e>22 9! - .h Ft r- - - - 7 1 i I r- A n J P'j - "Ar. 1 2 3 '% l/ 5 k L-W -.-I ,. - I p ~ . * r . . . . . . . I I d -7:-A 1 I I I I 11 II I 11 -1I I I t 12 .1 I I I N?k? f V- 00 ? 9 FIGURE 77 Early Mexican fine orange bulbous and pyriform vessels from Chiche'n Itza'. b; __ ; 1; E; t; t;; y; aa; cc: d ee, 1-4, i, i; h, i 1-_3; ii, 1-5: Monjas complex. d g; ee, 4: Mercado. o: Trenches south of Southeast Colonnade. f, 3: Cara- col. gg ji: Temple of the Atlantean Columns and House of the Grinding Stones. Remainder: Location unknown. a-1i -bb gg: Incised and plano-relief on red slip, no paint used. m-P: Incised through black slip with black painted decoration. g-w: With only black painted design. ; aa: ee; dd: Incised through allover red slip, with black painted decorations. jj: With applique'd boss bearing a mold-pressed human face. The specimens f-l are notable for their more in- volved, somewhat naturalistic design, in which more background area has been removed than in other types. The fact that no black or white paint occurs on sherds with this type of decoration suggests that these sherds come from a separate group of vessels. The rattle in the side-wall of the vessel .g is unique in the collection. Some of these vessels show a faint neck-body juncture (c di i: t ff, L) which intergrades into certain jars which do not show a sharp neck-shoulder break (cf. fig. 76, g; hj i; Li. There is a possibility that such bases as h, -3 belong to cylinders (cf. fig. 86, f in Medium Redware), but there is no proof for this form in fine orange. The incised circle on ygg, which suggests a maker's mark, is unique. [266] i \ b o0 1 0 1-0 0 oII :1 f~~~~~~~~Ii p iN n i ....... . _ y bb ee I I I 1 3 4 1 2 6 ff I > .. : hh 2(2 I . \3 , I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ *) - 0 0 dd z I _~~~~ cc c I e 'd i i i ilk-? -T ?Q r-i-ic E -lk k 7 "No, vlf 7 *- #-,In IRM.-IFly ik 1 'i FIGURE 78 Early Mexican fine orange cylindrical vessels from Chiche'n Itza' and the Mexican mainland. aj b: Isla de Sacrificios (private collection). f; Tlaxcala (after Marquina, 1928, scale uncertain). c: Temple of the Phalli. d; -. ; ; y, _-; aa. D: Mon- jas complex. y, _j aa, 2: Mercado. z: Temple of the Sculptured Jambs. ; c; h: Incised through black slipped area. dj e Incised through red allover slip. &: Incised through white slipped area with additional black painted designs Remainder bear only black painted designs. As far as is known, the cylindric vessel form in this ware always bears a trumpet base. The serpentlike head ofj is comparable to fig. 7S, a but seems attached to a seated anthropomorphic body. The masked human figure of h is closely analogous to fig. 79, s although proportions are quite different. [268] I. U? ..W ..f.?. . F- /~~ nsu ~- k , I I~~~ V l 3F 0 r y * / 7 I~~ _ I - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L 77f- - aa xx m 'Nt qw bi Ti d 7Iir - m-w p s I 4{ 1) i1 I\S 1%, I' 'WI I I r- (r ,el i r- ?-: I ?1?11 I , t t A c /P 4r w 4 I),, I I I FIGURE 79 Early Mexican fine orange vessels from Chiche'n Itza' and elsewhere in Yucatan. a: Chunkatzin, near Labna, PM, b; d _; f:; 1; _ 1, 2: Monjas complex. j. Caracol. n; r s: MM. o; q: MR. m: Probably from Temple of the Interior Atlan- tean Columns. Remainder from unknown locations at Chiche'n Itza. a; b; c: Belong to a sharply marked typed which nev- er shows painted or incised decoration. Shape and col- or variation on surface (orange rim and smudged gray body) are distinctive (see Brainerd, 1941, taper lip bowls, p. 167 for descriptions). Drucker (1952, p. 101) describes this decorative technique on ash tempered fine-textured orangeware bowls at La Venta, but unfor- tunately does not give sufficient data on vessel shape to allow close comparison. d- 1: Effigy-vessel fragments. See Dutton and Hobbs, 1943, fig. 81, d, for a roughly similar form in a Guatemalan highland ware; Shepard, 1948, figs. 20-22 for other similar vessels in plumbate; and du Solier, 1943, p. 76, fig. g for a similar vase in fine orange. e: Shows the head restored in d. i k: Seem to have come from globular vessels. h: Seems to have been an attachment for a hollow, modeled mask. Note lyre-shaped painted figure under eyes of d-f which is duplicated on a large, cylindrical incensario from Tula (photo courtesy of J. Acosta). i: Is a chin showing the teeth of the lower jaw. 1: Probably represents a spear thrower and darts, at least the left hand does not hold a bow. The painting on d-i includes a deep, maroon red, with specular sparkle, a clear, glossy white, and black resembling that used on other fine orange vessels. j Unique, incised decoration. m: Also unique; mold-pressed panel. hj g: Painted shoul- dered pyriform vases, cf. fig. 77. o: Unique vessel pro- portions but decoration is within the local range. pE r s: Incised cylinders, cf. figs. 78, ; 90, e-g; Charnay, 1887, p. 375; Weitlaner, 1948, pl. 2, 15, etc. (most of these specimens bear no black paint). This vessel form with mask design in a rectangular panel was among the most widely traded and most elaborate of its ware. The design panels show considerable variety as well as close correspondences in various details. They form a group with considerably more internal similarity than similarities with other groups such as, for example, the early Classic stage Kaminaljuyu masks illustrated by Kidder, Jennings, and Shook (1946, figs. 97, 98). [270] 0X'': f fW~~~ -. I 0 p I { I Il i I I I lI , IIII d r .-7- a'sI c I IIA k 7. -.- I I - I II I 11 I -, i II I I II FIGURE 80 Early Mexican fine orange bowls from Chiche'n Itza'. a; ; e ; ; ;L ,2; _; ff: Monjas complex. ;r Phalli complex. .i i t: Mercado. g.: Initial Series group. aa: North Colonnade. cc: Northeast Colonnade. Remainder Chiche'n Itza' unknown location. a-p: Round bottom basal break bowls, some with incised grater pattern on floor. Note much greater concavity of floor than that on Florescent bowls, also that walls are more vertical, lip squared, and vessel profile more constant in thickness. h: May belong with hemispheroid bowls. q-y: Hemispheroid bowls; this group may grade into the round bottom, basal break bowls; the one reconstructible specimen, however (s), has a shallow flaring, annular base rather than the spherical tripod cascabels commonly found on the above shape. z-gg: Globular vessels with restricted orifice, bb and cc are dubious but probably belong to this shape; ee is unique in both shape and decoration. ; _ bb: _ ff: Zgg: Incised through black slip. a-c e s w; ; cc: Incised through black slip area with addi- tional black painted design. w: Incised through white slipped area. jj x; y; aa: Incised through white slipped area with additional black painted design. d, Lf k 1: Black painted design. L; n-p; ee: Incised into orange paste. The grater bowl bottoms shown here, 1; _ o; p, originally suggested that this feature had been intro- duced with X Fine Orangeware, presumably from the Veracruz littoral. The likelihood that the grater bowl existed earlier in this area has been mentioned else- where (fig. 74, caption). It may be noted that the locally made grater bowls at Chiche'n Itza (fig. 74) are of a shape not copied from Fine Orange, although their characteristic incurved rim is not of local derivation. The incurved rim is a Tepeu-phase marker at Uaxactun, and incurved rim grater bowls dating Tepeu 3 have been found there (for form, see Smith, 1933, fig. 17). Tepeu 3, the terminal period at Uaxactun, also contains Chiche'n or X (Early Mexican subphase) Fine Orange, so the Uaxactun gratei bowls may equate with our Early Mexican subphase. Our specimens from Xpuhil, Campeche, which seem to be of Florescent date, do not show incurved rim and tripod rattle legs. Thus grater bowls seem to have re- mained localized on the east side of the Peninsula until early Mexican times, missing the Puuc area. The hairpin loop handled specimen z is unique in Yucata'n. These handles occur on late Huastec Black on White pottery, on a vessel from Isla de Sacrificios (Mayer, pp. 94, 95) but vessel form in neither of these cases resembles that illustrated here. Globular vessels showing a markedly restricted ori- fice (hole-mouthed vessels) are not found in Yucatan prior to this period. Their appearance here in Fine Orange as well as in Red on Slateware (fig. 75, , 1-i) suggests a Mexican mainland influence for this form, although I do not know of examples found there. [272] - -.p1bn Fe 4/ :~~~~~~~~ tzo y k= 7W ___ I I ee . ' a. C IFL- - - - ca L -- u- t- t I *%+4 dd I,- I s I r f v -71 , , I I i b A-! FIGURE 81 Early Mexican flat-bottom basal break fine orange bowls and unusual fine orange fragments from Chiche'n Itza. ; i; , 1: Phalli complex. b: North Colonnade floor. i: Temple adjoining the Northeast Colonnade to the south. k, 1: Zumpulche. m n; w, 2: Southeast Group. j L~ dd: Mercado. J_; v; aa bb; ee: Monjas complex. Remainder Chiche'n Itza' unknown provenience. a-Ji 1 ; o r; s; x, 1-6: With black painted designs only. i; j. 1; n-v: Incised through white slip band, usu- ally with additional black painted design. i and n show additional incision through red slip. a: Has shell-shaped ornament appliqued on the rim. m: Incision through red slip. x, 1-6: All show painted designs on flat bowl floor fragments. The lack of incised design through black slip on this bowl form is notable and suggests possible chronologi- cal or regional difference for the origin of these ves- sels. The form has a wide distribution; one Chichen Fine Orange specimen was found at Uaxactun, others at Tampico (Ekholm, 1944, fig. 21), a probable local copy at Tajumulco, Guatemala (Dutton and Hobbs, 1943, fig. 88). b: Unique in having been resist smudged, thus the colors are reversed from those in the drawing, orange design on dark gray ground. This probably was unintentional, a fault in the firing. y: A Veracruz region handle form (cf. Strebel, vol. 2, pl. 30, 1, 4 Mayer, p. 95). ff: This doughnut form is found in Puuc-style Fine Orange at Utatlan (Lothrop, 1936, fig. 78) but there the cross section is circular. Alabaster vessels of the cross sections illustrated here are known from Isla de Sacrificios. Legs of effigy vessels, bb-dd, are simi- lar in general to plumbate forms (cf. Shepard, 1948, figs. 14, 15). [274] wem Ioi T 4:~c420 0 = '. I cc G S i dd 0 '~ ~Iff /1 I- 1/ I, \?\ /1 I"\1,611 I I PW w 40,00 I u v 3 FIGURE 82 Exhibit comparing incised designs on Mexican-stage wares from Chiche'n Itza (continued on fig. 83). Designs have been restored when possible and are limited to one design repeat. Scale is not uniform; size of design has been made uniform to allow easier comparison. The specimens from which these designs were taken are all illustrated in other figures; validity of restorations may thus be checked by the reader. All variations of repeating band design which were recog- nized in the pottery are included. a: Chiche'n (X) Fine Orangeware. b: Medium Red- ware. c: Medium Slateware. d: Coarse Redware. These wares are all known to have been contemporaneous (Early Mexican substage) save for Coarse Redware, which reached its peak of popularity during Late Mexi- can times. From evidence of close copying of Chiche'n Fine Orange in these designs, and their absence from Mayapan in the rich Late Mexican deposits there, the ware may be suspected to have been first made during the Early or Middle Mexican subphase at Chiche'n Itza'. The design seems to have evolved in the state of Veracruz (Brainerd, 1941, 1942, 1953). The known dis- tribution of Fine Orangeware of the Chiche'n Itza' rep- ertory is discussed elsewhere. Although the history of this style of pottery design is nearly undocumented in its native area, it probably stems at least in part from the so-called Tajin style (Kidder, Jennings, and Shook, 1946, pp. 237-238, 250, fig. 156) common to stone carv- ing on Totonac yokes, palmas, and architectural bas- reliefs at the type site, but suspected to have originated by early Classic times. Common to most Tajin style material is the filling of fields with scrolls or hooks, usually subangular, with outlining composed of two closely spaced parallel lines. The scrolls in Tajin sculpture are often pendant to ribbonlike elements in plano-relief "entrelace" design which is used to fill panels, often of irregular shape, or in running bands. This style of hook is a basic element of X Fine Orange incised design and is the single best connecting link between the sculptural and ceramic styles. The decora- tive style of X Fine Orange pottery shows more regard for abstract symmetry than does stone sculpture of the earlier Tajin style, the predominant type being slide reflection (offset mirror, Brainerd, 1942). Whatever may be the historical development of this design, it arrived at Chiche'n a well-integrated style, underlaid with solid conventions and showing ease and variety in its application. The historic relationship between this design and that on plumbate pottery is uncertain; we lack docu- mentation. That the design of the two wares shows enough similarity to denote relations of some sort be- tween the two contemporary and not far-distant peoples who made them seems to me clear upon comparison of the series shown here with Miss Shepard's excel- lent design array of plumbate (Shepard, 1948, especi- ally figs. 35-41). The use of scroll and reverse curve designs, usually in double line and with the reverse curves usually asymmetric, is striking in both sets of material (note table, ibid, p. 58). There are, of course, equally obvious differences in the masses of designs from the two wares. The plumbate seems to show less regard for symmetric arrangement, and a more varied assortment of elements, a tendency to- ward vertical compression of scroll designs, a softer sweep of curve, and a variation of surface which sug- [27S] gests differences in technique and materials. Certain plumbate specimens also may share with Cerro Montoso polychrome a somewhat greater stylistic similarity to Tajin stone-carving design than does X Fine Orange, although this impression is admittedly based on small samples. Plumbate vessel shapes, the pedestal cylinders and tripod cascabel pyriforms, the round-bottomed tripod cascabel basal break bowls, the constricted cylindrical necked jars (Shepard, 1948, figs. 1-7), also resemble X Fine Orange forms more markedly than do most oth- er Middle American wares. Plumbate, in form as well as in design, bears a softness of outline in marked vari- ance to the delicacy and precision of X Fine Orange. This variance seems due to the use of a kabal in the forming of X Fine Orange, as well as to differences in materials between the two wares. These statements may answer the understandable objections which Miss Shepard has raised to my finding of an "obvious rela- tionship" between plumbate and X Fine Orange without explaining what sort of relationship I meant to specify. (See Shepard, 1948, pp. 133B-137.) Both X Fine Orange and "developed' or "Tohil" Plumbate were widely traded, and the ornate decora- tion, careful manufacture, and small vessel size of both wares suggest that they well may have been made specifically with trade in mind. They were traded con- temporaneously into markedly overlapping areas. Each of them is found in the area where the other was prob- ably made. It is certainly not surprising that there should be similarities in their form and decorative style, though the craft traditions and materials in which. the two wares were made seem to have been quite dis- tinct. These similarities may with reason be ascribed to copying between the makers of the two wares. To me, the style of the incised design on X Fine Orange seems more thoroughly integrated by convention than that of plumbate. If this may be interpreted as evidence of ma- turity in the development of a style, the majority of the incised design elements and arrangements common to the two wares may be assumed to have traveled from X Fine Orange to plumbate. Effigy shapes, on the con- trary, are commoner in plumbate and may have been copied in the other direction despite the fact that they are not found in the earlier San Juan Plumbate. But these styles may well owe much to traditions outside either of their areas; our information is still fragmen- tary. The principal aim of these plates of comparative de- signs is to demonstrate the relationship of X Fine Orange pottery to the local wares at Chichen Itza. All reconstructible incised designs on the Mexican-stage ceramics of Chiche6n Itza' are shown, with the exception of those definitely naturalistic designs which do not show evidence of symmetry or repetition. Since the in- cised pottery design of previous time horizons in Yucar. tan is known in some detail (see figs. 57, 58) it seems certain that few of the designs of this period are of local inspiration (possible local designs are fig. 83, b AZ e, 1-3), and the close similarities to those of X Fine Orange leave no doubt as to their source. As a rule, these copies are competent but uninspired, and tend toward simplification rather than toward any de- velopment or embellishment of the imported style. The local decorative technique has conformed to the BRAINERD: THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL CERAMICS OF YUCATAN new designs to the extent of using bands of black or white slip as backgrounds for incised borders, but the local technique of incising before slipping has been retained and stands in contrast to the fine orange tech- nique of postslip incising. Other retentions of local technique occur in the nonadoption of elaborate mold- ings on local pyriform vases and in the continued ten- oning of cascabels in Yucatan, whereas X Fine Orange cascabel legs are merely luted on (see fig. 86). This situation indicates effort on the part of the local crafts- men to imitate the appearance of X Fine Orange with- out any effort to import materials or to learn new technique s. The Mexicans seem thus to have arrived as a non- pottery-making group and to have superimposed their fashions, but not their techniques, on the local crafts- men. The same sort of an impact was made by the Spanish on the Yucatan ceramics of the Colonial peri- od. A similar effect may with some reason suggest a similar cause. The Mexicans probably were a warrior group, not including craftsmen, and with political and perhaps religious interests rather than a desire to colonize. A further study of the architectural and sculp- tural craftsmanship at this period in Chiche'n Itza with Mexican mainland craftsmanship and style particularly in mind would probably show, as do the ceramics, Mex- ican style grafted onto traditional local craft techniques. A similar situation seems to be evident in the Es- peranza phase at Kaminaljuyu where Kidder tentative- ly postulates a military invasion for the strikingly close similarities to Teotihuacan in architectural de- tail and in artifacts. (See Kidder, 1948, pp. 255-256.) The Mixteca-Puebla influence at Guasave, Sinaloa (see Ekholm, 1942, pp. 122-132 for a discussion), is postu- lated by Ekholm to have been caused by an actual move- ment of people, although I believe evidence of this seems scanty. Willey's proposed usage of "horizon style" and "tradition" (1945) fits this material neatly; the separation proves to run between styles of orna- mentation and techniques of manufacture. At other points in the Yucatan sequence this dichotomy does not work so well. Willey's concept will become fully mean- ingful only when we understand the underlying causes which govern its applicability. The relationship of Z Fine Orange to the contempo- raneous pottery of the Florescent stage in the Puuc area, as well as to X Fine Orange, may bear discus- sion. These two repertories of fine orange show only a very general similarity in design elements and types of design arrangement (cf. fig. 83, a, 30-32). Dzibil- chaltun and Puuc Fine Orange may be grouped together as much more similar to each other than either is to X Fine Orange. However, these earlier groups show a close similarity to the later in the use of technique and materials, the attributes which we expect to show per- sistence in craft tradition. These attributes include the use of an untempered orange-burning clay, postslip incising, use of black, white, red slips, allover and in bands, thin-walled precise forming. We have very scanty evidence for the location of manufacture of the earlier (Dzibilchaltun and Puuc) groups of fine orange. The Peten sites do not show them. Piedras Negras probably yielded a few fragments. Two published specimens which probably fit our cate- gories come from the Gulf of Campeche shore (Carmen, see fig. 36, j_) and Highland Guatemala (Utatlan, see Lothrop, 1936, figs. 78, 79). By far the highest frequen- cies of Puuc Fine Orange thus excavated come from the Campeche coastal sites dug by Ruz (n.d., fig. 31), and this region must therefore lie near the center of manu- facture. The craft techniques and materials which the Florescent and Early Mexican types of Fine Orange hold in common suggest that they may come from the same craft tradition and thus likely from the same re- gion. Chiche'n Fine Orange, however, seems never to have been found in quantity anywhere in refuse excava- tions, and is quite rare in Strebel's (1889) plates of col- lections from central Veracruz. The largest quantity of X Fine Orange, save for the Chiche'n Itza collections, comes from Isla de Sacrificios tombs, but these materi- als may have been brought from a considerable distance. Ekholm's finds of types similar to X Fine Orange at Panuco suggest northern Veracruz as a center of manu- facture. Although we do not know the source of X Fine Orange, it therefore seems likely that it was made in the same area as were the earlier types of fine orange- ware found in Yucatan. The Mayapan Fine Orange does not show as close a technical resemblance in vessel form and finish to the repertories above compared as do the Florescent and Early Mexican groups to each other. For example, slip bands, black painted designs, and elaborate incised de- sign are not common, although they do occur on the Mayapan types. Nevertheless, the finding at Mayapan, in Middle and Late Mexican deposits, of fragments defi- nitely belonging within the X Fine Orange repertory suggests no time gap between the two groups. A chrono- logical overlap between X and Mayapan Fine Orange is also supported by Seler's Uaxac Canal grave finds (see fig. 89, , s, D). That the center of Mayapan Fine Orange manufacture lies not far from Cintla, Tabasco, is sug- gested by the Brinton collection (see fig. 103, k, 1j, and supported by the common occurrence of probably iden- tical ware and similar forms in coarser wares in col- lections from the Campeche coast made by Ruz (n.d.). By the comparison of craft techniques, Mayapan Fine Orange may at this stage of knowledge be hypothesized as coming from another region than do the preceding types of fine orange, or alternatively, if it comes from the same area, a major population movement has caused a marked change in ceramic tradition. These prognos- tications are based on few and simple factors, and no far-reaching importance is claimed for them even in this specialized field. They are, however, available for objective testing in the future. (See Brainerd, 1953, for further discussion.) 27 7 b I1 b llOil b ,' '1.I 4X3Tm 2 111" 7 0n II ,w II -,1~ T r 9 III I2 0 _ 13 A, 0111 I;1 IN j_ ti_i:rC 1I6 1'1I d t , TV ou oo + V 26 2J- 'S g 36/ 3 1/' b 23 A.7 36 7Z 7I .,b LU i.iw i7! 31 '6 d d d ,;. -I 1-UJ . n. a 2V 1 O7T I /, 11-Ifiv ?j0 0 U 11 rk~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 IWrHe 10 7F'o' 1I QP mzv 16 21 TZI1{7 I., _/S I 17 7I;Z b 000 ,,, 0 0 0 11 '-I-T 1, \ /I oJ 19 C d 2 c j1i0 19 4, Jl I? ,, I f .iiz -1 IL I , 3 4 T r-?j 'FT -1 LOA 0 0 Ul 3 AU-) T- 6 o ??A4 f o 7 T "' -Ub-fj- /I\ 9 "'IL ,) 0 , , " 15 A.- III 25 .3.; 3, 5 b 2; I II I 2S 1% 'o Jrrjntli . I 36 37 0 FIGURE 83 Exhibit comparing incised designs on Mexican-stage wares from Chiche'n Itza' (continued from fig. 82). a: Chiche'n (X) Fine Orangeware. b: Medium Red- ware. c: Medium Slateware. d: Coarse Redware. e: Thin Slateware, Florescent stage (?). f: Sand tempered foreign ware (see fig. 91, p, 2). For discussion of this figure, see fig. 82 caption. [280] a b c ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0 X~~~~~~~~~~~~ 2 1fi 1 W d .s v .. 9 , .. .~4 s I m liiI X 0 v iIIE 5i 6 12 14 15 b c 7 16 I 18 4 5 6 f 19 20 21 1 X >SW1XK hfS mi!HYI b e f Q ill 11 12 7 p 2 2 2 F b 13 14 I 5 16 17 23 'l. /qv / (?~~~~~~~1 20} 21 2.5 26 b d 772S. 7} _7.5 A} 2 7 $ 7S29 27 2, 9 36) 3/ 2 IIX MSg ~~~~~III[I[f.LLEIII IL b c 91 .J,s' .{'J 1, 0 1, rI l EZEZEL II1[ 111 DII EI TEELTICI ., 1 10 ,J I Io 42 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~44 FT 13111 ] nL llJIIiIl IIZZt PIl I -DIZ') b f 1P, 4Z 1,'Y I'J/ i3f 52; C= UV')N-)- GNd E FIGURE 84 Exhibit of black painted design from Chiche6n (X) Fine Orangeware, Early Mexican substage, Chiche'n Itza. This design is all taken from specimens separate- ly illustrated. Reconstructions are only of parts which seemed certain to the author, and can be checked against the original figures. Drafting is neat but free to the point of careless- ness. Painted areas are of same surface texture as background. Paint appears to have been thin, easy to handle, and quite opaque. One specimen shows resist smudging (fig. 81, b), the rest show a clear, dark, gray-black color. Two degrees of line thickness may be discerned. The two thicknesses are not normally used on a single vessel. Examples of the commonest thickness are 56-60 of the thinner type are 22, 2, 30 , 5 . I know of no good parallels to the freely drawn birds, 61-82, save for specimens of local wares exhibited in the Universidad de Veracruz, Jalapa, in 1951. The exe- cution has been formalized, see 61, into seven strokes, but this procedure was obviously not rigidly adhered to and considerable variation is seen even on single specimens (fig. 80, 1. for example). The device shown on 22-32 is here always found pendant to the lower border of a band, and with many variants, is found from Middle Culture into Aztec times in the Valley of Mexico. (See Vaillant, 1930, pl. IV, j, and Franco C., 1945, lamina 4.) The abstract, geometric design in this series, 43- 60, is of particular interest in the differences it shows from the incised design which, fig. 81, 1. for example, sometimes occurs on the same vessels. First, none of these painted designs is in slide reflection, which is the commonest type of the incised series (fig. 82, , 1-22 ), and those which technically are in slide reflec- tion, i2, Xi, 5.j, 6., contain elements which suggest origins in the bifold rotational system (see Shepard, 1948a for usage of these symmetry terms). For this origin we may analyze step-fret band designs. Designs belonging to the step-fret system are very widespread in the New World (see Brainerd, 1942, p. 165). They characteristically consist of interlocking scrolls alternating with stepped figures of some sort, and are often composed in bifold rotational symmetry. Very little evidence of this design system appears in X Fine Orange incised design. The reversed curve scrolls and pendant hooks common in that system nev- er interlock, stepped elements (82, a, 4j, _42) are mir- ror symmetric, and are rare. Single or grouped pen- dant lines, pendant U's and circles are common in the incised design. Armed with these contrasting elements, and assuming their origins in the systems where they seem to fit (Brainerd, 1942, pp. 165-166), we can demn onstrate that the painted design of X Fine Orange is a blend of at least two origins. Fig. 84, 48 bears a mixture of elements; pendant hooks with adjacent double curves and probably the pe dant V's belong to the incised style, while the double stepped lines and simplified rectangular interlock scrolls are members of the step-fret system. Dissec ing the design, we have a bifold rotational step-fret band to which have been added extraneous elements in' simple repetition from the incised repertory. Designs 43-47 show added V's which do not destroy the symm try. 56-59 show variations and departures from the prevailing bifold rotational symmetry of step-fret de- sign, without any sure evidence of elements taken froi the incised repertory; the remainder of this series al show varying degrees of introduction of elements fro the slide rotational design system of the incised ware Since some of these designs are free of intrusions fro the incised design style, but none are free of step-fro elements, it seems reasonable to assume that the ste fret style is native to the painted design and that it shows influence from the incised style with which it occurs in combination. Step-fret bifold rotational de- sign is best known from the Anasazi area; I know of n other area nearer where a ceramic style shows it in pure or nearly pure form. Its presence as a live style in Mexico during this period is clearly attested, how- ever, in the mosaic wall decorations at Mitla. Perha ceramics of hitherto undescribed wares bear it, or it may have been common on perishable objects of east Mexico at this date; it is still commonly used on wea ing in this area. Other elements painted on X Fine Orange pottery are easier to relate to contemporaneous ceramics. element shown in 22-32 is common on Culhuacan (A I) ceramics. Other elements common to painted desi on X Fine Orange and Aztec I painted design are de- scribed elsewhere (see caption, fig. 76). It will not be completely clear whether these resemblances show contemporaneity until we know more of the wares an cedent to Aztec I painted pottery. These designs may have been in use at an earlier date, and it has been suggested that they may have originated in styles of the east Mexican mainland. From the design reperto ies of Aztec II design given by Jose Luis Franco (194 it seems unlikely that X Fine Orange dates this late. Design resemblances to Aztec I pottery are consider. ably greater than to Aztec II. [282] I ?lI 2S 34 . mow 111 1, ~ /7 I @-- 111_11I3~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4 ); >1 2.S~~~~~~~~~~~~~5 39 45F _ 0L 19 26 6 7 X $got ik? et a 13 /4 27/ 2/ 27 28 33S .34 35 -- 40 41 42 46 47 49 50 Vt Vt ? vS 0 4, 57 61 68 69 3 - 76 77 3? +~~~~~~~~~~ 53 58 62 63 70 71 - 74 79 54 59 64 65 - ~- 74~~~~~~ 3 I 72 3 ~~~~~~~~I i I ut)f / 0 /7 4., 44 4, 1 4S' 5I S.S 60 .? 6d~~. 1 ,v~~~~74 67 _- 7.5 i -N) rTrI ? ? ? ? LC. - 1- 31 FIGURE 85 Medium Redware jars and bulbous pyriform ves- sels, Early Mexican subphase, Chiche'n Itza'. a: Sacred Cenote, PM. , 1, 4, 5, 9-11 13; d, 2 j 7, 8, 12-, 16-, 21, 22; e, 1 6-a; f. 1, 2, 5-8: Mon- jas complex. , 3, 14; d, 9, 10 -, _ 9; f. 4: Caracol. d, 1, 3, 4, 6, 11, 15, 20; e, 3: Trenches south of Southeast Colonnade. 4, 19: Southeast Colonnade, Room B. Remainder: Location unknown. a; b, 1-4, -14: Incised under red slip. l 5: Incised under white slip band. a: Shows typical Yucatecan tech- nique of grooving to receive lip or tenon of cascabel leg. However, the legs on this vessel were never added. b, o: Has been formed by embossing the gadroons from the interior by pressure, and outlining them with a flat-ended incising tool. These operations were per- formed, of course, while the clay was soft. c: Bears incision, but no embossed gadrooning. The great majority of these vessels must be copies of X Fine Orange jars and pyriform vessels (cf. figs. 76, 77). A few are similar to Medium Slateware jars of the subphase (cf. 4, 8, 22 with fig. 75, h), while the tall, elegant neck of d, 16 seems to link most closely with plumbate forms (cf. Shepard, 1948, fig. 3, f h; yh. Tripod cascabel rattle legs are here applied to concave cylindric neck jars (cf. fig. 76, d 1 2 for similar X Fine Orange jars) as well as to the bulbous jars and pyriform vessels. The technical conservatism of the local potters is well demonstrated here in the common habit of tenoning the cascabels to the body as well as in the use of preslip incising. X Fine Orange bears de- signs in postslipped incising on vessels with simple luted cascabel legs. These bits of conservatism con- trast markedly with the ready copying of X Fine Orange form and designs. A further detail of X Fine Orange vessels which the Maya seldom copied is the forming of delicate moldings around necks of pyriform vessels (see fig. 77, o; ee 1-O. Most Medium Redware ves. sel necks simulate these moldings with incised encircl. ing lines as in d 13-16. For proper reconstruction of the sherds shown here, the cylindrical vessels of fig. 86 must be considered. Although present evidence is negative, it is possible that some pyriform or bulbous vessels bore trumpet bases (cf. fig. 77, g) and, conversely, that cylindric vessels may in some cases have borne rattle feet. [284] a '9 )'-' ii?i K> c I 1Lrff-7 1I7r\ fr d F H71 tmt1V(j I~?lA- e 'Wii 'vl/) % 16" i ,L - 2 ; d y y~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ animm-M 7,;' ,WFr(ipT " -l" ?i ??A 10 - FIGURE 86 Medium Redware cylindric and bulbous vessels and basal break bowls, Early Mexican subphase, Chiche6n Itza'. c; f: Phalli. d: Wall Panels. g, J ., 1, h ,3. , ,; L 3: Southwest Group. h, 4i, 11: Sculptured Jambs. g, ] 3 8; h, I 10, , 24, 26, 30-36'; j, 1, 7: Monjas complex. h, 7, 8, 12, 3 , j, , 228 2 j , 6: Caracol. , , 7, 20, 23: Trenches south of Southeast Colonnade. h, 27, 35: Mercado. i: Temple of Atlantean Columns and House of the Grinding Stones. j ,. Fitting sherds from Monjas and Caracol excavations. Remain- der with location unknown at Chiche'n Itza. a; b _ 5 7-11: Incised under red slip. g, l-_ L 1, 3, 7: Incised under white slip band. .L 2: Incised under black slip band. a, b, and c are classifiable apart from the remain- der. The churn shape is more like that shown on a late San Jose IV vessel (Thompson, 1939, fig. 8, _., b) than to those common to its ware, and the terraced skirts of a and b resemble those of Florescent basal break bowls (cf. fig. 58, a bj j). The ornamented rattle legs are unique. Design repertory of b and c show no exclu- sively Mexican mainland motifs, but design of a must have been X Fine Orange copy, and this supports the ware determinations in placing this group in the Early Mexican substage. d and e belong more properly with the bulbous and pyriform cascabel vessels of fig. 85. f-h demonstrate the range through bulbous to cylindric vessels which characterizes these forms. The tall ped- estal or cascabel footed forms are foreshadowed in Yucatan only by certain Z Fine Orange forms, but by nothing in the locally made Florescent-stage cerarnics. These forms have been made in Yucata'n, if one allows wide latitude in shape, through all successive substages until the present time (cf. figs. 23, ; 34, e; g 90, s t 9 2, b _ S.; j.i The basal break bowls are close to those of the con- temporaneous Medium Slateware (fig. 74). Cf. i; l 3, 5 with fig. 81, a-_; cf. j., 2, 6., 7 with fig. 80, a-pv also note more of these forms on fig. 87, a-t where d;j i; k belong to the latter group, the remainder to the former group. [286] -1 \ 2 t 3 M\\M\\\\\WWWOMW, 666 U~~~~~~~~ '2 ~~~~~~~~333 ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~Z13 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I6zt - r2't * lr1;ii Y ,;t h' 1:?SAo4j ii 6, .61 6 r?r?r=I=T -- s S?~~6z1 HTf fj _ >2 11 FIGURE 87 Medium Redware basal break and rounded bowls, Early Mexican subphase, and two specimens of Flores- cent phase, Chichen Itza. b u: Phalli. L 12t , 13. Southwest Group. 4; i; .i L s; t, 6-10 14, 16, 18; v; y: Monjas. e: Sculptured Jambs. p; ; tg 1-3, 5: Caracol. t, 11, _ aa; bb: Trenches south of Southeast Colonnade. w: Near Sacbe north of Castillo. cc: Mercado. a-s; x-cc: Incised under white slip band. u: Incised under red allover slip. y; z: Incised under black slip band. a-t: These basal break bowls show suggestions both of their Florescent predecessors and of style influence from Fine Orange imports (cf. fig. 81). The trumpet- shaped cascabel of the X Fine Orange form seems nev- er to have been adopted, but the black and white slip bands were taken over, and incised exterior designs, which, however, were done in the local preslip-incised tradition, although the designs are exclusively of X Fine Orange deviation. The monkey on the bowl lip, , finds its closest parallel in the shell on the X Fine Orange bowl lip, fig. 81, t. It is of interest that here as elsewhere in Medium Redware, although the black slip band was used, the X Fine Orange practice of drawing in black line was not used (only exception to this rule is use of black line in fig. 88, f, ). Medium Redware is considerably darker in color than the red slip of X Fine Orangeware, making the black paint less effective. The black slip bands also show a tendency to spall off; the black paint for Medium Redware seems not to have attained a sound technical development. The rounded bowls u; x-dd are similar to the X Fine Orange forms on fig. 80, _q-y. Base form is unknown. Walls are in general less constricted than Florescent forms (cf. v ). See fig. 88, a for more of this Flores- cent form. The two Florescent-stage bowls v, w are of a type rather rare in the Puuc collections, cf. fig. 51, 147-159, perhaps more commonly found in the Chenes area. aa- cc bear designs suggesting Z Fine Orange, cf. fig. 59, , __; _, 3, 2, and thus are perhaps Florescent in date. [288] Ja MO~~~~~ = s -I k #I m I VNM"Wt'. 777 7wgo I I I\\X F ~~~~~~~7 1~~~ 7 7~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ X ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ --F *7Tr 0 1 0qr &~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,.. Ib w aa I A LE??L : t i I I L(?g)- q r I -3 A;;? ?-? Li li? c q )IK- --a cc III : e FIGURE 88 Medium Redware rounded bowls, effigy fragments, graffiti, mainly of Early Mexican substage, Chich6n Itza'. aL 21 7X13 15 12; bL -4L IL L;, Z5. e1I 2: Caracol. A, 3., 5-1 a Z 6 7 X 13 L X; d 1 i;e2 L5 f. ,.; _-, 10: Monjas complex. _, 14 _ , J, _ c_; 1: Trenches south of Southeast Colonnade. , , 16 , g h 4: Phalli. c, 3: Sacbe north of Castillo. h 1: PM, Sacred Cenote. Remainder with location unknown. A, ; e, 3; f. 6 g: Bear incising under the slip. , 2: Was certainly mold pressed. Design on many frag- ments of d e; f was done by hand-modeled appliqued elements. Designs on h, 1-4 were scratched after fir- ing. L 4: Bears black paint. A Z; f.: Are painted, Red on Slateware, cf. fig. 75. Forms a b, and c and i show a wide variety of bowl base and leg forms. Some of these are certainly of Re- gional and Florescent stage. Compare such forms as a, 2-14; b, I with fig. 2, a; b of Regional stage from Coba. Cf. , , 172-20 and fig. 52, i-m, Florescent from Puuc sites. Cf. a. _-4 , 3 and L _-10 with fig. 51, 1 Florescent from Puuc sites. c, 1: Belonged to a larger, trumpet-based basin, c, 6 possibly to a drum. Most of the fragments shown in d _; f come from effigy vessels, many of which closely resembled plum- bate forms (cf. Shepard, 1948). , 6: May be an animal- head leg of the general type illustrated by Wauchope (1948, fig. 57, a-12J, although it seems somewhat large. If so, it is the only animal-head vessel leg of our Earl Mexican substage, save possibly the plumbate specime fig. 91, c, e (see discussion on captions of figs. 27; 28;2 95). The elaborate and rather naturalistic designs ofj are suggestive of fig. 89, , 4, which is a Mexican main land import. The graffiti designs,, h,_ 4, seem to have, been contemporary doodlings similar to those found scratched into many walls of Maya buildings (cf. h. 1 with Morris, Charlot, and Morris, 1931, fig. 261, i). [290] j j a 18 f j ,_ __1 i'l MU~o li2 X X 7 . '-19 5 7 ,A&; / 1 S _V0 21z S d 7.I e ,:4' I f I/ h i 7 91 i7 000 14 5 6 7 I 3 r- ;! I 4 V 5 3 1 2 I 5 FIGURE 89 Imported and rare pottery, mostly from Chichen Itza'. a: Trench 1 south of Southeast Colonnade. b, 1 2: Room B, Southeast Colonnade. 4, f. 1j 2,6 i; L 2; i; 1: n; p, 1-i; r: Monjas complex. i, i i: Akad- zib trenches. e, 3; , 1, 3, 4: Caracol. L 3: Hacienda Cenote. , 4: Southwest Group. f 5: Sculptured Jambs. O, s t: Redrawn from Seler, 1901, from figs. 23, 27, 25 respectively, Uaxac Canal. w: Phalli. x: Uxmal. a-e: Have fine orange paste. a and b belong to the four-color polychrome group often called Cerro Mon- toso Polychrome after the pieces collected by Strebel (1887-1889) at that site. More of these specimens, from the Nepean Collection from Isla de Sacrificios, have been illustrated by Nuttall (1910, pls. 11-14) and by Joyce (1914, pls. 18, 19; and 1937, p. 113). A vessel nearly identical in both design and shape with that shown here was excavated by W. du Solier at Isla de Sacrifi- cios, Veracruz (1943, p. 78, n, ). More remote but perceptible resemblances occur with certain polychrome vessels found at Guasave, Sinaloa (Ekholm, 1942, figs. 49, a, 5, a), which show, as does this vessel, elaborate- ly costumed men in profile with masks held before their faces. The chronological placement of this poly- chrome compared to that of X Fine Orange needs more work on the Mexican mainland. The original published description of the Nepean collection (1844) described bronze bells and a gold leaf at the same level as the fine pottery, just at water level under 10 to 14 feet of overburden. The Nepean collection preponderates in four-color polychrome, to judge from illustrations, but also contains considerable X Fine Orange. E. Spin- den (1933) illustrates what seem to be four-color poly- chrome sherds of this type from Tajin, but these may be surface material. Garcia Payon (1949, p. 473) states that Isla de Sacrificios ceramics do not appear at Ta- jin. From the context he seems to include four-color polychromes in this category. There is additional sep-. arate evidence that the Tajin occupation coincides at least in part with Teotihuacan II-III (see Kidder, Jen- nings, and Shook, 1946, p. 257 for a discussion). Druck- er (1943a, fig. 210) presents a puzzling sequence, with Isla de Sacrificios equated with Aztec III-IV and fol- lowing Cerro Montoso. This placement has been made (ibid., p. 84) because of the presence of Drucker's "Tan Polychrome" in his Upper II deposits, and his identification of similarities between this ware and pottery from Isla de Sacrificios. I believe Drucker 's Fine Line Black-on-White Ware (p. 54, pl. 4, a, b) seems closer both to Isla de Sacrificios wares and to the four-color Chiche6n Itza ware; all of these show a characteristic use of broadline white with black and red bordering. I have not been able to find a period placement of Fine Line Black-on-White in Drucker's report. Perhaps the Isla de Sacrificios materials may include the span from Mazapan to the Conquest, but we know they are at least partly of the Plumbate-Tula- Early Mexican substage horizon. Therefore Drucker's period series must be inaccurate in time placement if not reversed in sequence. In view of its presence at Isla de Sacrificios and at Tampico (Ekholm, 1944, figs. 21, 22), the apparent absence of X Fine Orange of the incised varieties at Cerro de la Mesas suggests either an exclusively northern distribution of the type or a temporal disjunction in the Cerro de las Mesas ceram- ic sequence. [292] In his conclusions, du Solier (1943) reports redware pottery and cherry-on-coffee pottery in burials below a stucco floor, and that fine orange pottery and poly- chromes were limited to upper levels. The "cherry- on-coffee" pottery is very close in form and ware to Tula pottery of the Mazapan period; thus it would seem that all X Fine Orange and the four-color polychromes postdate the Mazapan period. However, a difficulty arises in that du Solier reports (p. 35, burials 3 and 3a) fine orange from burials below stucco floors, but his lack of cross-referencing to the previously publishe description of Chich6n Itza Fine Orange pottery (Brain- erd, 1941), as well as lack of concise fine orangeware descriptions, makes attributions of the pieces from these potentially valuable excavations uncertain. Du Solier's redware probably comes within the designation X Fine Orange, and his distinction possibly is based upon a difference in weathering, a factor which was als very marked in the Chiche'n Itza' collections. The few vessels illustrated from du Solier's Isla de Sacrificios subfloor burials do not include the characteristic deco- rative treatments of X Fine Orange. The burial samplei are unfortunately too small for reliability, and no under floor sherd listings are given to supplement them. The sherd counts from the abovefloor level (p. S7) evidence a complete absence of cherry-on-coffee, a tremendous preponderance of polychrome, and rare Aztec I black- on-orange ware. A general surface collection made by the author in 1942 was strong in cherry-on-coffee and sparse in fine orangewares; most of the sherds came from washed-out levels at the water line. Du Solier's data, although not definitive, seem to support the thesis of X Fine Orange and Aztec I equivalence, arrived at on grounds (see captions to figs. 76 and 84) that the Chichen Itza Fine Orange pottery shows design resem- blances to that of Aztec I, thus probably fitting into the later end of the Mazapan period. It also seems likely that the four-color polychrome dates at least no earlie and may well be later than X Fine Orange. The above chain of conjectures should emphasize the difficulty of comparing pottery between publications, as well as the fact that little is known of Mexican east coast ceramics of these periods. Comparative work wi the already excavated Tajin and Zempoala ceramic se- quences should help this situation. c and , 1-3 also are made of a fine orange paste. 4, 1 is similar in decoration to ceramics found at Maya pan, cf. fig. 28, , I, 2, although shape is different. Sherds shown as e, 1-4 have the thinness and powdery surface characteristic of Z Fine Orange; f, 1-7 fit typ cally into that category. Z, _, 2 have a gray-cored past a white lustrous slip, and matte paint varying from black to chocolate brown when thinly applied. h, 1 is white slipped with matte orange figures outlined in black. The shape as restored is Huastec. h, 2-4 are of the same ware, 4 is an irregular constricted cylinder. i has a gritty brown paste and is markedly like the Isl de Sacrificios type described by du Solier (see above) as cherry-on-coffee of Mazapan date. .i 1-m all have medium-textured orange pastes and orange slip, red and black paint as shown. k bears an irregular, thin red slip on gray paste. n is badly abraded, but shows a thin, irregular white slip with traces of orange paint on orange paste. p, 1-4 all have a glossy finish overly. ing both slip and paint, and in finish resemble the Cho- lula lacquer wares, though colors and designs are var a L 11 I BRAINERD: THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL CERAMICS OF YUCATAN ants; the white and orange paints are thin and streaked. q has a chalky white slip which bears a thin orange overslip exteriorly, with what is probably a resist circle with black dots and paint as shown. The sherd is quite abraded. r bears a lustrous orange slip with red and black overpaint of type not unlike the Regional polychromes. Paste, however, is finer and orange in color (cf. fig. 60, c). o, s, and t are copied from Seler, 1901. They come from Uaxac Canal, Guatemala. o fits well into X Fine Orange, cf. fig. 78. s does also, save for the perforations, but also fits with the restricted heavy bowl rim form range from Mayapan, fig. 28, ., 4-6 and thus may date late in the X Fine Orange range. t can with good reason be called Mayapan Fine Orange on the basis of its human-head leg form and basal ridge, cf. 28, a. No concise data as to association of these three vessels are given by Seler. If they were found associated, they should date Middle Mexican sub- stage in our chronology, and suggest late dating of cyl- inders like o. This is weak evidence. u and x: of a rath- er fine-textured neutral gray paste, unslipped, and ex- teriorly shallow striated. Reconstruction hypothetical; a spout or other protuberance may be correct. A simi- lar sherd is illustrated by E. Noguera (1940) from Quintana Roo, and sherds identical in ware, and of somewhat similar form, came from Chenes sites in 1949. v is of medium-textured paste with high gloss and a design in red, seemingly in resist technique on a brownish black ground. w: with dark-gray paste, brown slip interiorly, matte-red exterior slip with glossy black and matte-white designs. 293 a f . (j, I ~ ~ ~ . / 9~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 :, - p IV , q II tI VU) U e J ------------- AtI m I i _1 'w& s \ I I I N 2 C;l I % I \ \ 2 7 ??\ I I "'p, r I\J\\\" OPI'11`?"' '?4 ,X, ? FIGURE 9 0 Miscellaneous pottery, mainly of Early Mexican substage from Chiche'n Itza and elsewhere. a: Zumpulche. b: Northwest Colonnade, Temple of the Warriors (see Morris, Charlot, and Morris, 1931, pp. 177-179, pl. 21). c: MM: "High Mound," Mayapan. d: MR. e: PM Yaxchilan. f: Tlamimilolpa (Teotihuacan) from Linne, 1942, figs. 274-275. g: MM, Yucatan. n; o: Monjas complex. p; _; r: PM, Chichen Itza. st Temple of the Warriors, see Morris, Charlot, and Morris, 1931, fig. 114, p. 101. Remainder: unknown locations at Chiche'n Itza'. a and b: Unslipped, of red-brown clay. c: Bearing a lustrous orange slip which allows its placement as Regional Polychrome like that from Mayapan (see fig. 9, f) and elsewhere. Glyphs are incised through slip, mouth area missing. d: Appears to be X Fine Orange. e; f: X Fine Orange. g: Of coarse brownish clay, a copy of X Fine Orange. hj j-o: Of Medium Slateware. i: Specular purplish-red slip on medium-textured paste. p-r: Of coarse gray paste with postfiring paint; p: has red body, white chest and face, outlining in bluish gray; .: with red rear legs and lower body, remainder white with blue-gray linework. r bears blue-gray linework on white painted body. s and t bear a red slip on coarse textured paste (Coarse Redware). b and probably a may well be Mexican imports, so close is their resemblance to certain pipes on exhibit at the Museo Nacional, Mexico, excavated by Isabel Kelly from Yacata 5, Tzintzuntzan, Michoacan. c is a unique piece, its reported provenience is the Mayapan main pyramid, within which Andrews (1943, p. 81) states there is an earlier building. This provenience should, however, be considered questionable. The three trumpet-foot cylinders, e f: g, from widely separated localities, show interesting points of similarity and difference. To this series may be added fig. 78, e; h a specimen from Corral Falso, Guerrero (Weitlaner, 1948, pp. 81-82, pl. II, 15) and Charnay's specimen from Ticul (1887, p. 375, reillustrated by Hamy and by. Vaillant, 1927, fig. 315). The effigy-vessel fragments h-o are in general similar to those of fig. 88, d-f. and seem to be local copies of plumbate and X Fine Orange imports. p, _g, and r are unfortunately documented only as to site. Their interest is heightened by their marked simi larity to those published by Gann from Santa Rita, Briti ish Honduras (Gann, 1900, pls. 23-27). The Santa Rita figurines were found with pottery vessels (ibid., fig. 7)j which suggest Late Mexican shapes (cf. figs. 22, i; 93,, aL, b), and one of the figurines (pl. 23-a3) is close to a type common on figurine incensarios (cf. fig. 27, a. The Santa Rita murals have long been believed late; Andrews (1943, p. 78) suggests their late dating on sty. listic grounds, at 1450-1525 A.D. The turtle effigy fro the Caracol (fig. 93, e.) probably also belongs to the Late Mexican substage or to the post-Mayapan period, but the tiger from the Caracol (fig. 93, O) and the tiger foot (fig. 93, f) are made of hard, medium-textured paste which does not occur later than Early Mexican times in Yucatan. Further possible evidence of earlier tradition for hand-modeled animals occurs at Tres Z potes (Drucker, 1943, pls. 53, 54) in a context which Drucker places at least as early as Early Mexican, al- though the association of these figurines with others of Drucker's Lirios type suggests to me that they may date Late Mexican (see fig. 54 caption). The tall cylin.- ders, Late Mexican derivatives of X Fine Orange shap are not paralleled by shapes in the Mayapan collection They were probably deposited after the fall of the mai temple of the Warriors, and perhaps were made espe ially for an offering. [296] I I I I x i;?b 5-( b e k I I I n I1h ' ,' 7 i g ... a I I - L? ??, lr)? 4 I r --4 A ML?p 11 I m FIGURE 91 Plumbate pottery, stamps and rare wares from Chiche'n Itza and elsewhere, Early Mexican substage. a, 1, 4, 5,7 10, 2, 18, 1, 2., t 3: Monjas com- plex. ^, 3: Northeast Colonnade. ^, 9: Sculptured Jambs. a, , 24: Zumpulche. b: MR, Yucatan. c: Temple of the Wall Panels, Caracol complex. d; g: Trenches south of Southeast Colonnade. e: Dzebtun, Yucata'n. f: Caracol tower, west side, just under five-member cor- nice in talus slope. i: PM, Chiche'n Itza', Sacred Cenote. k: House of the Shells, Initial Series Group. 1; o: MM. m: MR. p, 2: Mercado Patio. s: Yucatan, site uncer- tain. Remainder from Chiche'n Itza, exact location un- known. a, 21-1, -Z_4 b d-f: Plumbate. a, 20, 21: Highly lustrous brilliant orange slip, not plumbate. c: Frag- ment not examined; photos look like plumbate. gg-o: "Fabric stamps" of unslipped medium-textured clay. h, o seem heavily worn. p, 1, 2: Brown and tempered with quartz sand, incised after slipping. _g,: Orange sur- face and paste seems mold stamped. r: Looks like a Southwestern black-on-white sherd; gray slip with vague darkish paint design. s: Brown unslipped clay. t. 1: Gray paste, reed stamped. t. 2, 3: Brilliant black on reddish paste. The plumbate wares fall within Miss Shepard's ves- sel shape repertory (1948). c, which may not be plum- bate, does not. Animal-head vessel legs have not been found in plumbate, although an effigy-head legged bowl has been found associated in a grave with a plumbate vessel at Tajumulco (information from B. Dutton). c seems to belong to the general type of animal-head leg which belongs to the plumbate horizon (see caption fig. 95). e was included in the collection brought to the Me- rida Museum from Dzebtun, the other specimens of which all seem to belong to a single, much earlier pe- riod (see fig. 35). It has been broken off of an effigy pot, and the fracture ground smooth. f is an important dating piece. Its position unbroken in debris from the fallen Caracol tower seems to assur that it was placed there after the collapse of the tower masonry (see Thompson, 1941, p. 100). If so, the Cara- col tower had begun to fall in ruin while plumbate pot. tery was still in use. Ceramics of probable later date were found under the last floor within the tower (fig. 93, e). The stamps g-o seem to have been introduced to the Peninsula in Early Mexican times, likely from Veracr It is notable that Ekholrn (1944, p. 472, fig. 48, k-j) finds similar stamps limited to the plumbate horizon, his Huastec V. A fabric stamp very similar to these was found in a Middle Formative deposit in the Chenes in 1949. Such stamps also occur in the earliest Forma- tive phase known from the Guatemala Highlands (Shook 1951, p. 97). p, 1 and 2 are certainly imported, since silica sand is not found in Yucatan. , which looks re- markably like a Southwestern black-on-white sherd, would be more worthy of comment if it had been found with some record of provenience. As detailed in the in- troduction, these ceramics have passed twice through archaeological sortings, and have been long in storage. This sherd may be merely evidence of the passage of a Southwestern archaeologist through the site of Chich Itza' or may be an atypical local sherd. s is either a labret or an ear spool. It is thin and carefully modele Sherds of plumbate pottery have been found either on the ground surface or in top levels of excavations at the following sites: Oxkintok, Mani, Uxmal. None of these is associated with contemporaneous local potter and thus none is acceptable as evidence of a true occu pation of its site during the plumbate horizon. [298] as _ _ ' 613 16 - -. 19 1hk f" 2 _t ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2 b h k I I pI J - ,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 17 tS ....~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:: t S D ................ .. . . . .............. .............. ................. ...................................................................... ---------------------- --------------------------- ...... . .......... r - Z4 ze;. I q I It 2 k II III FIGURE 92 Coarse Slateware, Middle Mexican substage, Chi- che'n Itza' and elsewhere. a: Monjas, East Building. b: House of the Little Heads, Initial Series Group. c: MM. Hacienda Esper- anza, Maxcanu. d: MR. e, j f !i .i m: Monjas comiplex. f, 1-_, j-_914, 5-9:- Mercado. L i, 5, 11. 1j g, 1-4: Southeast Colonnade, Room B. f. 12: Zumpulche. i: Sculptured Jambs. With few exceptions, these vessels bear black trick- le paint. Designs are quite similar to those on Early Mexican Medium Slateware, figs. 71-74, the use of the S and Z, the question-mark-shaped figure shown on b, and groups of swirls pendant from the rim as in m, distinguishing them froom designs in the Florescent stage in trickle paint. Somewhat more painted design seems to have been used than in Early Mexican times, and paint-slip color contrast is striking. e, J, 2 are unslipped and show coarse notching and applique' work, all hand-modeled. e, 1 bears slip, thus definitely plac- ing it as Coarse Slateware (see caption, fig. 95, for a discussion). g, 5, 7 bear incised grater designs. h seems to have been oval in exterior cross section at the con- striction, circular in interior cross section. Whole form is unique, therefore unreconstructible. i is crudely fin. ished, allover slipped. k bears a modeled, applique'd skirt. The repertory of Coarse Slateware also includes fig. 19, i from Mani Cenote; fig. 20, a from Dzibilchal- tun; fig. 20, b from Acanceh; fig. 24 from Mayapan; fig. 93, p from Chiche'n Itza. Form repertory, as may be seen by comparison with figs. 71-74, follows that of Early Mexican Medium Slateware quite closely. [300] e ~~~~~~ 777~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 kQ? i FIGURE 93 Mainly unslipped pottery from the Mexican stage, Chiche'n Itza'. a; b: Temple of the Wall Panels. c _1-4 6: Merca- do. c 7. 8, L5-_18 s: Monjas complex. c, 10: Trenches south of Southeast Colonnade. ?.j 11, 13: Zumpulche. c, 1, 14: Southeast Colonnade, Room B. dg i; i: Caracol. h m o: Phalli. m; ggi: Initial Series Group. ky 1: Warriors. r; u v: MR, Yucatan. w y aa: PM, Sacred Cenote. x: PM from near Labna. z: South- east Colonnade. bb: cc: Modern from Maxcanu Camp. Remainder from Chiche'n Itza', exact provenience un- known. a bj c: Unslipped, exteriorly striated jars of Mid- dle and Late Mexican substage, cf. fig. 22, a-c. The small, straight, wide diameter rim and thin walls are diagnostic. d: Had been painted white after firing. Paste texture not seen. f: Is medium paste; proveni- ence seems to indicate placement after parts of Cara- col tower had fallen (see Ruppert, 1935, p. 221, fig. 128, c). e: Found underneath the floor of a chamber of the Caracol Tower (see Ruppert, 1935, p. 219, fig. 278, d). Paste not seen, but seems coarse in photographs. After-firing paint in green, yellow, black, bluish green. g.-o: All seem to have been parts of figurine incensar- ios save possibly h. 1: The object clasped in the hand may be an ear of corn (cf. Angel Fernandez, 1942, figs. 54, c., 55). k m: May represent a heart held in a hand. n: Cf. fig. 100, a for placement of this element on mask helmet. p: Misplaced here; is Coarse Slateware, prob-t ably comes from an extraordinarily thick-walled effigy, vessel. .: Paste not examined, ware unknown. r; z-cc: Are whistles, all hand-modeled. Beginning date of this modeled whistle type is unknown, but the tradition still carries on. bb and cc are of a type still made for sea- sonal holidays in Yucata'n. They are ornamented after firing by a coat of white watercolor with added details in imported colors, red, green, yellow, and black; cf. with the largely mold-pressed whistles of Florescent times, figs. 54-56. u and v are solid bird figurines re- sembling the hollow whistle L date and provenience un- known. ; t: Represent a considerable number of un- slipped crude miniature vessels found at Chiche'n Itza., , x, and v may show transitional stages between the pre-Conquest figurine incensario and the modern La- candon god pot, fig. 100, f but are completely undocu- mented in place and time, see also fig. 100, d, &-i. [302] c I I r- r- I I L 4k 5 1 2 3 6 i - A? 91 "e,, It S'l-s- I !t-- v ?W-v - . 1. '&i @k ?xr? - 71 Al- .;, I I . I p I " ,..!v 0)1? ?, i - --ls -. S v f- ? I , " - - - "'MM I ; A . II A) .F N - I I -- i c c ,; t r V 0 c 2. 4 I I ". - -1 -- z bb FIGURE 94 Coarse Dichrome and Redware from Chiche'n Itza', Late Mexican substage. a 1 2, , i, 9 -, 14-, j__ fi, 410-13, 2 2, 25; , 9; h, 8, 11, 14, 27, 32: Monjas complex. a, 13, 1 8 c; d; f, 14-82 f , 5; h, 1-3, i, 16, 18, 2, 24-26, 35: Caracol. f, 1, 2, 5; h, 10, 15: Mercado. f, 7-9: Phalli. ~g, 1, A, ~, 10:., 13, __,31: Southeast Colon- nade, Room B. g., 4: Wall Panels. h, i , 9: Zumpulche. a: Fragments of red-on-orange dichrome jars and bowls; a, 15 and a, 17 in addition bear black lines. This ware (also see fig. 23, c) differs from the much earlier Regional polychrome (fig. 63) in having a matte sur- face, and a buff-orange slip color like that of its con- temporaneous buff variants of Coarse Slate and Coarse Redware. a, 3 may not belong here (cf. similar squig- gle design on fig. 63, a, 9 and 12). The majority of these sherds come from surface collections. b: Coarse Redware, perhaps from an effigy vessel. c: Was found in postoccupational debris of the Caracol Tower (see Ruppert, 1935, p. 220, fig. 128, b). d: From talus of Caracol lower platform (see Ruppert, 1935, fig. 48). One of six, this bore blue paint on the unslipped exteri- or, as did many bowls of its type. e: Jar fragment, pseudo-gadrooned effect by preslip grooving. f: Sherds with unslipped interior, mostly jars (cf. fig. 25 sherds from Mayapan). Heads like L X1, 26 appear on un- slipped jars from Mayapan (cf. fig. 22, a, .6i-38). The elaborate neck forms shown here (L 16, 17, jQ.) as well as on the dichrome, a, ,1 19, do not occur in the Maya- pan collections: I know of no resemblances save to the Tres Zapotes 'complex necks" (Drucker, 1943, fig. 28, h-k) which concentrate in his Middle period (see Drucker's Table 3) at a much earlier date than these.; g: These basins (cf. fig. 27, g; k from Mayapan) carry on an older form. h: The bowls are of smaller diameter than those of preceding periods. Some small bowls of this sort wer4 used for copal incense offerings, many of these bore blue paint. At Chiche'n Itza' they are common in the C note finds as well as on top of the fallen masonry of buildings (cf. figs. 26, 95, 95). Most of these bowls be4 tripod supports. Few of them are of the spherical cas. cabel form of the Early and Middle Mexican periods. They are often solid conical, or when hollow they are often truncated cones with two vertically placed perfoe rations on the outer surface (see h, 1, 20). Also corr pare Angel Fernandez, 1941, pp. 175-177 from Tulun, The tau-shaped slab h. 3 (also see figs. 97, 2j 103, 1 , _) is in form not unlike occasional solid slab legs Teotihuacan III cylinder tripods. (For example, see Linne, 1942, fig. 287.) Slab legs do not seem to occur on Mayapan or Aztec I and II ceramics, see for exam Franco, 1945, pl. 15; they do occur on Aztec III bowls (Boas Album, pl. 31); also see Brenner, 1931, pl. A, f notched slab legs of Aztec period, and Griffin and Es- pejo, 1950, where they are listed as an Aztec III (Tlal. telolco Black on Orange) characteristic. Notched slab legs also are found in a collection of this period at Cintla, Tabasco (see fig. 103, 1 and caption). If these slab legs are evidence of culture contact, as seems probable, they provide a dating link between the Aztec III period and the Yucatecan Late Mexican substage. [304] I I i r 7 t8 I -------- 1 26 I 25 I r - - - I I I 428 3 S - - r-- - 4qlkkl?-' I 6 N% 13 b h I FIGURE Coarse Redware and unslipped ware vessels and a mask, majority from Chiche'n Itza', Late Mexican sub- stage. >,j, l, i, _ ;j f: Monjas complex. a 4; d: Merca- do. e: Temple of Warriors. h: Temple of the Wall Pan- els. f: Caracol. m: PM Sacred Cenote. b., 6: PM from Ticul. Remainder from Chichen Itza, g. is PM. d j ; k and m are unslipped; remainder slipped. Coarse Redware basal break bowl. a, 1-9: These fragments all bear exterior white slip bands on the vessel wall. a, 2 in addition bears black trickle paint interiorly. The legs of a, 3 may be incorrectly recon- structed, since this shape is characteristic of Early Mexican times rather than Late (see fig. 94, h for more likely leg forms). Note that designs on a, 2, 3, 4 belong in the X Fine Orange range, and that the other designs may also be X Fine Orange copies. All incision is preslip, as on the locally made Early Mexican in- cised design wares (cf. figs. 76-87 for comparative material on this style of design). The presence of this decorative style on Coarse Redware suggests a tem- poral overlap between this ware, characteristic of the Late Mexican substage, and Fine Orange and its local Yucatan copies, Medium Slateware and Medium Red- ware. An alternative explanation of these close simi- larities in decorative style would be the continuing of the earlier style as a tradition. I am incline to favor the former explanation; unslipped small coarse paste bowls and incense ladles, both occasionally covered with a thin red wash, are present in seemingly pure Early Mexican deposits, and it seems quite possible that Coarse Redware may occasionally have been manufactured then. Certain Early Mexican traditions in building plans have carried over closely at Mayapan, according to Andrews (1942, p. 261), but buildings are longer lived than pottery and may thus be expected to be copied for a longer time. However, there is also evidence that X Fine Orange may have outlasted the Yucatan Early Mexican ceramics; see fig. 28 caption. The classification of effigy-head legs (Wauchope, 1941; 1948, pp. 137-139, fig. 57) deserves reexamina- tion in view of the chronologic distribution of this form in Yucatan. Wauchope's original article discusses cer- tain forms dating earlier than his plumbate horizon. To these should be added our Florescent-stage speci- mens, although resemblances between them and the ones assembled by Wauchope is not strong (see figs. 58, c., e, ., g; 62, n). Several of these Florescent-stage figurine legs include a human body as well as a head. In the Early Mexican stage in Yucatan, effigy vessel feet are absent save for a possible fragment of Medium Redware, fig. 88, d, 6, and a fragment from Chiche'n Itza, Temple of the Wall Panels, catalogued as "Vessel leg? Plumbate." Although I have not seen this speci- men, the photograph from which the drawing, fig. 91, c, was made does not contradict this description, but the form does not match any known effigy-head speci- mens. Miss Shepard writes me that she has seen no effigy legs among the hundreds of plumbate vessels she has studied. Two effigy-head vessel legs from Chi- che'n Itza' (fig. 92, e, 1, 2) seem to come from Coarse Slateware bowls of the Middle Mexican substage. These crudely made legs seem to have been hand-modeled, with applique' eyes. Effigy-head legs, in both human and animal form, come from the Late Mexican sub- stage, in both Coarse Redware and Mayapan Fine [306] 95 Orange (figs. 27, g, 1-.3; 95, b., 1-i; 96, g; and 28, , 3, also probably 28, a, j, 13). These all bear mold impressed faces and are remarkably constant in type. Within this same typological group seem to come also Seler 's Uaxac Canal bowl, fig. 89, L and certain of the Cintla effigy-head legs, fig. 103, 1 , 10 Additional stylistic similarities linking these Cintla and Uaxac Canal ceramics to Mayapan Fine Orange are discusse in their respective figure captions. Effigy-head legs are also found in the later periods in the Mexican Hig lands, see Wauchope, 1941 for references, and are characteristic only of the final period, Aztec IV, in the Valley of Mexico sequence (Griffin y Espejo, 1950). At least some of these legs were made as a single piece in a mold; I have seen such a mold in a private colleoc tion from the vicinity of Puebla. An effigy head very close to that in fig. 27, &g, and therefore certainly con- temporaneous with the Yucatan Late Mexican substage, comes from La Venta where its late date has not been recognized (Drucker, 1952, p. 125, pl. 21, a, , O). Sew eral more of these distinctive legs have been illustrat from Campeche coastal sites (Ruz, n.d.). From his 1935-1936 excavations at Zacualpa, Wau- chope (1948) has described an archaeological phase called Tohil, which seemed to follow without disjunc- tion upon his Late Classic Maya Pokom phase, and is characterized by the presence of plumbate pottery and by certain stylistic resemblances which also link it to our Early Mexican substage. Following his Tohil phase Wauchope determined his Yaqui phase, represented only by crematory jars of distinctive ware, and by cer- tain typologically related specimens obtained from the soil surface or from plowed areas which also containe Tohil material (Wauchope, 1948, p. 155). By assuming that the beginning of his Tohil phase, which shows Mex can mainland influence, coincides with the traditional Quiche migration south from Tula, and that his Yaqui phase, characterized by cremation burials, represents the influx of Mexican mercenaries with the Spaniards at the time of the Conquest, Wauchope has been able to estimate the time lapse between the plumbate horizon and the Conque st. Thi s e stimate, based upon an average reign of 30 years each for the succession of traditional Quiche kings, places the Tohil phase as beginning at 1250 A.D., Adopting J. E. S. Thompson's estimate of 10.8.0.0.0 Maya as the time of the introduction of plumbate to Yucatan, Wauchope finds that an 11.3.0.0.0 correlation, as opposed to the more generally accepted 11.16.0.0.0 correlation, fits his data, but that the acceptance of the 11.16. 0.0.0 corr elation would r equir e exce s sive averag lengths of reign for the Quiche kings. This is an ingenious scheme, fairly presented, and is subject to no greater order of errors than the Yuca- tecan and Mexican documentary reconstructions now current. However, it is difficult to reconcile with the Yucatecan archaeological record, where at least one, and probably two, major ceramic phases are known to have preceded 1450 A.D. and to have followed the plum2- bate horizon. Added to this discrepancy are reconstruo- tions of both the Mexican and Yucatan chronologies from documentary sources, both of which seem to sup- port a lengthy postplumbate time span. A resolution of this difficulty seems to lie in the typology of effigy-head vessel legs. At Tajumulco, ac- cording to a tabulation kindly furnished me by Miss BRAINERD: THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL CERAMICS OF YUCATAN Dutton, seven effigy-head legged bowls were found as- sociated in graves with plumbate pottery. To these may be added animal-head legged bowls found asso- ciated with plumbate at Zaculeu. At Zaculeu, a post- plumbate-pre-Conquest pottery phase has also been recognized (see Woodbury, 1948, p. 122, pl. 17, c). All of the effigy-head legged vessels which have been illustrated bear legs which resemble certain of those figured by Wauchope (1948, fig. 57, a-h) in bearing series of prominent ridges and grooves above the eyes. Wauchope (1948, p. 139) states that this type comprises over 80 per cent of his total. It will be noticed that among the Yucatan specimens, only the Medium Red. ware fragment (fig. 88, 4, 6) and the plumbate leg (fig. 91, c), both of the Early Mexican substage, exhibit this peculiarity. Two of Wauchope's Tohil-phase specimens, his fig. 57, r ands, closely resemble our Late Mexi- can types, and several others in his group of aberrant forms may be variants of our type of that period. Thus Wauchope's Tohil-phase deposits would seem to con- tain a minority of material which dates from the peri- od of our main Mayapan samples, which are definitely free of plumbate pottery, and as definitely follow the plumbate horizon, and thus may well cover a period of four or five hundred years. Since Wauchope's first excavations at Zacualpa, the presence of a widespread postplumbate white-on-red pottery phase has been well established (note, for ex- ample, Woodbury, 1948), which presumably either pre- cedes or is contemporaneous with Wauchope's Yaqui phase. The Guatemala Highland evidence still is con- tradictory but, as Wauchope points out, the Quiche kings may have come in postplumbate times, or the king list may be abbreviated, or the kings may have been long lived. The effigy-leg crossties with Yucatan remove one of the stronger arguments for a short (11.3.0.0.0) correlation. d is a unique piece. gis matched to some degree by masks from Mayapan (fig. 29, f 1-.1), although these do not show skulls. h is one of a pair found at an im- provised shrine in the inner sanctuary of the Temple of the Wall Panels (Ruppert, 1931, pp. 125-123, pl. 17, i). These seem to date well after the construction date of the building, probably after the period of its official use. A cache of similar vessels, seemingly deposited under similar circumstances, came from the Temple of the Warriors (fig. 90, _ 1 bears the notched basal ridge characteristic of Mayapan Fine Orange (fig. 28, a) and of Coarse Redware at that site (fig. 26, c, 41-43, 45. 4) k and m are similar both in their somewhat atypically refined form and in their lack of slip. They may date from the Early Mexican substage. Of these vessels, i and n bear a buff-orange slip quite distinct from the commoner red. Slips of this same color occur in deposits of Coarse Slateware, sometimes bearing trickle paint. They are rare at Mayapan. This slip may tentatively be placed as trans- itional Middle-Late Mexican. 307 a(1- : - ::t i i LIIDL}\UI L W ,1t1 1z/ 000 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~NNWMI N\ Yl-- r]1JI 0)~ H) I( C) KL \ XW I t, I q Y jj 'J K 1!IMN 1) '. /5 - _ . - : - ," , I- ,Y J- -l "''I K. , L (I ), h *1 , I II I I f I'\ II ' ke 0 l) -7? 5 - Iz " I ?; lx? I j 0, t r I ,V- --- -- - 0 e FIGURE 96 Coarse Redware and unslipped ware from the Sa- cred Cenote, Chich6n Itza'. Late Mexican substage. All from Peabody Museum Collection. a; c-f; i: Coarse Redware. Remainder unslipped. h: Bears postfiring black paint. e o: Bear a blue wash; exterior walls of b and g bear alternate blue and ochre yellow vertical stripes 4 to 6 cm. wide; eyes and mouth of b are painted. The effigy vessel b seems to represent a rabbit; the paws and ear size distinguish it from a deer, but mouth and nose are definitely deerlike. I know of no other ves- sel very similar to this; perhaps Seler's plumbate bowl from Teotihuacan (Seler, 1915, fig. 260; Vaillant, 1927, fig. 423) is the closest. c: cf. Lothrop, 1936, fig. 5, from the Pipil area, Guatemala; Noguera, 1940a, p1. 9, j. Sherds from the PM collection gathered by Lothrop at Tulum also resemble this vessel. Design was prob- ably inspired by X Fine Orange. For discussion of.g see fig. 95 caption; Butler (1940, fig. 22, p) illustrates a bowl strangely similar to this, but dates it in her Chipal 1 period, much earlier than we place this vessel, h: If the Maya number 8 painted here represents a katun ending date, which of course cannot be proved, and the chronology presented in this report be acceptable, the date shown must be either at the departure of the Itzis from Chiche'n or the fall of Mayapan, both fateful dates for the Maya (see Morley, 1938). The legs of k, m, and n are longer and more splayed than average, approach. ing those of Mazapan bowls (cf. fig. 75, n, o). The reo. tangular bowl, o, has an approximate equivalent from Mayapan, fig. 27, d; the stepped slab leg has late paral- lels on the Mexican Highlands, cf. fig. 94, h, 32 and cap. tion. [3 10] X k I d i FIGURE 97 Unslipped incensarios, censers, comales, from Chiche'n Itza and elsewhere, Early and Middle Mexi- can substage. a; j PM, Sacred Cenote. d: PM, Chichen Itza. bl 5-7; c f _, 4-i; , ; 1 2: Caracol. e: MM, proven- ience unknown. f ; g, 1; k, 7, L; 9 3 6-2: Monjas complex. g, 2 8-11 ; i_k, _, _, 5: Trenches south of Southeast Colonnade. g, 3-7; k 5: Mercado. , 12: Southeast Colonnade, Room B. k, ;, 4: Zumpulche. h: Bears a specular, purplish-red slip, i is of Me- dium Redware, remainder are unslipped. All pottery shown in a, c and several other fragments are cov- ered with a rough postfiring white wash. The pedestal-based cup form with applied discs and thumbed fillets shown in a b, c must belong in the Mid- dle and/or Late Mexican repertory, since it occurs in some quantity at Mayapan (see fig. 23, e). It is of in- terest that a vessel of identical form comes from the Motagua Valley (Smith and Kidder, 1943, fig. 22, b). d and e also may correspond to forms found at Maya- pan (see fig. 23, d, e). f 2-9 are probably wall frag- ments of figurine incensarios (cf. figs. 99-102). Verti- cal flanges on incensarios, as shown in e, f. 1j, ap- pear first in the Mexican stage in Yucatan, but are much earlier in the Guatemala Highlands (see De Bor- hegyi, 1950, fig. 8; Kidder, Jennings, and Shook, 1946, p. 213). g.: The handle, 1, certainly the rim sherds, 10-12, and likely the legs, 2-_, come from perforated, ladle-handled censers like h-j. Land probably i are of local manufacture, h is likely a Mexican import. This style of censer was found with a vase of fine orange- ware, probably of the plumbate horizon, at Zaculeu in Highland Guatemala (Woodbury, 1948, p. 122). Wauchope calls this form "Mixtec type" and suggests a close re- lationship between these and certain Tarascan pipes from Michoacan. He finds the Mixtec censer in his To. hil phase at Zacualpa, and gives references for its dis- tribution (Wauchope, 1948, pp. 148-150). The comal fragments shown under k (see also fig. 66, g) document only a very sparse appearance of this form in Yucata'n. The Mayapan collections lack comalet entirely, as do all other collections from Yucatan. Kid; der (Kidder, Jennings, and Shook, 1946, p. 208) sum- marizes briefly the occurrences of this form, which was common in both the Guatemala Highlands and the Motagua Valley (Smith and Kidder, 1943, pp. 140-142) in pre-Classic and Classic times. It is described from Tres Zapotes in Late Classic times (Upper Tres Za- potes), but absent from Cerro de las Mesas; it is found at Classic Teotihuacan and is mainly post-Classic in the Huasteca, where it shows a progressive increase in frequency. It seems to be absent from Tula. The early distribution thus seems to have been southern, and a progressive northern spread may be hypothesize from the rather spotty data available. It seems possibl that the above distribution listing may be marred by confusion of two forms, the comal and a low casserole, The Tres Zapotes specimens may well be cassaroles, and a somewhat similar casserole shape is shown from Tula (cf. Drucker, 1943, fig. 42 with Acosta, 1945, fig. 20, 1). But Weiant shows what seems to be a comal fror Tres Zapotes (Weiant, 1943, fig. 25, c). It is likely of post-Classic date. 1 2 shows appliqu6d bosses and impressions of a hollow cylinder. L 3 is a collander bottom; 1 , 9 seem to be lids. [3 12] Ii .1 A, I II I i A I J., I I i a b J- I1- Ji)-- -- - - - - -e - s V@i 8 1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 h SQ , 1 .1" i. k X It 20 _ L I AM --- Os 40,00, 2 ""%%h 9 8 FIGURE 98 Figurine incensario fragments from Chiche'n Itza. Late Mexican substage. ; e; ; u v aa bb: Caracol. j: Mercado. All others from unidentified collections from Chiche'n Itza'. All buildings excavated at Chiche'n Itza' yielded frag- ments of this sort; none seem to have been found under floors; most were found on top of, or mixed with, fallen masonry. Cf. at Mayapan, figs. 27, a; 29, where this ware was found toward the tops of stratigraphic trenches, suggesting that its use was limited to late in the Late Mexican substage, perhaps continuing until after site abandonment. The figurines are made of coarse, gray paste. Buff variants were not noted either at Chiche'n Itza or Maya- pan, but are common in the collections from some oth- er areas. All parts of these figurines are hand-modeled save for the faces, which invariably seem to be mold- pressed; note molds Land fig. 29, ci. Molded faces fre- quently show secondary handwork in deepening of fea- tures, adding undercuts, and teeth (note c). Bodies and limbs are formed of modeled plates and tubes of clay, luted together, often with an added fillet for strength. Considerable attention seems to have been given to prevent closed spaces, perhaps to avoid air pressure explosions in rapid firing, although the clay seems too porous to have made this a danger. Arms and legs are characteristically formed with open ends, see, n, EL ., _, _, _, . Fingers and ornaments are formed from rolled fillets, balls, and other bits of clay; toes, finger- nails, and other details were added by grooving while the clay was still quite plastic. Surfaces were probably customarily coated with a wash of white marl or slaked lime after firing, and painted both in areas of color and with black details and outlining. Traces of this treat. ment survive on several fragments, see k ; fig. 27, , The selection show is an exceedingly small propor- tion of the total fragments recovered, and has been chosen for intelligibility in the drawings. There seems to be enough stylization among these figurines to allow most fragments to be identified as to placement on the figure, and thus to permit a study of variation in cos- tuming, facial character, etc., although such a study cannot be attempted here. [314] $ )~~~~~~~ZI d aw 05-- rtr? ?--, ? . I. . I . ? IC - i i 0 t u I . : bb : :-/; -,7 ,;_ I m i , -%4 Jr w aa FIGURE 99 Figurine incensarios, Late Mexican substage. ; c; d: MR. b: South of Chankom, near Chichen Itza. a: The Diving God is holding a dish of copal. For other Diving Gods on figurine incensarios, see fig. 101, d4 e and see fig. 61, h for a possible Florescent- stage example of the Diving God. See Lothrop, 1924, pl. 23, and Angel Fernandez, 1941, figs. 53, aj; 3, b for examples in stucco at Tulum; Thompson, Pollock, and Charlot, 1931, p. 84 for examples at Coba'. See Tozzer, 1941, pp. 143-144 for a discussion of the dis- tribution and meaning of this figure. Stephens (1843, vol. 2, p. 394) describes the diving figure at Tulum, which belongs to the Mayapan period, and notes its similarity to the Sayil figures. b: Showing a standing figure applied to a cylindrical vessel, is one of the common types of this period, cf. c; figs. 100, a, b 101, a, c. The pendant end of the headdress of the figure forms a vertical flange on the vessel. Flanged incensarios have an earlier vogue in Guatemala, and may have in some way influenced this style. (Kidder, Jennings, and Shook, 1946, pp. 209-210; De Borhegyi, 1950, p. 80.) d: Is unusual in vessel form. The tall, slit vessel neck is found on one incensario at Kaminaljuyu, Esperanza phase (Kidder, Jennings, and Shook, 1946, fig. 90), at Teotihuacan (Linne, 1942, figs. 316-317), and in many Zapotec funerary urns. Although the Zapo- tec urns are closer than the others to this form, all these resemblances are general. [3 16] a b I ,V.11 .?!- , ?j FIGURE 1 00 Figurine incensarios ranging probably from Late Mexican substage to modern. a b; _h i: MM. j e; .: MR. d: Surface find at a shrine near Coba', collected by J. E. S. Thompson. a and b fit well into the Late Mexican substage rep- ertory, c and e vary in having faces only, rather than complete figurines, but faces are similar to Late Mex- ican types, and vessel form does not differ greatly. Also, vertical postfiring paint striping occurs in this horizon on fig. 96, b; g as well as on these two speci- mens. d; g; h i: All probably are of late pre-Conquest or early post-Conquest date. This placement is based on the fact that no types similar to these have come from excavations, and that human faces appear on in. censarios only in Late Mexican times. These specimens also show a suggestion of stylistic similarity to the modern Lacandon incensario f The use of these small specimens, g; h i remains uncertain; they fall well be. low the size range of all earlier and modern specimens, [318] K. . ~~~~~~. 96 a e Z k WiS~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' FIGURE 1 01 Figurine incensarios, Late Mexican substage. a: MM. b-d: MR. e: Unknown location. a: Figure is perhaps seated or kneeling. b: Beard and knotted breast ornament are unique. c; d: Note triangular forehead ornament. c: Note close corres- pondence of breastplate with that in fig. 99, d. d; e: Diving God, see caption fig. 99,a. [320] 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 C.J,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ AP~~~~~~~~ I I / I I I .4 ?- ( / / U d FIGURE 102 Figurine incensarios, Late Mexican substage. a; d: MR. b: Probably from near Chichen Itza. c: MM. All fit stylistically into the Late Mexican range of types. a and b are noteworthy for the horizontal orien- tation of their supporting vessels, characterized by a neck projecting almost horizontally to the rear. The head and other appendages of a are not done in charao- teristic manner but are crudely hand-modeled, with little of the elaborate ornamentation common to the Late Mexican type. This specimen can at present most logically be dated as immediately pre- or even post- Conquest, with fig. 100, d; g; h i. [322] k ~~~~d ?.- if, , '. FIGURE 103 Miscellaneous ceramics from Yucata'n and neigh- boring areas. a: Slateware cylindrical vessel from a grave at Chi- chen Itza, PM. b: Crude slateware from Me'rida, PM. c: Chiche'n Itza, unslipped, PM. d: Oxkintok Fine Mono- chrome bowl, cinnamon buff color (cf. fig. 12, _L a) 0- 04 10 ~0 U V [357] CHULTUN 0 . VAULT / M.N / LITTLE HEADS INITIAL SERIES a 0 0 S 0 S I 0 5 10 15 20 M. I, . . . . I - I i I Map 22. -Chiche'n Itza. Initial Series Group. Compiled from maps and data by Vaillant and Ruppert. [358] 1 -J U -J -J w IL 0 i o 0 0 -J -J [ 359] (n) 0 - 0 U) . U] Uq 4 co N *,4 (Id 0 U 1. l I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I , , ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~U) ,~~~~~~ 02 !-- ---- , < x , z~~ _O N 0 4 OU N t1~~~~~~~ ~~ *! d [360] r-<,Li-l - - - -. I I I I I I I -i CHARTS Pattern Burnished Formative Unslipped IYAXUNA DZIBILCHALTU YAPAN t ;OB S( INTJ CANC E A N DZ J A B ABA ?HOLACTN ELSEWHERE H ABAe WAYIg CHICHEN IA 30c 30c Red over Striated 31. Formative Monochrome *e 170; 31 60a 6Qa 16;17a-d 66 i 51 17f-h 16 b19, 40;65c Formative_________Flaky _____Red ____c6AdI Regional Unslipped Ic,d,f I0,b 12.l-c 14a,b 14d, 19o-a 14s,g-i 65 o,b Regional Flaky Red 40.e 6b7;4o195c Flaky Dichrome 8& Related Ig-l',k;6a 17g 1-9 6o,e-g 6 0,d,j;63a; 64 Regional Polychrome 63cf,0 Sb3,dSb 3, Trickle on Flaky Red 7aoc 18c1-37b Thin Red on Brown i Oxkintok Coarse Monochrome H12g 34a 1,j Oxkintok Thin Monochrome i3h)1k-m Coba Dichrom e 8t Polychrom e 2- __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __30___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ F iber _T em pered _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Regional Coarse Red goe '1-,-Scs Regional Medium Red ~~~~~~~~~~~2f, g 4f,a;Sd, 18d,g,h; 66k Fine Gray ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~25g 2Sf 258o53f 25. 538 28e,53k 28. 35b;36b-d,eg,i; Thin Black 53 3 53 539 54ff Red on Thin Gray 20. 20d Dzibilchaltun Fine Orange 5g 58 6 Florescent Unslipped ~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~ ~~~~~38f,39i 14c 37d 14e 37k,c 38c,394 38d, 39g 358; 37o;39k 68,69b 35c 38o,b;65d 4h,IO0" 420k,. 15o-e, ZIo-c,t,61c,m I5o-r 58gl,2, 32,49j-1 37; 41; 40,43, 40,43, 41,42, 40f,410 66j;67,68C;71;72,73,74 35 ad,g,i, m, 49m. 43d;480 55s 57c3,. 5, gI, 4-8Shi 44, 45, 44,47, 44,46, 46,49, 46.,49h 36a,c;400-c, 491 58 2,3 47, 49, 49,54, 49,56, 5 4,57, 54,55 41 f, 42c,d, 43b, Florescent Medium Slate 54,55, 55;57, 57,58,- 58 45., 47d,.,h 57;61 58;59 62 Florescent Thin Slate 10h,55w Sic 18J;21d ISs 15., 6if 32. 4 35. Florescent Thin 8i Medium Red 5~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1k 51 I-n, 51., 51 g,h, 52 k,I 87v,w 35f,h;51df,520,c Florescent Thin & Medium Red ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~52 kbfm 52 cij 52h Holactun Slate 53a-d 4le 3 66C Puuc (Z) Fine Orange 598 59k! 59k-f 59c-f 59cd 59d. 5 9 cf 89e 1-4,fI1-7 36j;59a Early a~ Middle MexicanUnslipped 22;23d,. 68;S9,7Cnc,cj,9;97 Mexican Medium Slate 21 a7-9e 66 c,17 IJ 2; 73; 74,90h, jo 75; d 7, f6 R ed _on _M edium _S late__ __ __ __ __ _ __ __ __ __ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ M exican M edium R ed _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ 6 .k87 b,8 3k, 5,86 25c 5981 28d 66k,76,S81,82a;83a;84, 89o-s,90d,f Chichen (X) Fine O range __ _ _ __9_ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ Plumbate 91 o.f Mexicain Coarse Slate 20. 19,;208 24 92 9c 22;23d,e 14f,27b 70b. k 93; 95 d,g,k, m, 99-102 Late Mexican Unslipped___ 27c,29 I, II9bghko9 ______23ob25_ 960ktg94-o95;9acf Mexican Coarse Red 2781 23o,k25 ,,,,,,9-k9,9,6,-, Late Mexican Polychrome ____94 Mayapan Fine Orainge 28a,b,c Postconquest UnslippedI 33g.! 93bb, cc 34k 33&-f; 33a,f; 6Sf 349,h Postconquest Red 34____ 3ac- 4n 4 g,jk,I, 9c,d, 18fg8,i; 611 9g,k 60;d,g, 60813 60Odek, 60h, k 54g 9 iSk;6b;75o;89;90;91g-f; 30k Rare S Imported 6k;9qb 19g1,2,h1-4 N1'iA 62. 97k ______ Chart 1. Key to illustrations of pottery by ware and site. [362] m - 19 35 Chart 2. Yaxuna, trench 25. Frequencies of slipped wares by cut. Numerals in the right margin give size of sample. Chart 3. Yaxuna, trench 24. To the left are frequencies of slipped wares, to the right are frequencies of pottery classified by R. E. Smith as similar to pottery of the phases designated at Uaxactun, Guatemala. [363] b A medium paste slateware early trickle'\\ l l_ flaky redware _____ - laky dichrome I ~~~~~~~~~~early trickle-/ formative \l monochrome \l fiber tempered ware - e p . _ 9d C' I I I I I I I I I 0-0- = A 1% a a I a a I A I -- - -- - -- -- A? ? (I I I me 1dium regional redware fine slate- medium coarse regional redware- paste \ate tslate late trickle ware-T- -flaky redware fiber ware- formative monochrome IC. ._ .. P ,_ 370 87 Chart 4. Yaxuna combined collections from trenches 21 and 26. To the left are frequencies of slipped wares, to the right are frequencies of pottery classified by R. E. Smith as similar to the pottery of the phaseas designated at Uaxactun, Guate- mala. 8 25 23 Chart 5. Dzibilchaltun, trench 2. Frequencies of slipped wares. [364] I, LI I I I I I I I I i u -1 -w -- 0-0 ww -11I ( li Z * -- - *-* 0 A IL. I I a a I I a I a l V t %., I I I~~~~~~~~~~~~I' -fine orangeware medium paste slateware -fi,ne slateware -., 215 fine\\ red on thin gray grayware -medium blackware 53 Chart 6. Dzibiichalcun, trench 14. Fr_~quencies of slipped wares. Chart 8. Acanceh, trench 5. Frequencies of slipped wares. New excavation cuts were begun at each floor level. Chart 7. Dzibilchaltun, trench 3. Frequencies of slipped wares. [365] a b C I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. A A I --- Chart 9. Acanceh, combined collections from trenches 8 and 1. Frequencies of slipped wares. Chart 1G. Acanceh, trench 3. Frequencies of slipped wares. [366] Y- coarse paste redware- I coarse paste slateware-I I red on medium paste slateware thin g ray I~~~~~~~~~~ 91 662 189 774 Chart 11. Acanceh, trench 13. Frequencies of slipped wares. Chart 13. Acanceh, trench 16. Frequencies of slipped wares. Chart 12. Acanceh, trench 4. Frequencies of slipped wares. [36 7] a b C d ff a I I i I I 1 !==- .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ . I I I I I I I I I Chart 14. Mayapan, trench 7. Frequencies 'of slipped wares. Chart 15. Mayapan, trench 6. Frequencies of major wares. Chart 16. Mayapan, trench 5. Frequencies of major wares. [368] Chart 17. Mayapan, trench 2. Frequencies of major wares. Chart 18. Mani, trench 4. Frequencies of slipped wares. [3691 '3 t I | I I I I a b 3194 b.___ C d coarse paste redware e *80 coarse paste slatewe- f lorescent f * -**165 medium paste slateware medium paste slateware- coarsete- | ,\late-\ | dill / //ate w are _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 9 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ _ * 312 d - 9 | ~~formotive and regional ;\132ii\ monochrome and redware medium formative and regional Tzakol ~~~~~stylesaew\___ h . 229 | rome medium paste slaieware _____________ I| (stage unknown) burnished design ware I 517 I orange slip formative and regional- I interior monochrome and redwarei striated jars '522 f \ Chart 19. Mani, trench 2. Frequencies mono- of slipped wares. g chrome\ h , , , Chart 2G. Mani, trench i2. Frequencies of slipped wares. [370] ? Icoarse- L redware bN A igurine inc I T A E L MM E coarse slal I E C A A R N y medium_ F slateware L 0 R E S red on thin E 5 coarse an E medium re N T Oxkintok rr R fla ky redw E 0 GM monochron TA L I V burnished Chichen Itza Puuc Sites Holactun I Oxkintok I Yaxuna Dzibil- chaltun Acanceh IMayapan :ensarios - feware - __ __ ___ __ i gray d )dwares ionochrome sares nes desi I I I I_ _I I I a II I I II _ I _ I II I-- I, 1 I 1I1 I I 11 1L114 HIll 4i v 9i _nwe 11 11 E _ = I I~~~~~J I I I I Chart 21. Stratigraphic placements in the Yucata'n pottery sequence. To the left are the stages which are characterized by the wares listed immediately to their right. Verti- cal scale and distances between wares have no signifi- cance in this graph. For chronology, see chart 22. Only wares which occur in large percentage in collec- tions, and which have proved to be sensitive in dating, are included. Note that Coarse aedware, Medium Slate- ware, and F laky Redware overlap on two stages each. In these cases form and decoration provide the means of determining the stage to which specimens belong. Time sequence is arranged as in an excavation: late to the top of the chart. Sites are placed in the or- der of their excavation: first sites to the left. Each arrow is drawn from a ware to another which it super- ceded or was in the process of superceding in the col- lections examined at the indicated site. Cases made uncertain by small or otherwise unreliable samples are indicated by dotted arrows. All of these cases save those of the first three sites shown are drawn from figure s 1 - 1 1, and can thus be checked dire ctly. Few of these stratifications show complete replace- ment, most document trends. In general, as may be seen, the shortest arrows are the most significant, since they give the most accurate placements. Addi- tional evidence for the placement of almost every ware shown here came from stylistic analysis or seriation studies. See text for a discussion of the relative relia- bility of the placements. [371] Mani i i i i i i 1 o i i lw I i i i i i i I I II i i i i i i i i i i i I i i i i i I I I . i- i I i i i lw 1 1 i i i i i m i i lw i . i m , , , , , , a a , _ I , _ , - Svf W_ -- p I I 0 OF i I I 41 v i Chart 22. Ceramic evidence bearing on the Maya- Christian calendric correlation. Column I: 12.8.0.0.0, Spinden's correlation. Malkem- son (1950) has recently proposed a corre- lation very dlose to this. Colum-n II: 11.J.O.O.O correlation proposed for test- ing at various times by Vaillant, Thomp- son, Wauchope, Andrews. Column III: 11.16.0.0.G (Goodman-Martinez-Thomp- son) correlation. Column IV: Initial Series dates of the northern Yuca- tan Peninsula. The three preceding col- umns are aligned with this to give Chris- tian-Maya equivalents. Column V: Maya calendric scale by catuns. Baktuns and katuns are numbered; to the right is given tne ahau coefficient of the ending date of each lkatun. Column VI: Ceramnic stages for Yucatan. Column VII: Yucatan sites which have given the best ceramic samples for the time ranges in which they are placed. Column VIII: Top of column, Mexican sequence; bot- tom, Uaxactun ceramic sequence by pnase and subphase. Blac.K triangles show the chron-ologic location in the Maya calendar of In-itial S_ries dates which were found in association witn ceramics. These dates, save for 8. 16.6.0.0 and 9. 12.5.0.0, are specified with ceramic associations by A. L. Smitn (1950, pp. 1J-16, 86-87). Tne other two dates are from in-formation generously supplied by R. E. Smith in ad- vance of publication of his work on the ceramics of Uaxactun. Suophase bounda- ries are placed by the only feasible pro- cedure: between the ainchored collections. The writer is responsi'ole for all errors and misjudgm2nts; tha saquence is at- teimipted because of its great importance for dating the Yucatan collections. Con- necting lines between columns VII and VIII show Paten fragments in Yucata'n collections, save the Tepeu 3 Early Mex- ican connection which is the presence of X Fine Orange at both Chiche'n Itza' and Uaxactun. Only the Tepeu fragments have been identified to Peten subphase. All dating before the beginning of the Maya calendar is at present mere guesswork. Newly published radioactive carbon dates (Arnold and Libby, 1950) suggest that the Valley of Mexico Formative stage began before 1000 B.C. According to these find- ings, Form-ative dates given here are far too conservative. Points A, B, and C are after Thompson (1941). The events and their place within the Katun Round come from post-Conquest sources. Their spacing in time is the furthest compressed that is possible if they are ar- -ranged in the ceramically demonstrated order of occu- pation of Chiche'n Itza' and Mayapan. Point D is taken as 9.16.0.0.0 Maya, known to be contemporaneous with the Chenes-Puuc occupation, which in turn is 1mnown to precede the Toltec Chiche'n Itza occupation. Correlation of column I leaves a long space between points C and D; column II reverses C and D and is therefore stratigraphically unsound; col- umn III gives the best offhand fit and has been there- fore used in plotting columns VI and VII. Column I, the 12.9.0.0.0 correlation, remains a possibility, and it should be emphasized that if the katun ending dates are disavowed, the placements again become fluid. The Central Mexican chronology given at the top of column VIII is Vaillant's, reinforced by the date of the founding of Tenochtitlan kindly supplied in advance of publication by Dr. Paul Kirckhoff from his recent stud- ies of the Mexican chronicles. This chronology, as ex- plained in the text, ma;Les Aztec I fall nearly 200 years too late to fit the Yucatecan chronology. [372] A Foll of Mayapon Katun 8 Ahau B Itzas leave Chichen Katun 8 Ahau C Itzas settle at Ghichen Katun 4Ahau D Initiai series date 9.16.0.0.0 linked to Florescent ceramic stage. A.D. I539 l 500T F L 0 R E S C E N T- MAN I ,DZIBILCHALTUN CH U RCH,TELCHAQUI LLO CONQU EST MAYAPAN,in building debris at CHICHEN ITZA Post architectural at CHICHEN ITZA,early at MAYAPAN , DZI BI LCHALTUN PUUC Sites CHICHEN ITZA CHENES Sites,MANl TZEBTUN s YAXUNA CENOTE BALAM CANCHE Nearly all sites sampled. Exceptions are in the PUUC area. I II = .1, I ,,., TM R SI P NT C A L C T E A S H s H E R D w A x Y 0 p A Q u E F L A K y T R I C K L E 0 p A Q U E A B S E N T Modern Redware + + | | | + +| Colonial Redware + 1 + Late Mexican Redware + + _ + Middle Mexican Slateware +| + + ? Early Mexican Slate & Redwares ?+ + | ? + Florescent Slate & Redwares + + ? + Holactun Slateware + + ? + Red on Thin Grayware ? + Regional Redwares 1+ - -+ I l+ Oxkintok Monochromes + - ? 4+ Flaky Dichrome T+ I -+ +- Trickle on Flaky Redware + ? + Formative Flaky Redware - + + Formative Monochromes + ? t + + + Chart 23. Occurrence of various types of temper, slip, and paint through time in the slipped pottery of Yucata'n. Wares are arranged chronologically, early wares at the bot- tom of the chart. I! Chart 24. Diameter range of the Florescent Medium Slateware basin rims illustrated in this report. [374] TEM PER SLI P PAI NT PLATES 0 ~ ~~~7 8 9 :o 11 1.2 13 Plate I. Upper: Textures of potsherd fractures. Full size. Left to right 1, 2: Fineware; 3, 4: Thinware; 5, 6: Mediumware; 7, 8: Coarseware. 1, 2 contain no temper. Lower: Modern water jar made at Tepek