THE TERMINAL CLASSIC AT TIKAL AND UAXACTUN
Juan Antonio Valdes and Federico Fahsen
Ikal and Uaxactun were known in antiquity as Mutul and Sian-Kan (Scheie and Mathews 1998: 63-66), two cities that, because of their proximity and prosperous development, saw themselves involved in a long rivalry that began in the Preclassic period, when Uaxactun appears to have been more impressive in the eyes of visitors with its beautiful acropolis in Group H. This changed starting in the Early Classic, when the army commanded by K’ak’ Sih (Smoking Frog) entered the site at the complex identified by Fahsen (1992: 2) as Shell-Kawak (the famous Str. A-5), which was the true heart of the city, and took Uaxactun under his power. From this point on, the history of both cities was closer and more parallel, as K’ak’ Sih remained ruler of the city and his descendants were the sovereigns during the ensuing centuries until the Terminal Classic (Valdes and Fahsen 1995: 206-218).
During the last part of the Early Classic and during the centuries of the Late Classic, Tikal imposed a harsh control over the conquered land, because the blood of the victorious royal family coursed through the veins of all the sovereigns that followed Smoking Frog, as they recorded in their sculptured monuments through the centuries. Nevertheless, the high prestige enjoyed by Uaxactun always remained, and proof of this is that at this site the last carved monuments of these two cities were erected.
Without doubt, both cities were responsible for the process that led to the growth of Maya civilization and for the success that allowed the Maya of central Peten to remain in the vanguard, though with battles and falls along the way. One
Of their best weapons was their astuteness in creating and modifying continuously the ideological strategy that provided the population with a divine order, and that harmonized life into an axis and allowed them to understand how all the diverse components of life functioned, including the continual regeneration of the universe. The rulers transmitted this ideology that influenced the population that supported them for a millennium. There is also no doubt that their best “ally” during Classic times was the sophisticated use of architecture, sculpture, and painting, in which the plazas became theater stages where spectators, priests, and kings mixed with ceremonial paraphernalia, music, and the fragrant incense smoke dedicated to the gods.
In the central Maya area, this ideology began to crumble during the second half of the ninth century, when Tikal was governed by Hasaw Kan K’awil II and Uaxactun by his homologue, K’al Chik’in Chakte, in the year a. d. 889 (Valdes et al. 1999). Throughout the tenth century, chaos prevailed and, although Tikal maintained a more prolonged occupation, the inhabitants of Uaxactun migrated to other lands, possibly to the east and northeast in the direction of Belize, where human occupation lasted longer (Willey et al. 1965; Pendergast 1985). Interpretation of this process is under revision due to recent archaeological discoveries and epigraphic decipherments, reformulating the frequent political activity in the region during the last centuries of the Late and Terminal Classic. The relationships of dependency were as complex as the causes of the collapse, a phenomenon presently seen as a consequence of internal factors (Sabloff and Henderson 1993; Demarest and Valdes 1995; Foias and Bishop 1997), not of external influences over the Maya area, as suggested twenty-five years ago.
ANOTHER ENCOUNTER WITH THE FAME OF THE EIGHTH CENTURY
Multiple models have been presented in the last decades to explain the political organization of the Classic Maya, and their acceptance or critique have been derived mainly from the theoretieal orientation of the scholars themselves. However, the new epigraphic decipherments propose a territorial structure of macrostates, with political hegemonies that incorporate smaller polities, at least in the case of Tikal and Calakmul (Martin and Grube 1995; Martin 1996; Lacadena and Ciudad Ruiz 1998). In contrast to the numerous titles related to dependency that have helped determine the relationships between sites in the Usumacinta-Pasion region (Mathews 1985; Houston 1993; Scheie and Freidel 1990), the same situation does not occur in central Peten. Here, the growing wealth of the nobles was translated into sumptuous palaces and the acquisition of exotic goods, but monumental inscriptions are not so explicit about the system of sociopolitical organization, although more information about noble titles is being discovered on painted vessels that circulated as “social currency” (Reents-Budet 1994, 1997).
In the central area, the internal organization of the Late Classic is understood now through epigraphy, and through the same source we can observe that since the Early Classic, the hopes of the nobles were partially satisfied, since some of them were permitted to sculpt monuments and carve their own names, as seen in the “Tikal Ballcourt Marker” and the “Man of Tikal,” from the beginning of the fifth century. In Uaxactun, a similar process possibly took place when two personages with different nominals erected their own monument on the same date as early as a. d. 357. It is possible that this denotes a strategy of “democratization” in favor of the closest relatives of the rulers.
During the eighth century, the sovereigns of the central area focused on developing a complex network of social, economic, and political alliances, which constantly shifted depending on multiple variables. The glyphic inscriptions reflect wars, indicate the relations established with neighboring cities, and record important events in the lives of their leaders. This century, which we can call the “Golden Century,” shows the works of grandeur and stability as the product of sage governments. Polychrome vessels, the smaller masterpieces, have become a principal avenue for discovering details of the identities of the elites, as their painted palace scenes display images ranging from daily life to an internally stratified society.
The destiny of Tikal was driven from a. d. 633 until around a. d. 800 by great statesmen who had long reigns: Nun Bak Chak (Shield Skull, ca. a. d. 633-679) and his son, Hasaw Kan K’awil I (Ruler A, Ah Cacau, a. d. 682-734), and grandson, Yik’in Kan K’awil (Ruler B, a. d. 734-750), who was followed by his son, Yax Ain II (Ruler C, a. d. 768-ca.790) (Jones and Satterthwaite 1982; Scheie and Grube 1994). Recent studies confer on Nun Bak Chak responsibility for initiating the revitalization of Tikal and the hegemonic powers of its sovereigns. Although Nun Bak Chak’s reign was agitated by wars (Houston 1993: 108; Scheie and Mathews 1998), it is clear that he took very seriously his desire to place Tikal at the forefront with his program of transcendental works. The proof of this rests on the recent ceramic dating of the construction of Temple V during the Ik phase (Laporte and Gomez n. d.), revealing that Nun Bak Chak must have ordered the construction of this building around a. d. 600-650. From our viewpoint, this dating is perfectly supported by the architecture of the pyramidal base of Temple V, which exhibits certain elements fashionable during the Early Classic, such as rounded comers and wide balustrades framing the stairway that climbs to the top. The use of these elements denotes the persistence of a previous period’s tradition, also exposed in the earlier versions of Strs. 5C-49, 5D-22, and 5D-35. Furthermore, the simultaneous constmction of two ballcourts, one in the East Plaza and another in the Complex of the Seven Temples (Jones 1991: 116; Laporte and Fialko 1995: 83), indicates the importance of commemorating the creation myth and the rebirth of the people of Tikal into a prosperous future.
The extensive growth program was continued by Hasaw Kan K’awil and his descendants during the eighth century, proclaiming their qualities as magnificent statesmen and authors of ambitious constmctions, while at the same time access to foreign materials increased via commercial networks, and the polychrome pottery industry was reactivated (Dahlin 1986: 84-112), confirming the supremacy of this site and the glory of its local dynasty. This corresponds to the Imix phase, which is widely known for the beauty of the pottery types Palmar Orange Polychrome and Zacatel Cream Polychrome, many decorated with palace scenes and courtesans accompanied by hieroglyphic texts, distributed all over the lowlands. The monumental constructions of the Great Plaza, Central Acropolis, Lost World, and the rest of the architectural complexes of the city were enlarged. Also, religious rituals were revived and TikaPs external relations were expanded through political and marriage alliances to regions as far away as Piedras Negras, Yaxchilan, and Copan. Tikal was a beautiful metropolis, and its population increased dramatically to 90,000-120,000 persons (Culbert et al. 1990).
This golden age persisted even during the rule of Yax Ain II, around a. d. 800, as he ordered extensive architectural works in the city, including the building of courtyards and structures in the Central Acropolis, especially in the area around Toh Chak Ich’ak’s palace (Great Jaguar Paw, ca. a. d. 317-378). Possibly the most beautiful edifice was his royal palace, known today as the Maler Palace, where a date corresponding to July 4, 800, was found written, indicating that the residence was still in use at that time (Scheie and Mathews 1998). The continuous bellicose manifestations that affected this region at the end of the eighth century were also documented by the graffiti inscribed on these structures’ walls, as seen in the Maler Palace and the contemporaneous palaces of Group G, reflecting the preoccupation of their occupants with involvement in these actions, leading them to reproduce drawings of prisoners and the capture of palanquins of enemy rulers (Figure 8.1).
The only inscription dated for this time is Stela 24 in a. d. 810, but it was found so deteriorated that it was impossible to decipher the name of the ruler who erected it. Nevertheless, the glyphic text of Lintel 2 of Temple III ends by affirming that the construction was the work of the Supreme Priest or “Prayermaker of the People,” who is also identified by the titles of K’inich Nab Nal and Chakte. The interesting part of this case is that when the nominals of the sovereign in this panel are studied, they are almost identical to the glyphs used by Yax Ain II. For this reason, without a doubt his rule must have been responsible for the construction of Temple III around a. d. 810 and for Stela 24, which commemorates his reign. After this date, there is no glyphic information from Tikal until fifty-nine years later.
In the case of Uaxactun, recent studies (Valdes, Fahsen, and Escobedo 1999) have permitted full identification of four rulers boasting their power during the eighth century and the beginning of the ninth. It is known that one or two more mlers existed, because they are mentioned in Stelae 8 and 11, but their names have been completely destroyed by the erosion of the monuments. The first ruler appears on Stela 14, dated a. d. 702, and is named Chaan K’an Ko. The next ruler.
8J Graffiti from Group G (5E-11) of Tikal, showing captives tied and humiliated, a frequent theme on the structure walls during the eighth and ninth centuries.
Represented on Stela 2 fifty years later, was called Oxlahun Koxba, followed by another sovereign mentioned on a vase dated a. d. 759; although the first part of his name cannot be read, it concludes with Chik’in Chakte. Next ruled the two personages mentioned on Stelae 8 and 11. During the final part of the Late Classic, however, power was clearly in the hands of ruler K’an Ko, whose image was carved on Stela 7 in the year a. d. 810.
Of Chaan K’an Ko, we know that he was in power at the same time as Hasaw Kan K’awil in the neighboring metropolis, and it is notable that on Stela 14 this ruler makes reference to the founder of the Tikal lineage, Yax Moch Xoc. This mention and the erection of this stela in Group B of Uaxactun suggest the particular interest of this governor in maintaining the memory of his family’s place of origin and in proclaiming that he was the descendant of K’ak’ Sih of Tikal (Smoking Frog), who 300 years before had erected monuments commemorating his triumph in the same group (Mathews 1985; Scheie and Freidel 1990; Valdes and Fahsen 1995).
Several decades later. Stela 2 was erected, also in Group B, demonstrating the intention to honor this space again. The glyphs are clear in naming ruler Oxlahun Koxba, displaying his power and the date of celebration of the end of the k’atun in 9.16.0.0.0, which corresponds to August 5, 751. At that moment, the destiny of Tikal was in the hands of Yikin Kan K’awil, who had erected Stela 20 to celebrate the same event.
The next ruler was identified through the restudy of the so-called “Vase of the Initial Series,” which formed part of the mortuary offering of Burial A-2, discovered in Group A. According to this text, the new Uaxactun sovereign used the title “Chik’in Chakte,” although his complete name is unknown. The details of the burial (R. Smith 1937: 207) indicate that it was a male individual interred with a rich offering that included exotics, such as jade and marine artifacts, from faraway regions. After its placement, it was covered by fill, including hundreds of obsidian and chert flakes and blades, perpetuating an ancient tradition employed in royal tombs in Tikal and Uaxactun since the Early Classic. The custom of placing burials within bedrock, painting the walls and roofs of the vault of the tomb with a red color, and including jaguar skins is part of a funerary tradition of central Peten known from the North Acropolis and Lost World Complex at Tikal (Coggins 1975; Laporte and Fialko 1995), Uaxactun (L. Smith 1950), and Rio Azul (Adams 1986; Graham 1986), which may begin as early as the Late Preclassic with the burials in Tikal’s North Acropolis. For these reasons, the suggestion that it was a funerary tradition that arrived at Tikal from Caracol during the events of the Middle Classic (Chase and Chase (1987: 61) seems strange.
After the ruler Chik’in Chakte, mentioned on the “Vase of the Initial Series,” there were one or two additional leaders during the eighth century at Uaxactun who continued the work of aggrandizing the site and, in particular, ordering the construction of new plazas. At this point Stelae 8 and 11 were carved, but both are impossible to read, so it is unclear if they make reference to one or two separate individuals. Of great importance is the discovery that the construction of the Main Plaza in Group A took place between the years a. d. 760 and 770, because in 771 Stela 8 was the first to be erected in this plaza (Valdes, Fahsen, and Escobedo 1999). This new public space was the location of all monuments carved after this time, and in this way it perfected the processional avenue that united Groups A and B through a wide and beautiful sacbe oriented north-south. In this manner, the history of Uaxactun and its protagonists became joined symbolically, as two of the oldest edifices built before the conflict with Tikal (Strs. B-2 and A-1) were at this avenue’s extreme north and south ends. To complete the scene. Stela 9 (a. d. 327), pertaining to one of the first rulers of the fourth century, was raised in this plaza as a sign of respect for the ancestors and their millenarian traditions that continued to be valid even at the end of the eighth century.
During the dawn of the ninth century, the Main Plaza of Group A had become the most sacred space of Uaxactun, so the new ruler K’an Ko had erected Stela 7 (a. d. 810) in front of the stairway of Temple A-1. This monument was placed in its position at the same time that Stela 24 was raised at Tikal, celebrating in both cases the end of k’atun 19. The construction projects in the Main Plaza begun by The previous sovereign were continued by K’an Ko, and new edifices were built at this time, such as the remodeling of Str. A-5.
World History
