Oxkintok

Oxkintok is a pre-Columbian Maya archaeological site in the Puuc region of Yucatán state, in southeastern Mexico.

History of research

The site of Oxkintok was first described in the 16th century by Brother Antonio de Ciudad Real, who noted the proximity of the site to the Puuc mountain range and the large ruined structures. He was also first to make note of Satunsat "the place where they tossed those who had committed great offenses so that there they may die" (Torecilla, 1998). Afterwards the site isn't mentioned again until the 19th century when it's visited by J.L. Stephens (Torecilla, 1998). In 1842, John Lloyd Stephens and Frederick Catherwood explored Oxkintok, including The Labyrinth. In the early 20th century, under the Carnegie project, Edwin M. Shook spent a short time at the site. The first actual excavations were funded by the University of Pennsylvania and directed by H.E. Mercer in February 1895. These first investigations were focused on the architectural group of Satunsat. Between 1932 and 1940 the Carnegie institution of Washington funded a large project to collect data on many sites of the Yucatán peninsula (Torecilla, 1998). Oxkintok was studied by H.E.D Pollock, E.M. Shook and G.W. Brainerd with a focus heavily on architecture and ceramics during the 1940s but no large scale excavations took place. Since the 1980s a long-term project directed by Miguel Rivera Dorado (of Madrid, Spain) has produced a vast amount of data on Oxkintok. Most recently, Mexico's INAH has invested in excavations and reconstructions at the site (under the direction of Ricardo Velazquez Valadez).

The Oxkintok Project

The first large scale excavations at Oxkintok were conducted from 1986 to 1991 during the Oxkintok Project/M.A.E.M. (Mision Arcqueologica de Espana en Mexico) headed by Miguel Rivera Dorado. The goals of the excavations were twofold (Madrid, 1991).

• 1) Finish excavations at a site that suggest clues towards the social order of prehispanic Mayans.
• 2) Oxkintok provides clues to gaps in the evolution of the first civilizations in the Northern Yucatán.

This is by far the majority of the body of publications available as individual team members publish on Oxkintok.

Chronology

The site has provided evidence of habitation from the Late Preclassic through the Late Postclassic periods of Maya prehistory. However, Oxkintok became a major center between the Early Classic and Terminal Classic periods (including what Carmen Varela terms the "Middle Classic"). It is well known as possessing a very early Long Count date in 475 CE (on the lintel of Structure 6 in the "Canul" group). The latest dated monument at the site records a date in 859 CE. In total there are about 70,000 pot sherds collected at Oxkintok, and 38 complete vessels. The chronology is largely based on pottery types that emerge and die out in Maya culture. However, there is ongoing debate within the excavation team about how to interpret the ceramics. The chronology that includes aspects aside from ceramics includes architecture and iconography.

Based on this model, there were six phases:

• Sihil, But, Ichpa, Noheb, Ukmul, Nak, and Tokoy.

The chronology of the site starts at ~600 BCE and lasts until ~1500 CE The first two phases are weakly defined and things don't solidify until the Ichpa phase, which lines up with the Early Classic Period and is consequently the first agreed upon phase. There is polychrome pottery characteristic of the region in that time period, and hieroglyphics. The Noheb phase lines up with the Middle Classic and during this period, polychrome pottery disappears along with any sort of stone inscriptions, and the construction of large pyramids begins. In the Ukmul phase, hieroglyphics re-emerge and there is an abundance of rich detailed iconography. The Nak phase is a high point, with the building of the most 'glamorous' architecture, and Pre-pizarran ceramics emerge, characterized by supporting conical feet but displaying a broad diversity in design otherwise. Finally the Tokoy phase is defined by a disappearance in all evidence of human activity, except for pottery with a deterioration in materials and in consistency in technique, which fades out completely towards 1500 CE.

There is no evidence that warfare or famine caused the abandonment of Oxkintok. Nor is there evidence for occupation after it was abandoned around 1500 CE.

Architecture

The style of architecture is an interesting mix of Early, Late and Terminal Classic techniques. Some of the structures exhibit slab-vaulted masonry (indicative of the Early Classic and early Late Classic periods), while many quadrangles contain structures with veneer masonry (introduced at the end of the Late Classic and elaborated during the Terminal Classic period). The site is used as an example of the transition from traditional Classic Period architecture to Puuc Veneer masonry by George F. Andrews. Oxkintok also exhibits a type of "talud-tablero" architecture, most commonly associated with central Mexican sites such as Teotihuacan, Monte Albán and Cholula (but can also be found among certain Maya sites, such as Tikal, Kaminaljuyu and neighboring Chunchucmil, during the Middle Classic).

The architecture is best understood and is almost always broken up into four groups and then looking at how architecture changed or didn't change within those groups. The four groups are: May, Satunsat, and Ah Canul/Canul and Dzib. These groups make up the urban center, and are almost exclusively monumental architecture. They were defined by the excavation team and they're essentially just a cluster of buildings, or a building (Madrid, 1991). There's much more than just these four groups; the rest just hasn't been excavated really, since there was such a heavy focus on excavating monumental architecture. Most of what's been excavated at Oxkintok is temples, palaces, and multiroom structures. To trace the changes in architecture of the site, the above chart (Fig. 7) was compiled. It's a compilation of data from the three sources listed below figure 7. It is evident that there are many major changes between the three periods, and in general it's a transition from irregular design to a more elaborate, very planned out geometric design with decoration and complex stucco art and stone wrought decorations. One thing that remains consistent the use of domes and arches for entryways and open spaces. Concerning the individual groups, there's a concentration of Proto Puuc in the Ah-Canul group and Early Oxkintok in the May group that was later modified in the Proto Puuc phase, but no group is confined to one phase.

Satunsat

The most popular structure at the site is the tzat tun tzat (sometimes written Satunsat, but most commonly called "The Labyrinth"). The Satunsat group is an outlier. It's a single building, a sort of a maze or labyrinth, built to replicate a cave complex. There's no real guess as to what it was built for, though there was a recent discovery that most of the ventilation shafts line up with specific positions of the sun, so some think it was a maze used for initiation and practice of religion but there's nothing conclusive. So it's a little hard to place Satunsat into any one phase, but sources continuously point to a probability that this structure was built in the early Oxkintok phase.

In the VI century, one of the rooms of the lower floor was converted into a burial chamber with a reduced area of the labyrinth. The staircase to the third floor on the north side was also blocked, the painting of the north, east and south facades was replaced and a staircase was added to the east side. According to Miguel Rivera Dorado, this conversion marked the transformation of a specific semi-subterranean labyrinthine palace into an ordinary palace.

Sculpture

Oxkintok is well known for its anthropomorphic columns. These Late to Terminal Classic columns were sculpted to represent elites, warriors and deities – a potential precursor to the “warrior columns” of Chichen Itza and Mayapan. Notes on some of these columns were included in the pioneering work of Tatiana Proskouriakoff (see references, below).

Tombs

Due to the looting of Oxkintok, there are currently only 11 (though the number of intact tombs varies in the literature between 11 (Dorado) and 5 (Torecilla)) undisturbed tombs, almost all of which were very similar.

Tombs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 dated to the Middle Classic, 6,7, to the transition between the Late and Middle Classic, 8, 9 and 10 belong to the late Classic and 11 is preliminarily dated to the terminal classic. There are no foreign burials, and the only burials that aren't of males are of undetermined sex. It does seem however that these burials were only of those of high status.

• Mostly Male Burials, with only three of unknown sex
• All individual burials aside from one mixed burial
• Secondary burials, with two primary
• Burial Chambers/graves within monumental Maya architecture
• Offerings varied little. Almost always included shell jewelry and fragments, jade mask and/or pendant fragments, few obsidian tools, and a form of tripod ceramics.

Bones

There many skeletal remains throughout site that aren't included in burials, and were either parts of offerings or have been intentionally deposited. Some of them are animal, but most are human. Many of the bones have signs of breakdown through arthritis, osteomieltisis (which is a bone marrow disease that leads to deterioration of the affected bones), and many of the teeth had severely worn down enamel.

Religion and ideology

At Oxkintok, religion, government and architecture were closely tied together as was the case for Maya religion at most cities. Firstly it is clear that the northern half of the urban center was less important than the southern half, due to the lack of iconography and the presence of a ball court in the southern half. Of the three architectural groups of this southern half the Ah Canul group is considered to have been the center of power, with three monumental pyramids…