A Chancay-Style Grave at Zapallan, Peru by S. K. Lothrop; Joy Mahler Review by: A. H. Gayton American Journal of Archaeology, Vol.

62, No. 2 (Apr., 1958), pp. 255-256 Published by: Archaeological Institute of America Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/502381 . Accessed: 24/08/2013 21:12
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Archaeological Institute of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Journal of Archaeology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 66.213.13.49 on Sat, 24 Aug 2013 21:12:52 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

1958]

BOOK REVIEWS

255

his revised text without radically changing Morley's outline for the book. Spinden, like Morley, has always been tremendously impressed with the astronomical and calendrical achievements of the Maya. In fact most of his papers on Mesoamerican subjects have dealt with calendrical problems and especially the 12.9.o.o.o correlation of the Maya and Christian chronologies which he has so consistently championed. Unlike Morley, who did not summarize his views on Maya civilization until late in life, Spinden produced important syntheses early in his career. Maya Art and Civilization is little more than a reprinting of two of these early summary studies. Unfortunately, the publishers do not make this fact clear and nowhere do they identify properly or adequately the publications which they reproduce in this volume. Part I is a photographic reproduction in reduced format of A Study of Maya Art; its subject matter and historical development originally published in 1913 as Volume 6 of the Memoirs of the Peabody Museum, Harvard University. This study is without doubt Spinden's most important work and its reprinting is to be welcomed for it has long been out of print. It is a tribute to the lasting quality of Spinden's early appraisal of the artistic achievements of the Maya that it can be offered over 40 years after its original publication as a useful introduction to Maya art, even though it needs extensive revision as a result of the gain in knowledge over this period of time. No revisions have been made in the present edition. Part II is a reprint with a new title of the third revised edition (1928) of Spinden's Ancient Civilizations of Mexico and Central America which was first published in 1917 in the Handbook Series of the American Museum of Natural History. Again the text and illustrations are reproduced without change except that the text has been reset to better utilize the larger page size of the reprinted edition. This little monograph was for many years the best brief treatment of the several related traditions of civilization in the Mesoamerican area and until fairly recently the 1928 revision could be considered reasonably up-to-date. However, the archaeological advances of the past 15-20 years have so changed the picture that the reprinting of the unrevised 1928 edition hardly seems justifiable. Spinden has ostensibly revised the reprint by adding a 27 page epilogue called "Maya Dynamic Dating and the Fallacy of Time" and 48 illustrations. Neither the new plates nor the long accompanying captions, which contain undocumented identifications of various temple structures with individual Toltec rulers, seem to have any relationship to the new text material. The text of the epilogue, as its title indicates, is devoted to calendrical problems and is pure Spindenese, for it provides no more than an unfortunately confused restatement of his oft stated views on Mesoamerican chronological problems.
RAYMOND
UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

A CHANCAY-STYLE GRAVE AT ZAPALLAN, PERU,

by

S. K. Lothrop and Joy Mahler. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, Vol. L, No. i. Pp. viii + 38, pls. 17, figs. io, tables 9. Peabody Museum, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1957. $2.50. Zapallan lies inland on the rim of the Chillon Valley, roughly equi-distant from the Chancay and Rimac Valleys. Adobe brick and tapia ruins, large stone grinding troughs, and extensive graves mark this ancient site where a reed-roofed, cubical grave opened in the presence of S. K. Lothrop in 1943 yielded abundant, unusual contents. Of first interest was the flexed mummy, to whose inner wrappings were sewn representations of breasts made of cloth stuffed with cotton fiber; such symbols are unique and unexpected from Peruvian burials. A feathered poncho, brocaded shawl, and several mediocre cloths were within the mummy bundle. A false head stuffed with avocado leaves, which had a hair fringe and silver facial features, topped the wrapped and roped bundle. Surrounding the bale was a remarkable number of yarnwrapped reeds, considerably more than two hundred. Other grave furnishings included sixteen pottery vessels, two work baskets with the customary contents, a loom, a gourd, cotton fiber cones, and two dogs. Description and comment on these diversified materials have been made by several contributors: the pottery, S. K. Lothrop; the textiles and related artifacts, Joy Mahler; the dogs, Barbara Lawrence; the textile dyes, William J. Young. Vegetal remains were identified by Margaret A. Towle. The sixteen pottery vessels within the grave represented five well-known Central Coast ceramic styles: White and Black on Red; Red, Black and White Geometric; Black on White; Plain White; Plain Red. Each style is discussed (pp. 5-12) with reference to comparable surface materials collected at Zapallan and other Central Coast sites (now in the Peabody Museum) and to germane materials in the literature. Lothrop concludes that ". . . ground associations at three sites in the Chancay Valley and also at Ancon, Zapallan and Pachacamac indicate that overlapping and contemporaneity of certain pottery types is as well established as their supposed sequence" (p. 12). This conclusion might have been strengthened if the proportionate representation of each of the five styles had been given for the grave-lot and surface pottery from Zapallan. These data might then be used toward the style-sequence revision which Lothrop suggests (pp. 12, 26). Twenty-one cloths from the grave are analyzed for fiber, direction of spin, yarn count, color, and other technical features (pp. I2-19). The feather poncho is given detailed description, as are the striped and plaid utility fabrics; the tapestry fragments and a possible patchwork piece are also described. The largest complete textile, a shawl with brocaded corners, is

H.

THOMPSON

This content downloaded from 66.213.13.49 on Sat, 24 Aug 2013 21:12:52 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

256

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF ARCHAEOLOGY

[AJA 62

omitted from special comment: the brocading technique and designs surely merit equal treatment. Two hundred and six yarn-wrapped reeds are analyzed for fiber, spin, color, and method of construction (pp. 22-25). The pattern-frequencies of the wrappings are: Banded, 146; Spiral, 15; and Diamond, 45. Although wrappings of two to four colors are the most common and five to seven colors rarer, at least sixteen colors are present in the seven hundred and forty-seven veneering yarns analyzed. Most of Mahler's discussion of the textile materials, whether cloth or reed-wrappings, centers on the direction of spin of the yarns which is predominantly S-spun single and Z-spun, S-doubled. This she contrasts with the differing spinning traditions of the North and South Coasts of Peru and introduces new data on Central Coast spinning from Zapallan (surface textiles), Pachacamac, Bandurria, Chilca, and Mala Valley. There is other valuable information in this paper, e. g., on the loom, the contents of the work baskets, and two "dolls" from Pasamayo, as well as illustrations of Chancay-style pottery from sites other than Zapallan. The two dogs are classified as "Inca" type by Lawrence, and Young describes the laboratory techniques by which he identified indigo, cochineal, and possibly fustic dyes, and alum and iron mordants. A. H. GAYTON
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY

CERAMIC SEQUENCE AT UAXACTUN,

GUATEMALA, by Robert E. Smith. 2 vols. Pp. 214, maps 2, charts 2, tables 23, collotype illustrations 86. Publication No. 20, Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University, New Orleans, 1955.

Uaxactun, in the northern Petin Department of Guatemala, lies near the heart of the territory of the Maya "Old Empire." Selected in 1926 for intensive excavation by the Carnegie Institution's archaeologists, it has provided much of the basic data on stelae, architecture, burials, domestic mounds, and artifacts of the Maya Pre-Classic and Classic Periods. (See Ricketson, O.G. and E.B., Uaxactun, Guatemala: Group E--z92631, Carnegie Institution of Washington, Publication No. 477, 1937; Smith, A.L., Uaxactun, Guatemala, Excavations of 1931-37, same series, No. 594, 1950; Kidder, A.V., Artifacts of Uaxactun, Guatemala, same series, No. 576, 1947.) R.E. Smith's pottery studies of Uaxactun have continued the initial work begun by Edith B. Ricketson, and in the present monograph he provides a detailed analysis of all Uaxactun ceramics which were obtained at that site over the excavations of 1926 through 1937. Smith's work is an outstanding contribution, being the most complete investigation of prehistoric Maya pottery published to date. It will serve as a basic datum of comparison for all future Maya ceramic studies for

many years to come, and its importance and implications extend to all aspects of Maya archaeology. The bulk of the Uaxactun ceramics was recovered from debris underlying the principal plazas, from the fill between floor levels of plazas, temples, and palaces, and from tomb associations. Like other Maya "cities" of the Petin or Usumacinta lowlands, Uaxactun is considered to be a "ceremonial center." That is, it consists of a complex of stone-faced platforms and flattopped pyramids capped with vaulted stone masonry buildings; and it is presumed to have functioned as a politico-religious "capital" for the immediately surrounding territory. Although it may not have had a large resident population, the substantial amount of broken pottery and other refuse at the site implies continuity of habitation over a very long period. The problem of surrounding supporting populations for such a ceremonial center and those permanently domiciled there is a complex one with which Smith's monograph is not immediately concerned. It is germane, however, to note that Maya pottery from Uaxactun and comparable centers is, in large part, duplicated in outlying house sites and hamlets. In a brief Introduction Smith ably sketches in the Maya archaeological setting for the Uaxactun ceramic study. In so doing he draws upon his unparalleled survey knowledge of Maya pottery from other sites and regions. Uaxactun appears to be representative of what might be termed a Northern Peten ceramic region, with north-south limits at Calakmul and Yaxha, and with Yaloch and the Rio San Pedro Martir setting approximate east-west boundaries. Adjacent British Honduras, with such sites as Benque Viejo, San Jose, Baking Pot, and Barton Ramie, adheres closely to Uaxactun pottery norms. The west, on the other hand, is more divergent (as at Piedras Negras) or, in cases (as at Palenque), strikingly different. Thus, we see that the relative uniformity of sculptural art, architecture, writing, and the calendar that binds together a southern lowland Maya subarea of Middle America does not obtain in the same degree in ceramics. Smith's later ceramic phases are correlated with Initial Series stelae dates and building construction periods so that the earlier, Tzakol, is placed between Maya dates 8.I2.o.o.o and 9.8.0.0.0 (A.D.278-593, Goodman-Thompson correlation) and the later, Tepeu, between 9.8.0.0.0 and 10.3.0o.o.o0 (A.D.593-889). In gross, these equate with the generally accepted divisions of the Early and Late Classic periods of Maya civilization. The two ceramic phases assigned to Pre-Classic times, Mamom and Chicanel, are not specified as to absolute age. The current assumptions are, however, that Mamom begins a millennium or more before A.D. I while Chicanel lasts until the onset of Tzakol or intergrades with a short transitional phase between Chicanel and Tzakol, the Matzanel. Smith's presentation of the pottery is detailed, fully descriptive, and essentially analytical. The work is well illustrated. (The entire second volume is devoted to plates and their captions.) It is a reference book and is

This content downloaded from 66.213.13.49 on Sat, 24 Aug 2013 21:12:52 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions