Royal Courts of the Ancient Maya Volume Takeshi Inomata Dragged

Opening the Royal Maya Court

The English word eorlrt has two basic meanings. The first is that of a group of people, ir7cluding thr srrvereip and the individuals who sur- round this high personage. The second describes an architectural corn- pound where the royal family lives and where a significant portion of court activities takes place. The focus of this book is very firmly on the forxncr, that is, on the cowt as a group of peope- The latter, t-he architectural coqlex, serves oi necessiv as a primary source of irrformatim, Ar- chitecbre remains are not mere materid rczsidues of past behaviclr, but they probably played active roles in shaping the concepts and acts of court members (McAnany and Plmk, this va2ume). We, nonetheless, are far m m interested in the long-lieceased people who lived, worked, and died in such locatims. Moxeover, all courts change through time, if in a manner conditimed by the inertia of courtly pmtocol, hhitual practice, and monumental setting-what David Webster (this volume) has called the ""hrmit-crab" effect, but from which these royal crabs could not so easily extract themselves! To look at change, this book ennbraces the Maya area of southeastern Mesoamerica, from t-he Late pm-Classic, Clas- sic, and post-Classic periods (Figure 1.1,). Because of their rich and corn- prchensive evidence, the southern lowlands during the Classic period constih;lte the core of many papers. 'I'he chaptes that follow art? eyually attentive to Early Colonial mention of pre-Hispanic courts and to their survivals dter Spanish contact, Each of the contributors makes clear how much is knom, but also haw very much more needs to be done before a full history of the Maya court can be wrimm. 'This inl.roduction, then, is a beginning to a beg ing, as we slowly uncover the royal Maya court to modern gaze.

Gulf of Mexico

FIGURE 1.2 Map of the Maya Area with the Locatian of Major Sites Discussed in the Vc3lrrrne

Openi~zg kke Royal Mnyn Court 5

The Study- of Royal Courts in the Maya Area To date, the study of the ancient Maya court has been limited h aim and unfocused in a p p a c h . Some of the most rewealing work has concen- trated on the post-Classic period, for which detailed ethnohistorieal data exist (Casmack 1981; Rays 1943). Monethekss, the royal court was pe- ripheral to these inquiries, being addressed somevvhat ineiirectly as an adullct to political organization, elite lineage systcms, and other matters of relevance to synrhrmic, society-wide reconstructions. The study of Classic Maya courts (ca. A.D. 250-850) has hem even more. ~stricted. 'Thfs is not surprising, considering that only Ihirty years have passed since scholars fully recogized the presence of rulers and courts in Classic society A f er the brrak&rcwghr; of Proskouriakoff (4960, 1963, 1964), devel- opments in hiem$lyphic &ciphermeat brought the history of rulers and dynasties to light, yet in surprisingly delayed research that did not reach fruition until the late 1970s and 1980s. (The delay probably resdted h m the small number of practicing glyph specialists and the meager quantity of accessible texts, Coe 1992:19>217,) At this time, the nature of Maya kingship and the recmstntction of dynastic history became major subjects of investigation (e.g., CulE>ert 1991; Freidel and Schele 1988; FZouslon 1993; Schele and Freidei. 1990; Schele and Miller 1986), but with relatively little attention to the web of relationships that constihnted the court. Such h m a n intersections were barely conside~d for the simple reasnn that a significant portion of hieroglyphic inscriptions seemed to refer mostly to ruiers and had scant inforr~ation on other people. More &tailed views of courtly life came into eltistence with the decipherment- of nonregd titles, the study of icmography, and. the detection of court scri:bes (e.g., Coe 1973; Miller 1986; Stuart 1987; Reents-Budet 1994). One sf the few sbdies targeting courts was Schele and Miller's infIuer~tial The Blood of k'ings (1986), which did, more than any other work of the period. to evoke the ritual life a d liynastic interplay of the ancient Maya.

Archaeology has been just as slow in opening the royal court. Excava- tors have long, known of large build.ings that they temed palaces, a label used with a pronounced diffidence about what, preciselyI a patace might be @ge, Satterthwaite 1943:17), Chly with systematic excavation, particularly by Peter Hasrison (1970) in the Cmtral Acropolis at Tikal, did, it become clear that some sf these strucbres were residences of rulers and other high dignitaries and that such buildings served as the locus of courtly activity. Data on numrous elaborate residential structures and rich bufials indkated that there wercl. a significant number of high-status individuals at each center" 'These hdividuals appear to have closely as- sisted the rulers and functioned as members of the court, Nonetheless, anthropological archaeologists, especially those in the United States, cm-

tinued to address highly abstract issues such as political organizaticm and social stratification (e*g., Demarest 1992; Houston 1993; Marcus 1993)- Royal courts as analytic entities barely registered on academic radar screens. People who lived in elaborate rttsidences were generally called elites, to be delined as separate units of andysis rather than as groups of agents with strategic objectives qualified by a s h a d world- view (Chase and Chase 1992; Palka 1905). Alternativelyr a ~gicentric focus looked narrowly at the stratagems of historically ider~ti,fied rulers and their peers (Schele and Freidel 1990). In this milieu, S d e r s and Webster observed incisively that "since so much of the anthpological literature on early state development has stressed Ihe ernergence of for- mal bureaucracies, it is w r t h remembering that the less format court dimensions of centralization may also be extwmeiy Fr.nportantf" (Sanders m d Webster 1988:524).

In our view, the analysis of royal courts cannot be subsumed under the study of kingship, pofiticd organizatim, administrative systems, and social stratification, thou* these themes surely have much in comanon. Court studies involve dimgasions that are quite dissimilar yet still nodal in understanding theoretical concepts of class, polity, and Lncipient bureaucracy. For example, cottrt mern:bers are not necessaril,y indjviduals of high status (muston and Sbart, this volume; Inomata, this voluxne), Nor can a royal court be studied oniy throu* its administrative functions, since its internal power relations and symbolic properties dernmd equal scrutiny Tn the following section, we dlscuss these theoretical issues in more detail.

Theoretical Issues The first and mast essential questio~~ might be, How is the court to be de- h d ? At the outset we admit to great reluctance in offerir\g a rigid, a pri- ori definition that may eventually prove misleaeiing and unproductive, A quick review of royal courts in various parts of the world makes it clear that there exist numerous types of courts that vary significantly from each other in terns of composition, function, meaning, and organization. Ralhel; cou,rts m s t be studjed withjn specific culturd and hjstoricai contexts, accordhg to the research interests of indjvidual scholars, The m s t effective kind of definition &odd be flexible and jointly sensitive to in- digenous precepts and present-day analytical requirements. Yet court does need to be djscussed heuristically as a type defhition that can be modified a d altered to i~~dividual taste. 111 our judgment, the pivotai feature of the royal court is that it hcorporates an orga~~ization cer~tered around the sovereign, be this person a king, ruler, empem, or monarch. The people vvho sufround the ruler may inrlude his c ~ r her family mem-


bers, advisers, retainers, guards, assistants, craftspeople, and servants. These cot~rt melnbers are bound by mutual understmdhgs and obliga- tions; their interactions generally take place in culturally ordered spatial se tti~tgs.

Poweriul nobles may also form their own courts, and the royal court itself may originate in the patterning of wealthy households (Webster, this votume). A potential pr"blcm oE our defhitim is that it exciudes these secondq courts. We aehokvledge that consideration of nonroyai, c m t s leads to productive lines of reseal-ch, and this problem should, be dealt with, again flexibly according to the =search vestion and strategy of each scholar (Armstrong 1927; Jaeger l985:28; Evans, this ~rol~~me), Still, we =iterate that the central fcicus of this book is on the royal court, One =ason fnr our rczgicentric definition is tc:, preserve tight focus on the specific research issues. h o t h e r reason is Chat dlhough secondary courts may duplicate the estiential o~anization and functions of the royal court, certain fcabres, particday those of symbolic. name, discussed fur&er on, remain uniqve to the latter. W e n nonmyat courts appear in this book, they do so in a supporting, comparatke role.

The inclusive and vague definition we fawor helps to avoid ethacentric bias but leaves a difficulty in defining court boundaries, Argmbly, even a state or polity can represent m organization centcred around the sovereign. We beliewe the crucial element here is physicaf proximity to the ruler. Spatial i,ncilusiveness and exclusiveness serve to define the mcm- bership of a court in many societies, In his pioneering sociological inquiry into the court, Elias (1983:4143) noted that the court of the Frttnch ulzcien r@ime was the vastly extended house and household of the king and his dependents and that all or at least a considerable segment of courtiers had bdgings in the king's house in Vctrsailles, as well as at residences in the city of Paris. In such a cme, court mmbership can be de- i4ned by the right or duty to reside or to be present in the court as an ar- chi tect~& entity. This ccmflation of the two meanings of ccnrrt in English derives from the European tradition. Nonelht.less, it is cross-czxlturdly true that spatid settings provide critical parameters in defining the court at; a group of individuals. Wten we appfy this concept universally, the spatial settings of a court do not necessarily involve physically fixed h- calities, The cmrts of Moroccan kings, for example, were in continual, if episodic, movement (6et.rtz 1977). "Thus the physical prcrsence of the king, not permanent architecture, anchored the court, Even European monarchs sometimes moved between different palaces and locdities, and so did their courts (ISrom and Elliott 1980; Dickens 1977:17-18; El-

liott 3989:154; Jaeger 1985:19). An exceltent illustratim of this is fie Eliza- bethan ploy of hanknxpting nobles by visiting them for interminde, de- mandhg stays: The cost of housing the royal entourage would tax the wealthiest peer (Loaeies 1984). II a vast majority of historically m d ethalogically h~own. examples,

the sovereips and their c a t s tended to stay in fixed localities for pro- htnged periods, ~ o u g h this evidence does not preclude their occasional moves (Ball and Taschek, vol, 2 of this book, forthcoming 21)Cfl). 'These fixed localities were usuatl_). marked by an imposing built environment with pronounced attention to physical elevation and horizontal scrpara- tion from other residences. In pre-Hispmic Maya society, it is most likely that some of the so-called palaces were the places where royal house- hdds resided and a large portion of courtly activities took place. In cm- sequence, many of the contributors to this book place their strongest emphasis on architecturd complexes with myaX residential functions.

The degree of control over access to the royal palace or s o v e ~ i p dif- fers from one society to anothez Accordingly, the defhition of the bou~~d- ary of a court diverges to a tremendous degree?, In many historically known societies, the batdnce betwwn the prudence of tight control over access and the convenience of easy comunication was clne of the primary concerns of the courts (Loades 1986:45). The power, prestige, and authoriw of the king and courtiers over the rest of swiety hinged heavily on this balance. II Ming- and Qing-period China, admjssion to the royal p&ce was tightly restricted, as its namef the Forbidden City, implies, In such irzstances, the boundary of fie court as a social group is rczlatively clear. II other cases, the boundary of the court may be inherently bl~xrred, or it may even shift from t h e to time. For example, the English Tudor court apparently did not have clear-cut rules as to who should not be lodged in the palace. Thc nzlmlcler of- people that *sided at cowt fadlities fluctuated grcally with sessions of parliament and other events (Loades 39811:3840). In Spain under the Ilabsburgs, there was a large but indeter- minate body of people loosely associated with the coust, besides court of- ficials with accommodation in the palace or the town (Brown and EIZiott 398(3:36). The ve"ion of where the ancicmt Maya fell in thjs continwm of court boundedness can be determined only through empirical research. (We see intriguing variation in the degree of isolation of palaces: At some sites l w palaces sit adjacent to smaller pluzzteln groups [e.g., Dos Pilas, Gua.t.ennalaJ, w h e ~ a s at others varnlted palaces are acutely sepa- rated. f m other residences [@*g,, Piedras Negras, Guatemala]; see Mar- tin, this volume.) Another complicated matter is how to treat occasional visitors of the rulers or royal palaces, including pocverfrll nobles or feu- dal Zeds who generally stayed in provinces outside the capitaf, or high- ranking bureaucrats who worked in administrative b.taildint;s separate


from the royal palaces, Whether to conslder them as part of the court de- pmds on the research questio~zs and analytical procedure of each investi- gates, not on ernic defhitions of courts in specific societies.

Built envircmments and oher setti~ngs of the court are not mere physical, delimiters or containers of courtiers. Spatial arrangeme~zts expressed in physical settings inlnerently touch on the composition, patterns of be- havior, and ways of thinkixng in the court. Elias (1983:4,7) noted:

Far every kind of "being together" of people has a corresponding arrange- ment of space, where the people belonging together adually are or can be to>gether; i f not as a whole then at least In small units. And so the precipitate of a social unit in terms of space and indeed, more narrowly, in terms of rctc~ms, is a tangible and-in the literal sense-visible representatim af its special nature. In this sense the kind of accommodation of court people gives sure and very paphic access to an understanding of certain social relationships characteristic c ~ f court society,

In the case of the Japanese imperial, court, the architectural prosperity and decay of noble houses closely reflected shifts in power among political, competitors (Hall 1974:19). F~~rthermore, we believe that the built ell- virmmnt shapes human intesaction and serves as a mnemonic device that i17Vokes and recalls thr cosmology of kingship, royal history, and court etiquette (see Houston 1998; Mouston and Taube n.d.; Parker Pear- son and Richards 1994; Rapoport 1991)). Royal compounds may also materialize the symbolism and official ideology of the court (Ashmore 1992). Such architecture loaded with symbolism, i d e o l o ~ ~ m d cultural meanings exerts active effects on courses of action taken by those who live or work there. For example, Reese p996) points out that the extraordinary conservatism of the Vatican court comes, at least in part, from its mcient, imposing quarters,

The Royal Court as a "House" and Houselzold In some societies, architecturt? may function as a vehicle for categoridrtg and contermplating social institutions. Li.vi-Stmuss (1982) noted the presence of houses as key terminological elements in smieties Irom medieval Europe to Japan, with profound implications for the study of courts in a broad sense, including the elusive matrt-er of nonroyal courts. For tkvi- Straws, the house could supersede tmd.itional anthropological terms for descent and kinship, which never seemed quite to match the loose and s ~ ~ p p l e organizations that anthropologists and historians discerned on the ground. For example, noble houses of medieval, Europe strike many as problematic sociat units, sixlce the transmission of membership,

names, and wealth seldom fullowed clear-cut principles of descent or kinship. Voilh, the "'house"Cfa corporate body holding an estate made up of both material and immaterial wealth, which perpetuates itself through the transmission of its name, its goods, and its title down a real or imagi- nary line, cansidered legitimate as long as this conthuity can express itself h the language of klnship or of affinity and, most often, both" (t4vi- Strauss 1982:174). 'I'he house is an fnstitutionai creation that permits fie coc.)tistence of contradictory ta~dencies, such as patrilineal &scent and matrilineal descent, filiation and residence, hypergamy and hypogamy close marriage and etistant marriage, and heredity and election (Le%- Strauss 1982:3184).

Carsten and Hugtn-Jones (1.995) further examixled the relation between the house-as-architecbre and the house-as-social-instibtion, noting that buildings expressed not only social units but naturalized differaces in rank. Although the original formulation of LPvi-Skauss refers to noble houses, tbis cclncept m y be useful i r ~ the study of myal colarts. fn some soci.eties, noble houses constitute primary subgroups within the royal court, or they provide social and economic bases for competing noble courtiers. The concept of house may even apply dircctly to some royal courts. For the study of the ancient m);&, where glyphic and ethohis- toric evidence suggests that the ancestry and grouping of royalty and nobility were sometimes referred to as houses (Housto~~ 1998:521; Carmack f981), I:.,hvi-Sfrauss"~ concept of house offers an attractive theoretical model (see GiXlespie and Joyce 1997 ; Chmce 1998; foyce 1996,1999; Joycc and Gaespie 2C)t)Q; also see the Braswefl and the :Ringle and Bey chapters in the forthcolning volurne 2 of this bnok).

A related issue is the nature of the royal court as a household. Clearly, the ccnart discharges many of the same roles, Like other households, t-t-re rnyal court involves daity practices, operating as a place ol production and reproduction, both social and physical. Xt is a site where weafth and rights are transmitted. For courts across the world, inctuding those of early modem Europe, intermingling of royal household and polity administration was quite common (Brown and ElZiott 1980:35-36). Follow- ing Max Weber, Elias (1983:4143) argued that the authority and power of the Frenctn kings developed from tht.ir domestic aulhority as masters of a house, The kingshle over the countfy was an extension of their rule of the court yua household. Sanders and Webster (19813:524) suggested that among the three types of centers-regal-ritual, administrative, and mer- cantiledeveloped by Fox (1977), the regal-ritual center could be con- ceived as the expanded household of the d e r , 'I'hat is, the administration of the polity is in mnny respects an extension of household administraticm. Nonetheless, it may be that this definition of the royal court reduces its hterpmtivr usefulness, since it effectively encompasses

Openi~zg kke Royal Mnyn Court 1 2

all settlement anci poputation within the urban ey>icenter. The naturr of the couft as a household merits further inquiry (Mchanp and Plank, this volume).

Slrahs and the Dynanzics of Power itz the Royal Court In terns of the composilion of courts, we need to emphasize that the d e h - ition of corlrl through thc pbysjcal proxhity to the sovereip does not necessarily imply that all the members of the court esljoyed high status. Euro- pean courts, such as that of Louis XIV in France, were largely occupied by high-status figures, and Eljas (5983:17-18) called court people an elite p u p . Sisnilar situations can be found. in many other societies, yet we cannot assume that this was always the case. Some historically and ethno- graphically h o w n cotxrts hcluded i-ndividuals of humble orighs, those with physical deformityI especially dwarfs, and criminals (Amino 1993; Evms-Pritrchard 1948; Houston 1992; Mitamura 19"i"a; also see b~omata, this ~Tol~xnne). h some cases, these hdividuals gained great power and economic weallln through their intirnacy with the sovereip and by controlling access tc:, the king. It should be remembered that the catcufus of power, p~st.ige, and weallh was likely to have been ki&ly complex even h societies where the courts consisted. mainly of high-status hdividuafs (McGuFre 1983; Paynter 1989; Palka 1995). For exam* the pditical power and eco~~omic wealth of s o m highly rtzspskd hdividuals, such as religious personnel, may have been rather ~stricted. 3311s it is misleading simply to characterize all of the court membas as e1itt.s (for problems in definirzg elites, see Howton md Skart, this volume).

The wide variety in the composition of courts means that organiza- ticmal principles and the dynamics of internal power achieve singdar prominence in any anthropological or historical investigation. In some societies, the position, power, and duties of each court member follow fnrmat laws and sumptuav codes; in others, such prescriptions are less clear. Despite such variety duties and relations among individuals in courts under discussion here are generally less clearly defined &m in most i~~dustrial nations. In other words, relations between courtiers tend to be personal and fi~x,id ratha than professional and prcdefined (Elias 1983:1), Moreover, even in societies where the positions and. ranks of court members are hierarchically determined, some courtiers of low rank may gain profotrnd influence through their personat friendship with the sovercrign. Thus, our scope of study should encompass nut only noble courtiers but also kw-ranking members, all potentiaify impmtant play- ers with distinct personal objectives. This also means that the court must always be interpretable with rcspect to human agents and their influence on institutional structures (see Giddens 19M).

The court is an arma of keen competi.tion m d the negcrtiatim of pwer. Such competitiw~ can weur among different classes and factions \zrirhin a court, as well as beheen a ruler md subjects, some more subsexvient than o&ers (see Bmnmfiel 3994; Gailey and h ~ e r s o n 1987). The impiications of such competition are so~~etirnes quite complex. In the Tudor cou&, the sov- e d g n often took advantage of coslfGcts among nobles, for they served his or her purpose of weakening the nobility (Loades 1986:89). Nonetbeless, rulers in many societies are &tell manipulated by their dose &endmts, particularly by those who handle the flow of critical information and sup- pkants. Courts can, in a sense, be places of qualitative imprisonmat of the ruler, where the lord can be mnre v u h r a b . md impotent. than alf-power- ful. The vuh~erability of sovereips to manipulation may depend on their personal characters, as well as m their physicrti condifir,n and mental state. This observatio~n, reiterates the fact that courts are sahrated not only with hstitutionalization but with idiosyncratic, individual touches (see Reese 1996:185). The Heian court of Japan provides a suggestive example. &rhg this pwiod, the power ol' names suqassd that of the emperor, and coIBpe- tition among courtiers eseal.ated. Nobles, however, conthued to rely m the courtly order as the s o m e oE ultimate fegitimkaticrn for their authority The stackre of the court served as a franework hvhesein such cmpetition tmk place and helped to keep conflict under control (Hdl 1974:19). Alll h all, courts are at once adwantageous and dangwous places for aspiring political actors (Anglo 197233; E,oades 19%:1"30).

Fanetions of the Coud and Its Relation to Society Tn most prcjndustrial societies, a court performs essential, administrative, judiciary ce~mcmial, and diplomatic functions of the state or polity. For many scholars, the administrative functions are of particular interest. In the case of the pre-Hispanic Maya, we can reasmably assume that the royal couft was the central ruling body of each polity Yet, like many sizn- ilar societies, it is probable that Maya polity administration was not seg- regated frm o t h r fcatures of the court but was eznbedded in the mufti- faceted entity that we call the court. In p~industrial societies, functional differentiation between administration and the judiciary was genaally undeveloped. Ad~ustable personal relations, not fegal injunctions, may have served as important: ch els for etecisionmaking and the execution of tasks. In addition, some of administrative and diplomatic functions may have been carried out in elaborate ceremonial contexts, In an extreme and perhaps owerinterprtrted case, Geertz (1980) descriZles Balinese h g d o m s as "theater states'bwhere theatrical performme of royal courts, not syualid political ends, was the ulthate objective of court activity. Again, we do not want to overgeneralize thrse aspects of courts in


noting the immense variety in examples known to us from the anthrflpo- logical and historical literature.

The composition, organization, functions, and symbolism of the court are nabrally formed througl~ their rczlaticm to the rest of swiety* The administrative functions of the court &odd be undcrstood &rough Itcal political structures, Despite the tendency toward centralization repre- sented by the court, a sipificant segment cJf administrative and judiciary fuxzdions h many traditio~zal societies is carried out by disparate sectors of society, in.cluding councils at the level of local, or kin groups (see Sanders and TvVebster 1988; Southall 1988; Tarnbid 1976). The existmce and continuation of a court natura:lfy depe~zded on material and personal resources extracted from society Securing these revenues had to be critical for every court, although doubtless these overtures were not always successful against thc "wcapons of the weak" and a potentially obdurate peasantry (Scott 19%). The use of numerous sewants at court can, bow- ever serve as a mechanism for distributing wealth and prestige to lower classes of society Armstrong (2"377:58-59) pobts out that such processes iostered the security of the court of Burgundy because so many people had a stake h seeing it cmthue and thrive.

The scale and size of: a polity and its popdalinn are just as important (Feinman 1998; Houston 1997). TThe operation of the court depends heavily on face-to-face contacts among courtiers. For many small- to medium- sized Maya centers, such face-to-face contacts m y have been possible between the central authorlities and the rest of the population at important political a d ceremonial occasions. At large centers such as Tikal, CalakmuL, and Caracol, interaction may have bee11 quite differat, of an austere remoteness that accentuated differences behnieen ruler and ruled.

IMeaniag in the Royal Goud Another saiient aspect of royal courts concerns the symbolic meanings they possessed or reprtlsented. %n most swicli,es, the court appears to represent two contrasthg me gs, One ernghasizes the court as a syrnbd of societd unim and as an exemplar for the rest of society CC;eertz 1980). The other stresses the external origins of the king and court and their detach- ment h r n others (SaEtlins 1985). n e s e notions pertain to the inherent@ contradictory na&e of kingship: at once remote and close, sacwd and sec- ular, protective and dangerous (Hornton and Stuart, this volume). The klng is a distant personage who intercedes with the supernatural (Houston and Stuart 1996) anli a close fig- who met;llphorically equates with the .father/mot)ler of the state qua household.; the king reigns as a transeen- dental, serritdivine figure and governs md, administrata the mundane; the king comects with the sky and its supernahral forces and also with the fe-

c u d earth &at supplies food; in s , the king resides both at the cmter of society md outside it. It: is by this symbolism that the royail court disth- guishes itself most substantially from the secondary courts of nobles.

S o w symbolism m d idedogy may serve to legihize the power and authority of the ruling dass fE)ctnarest 1992; Codelier 197ff). Yet it is naive-and unwittingly reflective of currcnt thinking-to considcr that these ideologies we= created by cyniral indivjduals htent cm exploiting a gullible underclass. ",m whcn ideologies refl.ect the int.ercsts of rulers, it is more likely that royal symbolism transformed and appropriated previ- ortsly existing patterns (Bloch 1986); this symbolism atrtains its greatest res- onance when fashioned from broadly held beliefs or a cmmon idiom of collective understandings (Houston and C u m i n s 1998). We need to re- member &at irm many cases the mlers themselves are born liefs (Claessen and Oosten 11990). Royal i d e o l o ~ and syntboli ways be tmderstood as frmctional or pragmatic devices political purposes. Patmtly the composition and organization of a court has *7iXed elements: s m e that prftject the royal ideology and symbolism,

ot he explained in terms of political functionality and prag- matism, others that are &aped for collective or personal political purposes.

Resides such long-endusing symbolism, the royal court constantly recreates its own images in, the shorter term, either consciously or un- conscicrudy This process is deeply rooted in the ~ l a t i o n of the court to the rest of society; in internal competition among court members, and in rbalsy with other courts. In other sections of society, high culture em- bodied by cowtiers serves to distinguish the privileged and to prompt ahirat ion by others (see Bourdieu 1,984; Baines and Yoffee 1,998). Thus the cultural ideal and aesthetics reprcsentczd by the court need to be maintained and enhanced incessantly by the proper education, behav- ior, and de~neanor of its members. Conspicuous consumption and theatrical spectacles by the sove~ign and courtiers in the form of elaborate ceremonies, courtly attire, opulent banquets, magnificent ~sidences, and rare commodities obtained through long-distance trade is a typical means of generating glorious images of the court. The acquisition, main- tenance, and monopoly of skilled artists and artisans who materialize elements of the cultural ideal and aesthetics are of vital interest to the court (momata., this volume). Courtly culture developed. and maintained in this manner can have strong effects on the rest of society. The court may assist the "civilizing process"-civilized in this case may be specifically defin.ed in each society from the pojnt of view of court members-b y imposing its discipline on society (Etias 1978; Elliott 1989: 146). It is irnpmtant to note that at the sarnc time, noblesse obljge can becme a burden for courtiers. Court culture, disciplirre, and decorum may lixnit their political options. Courtiers are usually expected to maintain ade- quate lifestyles, which may impose ponderous economic strains fEIias 19831,


As to competition among courtiers, the refinement of rhetorical strategies of spewh and posturing is a nearly ubiquitous process stimulated by the Merent competition in courtly settings. The emphasis on courtly culture may reach tbt-! poht where political and civic activities of courtiers become performance or a work of art (EIias f 978; Jaeger 19859 3-4 4,258). Under extreme circumstances, rhetorical and theatrical excellence may weigh more than progress toward admi~tistrativc objecthes. 'This is one of the reasons some historically known states that sought to govern thruugh militaristic power or effective bureaucracy saw the hi@ culture of the court as an obstacle to successful rule. The Kmakura and Toku- gawa shogunates of Japan, for example, m d e conscious efforts to differ-. entiak themselves frm the emperor's court and to maintain Spartarn discipline. Yet their attitucie to imperial-court cdturt~ often remained ambivalent, and theyr too, developed their own courtly culture, though based on somewhat different stmdards of aesthetics and refhement,

With regard to foreign rivalry, thr splendor of courtly practices can serve as a means of outsf-rhhg otbcr courts. kceptions for forc-.ip en- voys can be occasions fnr both ragpmhement and intense competition, New or lower-rank courts may import practices of promhent dynasties, thus prontoting the difft~sion of simibr courtly culture beyond pditical boundaries, For this reason, well-documented practices among medieval and mod- European courts (e.g., Amstrong 1977; Elliott 1989; Jaeger f 985) appear highly szlggestive for the study of Maya courts

Althougln court culture is based largely on mutual undcrstmdings oi the members, it may be strmgv influenced by the pesmality oE individual rulers (see previous text). At the Spanish court, such monarchs as Charles V and PhiIip EI did overcome prcvious court protocol and etiquette and established new patterns (Elliott 1989:151). Likewise, images of the court hctd by the rest of society oft- depend heak~ily on the charisma of specific rulers. In the case of England, Elizabeth was particularly successful in generating powerfui and compelling images of su- premcy and primacy, whereas her predecessor, Mary was not (I.,oadcs 1986:1,34)+

Specific Questions and Data Sets

We hope that the foregoing djscussion demonstrates the ixnportance and potential of court studies. Courts are fascinathg in their oMin right, but they also retate to issues of traditional inlerest to Mayanjsts.. 'These in- clude the nature of kingship, administrative system$ political osgmiza- tion, and social inequality. The compo";ti"n and symbolism of the court are closely related to the nature of kings&. Without proper consideration of the former we cannot fully understand the latter (Houston and

Shart 1996). Administrative systems, craff production, and pcritical organization need to be reviekved with respect to the symbolism, rituals, and internal dynamics of the court. Momover, a quick review of royal courts remi~~ds us that the nabre of social hequality is far more cm* than a simplistic view that labels the cowtiers as an elite. The specific focus on the court helps to bring together different strategies and ap- proaches: a social-scien.tific approach that adksses the abshact models of political organization, a humanistic approach that focuses on dynastic histories and people, and an analytic approach to institutions insofar as they can be rr.constructed horn available infomtim.

With these poi~~ts h mind, we plmned this book so that it would examhe a variety of questions rczgading royal courts of the ancient Maya. Mich srtbgroups constituted a royal court? Werl, its oqanizational principles bascd mah:ly on kinstnip or other instihtional bases, or did, they cllnsist of more fluid personal relations (Smders and Wetaster 1.988)? Were the dead considered a part of the court as in &c. case of the Znka? Is I,$vi-Strauss's concept of "house society" an appropriate modcl (L6vi-Strauss 1982; Carsten and Hugh-Jmes 1995)? Irr what way is the royal court comparable to or dgferent h m other households? These questions lead to the issue of p u p dynanics. M a t role did each member and s~lbgroup play? What role did court artisans and, scribes discharge (Coe 1973,1977; H e h s 1993; Reents-Budet 199411 How can we malyze power ~ la t ions m m g court members and between the court and other sc~ctors of society (Gailep and Patterson 1987)? How was gender ideology perceived in a court?

The questions cclntinue. What k k d of admi~~istratrive functions did a court carry out: and ho\y? What- %stained the court h material terns? (In basic terms, how did pe~ple in the court eat?) What was the mechanism of tribute extrxtion? Should a Maya court be viewed as an exemplq center for the rest of society or as a focus of a theater state (Geertz 15380; ?Bte 19"62)? Or did it emphasiz transcendence and external origjns that contrasted with a d were detached from other parts of Maya society (Evans-Pritchard 1948; S&1ins 1985)? Are there any common cosmologi- caI themes that shaped, the royal comts of dihrent polities, including tropes of centrality, quadripartition, landscape, and mythic conflation with heroic or c ~ a t o r beSng;s in, rcmote time?

Data Se& Tn addressing such questions, this book and its companion volume bring together data from archaeology, epigraphy, icmography and e ~ ~ ~ o h i s -


tory. As mcmtioned, thr royal court as an architectural entity is a primary source of information. In the case of Che ancient Maya, large-building cmplexest often called palaces, most likely served as royal courts in this sense (Kowdski 1987; Harrison 1970. Altbou@ pdaces are among the most conspicuous remnins at Maya sites, our understanding of their iunctions and meanings has been rather limited. &cent excavations at various Maya sites are providing detailed information about pdace architecture and activities conducted in these complexes (Ball 1993; Chase and Chase 1996; Folan et al. 1995; Hansen 1998; Shares, Miller, and Traxler 1992; Vald6s and Fahsen 1995). Palaces, however, were not the only locations where court activities took place. Some court members probab%y lived and conducted part of their duties in buildings outside of myal palaces (f?ouston et al. 1998; fnclmata 1995; Webst(L"r 1989). 11% acldi- tion, the ruler and his or her entourage may have possessed morc than one residence and may have visited other locations for administratke, diplomatic, and religious purposes (Geertz 1977; Houston 1993; Struart: and Housto~~ 1994)"

ho the r important set of data derives from epigraphi.~ and iconographic studies. These prment vivid fmat;es of ac'tivilie fn royal courts and. of the people who participated in them. Such people are not easily accessible h the archaeological record other than as the occupants of rich but mnregal graves and as the probi\ble occupmts of smller palaces. Until rc-tcently, epigraphy and ico~~ography primarily provided evidtmce of mlers, largely because these figures formed the principal AetoricaI emphasis of stone monuments exmined. by Proskouri&oM. New deciphments of titles and other glyphs substantially augment Che drarnatis personae of the Maya court (Houston 1.993; k g k 1990; Stuart 199% Schele and Miller 19236). En addition, caamic painkgs often depict numerous indivjduals engaged in cot~xtly activities and offer abrlndant hf~rmation for the study of comts (Coe 1973; Reents-Budet 1994). The study of this particular type of media has been hciIitated trmormously by splendid roU-out picbres of vase paint- hgs by fusth~ Kerr (1989--1997). Mural paj-ntkgs, too, represent some of the most detailed hages of court life (Miller 1986).

Finally, ethnohistoric d o c m n t s from the Early Colonial pericrd provide debiled informtim on the court that is unavailable for earlier periods (Braswell 1996; Carmack 1981; Hill and Monaghan 1987; Restall 1991i;- Roys 1943). Important in themselves, these data also serve as sources of andogy for Classic courts.

Organization of the Baok This effort consists of two volumes, The present Volume 1 includes two parts: "l'heoretical and 'l'hematif Appmaches" and ""Cornparathe Mews

and Concksions." Volume 2. pmsents chaptcrs etiscussing royal courts at specific centers m d areas. In Part 1 of this volume, thc theoretical and thematic section, contributors present theoreticd frameworks for the study of courts and itemfze fmportant issues to be examined. 11% addition, epigraphic and iconographic data arc s'y'nthesiZed from across the Maya region. First, fnomata deals with the identity and roles of nonroyal members of the court from a comparative perspective. The t h e w of Houston and Stuart's cchapter is the power play between rulers and secundary lords, who are identified by title and by context. McAnasry and Plmk dis- cuss the questions of the co~& as a household and the role of domestic space. In the foilowing chapter, Wcbster exarnirres spa td aspects of Ihe court by anabzing the layout of palaccs at major Classic Maya centers. Martin also analyzes arct-ritectural settings of the court and discusses their implications for the understanding of court organization. Rcents- Budet reviews court scenes depicted, in ceramic vase paintings, focusing on their architectural elements. h the first chapter of Part 2, Evans examines the Aztec royal court and

buil.ds on her long-standing archaeological. and ethnohistorical research (Evms 1994). Rich ehohistoric information m the Aztec court p s e n t s valuable malogies for Maymist readers. In the last contribution, Coe presents his concluding remarks, refrzrring to the entire book. He makes a =sounding plea for closer attention to hlfaya iconographli, *ere couftly life comes alive like nowhere else,

Many of the ideas presented here were developed and refined through cmversa- tions and dixussion with the padicipants af the cmference and the cmtributors to the volume. We are particularly indebted to David Webster and anonymous re- viewers for their insightful comments an earlier drafts of this introduction,

References Amino, Yoshihika. 1993. lgyono Oken [in Japanese, Kingship of strange appear-

ance]. Tokyo: Heibonsha. Angia, Sydney 2 977, ""Te Caurtier: The 13enaissance and Changing Ideals," In A.

G. Dickens, ed., The Coil rZs of Europe: Politics, Ptztrer~age, and Rupaf dy, 2 400-1 800, pp. 33-53, London: Thames and Hudson.

Armstrong, C.A. J. 1977. "The Gctf den Age of Burgundy: Dukes That Outdid Kings," h AA. G. Dickens, ed,, The Courts of Eur.ape: I")olitit=s, Patronage, and Roy- alty, 1400--1800, pp. 55-75. London: Thames and FTudsc~n.

Ashmare, Wertdy. 1992. "Deciphering Maya Architectural Plans." In Elin Danien and Robert Sharer, eds., New Tlteouies on the Anclrtant Maya, pp. 173-184. Philadelphia: University Museum, University of Pennsylvania.


Baines, John, and Norman Uoffee. 1998, ""Ordel; Legitimacy, and Wealth in An- cient E a p t and Mesopotamia." h Gary Feinman and J ~ y c e Marcus, eds., Ar- c h i c Slates, pp. 199-260. Santa Fe: %boo2 of American Research.

Ball, Joseph W. 1993, *'Pottery, Potters, Palaces, and frolitics: Some %cioeconomic and Political Implications of Late Classic Maya Ceramic Industries." h Jferemy A. Sabloff and J o b S. Henderstm, eds., Lowland M a p Civiliz~lio~t in the Ei8Fit.h Cenfztry A.D., pp. 24S272. Mshington, DC: Dumbarton Qaks Research Ljbraq and Collection.

Btoch, Maurice. 1986, Fro.crl*rt Blessing to Violenw: Hiskoty atzd Ideology in the Circzimci- sion Rittdtrl of fhc Merina of- Mndngnscnr. Cambridge: Cambridge University 13ress.

Braswelt Geoffrey E. 1996. ""A Maya Obsidian Source: The G~archaeolc>gy, Set- tlemrtnl: History, and Ancient Economy of San Martin Jilotepeque, Guatemala,'" I""h.l>. dissertation, Tulane University.

Brown, Jonatl~an, and J. H. Elliott. 1980. A Pahm fur a Kitzg: The Biicn Refim t k ~ d the Court @P.hili;p IV. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Brrrmfiel, Elizabeth M. 1994. "Factional Competitic~n and Political Development in the New World: An Introduction." In Elizabeth M. Brurnfiel and John W. Fox, eds., Facfioiolzat Competitiorz alzd Potifienl Development itz the New World, pp. 3-13. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction: A Social GriCiqzre ofthe Judgenzeni of Tasfe. Trans- bted b y airhard Nice. Cambridge, MA: Haward University Press.

Carmack, Robert M. 1983 . The Qtricltt Mayt~s of Utnfldn: The Evoltltion oJa Higltland Guntemnla Kitzghm. Ncjrman: University of OklaFLc>ma Press.

Carsten, fanet, and Stephen Hugh-Jones, eds. 19%. Aboztt the House: Ldzli-Strnuss alzd Bqo~zd , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chance, John K. 1998, "Descent and the Nahua Noble House," Paper presented at the American Anthopafogical Asst~ciation, PhiladelpKa.

Chase, Arlen E, and Diane Z. Chase, 1992. "Mesoarnerican Elites: Assumptions, Definitions, and Models." h I[nP>iane Z. Chase and Arlen E Chase, eds., Mesoalrzerican Elites: A n Arcl2neaEogiml Assessnzent, pp. 3-17, Norman: Univer- sity of Oklahoma Press.

1996, "The Organization and Composition of Classic Lowland Maya Soci- ety: The View Erc3rn Caracol, Beiize." h Mrulfia J. Macri and Jan McHargue, eds., Eighftr Palenqz~e Roztr~d Table, 2993, pp. 243-222. Merle Creene Robertson, general editor. San Francisco: Pre-Coturnbian Art Research Institute,

CLaessen, P-ienri J, M,, and Jarich C. Qosten. 1996. "Disrrssion and Cc~nsiclera- tians." h Henri J, M, CXaessen and Jarich G, Oostm, eds., Ideology n ~ d the For- mation oJ Early Stales, pp. 359-405. Studies in Human Sc>ciety vol. 2.1E~iden: E. J. Brill.

Coe, MichaeX D. 1973. The May@ Scribe and His World. New York: The Grcllier Club.

. 1977. ""Supernatural Patrons of Maya Scribes and Artists.'' h Norman Hammancl, ed., Sockt Process in Maya Prehistory: Essays in klorzor of Sir En"c Ttzo~rtpson, pp. 327-349. London: Academic Press,

1992, Brerakirzg the h y t r Code, London: Thames and Hudsan. Culbert, T. Patrick, ed, 1993. Classic Maya X"3olz'ticnl Histoq: Hieroglypl2ic and Arcltae-

ologimZ Evidence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

20 Tak~~flli Inomnla and Stqlzen D. HousFon

Demarest, Arthur A, 4992. ""leology in Ancient Maya Cultural Evolutiim: The Dynamics of Galactic Polities." h Tnrthur A. Dernarest and Geoffrey Mr; Con- rad, eds., Ideology and Pre- Col~nzbia~ Ciz?ili;zations, pp.135-158. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.

Dickens, A. C, 4977'. "Monarchy and Cultural Revival: Courts in the Middle Ages." In A. G, Dickens, ed,, The Courts of Europe: Pc~litics, P~tronnge, and Roy- alfy, 14UO--1800, pp. 8-31. Lc>ndon: Thames and Httdsc)n.

Elias, Narbert. 1978. Tlze Ciailizi~zg P W ~ S S , New b r k : Urizen. . 1983. T?le Cozrrt Society [Die hiFfiscIze Gesellscizafi, 19691 Ranslated b y Ed-

rnund jephcott. New York: Pantheon, Elliott, John H. 1989. ""Te Court af the Spanish Habsburgs: A Peculiar Institu-

tion?" In John FT. Ellie>tt, ed., S ~ ~ a i n and Ifs World, 1501b1700, pp. 142-161. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Evam, Susan "1: 1992. ""Architecture and Authority in an Aztec Village: Farm and Fmction of the Tecpan," In H. R, P-ial-ciey ed., Ln~zd a ~ d Politics in the Valley of Mexico: R Two Thousand Year Perspective, pp. 291-319. ALbuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.

Evam-Pritchard, E, E. 2 948. Tke Divitze Ki~gship of the Slzilzlk of trlte Nilntic S u d n ~ . Cambridge: Cambridge University 13ress,

Feinman, Gary M. 1998, ""Scale and Sclcial Organization: Perspectives on the Ar- chaic State.""n Gary M. Feinman and Joyce Marcus, eds., ArcI-ral'c SCntes, pp. 95-1 34. Santa Fe: khsoX of American Research Press.

Folan, WiXliam X., Joyce Marcus, Svphia Pincernin, Maria del Rosario Uomhguez Carrasco, Laraine FXetcher, and Abef Morales Edpez. 2 "395, ""Calakmul: New Data from an Ancient Maya Capital in Campeche, Mexico." Lati~z Rmcricnn Rn- tz'quify 6: 31 0-334.

Fcm, Richard . 1977. Urban Anfhropology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentlce Hall. Freidel, Bavid A., and Linda Schele. 2988. "Kingship in the Late Preclassic Low-

bnds: The Instruments and Places of Ritual Power." A~lrterican Antlzropologist 90: 547-567.

GaiXey Christine W., and Thornas C. Patterso)n. 1987. ""lxwer Refations and State Formation." In Thornas C. Patterson and Christine W. Gailey exis., Pt~zuer Relr- tions n ~ d State Forfmtion, pp. 1-26, Washin@on, DC: American Anthropological Association.

Ceertz, Clifford. 1977, "Centers, King$ and Charisma: Reflections an the Symbol- i c ~ of Pc>wer." In Joseph Ben-David and 'Terry Nichols CXarkc;l, eds., Gzl ldu~ and Ifs Crenfors: Essays in Wonsr of Edzuard Shils, pp. 150-171. Chicago: tmiversity of Chicago 13ress,

. 1980. Rlegam: The Tlzcater State i12 Ni~2etectzf/2-Centztry Buli, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Giddens, Anthony 1984. Tlw Conslilufion c$ SocieE-y: Ozrlline cf the nteo1y of Strue- tumtz'otf. brkeley: Universiq of Califc>rnja Press.

Gille~pie~ Susan B., and Rcrxmary A, Joyce, 1997, "Gendered Goods: The Sym- bolism of Maya Hierarchical Exchange Relations." h Tnheryl Claassen and Rosemary A, Joyee, eds., Worneft itz Preilisfuq: North Amel-icnn and Mesutrmcricn, pp. 189-207. Philadelphia: Universiv of Pennsylvania Press.


Codeliel; Maurice. 1978, ""Ecc~nomy and Religion: An Evolutionary Optical IIlu- sion.'?n Jonathan Friedman and M, j. Rowlands, eds., The Ez?olufz'on of Social Systents, pp. 3-12. London: Duckw-orth.

Hall, John VV, 1974, "Kyoto as Historical Background." In John ttl, Hall and Jeffrey I"". Mass, eds., Medieval japan: Essays in Institutional Histo?, pp. 3-38.. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Hansen, Riichard. 1998. "Continuity and Disjunction: The Pre-Classic An- tecedents of Classic Maya Architecture." In Stephen D, Houston, ed., Fur?ctl'orz n ~ d Meani~zg i1.2 C ~ Q S S ~ G a y a ArclziCecture, pp. 49-1 22. Washington, BC: Dumb- arton Oaks Research Library and Collection.

Harrism, Peter D. 1977. "The Central Acropolis, Tikal, Guatemala: A Prelixninary Study of the Functions of Xts Structural Components During the Late Classic 13eriod.'" Ph,B. dissertation, University of 13emsyfvania.

Helms, Mary W 1993. Craft alzd the K i ~ g I y Meal: Art, Trt~cle, and Pozo~?~. Austin: Uni- versity of Texas Press.

Hill, Robert M., II, and John Mcjnaghan. 1987. Confi~uities i~z Higlglllland Mnyn Social O r p ~ i z n t h ~ : Efhrzohistuly in Sawpulns, Gzratemnta, Pl~iladelphia: University of 13ennsy lvania 13ress,

Houston, Stephen D. 1992, "A Name C1-h for Classic Maya Dwarfs." In justin Kerr, ed., Tale Maya V ~ s e Bad, vol. 3, pp. 526532. New York: Kerr Associates.

. 19%. Hieroglyphs and Histoy nb Dos Pilns: D!inasfic F"ulitic~ of fhe Classk May@. Austin: University of Texas fyess.

. 1997. "Eig Ts Beautihl: I""iedras Negras and Z,owland Maya Urbanism." Paper presnted at the Complex Society Meetings, University of Arizcma,

. 1998. "Finding Function and Meaning in Classic Maya Architecture." In Stephen D, Houston, ed,, Fur?ctiorz and Meani~g in Clnssk h y a Architecture, pp. 519-538, Washingtcm, BC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Callcscticjn.

Houston, Stephen, and Tom Curnmins. 1998. "h+, Presence, and Space in An- dean and Mesoamerican Rulership." "per presented at symp~siurn ""Ancimt Palaces of the New World: Form, Function, and. Meaning,"" Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, mshiington, B.C.

Houston, Stephen, Ff6ctor Escobedob Mark Child, Charles GoXden, Rene Mux?ic>z, and MBnica Urquiz~. 1998. "Monumental Architecture at Piedras Negras, Guatemala: Time, Histo% Meaning." M ~ y a b 11: 40-56.

Housttln, Stephen, and Davicl Stuart. 1996. "Of Gods, Clyphs, and Kings: Divin- ity and Rulership Among the Classic Maya." Antiquity 70: 289-312.

Houston, Stephen, and G r l Taube. N.d. ""An Archaeology of the Snses: Percep- tual Psychology in Classic Maya Art, Writing, and Architecture," Unpublished manuwript.

Tnornata, "hkeshi. 1995. "At-chaeological Tnvestigatians at the Fortifid Center of Aguateca, EX Pet4n, Guatemala: Implications for the Study of the Classic Maya Collapse."Th.D, dissertation, Vanderbilt U~versity.

Jaeger, Stephen C. 1985. The Qrigizzs c$Courtliness: Civilizi~zg Trends and tlze Fornza- tic~rz ojCourZIy Ideals, 939-2210. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Joyce, Rosemary A. 1996, "Social Dynamics of Exchange: Changing Patterns in the Honduran Archaeological Record.""n Car1 Menrik Langebaek and Felipe Cardenas-Armyo, eds., Chieftcril-zs, Pozuer nud Trade: Regional Interactimr izt the bt-

termediate Arm of thc Americas, pp. 34-46. Bogc~th: Departamentcr de Antropolcrga, Universidad de los Andes.

. 1999. "%~ciat Dimensions of Pre-Classic BuriaXs." h Tnavid C. Grcjve and Rosemary A. Joyce, eds., Social l% t terrzs ilz Pre-Classic Mesoanrericn, pp. 15-47. Warjhingtcm, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Z,ibrary and Csllection.

Joyee, Rosemary A., and Susan D, Gillespie, eds. 2W0. B q o ~ t d Ki~slzip: Social and Material Repmdrcction izz House Sociefics. Philadelphia: Universiv of Pennsylva- nia Press.

Kerr, Justin. 2989-1997. The Maya Vase Book: A Corpus of Rollout Plzofograplzs of M y a Vaslrs. Vols.. 1-5, New York: Kerr Associates.

Kowaiski, Jeff Karl. 1987, Tke Hotase of the Governor. Norman: University of Okla- homa.

Lkvi-Straws, CXaude. 1982. The Way of the Mask . Translated b y Sylvia Modelski. SeattXe: University of Washington Press.

Loades, David. 1986. The E~dor Cozirt, London: Batsford. Marcus, Joyce. 1993. ""Andent Maya Politicat Organization." h Jererny A. Sabtoff

and John S. Henderson, eds., Lozulntzd Mayn CiviEizntic~tz in the EigJzEk Centuq A. D., pp. 11 1-1 84. Washington, BC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collectic>n.

McGuire, [randall H, 1983. "Breaking Down Cultural Complexity: Inequality and Hetero>geneiv." In Inishaef %lhiffer# ed ., Adclances i n A rcizneologid Meflzod and Ttzeo~y~ vol. 6, pp. 91-141, Mew York: Academic Press.

Miller, Mary Eilen. 1986. Tlze Mlamfs oJBonanzpak. Princeton: Princeton Universiv Press.

Mitarnura, Taisuke. 1970. C111'nese E Z I ~ U C ~ E S : Tlze Structztre of I~?Ci?nfe Politics [Kiln- gan], Tramlated by Charles A, Pomeroy. C. E. Rutland, VE C, E, Tuttle.

Palka, Joet. 1995. "Classic Maya Svciaf Inequality and the Collapse at Dos Pilas, Peten, Guatemala." 1""h.D. dissertation, Vanderbilt University.

Parker Pearson, Michael, and Cotin XGchards, eds. 1994, Arc1"zitecture and Order: Apprcjtnc!~ to Social Spce. London: Routledge.

Paynter, Robert. 1989, "The Archaeology of Equaliv and Inequality." Annual Re- 71i~~w ~ ~ A I z tlz~pritlogy 1 8: 369-399.

Proskouriakoff, Tatiana. 4960. ""Historical Implications of a Pattern of Dates at P-iedras Negras, Guatemala." Americ~n Anliquify 25: 354-4175,

1963. ""Historical Data in the Inscriptic~ns of Yaxchifan, Part 4," Esfudios de Cultura Maya 3: 149-167. Mexico: Universidad Aut6noma Be Mexico.

1964, ""l-listorical Data in the Inscriptic~ns of Yaxchitan, Part 2," Esfudios de Cultura Maya 4:27?-201. Mkxico: Universidad Autrinorna de ~Vkxicu.

Ragoport, Amos. 1990. ""Systems of Activities and Systems of Settings." h Susan Kent, ed,, Dolrrestic Arcltitecture and trlte Use of Space: An Xnterdisciplina7-y Cross- Gzllfuml Study, pp, 9-20. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Reese, Thomas. 1996, Inside ttw k l i ca t~ : The Politics and Orgalzizntiorz of fttc Catttolic Glzlil~l~. Cambridge, MA: Haward University Press.

Reent$Rudet, Dcrrie. 4994. Pailtling tttc Mnya Unizrerse: Royal Ceramics of tfze Classic Perisd. Durham, MC: Duke U ~ v m s i t y Press.

Restall, Matthew, 1997. The h y n World: Vzrmfec Culture a~zd Societyf 1550-2850. Stanford: Stanford University Press,


Ringle, William M, 4990, "Who Was Who in Ninth-Century Chichen Itza." An- cie~zf Mesaalrzericn 2 : 23S243.

Roys, Rafph L. 1943. The [n!nAh;rn, Bnckgrcjtund I?J: Colonial "I"um5nn. Washington, DC: Camegie Institution of Washin@on.

Sahlins, Marshail. 1985. Islands cfHisto~y. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Sanders, Williarn T., and David Wbster. 4988. "The Mesoamerican Urban Tradi-

tion." A/"?inzerz'can Anlrlzrqologist 90: 521 -546. Satterthwaite, Linton. 1943. Pitdrras Nrgrns Arc/zneolt7gy: ArcI~itectur, Part 1, No. 2,

hittroduction. Philadelphia: University Museum, Unhersity af 13ennsyfvania Schele, tinda, and David Freidel. 4990. Forest of Ki~zgs: The Unfold Story of the An-

cielzt Maya. New York: Morrow Schele, Z,inda, and Mary EIIen Millez: 1986. The IZEtlod #Kings: Dynasly and Ritltal

irz Maya Ark, New York: George Braziltler. Scott, Jarnes, C. 1985. Weapons cf the Weak: Eaeyldny Fornzs I?J: Peasnnl Resistance.

New Haven: Yale University Press. Sharer, Robert J., Julia C. Miller, and Loa Traxler. 1992. ""Evolution of Classic Pe-

riod Architecture in the Eastern Acropolis, Copan: A Progress Report," Ancienk Meso~mericn 3: 145-159.

Southall, Aidan. 4988. "The Segmentary State in Africa and Asia," Cumpnra"nliiz7e Studies i~ z Society nnd H k t o y 30(1): 52-82.

Stuart, David. 1987. Ten Phonetic Syllables. Research Reports on Ancient Maya Writing 14. Wshington, DC: Center for Maya Research,

. 1995. ""A Study of Maya Tnscriptions." ".E>. dissertation, Vandehilt Uni- versity.

Stuart; Ravid, and Stephen Houston. 1994. Classic Mnyn Place Mantes. Studies in Pre-Columbian Art and Arehaecjlogy. Nshington, DC: Dumbartc~n Oaks Re- search Library and Collectiron.

Tambiah, Stanley j, 1976. InkarM Conq~dcror t k ~ d World Re~~ozalilcer. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press.

Tate, Carolyn E. 1992. Y~xcitilan: Tlze Design ofn Mnyn Ce~enzoni~l City. Austin: Uni- vmsity of Texas Press,

VaIdGs, Juan Antonic, and Federico Fahsen. 1995. "The Reigning Dynasty of Uax- actun During the Early Classic: The Rulers and the Ruled." A~cienk Meso~mer- ica f7: 197-21 9.

Webstel; David, ed. 4989. The House of the Bncnbs, Copnlz, Hondirms. Studies in Pre- Columbian Art and Archaeology, no. 29, Washington, B.: Bumbarton Oaks Re- search Library and Collection,

Royal Courts of the Ancient Maya Volume Takeshi Inomata Dragged

Documents

Transcript of Royal Courts of the Ancient Maya Volume Takeshi Inomata Dragged