11. excavations at the plaza de tayra tz´ibatnah-northeastern peten, guatemala

2

Published by:Slovak Archaeological and Historical InstituteBratislava, Vajnorská 8/aSlovak RepublicThe fi rst edition in [email protected]

Editors: D. Hulínek – D. Bonatz – M. Kováč

Authors of the publication in alphabetical order:DOMINIK BONATZ, ALICE DESPRAT, MILOŠ GREGOR, JANA HLAVATÁ, ANNIKA HOTZAN-TCHABASHVILI, DRAHOSLAV HULÍNEK, EVA HULÍNKOVÁ- ŤUCHOVÁ, PAVOL JELÍNEK, VLADIMÍR KARLOVSKÝ, DANIEL KENDRALA, MILAN KOVÁČ, BRANISLAV KOVÁR, TIBOR LIESKOVSKÝ, CARLOS PALLÁN GAYOL, JÚLIUS VAVÁK

Peer reviewed by: PhDr. Dagmar Dreslerová Ph.D., Oddělení archeologie krajiny a archeobiologie, Archeolo-gický ústav AV ČR, Praha, Česká republika. Ing. Jana Faixová Chalachanová, PhD., Department of Theoretical Geodesy, Faculty of Ci-vil Engineering, Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava, Slovak Republic. Prof. Elizabeth Graham, PhD., F.S.A., Institute of Archaeology, University College London, United Kingdom.Doc. PhDr. Peter Pavúk PhD., Ústav pro klasickou archeologii, Univerzita Karlova v Praze, Česká republika. Prof. David Pendergast PhD., Institute of Archaeology, University College London, United Kingdom.

English translation and corrections: PORTER, s.r.o., Pluhová 42, 831 03 Bratislava, Slovenská republika, www.porter.sk Mgr. Eva JobbováMgr. Peter ValentTobias Brooks

Graphics, layout and cover design: Marcel Križan, SAHI

Printing:FINIDR, s.r.o., Český Těšín

Cover illustration:Front cover: Preclassic stucco mask of Maya deity from Uaxactun in Gutemala (Photo SAHI). View of the highest part of the site of Tell Fekheriye in Syria (Photo SAHI). Bronze Age pottery found at the site in Budmerice, Slovakia (Photo SAHI). Surface fi nd from Budmerice, Slovakia - a heart-shaped pendant (Photo SAHI).

Back cover: Preclassic stucco mask of deity from Uaxactun in Gutemala (Photo SAHI). Map showing the activities of SAHI on three continents.

ISBN: 978 – 80 – 89704 – 01 – 9

171

11. EXCAVATIONS AT THE PLAZA DE TAYRA, TZ´IBATNAH –NORTHEASTERN PETEN, GUATEMALA

DRAHOSLAV HULÍNEK, SLOVAK ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL INSTITUTE

EVA HULÍNKOVÁ-TUCHOVÁ, SLOVAK ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL INSTITUTE

ABSTRACTThe Maya site of Tz’ibatnah was identifi ed by the

SAHI team in 2009. It is located in Northeastern Petén, Guatemala, near the Mexican border. Since 2010, ar-chaeological investigation has been taking place here. Excavations have been focused on the ‘House of Pain-tings‘, the Acropolis and the Plaza de Tayra. In the plaza area were discovered remains of barricades, which are most likely related to the overall fortifi cation of the city. We also found a grave, which brought to attention some chronological issues context in regards to the occupati-on of the site.

The site of Tz’ibatnah was identifi ed by the survey team of SAHI (Slovak Archaeological and Histori-

cal Institute) led by Prof. Milan Kováč. The team fur-ther consisted of the co-director of the project Ernesto Arredondo and the epigrapher Ramzy Barrois. The site was discovered in spring 2009, in the jungle area in north-eastern Petén, Guatemala, between stations El Cedro and Ixcanrío, established by Mirador – Río Azul National Park. The site is located approximately 4,5 km eastwards from El Cedro, 15 km east of Dos Lagunas station and 20 km to the west by unpaved road of the sta-tion Ixcanrío. About 4,5 km northeast of Ixcanrío lies the important Maya site, Río Azul, the fate of which could, to a large extent, be tied to the newly discovered citysite of Tz’ibatnah.

Tz’ibatnah’s geographical coordinates are 17o41´26´´ north and 89o26´4´´ west (Kováč/Arredondo 2010, 1–5; Kováč/Hulínek/Szymanski 2011, 439). Archaeological remains of the site were neither mapped nor documented before, and the settlement was not registered as an archaeo-logical site. The name Tz’ibatnah meanings „Painter of houses“ or „Painted house“ and was chosen for the site based on M. Kováč’s discovery during the initial explora-tion, when he found an almost completely preserved stone house, painted inside by red, orange and black colores, with walls covered with engraved pictures - graffi ti. Tz’ibatnah is a term from Lacandon Maya language, and refers to the Maya god of painting and writing; it also relates to relative-ly recent presence of Lacandon Maya in Petén as a last in-

digenous ethnic group in the rainforest area (Kováč 2010; Kováč/Hulínek/Szymanski 2011, 439–444). The original name of the site is unknown and the lack of stelae with the inscriptions also does not improve the prospects for fi nding out the original name.

After obtaining permission in 2010, SAHI built its own camp in El Cedro the local station of Mirador – Río Azul National Park and commenced systematic excava-tions of Tz’ibatnah. This large urbanistically compact and architectonically elaborate Maya city was provisi-onally mapped by SAHI. The main excavations have been focused on the Acropolis; also on the largest plaza named Plaza de los Murcielagos and on the central plaza called Plaza de Tayra (Kováč/Arredondo 2010; 2013). During the fi rst season, on the excavations under the supervision of M. Kováč, the director of SAHI Dr. Dra-hoslav Hulínek and Polish archaeologist Jan Szymanski also participated. In the second season, this team was joined by Slovak ceramic specialist Eva Hulínková-Ťu-chová, Guatemalan co-director of the project Ernesto Arredondo, Finish mayanist Harri Kettunen and Mexi-can archaeologist Verónica Vázquez, which increased the effi ciency of the research and systematized exca-vations. Results achieved so far include the ascertain-ment that the chronology of the site covers all important periods of Maya history from the Preclassic up to the Terminal Classic Period. Also important was the disco-very of Casa de las Pinturas (House of Paintings), with completely preserved building containing original Maya paintings adorned with more than 160 graffi ti dating to the Late Classic Period, which are being studied by M. Kováč (Kováč 2011; Kováč 2012).

The other important discovery was the burial on Plaza de Tayra with chronologically and typologica-lly uncommon offerings investigated by D. Hulínek. The identifi cation of a ritual ballcourt at the Plaza de los Murcielagos have been investigated by V. Vázquez, who is also conducting excavations in residential patios, documenting architectural patterns of the settlement. The exploration of the fortifi ed boundaries of the city, where fortifi cation also includes residential units, was

Archaeology on Three Continents 2006 – 2011

ˇ

172

undertaken by E. Arredondo and H. Kettunen. Excava-tions of the stone barricades were the responsibility of D. Hulínek. The main goal of the research was to place

this site on the map of important settlements in the his-tory of northeastern Petén while identifying its political relations with other localities (Kováč/Arredondo 2013).

PLAZA DE TAYRAIn the immediate vicinity of the Acropolis, we identi-

fi ed a T-shaped space (Fig. 1). This area has all the attri-butes of the Maya site‘s main plaza. Given its central location, and also the layout of individual architectural features in its vicinity, it is possible to identify this area as a central plaza. It was named after an animal from the weasel family - Tayra (Eira barbara), which was often spotted in the area of our research. The research here was carried out by D. Hulínek and it was given the wor-king designation ‘Suboperation A‘. Suboperation A was divided into two areas of research: Operation 2 - barri-cade (in 2010) and Operation 4 - the central plaza area (in 2011); where several excavation units were set out within each operation.

SEASON 2010 – BARRICADE AT THE PLAZA DE TAYRA

Suboperation A, Operation 2 (area of investigation in 2010 season) was situated on the edge of the assumed central plaza - Plaza de Tayra (Fig. 2). It was consisting of

map scale 1:200

BARRICADE

PLAZA DE TAYRA

BARRICADE

GUATEMALASITIO TZIBATNAH

0 2 4 6 8 10

Fig. 1 Plaza de Tayra. Location of the Operation 2 in 2010 and Operation 4 in 2011. Project SAHI – Uaxactun.

Fig. 2 View of the area of Operation 2, Suboperation A, Unidad 1 a 2 before excavations. Stones represent piled up barricade in the Plaza de Tayra area. Photo: Drahoslav Hulínek.

Drahoslav Hulínek, Eva Hulínková-Ťuchová

173

a cross-section of the wall stacked up from stones. The wall linked two arms of stone structures, thus creating smaller enclosed area within the central plaza (in its northern part). Our fi rst objective was to determine the structure of the

rampart, which we assumed would be simple – consis-ting only of the stacked up stones. Furthermore, we ai-med to ascertain, at least to some extent, the function of the fortifi cation, as there were a few similar features at

Fig. 3 Plaza de Tayra. Western profi le of Unidad 1 and 2, Operation 2 at the Plaza de Tayra. Cross-section of the barricade. Project SAHI – Uaxactun.

Fig. 4 View of the Operation 2, western profi le of Unidad 1 and 2 with cross-section of the barricade. In the groundplan Piso 1 is vis-ible – in the corner of Unidad 2 and Piso 2 in the rest of the area of both units. Photo: Drahoslav Hulínek.

Excavations at the square Plaza de Tayra, Tz´ibatnah –Northeastern Petén, Guatemala

174

the site. Our main goal was to determine chronological defi nitions and boundaries of the object.Three excavati-on units were set out (Hulínek 2010). Unidad 1 (2x2 m) and Unidad 2 (2x2 m) eventually became interconnec-ted and together they formed the cross-section of the ba-rricade. Next excavation unit - Unidad 3 (150x130 cm) was placed west of Unidad 2, starting from its southwest corner and lined up with its western edge. Unidad 3 be-come linked with Unidad 2, setting out an excavation area of Subopearation A during the season 2010 (Hulí-nek 2010).

First we wanted to describe the way the stone wall was constructed and the phases of its construction, and thus contribute to the understanding of its strati-graphy and to the chronology of the phases of occupa-tion in the central plaza area. As mentioned, the bar-ricade linked the arms of two stone structures leading into the plaza, thus forming an area proctected from each side in the northern part of the central plaza. Wi-thin Suboperation A, the three units showed the same situation within Lote 1 (lote represents an individual layer or context in the respective unit), which, beside the humus layer, consisted of the topmost layer of lo-

osely placed stones of the barricade (Hulínek 2010). This was followed by Lote 2, containing another layer of stones, which were placed next to each other wit-hout any visible binding material – this was the case for all three units. Lote 3 can be compared among individual units only to a certain extent. In all three units Lote 3 represented the bottom most layer above the fl oors: Piso 2 (Lote 4 in Unidad 1) and Piso 1 and Piso 2 (Lote 4 and Lote 5 in Unidad 2 and Unidad 3 respectively). However, the situation differed in that while in Unidad 1 the bottom most layer of barricade was found already in the Lote 2, in the other two units this layer appeared in Lote 3 (Hulínek 2010).

Overall, we can say that the barricade was stacked up from loosely placed stones, without any apparent com-pact structure and construction adhesive (Fig. 3, 4). In cases like these, in Maya area lime mortar was usually used, or for such makeshift objects often a mixture of clay, lime and fi ne gravel or shards. Here however, even these are absent. It is also hard to perceive any regularity within the barricade, which is related to the fact that the stones used for construction of the barricade were of di-fferent shapes and sizes. Stone dimensions ranged from 10 cm to almost 100 cm in diameter (Hulínek 2010;

Fig. 5 Suboperation A, Operation 2, situation in Unidad 3, Lote 3 with clusters of compact pottery, from period just before construction of the barricade. Photo: Drahoslav Hulínek.


175

Kováč/Hulínek/Szymanski 2011, 441–442). This might suggest that during the construction of the barricade re-cycled stones were potentially used, removed from other structures throughout the site. The stacked-upstones wi-thin the barricade in its present state reached an average height of approximately 65 cm (in Unidad 2, Lote 3, see western profi le Unidad 1 and 2) and a maximal width of 252 cm (Fig. 3, 4). This pertains to Unidad 1 and 2 (in the cross-section of the barricade) – in both cases the height and width was measured in Lote 2 in a north-south direc-tion (see western profi le). At the ends of the barricade, the stacked up stones only reach a height of approxima-tely 30 cm (southern end – Unidad 2 – outwards of the fortifi ed area) and 18-22 cm (northern end – Unidad 1 – inwards of the fortifi ed area). The highest stacked-up stones of the barricade are preserved in Unidad 3, distin-guishable in the western profi le. Here the preserved part of the barricade reaches a height of 98 cm ± 10 cm (Fig. 6). We assume that the barricade was originally higher. Over time some stones became loose and fell down, and the barricade also sagged a bit. We can reasonably assu-me that during the time of its construction, the barricade possibly reached a height of approximately 1,2 – 1,5 m. Similarly, the base of the barricade was possibly origina-lly smaller, with maximal width of placed stones narro-wer by 30 – 50 cm, than at the time it was uncovered (252 cm). The width could not have been much smaller than that however, as dry-stacked stones need a wider base in order to ensure static stability. This width was probably increased over time by the gradual degrada-tion and crumbling of the upper parts of the barricade. The barricade most likely had a protective function and

was only high enough to allow for a spear to be easily thrown from the inside, thus not restricting combative options of defenders. The inference that some fi ghting took place here is supported by fi nds from layers asso-ciated with the barricade, where we found stone mallets and a spear point (Hulínek 2010; Kováč/Hulínek/Szy-manski 2011, 441–444).

The largest amount of artifacts were found in Unida-ds 2 and 3. They were mostly ceramics, often represen-ted by whole or partially complete vessels. Furthermore in Unidad 2, Lote 3 human skeletal remains were unco-vered, showing signs of human modifi cation (cut marks in one line). The situation was the most complex in Uni-dad 3 in Lote 3, where the largest amount of pottery in fi ve clusters were preserved (Fig. 5). In the same lot a clay whistle was found, modeled in the form of an owl, and also remains of clay fi gurines, including part of the head of nice anthropomorphic fi gurine were recovered.

The rich deposit in Lote 3 was found after the bottom most layer of stones of the barricade in the upper part of the lot was removed (Hulínek 2010, 16–18; Kováč/Hulínek/Szymanski 2011, 441–442). After removing the deposits in lote 3, in the southern part of Unidad 3 a fragment of the fl oor (Piso 1) – Lote 4 was then un-covered. Each fl oor (Piso) is marked by a numerical in-dex (1–4); the smaller is the number, the younger/more recent is the fl oor (Hulínek 2010). Lote 4 in Unidad 3 is identical with Lote 4 in Unidad 2 and represents the most recent fl oor (Piso 1), which was most likely distur-bed by construction of the barricade. This is supported by the fact that the damage to the fl oor in Lote 4, Unidad


Fig. 6 Western profi le of Unidad 3, Operation 2. Section of the barricade at Plaza de Tayra.Project SAHI – Uaxactun.

176

3 was most evident in the area from which the stones of the barricade were removed. The fl oor fragments (Lote 4) were located on the southwest edge of Unidad 2, and in the southern part of Unidad 3. In Unidad 1, Lote 4 is represented by a compact fl oor (Piso 2), which is iden-tical to the fl oor found in Unidad 2 (designed as Lote 5) and Unidad 3 (Lote 5), where the fl oor was damaged in

the northern and western part of the unit.We assume that the layer represented by Lote 3 in all units was the last layer before the construction of the barricade, and that it was contemporary with its construction. Based on this assumption we can say that Piso 1 (Lote 4 in Unidad 2 and 3) was most probably broken as a result of the bar-ricade construction. The base of the barricade was found


Fig. 7 Burial from Plaza de Tayra, Operation 2, Unidad 2, Lote 2. Proj-ect SAHI – Uaxactun.

177

only a few centimetres (2 – 6 cm) above the Lote 4 in Unidad 1, and above Lote 5 in Unidad 2 and 3 – there-fore above Piso 2.

The last layer uncovered in Unidad 3 was Lote 6. The layer consisted of mixed deposits containing materials from damagaed fl oors in Lote 4 and 5 (Hulínek 2010). Lote 5 in Unidad 2 and 3 and Lote 4 in Unidad 1 re-present the same fl oor. We did not fi nd any traces of Piso 1 in Unidad 1. Overall, in this operation we uncovered 4 fl oors (Piso 1–4), some in fragments, others in more compact form (Fig. 3; 4).

The situation under the fl oor (Unidad 1 – Lote 4; Unidad 2 – Lote 5; Unidad 3 – Lote 5) was assessed based on a small test pit with dimensions of 1x1m in northwest corner of Unidad 1. After part of Piso 2 (Lote 4) was removed, we discovered another fl oor - Piso 3 (Lote 5), which was 1,6 cm thick. Underneath Lote 5 followed a layer of white material (Lote 6) with a large amount of stones between fl oors (Lote 5 and Lote 7). This layer was 8 – 15 cm thick. After this layer

followed third fl oor in Unidad 1 (Piso 4 for whole Ope-ration 2, Suboperation A, Lote 7). After Piso 4 was re-moved in the test pit in Unidad 1, underneath followed a white – grey layer. Below that was found a last grey layer of clay (Lote 9), which was the last layer above the sterile geological layer (Hulínek 2010). These in-dividual layers of the stratigraphic record indicate that the stone barricade was chronologicaly the last event in the excavated area.

SEASON 2011 – VERIFICATION OF MONUMENTS AND BURIAL AT PLAZA DE TAYRA

In season 2011, new Operation 4 Suboperation A was again situated in the space of the central plaza – Plaza de Tayra. The investigation in the second season was focused on the architectural layout of the plaza in its central and western part. At the same time, we tried to locate any possible stone monuments or stealae (Hulí-nek 2011).

The fi rst three units were set up with the aim of ascer-taining the situation in the wider central area of the pla-


Fig. 8 Situation in Unidad 2, Lote 2 (Operation 4), with burial found in 2011. Project SAHI – Uaxactun.

178

za. We focused on areas with stones of larger dimensions (up to 100 cm in diameter), upper parts of which were visible on the surface, the rest embedded in the ground. By excavating them, we wanted to determine whether these are the remains of stone monuments, architectu-ral elements, incidentally fallen stones or other objects (Hulínek 2011).

Unidad 1 (2,5x2,5 m) and Unidad 2 (2,5x1,3 m) were eventually joined together, as the cluster of sto-nes appeard to be continuous (Fig. 10). Our task was therefore to identify if these represent naturally fused or continuous stones, or if their occurence is associated with human activity. Eventually we had to extend Uni-dad 2 due to the unexpected discovery of a burial in the northwest corner of the unit. Subsequently we situated another unit – Unidad 3 (2,3x2,5 m) in a northeast direc-tion from Unidad 2. Unidad 2 and 3 were not completely linked together (Hulínek 2011).

Unidad 4 (2x2 m) was placed at the likely border be-tween probable fi rst step of the western structure and the surface of central plaza. It was set out in the direction of the central axis of the plaza in an east-west orientation. Since the unit was encroaching into the structure deli-miting the western part of the plaza, it was eventually

placed at the end of the axis. Our goal was to fi nd out the relationship between the structure and the plaza (Hu-línek 2011, 587; 606–608). However, the conclusions in this matter have not been made yet and it would be pre-mature to discuss them at this point.

Overall, we have examined the area in four units, which were the main objective of the 2011 season. We found out that the larger stones had no correlation with presumed stone monuments. Stones and their place-ment were either of natural origin, or they represen-ted a secondary construction intervention, most likely unrelated to the main phases of local occupation – par-ticularly in Unidad 3. Therefore, we can state unequi-vocally that no stelae or altars were found in Unidad 1, Unidad 2 (Lote 2) and Unidad 3 (Lote 3) (Fig. 9) (Hulínek 2011). The average maximum depth of the last layer in the fi rst three units, where we reached bed rock, was 39 – 63 cm. Stones which were visible on the surface are most probably directly related to the bed rock, which in this case is very close under the sur-face – especially in Unidad 1 and 2. Alternatively, the stones could be associated with an as yet undetermined structure, which could represent a secondary occupati-on after the collapse of the city (Unidad 3).

Fig. 10 Eastern profi le of Unidad 1 and 2, Operation 4 (2011) at Plaza de Tayra. Project SAHI – Uaxactun.


Fig. 9 Eastern profi le with large stones in Operation 4, Unidad 3. Project SAHI – Uaxactun.

179

The existence of a fragmentary, stucco fl oor was identifi ed only in Unidad 1 – Lote 4. Conversely, the fl oor made of trampled fi ne gravel (whether in compact form or partly destroyed) was found in all four units – Unidad 1, 2, 3 and 4 – Lote 2 (Fig. 9–11). Compared to

the northern part of the plaza, where investigation was carried out in 2010, it is a big difference. For example, in 2010 four layers of stucco fl oors were uncovered in Uni-dads 1–3 (as described above). Also the thickness of the anthropogenic layers was greater. In Unidad 1 – Lote 9,

Fig. 11 Western profi le in Unidad 4, Operation 4 at Plaza de Tayra. Project SAHI – Uaxactun.

Fig. 12 Detail of the burial 1 in Operation 4, Suboperation A, Unidad 2, Lote 2. View of the grave from the east. Photo: Drahoslav Hulínek.


180

the anthropogenic layer reached a depth of 110 cm, and the bed rock a depth of 160 cm (Hulínek 2010, 13–33; 2011; Kováč/Arredondo/Hulínek et al. 2012; Kováč/Hu-línek/Szymanski 2011). At the same cetral plaza area, relatively close by (max. 20 m), bedrock was already reached by depths of 40 – 60 cm, and no compact fl oor was found.

This unusual situation was underscored by the disco-very of a very shallow grave. While carrying out the in-vestigation in Unidad 2, the fi ndings in the unit were po-inting to the existence of a burial (Fig. 7; 8; 12; 17). We extended Unidad 2 in its northwestern part in order to uncover the whole extent of the burial. The rectangular burial area had dimensions of 100x180 cm. The burial was located under a provisional fl oor formed from small stones, which was identical across almost the entire area of Unidad 2. Soil in Lote 2 was particularly compact, which made uncovering the burial very diffi cult. The burial was partially protected, or outlined by both larger and smaller stones, on the eastern and western sides. The largest and most dominant stone was placed on the wes-tern side of the grave. The depth of the grave from the surface was only 18-24 cm (Fig. 10). The grave goods included two vessels (Fig. 12–17): 1. – ceramic pedestal base of gray-black colour (with engraved ornaments); 2. – brick-red plate decorated with engobe (fragmentarily preserved), sharply profi led. Vessels were preserved al-most complete, and it was possible to restore them well (reconstruction was carried out by E. Hulínková-Ťucho-vá). Furthermore, we found 59 beads from either skele-

tal or shall remains of some aqautic animal. This will be resolved in the future after further fi nd processing. The head, which was originally most likely placed on the plate, was later moved by natural processes. Based on the skeletal remains found under the head of the skeleton, we believe that the head was rested on hands. The individual was lying in a crou-ched position with the body facing east. The grave lay in a longitudinal orientation- south (skull) - to north (lower extremities) -was signifi cantly damaged and very shallow. The skull was extensively fragmented. Most damaged part was the chest – espe-ciall they ribs, and the lower porti-ons of all limbs were preserved only in very fragmentary state (Hulínek 2011, 585–609; Kováč/Arredondo/Hulínek et al. 2012, 150). One of the

Fig. 13 Brick-red plate decorated with engobe, with sharp profi le, found in burial 1 at Plaza de Tayra – Operation 4, Unidad 2, Lote 2. Photo: Eva Hulínková-Ťuchová.

Fig. 14 Gray-black ceramic pedestal (with engraved ornaments), found in burial 1 at Plaza de Tayra – Operation 4, Unidad 2, Lote 2.Photo: Eva Hulínková-Ťuchová.


181

interesting pieces from the grave goods was the pedestal base, which was most likely used as a pe-destal base for a round--bottomed vessel, which served for preparation of cocoa (Kováč/Arredon-do/Hulínek et al. 2012, 150). Similar pedestals are known, although not very common, and they date to Early Clasic pe-riod. An example can be seen in the museum of Dr. Juan Antonio Valdés in Uaxactún (Coe 2005, 10; Demarest 2004, 8–30; Houston/Inomata 2009, 3–27; Kováč/Arredondo/Hulínek et al. 2012, 150–152). Nei-ther in other cases, these pedestals were accompanied by the rounded vessels. Our second vessel – a plate, sho-wed characteristic features of ceramic phase Matzanel, and it is remarkable evidence for the transitional forms between ceramic phases Chicanel and Tzakol.

CONCLUSIONThe newly discovered site of Tz’ibatnah is located

in what was the border zone of the contemporary su-perpowers Calakmul and Tikal. This fact is supported by the presence of fortifi cation systems, from the more complex to the simplest ones, later represented perhaps by loosely piled-up barricades. Some of the dwellings were apparently incorporated into the more complex fortifi cation system, as it was recognized in the north-ern and northeastern part of the city (Kováč/Arredondo/Hulínek et al., 2012, 149). Simple walls, which are sec-ondarily enclosing certain spaces, and we have provi-sionarily called barricades, were found in several parts of the city. So far we encountered at least 19 of them, located in various areas including the central plaza and individual residential patios. It is likely that the barri-cades are associated with the last phase of the occupa-tion of this site. To some extent, this is supported by the fact that during their construction the last fl oor (marked as Piso 1) was broken several times. Respectively, their foundations were built almost directly on the fl oor (Piso 2) (Fig. 3, 4, 6).

The greater amount of the artefacts, especially of more compact pottery, encountered in Unidad 3, Lote 3 in 2010 was found towards the center of the unit, just below the barricade. Such location points to the urgency of con-struction at the time the area fl ourished. Well preserved pottery is seldom found on the surface. Eventually, ful-

ly fl ourishing life was interrupted, probably because of violent attack. People would seem to have immediately built simple barricades piled-up from stones. Also some of the fi nds could be used as evidence for fi ghting having taken place here. For example, in the immediate vicin-ity of the barricade remains of broken stone spear points were found.

We can reasonably assume that the barricade as a last cultural layer is associated with the last phase of con-tinuous occupation. It is further supported by pottery found directly below the barricade, dating to the Ter-minal Classic period (800–950 AD.) (Kováč/Hulínek/Szymanski 2011, 441). It is likely that the barricades witnessed the violent end of the city during the period of so called „collapse“. However, we still can not com-pletely rule out the possibility that these barricades are the remains of Maya communities surviving in this area, inhabiting it after the collapse, simply using the ruins. For such an alternative, unlike for the fi rst one, we so far have no evidence in form of pottery. Therefore, the most likely scenario appears to be one in which the barricade at the Plaza de Tayra represents the terminal/abandon-ment horizon of previous continuous occupation of the city. This in local conditions corresponds to the Terminal Classic period, for the research of which Tz’ibatnah has exceptional potential (Coe 2005, 10; Houston/Inomata 2009, 3–27). The abandonment horizon can only be bet-ter understood by consistent longer-term research. In the future, the research should, among other things, focus on the layout of architectural structures, fl anking open spaces of the central plaza.

Equally important will be the open area of the central plaza, where we can possibly expect the occurrence of other burials. In the part of the plaza where the burial was found, the bed rock appears very close below the surface, a considerable contrast to the situation in the


Fig. 15 Reconstruction drawing of brick-red plate profi le, decorated with engobe, with sharp profi le, found in burial 1 at Plaza de Tayra – Operation 4, Unidad 2, Lote 2. After: Eva Hulínková-Ťuchová.

182


Fig. 16 Reconstruction drawing of ceramic pedestal decoration (with engraved ornaments), found in burial 1 at Plaza de Tayra – Operation 4, Unidad 2, Lote 2. After: Eva Hulínková-Ťuchová.

183

nearby northeastern side of the plaza (Fig. 10). This discrepancy may be related to the different original geomorphologic structure of this area, where the older burial could have been almost uncovered by later level-ing works at Plaza de Tayra. There are also other pos-sibilities, which, however, can only be either confi rmed or disproved by further research. In regard to the burial found in the area of Plaza the Tayra, it is necessary to point out a few important facts:

In addition to its extreme shallowness (relative to its estimated dating between 250–300 AD), there is also the presence of excellente elaborate pottery. Both pieces show some interesting chronological features. The plate with red brick engoba (Fig. 13, 15) is typologically dif-ferent from the elaborate ceramic pedestal (Fig. 14, 16). First of all it is simpler, but mainly, it is related to the phase, or ceramic type Matzanel, which is not yet well defi ned chronologically, although it is linked to the so called Proto-Classic phase. On the other hand, the elabo-rate pedestal has been clearly chronologically classifi ed into the Early Classic period Tzakol (250–550 AD). The Matzanel type has been, in fact, so far defi ned only by a specifi c type of ceramics, occurring mainly in graves. This ceramic type has been recognized as belonging to

the Chicanel period (300 BC–250 AD), while also over-laping the Tzakol 1 period (about 250–300 AD). The seeming inconsistency of the chronologies of the two vessels could be plausibly explained by their coexistence during the Tzakol 1 phase, during which the end of the Proto-Classic period, when the plate was made, overlaps with the begining of the Early Classic period, to which the pedestal is dated. This means that we can speak about the transitional period between the Preclassic and the Classic period (Coe 2005, 10; Demarest 2004, 8–30; Houston/Inomata 2009, 3–27). However, this fairly ac-curate chronological classifi cation (50 years period be-tween 250 and 300 AD), yet has to be confi rmed by the C14 dating, as there are always other possible interpreta-tions; for example the secondary use of older ceramics in a more recent grave.

At present we assume that the site of Tz’ibatnah, de-spite having 163 stone structures in its centre (Drápela/Kováč 2013), most likely was not a political centre of an independent kingdom. This assumption is based on the fact that, no stelae have been so far discovered in the area. Tz’ibatnah was probably an important city of a Maya kingdom, which, however, had its political center elsewhere and we have been trying to identify it. One of the possible candidates is located 25 km to the east, the

Fig. 17 Northern view of Unidad 1 and 2, with burial 1 in Operation 4 at Plaza de Tayra. Photo: Drahoslav Hulínek.


184

longer-known important political centre Rio Azul. Re-gardless, the city of Tz’ibatnah, located in a sensitive area on the border of two Maya superpowers, certainly played an important political role.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

COE 2005 –M. D. Coe, The Maya. London 2005.

DEMAREST 2004 –A. Demarest, Ancient Maya. The Rise and Fall of

a Rain forest Civilization. Cambridge 2009.

DRÁPELA/KOVÁČ 2013 – Programa de recorridos de Tz’ibatnah y sus alrededo-

res. In: M. Kováč/E. Arredondo Leiva (ed.), Excavacio-nes en el Peten Noreste II. Tz’ibatnah y Ch’anal. Tempo-rada 2011-2012. Bratislava – Guatemala 2013.

HOUSTON/INOMATA 2009 –S. D. Houston/T. Inomata,The classic Maya. Cam-

bridge 2009.

HULÍNEK 2010 –D. Hulínek, Capítulo II. Excavaciones en los Sistemas

Defensivos de Tz’ibatnah. In: M. Kováč/E. Arredondo Le-iva (ed.), Excavaciones en el Peten Noreste Tz’ibatnah I. Temporada 2010. Bratislava – Guatemala 2010, 13-33.

HULÍNEK 2011 –D. Hulínek, Capítulo XXIX. Sondeos en la Plaza de

Tayra (operación TZB 4). In: M. Kováč/E. Arredondo Leiva (ed.), Proyecto Arqueológico SAHI-Uaxactun. Instituto Eslovaco de Arqueologia e Historia Bratislava, Eslovaquia. Guatemala 2011.

KOVÁČ 2010 –M. Kováč, Excavaciones en „La Casa de las Pintu-

ras“. In: M. Kováč/E. Arredondo Leiva (ed.), Excavaci-ones en el Peten Noreste Tz’ibatnah I. Temporada 2010. Bratislava – Guatemala 2010, 34-83.

KOVÁČ 2011 –M. Kováč, Bohovia, smiech a pamäť – mayské neofi -

ciálne umenie z mesta Tz’ibatnah. In: Axis Mundi, roč. 6, 2/2011, Bratislava 2011, 3-10.

KOVÁČ 2012 –Grafi tos de Tz’ibatnah. El arte maya extraofi cial del

Peten noreste. XXV Simposio de Investigaciones arque-logicas en Guatemala. Guatemala 2012.

KOVÁČ/ARREDONDO 2010 –M. Kováč/E. Arredondo Leiva (ed.), Excavaciones en

el Peten Noreste Tz’ibatnah I. Temporada 2010. Brati-slava – Guatemala 2010.

KOVÁČ/ARREDONDO 2013 –M. Kováč/E. Arredondo Leiva (ed.), Excavaciones en

el Peten Noreste II. Tz’ibatnah y Ch’anal. Temporada 2011-2012. Bratislava – Guatemala 2013.

KOVÁČ/ARREDONDO/HULÍNEK ET AL. 2012 – M. Kováč/E. Arredondo/D. Hulínek et al., Resultados

preliminares de la segunda Temporada de campo -2011 en Tz’ibatnah, Petén. In: B. Arroyo/L. Paiz/H. Mejía (ed.), XXV Simposio de Investigaciones arquelogicas en Guatemala. Guatemala 2012, 147-157.

KOVÁČ/HULÍNEK/SZYMANSKI 2011 –M. Kováč/D. Hulínek/J. Szymanski, Tz’ibatnah-el

nuevo sitio maya del norte de Petén. In: B. Arroyo/L. Paiz/A. Linares/A. L. Arroyave (ed.), XXIV Simposio de Investigaciones arquelogicas en Guatemala. Guate-mala 2011, 439-448.


195

CONTENT

INTRODUCTIONDRAHOSLAV HULÍNEK

SECTION A. PROJECT TELL FEKHERIYE

1. TELL FEKHERIYE – AN INTRODUCTION TO THE CURRENT STATE OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCHDOMINIK BONATZ

2. THE NEOLITHIC AT TELL FEKHERIYEANNIKA HOTZAN-TCHABASHVILI

3. RESEARCH ON THE C-IV TRENCH IN A BROADER CONTEXT OF THE EXCAVATIONS CONDUCTED AT TELL FEKHERIYE, WITH AN EMPHASIS ON THE MIDDLE ASSYRIAN PERIODDRAHOSLAV HULÍNEK

4. GEODETIC SURVEYS AND TOPOGRAPHY AT THE TELL FEKHERIYE LOCATIONTIBOR LIESKOVSKÝ, DRAHOSLAV HULÍNEK, DANIEL KENDRALA

SECTION B. PROJECT BUDMERICE

5. THE 2010 TRIAL EXCAVATIONS OF A FORTIFIED SETTLEMENT AT BUDMERICE. PRELIMINARY REPORTJÚLIUS VAVÁK

6. A NOTE ON SPIRITUAL LIFE OF THE MAĎAROVCE CULTUREPAVOL JELÍNEK

7. ENVIRONMENTAL ARCHAEOLOGY USE – ARCHAEOBOTANYJANA HLAVATÁ

5

9

13

31

39

59

73

77

89

111

196

SECTION C. ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH IN CENTRAL NORTH-EASTERN PETÉN, GUATEMALA

8. NEW STUCCO MASKS FROM UAXACTUN: INTERPRETATION, CONSERVATION AND DOCUMENTATION OF EXTRAORDINARY PRECLASSIC MAYA ARTMILAN KOVÁC, ALICE DESPRAT, CARLOS PALLÁN GAYOL

9. NEW MAYA OBSERVATORY IDENTIFIED IN UAXACTÚN, GUATEMALAMILAN KOVÁC, VLADIMÍR KARLOVSKÝ

10. VOLCANIC ASH IN ANCIENT MAYA CERAMICS. MINERALOGICAL AND PETROGRAPHICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF MAYA CERAMICS FROM UAXACTÚN, GUATEMALA.MILOŠ GREGOR, MILAN KOVÁC, BRANISLAV KOVÁR

11. EXCAVATIONS AT THE SQUARE PLAZA DE TAYRA, TZ´IBATNAH –NORTHEASTERN PETÉN, GUATEMALADRAHOSLAV HULÍNEK, EVA HULÍNKOVÁ-TUCHOVÁ

LIST OF FIGURES

CONTENT

ABBREVIATIONS

INDEX

121

125

143

157

171

187

195

199

201

ˇ

ˇ

ˇ

ˇ

11. excavations at the plaza de tayra tz´ibatnah-northeastern peten, guatemala

Documents