The classic Maya collapse: study of the internal warfare theory

Résumé du document

In 1970, an advanced seminar was held at the School of American research in Santa Fe, New Mexico in order to compare the field data which had been collected on the lowlands collapse and the various theories which were formulated by anthropologists to understand the fall of this civilization. However, the role of conflicts between Maya centers during the Late Classic period was poorly discussed. Today, the significance of Maya warfare in the comprehension of the collapse is widely recognized. However, a long-standing debate has been doing the rounds with two "schools of thoughts". It supports the endemic warfare thesis that says the anthropologists who believe that chronic wars between regional centers triggered the fall of the Classic Maya civilization.

Extraits

[...] The archeological team concluded that they must have been captive warriors that were sacrificed. Such evidence could be related to an ancient practice in Mesoamerica, the one of war trophies, which allowed the victor of a combat to affirm his political power. The “Skull at Colha (Steele, Eaton, and Taylor 1980) perfectly illustrated the existence of such practice in Maya lowlands during the Late Classic period. Indeed, heads of 20 adults and ten children of both sexes were exhibited in this center while the skulls which had still articulated vertebrae were buried. [...]

[...] II) The endemic warfare model Regionalism and political fragmentation Classic Maya Lowlands polities were united by a common cultural tradition and especially by a shared hieroglyphic writing. Indeed, in 2000, Houston, Robertson and Stuart supported the existence of Classic Ch'olti'an, a single language shared by Maya elites[14]. However, as I said before, dynasties progressively emerged in Maya centers. For instance, stelae of Piedras Negras, as in many other sites[15], record accession of rulers. As Spinden wrote in 1916, “there is an interesting series of monuments at Piedras Negras, consisting of Stelae and 14 in the order given. [...]

[...] However, as Cowgill said, the Classic Maya collapse should be understood as end of a great cultural tradition” (1988: 256). Indeed, Rice more precisely defined it writing that abrupt cessation of hallmark activities of the Classic Maya civilization (circa A.D. 250- 950)—construction of monumental architecture and erection of carved, dated stelae and altars—indicated to early explorers that the elite occupation of the great cities of the Southern Lowlands had ceased and that the civilization had experienced transformations so dramatic as to be called ‘collapse'” (2007: 142). [...]

[...] The relationship between these two theses should therefore be studied as well as the causes of the conflicts between regional centers which remain often unclear. Moreover, some anthropologists elaborated another thesis to understand the Classic Maya Collapse closely related to warfare, the foreign invasion theory [supposed to be Mexican]. Jeremy Sabloff and Gordon Willey especially studied this thesis in 1967 supporting their arguments on evidence they excavated at the site of Seibal, on the Río Pasion in southwestern Petén, Guatemala[19]. [...]

[...] I will first study the increasing power of elites in Classic Maya society which constitutes a crucial element in both scenarios. To do so, I will especially use the information provided by Webster in his article entitled Maya elites: the perspectives of Copán. Then, I will analyze the endemic warfare thesis essentially utilizing field data excavated by Demarest and his team in the Petexbatun region[2] from 1989 to 1997. Finally, I will study the peasant revolt thesis primarily formulated by Thompson and then largely analyzed by Hamblin and Pitcher in 1980 in their article entitled The Classic Maya Collapse: testing class conflict hypotheses. [...]