![Sample our Museum and Heritage Studies journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5945/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Museum-Heritage-Studies.jpg"})
Abstract
This paper explores possibilities for recognizing and analytically using culturally-specific understandings of artefacts and spaces at an ancient Maya archaeological site. In the case study that we present, we use Classic Maya material categories – derived from hieroglyphic texts – to re-envision our representations of artefactual distributions and accompanying interpretations. We take inspiration from countermapping as an approach that recognizes the positionality of spatial representations and makes space for multiple/alternative spatial perspectives. We present spatial analyses based on our work at the Classic Maya archaeological site of Say Kah, Belize, juxtaposing modern modes of visualizing the results of multiple seasons of excavations with visualizations that instead draw upon reconstructed elements of ancient inhabitants’ perspectives on the site, its spaces, and usages (based on information drawn from Classic Maya textual ‘property qualifiers’). We argue that even incomplete information, such as that available for archaeological contexts, allows us to reimagine past spatial perspectives and experiences. Furthermore, doing so represents a move towards inclusion that changes our understanding of sites in terms of ancient experience and usage. The outcome is a shifted perspective on the spaces of the site that decentres the modern, archaeological vision, accompanied by a more reflexive awareness of the processes we use to construct our interpretations. We end with larger reflections useful for archaeologists curious about translating these ideas to other cultural settings.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The fieldwork that contributed to this study was supported by the Wenner-Gren Foundation (Grant 9001), the National Geographic Society (Grants W377-14 and HJ-038R-17), the American Philosophical Society (Franklin Research Grant), the Curtiss T. and Mary G. Brennan Foundation, the Taft Research Center (University of Cincinnati), and the College of Arts and Sciences (University of Cincinnati), which the authors gratefully acknowledge. Our fieldwork was made possible by Dr. Fred Valdez, the Programme for Belize Archaeological Project (PfBAP), and the Belize Institute of Archaeology. Key project staff members who contributed to this work include: Lindsay Argo, Luke Aspland, Meredith Coats, Holly Dorning, Chris Motz, Beau Murphy, Anna Novotny, Colleen O’Brien, and Caleigh Richissin. Valuable feedback on the article came from Jeff Millar, Leila Rodriguez, and Stephanie Sadre-Orafai; we also thank Andrew Newman for helpful perspectives on countermapping. Finally, we are grateful for the detailed and thought-provoking comments of two anonymous reviewers, which helped clarify our thinking and strengthen our manuscript.
DECLARATION OF INTEREST STATEMENT
The authors have no conflicts of interests related to this research or publication.
Notes
1. For example, see Solari’s (Citation2013, pp. 62–67) discussion of the colonial Yukatek Maya Bird Map, which represents the Yucatan Peninsula in avian form, rendering the geographical expense inseparable from the animate landscape; this representation draws on an analogical ontological mode, which is distinct from the naturalistic ontological mode represented in a GIS-generated map.
2. E.g. per Malafouris’s (Citation2013) discussion of enactive signs.
3. See discussions in material engagement theory (Malafouris Citation2013, p. 15).
4. Though its usages and meanings may be multiple and complex (e.g. Newman Citation2018).
5. See related discussion in Stone and Zender (Citation2011, pp. 174–175), for instance.
6. E.g. per the rain god Chaak’s use of this instrument.
7. E.g. see Todd’s (Citation2017) process of thinking through how to understand petroleum products in modern day ecological disasters, e.g., in Alberta, through a framework of kinship.