In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

551 The revised edition of the Topographic Map of the Ruins of Mayapán, Yucatán, Mexico, terminates this series of publications. A few words are needed about the map. The preliminary edition of this map was first issuedin1951andreissued,withoutchange,toaccompany Current Report 1 in 1952. The text of that report describes the mapping procedures and indicates the relative reliability of the map. The present revised edition incorporates no changes in the basic survey, such alterations as appear being limited to individual structures and isolated natural features, and being the result of excavation and the detailed archaeological examination that have been carried on since the original topographic survey was completed. Other changes involve additions and deletions designed to make the map more uniform in the information it provides and more useful to the archaeologist. Certain changes in the revised edition of the map are obvious. The scale has been reduced to half that of the earlier edition; all structures have been numbered ; gates in the city wall have been labeled. Less obviousistheinclusionofnamesforthreemorecenotes . In the matter of numbering, it should be noted that structures are numbered consecutively within each square. Any building is thus identified by the letter of the square in which it lies plus the number of the building, often followed by a lower-case letter (e.g., Str. A-1, or Str. A-2a). Generally speaking, a structure that is one of a group of dwellings carries a number with a terminal letter, the number without this letter designating the group (e.g., Group A-2 with Strs. A-2a, A-2b, and A-2c). Civic and religious buildings normally carry numbers without a terminal letter (e.g., Str. Q-162). There are exceptions to this general rule, however, as a few groups of dwellings are shown with structures numbered separately (e.g., Group R-85 to R-90), and some civic and religious buildings carry numbers with terminal letters. This inconsistency in our system was brought about by the discovery of additional buildings after numC u r r e n t R e p o r t s Carnegie Institution of Washington Department of Archaeology December 1957 Editor’s Note H.E.D. Pollock H.E.D. Pollock 552 bers had been assigned, and by changes in our ideas about the functions of structures, a natural development following excavation and intensive study. Far and away the most frequent change in the revised edition of the map has been the inclusion of small, inconspicuous structures that were missed by the original survey. These total well over a hundred. Much less frequent are the correction in orientation of a mound, minor changes in plan, the combining of two or more structures to form a single one, and the separation of one mound into two or more structures . The relatively detailed plans of a large number of buildings outside the ceremonial groups represent an inconsistency in the map. Our information would allow detailed plans for a much larger number of house mounds. It was decided, however, that the value of such plans, in the light of the minute scale at which they would appear, would in no way compensate for the great amount of labor involved. Many plans of dwellings, shown at an adequate scale, have appeared in this series of Current Reports, and still others will appear in a monograph now in preparation. Ideally, it might have been better to change all house mounds to a conventionalized mound symbol, for consistency, but here again the value of the result did not seem to be commensurate with the effort required. With one or two rare exceptions, plans of ceremonial structures and of the larger residential complexes have not been corrected. The scale of the map made it impracticable to attempt to do so. For that reason a certain number of structures that were found by excavation do not appear. Plans of the ceremonial groups, including those buildings not shown on the map, will appear at an adequate scale in the forthcoming monograph. Plans of residential complexes that were excavated have already appeared in earlier Current Reports. Boundary walls, believed to be pre-Conquest in origin, a number of which are shown on the preliminary edition of the map, have been deleted from the revised edition, and their symbol has been removed from the legend; such walls are found in great numbers all over the site, and the few that were shown gave a false impression of their relative frequency. Our...

Share