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

179 The principal sacbe, or causeway, at Mayapán is seen on the map of the ruins (Jones 1952) running from the western part of Square R in a southwesterly direction to the northeastern part of Square Z. The roadway connects two groups of structures, each group forming a quadrangle about a court, that give the impression of having been of some importance , to judge from size of structures and quality of workmanship. The northern group (Strs. R-95 to -99), which is the larger, appears to be domiciliary in character and it is probable that the oft misused term “palace” can appropriately be applied to it. It is likely that the southern group also was primarily domiciliary, but its character is less clear from superficial observation. One cannot, moreover, in the absence of further excavation disregard the possibility that these assemblages may have served as community ritual centers. Artificially constructed roads, or sacbes, are of course well known in the Maya area, where they occur in both the northern and southern regions. For the most part they presumably date from the Classic period, but at Chichén Itzá certain examples appear to be from Toltec times. Recently, after the work described in this paper was completed, William T. Sanders informed me of the existence of two sacbes on the island of Cozumel, a fact of which I was ignorant . It is entirely possible that those roads are of the same late period represented by the Mayapán remains. It should also be noted that there are two other constructions at Mayapán, one in the southwestern part of Square E, the other in the southern part of Square Y, that are considerably smaller than the principle sacbe and of which there is some question as to function. They probably are small roads and deserve the designation sacbe. The work described here was undertaken to find the time of construction of the sacbe: first, in relation to that of the quadrangle (Strs. R-95 to -99) at the northern end; secondly, and if possible, in relation C u r r e n t R e p o r t s Carnegie Institution of Washington Department of Archaeology No. 15 July 1954 The Northern T erminus of the Principal Sacbe at Ma yapán H.E.D. Pollock H.E.D. Pollock 180 to the period of occupation of the site. There are ample traces at Mayapán of remains that almost surely date from a time earlier than that of the great epoch of the city, remains apparently of the Puuc period of Yucatán history. These occur in the form of pottery and of loose andre-usedbuildingstone.Nostructure that can be assigned to Puuc period, or for that matter to the Toltec period of Chichén Itzá, has yet been identified. We wondered if the sacbe, and possibly some underlying construction in Group R-95 to -99, might be of an early time. This did not turn out to be the case. The sacbe apparently was constructed not only during the Mayapán period but probably late in that era. In order to relate the detailed plan given here (Fig. 15.1) to the plan of the group shown on the map of the site, it should be noted that Str. R-95 is the small southern mound on the map and Str. R-98 is the western mound. Str. R95a was mostly buried and developed only by excavation. On the map Str. R-98 appears to rest immediately on the southern edge of the general terrace supporting the group, whereas the building proper, of which only the southeast corner is shown in Figure 15.1, actually rests about 4 m north of the edge of the terrace. Only the west end and southwest corner of the substructure of Str. R-95 are shown in Figure 15.1, our excavations not having been carried as far east as the superstructure. The line of this substructure on the detailed plan closely approximates that shown on the map. So far as I know, no earlier excavations, with one minor exception, had been carried on in connection with the sacbe or at Group R-95 to -99. The northern end of a vaulted passage that forms an entrance to the quadrangle at the northeast corner of the court (shown in dashed line on the map) had been cleared of debris, presumably by E. W. Andrews in 1942. A photograph of this excavation...

Share