Introduction

This study presents the initial results of the analysis of vertebrate remains recovered during the first five excavation seasons at the Maya site of San Bartolo, Guatemala, with a focus on social inequality among elite and intermediary classes as revealed by differences in animal remains from ritual and secular deposits. San Bartolo provides an unprecedented view of the religion, art, and lifestyles of the ancient Maya, particularly during the poorly understood Preclassic period and the transition from Preclassic to Late Classic periods. Located within the swampy lowlands of the Petén forest (Figure 4.1), the site was initially occupied at least 2,500 years ago (Saturno et al. 2006). San Bartolo is perhaps best known for its elaborate Preclassic murals illustrating a number of ancient myths, nearly all of which incorporate animal imagery (Saturno 2002; Saturno et al. 2004, 2005). These images, when combined with the actual faunal evidence, provide an opportunity to compare the ritual and domestic use of animals among Maya community members of different social ranks.

Figure 4.1. Mesoamerica, with San Bartolo and other Late Preclassic Maya sites. (Map courtesy of the San Bartolo Project.)

We compare the faunal remains between chronological periods and social contexts, as well as with the animals depicted in the Preclassic murals, to gain insight into how certain animal species may have been used to emphasize status distinctions among different Maya social classes in the past. In particular, we explore whether the domestic and/or ritual use of particular species was limited to certain classes, if the ritual significance of animals played a role in these class divisions, and if these patterns of socially delimited animal use changed through time.

The San Bartolo Excavations

The earliest phases of the site date to the Middle Preclassic (ca. 800–400 BC). San Bartolo’s “golden age” took place during the Late Preclassic (400 BC–AD 200), when the largest stone monuments and temples were constructed (Saturno 2002). The site was mostly abandoned during the Classic period and was reoccupied during the Late Classic (AD 600–800), although new construction projects were rare and old structures were renovated for reuse. Like many Maya sites in Guatemala, Belize, and southern Mexico, the last San Bartolo inhabitants departed around AD 800, during a time of social unrest that coincided with the abandonment of a number of Maya communities in an event popularly known today as the Classic Maya collapse.

Annual excavations at San Bartolo have been conducted since its discovery in 2001, under the direction of William Saturno and the codirection of Monica Urquizu of the Instituto de Antropología e Historia of Guatemala. The site consists of three large pyramid complexes surrounded by several smaller residential groups (Figure 4.2). Thus far, over 100 structures have been discovered (Saturno 2002). The Las Pinturas complex appears to have served as the religious center of the site, and includes a platform with four temples that were rebuilt several times during the Preclassic period. The largest of the four temples contains the murals. San Bartolo’s central complex, Las Ventanas, lies to the west, and includes a palace (El Tigrillo), ballcourt, administrative structures, and the site’s Main Plaza. A complex of lower-elite residential structures, Las Plumas, is located a short distance to the south, and was occupied during both the Late Preclassic and Late Classic periods. A smaller residential complex, Jabali, is located to the west. A third pyramid complex, Saraguate, also includes a ball court (Urquizu and Menendez 2006). The largest residential complexes at the site are concentrated around Las Ventanas and Jabali.

Figure 4.2. Major sites of excavation at San Bartolo, with locations where faunal material was recovered. (Map courtesy of the San Bartolo Project.)

For this study, we divided the faunal contexts into three categories based on archaeological markers of status and function: elite domestic, lesser or non-elite domestic, and elite ritual. Elite domestic remains were recovered from the Las Ventanas and Jabali groups, believed to be the residences of those who had the most power and authority at the site, including the king and his court. Lesser or non-elite domestic remains were recovered from the Las Plumas residences, as well as a few smaller residential structures located around the site core. Ritual remains came from the religious center of the site, Las Pinturas, as well as a “special deposit” near Las Plumas.

For these comparative divisions we follow status and function designations made by the project archaeologists based on established archaeological markers such as the size and quality of architectural features and associated artifact assemblages, as well as spatial distance from the primary administrative, dwelling (palace), and ritual complexes (Urquizu and Saturno 2002, 2004). Although such divisions are an effective heuristic devise, they are still arguably arbitrary, for neither social status nor functional use is easily segregated into such categories. A thorough explanation of the distinguishing factors among different Classic Maya social ranks lies outside the scope of this chapter (see Hendon 1991; Palka 1997), but we define an elite as anyone who belonged or was closely associated with the ruling family, including community administrators and the highest-ranking priests. Lesser elites included administrative attachés, merchants, and craftspeople. The non-elite class constituted the farmers, servants, and lower-ranking merchants and artisans.

The Murals

The San Bartolo murals are located within a small substructure on the east side of the Las Pinturas complex, and have been dated to the Late Preclassic period (Saturno 2002). They represent some of the earliest and best-preserved examples of Maya mythology as depicted in art. For the zooarchaeologist, the murals suggest that the San Bartolo inhabitants had a strong fascination with the natural world, and they reveal a close relationship between certain animal species and the rituals of kingship. Along the North Wall trails a large feathered-serpent, emerging from a cave—the mouth of the underworld—with eight individuals on its back (Hurst 2004; Saturno et al. 2005). One of the riders is the Maize God, an important deity featured prominently in Maya lore for his heroism and links to divine kingship. The cave from which the serpent emerges (Figure 4.3) may represent a primordial source of life (Saturno et al. 2005:18). Surrounding the cave is a series of animals, including two snakes (one possibly a fer-de-lance, Bothrops asper, based on the coloring and markings), an unidentified reptile, a jaguar (Panthera onca), and three birds that Sharpe has tentatively identified as Montezuma oropendolas (Psarocolius montezuma) based on a depiction of their distinctive hanging nest.

Figure 4.3. Section of the North Wall murals. The base of the image is the back of a feathered serpent, on which six individuals appear in this detail. The backward-facing Maize God (center) and other deities emerge from the cave, surrounded by various animals and vegetation that suggest the cave’s “wild” aspect. Two snakes appear in the upper and lower left, respectively, along with a reptile (left) and a jaguar (above the kneeling woman at left), as three oropendolas near the jaguar’s head circle their hanging nest. Drawing by Heather Hurst.

Two scenes also run along the West Wall, displayed back-to-back like the folded pages of a Maya codex (Figure 4.4). One illustrates a series of heroes luring a large mythical bird down from the heavens with sacrificial offerings (Saturno et al. 2004). The offerings consist of a fish (possibly a catfish, based on the presence of chin barbels), a white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), and a possible turkey or other large galliform bird. Fish, deer, and turkeys are also represented as offerings in the Maya codices dating to over a thousand years later, and were crucial offerings during ceremonies described by the Spanish friar Diego de Landa in the sixteenth century (Bill et al. 2000; Bricker 1991; Landa 1941; Taube 1988). These patterns reveal a remarkable continuity in the types of animal offerings used in elite rituals celebrating the divine power of the Maya kings over the millennia.

Figure 4.4. The West Wall murals, depicting three sacrifices to the Principal Bird Deity. On the three tripods are sacrifices (left to right) of what are likely a catfish, deer, and turkey, respectively. Drawing by Heather Hurst.

Although not illustrated here, the life of the Maize God pans out beside the sacrifice scene, from his mythic birth to his coronation by his own hands, followed by his subsequent death and reincarnation in the watery depths of the underworld. To the right of the story, the coronation of the San Bartolo king is depicted (not illustrated here), signifying his superhuman status. Altogether, the scenes illustrate a complex series of myths and symbols that have yet to be fully understood, but that yet reveal a deep antiquity for the role certain animals played in legends ranging from the Preclassic to Postclassic and Colonial times.

Methods of the Zooarchaeological Analysis

The faunal remains included in this study come from the first five seasons of excavations at San Bartolo and were identified by Sharpe in the Peabody Museum Zooarchaeology Laboratory at Harvard University under the supervision of Dr. Richard Meadow (Sharpe 2009). The Number of Individual Specimens (NISP) was calculated for all specimens larger than one centimeter. The Minimum Number of Individuals (MNI) was determined for specimens identified below the level of class (with the exception of birds), and was based on grouping skeletal elements from the same taxa identified in contemporary lots located in the same area of a structure (White 1953). Interpretation of the status-based faunal associations was conducted by Sharpe and Emery at the Florida Museum of Natural History based on contextual data provided by Saturno. All specimens are currently stored in the San Bartolo Project Laboratory in Antigua, Guatemala.

This study includes only those remains that were identified to or below the level of class. Unidentified taxa that lacked a definitive context were also excluded, as were taxa that were likely intrusive, including shrews, bats, and rodents. These exclusions limit the size of the studied assemblage but ensure that the data are pertinent to the questions of status and animal use. The pertinent taxa have been grouped according to chronological period (Preclassic or Late Classic) and social context—that is, remains from elite residential and administrative structures, those from elite ritual structures, and those from lower-status structures that are likely the households of the lesser-elite or middle-class.

Describing the Faunal Assemblage

Due to the poor preservation of animal remains throughout the site, a total of only 511 identifiable specimens were recorded in the assemblage (Table 4.1). Unidentified mammal material, mostly small shaft fragments, constituted about 40 percent of the total. This diachronic study of the relationship between fauna and social status only includes specimens that were definitively associated with social contexts, a sample of 359 specimens. Although this is a small sample size, we believe it is adequate to perform preliminary comparisons of social inequality in Preclassic and Late Classic contexts at San Bartolo because it contains only the most useful specimens for the study and because the contextual associations are well-defined. Faunal assemblages in the Maya area tend to be small due to taphonomic and cultural conditions, and very few assemblages in the lowland region of Guatemala contain any Preclassic faunal remains, let alone remains that can be correlated among contexts with different social classes. Thus, this sample is pivotal to understanding the important Preclassic and transitional Classic periods in the Maya area.

Fieldwork over the past several years has focused on the Las Pinturas structure, so many of the faunal remains come from these excavations (23.5 percent). Extensive excavations at the Tigrillo Palace also contribute a significant portion of the analyzed fauna (39.1 percent). Given this focus on elite structures, it is not surprising that about two-thirds of the animal remains come from elite deposits, associated with either ritual or domestic contexts. Most of the excavated structures are dated to the Late Preclassic period, which is reflected in the overall larger proportion of animal remains from this time (49.5 percent as opposed to 12.4 percent from the Late Classic period).

Comparison of Preclassic and Late Classic Animal Use

An overall comparison between the Preclassic and Late Classic contexts reveals that the former is much more taxonomically diverse (Table 4.2). This is partly the result of the larger Preclassic sample size. Nonetheless, the specific species that make up this more diverse Preclassic assemblage are intriguing because many of the most culturally significant species only appear during this period, including dogs and wild cats. These are two important symbolic taxa represented in art and closely associated with the mythical themes of sacrifice and the underworld. A Preclassic period focus on dogs has also been noted at other lowland sites, such as Cuello, Colha, and Cerros (Carr 1986; Clutton-Brock and Hammond 1994; Shaw 1999). The San Bartolo Preclassic murals include a jaguar in the symbolism associated with kingship, a theme repeated throughout artwork in Maya and other Preclassic cultures (Benson 1985, 1998).

During the Classic and Late Classic periods, large animals, particularly white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and peccary (Tayassuidae), appear to have been the prime focus of hunting at major sites, and were also used as sacrificial offerings (e.g., Emery 2003; Masson 1999, 2004; Pohl 1994). The overall patterns at San Bartolo correlate well with these regional findings, revealing an increased use of artiodactyls to the exclusion of other animal species from the Preclassic to Late Classic periods. The white-tailed deer is also represented as a sacrificial animal on the San Bartolo murals, emphasizing the local importance of this species beyond domestic purposes. These overall patterns are better understood when compared among deposits from different social ranks and between domestic and ritual contexts.

Comparison of Elite and Lesser/Non-Elite Animal Use

Comparison of the remains recovered from domestic elite and lesser/non-elite contexts reveals that the elite domestic contexts had a greater diversity of taxa, including species represented in the murals such as wild cats and large galliform birds, which are absent from the domestic lesser/non-elite assemblages (Table 4.2). This suggests that the use of these symbolically significant species was limited to the elite ranks even in domestic contexts (also see Jackson, chapter 5, this volume). In contrast, the lesser and non-elite domestic contexts primarily contained artiodactyls during both occupational periods (Figure 4.5b).

Figure 4.5. Comparison of Preclassic and Late Classic animal taxa from (a) elite domestic, (b) lesser and non-elite domestic, and (c) elite ritual contexts. Proportions are based on NISP, and exclude unidentifiable mammal remains.

During the Preclassic period, carnivores made up a large portion of the elite material (45.3 percent), although this is not the case for contemporary material from the lesser/non-elite structures. The remains of one wild cat uncovered at the Palace are of particular interest for examining the role of animals in inequality. The Maya prized felines, particularly jaguars, as symbols of courage. Jaguar pelts were worn by priests and other important societal figures (Benson 1985, 1998). The association between jaguars and kingship was also a fairly common motif among the Olmec of south-central Mexico, whose civilization was contemporaneous with the earliest known occupation levels of San Bartolo (Coe 1972). The San Bartolo murals depict a king seated before a jaguar skin during a coronation ritual. Elsewhere, the Maize God wears jaguar-spotted attire in a separate ceremony. Thus, both the faunal evidence recovered at San Bartolo and the murals suggest that wild cats had an important role in legitimating the power of the king within the community, even as early as the Preclassic period when Maya states were beginning to form.

Although the small sample size of the assemblage makes comparisons between Preclassic and Late Classic animal use difficult, these preliminary results suggest that the Late Classic inhabitants had different dietary preferences than the Preclassic community. There is a clear decrease in species diversity between the Preclassic and Late Classic periods, especially regarding elite contexts, thus making diversity similar between social classes during this later period. By the Late Classic period, artiodactyls make up the majority of identifiable remains in all domestic contexts (78.9 percent of the elite material and 82.8 percent of the lesser/non-elite material). The Late Classic inhabitants of the site, both elites and non-elites alike, may have intentionally focused their hunting practices on acquiring artiodactyls. This focus on large-bodied game species during the Late Classic is also reflected in other Maya assemblages (Emery 2004).

The greater similarity between elite and lesser/non-elite animal use during the Late Classic period in comparison to the Preclassic period is intriguing. During both periods status differences were of paramount importance to the residents of Maya communities, although perhaps in different ways. During the Preclassic period the Maya kings were donning the cloak of divine status, emphasizing their rulership and presumably defining the roles of their entourage as a separate class. During the Late Classic period, such social classes were entrenched, often reaffirmed in actions and material objects (Inomata 2006). In the nearby Petexbatun region, there is evidence that faunal variation between social classes became less defined through time, possibly as a result of the loss of control over certain taxa by elites in the area as social tensions increased (Emery 2003). There is not enough evidence to make a similar claim for the patterns observed in the San Bartolo remains. However, it is possible that the smaller Late Classic population at the site had a less distinct division between elite and lesser/non-elite classes than did the Preclassic community, which resulted in the similarity observed in the Late Classic assemblages from both social tiers.

Another important finding is the significant emphasis on white-tailed deer and peccary within domestic contexts during the Late Classic period. At other contemporaneous Late Classic sites, deer were a common part of deposits associated with individuals of higher status, although they were also found in association with lower-status households (Emery 2003; Masson 1999; Masson and Peraza Lope 2008). The Late Classic elite at San Bartolo, however, appeared to have focused more heavily on peccary than was common at other neighboring sites. Although deer remains are generally found in greater abundance than peccary at sites in the lowland Maya regions, the two species have both been associated with higher or elite status contexts at other communities (Masson 1999; Pohl 1976).

At the Las Plumas residences, the artiodactyl bones may have been valued by both social groups for crafting tools and ornaments during the Late Classic: several long bones and at least one antler had been cut or carved to make awls, pins, and at least one bead. Chert hammerstones and knives were found alongside these remains (Ortiz Kreis and Mencos 2005:367–368). Furthermore, the structures at Las Plumas contained a significant number of unidentified medium- or large-mammal remains, which were most likely artiodactyl (see Table 4.2). A few exhibited evidence of cutting and carving. This material was possibly the detritus of bone-crafting activity.

At other contemporary Late Classic sites, crafting materials are often found associated with elite or lesser-elite specialists within a community (Emery 2009; Emery and Aoyama 2007; Moholy-Nagy 1997). At Las Plumas, there is not enough material to suggest the structure was ever used as a “workshop” for the specialized manufacture of a specific type of craft object (Moholy-Nagy 1997:294), but it is clear that it at least served as a production area at one time for the creation of bone ornaments and tools.

Comparison of Animal Remains in Ritual and Non-Ritual Elite Contexts

It is also important to distinguish between ritual and non-ritual contexts, a possibility only for the elite deposits since material remains at San Bartolo cannot clearly distinguish non-elite ritual deposits. In the Maya area, elites were often involved in ritual feasts, performances, and other activities that may have involved different animal taxa than did domestic activities (Inomata 2006). For this comparison we consider only structures that were either (1) primarily ritual and nonresidential or (2) clearly defined caches and dedication or termination offerings found in ritual or domestic structures. Again, these classifications are based on archaeological findings and interpretations (Urquizu and Saturno 2002, 2004).

Ritual remains include those uncovered from the construction fill and collapse material within the mural room, as well as from the large structure to the west of the mural room that is believed to have been the Preclassic religious center of the site. The fauna from elite ritual contexts at San Bartolo differs significantly from elite non-ritual contexts, although the total number of identified specimens from both ritual and non-ritual areas was nearly identical (Figure 4.5). Dogs and deer constitute over a quarter (29 percent) of the Preclassic ritual remains. The only identified ritual fauna from the Late Classic period are deer and turtles. Combined, dogs, deer, and turtles constitute a significant proportion of the ritual fauna at San Bartolo (40.3 percent). Peccary, the most significant animal among the Late Classic elite residences, were not found in the Late Classic ritual contexts.

All of the dog remains uncovered at San Bartolo came from Las Pinturas; however, while they all dated to the Preclassic period, they were not deposited contemporaneously. The main Las Pinturas structure was rebuilt over seven phases, and the dog remains, mostly teeth, were recovered from the fill between several different phases. The roots of many teeth were intact, and none had been drilled for use as ornamentation, as is commonly found at many sites (Garber 1989; Teeter 2004). The fact that the only dog remains at San Bartolo were in the ritual center suggests that dog teeth, and possibly dogs themselves, were reserved for ritual purposes. At the Postclassic Maya site of Cozumel, a significant number of dog teeth were also found disassociated from postcranial elements; it was hypothesized that the teeth may have held a special symbolic meaning within the community (Hamblin 1984:114). It has been suggested elsewhere that unperforated dog teeth found with perforated teeth were “blanks” for future crafting projects (Middleton et al. 2002:242–243). It is possible that the San Bartolo dog teeth were used in specific rites or in the production of ceremonial ornaments by attendants associated with the ceremonial complex.

The Late Classic ritual remains came solely from one ceremonial deposit near the Main Plaza, unlike those from the Preclassic period, which mostly came from the fill of the Las Pinturas structure. Thus, the Late Classic ritual remains differ from the Preclassic remains in that they come from a specific event, whereas the Preclassic remains represent intermixed material from the religious structure of the site.

The Late Classic deposit, located fifty meters south of the Tigrillo Palace, resembles a termination ritual (Craig 2004). Termination rituals often consist of a number of potsherds and other dedicatory offerings placed in a specific area or structure, signifying its use had come to an end (Garber 1983; Garber et al. 1998). In this instance, several thousand sherds were deposited within a structure, reaching a depth of at least a meter. One recipient of this offering was a large statue of a potbellied individual, which appears to have been created by the Preclassic inhabitants of the site and was later moved by the Late Classic occupants into the structure housing the possible termination-ritual deposit (Craig 2002, 2003, 2004). The statue resembles a number of other Preclassic figures, often found near the Pacific coast of Guatemala (Rodas 1993). The San Bartolo statue is unique in that it wears the carved shell of a turtle on its back, giving it the striking resemblance to a Classic period Pauahtun, or Skybearer, which were also depicted wearing turtle shells. These deities were believed to hold up the sky at the four cardinal directions (Milbrath 1999:149–150). Interestingly, the remains of a turtle were also found within the dedicatory sherds, and may have been of symbolic importance.

The possible termination-ritual deposit also included the bones of a young white-tailed deer, placed over the partially cremated remains of at least two adult humans of unknown gender (Sharpe 2009). While many of the unburned human bones were covered in ash, the deer bones were not. Deer were often associated with the themes of renewal and rebirth; deer sacrifices marked the end of calendrical cycles (Milbrath 1999:20, 61; Montero-Lopez 2009; Pohl 1983). Mary Pohl (1981:515–516) suggests that in the ancient Maya cuch ritual illustrated on Late Classic vessels, sacrificial victims were often associated with, or attired as, deer. The Spanish friar Diego de Landa also commented on the use of deer in the New Year ceremonies (Landa 1941:141, 144), and there are a number of instances in the Madrid and Dresden codices where deer are sacrificed on similar occasions (e.g., Bill et al. 2000; Bricker 1991; Colas 2006). Although the San Bartolo murals date to the Preclassic period, they illustrate the sacrifice of a deer to a mythical entity; the individual performing the sacrifice also has a small deer attached to his waistband. The young San Bartolo deer from the Late Classic deposit may have been sacrificed during a similar event.

Conclusions

San Bartolo offers zooarchaeologists the chance to compare faunal material and ancient art to learn how the Maya used and viewed their animal resources. Although the number of animal remains currently recovered is small, preliminary results provide insight into how the differential access and use of animals changed over time. During the Preclassic period, many different animal species were used and deposited in both domestic and ritual contexts. The Preclassic elite appear to have used a more diverse array of species than were exploited during the Late Classic, although sample size requires that this suggestion be tested further. Animal species recovered from Preclassic ritual and elite contexts were also depicted on the mural walls of Las Pinturas, including deer and turkey, revealing their symbolic significance and importance in establishing social inequality during the Preclassic. Jaguars were also featured on the mural walls, including on the throne of the king, and Preclassic wild cat remains recovered from the palace affirm this connection between felines and kingship.

The most significant aspect of San Bartolo’s faunal assemblage is the marked decline in species diversity from the Preclassic to Late Classic periods among both elite and intermediary classes, although most dramatically among the elite. Although it is possible that this decrease is a result of sampling bias, the specific shifts in taxa suggest it reflects an actual trend in the use of animals. Smaller-bodied animals are particularly underrepresented during the Late Classic, such as rabbits, opossums, turtles, and birds. By the Late Classic, the residents of San Bartolo had begun to focus on specific large-body, high-status game species, namely deer and peccary. In elite residential contexts, peccary appear to have increased in frequency of use while white-tailed deer became more important in both elite and intermediary-class residences. By the Late Classic period, deer had also become the focus of elite ritual ceremonies, alongside turtles.

These preliminary results from the San Bartolo zooarchaeological data also reveal complementary patterns between the use of animals in different social classes and their depiction on the Preclassic mural paintings. Sacrificial and symbolically important animals depicted on the murals, such as deer, turkeys, and wild cats, were found not only in ritual contexts at San Bartolo but also exclusively among the elite residences and the palace. This suggests that the ancient Maya elite differentiated themselves from the lower classes by maintaining preferential control over these select species, which were also depicted as important actors in mythical stories. Future studies in Maya archaeology that investigate how animals created social distinctions in the past will hopefully find further evidence to elaborate on these preliminary results.

Acknowledgments. We would like to thank Dr. Richard Meadow and the Harvard Peabody Zooarchaeology Laboratory for providing invaluable assistance throughout the analysis. We would also like to thank everyone from the San Bartolo Archaeological Project that contributed to this research, particularly Jessica Craig (University of Kansas) for her notes and information regarding the shrine at Structure 63, and Astrid Runggaldier (Boston University) for her suggestions concerning the Tigrillo Palace material.