Ritualized Chipped-Stone Production at Piedras Negras, Guatemala

P1: OJLUCJN049-05-Hruby AP3A.cls March 10, 2007 1:27

5

Ritualized Lithic Production at PiedrasNegras, Guatemala

Zachary X. HrubyUniversity of California Riverside

ABSTRACTThe symbolic and iconographic nature of many obsidian eccentrics, chipped-stone items of ritual significance to theancient Maya, appears to be related to the techniques used to produce them. This study shows that the symbolismof eccentrics extended beyond morphology and into the processes of production. It is argued that the manufactureof obsidian eccentrics may constitute an archaeological example of ritualized production, which is described here asthe binding of craft and religious practice to produce material items. Ritualized production, an under-studied aspectof economic, political, and social organization in archaeology, has implications for understanding precapitalist orpreindustrial societies in which religion structured many social practices in a significant way. Although it is difficultto archaeologically demonstrate ritualized production, its investigation sheds light on little-understood aspects ofeconomic value in ancient societies.

Keywords: lithic, Maya, cache, ritual, production

This study of ritualized production focuses on the manu-facture of obsidian eccentrics1 during the early part of

the Late Classic period at the ancient Maya site of PiedrasNegras (A.D. 603–757), situated along the Usumacinta Riverin northwestern Peten, Guatemala (Houston et al. 1999; Fig-ure 5.1). The scale and organization of production are notdirectly addressed here but rather the process and prac-tice of production. The making of some types of obsid-ian eccentrics probably was tied to the reduction of pris-matic blade cores (i.e., the production of prismatic blades),and these examples cloud the boundary between utilitarianand ritual activities insofar as they have been codified inanthropological and archaeological literature. This chapterseeks to move beyond a ceremonial/utilitarian dichotomy tobroaden our understanding of those social aspects of pro-duction that are not clearly economic in their significancebut that nevertheless impacted the organization of economicactivities.

ARCHEOLOGICAL PAPERS OF THE AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION, Vol. 17, Issue 1, pp. 68–87, ISSN 1551-823X,online ISSN 1551-8248. C! 2007 by the American Anthropological Association. All rights reserved. Please direct all requests for permissionto photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press’s Rights and Permissions website, http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintInfo.asp. DOI: 10.1525/ap3a.2007.17.1.68.

Piedras Negras, with its full complement of stelae, pyra-mids, and palaces, can be described as a typical Classic Mayacenter in the western Maya Lowlands. It is far from the ElChayal obsidian source of Highland Guatemala (approxi-mately 400 kilometers), and the general paucity of obsid-ian found at Piedras Negras reflects the difficulty in ob-taining large quantities of this material via long-distancetrade routes. Obsidian was handled efficiently through con-servative core-reduction techniques and also the utilizationof larger pieces of debitage for obsidian eccentrics. Obsid-ian and chert eccentrics (Figure 5.2) are found almost en-tirely in ceremonial cache deposits and can be consideredto be a form of prestige good that was reserved for royalconsumption. In the case of obsidian eccentrics, obsidian-blade producers used particular types of debitage as blanksor preforms in the production of specific symbolic forms(i.e., obsidian eccentrics) that can best be described as godeffigies (Escobedo and Hruby 2002; Meadows 2001). It is


Ritualized Lithic Production at Piedras Negras, Guatemala 69

Figure 5.1. Map of Piedras Negras, Guatemala, showing spatial designations mentioned in the text (darkgrey = acropolis, light grey = site center, white = near periphery) (map by Nathan Currit, Timothy Murtha,and Zachary Nelson).


70 Zachary X. Hruby

Figure 5.2. Chert eccentrics depicting god heads from CacheR-5-4, Piedras Negras. Lengths in centimeters: upper left = 5.3,middle left = 7.0, bottom left = 9.8, right = 7.2 (drawings byZachary X. Hruby).

argued here that such a tight correlation between how athing was produced (i.e., technology) and religious symbol-ism indicates that production process was ritualized to somedegree.

Since lithic reduction techniques are subtractive tech-nologies, they are particularly amenable to understandingthe processes and stages of production. For many obsidianeccentrics it is possible to determine the morphology of theoriginal material (i.e., blank: flake, blade, or core) beforethe product was finished. Thus, I try to achieve two majorgoals in this chapter, one methodological and the other the-oretical and interpretive: (1) to explore methods by whicharchaeologists can identify ritualized lithic production viathe archaeological record and (2) to offer explanations forhow production techniques can change over time. To ad-dress the first issue I compare obsidian eccentric productiontechniques used in two different caches from Piedras Ne-gras to argue that blade-core technology was tied to aspectsof Classic Maya religion and mythology. For the latter I usecross-cultural examples and social theory to provide ana-logues for the patterns we see in the archaeological record.I begin with a discussion of ritualized production and pro-

vide cross-cultural examples. Next, I review the process ofblade-core reduction, and finally I discuss specific examplesfrom Piedras Negras.

Ritualized Production: A Cross-Cultural andTheoretical Perspective

Ritualized production is a category of social practicethat encompasses a wide variety of behaviors, both religiousand secular. It can be distinguished from nonritualized pro-duction in that “steps” are introduced into the productionprocess that are not related to the “basic necessities” of pro-duction, including prayers, chants, unrelated bodily move-ments and gestures, uses of materials and production tech-niques that do not reflect efficiency or aesthetics, sacrifice,impractical or unusual production locales, and many more.Although ritualized production can be secular, if one choosesto draw a distinction between secular and religious ritual, Ifocus here on ritualized production that is infused with reli-gious symbolism and elements of “worldview.” The productneed not be a ritual or ceremonial item, such as a scepter ora sacrificial knife, but there are examples of “ritual goods”being ritually produced (see below). Furthermore, the prac-tice of ritualized production does not always include prayersor chants carried out during the actual process of produc-tion. It also can include ritual circumscription in which pro-duction activities were marked by a series of rituals before,after, and during important steps of the production process(see Childs 1998). Ritualized production is not necessarilya constant part of crafting practice and may be employedperiodically during particularly important times of the year(Childs 1998:115).

The general term production is employed because sim-ilar rituals can be associated with the production of foods,commodities, crafts, weapons, and so forth. Of course, Mayablade production could be categorized as craft production orcraft specialization, but the phenomenon of ritualized pro-duction need not be solely associated with crafts or evenwith specialized forms of production. For example, the pro-cessing of meat according to Jewish law (i.e., the produc-tion of kosher commodities) is done in ways that could bedefined as ritualized production, involving a special knife,inefficient techniques, and, in the best-case scenario, a re-ligiously knowledgeable man. In Chapter 7, Flad exploresanother form of ritualized commodity production in whichthe production of salt appears to have been circumscribedby pyro-scapulimancy (i.e., divination with scapulae). Anexample more closely related to the present study is theobsidian-blade production described by Carter in Chapter6. In that case, the unusual production locale of a burial plot



and probable coincidence with a burial ceremony indicatesthat the production process may have been ritualized. Bothinstances reveal a connection between ritualized productionand status differentiation, a pattern to be discussed below forPiedras Negras.

Spielmann (1998) argues that the production of goodsused in rituals and ceremonies can confer heightened statuson the producer (see also DeMarrais et al. 1996). Spielmann(1998:153–154) refers to the materialization of ideologies(i.e., the production of goods used in rituals) as ritual craftspecialization. I draw a distinction between ritual craft spe-cialization and ritualized production in that the former refersmainly to the nature of the product and how it is consumedafter production, and the latter refers to the practice of pro-duction. In ritualized production the product can be a “mun-dane,” “utilitarian,” “prestige,” “ceremonial,” or other typeof object, but the process of production is itself a ritualizedactivity. It may be that ritual craft goods are more likelyproduced in a ritualized manner by ritual specialists (Spiel-mann 1998:156), but the focus here is on the intersection ofworldviews and religion with the practice of production.

The melding of craft production with religious cere-mony and ritual can have a profound effect on how per-sonhood and identity are developed and, in part, shapes theway the economy is structured. Ritualized production is onepossible means to exclude others in society from access tothe esoteric knowledge necessary to carry out certain formsof production (see Childs 1998; Childs and Dewey 1996;Herbert 1984; Schmidt 1997), but it may also be key inpassing down production knowledge to the next generation(Clark 1989). Esoteric production knowledge is defined hereas those kinds of knowledge related to production that mayor may not be ritual in nature but nevertheless can be de-scribed as uncommon knowledge about the production pro-cess. Different categories of esoteric production knowledgecan be delineated, such as production technique and ritualsor prayers, but these require a more in-depth study. Esotericproduction knowledge may be related to more specializedtypes of production and can be safeguarded and restricted(as much as it is possible to guard knowledge) by and forthose who are identified with that type of production. Africanmetallurgy provides some excellent examples of this sort ofknowledge in practice.

Herbert (1984) cites examples of African kingship inwhich smelting and smithing is a marker of the royal family.Like agricultural production and land ownership, the pro-duction of metal goods can be a politically potent practice.In the Kongo tradition, the ancestry of kings is closely tied tothe ownership of ore resources but, more important, is tiedto the esoteric knowledge of smelting and smithing (i.e., thetransformation of soils into workable tools usually used in

warfare and agriculture). In many African societies the met-alsmith takes on the role of a diviner or a controller of essen-tial magic that brings about prosperity (Herbert 1984:41). Asmith may also be an owner of a mine, but, more important,he can control the necessary esoteric ritual and technolog-ical knowledge needed for the socially proper creation ofmetal goods. The acquisition of social ties and technolog-ical knowledge can ultimately lead to positions of powerwithin the society. Childs explains this relationship for theWestern Ugandan Toro:

Rituals employed during manufacture took time and ef-fort away from the technical tasks at hand. Such ritualsalso involved additional skills and responsibilities in theproduction sequence that had to be mastered during theapprenticeship and followed during production. Theserules and rituals were used to minimize risk and max-imize success during an operation, to prevent harm toiron workers, and to promote social and economic depen-dency on the iron workers within the community ratherthan realize the Western value of efficiency. If the tabooswere not met or the rituals were not performed, how-ever, the resulting disasters would certainly reduce theefficiency of Toro iron production. [Childs 1998:134]

The forge, bellows, and other “utilitarian” tools andfeatures used in metal-goods production in Africa also arehighly symbolic and are essential aspects of social identity(Childs 1998:119). In addition to rituals carried out uponthe creation of a forge and bellows, they are also decoratedwith male and female icons of sexual fertility. Many of theobjects smiths manufacture are imbued with the prestige andsymbolism of the source, production area, and producer oftheir origin.

Although ritual and ceremony can mask or advertiseeconomic realities (cf. Bourdieu 1977:181), they are alsoembodied experiences that give meaning to life and com-munity. Dobres (2000) brings a further dimension to produc-tion by stressing the inherent connectedness between peopleand the world through the practice of technology. She em-phasizes the Heideggerian notion of being-in-the-world andhow technology, the knowledge and practice of craft produc-tion, is necessary to the formation of social relationships andidentities (Dobres 2000). In her discussion of the embod-ied practice of technology, Dobres (2000:128) focuses onthe importance of everyday technological practice in “ex-pressing and materializing larger cultural epistemologies,ontologies, identities, and differences” (Dobres 2000:139).However, Dobres also notes the multifaceted nature of tech-nology and that “differences in experience, skill, knowledge,and one’s awareness of being-in-the-world, as well as differ-ences in explicitly articulated goals and how they should beaccomplished, all become resources through which political


72 Zachary X. Hruby

interests materialize” (Dobres 2000:140, my emphasis). Inother words, production and ritualized production can bemore or less politicized in more or less conscious ways. Thedegree to which ritualized production becomes a consciousand politicized act has implications for social and economicorganization.

In Mesoamerica, many types of production appear tohave been ritualized. The most obvious examples of rit-ual associated with human creation are dedicatory cachesdeposited during particular phases of architectural con-struction. Monaghan (1998) has recently conceptualizeddedicatory and caching ritual practice as production, afterobservations from his ethnographic work in Oaxaca. ForMonaghan, the “ritual” aspects of production are so ubiq-uitous at most levels that they are indelible aspects of ma-terial production, and thus economy and religion cannot beseparated in a clear and concise manner. He notes that “inthe Mixtec-speaking town of Santiago Nuyoo, people do notseparate the creation of objects into ’practical’ versus ’ritual’aspects” (Monaghan 1998:48). Furthermore, Monaghan be-lieves that “the classification of any behavior as ’ritual’ in re-lation to other activities is impossible” (Monaghan 1998:48).These patterns suggest that the ritual aspects of productionhave become inseparable from everyday sorts of practices.

Ethnohistoric evidence suggests that ritualized produc-tion was carried out in other Mesoamerican contexts. Brum-fiel notes that elite Aztec craft specialists were trained intemple schools and that feather workers, for example, “as-sert[ed] that their craft required the same spiritual and intel-lectual qualities as governing” (Brumfiel 1998:148). Featherworkers, pulque makers, oil makers, and mat makers pur-chased slaves to sacrifice to their patron deities as a formof ritual circumscription of production activities (Brumfiel1998:149).

The production of “idols” or effigies in Contact periodYucatan is an example of ritualized production that was car-ried out to properly and safely, from a spiritual standpoint,bring off the production of items used in ceremony and wor-ship: “Among the occupations of the Indians were potteryand wood-working; they made much profit from formingidols of clay and wood, in doing which they fasted much andfollowed many rites” (Gates 1978:37). Specifically, F. Diegode Landa describes intense ritualized production before, af-ter, and during the production of god effigies:

They put what they needed for scarifying themselves orfor drawing blood from their ears, and the instrumentsfor sculpturing the black gods, and with these prepara-tions, the priests and the Chacs and the workmen shutthemselves up in the hut, and began their work on thegods, often cutting their ears, and anointing those idolswith the blood and burning their incense, and thus they

continued until the work was ended, the one to whom (theidol) belonged giving them food and what they needed;and they could not have relations with their wives, evenin thought, nor could any one come to the place wherethey were. [Tozzer 1941:159–160]

The pan-Maya practice of recreating mythical and his-torical events reveals the essential role of humans in theperpetuation of the gods, both through everyday ritualizedpractice and special large-scale ritual events. This processhas the recursive effect of reaffirming social roles in thecommunity and clarifying personhood and social identity(Clark and Houston 1998; Joyce 2001). It is equally possiblethat the “profit” gained by crafters could have spurred onhorizontal competition between craft producers in the samefield. Ritual knowledge would have been an important ele-ment of this competition.

An Aztec example indicates that the production ofchipped-stone goods was ritualized. Elaborate rituals wereconducted to pass down lithic production knowledge tothe next generation of craftsmen: “[Then] came the mas-ter craftsmen who detached the knives, they also fastedand prayed, and they detached many knives with which thetongues had to be opened, and as they kept detaching themthey kept placing them on a clean mantle. And if one shouldbreak while being detached, they said they had not fastedproperly” (Kidder et al. 1946:135).

Maya stone tool production involved similar ritual as-pects. As Clark has pointed out, the Lacandon Maya wereobliged to observe rites before their knapping activities, be-cause “an integral part of the ‘technique’ [of arrowhead pro-duction] was chanting to the flint and fasting before the ac-tual knapping” (Clark 1989:305). Furthermore, they carriedout production in a temple or “god house,” where they werecompelled to recite chants to successfully complete the task.These chants, as may have been the case for the Aztecs, werekey in memorizing production techniques and have implica-tions for understanding the role of ritual in the transmissionof technological knowledge from one generation to the next.As in the African examples, ritualized production may havebeen politicized and, at certain times, performed in moreconscious ways to confirm or create status differences.

Foundations of Ritualized Production:Mythological Charter and the Creation of

Social Identity

Status differences created by limited access to eso-teric production knowledge may be legitimized by mythol-ogy and worldview. Although he has not explicitly arguedthat elite craftwork was ritualized, Inomata (2001) contendsthat ancient Maya craft specialization was a potent form of



ideologically loaded production. The manufacture of partic-ular goods, such as those featuring hieroglyphic inscriptions,had the effect of creating social distance between the royalfamily and the rest of society (Inomata 2001). Thus, thistype of craft production and the resulting products expressedpolitical power and the legitimizing ideology of the rulingfamily; hence the term ideologically loaded production.

Reents-Budet (1998) takes a similar stance in her de-scription of polychrome pottery production during the LateClassic. She argues that craft producers may have couchedtheir craftwork in terms of creation mythology, thus con-necting the producers and their products to sacred space andtime. I define the establishment of this form of privilegeand authority, gained by virtue of supernatural association,as mythological charter (see also Houston 2001). For eliteor royal status groups, the guarding of esoteric productionknowledge, as legitimized by mythological charter, should beconsidered an important aspect of royal power in the com-munity. This understanding should be applied not only toelite artisans but also to other status groups in society thatsituate their social role in relation to local mythologies.

I argue that many forms of craft production were ideo-logically loaded but perhaps without the same level of po-litical control as royal crafts, such as painting and carvinghieroglyphs. The role of mythology is important because itnot only sanctions the production practices of the elites (In-omata 2001) but also charters other forms of craft special-ization and helps define the social role of nonroyal membersof the community. Mythological charter has two readily ap-parent effects: (1) it creates and concretizes social differen-tiation between groups and (2) it reinforces social cohesionby defining social roles and creating a common connectionbetween individual, disparate worldviews in the community.

The Quiche account of creation, known as the PopolVuh, reflects how myth can be steeped in productionmetaphor and easily relatable to different crafts. Gods aredepicted as artists and craft producers in key moments ofworld creation: “It hasn’t turned out our names have beennamed. Since we are their mason and sculptor this will notdo” (Tedlock 1996:67). Creator gods are called upon by the“Maker, Modeler,” in Tedlock’s terms, to create human be-ings out of mud, wood, and corn: “So be it, fulfill yournames: Hunahpu Possum, Hunahpu Coyote, Bearer twiceover, Begetter twice over, Great Peccary, Great Coati, lap-idary, jeweler, sawyer, carpenter, plate shaper, bowl shaper,incense maker, master craftsman, Grandmother of Day,Grandmother of light” (Tedlock 1996:69). Classic periodhieroglyphic writing indicates that similar metaphors wereprevalent. The verb pat, meaning “to form,” was used todescribe the creation of gods and also ceramic vessels (seepotting as pat for the Yucatec Maya, Clark and Houston

1998). The verb tzutz, used most extensively for describingthe completion of long periods of time, is also the most com-mon verb used to describe the completion of a textile (Hrubyand Robertson 2001).

The intersection between craft production and person-hood recalls the description of the Contact period oficio inethnohistoric sources: “The final step of [the] developmen-tal process of selfhood involved individual achievement andoffice . . . Craft Specialties were also considered oficios andwould have been a principal identifier of a person’s particularachievement. In short, one became a full person by carryingout one’s station or oficio” (Clark and Houston 1998:39).During the ceremony of the month of Mol children wereritually beaten “so that they might become skillful work-men in the professions of their fathers and mothers” (Tozzer1941:159). Thus, craft production was one of the bridges be-tween ritualized mythological reenactment and the individ-ual in society, whereby individuals from different economicspheres formed social bonds and reaffirmed their worldview.Craft production puts one in the role of the gods as a creatorbeing, probably enhanced by trance and deity impersonationduring ritualized production, but with an understanding ofthe human origins of their products. As Landa stated: “Asregards to the images [the idols], they knew perfectly thatthey were made by human hands, perishable, and not divine;but they had honored them because of what they representedand the ceremonies that had been performed during theirfabrication” (Gates 1978:47).

To summarize, in ritualized production, elements ofworldview, religion, and mythology become an indelible partof technological performance. It is one of the most elaborateexamples of how technology embodies the relationship be-tween people and the world around them. It is a form of actionthat is often, though not always, tied to competition, and itcan be a part of everyday, less discursive types of activities.Aspects of local mythology can be emphasized to chartercertain types of production for particular social groups. Eth-nohistoric accounts of the Maya indicate that some groups ofcraft specialists ritually produced chipped-stone goods andgod effigies or idols. It is likely that individual crafters weresocialized into these roles via rituals based in local mythol-ogy and worldview.

Obsidian Craft Production at Piedras Negras

Obsidian-blade production has a long history inMesoamerica and the Maya area. It is a highly systematicpractice that requires trial and error, access to raw mate-rials (i.e., obsidian blade cores), and an instructor who iswilling to pass down the knowledge. In other words, the


74 Zachary X. Hruby

independent discovery and development of such a technol-ogy is unlikely outside of areas within close proximity toan obsidian source or without many prepared blade cores(i.e., large quantities of raw materials; see Hruby 2004 foran example from Kaminaljuyu). In relatively impoverishedpolities in the Maya Lowlands, such as Piedras Negras, ob-sidian cores likely were not available to everyone in society,and in fact they were not found in every household (Hruby2006). The rarity of blade cores and the production knowl-edge that was required to make prismatic blades probablyheightened their value, which is a similar argument to thatof Clark (1987) in his characterization of blade productionin the Formative period. Furthermore, the special role of ob-sidian eccentric production and deposition at Piedras Negrasmay have increased the symbolic importance and economicvalue of obsidian goods in general. The results of these fac-tors were that blade production and core-preparation tech-niques were rather efficient and the resulting debitage, whichwas later used to make obsidian eccentrics, was quite regular.

Although small “bullet” cores have been found in thenear periphery of Piedras Negras (Kovak and Webster 2001),possibly for the production of microblades, only house-hold groups in the site core feature evidence of all blade-core maintenance and rejuvenation techniques. Further-more, continued blade production took place in the samehousehold groups over many decades (Hruby 1999, 2001,2003, 2006). Royal household groups located on the acrop-olis (i.e., the palace) and nonroyal and nonroyal-elite house-hold groups in the site center also feature evidence of ob-sidian eccentric production, which indicates that prestige-goods production also crosscut status boundaries (Hruby2006). These circumstances argue for relatively well-definedcraft oficios in the site core, restricted distribution of bladecores, and the guarding of esoteric production knowledgeover time.

Obsidian also was a common element of stelae andstructure dedication ceremonies, the material remains ofwhich consist of so-called caches that were placed in plat-forms, in stairways, and underneath stelae.2 One major com-ponent of Piedras Negras dedicatory caches is god effi-gies or idols—jades, shells, flints, and obsidians that wereknapped, incised, and painted in the form of important Clas-sic Maya deities. The social function of these small effi-gies is still largely unknown, but their depositional contextdemonstrates their ritual significance and the process of theirproduction ties into the general symbolism and meaning as-sociated with the caches. Caches evoke the connections be-tween the buildings, the stelae, and the prehistoric (in ClassicMaya terms) or primordial creation of the world and central-ity (Joyce 1992). Since all of these cache rituals ostensi-bly were quite visible, it is likely that obsidian goods were

recognized throughout the community as economically andsymbolically valuable. In all likelihood, some of the cachegoods were handled and perhaps deposited during dedicationrituals by the king himself.

The similarity of symbolic forms, technological types,and deposition patterns of obsidian eccentrics at PiedrasNegras, Tikal, and Uaxactun suggests that Piedras Negrasknappers were likely influenced by the Central Peten at sometime. Although Tikal eccentrics were incised and PiedrasNegras obsidians were notched, the debitage types used foreccentrics and the gods depicted on them are extremely sim-ilar (see Coe 1959, 1965) and unlike those from most otherareas of the lowlands. The regular production and use of ec-centrics at Piedras Negras, especially during the early LateClassic, suggests that the practice of production involved thepassing of knowledge between one producer and another.

The Blade-Making Process and theProduction of Obsidian Cache Goods

To understand how obsidian eccentrics were made, itis necessary to discuss the process of blade-core reduction(i.e., prismatic blade production). The details in this sectionillustrate critical stages of blade production that may havebeen more amenable than others to ritualization. The goalis to show that the production process was often a formal-ized, staged activity and that the flakes and blades used toproduce eccentrics represent important stages in blade-corereduction.

While the proper removal of a prismatic blade froma core can be considered a difficult endeavor, it is neitherthe most difficult nor the most crucial aspect of blade pro-duction. In fact, core preparation, platform preparation, andcore maintenance are much more time intensive and requirea great deal of learned skill to perform. Cores exported fromEl Chayal often featured irregular scar or arris patterns, in-cipient cones in the platform, residue cortex, poorly preparedplatforms and angles, ash inclusions, and other inconsisten-cies that caused an array of problems for the Piedras Negrasblade smiths. Thus, the removal of initial percussion flakesand blades to regularize the core were among the most im-portant steps in the blade-making process. An error at thisstage could endanger the bulk of the core and greatly reducethe number of blades produced from it. These initial flakesand blades were among the most common blanks used forobsidian cache eccentrics.

Core Preparation

Most of the percussion debitage produced during corepreparation rarely exceeds 10 centimeters in length, and the



Figure 5.3. A hypothetical polyhedral core and core reduction and examples of debitage made into eccentrics from Piedras Negras. Corelength approximately 10 centimeters (drawings by Zachary X. Hruby).

dorsal surfaces and arrises appear to have older and oftenground percussion scars. Thus, it is likely that many ofthe cores from this period (A.D. 605–757) were importedas roughly shaped, small polyhedral cores (Figure 5.3).Approximately 96 percent of all obsidian recovered fromPiedras Negras was determined to be from the El Chayalsource in the Guatemala highlands. Although a few largepercussion flakes from the Ixtepeque and San MartınJilotepeque sources were found, few if any cores madefrom these materials were imported to the site (Hruby1999, 2006). El Chayal cores were then further reducedthrough percussion by Piedras Negras knappers in or-der to regularize the facets for pressure reduction. Initialflakes and blades were used for some types of eccentrics(Figure 5.3).

The sequence in which imported polyhedral cores wereprepared by percussion at Piedras Negras is reconstructedin Figure 5.3. The hypothetical debitage types are comparedwith actual debitage found at Piedras Negras and debitagecreated by me during replication experiments. First, widepercussion flakes were removed from one face of the coreto isolate a centrally located platform. Next, a long, thinblade was removed from the central working face of thecore. If necessary, flakes and blades were removed from thedistal end of the core to complete regularization. This ratherspare regularization strategy was all that was required tobegin the pressure reduction of the core. These larger piecesof production debitage do not seem to have been thrown intypical trash dumps but rather reserved for obsidian eccentricproduction.


76 Zachary X. Hruby

Blade Production and Core Maintenance

Once the core was prepared it was stabilized on theground using one’s feet (Clark 1982; Hruby and Araki 2005).A gut crutch or long pressure-flaker of some kind was con-structed with either a bone or an antler bit, and after thecore was stabilized, blades were removed. The first series ofblades detached from the core were important to creating aclean working face from which to continue error-free bladeproduction. These early pressure blades also were depositedin cache deposits. Although this process could have been per-formed by a single person, attendants may have helped byrestabilizing the core and maintaining the bit of the pressuredevice. Since most core platforms at Piedras Negras wereat least lightly ground, the knappers must have periodicallyprepared the platform of the core as well as specific areaswith platform overhang or irregularities. Next, the first- andsecond-series blades were detached from the core by pres-sure, which removed the percussion scars on the core left bythe core-preparation techniques.

In some cases, one face of the core was reduced throughpressure and then further percussion blades were removedfrom the sides of the core that were not initially regularized(Figure 5.3). These blades and flakes feature dorsal surfacesthat have pressure scars and old, heavily worn, percussionscars. One result of this reduction technique was exhaustedcores that appear oval or lenticular in cross section with oneside reduced by pressure and the other maintaining its orig-inal ground percussion scars—probably remnants from theoriginal preparation of the core at the source (Figure 5.3).During the Terminal Classic at Piedras Negras, these coreswere further modified through bipolar, indirect percussion,and pressure techniques to create the biface-type eccentricsthat are common at Piedras Negras (see Hruby and Araki2005 and Hruby 2006 for a complete explanation of thisreduction strategy). It is possible that one of the goals of re-taining this form of exhausted core was to produce eccentricblanks for cache deposits.

If an error was made, resulting in a step fracture near theplatform or a hinge termination on the face of the core, a po-tentially risky set of procedures was used to fix the problem.At Piedras Negras these procedures included (1) platformrejuvenation by either faceting or removing a single, largeplatform rejuvenation flake, (2) hinge removal through aproximal percussion blade, (3) distal rejuvenation, but of-ten in a single-step process rather than the two-step processdescribed by Clark and Bryant (1997:116), and (4) medialrejuvenation using a pressure device (see Figure 5.3). Distalrejuvenation flakes may also have had the effect of regular-izing the face of the core and preventing outre passe ter-minations or overshots. Lateral and direct rejuvenation do

not appear to have been common techniques at Piedras Ne-gras, but a few examples do exist. All of these proceduresrepresent a dangerous time in the life of the core, and theirsuccess determines whether the core can be used in the fur-ther production of blades. These types of debitage are alsofound in royal caches, along with exhausted cores, first- andsecond-series blades, and extremely fine third-series blades,possibly used for bloodletting (see Clark and Bryant 1997;their Figure 5.5 shows a broken example).

In summary, cached obsidians at Piedras Negras marksignificant stages in the practice and process of blade-corereduction: initial preparation, successful maintenance, initialproduction, and final product. The offering of these flakesfor royal caches indicates that they were special, highly val-ued items—items that resulted from technological practicesof blade producers. The use of these flakes in public rituals,probably by the king, emphasized the esoteric productionknowledge of obsidian craft specialists and had the effect oflegitimizing their social status. Knappers thoughtfully dis-played their prowess in ways that went beyond the manufac-ture of fine prismatic blades. Given the long and uniformhistory of blade production through time, obsidian workersmay have been paying homage to their ancestors, historicalfigures, and deities associated with the adoption and practiceof blade technology. It is likely that these social and historicalfactors were the source of value to the royal family, ratherthan the size and quality of the eccentric obsidian. Beingthe sole consumer of the most symbolically potent obsidiangoods in the city allowed the royal family to demonstrate theirinfluence over ritual and ideological aspects of craft produc-tion. Conversely, obsidian workers connected their craft tomythological charter and associated royal rituals, and theroyal family recognized their ability to do so by using theircraft goods publicly.

A Classic Maya Example from Piedras Negras

At Classic period Piedras Negras there appears to havebeen a connection between the symbolism of an obsidianeccentric, as reflected by its morphology, and the techniqueused to manufacture it. Many types of eccentrics representnatural elements and supernatural beings, and these small ef-figies were deposited ritualistically during the production oftemples and carved stone monuments (Escobedo and Hruby2002; Meadows 2001; Schele and Freidel 1990). At PiedrasNegras in particular, symbolic forms repeat in local cachesover a period of centuries. Elaborate production techniquesalso were reproduced, suggesting that traditions probablywere passed on from one generation of knappers to the next.



Figure 5.4. Caches from Temple R-5, Piedras Negras: (a) Cache R-5-4; (b) Cache R-5-6 (drawings by Zachary X. Hruby).

In this section I compare two caches from the Yaxcheceramic phase (A.D. 620–750), which roughly corresponds tothe reigns of Ruler 1 through Ruler 4 (A.D. 605–757). In thenext section another comparison is made to later caches fromthe Chacalhaaz ceramic phase (A.D. 750–830) to show tech-nological change through time. The first two caches comefrom the R-5 pyramid excavated by Hector Escobedo (see Es-cobedo and Zamora 1999, 2001; Escobedo and Hruby 2002),and each contained a set of nine obsidian eccentrics of thesame symbolic form, probably evoking specific gods (Hruby2001, 2003). These caches were deposited as part of two dis-tinct rituals—as a substela cache of Stelae 37 (Figure 5.4a)and as a “column altar” cache (Figure 5.4b)—probably from1 to 20 years apart.3 They were deposited in different parts ofthe R-5 platform and do not appear to be from related rituals.In other words, they were not simultaneous caching eventsand the eccentrics were probably not made at the same time.

These caches are part of a tradition of eccentric produc-tion that extended predominantly from the reign of Ruler 1 toRuler 4 (i.e., from the late Balche phase to the end of the Yax-che phase). While Balche phase (A.D. 550–620) obsidians areunifacially notched, they do not adhere to the same formaloutline as those from the Yaxche phase, and those from Ruler5 to Ruler 7 (i.e., A.D. 757–808; early Chacalhaaz phase) use

a similar symbolic form but largely are made from exhaustedcores—a tradition less common during Yaxche times. It maybe possible that the obsidian eccentrics made from the Yax-che phase were manufactured by a few of the knappers fromPiedras Negras who passed their knowledge down throughthree or four generations. Given the similarity to obsidian ec-centrics from Tikal, it is possible that the creation and use ofthis style was not a completely autochthonous development.

Although there are formal and technological similaritiesamong all caches during the Yaxche phase at Piedras Negras,the two caches from R-5 provide an excellent test case withwhich to compare two almost identical groups of obsidianeccentrics. The first, Cache R-5-4, is a substela cache of Stela37 (early seventh century, Ruler 2) that was deposited in alimestone cyst located behind the support shaft of the stela.The second, Cache R-5-6, was deposited around a cylindri-cal column altar located to the side of Stela 37 in the samenortheast platform of R-5. Even though the contexts are dif-ferent and there is variation between the deposition stylesof the non-obsidian cache goods, for unknown reasons thesymbolic forms of the obsidians were repeated.4 The firstclear difference between the two samples of obsidian ec-centrics from Caches R-5-4 and R-5-6 is that the columnaltar eccentrics are smaller than their substela counterparts


78 Zachary X. Hruby

Figure 5.5. A comparison of eccentric obsidians from Caches R-5-4 and R-5-6, Temple R-5, Piedras Negras (drawings by ZacharyX. Hruby).

(Figure 5.5). The second is that the forms are not exactly thesame. In most cases, however, the notching is carried out atthe same points of each corresponding flake or blade. Theclosest similarity between the two groups actually involvesthe blades and flakes used to create each corresponding form.

Figure 5.5 represents a comparison between the nine ob-sidians in each cache, with numbered columns marking eachdistinct form. On the basis of a comparison with other ob-sidian eccentrics from Piedras Negras and incised obsidiansfrom the Central Peten, notched obsidians from R-5-4 andR-5-6 appear to represent a series of god effigies common tocaches from both of these areas. Most common among therepresented gods are the lightening god, K’awiil, the JesterGod of the three-stone-hearth, the sun and moon gods, themat sign (pop, which is an icon symbolizing rulership), GodC, and the principal bird deity (see Taube 1992 for detaileddescriptions of these major gods). Certain gods also are re-peated at Tikal as either standing or sitting and are thus re-peated in the cache. At Piedras Negras there are no full-bodyrepresentations of the gods, but rather profile silhouettes oftheir heads are notched into the stone—a pattern also foundfor notched flint eccentrics at Piedras Negras (Figure 5.2).Representations of the sun and moon are not usually knappedas profiles but are left as either rounded discs or as notchedcrescents. The symbolism of some notched obsidians, suchas the double-notched blade or laurel leaf form, remain tobe understood but probably correlate to one of the common

gods represented on Tikal incised obsidians (Figure 5.6). Thesocial function of these eccentrics is difficult to determine,but their placement near monuments of calendrical impor-tance indicates association with the symbolic representationof time or with the movement of celestial bodies.

The following is a description of the eccentrics fromR-5-4 and R-5-6 using the format of Figure 5.5 to comparesymbolic and technological forms. Thick, wide, percussionblades (designated as small percussion-blades according toClark [1989]) removed to regularize the sides of the workingface of the core (Figure 5.3) were used for the eccentrics inColumns 3 and 4. These eccentrics probably represent a sil-houette of the Classic Maya lightning god, K’awiil. K’awiilshaped eccentrics can be identified by a long snout, an openmouth, and a central torch element emanating from the “fore-head” area of the silhouette (see Figure 5.7, left, for a depic-tion of K’awiil). Thinner, longer percussion blades removedfrom the central portion of the working face (Figure 5.3)were chosen for the “centipede” or “pop” style eccentricsin Column 2. Although centipedes do appear on Tikal in-cised obsidians, the pop or mat sign is much more common,and the symmetry of the Piedras Negras eccentrics suggeststhat the pop sign probably was the intended symbol. Theremay be some symbolic overlap between the two forms, how-ever. Column 1 eccentrics, representing the Jester God, weremade from wide percussion flakes removed from the sidesof the blade core, probably to isolate the platform of the



Figure 5.6. A comparison of the incised obsidians from Tikal and the chipped-obsidian eccentrics of Piedras Negras. Artifacts not toscale (incised obsidians after Coe 1965; drawings by Zachary X. Hruby).

blade to be removed from the central face of the core. TheJester God form is similar to K’awiil forms but usually fea-tures a pointed element that represents the top of the head(Figure 5.5).

The disc-like eccentrics in Columns 7 and 8 may rep-resent the sun god and the moon goddess, since roundedflakes are usually reserved for the sun disc and the mooncrescent. Column 7 eccentrics were made with percussionflakes with hinge terminations, and Column 8 eccentrics aregenerally round, but there is no technological correlation be-tween them; one is a distal rejuvenation flake while the otheris a proximal fragment of a percussion blade or flake. This

Figure 5.7. Relationship between incised eccentrics and flaketypes from Tikal, Guatemala. Core length approximately 15 cen-timeters (eccentric images after Kidder 1947; drawings by ZacharyX. Hruby).

technological incongruence indicates a lack of the desiredflake at the time the cache was deposited, but it may alsorepresent an unrecognized pattern. It is important to note,however, that the round forms were derived from flakes re-moved from either the proximal or distal end of the core.Fragments of flakes and blades were not chosen for disc-shaped eccentrics as they often were for regalia and insetsfor figurines.

Column 5 eccentrics are made out of step or hinge re-moval percussion flakes and represent a common trefoil format Piedras Negras that has an unknown symbolic meaning.Similarly, meanings are not known for Columns 6 and 9,but they may correlate with some of the other deities, suchas God C, because they are repeated with great frequencyas they are at Tikal. The double-notch forms in Column 6are early pressure blades (“first-series pressure blades,” us-ing Clark and Bryant’s [1997] terminology), and Column 9eccentrics are exhausted cores.

Ultimately, the flake and blade appears to be an inte-gral aspect of the finished eccentric, even when it representsthe correction of a mistake or an inefficiency in the normalblade-making process. These forms are repeated in othercaches, but not in the same groupings of nine found in thesecaches. Close to 150 years later, similar forms continuedto be used at Piedras Negras in the temple Cache O-13-7, but the technology had shifted primarily to the notchingof exhausted cores. Nevertheless, the same flake/blade cor-relation to symbolic type continues, although in a dimin-ished quantity, up until eccentrics are no longer used (Ta-ble 5.1). Figure 5.8a depicts a series of three disc-shapedobsidians, all of which are made from distal rejuvenationflakes. Figure 5.8b shows that the correlation between thelarge K’awiil form and the percussion blade removed from


80 Zachary X. Hruby

Table 5.1. Technological types of obsidian eccentrics through time

Ceramic Phase

Balche Early Yaxche Late Yaxche Early Chacalhaaz Late ChacalhaazObsidian eccentric A.D. 550–620 r A.D. 620–660 A.D. 660–750 A.D. 750–808 A.D. 808–830

Notched flakes 3 25 3 8 12Notched blades 1 27 13 6 25Notched cores 5 2 11 2Most bifacially worked 0 0 11 5Fully bifacially worked 0 1 81 8

the side of the pressure blade core was repeated during theearly Late Classic period and beyond.

These patterns suggest that the kind of original obsidiandebitage was key in embodying the complete symbolism ofthe eccentric and, in addition, that the stages of blade-corereduction at Piedras Negras may have also had a symboliccomponent. A recent analysis of incised obsidian eccentricsfrom Tikal and Uaxactun also suggests ritualized productionand an adherence between symbol and technology, albeitslightly different from that of Piedras Negras flake types.Round distal rejuvenation flakes were reserved for the sunand moon gods and distal rejuvenation blades depict kneel-ing or sitting gods, while percussion blades are reserved forstanding gods, the pop sign, and scorpions (Figure 5.7). Al-though this may be an ad hoc use of correctly shaped flakesfor particular gods, it may also indicate a similar traditionto that of the Piedras Negras eccentrics, wherein specific

Figure 5.8. Flakes and blades removed after pressure reductionhad begun. (a) Discs made from distal rejuvenation flakes; (b)K’awiil profiles made from percussion blades removed from par-tially reduced cores (views of dorsal sides except for second fromthe right) (drawings by Zachary X. Hruby).

kinds of flakes were used for specific gods and entities. Anin-depth analysis of the Tikal obsidians is required to seewhether this pattern is repeated for all caches.

At Piedras Negras and elsewhere it appears that knap-pers had a folk knowledge of the core that related to ClassicMaya deities (e.g., Figure 5.7). The directionality, position,and morphology of the core (i.e., proximal versus distal endof the core) may have been marked by where certain gods“resided” in the core as flakes and blades. This possibilitydoes not seem too far-fetched given that objects and housesoften were anthropomorphized or characterized as a cos-mogram in Maya cultures (Vogt 1998). When preparationflakes and blades were removed from the core, it likely wasthat the knappers had specific gods in mind as they weremaking them. These symbolic associations comprised partof the esoteric production knowledge controlled by blademakers. Thus, practice of production not only involved theproduction of “ritual” prestige goods, but mythological be-ings and elements were inherent to the flakes themselves.These flakes and blades also mark crucial and “dangerous”moments of core maintenance, similar to the staged ritual-ized production of the Toro iron workers (Childs 1998).

As the ethnographic and ethnohistoric cases discussedabove suggest, the production of eccentrics is a well-suitedpractice for the ritualization of production—the binding ofesoteric ritual knowledge with technological practice. Therepetition of particular god effigies in caches also suggeststhat there was an intense mythological component to the ec-centrics. This component may have tied into a mythologicalcharter for obsidian crafters. Although there was anotherstage of production to finish many of the prestige lithicsfor caches (i.e., notching), the correlation between technol-ogy and symbolism suggests that it was the obsidian work-ers themselves who made the connection between the core,flake, and god. Another salient point is that some of the flakesused for obsidian eccentrics were removed during the pro-cess of prismatic blade production, not during the removalof the first series of percussion flakes and blades. I proposethat blade production as a whole may also have been ritu-alized or ritually circumscribed, especially considering the



Figure 5.9. Balche phase eccentrics from Cache R-16-2, PiedrasNegras (photograph by Zachary X. Hruby).

ritual tasks for which prismatic blades often were used (e.g.,bloodletting).

Implications of Ritualized Production:Technological and Stylistic Change

through Time

Balche period (A.D. 550–620) eccentrics differed fromLate Classic eccentrics both technologically and symboli-cally. Obsidian eccentrics from Caches K-5-8 and R-16-2reflect these differences (Figure 5.9). The Balche obsidi-ans are made with a notching technique and may very wellsymbolize various gods, but any connection to early LateClassic obsidians is unclear. The Balche phase five-pointedstar and the dart point (Figure 5.9), for example, may be dis-tantly related to Terminal Classic versions symbolically, butthey are made by notching a lateral rejuvenation flake anda stunted blade, respectively, instead of creating symmetrythrough complete bifacial reduction. The elaborate Balcheobsidians indicate a symbol and a technological system sim-ilar to those of other time periods, but their meaning remainsopaque. Unlike that of the Central Peten, the notched flaketradition of the Balche phase, and likely before, appears tocontinue into the early Late Classic at Piedras Negras, indi-cating some technological continuity, even though there mayhave been a shift in the symbolism of obsidian eccentrics.

The early Late Classic period at Piedras Negras (A.D.603–757, largely marked by the Yaxche ceramic phase [A.D.620–750]), which is the topic of this discussion, reveals acontinuation of the notched flake technology but with ad-herence to a symbol system that differs from that of earlierobsidian eccentrics. Although the sample is quite small forthe Balche phase (A.D. 550–620), and it may very well in-volve similar gods, the flake-to-symbol correlation is not inevidence. The two caches analyzed above should also notbe considered the norm in terms of cache content. Tikal

caches regularly contain a series of nine obsidians with ex-treme technological and symbolic regularity (Coe 1965), butPiedras Negras caches appear to be much more varied. Thesame symbolic and technological forms appear throughoutthe corpus but in differing numbers and combinations ofeccentrics. The K’awiil eccentric of Cache K-5-1, for exam-ple, uses the same percussion flake and notching techniqueas that in Cache R-5-6 (Figure 5.5), but it is deposited witha different series of obsidian effigies. The obsidians fromCaches K-5-1 and R-5-6 reveal that the same symbolismand technology span the entire early Late Classic but in dif-ferent platforms, substela caches, and stairway dedicationsthroughout the site. The meaning and variation of cache de-posits still remain to be deciphered, but it is clear that theyare using combinations of the same eccentrics to expressdifferent mythological meanings.

Sometime after the demise of Ruler 4 (A.D. 757) manyof the same symbolic forms were retained, but the way ob-sidian eccentrics were made changed significantly. Bifacialtechnologies were introduced to the manufacture of obsidianeccentrics, and as a result, they became thinner and better de-fined (Figure 5.10). Before the Terminal Classic, eccentricswere produced with notching, indirect percussion, and bipo-lar technologies that could have been carried out by bladeproducers who knew and understood that type of reduction.These technologies were readily available to blade produc-ers because they are necessary for the successful reductionof blade cores. At the onset of the Chacalhaaz phase (A.D.750–830), however, bifacial technologies, previously onlycommanded by flint workers, are employed in the produc-tion of the majority of obsidian eccentrics. Biface thinningtechnology is unrelated and completely unnecessary for thesuccessful manufacture of prismatic blades. Whether flintworkers were made to produce obsidian eccentrics or obsid-ian workers gained new technological knowledge of bifacialreduction is unknown. In either case, however, the obsidiancraft specialists of the Yaxche phase (A.D. 620–750) had tocompromise with new ceremonial and political demands. Inaddition to the old symbolic forms, new ones were also in-troduced (Figure 5.10), indicating that both symbolic andtechnological shifts had occurred in how proper cache ma-terials were meant to be produced.

Table 5.1 illustrates technological changes through timein obsidian eccentrics at Piedras Negras. The dominant tech-nique for creating obsidian eccentrics during the Balche andYaxche phases is notching blades and flakes and, to a lesserextent, notching cores. The number of notched cores in-creases with the transition to the Chacalhaaz phase. Themajor shift, however, occurs during the early Chacalhaazphase, in which the number of bifacially worked obsidiansovershadows other forms. After the early Chacalhaaz phase


82 Zachary X. Hruby

Figure 5.10. Bifacially reduced obsidian eccentrics (photographby Zachary X. Hruby).

(A.D. 750–808), the demise of Ruler 7, and the decline ofthe dynastic line at Piedras Negras, notched flake eccentricsonce again become common, but they do not adhere to thesystem established during the Yaxche phase.

The shift from Balche phase symbolism to Yaxche phaseconservatism and ultimately to Terminal Classic (Chacal-haaz phase) elaboration shows that technology and style ac-company political change. Around A.D. 750 (i.e., the Chacal-haaz ceramic phase) population also rose at Piedras Negras(Nelson 2005) and there is a corresponding increase in thenumber of obsidian production locales at the site (Hruby2006). With increased cache sizes and higher levels of ob-sidian found at Piedras Negras, it is also clear that moreobsidian was imported to the site during Chacalhaaz times.Thus, there are a number of political, economic, and demo-graphic forces that may have influenced changes in the styleand technology of obsidian eccentrics.

The stability of technological practice for the early LateClassic indicates that particular groups of obsidian special-ists were responsible for maintaining a specific practice ofobsidian craft production that was dominant for 150 years.The transition to the Terminal Classic shows that originalgroups of eccentric producers may have relayed certain el-ements of obsidian symbolism to the next group, but thedominance of their technological practice diminished. If ob-sidian eccentric production was ritualized during the Yaxchephase, as is argued above, then the core of this practice andits practitioners appear to have lost exclusive favor of theruling family. The fact that the notched flake and blade ec-centrics continue in a minor way after the introduction ofbifacially reduced obsidian eccentrics during the late Cha-calhaaz subphase (A.D. 808–830) suggests that this tradition

did survive, but the products derived from it may not havebeen the most valued.

Discussion

Patterns in obsidian eccentric production and consump-tion lead us to ask, what was the socioeconomic status ofthe obsidian craft specialists and where did they live? Ac-cording to a distributional analysis of production debitage atPiedras Negras (see Hruby 2006 for a complete discussionof the organization of chipped-stone production), people ofvarying status groups were involved in prismatic blade pro-duction, as well as obsidian eccentric manufacture in somecases. Although there are no large production dumps of ob-sidian debitage at Piedras Negras (see also Moholy-Nagy1997 for Tikal and Aoyama 1999 for Copan), some house-hold groups, such as the U group in the southern area ofthe site and Operation PN 26 to the north of the acropolis(Figure 5.1; Nelson 2001; Nelson and Hruby 2002; Wells1999), feature small amounts of eccentric production deb-itage. The existence of failed eccentrics along with core-preparation flakes in a household group distant from theseat of royal power (i.e., the acropolis located on the north-ern edge of the site core) indicates that the production ofblades, core preparation, and the manufacture of obsidianeccentrics for royal caches were not completely controlledby the royal family. Instead, there may have existed a systemof exchange whereby the royal family distributed cores tocraft specialists, and knappers returned high-quality bladesand obsidian eccentrics. This relationship gave the appear-ance of royal control over symbolically potent products butalso offered the knappers symbolic capital in the form ofprestige and public recognition. Emphasizing craft ideolo-gies in royal rituals legitimated the craft oficio and socialstatus.

The shifts in obsidian eccentric technology and symbol-ism from the Balche phase (A.D. 550–620) to the early LateClassic (A.D. 620–750) and finally to the Terminal Classicalso accompany political changes (i.e., major shifts in thedynastic line). I suggest that the ritualized or ideologicallyloaded production that defines the Yaxche phase representsa small group of obsidian crafters who shared esoteric pro-duction knowledge. The population increase and the changesin obsidian technology and symbolism that characterize theTerminal Classic indicate that producers were competingwith each other and that the ritual and symbolic aspectsof production played a role in that competition. Differentgroups of knappers may have had unique rituals and tradi-tions, but successful exchange with the royal family allowedfor the concretization of one particular technique for caching



rituals. It is important to note that competition in other fieldsof craft production was present at Piedras Negras during theTerminal Classic. Munoz (2006) argues that competition be-tween ceramic producers increased with greater population,and the near-exponential increase in the number of carvers’signatures on Piedras Negras monuments shows that morepeople were getting involved in crafts that were reserved forthe few in preceding centuries.

A study of flint eccentrics from the eastern lowlandsyielded similar conclusions. According to Meadows:

The crafter’s place within ancient Maya society was onein which social identity was simultaneously part of andseparate from the elite communities with which they in-teracted . . . this likely included competition and alliancewithin and across socioeconomic and political bound-aries. The Classic Period was a time of intense politicalcompetitiveness in the lowlands, a time that saw increas-ing efforts by the elite to reproduce their positions ofpower via the formation of politically expedient factionsand exercising the significant power of traditional lin-eages. [Meadows 2001:47]

The obsidian eccentrics and eccentric producers ofPiedras Negras reflect these kinds of social relationshipsbut provide further information about how value and mean-ing may have been constructed. Ritualized production andmythological charter were socially valuable aspects of ob-sidian craft specialization as a part of everyday experi-ence. However, in times of political turmoil esoteric pro-duction knowledge became politicized, moved to consciousdiscourse, and became an economically valuable part of thefinished product.

Conclusion

A combination of a direct historical approach, ethno-graphic analogy, symbolic interpretation, and lithic technol-ogy studies shows that eccentric-obsidian production wasan ideologically loaded activity. Notched flake obsidian ec-centrics represent a form of god effigy that was used in royalcaches, but the symbolic content of these eccentrics doesnot end there. The fact that flakes and blades from crucialstages in the blade-making process were reserved for theseritually deposited goods indicates that the process of bladeproduction as the periodic creation of god effigies or idolswould have also been ritualized (see also Tozzer 1941). Therarity of obsidian at Piedras Negras may have heightenedthe importance of blade manufacture at the site, and as thesole source of obsidian bloodletters and obsidian eccentrics,blade-making, the passing on of production knowledge, andthe display of the final products could have been importantsocial events that required ritualization or ritual circumscrip-

tion. Since eccentric and blade production were technolog-ically bound to “mundane” blade manufacture, it should beconsidered that blade production in general was also ritual-ized and an ideologically loaded activity. The production ofprismatic pressure blades at Piedras Negras appears to havebeen a guarded cultural practice that was passed from onegeneration of knappers to the next.

The first, methodological goal of this chapter was toshow that context, technology, and symbolism are all im-portant avenues for interpreting archaeological finds. Theseanalyses should be done concurrently in order to elucidatepreviously unrecognized patterns of social and economic in-teraction. I have compared the obsidian eccentrics from twodifferent caches to show the value of studying both the lithictechnology and religious symbolism. New patterns arise byshifting the focus of analysis, which ultimately allows us toask different questions about the symbolism of the artifactsand the role of the producers in society. Identifying possi-ble social realms in which ritualized production and the useof mythological charter were significant urges us to rethinkprevious models of craft production in ancient societies. Oneimplication of this research is that understanding more aboutthe identity of craft producers and their products brings uscloser to an understanding of value (a topic considered in de-tail in the introduction and in Clark, Chapter 2, this volume).

The second, interpretive goal of this chapter was toexplain the possible causes of technological and symbolicchange over time. The connections between technologicalpractice, mythology, and ritual are significant, especially ifthey are brought into conscious discourse. This chapter illus-trates the relatively static nature of obsidian eccentric pro-duction for the early Late Classic period of the Piedras Ne-gras polity. Competition between craft producers increasedafter the reign of Ruler 4, however, and craft ideologiesmay have been raised into discursive consciousness. In otherwords, mythological charter and ritualized production mayhave begun as a nondiscursive doxic reality, but the intensi-fied political nature of Classic Maya polities provoked ob-sidian workers to reify symbolically potent aspects of theirpractice. In the case of Piedras Negras, politics, as wellas economic and demographic factors, played a role in theheightened competition during the end of the Late Classicperiod.

We should alter our theoretical frameworks to accom-modate social aspects of production and investigate ways thatutilitarian activities may have been religious experiences or,at least, socially recognized and ideologically potent activ-ities. These production techniques also have implicationsfor the uses of products. Interpretation of the distinction be-tween ceremonial and utilitarian activities and objects shouldbe reserved until rigorous analyses are conducted or until


84 Zachary X. Hruby

a theoretical framework is constructed that supports thoseclaims. This reconsideration should begin with the artifacttypologies created and used by modern archaeologists andlithic technologists.

Acknowlegments

I thank the directors of the Piedras Negras Project,Stephen Houston and Hector Escobedo, for their continuingsupport and for allowing me to work with such an interestinglithic sample. I also thank the Museo Nacional de Arque-ologıa e Historia de Guatemala and the University Museumof the University of Pennsylvania for granting me access toPiedras Negras collections excavated by the University ofPennsylvania (Monica Perez, Fernando Moscoso, and BillWierzebowski were especially helpful). This research wouldnot have been possible without funding from the Universityof California at Riverside (Graduate Division, the GraduateStudent Association, and the School of the Humanities), theNew World Archaeological Foundation, and my mother andgrandmother. I would like to thank my parents for their con-tinued support over the years. Rowan Flad, Stephen Houston,Scott Hutson, Jeffrey Glover, Takeshi Inomata, Karl Taube,and the AP3A reviewers were a great help to me in revisingthis chapter. Any mistakes are mine alone.

Notes

1. Meadows (2001) suggests that eccentric flints andobsidians should rather be called flaked stone symbols. How-ever, flaked stone symbol is an inaccurate category for tworeasons. First, flakes, blades, chunks, and celt axes (i.e., “util-itarian” forms) are sometimes deposited alongside “eccen-tric” or “symbolic” lithics in caches and burials, suggestingthat any lithic artifact could have acted as a flaked stone sym-bol. Second, various forms of eccentrics had a wide rangeof symbolic and material functions, some of which are stillcompletely unknown. I continue to use the equally inaccu-rate but traditional term of flint and obsidian eccentrics andleave the issue for later debate.

2. This deposition of valuable items contrasts with ter-mination deposits that feature destroyed craft goods laidupon the leveled, earlier structures (see Mock 1998 for areview of termination rituals).

3. Column altars were used in many different ways atPiedras Negras, but when they were deposited in templeplatforms along with stela, which record the completion ofsignificant periods of time, such as the hotuun (five years)and k’atuun (20 years), it is possible that they mark the com-pletion of a less significant period.

4. It is likely that column altar caches and stelae cacheswere conceptually linked since the cache contents associ-ated with each are usually quite similar. Column altar cachesprobably are the material remains of periodic rituals carriedout at the end of one-year cycles (e.g., tuun endings) or othershort periods of time.

References

Aoyama, Kazuo1999 Ancient Maya State, Urbanism, Exchange, and

Craft Specialization: Chipped Stone Evidence ofthe Copan Valley and the La Entrada Region, Hon-duras. Memoirs in Latin American Archaeology,12. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

Bourdieu, Pierre1977 [1972] Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Brumfiel, Elizabeth M.1998 The Multiple Identities of Aztec Craft Specialists.

In Craft and Social Identity. Cathy L. Costin andRita P. Wright, eds. Pp. 145–152. ArcheologicalPapers of the American Anthropological Associa-tion, 8. Arlington, VA: American AnthropologicalAssociation.

Childs, S. Terry1998 Social Identity and Craft Specialization among

Toro Iron Workers in Western Uganda. In Craft andSocial Identity. Cathy L. Costin and Rita P. Wright,eds. Pp. 109–121. Archeological Papers of theAmerican Anthropological Association, 8. Arling-ton, VA: American Anthropological Association.

Childs, S. Terry, and William J. Dewey1996 Forging Symbolic Meaning in Zaire and

Zimbabwe. In The Culture and Technology ofAfrican Iron Production. P. Schmidt, ed. Pp.145–171. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.

Clark, John E.1982 Manufacture of Mesoamerican Prismatic Blades:

An Alternative Technique. American Antiquity47(2):355–376.

1987 Politics, Prismatic Blades, and Mesoamerican Civ-ilization. In The Organization of Core Technology.Jay K. Johnson and Carol A. Morrow, eds. Pp. 259–284. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.



1989 Obsidian: The Primary Mesoamerican Sources. InLa obsidiana en Mesoamerica. Margarita GaxiolaG. and John E. Clark, eds. Pp. 299–319. Mexico:Instituto Nacional de Antropologıa e Historia.

Clark, John E., and Douglas Bryant1997 A Technological Typology of Prismatic Blades and

Debitage from Ojo de Agua, Chiapas, Mexico. An-cient Mesoamerica 8:111–136.

Clark, John E., and Stephen D. Houston1998 Craft Specialization, Gender, and Personhood

among the Post-conquest Maya of Yucatan,Mexico. In Craft and Social Identity. Cathy L.Costin and Rita P. Wright, eds. Pp. 31–46. Arche-ological Papers of the American AnthropologicalAssociation, 8. Arlington, VA: American Anthro-pological Association.

Coe, William R.1959 Piedras Negras Archaeology: Artifacts, Caches,

and Burials. Museum Monographs. Philadelphia:University Museum, University of Pennsylvania.

1965 Caches and Offertory Practices of the Maya Low-lands. In Archaeology of Southern Mesoamerica,Part 1. Gordon R. Willey, ed. Pp. 462–468. TheHandbook of Middle American Indians, 2. Austin:University of Texas Press.

DeMarrais, Elizabeth, Luis J. Castillo, and Timothy K. Earle1996 Ideology, Materialization and Power Strategies.

Current Anthropology 37:15–32.

Dobres, Marcia-Anne2000 Technology and Social Agency: Outlining a

Practice Framework for Archaeology. Oxford:Blackwell.

Escobedo, Hector L., and Zachary X. Hruby2002 El contexto y produccion del Escondite O-13-57

de Piedras Negras, Guatemala. In XV Simposiode Investigaciones Arqueologicas en Guatemala.Juan Pedro Laporte, Barbara Arroyo, Hector L. Es-cobedo, and Hector E. Mejıa, eds. Pp. 927–935.Guatemala City: Museo Nacional de Arqueologıay Etnologıa.

Escobedo, Hector L., and Marcelo Zamora1999 PN 47: Excavaciones en la Estructura R-5. In

Proyecto Arqueologico Piedras Negras: informepreliminar No. 3, tercera temporada, 1999. Hector

L. Escobedo and Stephen D. Houston, eds. Pp. 217–248. Technical Report. Guatemala City: Instituto deAntropologıa e Historia de Guatemala (IDAEH).

2001 PN 47: Excavaciones en la Estructura R-5. InProyecto Arqueologico Piedras Negras: informepreliminar No. 4, cuarta temporada, 2000. HectorL. Escobedo and Stephen D. Houston, eds. Pp. 199–216. Technical Report. Guatemala City: Instituto deAntropologıa e Historia de Guatemala (IDAEH).

Gates, William, trans.1978 Yucatan before and after the Conquest, by F. Diego

de Landa. New York: Dover.

Herbert, Eugenia W.1984 Red Gold of Africa: Copper in Pre-Colonial His-

tory and Culture. Madison: University of Wiscon-sin Press.

Houston, Stephen D.2001 Comment on Power and Ideology of Artistic Cre-

ation: Elite Craft Specialists in Classic Maya So-ciety, by Takeshi Inomata. Current Anthropology42(3):336–337.

Houston, Stephen D., Hector Escobedo, Perry Hardin,Richard Terry, David Webster, Mark Child, Charles Golden,Kitty F. Emery, and David Stewart

1999 Between Mountains and Sea: Investigations atPiedras Negras, Guatemala, 1998. Mexicon 21:10–17.

Hruby, Zachary X.1999 La lıtica de Piedras Negras, temporada de 1999.

In Proyecto Arqueologico Piedras Negras: informepreliminar No. 3, tercera temporada, 1999. HectorL. Escobedo and Stephen D. Houston, eds. Pp.275–386. Technical Report. Guatemala City: In-stituto de Antropologıa e Historia de Guatemala(IDAEH).

2001 Aspectos economicos y sociales de la fabricacionde herramientos de piedra y la obtencion de mate-riales en Piedras Negras, Peten. In XIV Simposiode Investigaciones Arqueologicas en Guatemala.Juan Pedro Laporte, Anna C. Monzon deSausnavar, and Barbara Arroyo, eds. Pp. 869–884.Guatemala City: Museo Nacional de Arqueologıa yEtnologıa.

2003 Re-evaluacion de las categorıas utilitarias y cere-moniales de artefactos Mayas de Piedra Tallada. InXVI Simposio de Investigaciones Arqueologicas


86 Zachary X. Hruby

en Guatemala. Juan Pedro Laporte, Barbara Ar-royo, and Hector L. Escobedo, eds. Pp. 513–518.Guatemala City: Museo Nacional de Arqueologıay Etnologıa.

2004 Observaciones preliminares de la obsidiana. InKaminaljuyu: informe de las excavaciones real-izadas en el Parque Kaminaljuyu, Guatemala, deJulio 2003 a Febrero 2004. Matilde Ivic de Mon-terosso and Carlos Alvarado Galindo, eds. Pp. 335–339. Technical Report. Guatemala City: Instituto deAntropologıa e Historia de Guatemala (IDAEH).

2006 The Organization of Chipped-Stone Economies atPiedras Negras, Guatemala. Ph.D. dissertation, De-partment of Anthropology, University of Califor-nia, Riverside.

Hruby, Zachary X., and Shuji Araki2005 Tecnicas de reduccion de nucleos poliedricos en

Piedras Negras, Guatemala. In XVIII Simposiode Investigaciones Arqueologicas en Guatemala.Juan Pedro Laporte and Hector L. Escobedo, eds.Guatemala City: Museo Nacional de Arqueologıa yEtnologıa. (Available on-line at http://www.famsi.org/reports/03101es/66hruby araki.)

Hruby, Zachary X., and John Robertson2001 Evidence for Language Change in Ancient Maya

Writing: A Case Study of the Verb Tzutz. ResearchReports on Ancient Maya Writing, 50. Pp. 25–40.Washington, DC: Center for Maya Research.

Inomata, Takeshi2001 The Power and Ideology of Artistic Creation: Elite

Craft Specialists in Classic Maya Society. CurrentAnthropology 42:321–349.

Joyce, Rosemary A.1992 Ideology in Action: Classic Maya Ritual Practice.

In Ancient Images, Ancient Thought: The Archae-ology of Ideology. Proceedings of the 23rd An-nual Chacmool Conference. A. Sean Goldsmith,Sandra Garvie, David Selin, and Jeannette Smith,eds. Pp. 497–506. Calgary: Archaeological Asso-ciation, University of Calgary.

2001 Gender and Power in Prehispanic Mesoamerica.Austin: University of Texas Press.

Kidder, Alfred V.1947 The Artifacts of Uaxactun, Guatemala. Carnegie

Institution of Washington, Publication 576. Wash-ington, DC: Carnegie Institution of Washington.

Kidder, Alfred V., Jesse D. Jennings, and Edwin M. Shook1946 Excavations at Kaminaljuyu, Guatemala. Carnegie

Institution of Washington, Publication 561.Washington, DC: Carnegie Institution ofWashington.

Kovak, Amy, and David Webster2001 RS 29: Excavaciones en la periferia de Piedras Ne-

gras. In Proyecto Arqueologico Piedras Negras: in-forme preliminar No. 4, cuarta temporada, 2000.Hector L. Escobedo and Stephen D. Houston, eds.Pp. 501–508. Technical Report. Guatemala City:Instituto de Antropologıa e Historia de Guatemala(IDAEH).

Meadows, Richard2001 Crafting K’awil: A Comparative Analysis of An-

cient Maya Symbolic Lithics from Three Sites inNorthern Belize. Ph.D. dissertation, Department ofAnthropology, University of Texas at Austin.

Mock, Shirley Boteler, ed.1998 The Sowing and the Dawning: Termination, Ded-

ication, and Transformation in the Archaeologicaland Ethnographic Record of Mesoamerica. Albu-querque: University of New Mexico Press.

Moholy-Nagy, Hattula1997 Middens, Construction Fill, and Offerings: Evi-

dence for the Organization of Classic Period CraftProduction at Tikal, Guatemala. Journal of FieldArchaeology 24:293–313.

Monaghan, John1998 Dedication: Ritual or Production? In The Sowing

and the Dawning: Termination, Dedication, andTransformation in the Archaeological and Ethno-graphic Record of Mesoamerica. Shirley B. Mock,ed. Pp. 47–52. Albuquerque: University of NewMexico Press.

Munoz, Arturo Rene2006 Power, Production, and Prestige: Technological

Change in the Late Classic Ceramics of Piedras Ne-gras, Guatemala. Ph.D. dissertation, Department ofAnthropology, University of Arizona.

Nelson, Zachary2001 PN 33: Excavaciones en el Grupo U, sobre el

valle. In Proyecto Arqueologico Piedras Negras:informe preliminar No. 4, cuarta temporada 2000.



Hector L. Escobedo and Stephen D. Houston, eds.Pp. 63–104. Technical Report. Guatemala City: In-stituto de Antropologıa e Historia de Guatemala(IDAEH).

2005 Settlement and Population at Piedras Negras,Guatemala. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of An-thropology, Pennsylvania State University.

Nelson, Zachary N., and Zachary X. Hruby2002 La distribucion y analisis preliminar de artifac-

tos liticos en una residencia de Piedras Negras,Guatemala. In XV Simposio de InvestigacionesArqueologicas en Guatemala. Juan Pedro Laporte,Barbara Arroyo, Hector L. Escobedo, and Hector E.Mejıa, eds. Pp. 987–996. Guatemala City: MuseoNacional de Arqueologıa y Etnologıa.

Reents-Budet, Dorie1998 Elite Maya Pottery and Artisans as Social Indica-

tors. In Craft and Social Identity. Cathy L. Costinand Rita P. Wright, eds. Pp. 71–89. ArcheologicalPapers of the American Anthropological Associa-tion, 8. Arlington, VA: American AnthropologicalAssociation.

Schele, Linda, and David Freidel1990 A Forest of Kings: The Untold Story of the Ancient

Maya. New York: Quill.

Schmidt, Peter R.1997 Iron Technology in East Africa: Symbolism, Sci-

ence, and Archaeology. Bloomington: Indiana Uni-versity Press.

Spielmann, Katherine A.1998 Ritual Craft Specialists in Middle Range Societies.

In Craft and Social Identity. Cathy L. Costin and

Rita P. Wright, eds. Pp. 153–159. ArcheologicalPapers of the American Anthropological Associa-tion, 8. Arlington, VA: American AnthropologicalAssociation.

Taube, Karl A.1992 The Major Gods of Ancient Yucatan. Studies in Pre-

Colombian Art and Archaeology, No. 32. Washing-ton, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library andCollection.

Tedlock, Dennis1996 Popol Vuh: The Mayan Book of the Dawn of Life.

New York: Touchstone.

Tozzer, Alfred M.1941 Landa’s Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatan: A Trans-

lation. Papers of the Peabody Museum of AmericanArchaeology and Ethnology, 18. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University.

Vogt, Evon Z.1998 Zinacanteco Dedication and Termination Rituals.

In The Sowing and the Dawning: Termination, Ded-ication, and Transformation in the Archaeologicaland Ethnographic Record of Mesoamerica. ShirleyB. Mock, ed. Pp. 21–30. Albuquerque: Universityof New Mexico Press.

Wells, E. Christian1999 PN 33: Investigaciones en un conjunto residen-

cial del Cuadrante U. In Proyecto ArqueologicoPiedras Negras: informe preliminar No. 3, terceratemporada, 1999. Hector L. Escobedo and StephenD. Houston, eds. Pp. 65–104. Technical Report.Guatemala City: Instituto de Antropologıa e His-toria de Guatemala (IDAEH).

Ritualized Chipped-Stone Production at Piedras Negras, Guatemala

Documents

Transcript of Ritualized Chipped-Stone Production at Piedras Negras, Guatemala