Written on the Landscape

A Paper prepared for the XIV Mesa Redonda, INAH, Mexico

Nov. 17-21,2008

At Palenque, Chiapas

Peter D. Harrison

(1) title Mesa Redonda 08:Writing on the Landscape

I want to thank the officials of this Mesa Redonda for the special honor of inviting

me to attend, and by doing so honor my friend and colleague Ian Graham. We first

met in the West Plaza in Tikal where I was working on plaza trenches to test the

viability of sonar detection of subterranean structures, on a sunny morning in the

spring of 1961. Ian was seeking the location of Stela 29, the oldest dated monument

at Tikal. It had been hauled out a Post Class dump west of the West Plaza and was

at the time parked, propped up with stick next to 5D-11. After we established that

we did indeed both speak English, we became acquainted It seems that we have both

been dealing with stelae and architecture in the Maya Lowlands ever since.

(2) This paper is a work in progress and will be a progress report on a subject

that has fascinated me for almost a katun. The seeds of the idea were originally

presented in back-to-back papers with Flora Clancy under the title of Spatial

Geometryand logic in the Ancient Maya Mind, Part I: Art, and Part II: Architecture.

This was in 1989. Although I have worked on the subject almost exclusively at Tikal,

1 have spent some time fascinated by its application here at Palenque. The study

deals with the Maya use of alignments, right angles and certain integral right-angled

triangles. (I-'ig) The existence of the connection of points that this implies is not

fantasy, but clearly demonstrable on the map of this dense and complex city.

However, the meaning of this type of geometric order among monuments will be

debated and studied for a long time to come .For years I was convinced that the only

meaningful entities in these geometric arrangements were the integral right

triangles as 1had defined them in 1989. The appeal of this configuration of triangles

likely was its relationship to Pythagoras in ancient Greece. I am forced now with

accumulated knowledge to accept that it is more complex than simple Pythagorean

geometry. The relationship between alignments, triangles and simple right angles is

almost certainly motivated by the drive to record decadency. 1must say "almost

certainly" as thereare cases where one ruler marked events in his own life without

reference to the glory of ancestraldescent. If the data were complete for all major

structures and stelae at Tikal the integration of the geometry should represent an

interwoven pattern ofthe history of the city. We do not have this completion ofdata

and so there aregaps and the necessary and often uncomfortable requirements of

interpretation to fill in the holes. Such is the nature of archaeology. The specific

positioning of monumental architecture and stelae represent aseries of signals on

the ground, presently read only in two dimensions, analogous to awritten history

and equally subject to distortion according to the wishes of the builder and the

message ofhis ancestry which he wanted his followers to believe.

There are a number ofimportant principles incorporated into this hypothesis and I

believe that I havenot made them clear in the past and will attempt to do so now.

Thefirst and most important of these is that the monumental relationships are

based on a single point for a building or stela. For a large structure this is hard to

imagine, but it can bedefined. In the past I have called this the Primary Axial Point

which is the intersection of the structural axis and the front line of the building. M.

Chitam (486AD?), but still an ancestor of Ruler II. The southern burial could be the

wife of whoever the main figure is in 3C-43.

Ruler A (Hasaw Chan K'awil) the now classic configuration of a perfect

3-4-5 triangle was built by Hasaw Chan Kawil (Ruler A), principally to honor his

wife, but also honoring the ancestor buried in 3C-43 noted above. The order of

dating is curious. The base line extends from the PAP of T I , passes through the

PAP of T II and terminates at Stela 16 in N Group. The remarkable part of this is

that a stela, or possibly a burial under that stela can serve as a triangular turning

point, as easily as the PAP of a structure. In other words a depiction of a personage

or his/her burial has equal rank with a building which commemorates that of

another personage. The stela date is 711AD, T I is 732 AD (later) and 3C-43 is

guessed at 486 AD. Therefore it was the position of Stela 16 and likely the context of

the story on its own Altar V which determined this configuration.

(17)The second configuration associated with Ruler A connects T I with 5D-73

(Burial 196) and Temple 22 (Early Classic). It is a 7-24-25 phase configuration. The

interesting thing here is that we do not have a good date for Burial 196, a very grand

burial indeed. The favored explanation is that Bu 196 was the younger brother of

Hasaw who planned this internment and triangle. The alternative is that another

person arranged the burial after Hasaw's death, but this explanation has multiple

problems. Such an individual took no credit and is omitted from the triangle, for

which there is no other precedence and apparently did not himself succeed.

Other Rulers

(IS) Great Jaguar Claw Str 5D-46 to 5E-38 to 51)40. The 46-38 axis is part of the

long CA axis that extends to 5D-66. 38 is a Late Classic structure with a possible EC

burial beneath (speculation). If 38 and 46 had been related in EC times they would

form a Plaza Pattern 2, for Tikal a common form in which the burial was under the

temple. It remains speculation that this is the true burial place of Jaguar Claw the

Great. The triangle with 5D-40 creates a 3-4-5 configuration but we have no idea of

the function of this building despite some sample excavations. It is the geometry that

suggest ancestral meaning.

(19) Arising from the same base line that joins 66 and 38 there is another

connection from 66 to St 19 in R Group which dates to 768AD. This 5-12-13 triangle

was set by the builder of 5D-66, a simple oratorio with no burials in the CA. Since

66 is stratigraphically later that Stela 19, the implication is inevitable that 66 was

built by Shield Skull II who is associated with T HI. He was honoring his father at

(Stela 19) and someone in 5E-38 (Great Jaguar Paw?), a venerable ancestor.

(20) Shield Skull II and Temple III

The 3-4-5 triangle that joins T III with 5D-71and 5D-22 is a classic of structure

determination. The base line of the North Acropolis - the sacred line of the

necropolis of the Jaguar Clan determines the position of Temple HI which argues

for a soundly claimed descendancy for Shield Skull II. The base line crosses Bu 23,

the burial place of Shield Skull I in 679 AD. T III is dated by the lintel at 810AD.

(21 (Also attributed to Shield Skull II is the triangle that joins T 111 to the South

Acropolis (Str5D-104), and there to the PAP ofStr 5D-52-2nd in the CA. This

perfect 3-4-5 triangle had to be initiated by the builder of the South Acropolis who is

honoring his father, Shield Skull II (Till) and his great-grandfather, Y'ikin, at least.

(22) One final cluster of triangles is presented together as a group because they all

rotate around 5D-104, the South Acropolis showing connection from this large, late

conglomerate of architecture to central Tikal. The SA is interpreted as the work of

the final ruler. Hasaw Chan K'awil II. There may, of course be much buried

beneath the acropolis. Within this cluster, the larger set is another back-to-back

pair of triangles with a common N-S axis from Str 5D-104 in the south and Stela 33

in Complex () (731 AD), built near the death of Hasaw Chan K'awil I. The eastern

triangle terminates at the inner PAP of 5E-58, the main standing palace of G Group,

the courtly royal house of Y'ikin. The west triangle extends to 5C-49, a temple

which contained two Late Classic royal burials of importance. This is the only

triangle found so far which connects the central portion of royal Tikal to the Lost

World portion which also contained royal burials. The east triangle associates the

late life of Ruler A with the prime of his son, Ruler B with the South Acropolis. The

latter is assumed to be the latest date in the triangle.

The fulcrum of Str 5D-104 is amplified by another 7-24-25 triangle connecting

Temple HI to 5D-52-21"1, that is, connecting to Hasaw Chan K'awil's father, Shield

Skull II, and to his grandfather Y'ikin.

The final touch in the South Acropolis fulcrum is a 5-12-13 triangle reaching to the

axis of the Bat Palace (5C-13), which was the likely residence of Shield Skull II of

Temple HI. The east and west points of this system both terminate in ancestral

courtly residences, while connecting to a large group of ancestors in between. It is a

convincing declaration of decadency.

There is much more and no more time. I truly hope that other scholars will take up

the mantel of this study and try it at other sites. It certainly works at Palenque, this

much I know.

The study has a major flaw. It is like taking a slice through a human being from

brain to toes and trying to interpret the whole body from the sliver. My study is

two-dimensional. If the third dimension were added the result could be of fractal

complexity a related form of geometry which also originates in natural sources. (22)

Final Morgan of Tikal. The complexity of architectural arrangements at Tikal often

appears random and non-grid based. The geometry of triangles explains this

appearance to our Western eyes.

Written on the Landscape Illustrations will be written in red

111 ritle wiili Morgan Followed bj intra

:i\ iew of Hkal b) Morgan

l-'iu: the trianulcs

(3)1 lie I'M' o.l :i building and its possible movement, three clii k :

ill \lignment: 5D-I5-5E-38

(5) Alignment: CA 5E-38-5D-66

iii reclinolot!> the pectoral ((IQlThe triangle for 5D-65 and how it works (dates)

17) Technique: view inn with the pectoral

isi lechnique viewing over an obstacle

(9 How (he) did ll in the codices three pics (Mixtec

110) Ihe triangle for 5D-65. how is worked

111 (Surveying 5D-65 from 58

(12) rriangles by Rulers: Ruler C: Nuun Yax Un II:

14-SI 19-T. VI 5-12-13

13) Si l9-St22-Group F 3-4-5-

(14)Ruler 13 Y'ikin IV-I- \

(15) Ruler B Y'ikin 3C43 North Zone)- VI 5D-61 south zone 3-4-5

(15) RulerB 5C43-5D-61-nTTV 7-24-25 back to back

(!6)Rulei MHasaw Chan Kawil) T. I - Stela 16- 3< 43 1-4-5

(17) Ruler A 75-1 -22 7-24-25

Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.25"

Formatted: Bullets and Numbering

Oilier Rulers

(18) Great Jaguar Claw 46-5E-38-5D-40 5-4-5

(19) 5D-66-through 46 to 5E-38-Stela 19 5/12/13

(20) Shield Skull II 1. Ill

T III- 22- 71 3-4-5 base line oFNorth Acropolis.

(21) Till - 204 s. Acropolis)- 52-isl $-4-5 perfeel

(22) A similarconfiguration rotates around the South Acropolis.(5D-l04) The east

triangle points on Stela 21 inO Group placed b> Hasaw near his death, andconnects to G

Group the royal palace ofYikin .. (54S) Ihe west counterpart reaches io the Bat Palace

. In wayof5D-49.

The fulcrum of 5D- 104 is further enhanced In two nunc triangles, one touching temple

III and 5D-52-I 'and the other touches also the Bal Palace and 5D-49.

(23) Final Morgan