This PDF file of your paper in Behaviour Behind Bones belongs to the publishers Oxbow Books and it is their copyright. As author you are licenced to make up to 50 offprints from it, but beyond that you may not publish it on the World Wide Web or in any other form. Proceedings of the 9th Conference of the International Council of Archaeozoology, Durham, August 2002 Series Editors: Peter Rowley-Conwy, Umberto Albarella and Keith Dobney An offprint from Behaviour Behind Bones The zooarchaeology of ritual, religion, status and identity Edited by Sharyn Jones O’Day, Wim Van Neer and Anton Ervynck © Oxbow Books 2004 ISBN 1 84217 113 5 Contents Preface ............................................................................................................................................................................... ix Peter Rowley-Conwy, Umberto Albarella and Keith Dobney Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................ xi Sharyn Jones O’Day, Wim Van Neer and Anton Ervynck Part 1: Beyond calories: the zooarchaeology of ritual and religion edited by Sharyn Jones O’Day 1. Feasting with the dead? – a ritual bone deposit at Domuztepe, south eastern Turkey (c. 5550 cal BC) ............... 2 Sarah Whitcher Kansa and Stuart Campbell 2. Animal offerings found in Necropoleis belonging to Santana of Mures-Cerniahov culture from the east and the south extra-Carpathian Zones of Romania .................................................................................................. 14 Simina Stanc and Luminita Bejenaru 3. Caprines and toads: taphonomic patterning of animal offering practices in a Late Bronze Age burial assemblage ....................................................................................................................................................... 20 Lior Weissbrod and Guy Bar-Oz 4. The butchering patterns of Gamla and Yodefat: beginning the search for kosher practices ................................. 25 Carole Cope 5. Predynastic Egyptian bovid burial in the elite cemetery at Hierakonpolis ............................................................. 34 Sylvia Warman 6. Typhonic bones: a ritual deposit from Saqqara? ...................................................................................................... 41 Salima Ikram 7. Bones and bowls: a preliminary interpretation of the faunal remains from the Punic levels in Area B, at the temple of Tas-Silg, Malta ................................................................................................................................ 47 André Corrado, Anthony Bonanno and Nicholas C. Vella 8. An Iron Age bone assemblage from Durezza Cave, Carinthia, Austria: detecting ritual behaviour through archaeozoological and taphonomical analyses ......................................................................................................... 54 Alfred Galik 9. Ritual feasting in the Irish Iron Age: re-examining the fauna from Dún Ailinne in light of contemporary archaeological theory ................................................................................................................................................. 62 Pam Crabtree 10. The economic and non-economic animal: Roman depositions and offerings ......................................................... 66 Roel C. G. M. Lauwerier 11. Roman suovitaurilia and its predecessors ................................................................................................................ 73 Barbara Wilkens 12. Gastronomy or religion? the animal remains from the mithraeum at Tienen (Belgium) ....................................... 77 An Lentacker, Anton Ervynck and Wim Van Neer 13. Prehispanic guinea pig sacrifices in southern Perú, the case of el Yaral ................................................................ 95 Juan Rofes 14. Animals from the Maya underworld: reconstructing elite Maya ritual at the Cueva de los Quetzales, Guatemala ................................................................................................................................................................. 101 Kitty F. Emery 15. Observations on the religious content of the animal imagery of the ‘Gran Coclé’ semiotic tradition of pre-Columbian Panama ............................................................................................................................................ 114 Richard Cooke 16. Identifying ritual use of animals in the northern American Southwest ................................................................. 128 Robert J. Muir and Jonathan C. Driver 17. Facts and fantasies: the archaeology of the Marquesan dog ................................................................................. 144 Sidsel N. Millerstrom 18. Past and present perspectives on secular ritual: food and the fisherwomen of the Lau Islands, Fiji .................. 153 Sharyn Jones O’Day Part 2: Equations for inequality: the zooarchaeology of identity, status and other forms of social differentiation in former human societies edited by Wim Van Neer and Anton Ervynck 19. Early evidence of economic specialization or social differentiation: a case study from the Neolithic lake shore settlement ‘Arbon-Bleiche 3’ (Switzerland) ........................................................................................................... 164 Elisabeth Marti-Grädel, Sabine Deschler-Erb, Heide Hüster-Plogmann and Jörg Schibler 20. Levels of social identity expressed in the refuse and worked bone from Middle Bronze Age Százhalombatta– Földvár, Vatya culture, Hungary ............................................................................................................................. 177 Alice M. Choyke, Maria Vretemark and Sabine Sten 21. Animal husbandry and centralized cultures. How social and political factors can influence rural lifestyle ....... 190 Giovanni Siracusano 22. Food for the dead, the priest, and the mayor: looking for status and identity in the Middle Kingdom settlement at South Abydos, Egypt ......................................................................................................................... 198 Stine Rossel 23. Remains of traded fish in archaeological sites: indicators of status, or bulk food? ............................................. 203 Wim Van Neer and Anton Ervynck 24. Orant, pugnant, laborant. The diet of the three orders in the feudal society of medieval north-western Europe ....................................................................................................................................................................... 215 Anton Ervynck 25. Dietary habits of a monastic community as indicated by animal bone remains from Early Modern Age in Austria .................................................................................................................................................................. 224 Alfred Galik and Günther Karl Kunst 26. Status as reflected in food refuse of late medieval noble and urban households at Namur (Belgium) ............... 233 Fabienne Pigière, Ides Boone, Mircea Udrescu, Wim Van Neer and Sofie Vanpoucke 27. Food, status and formation processes: a case study from medieval England ....................................................... 244 Jonathan C. Driver 28. Animal bones as indicators of kosher food refuse from 14th century AD Buda, Hungary ................................. 252 László Daróczi-Szabó 29. Ethnic traditions in meat consumption and herding at a 16th century Cumanian settlement in the Great Hungarian Plain ............................................................................................................................................. 262 Éva Ágnes Nyerges 30. Rich, poor, shaman, child: animals, rank, and status in the ‘Gran Coclé’ culture area of pre-Columbian Panama ............................................................................................................................................ 271 Richard Cooke 31. Hunting and social differentiation in the late prehispanic American Southwest .................................................. 285 James M. Potter 32. Zooarchaeological evidence for changing socioeconomic status within early historic Native American communities in Mid-Atlantic North America ......................................................................................................... 293 Heather A. Lapham 33. Implications of risk theory for understanding nineteenth century slave diets in the southern United States ............................................................................................................................................. 304 Justin S. E. Lev-Tov 34. Cultural identity and the consumption of dogs in western Africa ......................................................................... 318 Veerle Linseele 35. Hunting practices and consumption patterns in rural communities in the Rif mountains (Morocco) – some ethno-zoological notes ............................................................................................................................... 327 Marta Moreno-García 9th ICAZ Conference, Durham 2002 Animals from the Maya underworld 101 Behaviour Behind Bones, (ed. Sharyn Jones O’Day et al.) pp. 101–113 14. Animals from the Maya underworld: reconstructing elite Maya ritual at the Cueva de los Quetzales, Guatemala Kitty F. Emery A well-preserved zooarchaeological assemblage has been recovered from the Cueva de los Quetzales at the Classic Maya site of Las Pacayas, Guatemala. The cave location and artifactual remains both suggest that the animal remains found in the cave were ritually derived or were the result of elite activities. Zooarchaeological analysis reveals a diverse faunal population including cave residents, exotic species, and dietary favorites of the ancient Maya. These remains do not, however, provide clear evidence of the nature of this deposit as resulting from elite cave-associated rituals, as opposed to debitage from the royal dining tables, or deposition of remains from natural cave fauna. The distinction is particularly important for current debates concerning the role of cave rituals and the politics of landscape control in the ancient Maya world. A detailed analysis of the zooarchaeological correlates of different scales, types, and functions of cave-associated rituals tests the hypothesis that the faunal materials recovered from the Cueva de los Quetzales are the result of cave rituals. These correlations are then used to define the specific nature of those rituals as private or public, and inclusionary or exclusionary. Although based on preliminary data, this analysis explores the potential of structural modeling in the analysis of zooarchaeological assemblages whose identification as ritual is compromised. Introduction in the faunal remains themselves. These zooarchaeological As the physical manifestations of otherwise invisible correlates must be based on culturally specific definitions religious and social beliefs, rituals are particularly attract- of type and scale of ritual because symbolic behavior and ive to archaeologists. Their formalized, symbolic, and its zooarchaeological correlates are highly variable within repetitive nature makes them likely to appear in the and between cultures. Animal remains resulting from feast archaeological record, and likely to reflect a standard set and fast, for example, will be very different. And the of behaviors as opposed to a diversity of singular events strictures associated with fasting will differ considerably (Flannery 1976, 132; Rappaport 1999, 24). Rituals are on the basis of ethnicity, religious beliefs, and resource also intriguing to zooarchaeologists primarily because they availabilities. are often associated with animal sacrifice, feasting, and Here we present an example of one faunal assemblage animal related symbolism. But how do we determine that whose ritual status cannot be easily defined by context or a faunal assemblage actually derives from ritual activity? taxonomy: remains from the Cueva de los Quetzales, or Ritual animal assemblages can often be so defined on Cave of the Quetzal Bird, located in the Petén jungles of the basis of archaeological context and taxonomic content Guatemala (Fig. 1). This cave system runs beneath the – because in ritual situations both the scene and its players site of Las Pacayas, an elite political center occupied should be notably unusual (Rappaport 1999; Sponsel 2001, during the periods of earliest societal complexity in the 178). But in some cases even seemingly ritual contexts Maya world (300 BC – AD 500). The sole entrance to this and taxa cannot be considered sufficient evidence of cave system is a vertical shaft opening into the center of ritually derived animal assemblages. In these cases, before the main politico-religious complex at the site (Brady and we can designate an assemblage as “ritual,” we must find Rodas 1994; Brady and Rodas 1995; Brady 1997). Other clear zooarchaeological correlates of ritualized behavior such cave systems are recognized as ritual loci by several 102 Kitty F. Emery Fig. 1. Map of the Maya world and the Guatemalan Petén with the site of Las Pacayas and other sites mentioned in the text. The Cueva de los Quetzales lies beneath the main ceremonial plaza of Las Pacayas. authors (Brady and Rodas 1994, Reeder et al. 1998, In the ancient Maya world, caves held enormous myst- Thompson 1975). Brady has suggested that the artifactual ical and religious importance. They were the portals to the remains recovered beneath this opening resulted from underworld and the link to the ancestors and gods who cave-associated rituals (Brady and Rodas 1995; Brady controlled time, life, and the vagaries of nature (Thompson 1997). The artifact assemblage is clearly ritual in nature, 1970, 267–76; Bassie-Sweet 1991; Stone 1995). But caves including large collections of musical instruments (both were also politically important as the legendary places of portable ceramic drums and ocarinas) as well as other human origin, the birthplaces of the divine Maya rulers, ceremonial goods (Brady and Rodas 1994; Helton 1997; and the ultimate homes to the spirits of these rulers (Pohl Reeder et al. 1998) 1983, 99; Brady 1989, 55–64; Bassie-Sweet 1991, 77;  Animals from the Maya underworld 103 Tedlock 1996, 91–102; Brady 1997; Christenson 2000, 70–86). Correlations between political centers and cave entrances suggest that the political elite made a conscious effort to claim ownership over these underworld entrances, and presumably control access to them (Brady 1997, 604, 611). In view of the role caves played in ancient Maya beliefs, it seems reasonable that the faunal remains collected from the Cueva de los Quetzales would represent cave-related ceremonies of the elite Maya residents of the site of Las Pacayas. However, in this case both context and taxonomy are complicated by the fact that the species symbolically associated with cave rituals included both those that normally inhabit caves and those that were favorite elite Maya foods. As a metaphor for the passage to the under- world, there is no better messenger than the bat (a cave resident). The deer was the ultimate symbol of fertility and rebirth, but was also the favorite food of the Maya elite. Clearly then, to prove that the Cueva de los Quetzales assemblage is one derived from ritual activity, specific zooarchaeological correlates go beyond the taxonomic characteristics of the zooarchaeological assemblage. In addition, because today, and likely in the past, Maya cave rituals range from solitary petitions for fertility to community-wide royal accession rites (Vogt 1969, 387; Thompson 1970, 268; Heyden 1981; Bassie-Sweet 1991, 77–80), even cave-related zooarchaeological correlates Fig. 2. Profile and plan of the Cueva de los Quetzales and may vary enormously between rituals. So the structure of associated ceremonial architecture of the site of Las ancient Maya cave ritual must be defined before patterned Pacayas. Note the location of the ‘sky-light’ opening animal use behaviors can be linked to these rituals. The centrally located between the two main temple-mounds, following discussion explores the potential of structural and the conical dump of matrix (where the faunal assem- modeling in the analysis of zooarchaeological assemblages blage was recovered). whose identification as ritual is compromised. In 1990, both the cave and Las Pacayas were surveyed The faunal assemblage and test pitted by members of the Atlas Arqueológico de The Cueva de los Quetzales stretches under one of two Guatemala, directed by Dr. Juan Pedro Laporte. Excav- politico-ceremonial complexes centrally located in the site ations were directed by Lic. Hector Escobedo and Dr. of Las Pacayas (Fig. 2). During occupation of the site, the James Brady (Brady and Rodas 1994; Escobedo et al. sole entrance to the cave was a “sky-light” opening into the 1994; Brady and Rodas 1995). The cave deposit was main ceremonial complex. All other cave entrances were trowel excavated and matrices were water-screened using intentionally blocked when Las Pacayas was constructed, a 4 mm gauge mesh (Brady and Schwegman 1994). The although today a second entrance has been opened by recent excavators considered all materials from this deposit to looting (Brady and Rodas 1994; Brady and Rodas 1995; be part of a single unstratified provenience unit because Brady 1997, 608). Directly below this entrance lies a they noted no cultural or natural subdivisions (Brady, pers. conical matrix “dump” some 3 meters deep, containing comm.). The identifications presented here represent artifacts and ecofacts tossed in from above, presumably approximately a third of the total faunal assemblage. from the ceremonial plaza (Brady and Rodas 1994; Brady Identifications were begun in 1999 and 2000 by Emery, and Rodas 1995). The site of Las Pacayas, located approxi- was continued by Emery and Stevens in 2001 at SUNY mately 12 km east of the Petexbatún region, was constructed Potsdam, and was completed by Emery in 2002. All atop a natural hill that was later transformed into a stepped identifications are based on comparison with specimens pyramidal base for the political core of the site (Escobedo from SUNY Potsdam and the Florida Museum of Natural et al. 1994; Brady 1997, 608). Residential structures History. All calculations are presented as number of surrounded this political center, and the residents of the identified specimens (NISP) although elements have been site would have been supported by extensive agriculture refitted where possible to create an approximation of the and trade with neighboring communities. minimum number of elements (MNE). 104 Kitty F. Emery Remains from the neighboring site of Arroyo de Piedra at the community or regional level) or private (performed (approximately 15 km away) are used as a comparative by individuals or households) (Goody 1982, 99; Mennell sample. The assemblage is similar in size, and comes from 1996, 32). They can also be divided on the basis of group chronologically contemporaneous elite deposits, in this membership as exclusionary (used to sanctify divisions case residential. These remains were excavated by the between groups) or inclusionary (promoting wide scale Vanderbilt Petexbatún project of which Brady and solidarity within communities, regions, or trade networks) Escobedo were both a part, and identified by the author, (Brumfiel and Earle 1987; Clark and Blake 1994; Hayden so excavation and analytical methods are comparable 1995, 27; Dietler 1996, 92–7). Ancient Maya rituals varied (Escobedo 1994; Escobedo 1997; Emery 1997). Again, as well by type (Drennan 1976; Flannery 1976, 332), NISP has been used as the quantitative unit. celebrating a range of ritual cycles including life transition Taphonomic conditions require separate mention here cycles (birth, maturity, death), time cycles (calendrical, since cave assemblages present special circumstances of annual, or longer cycles), and political cycles (transfers of preservation and intrusion. Cave deposits, protected from power from one ruler to the next, cycles of conflict in the elements and in direct association with limestone stylized warfare). Combining these, a continuum of rituals bedrock, are generally well preserved in comparison to can be envisioned that included private rituals, public other tropical assemblages. There is no evidence of water exclusionary rituals, and public inclusionary rituals. Each activity in the Cueva de los Quetzales during or after the of these ritual categories was associated with specific occupation of Las Pacayas (Brady and Rodas 1994). Non- formalized behaviors and material correlates depending aquatic intrusive animals however, should be considered on whether the ritual being celebrated was a life transition, in a discussion of taphonomic agents for this cave deposit. time, or political cycle. Two factors argue against a significant role for intrusive Literature on the specific details of ancient Maya rituals animals either as inclusions in the deposit or as taphonomic include ethnographic analogies, iconographic analyses, agents. First, all other cave entrances had been blocked by and ethnohistoric documents (Redfield and Rojas 1934; the ancient Maya, leaving only this entrance, which, in the Tozzer 1941; Bunzel 1952; Vogt 1993) as well as several center of a bustling administrative center, would have been excellent discussions of ritual in general and feasting in inaccessible to wild animals. Second, the remains come particular (e.g., LeCount 2001). Private rituals in the Maya from a single conical deposit, which is admittedly an world are, and likely were in the past, celebrated at the unlikely spot for intrusive animals conveniently to have individual or family level as a communication with the died. gods or family ancestors (Vogt 1993, 192; LeCount 2001). These emphasized individual sacrifices and the use of the sacred, and were usually celebrations of individual trans- itions and seasonal calendrical cycles (Tozzer 1941). Defining ritual Archaeological remains suggest that contexts were private A structural model of ancient Maya cave rituals must begin or household locations, and trash was probably considered with a set of definitions. Ritual is generally described as ceremonial (following Walker 1995). Zooarchaeological the set of formalized behaviors through which religious markers of private rituals would include the symbolic use constructs are generated and reproduced (Rappaport 1999, of sacred species or rare individuals, sacrifices of in- 23, 27). In zooarchaeological terms these behaviors in- dividual animals, and the use of individual performative clude animals in their symbolic roles as performative or or transformational paraphernalia. communication devices (see Douglas 1994). Animals act Public Maya rituals were used to legitimate social as metaphors (for conditions of nature including seasons, hierarchy, sanctify interregional exchange, or manage for social conditions like rulership or age, and for special extremes in resources through redistribution or tithing circumstances like those of war), as totems (of the soul, of (Tozzer 1941; McAnany 1995, 8). Today these vary from lineages, of social groups or communities), as offerings rituals that include groups within a community to those (as sacrifices or as foods both in redistributive and that include the entire community or polity. Public ex- competitive feasts or as tithes), and as measures for clusionary rituals were likely celebrated within extended quantitative comparison between individuals and groups families, class groups, or occupational groups, and they (of, for example, sacredness, or power). Current interest emphasized solidarity within the group and exclusion of in feasting as one facet of politically motivated ceremonial outsiders, so their communication was between and among activity in hierarchical societies has generated a robust group members. The contexts for these celebrations were literature on ritual types and their archaeological cor- ceremonial or uncommon communal locations. These relates. The general discussion of ritual types presented rituals celebrate life cycles or annual time cycles (Tozzer here is based on a range of comparative literature (Drennan 1941, 163; LeCount 2001), but as in most hierarchical 1976; Flannery 1976; Goody 1982; Hayden 1995; Dietler societies, they also emphasized competition between 1996; Hayden 1996; Mennell 1996). groups as competitive feasting or displays of material As in most complex hierarchical agricultural societies, wealth (Hayden 1995; Dietler 1996). As exclusionary Maya rituals can be separated by scale as public (occurring rituals they likely emphasized the rare and inaccessible.  Animals from the Maya underworld 105 Zooarchaeological markers at this level might include the required sacrifice in new-year renewal rituals (Tozzer use of lineage or group totem species, the use of exotics 1941, 137–41; Pohl 1983, 79, 103), while fish and deer or high status goods in competitive displays, a show of were offerings demanded by the gods during the transfer control of managed animals through sacrifice of certain of rulership and at period endings (Tozzer 1941, 134, special individuals, small scale performance or dance, and 155–56; Pohl 1981; Pohl 1983, 63, 74). The deer was an emphasis on high quality and exotic, expensive goods. particularly associated with fertility and life-renewal Ancient public inclusionary rituals were community- ceremonies carried out in caves (Pohl 1981; Pohl 1983) and polity-based, and likely celebrated annual or period- and may have been sacrificed there, although most of the ending calendrical cycles or political cycles to emphasize cave-related deer remains appear to be crania, antlers, the solidarity of the community or polity and legitimate and teeth (Pohl 1983, 89; Pohl and Pohl 1983). The dog social order and hierarchy (LeCount 2001). Ethnographic was also important in the renewal of the new-year and evidence and ethnohistoric literature suggests that this during political transitions (Danien 1997; White et al. level of ritual was associated with large scale feasting as 2001, 92), but was often buried with the royalty as a guide redistribution from the elite core, with tithing back into during the dangerous journey to the afterlife (Tozzer and the core as offerings, with sacrifices emphasizing quantity Allen 1910, 360; Pohl 1983, 70). not quality of goods, and with theatrical performances As a reminder though, some of these species are natural involving elaborate costuming and music (Tozzer 1941; cave residents (bats for example) or are found near or Farriss 1984; Vogt 1993). Ritual deposition of trash is inside cave entrances (snakes and jaguars), or associated unlikely to have occurred since most trash was probably with nearby exposed rocks (iguanas, etc.). Other species not directly ceremonial. are favored foods (deer and dog), and some may simply At each level then, the symbolic use of animals reflects be better preserved in this environment than at surface the ritual type. Contexts, totemic representation, offering sites (fish for example). Because of these complications, type, and measures all directly reflect the level of ritual it would be naïve to consider the Quetzales animals in from individual-private to broadest public ritual. Meta- terms of generalized ritual metaphors. It is important phors and offerings may reflect ritual scale or the cycle instead to search for patterns that would indicate these being celebrated. The next step in the analysis of these species do reflect specific ritual activities. Here we con- remains is the recognition and definition of the zoo- sider them in terms of three relevant categories: 1) sacred archaeological correlates of these structurally defined species, those that are used only in ritual situations (in the ritual types in the Cueva de los Quetzales faunal remains. Cueva de los Quetzales assemblage these include such species as jaguars; the cane toad, whose poisons were used as hallucinogens; and the stingrays, whose spines were used in blood-letting sacrifices); 2) exotics, those Searching for marker of ceremony in the assemblage that would signify use in exclusionary rituals that define The following analysis defines the patterns in taxonomy, the power of the elite (here mainly marine species); and 3) element distribution, and population characteristics found artifacts representing ritual paraphernalia, including adorn- in the Cueva de los Quetzales faunal assemblage. However, ments, musical instruments, and the like (Fig. 4). it is through the comparison of these patterns with those While the Cueva de los Quetzales and Arroyo de Piedra found in another, non-ritual assemblage from the site of assemblages are equivalent in terms of the use of exotics Arroyo de Piedra, that special patterning might be dis- (an elite prerogative) and artifactual adornments, the use tinguished. Data is presented here as comparative analyses, of primarily sacred species is clearly greater at the Cueva and always as relative frequencies to avoid sample size de los Quetzales. This is a good indication of rituals carried biases in the comparisons. out at the private and public exclusionary levels. However this interpretation continues to rest on the complicated taxonomic issues. Here our ‘sacred’ species include bats, Taxonomy: sacred animals marine toads, and other potentially intrusive species, so Several of the species found more often at the Cueva de this cannot act as our only evidence. los Quetzales than at Arroyo de Piedra were either sacred or ritually important (Fig. 3). The felines are underworld Taxonomy: managed animals deities associated with dynastic ritual (Roys 1965; Peterson 1980; Saunders 1994) and specifically with caves An analysis of certain “managed” species provides data (Tedlock 1986, 128; Stone 1995, 23, 43), crocodiles that are consistent with the conclusion of ritually specific represent the earth itself (Puleston 1977; Pohl 1983, 65, use of taxa in the Cueva de los Quetzales. Managed ritual 80), bats are the messengers of the gods (Benson 1988), species include those that, although not always domesti- and it is out of the maw of the snake that the ancestors are cated, were husbanded, raised, or penned in anticipation reborn (Peterson 1980; Aguilera 1985; Reifler-Bricker of their ritual use. In the ancient Maya world, only the dog 1990). Other species hold roles in certain cave-related was fully domesticated during the period of occupation of rituals. The opossum was the year-bearer and the iguana a the Cueva de los Quetzales (Schwartz 1997). However 106 Kitty F. Emery Cueva de los Quetzales Arroyo de Piedra Cumulative % Comparative Taxonomic Category NISP NISP NISP %NISP Freshwater Molluscs – 29 2.58 0.31 Jute (Pachychilus spp.) 1 Apple Snail (Pomacea flagellata) 9 River Clam (Psoronaias spp.) 16 Winged River Clam (Nephronaias spp.) 3 Marine Molluscs – 6 0.53 0.61 Olive Snail (Oliva spp.) 5 Marine Bivalve (Pelecypoda. marine) 1 Stingrays (Dasyatidae) 1 1 0.09 0.00 Bony Fishes (Osteichthyes) 196 211 18.77 0.31 Freshwater Gars (Lepisosteiformes) 5 Freshwater Catfishes (Ictaluridae) 10 Marine Toad (Bufo marinus) 12 12 1.07 0.00 Reptiles 4 Crocodiles (Crocodylus spp.) 3 3 0.27 0.00 Turtles (Testudines) 153 173 15.39 12.27 Giant Musk Turtle (Staurotypus triporcatus) 2 Mud and Musk Turtles (Kinosternon spp.) 2 Slider (Trachemys scripta) 8 Central American River Turtle (Dermatemys mawii) 8 Lizards (Lacertilia) 24 33 2.94 0.31 Iguanas (Iguanidae) 9 Snakes (Serpentes) 63 63 5.60 0.00 Birds (Aves) 9 12 1.07 0.15 Galliform Birds (Galliformes) 3 Bats (Chiroptera) 13 13 1.16 0.00 Armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus) 178 16 1.42 0.00 Opossums (Didelphidae) 33 33 2.94 0.15 Carnivores. small – 6 0.53 0.00 Procyonids (Procyonidae) 3 Weasels (Mustelidae) 1 Coatis (Nasua narica) 2 Grey Fox (Urcyon cineoargenteus) 5 5 0.44 0.00 Domestic Dog (Canis familiaris) 67 71 6.32 0.77 Wild Cats (Felidae) 17 21 1.87 0.61 Indeterminate Dogs/Cats (Canidae/Felidae) 8 Deers and Peccaries (Artiodactyla) 8 Tapir (Tapirus bairdii) 0 0 0.31 Peccaries (Tayassuidae) 10 12 1.07 2.76 Brocket Deer (Mazama americana) 24 26 2.31 2.61 White–tailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus) 107 114 10.14 13.19 Agoutis and Pacas (Dasyproctidae) – 72 6.41 1.23 Paca (Agouti paca) 47 Agouti (Dasyprocta punctata) 25 Rodentia. small 12 12 1.07 0.31 Rabbits (Sylvilagus spp.) 6 6 0.53 0.15 Other Mammals 170 TOTAL NISP 1283 1124 652 Fig. 3. List of all taxa recovered in the Cueva de los Quetzales faunal assemblage. Taxa are presented by common name, but are listed in taxonomic order.  Animals from the Maya underworld 107 9.7 Cueva de los Quetzales Arroyo de Piedra %NISP 5.34 4.6 0.61 0.53 0.61 Artifactually modified Exotic taxa Sacred taxa Fig. 4. Bar chart of relative frequencies of sacred and exotic taxa as well as artifactually modified remains. Frequencies are relative NISPs charted as a percent of the total faunal assemblage for each site. %NISP 21.26 18.10 Arroyo de Piedra Cueva de los Quetzales 14.88 12.37 6.67 2.30 0.89 0.77 1.33 0.15 Total Cervids Peccary Dog Turkey Fig. 5. Relative frequency of “managed” taxa including domestic dog, deer, peccary, and galliform birds. ethnographic and ethnohistoric literature suggest that in management of certain species for ritual uses has very addition to the domestic dog, other species including the ancient antecedents. deer, turkey, and peccary were captured and penned for In fact, both Arroyo de Piedra and the Cueva de los fattening prior to a ritual event during the Postclassic Quetzales have approximately the same proportion of deer period (Pohl and Feldman 1982; Pohl 1983; Carr 1996; and peccary in their assemblages suggesting their use was White et al. 2001). In 16th century communities, select an elite prerogative but not limited to ritual activity (Fig. deer and dogs were raised by the priestly elite as a stable 5). However, the Cueva de los Quetzales assemblage has resource specifically for elite feasts and for ritual use significantly more dog (the only real domesticate of the (Tozzer 1941; Pohl 1985; White et al. 2001, 92). Pohl Early Classic Maya world), and turkey (a later domesticate and Feldman (1982) documented that women raise, care introduced from Mexico and an important sacrificial for, and even breast-feed young animals in modern com- offering during Postclassic and Historic periods). These munities, a practice also documented in the ethnohistoric observations are not in themselves sufficient evidence of literature (Tozzer and Allen 1910; Tozzer 1941). Classic ritual management of dogs, and certainly do not provide period Maya artwork often depicts women carrying or any argument for the ritual management of deer popu- feeding dogs, and deer tethered and even being ridden lations. However it is intriguing that higher frequencies of (Tozzer and Allen 1910; Pendergast 1974; Danien 1997; domesticates occur in the cave assemblage. White et al. 2001). Dog remains recovered from caches by White (2001) provide chemical evidence that these individuals have been specially fed apart from other dogs Population characters in the communities. Similar chemical studies of deer In view then of the greater frequency of dog bones in the remains suggest that some individuals of this species were Cueva de los Quetzales assemblage, it is useful to look also intentionally fed (White et al. 1993; White et al. beyond simple taxonomy to the specific characteristics of 2001; White et al., in press). It is possible that this the various animal populations – in particular at the age 108 Kitty F. Emery 37.58 Cueva de los Quetzales Arroyo de Piedra %NISP 23.53 23.88 19.83 14.00 12.00 Total mammals Artiodactyls Cats Dogs Fig. 6. Relative distributions of immature and mature individuals as represented by elemental epiphyseal fusion and tooth eruption. These are presented here as frequency of immature elements as a percent of total aged mammals for each site. distributions. Age is often used as a marker of animal Element distribution: body portions management, whether in hunted or domesticated popu- Element distributions can provide further tests of the ritual lations. It is important to recognize specific age groups model. Modern Maya rituals often include a ceremonial culled from populations that are otherwise represented in use of the cranium and its ritual deposition (Pohl 1981; the zooarchaeological assemblages by natural or hunted Pohl 1983). As well, elite deposits at some sites have a distributions. Most individuals in Maya faunal assem- greater frequency of meat-bearing elements (Pohl 1994) blages are adult, and very few young individuals are found suggesting preferential access to these portions. Un- as dietary debitage. However, young individuals are fortunately, there is no overt evidence of decapitated crania common in Maya ritual deposits (Pohl 1981; Pohl 1983, or other clear indication of sacrifice or ritual activity in 62; Wing and Scudder 1991; Carr 1996) and are more the Cueva de los Quetzales remains, so once again it is the frequent in elite deposits, suggesting a status mediated more subtle patterning that must provide clues to ritual control over the culling of young individuals in both wild behavior. Overall, the intermediate mammal group and domestic populations. (dominated by dogs and cats) and large mammals (mainly The age analysis discussed here is preliminary and artiodactyls) are represented by far greater proportions of classifies animals only as immature vs. mature based on cranial and axial elements at the Cueva de los Quetzales epiphyseal fusions and tooth eruption. Overall, the age of than at Arroyo de Piedra (Fig. 7 and Fig. 8). To test the the Cueva de los Quetzales population is fairly similar to possibility that this reflects a greater overall skeletal the age of the Arroyo de Piedra animals but, in fact, the completeness, Stiner’s “index of completeness” (1994) proportion of immature individuals of the “managed” and can be used to calculate a ratio of limb to non-limb sacred species is much higher in the cave record (Fig. 6). elements (Fig. 9). Completeness is indeed higher for both In particular, the complete absence of immature dogs or intermediate and large mammals at the Cueva de los cats at Arroyo de Piedra and the high proportion of Quetzales. The separate comparison of dog and deer immature artiodactyls at the Cueva de los Quetzales are remains at the Cueva de los Quetzales indicates that this both notable divergences. trend holds true for these specific taxa as well and in these These results point to the use of specific individuals of cases can be used as a marker for sacrifice or burial managed populations. An emphasis on immaturity might deposition (Reitz and Wing 1999, 114). be a symbolic metaphor for rebirth and renewal, and immature animals often play a role in period-ending rituals (Pohl 1981; Pohl 1983). However, it is important that the Element distribution: sides emphasis is on immature individuals only among Another element distribution pattern that has been potentially managed species. This suggests that the pattern suggested for the Maya realm, and particularly for caves, represents public exclusionary rituals because elites with is the symbolic emphasis of the “left” as representative of preferential access to these animals would be more likely the underworld, the direction of the setting sun, and the to present them as quality sacrifices or feast foods in an holy (Gossen 1974). Mary Pohl (Pohl 1983, 89–90; Pohl exclusionary arena than in an inclusionary redistribution and Pohl 1983; Pohl 1985) has found a statistically higher festival. proportion of left elements of birds and deer in a few other ritual deposits, suggesting a differential use of body side in ceremonial contexts.  Animals from the Maya underworld 109 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 %NISP 12.21 Cranial 43.6 Axial 28.57 4.07 Pectoral/pelvic girdles 10.47 Upper limb 7.14 8.72 Lower limb 35.71 20.93 Distal 28.57 Cueva de los Quetzales Arroyo de Piedra Fig. 7. Distribution of elements by body portion for intermediate mammals. %NISP 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 5.56 Cranial 27.78 Axial 8.33 6.67 Pectoral/pelvic girdles 23.33 Upper limb 21.97 10.56 Lower limb 16.67 26.11 Distal 36.36 Cueva de los Quetzales Arroyo de Piedra Fig. 8. Distribution of elements by body portion for large mammals. At both the Cueva de los Quetzales and Arroyo de Discussion Piedra the majority of the mammals (including dogs), are While many ritual faunal assemblages can be so defined represented by a standard proportion of left to right on the basis of the ceremonial contexts in which they are elements (Fig. 10). However, the artiodactyls, and particu- found and the sacred taxa that they contain, this is not the larly the deer remains, are clearly more frequently left case for animal remains found in caves in the Maya world. elements than right in the Cueva de los Quetzales assem- At first glance, the Cueva de los Quetzales appears to be blage. Intriguingly the majority of the Cueva de los a ceremonial context (beneath the main ritual complex of Quetzales galliform bird elements are also lefts (there are a Maya site), and the remains recovered from within the admittedly very few of these). Ethnohistoric documents cave contain species with definite sacred meaning for the record the fact that during certain ceremonies the priest is ancient Maya. However, the same species that given a cut of deer (Landa 1978, 62–3; Taube 1988, 244), symbolically represent caves are often the natural residents and perhaps that was from the left side. Possibly the ritually of caves. As well, it is possible that the remains found imbued left side was habitually sacrificed to the gods. This within the cave were not associated directly with cave metaphorical use of animal carcass portions as sacrifices ritual, but were derived instead from non-cave related or offerings likely represents private or public exclusionary surface rituals or feasting by the residents of the elite rituals and not large-scale festivities or feasting during center of Las Pacayas. Since ceremonial trash is often which whole animals would have been used. 110 Kitty F. Emery %NISP 59.63 56.42 42.23 33.80 24.50 2.60 Quetzales deer/dog Large mammals Intermediate mammals Cueva de los Quetzales Arroyo de Piedra Fig. 9. Skeletal completeness measured as a ratio of limb to non-limb elements. 70.00 %NISP 63.38 50.63 50.00 52.29 45.65 40.00 Artiodactyla Dogs Other mammals Galliform birds Cueva de los Quetzales Arroyo de Piedra Fig. 10. Proportion of left sided elements for selected taxa (note the 50% starting point for these frequency distributions). deposited in a sanctified location, it is quite possible that species, on deer and dog, on young individuals and on left the material was the trash from surface rituals or even elements, are all key to cave rituals. from secular but elite feasting. It is important therefore to Nevertheless, it is clear that a simple designation of prove both that the remains recovered in the Cueva de los “ritual” or even “cave ritual” is insufficient to understand Quetzales were derived from ritual activity, and that those the zooarchaeological correlates of ritual behavior, or to rituals were in fact associated with the cave itself. properly describe either emic symbolic roles or etic The correlation between zooarchaeological markers and functional or structural interpretations. The results of this cave-related ritual behavior provides excellent evidence attempt to correlate different scales and types of Maya that this was indeed a ritual deposit. The comparison cave rituals with the zooarchaeological distributions that between the Cueva de los Quetzales remains and another identify these in the archaeological recordare interesting elite assemblage from the same period at the site of Arroyo despite the preliminary nature of this analysis. In many de Piedra shows that secular elite deposits do not contain ways the Cueva de los Quetzales assemblage resembles the same animal types (including non-intrusives), nor do other Early Classic elite deposits. High quantities of exotic they contain the same distributions of managed species, materials and managed species including deer, dogs, and age groups, or body portions. The differences observed galliform birds suggest that in both situations the elite used between the assemblages from the two elite centers vary these markers as expressions of status, power, and wealth. specifically in patterns that are directly associated with These markers would have been used competitively as cave rituals. The emphasis on symbolic underworld symbolic metaphors as well as quantitative measures.  Animals from the Maya underworld 111 However, in many subtle ways, the Cueva de los tance is gratefully acknowledged. Comments by Jim Brady Quetzales assemblage is different from the secular Arroyo have significantly improved this paper, and the author de Piedra remains. The Cueva de los Quetzales fauna are takes full responsibility for all remaining errors. My thanks more often sacred animals with metaphorical links to the to Sharyn Jones O’Day for including me in the original underworld, to royalty, and to rites of death, renewal, and ICAZ session from which this paper was derived. fertility. The dog, a symbolic link to the underworld, and the only Maya managed domesticate at this time, is References significantly more frequent at the Cueva de los Quetzales. More importantly, at the Cueva de los Quetzales, this Aguilera, C. A. 1985. Flora y Fauna Mexicana: Mitologia y Tradiciones. Mexico City: Editorial Everest Mexicana. managed species as well as deer and cats are much more Bassie-Sweet, K. 1991. From the Mouth of the Dark Cave: Com- frequently represented by juvenile elements and higher memorative sculpture of the Late Classic Maya. Norman, OK: skeletal completeness ratios. In combination this suggests University of Oklahoma Press. sacrifice or ritual deposition of managed species as whole- Benson, E. P. 1988. The Maya and the bat. Latin American Indian body carcasses or, in the case of deer, body portions. The Literatures Journal 4(2), 99–124. Brady, J. E. 1989. An Investigation of Maya Ritual Cave Use with deer body portions intriguingly emphasize the left side of Special Reference to Naj Tunich, Peten, Guatemala. Ph.D. the carcass, suggesting that when deer body portions were Dissertation, UCLA. offered to the underworld gods they were from the left Brady, J. E. 1997. Settlement configuration and cosmology: the side of the body – the side associated with the underworld role of caves at Dos Pilas. American Anthropologist 99(3), 602– and the heart. 18. Although the results presented here are too preliminary Brady, J. E. and Rodas, I. 1994. Analisis de la naturaleza de los depositos ceremoniales en cuevas Mayas: investigaciones to completely substantiate this proposal, it is possible to recientes en la Cueva de los Quetzales, pp. 540–43, in Laporte, suggest that the zooarchaeological remains from the Cueva J. P. and Escobedo, H. L. (ed.), VII Simposio de Investigaciones de los Quetzales indicate public exclusionary rituals that Arqueologicas en Guatemala. Guatemala City: Museo de focus on competitive elite rites of renewal (of annual and Antropologia e Historia y Asociacion Tikal. political cycles) and include sacrifice of juvenile dogs, Brady, J. E. and Rodas, I. 1995. Maya ritual cave deposits: recent cats, and deer, and offerings of deer body portions. The insights from the Cueva de los Quetzales. Institute of Maya Studies Journal 1(1), 17–25. fact that the body portions do not overemphasize the meaty Brady, J. E. and Schwegman, A. S. 1994. Nuevos metodos para la haunches suggests that the ritual significance of side was investigacion de cuevas Mayas, in Laporte, J. P. and Escobedo, more important in these offerings than the quality of the H. L. (eds), VII Simposio de Investigaciones Arqueologicas en food it represented. Guatemala. Guatemala City: Museo de Antropologia e Historia This conclusion has broader implications for the elite y Asociacion Tikal. Brumfiel, E. M. and Earle, T. K. (eds). 1987. Specialization, control of landscape and of the symbolic center of the Exchange and Complex Societies. Cambridge: Cambridge Maya universe. The Maya elite clearly positioned them- University Press. selves to control entrance to this and other caves or portals Bunzel, R. 1952. Chichicastenango, a Guatemalan village to the underworld, but they may also have used ritual to (American Ethnological Society Publication 22). Locust Valley, sanctify the exclusivity of elite access to these portals. NY: American Ethnological Society. Their control of these underworld portals may have been Carr, H. S. 1996. Precolumbian Maya exploitation and management of deer populations, pp. 251–61 in Fedick, S. L. (ed.), The celebrated in performative rituals displayed as expressions Managed Mosaic: Ancient Maya Agriculture and Resource Use. of power to visiting elites from other polities or to other Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. individuals of the non-ruling nobility. Christenson, A. J. 2000. Popol Vuh: The Mythic Sections. Provo, Regardless of the conclusions that are raised by this UT: Brigham Young University Press. analysis, it may be useful to emphasize the fact that in Clark, J. E. and Blake, M. 1994. The power of prestige: competitive certain situations, we must ask how to define ritual assem- generosity and the emergence of rank societies in lowland Mesoamerica, pp. 17–30 in Brumfiel, E. M. and Fox, J. W. blages in a zooarchaeological sense before using presumed (eds), Factional Competition and Political Development in the ceremonial deposits as descriptors for ceremonial activities New World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. involving animals. Zooarchaeology can link faunal remains Danien, E. 1997. The ritual on the Ratinlixul vase: pots and politics to specific scales and types of rituals and therefore to the in highland Guatemala. Expedition 39, 37–48. cultural meaning behind the ritualized behavior. Dietler, M. 1996. Feasts and commensal politics in the political economy: food, power and status in prehistoric Europe, pp. 86– 126 in Wiessner, P. and Schiefenhovel, W. (eds), Food and the Status Quest: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Providence, RI: Acknowledgements Berghahn Books. Funding for the Las Pacayas/Los Quetzales excavations Douglas, M. 1994. The pangolin revisited: a new approach to animal were generously provided by a Wenner-Gren grant to Juan symbolism, pp. 25–36 in Willis, R. (ed.), Signifying Animals: Pedro Laporte, and permission for zooarchaeological Human Meaning in the Natural World. London: Routledge Press. analysis was granted by the Instituto de Antropologia e Drennan, R. D. 1976. Religion and social evolution in formative Historia de Guatemala. Bevin Stevens did some of the mesoamerica, pp. 345–68 in Flannery, K. V. (ed.), The Early Quetzales faunal identifications and her enthusiastic assis- Mesoamerican Village. New York: Academic Press. 112 Kitty F. Emery Emery, K. F. 1997. The Maya collapse: a Zooarchaeological omy (Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Inquiry. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Ethnology 77). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Cornell University. Pohl, M. D. 1994. The economics and politics of Maya meat eating, Escobedo, H. L. 1994. Investigaciones arqueologicas y epigraficas pp. 121–149 in Brumfiel, E. M. (ed.), The Economic Anthrop- en Arroyo de Piedra: un centro secundario en la region ology of the State (Monographs in Economic Anthropology 11). Petexbatún pp. 429–37 in Laporte, J. P. and Escobedo, H. (eds), New York: University Press of America. VII Simposio de Arqueologia Guatemalteca, 1993. Guatemala: Pohl, M. D. and Feldman, L. H. 1982. The traditional role of women Ministerio de Cultura y Deportes, IDAEH, Asociacion Tikal. and animals in the Lowland Maya economy, pp. 295–311 in Escobedo, H. L. 1997. Arroyo de Piedra: sociopolitical dynamics Flannery, K. (ed.), Maya Subsistence. New York: Academic of a secondary center in the Petexbatún region. Ancient Meso- Press. america 8(2), 307–20. Pohl, M. D. and Pohl, J. M. 1983. Ancient Maya Cave Rituals. Escobedo, H. L., Samayoa, J. M., and Gomez, O. 1994. Las Pacayas: Archaeology 36, 28–32, 50–1. Un nuevo sitio arqueologico en la region Petexbatún, pp. 515– Puleston, D. E. 1977. The art and archaeology of hydraulic agri- 22 in Laporte, J. P. and Escobedo, H. L. (eds), VII Simposio de culture in the Maya lowlands, pp. 449–67 in Hammond, N. Investigaciones Arqueologicas en Guatemala. Guatemala City: (ed.), Social Process in Maya Prehistory: Studies in Memory Museo de Antropologia e Historia y Asociacion Tikal. of Sir Eric Thompson. London: Academic Press. Farriss, N. M. 1984. Maya Society Under Colonial Rule: Collective Rappaport, R. A. 1999. Ritual and Religion in the Making of Enterprise of Survival. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Humanity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Press. Redfield, R. and Rojas, A. V. 1934. Chan Kom: A Maya Village Flannery, K. V. (ed.). 1976. The Early Mesoamerican Village. (Carnegie Institution of Washington Publication 448). New York: Academic Press. Washington DC: Carnegie Institute. Goody, J. 1982. Cooking, Cuisine and Class: A Study in Com- Reeder, P., Brady, J.E. and Webster, J. 1998. Geoarchaeological parative Sociology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. investigations on the Northern Vaca Plateau, Belize. Mexicon Gossen, G. 1974. Chamulas in the World of the Sun. Cambridge, 20, 37–41. MA: Harvard University Press. Reifler-Bricker, V. 1990. Faunal offerings in the Dresden Codex, Hayden, B. 1995. Pathways to power: principles for creating pp. 285–93 in Robertson, M. G. and Field, V. M. (eds), The socioeconomic inequalities, pp. 15–85 in Price, T. D. and Sixth Palenque Round Table, 1986. Norman, OK: University of Feinman, G. M. (eds), Foundations of Social Inequality. New Oklahoma Press. York: Plenum Press. Reitz, E. J. and Wing, E. S. 1999. Zooarchaeology. Cambridge Hayden, B. 1996. Feasting in prehistoric and traditional societies, Manuals in Archaeology. New York: Cambridge University pp. 127–47 in Wiessner, P. and Schiefenhovel, W. (eds), Food Press. and the Status Quest. Oxford: Berghahn Books. Roys, R. L. 1965. Ritual of the Bacabs: A Book of Maya Helton, C. 1997. An Analysis of Polychrome Ceramics from Los Incantations. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press. Quetzales Cave at the Site of Las Pacayas, Guatemala: typ- Saunders, N. J. 1994. Tezcatlipoca: jaguar metaphors and the Aztec ology, structure and design. M.A. Thesis, Department of mirror of nature, pp. 159–77 in Willis, R. (ed.), Signifying Anthropology, Brigham Young University Provo UT. Animals: Human Meaning in the Natural World (One World Heyden, D. 1981. Caves, gods and myths: world-view and planning Archaeology 16). London: Routledge. in Teotihuacan, pp. 143–211 in Benson, E. P. (ed.), Meso- Schwartz, M. 1997. A History of Dogs in the Early Americas. New american Sites and World-Views. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Oaks Research Library. Sponsel, L. E. 2001. Do anthropologists need religion, and vice Landa, D. de 1978. Yucatan Before and After the Conquest versa? adventures and dangers in spiritual ecology, pp. 177– (translated by W. Gates). New York: Dover Publications. 202 in Crumley, C. L. (ed.), New Directions in Anthropology LeCount, L. J. 2001. Like water for chocolate: feasting and political and Environment: Intersections. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira ritual among the Late Classic Maya at Xunantunich, Belize. Press. American Anthropologist 103(4), 935–53. Stiner, M. C. 1994. Honor Among Thieves: A Zooarchaeological McAnany, P. A. 1995. Living with the Ancestors: Kinship and Study of Neandertal Ecology. New Jersey: Princeton University Kingship in Ancient Maya Society. Austin: University of Texas Press. Press,. Stone, A. J. 1995. Images from the Underworld: Naj Tunich and Mennell, S. 1996. All Manners of Food: Eating and Taste in the Tradition of Maya Cave Painting. Austin, TX: University England and France from the Middle Ages to the Present. of Texas Press. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Taube, K. A. 1988. The Ancient Yucatec New Year Festival: the Pendergast, D. M. 1974. Excavations at Actun Polbiche. Toronto, Liminal Period in Maya Ritual and Cosmology. Ph.D. Disser- ON: Royal Ontario Museum. tation, Yale University. Peterson, J. F. 1980. Precolumbian Flora and Fauna: Continuity Tedlock, B. 1986. On a mountain road in the dark, pp. 125–38 in of Plant and Animal Themes in Mesoamerican Art. San Diego: Gossen, G. H. (ed.), Symbol and Meaning Beyond the Closed Mingei International Museum. Community: Essays in Mesoamerican Ideas. Albany, NY: Pohl, M. D. 1981. Ritual continuity and transformation in Meso- Institute for Mesoamerican Studies, University of Albany. america: reconstructing the Ancient Maya Cuch Ritual. Tedlock, D. 1996. Popol Vuh (revised edition). New York: American Antiquity 46(3), 513–29. Touchstone. Pohl, M. D. 1983. Maya ritual faunas: vertebrate remains from Thompson, J. E. S. 1970. Maya History and Religion. Norman, burials, caches, caves, and cenotes in the Maya Lowlands, pp. OK: University of Oklahoma Press. 55–103 in Leventhal, R. and Kolata, A. (eds), Civilization in Tozzer, A. M. 1941. Landa’s Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatan the Ancient Americas. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico (Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Press. Ethnology 18). Cambridge MA: Harvard University. Pohl, M. D. 1985. The privileges of Maya elites: prehistoric Tozzer, A. M. and Allen, G. M. 1910. Animal Figures in the Maya vertebrate fauna from Seibal, pp. 133–45 in Pohl, M. D. (ed.), Codices (Papers of the Peabody Museum vol. 4, no. 3). Prehistoric Lowland Maya Environment and Subsistence Econ- Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.  Animals from the Maya underworld 113 Vogt, E. 1969. Zinacantan. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University 2001. Isotopic evidence for Maya patterns of deer and dog use Press. at Preclassic Colha. Journal of Archaeological Science 28, 89– Vogt, E. 1993. Tortillas for the Gods: A Symbolic Analysis of 107. Zinacanteco Rituals. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, White, C. D., Pohl, M. D., Schwarcz, H. P. and Longstaffe, F. J. in OK. press. Feast, field and forest: deer and dog diets at Lagartero, Walker, W. H. 1995. Ceremonial trash?, pp. 67–79 in Skibo, J., Tikal, and Copan, in Emery, K. F. (ed.), Maya Zooarchaeology: Walker, W. H. and Nielson, A. (eds), Expanding Archaeology. New Directions in Method and Theory. Los Angeles: Institute Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. of Archaeology, UCLA Press. White, C. D., Healy, P. F. and Schwarcz, H. P. 1993. Intensive Wing, E. S. and Scudder, S. J. 1991. The exploitation of animals, agriculture, social status, and Maya diet at Pacbitun, Belize. pp. 84–97 in Hammond, N. (ed.), Cuello: An Early Maya Journal of Anthropological Research 49, 347–75. Community. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. White, C. D., Pohl, M. D., Schwarcz, H. P. and Longstaffe, F. J. Kitty F. Emery Curator of Environmental Archaeology, Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida Box 117800, Gainesville, Florida 32611–7800, USA. E-mail: kemery@flmnh.ufl.edu