Sociopolitical Development Copan

Sociopolitical Developments and Methodological Issues at Copan, Honduras: A Conjunctive
Perspective
Author(s): William L. Fash and Robert J. Sharer
Source: Latin American Antiquity, Vol. 2, No. 2 (Jun., 1991), pp. 166-187
Published by: Cambridge University Press
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/972276
Accessed: 06-04-2020 18:44 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/972276?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Latin American Antiquity
This content downloaded from 200.130.19.155 on Mon, 06 Apr 2020 18:44:49 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
SOCIOPOLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES
AT COPAN, HONDURAS: A CONJUNCIIVE PERSPECTIVE
William L. Fash and Robert J. Sharer
Results of 16 years of archaeological research at Copan, Honduras, based on different methods and theoretical
perspectives, can be used in combination to better understand the developmental trajectory of Classic period
sociopolitical evolution in the Copan Valley. Although research continues, findings to date demonstrate the ad-
vantage of conjunctive research that applies archaeological, epigraphic, and iconographic data in a crosscutting,
self-corrective strategy. While the use of any single data set may produce incomplete or inaccurate conclusions,
as in the use of settlement data alone to reconstruct Middle Classic population size and assess the developmental
status of the Copan polity, more complete conclusions can be reached by applying a fuller range of data from
excavations in both the valley and Acropolis of Copan's urban core, along with epigraphic and iconographic
evidence. These combined data show that from its beginning in the fifth century, the Classic Copan polity was
ruled by powerful kings who controlled large populations and, quite likely, an extensive territory that may have
included the site of Quirigua in the Motagua Valley to the north.
At the other end of the developmental trajector, the combination of research findings from the Acropolis and
surrounding elite residential compounds and valley settlement data, has led to a redefinition of the Classic
"collapse" at Copan, now seen as a long-enduring process involving the decentralization of political authority,
the end of centralized dynastic rule, and gradual depopulation of the valley. This reconstruction, in combination
with evidence for the end of the Classic period at other Lowland Maya sites, supports the long-standing conclusion
that there was no single cause for the collapse, but rather that a complex and long-operating series of processes
was responsible for the end of lowland Classic Maya civilization.
Mas de un siglo de investigaciones en las ruinas de Copan, Honduras, ha proporcionado una gran cantidad de
informacion sobre una ocupacion precolombina de mas de 2.000 anos de duracion (Preclasico Temprano hasta
Postclasico). La culminacion de dicha ocupacion fue durante el periodo Clasico (entre ca. 200 y 900 D. C., a nivel
local), cuando Copan desarrollo las caracterEsticas economicas, sociales, politicas, e ideologicas de un estado. Los
datos procedentes de Copan of recen una aportacion importante sobre asuntos de interes vital para los arqueologos,
entre ellos los del origen y delfin de los sistemas sociopoliticos complejos. En este artfculo tratamos los dos asuntos
desde la perspectiva de Copan. Principalmente las cuestiones metodologicas que se enfrentan al intentar adquirir
e interpretar los datos arqueologicos relacionados con la comprension del inicio y la decadencia de las sociedades
complejas.
Los resultados de los ultimos dieciseis anos de investigacion en Copan han estado fundados en perspectivas
diferentes tanto de metodologia como de teoria. No obstante, pueden ser usados conjuntamente para otorgar una
mayor comprension de la trayectoria de la evolucion sociopolitica en el valle de Copan durante el perfodo Clasico.
Aunque las investigaciones continuan, los resultados obtenidos hasta la fecha demuestran las ventajas de inves-
tigaciones conjuntas que aplican datos arqueologicos, epigraficos, e iconograficos en una estrategia que cruza las
limitaciones disciplinarias y permite la autocorreccion. Mientras el uso de cualquier tipo de datos aislados puede
conducir a conclusiones incompletas o erroneas, tal como sucedio cuando se utilizaron exclusivamente los datos
provenientes del estudio de los asentamientos tardios para reconstruir el tamano de la poblacion durante el Clasico
Medio y evaluar el grado de desarrollo del antiguo Copan, conclusiones mas completas son alcanzadas al aplicar
datos de un campo mayor, en este caso de las excavaciones tanto en el valle de Copan como en su nucleo urbano
alrededor de la Acropolis en conjunto con las evidencias epigraficas e iconograficas. Estos datos en combinacion
demuestran que desde su inicio en el quinto siglo despues de Cristo, el reino Clasico de Copan fue dominado por
gobernantes poderosos que controlaron grandes poblaciones y probablemente un territorio amplio que posiblemente
incluyo el sitio de Quirigua en el valle de Motagua al norte de Copan.
En el otro extremo de la trayectoria de desarrollo, la combinacion de resultados de la Acropolis y sus conjuntos
residenciales aledanos, y los datos de los asentamientos en el valle, ha conducido a una nueva definicion del
"colapso" a finales del periodo Clasico en Copan. Actualmente se concibe de ello como un proceso de larga
William L. Fash, Department of Anthropology, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL 60115

Robert J. Sharer, Department of Anthropology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104
Latin American Antiquity, 2(2), 1991, pp. 166-187.

Copyright C) 1991 by the Society for American Archaeology
166
lFash and Sharer] COPAN, HONDURAS: A CONJUNCTIVE PERSPECTIVE 167
envergadura que vio la descentralizacion del poder politico, el fin del mando dinastico-real, y la despoblacion
gradual del valle. Esta reconstruccion, en combinacion con la evidencia para el fin del periodo Clasico en otros
sitios mayas de las Tierras Bajas, apoyan la conclusion ya establecida de que no hubo una causa unica para el
"colapso, " sino u na serie de procesos co mplejos y de larga duracion, que fue respo nsable del fin de la civilizacion
Clasico de los mayas en las Tierras Bajas del sur.
Over a century of research at Copan, Honduras, has yielded a large corpus of data spanning a
sequence of more than 2,000 years of Precolumbian occupation (Early Preclassic to Postclassic).
The culmination of this occupation was during the Classic period (locally ca. A.D. 200-900) when
Copan developed the economic, social, political, and ideological dimensions of a complex state
organization (Fash 1988). The Copan data have an important bearing on central issues of concern
to archaeologists, including the origins and demise of complex sociopolitical systems. In this paper
we address both of these questions from the perspective of Copan, especially methodological issues
raised by attempts to acquire and interpret archaeological data relevant to understanding the rise
and fall of complex societies.
After a brief summary of research at Copan, we review the overall strategy of a conjunctiv
methodology and the advantages of combining prehistoric and historic data sets as they are appl
at Copan. Then we examine two specific questions addressed by research in both the valley settlem
and the urban core of Copan: the origins and demise of the Classic period polity.
To do this we draw on results gained by prior and completed research, as well as our own continuin
investigations. Because our work is not yet completed, we cannot yet propose final answers to the
questions. Rather, we offer an interim evaluation of the results gained thus far and the gaps th
still remain. In this way we hope that future research, both at Copan and elsewhere, may benef
from the lessons learned, and obtain a clearer definition of the problems encountered and the kin
of research needed for their solution.
In the course of this review we hope to make clear that none of the past or present research
programs by themselves are adequate to provide a final understanding of the origins and demise of
the Classic Maya polity at Copan. While each has made important contributions to resolving these
questions, it is only by combining the results of all relevant research at Copan that we can approach
comprehensive answers. Thus, for example, we point out that the recent settlement research con-
ducted by our colleagues from The Pennsylvania State University (Webster and Freter 1990a), while
providing a comprehensive view of Late Classic occupation in the Copan valley, has very likely
underestimated the size of Middle Classic (ca. A.D. 400-650) populations in the same region. By
looking at Middle Classic developments from a rural-settlement perspective, rather than holistically
by including the urban core data, they have also misjudged the timing and significance of the origins
of the Classic Copan polity. At the other end of the spectrum, we hope a summary of all relevant
evidence bearing on the end of the Classic at Copan, including the important new findings from the
same recent valley research (Webster and Freter 1990a) will further clarify the much-remarked-on
issue of the Classic Maya "collapse."
SUMMARY OF RESEARCH AT COPAN
The origins of research at Copan date to the nineteenth century, with the first ex
ducted in what is now recognized as the Classic period urban core, or Principal Gr
the Acropolis, adjacent Great Plaza, and the surrounding concentration of masonry
remains (Gordon 1896; Maudslay 1889-1902). The chief concerns of this work, and
Carnegie Institution of Washington investigations in the first half of this century (
Trik 1939), centered on chronology and determining the beginning and end of Cla
occupation at Copan. But not all this early effort was devoted to the urban core. Th
at reconstructing settlement history in the Copan Valley (Figure 2) were those of Sy
who explored many sites in the valley in search of inscriptions for inclusion in his m
Inscriptions at Copan (Morley 1920). Morley was the first to propose the intrusion o
into the valley in the Early Classic and to note the impressive array of early dates (9.
9.9.0.0.0 or A.D. 465-613) found in the locus presently occupied by the modern vill
168 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY lVol. 2, No. 2, 1991
54 X
0 50 100
meters 1-, i \
Figure 1. Plan of the Principal Group at Copan, Honduras, showing location of the Acropolis, Great Plaza,
and adjacent architecture.
Fash and Sharer] COPAN, HONDURAS: A CONJUNCTIVE PERSPECTIVE 169
Figure 2. Map of the Copan Valley, Honduras (after Webster and Freter l990a:Figure 2).
("Group 9"). Since there were at that time no monuments of comparable age known from the
Principal Group of ruins, Morley concluded that Group 9 had been the primary locus of settlement
and political power in the valley, and that later on (after 9.9.0.0.0 or A.D. 613) the area occupied
by the Principal Group became important.
Morley's ideas on the intrusion of a Maya elite group into the Copan Valley during the Early
Classic were seconded by John Longyear as a result of his subsequent studies of Copan's ceramics
(Longyear 1952:67-72). In Longyear's view, after the arrival of the ruling elite from the central
Maya Lowlands, life's pace quickened for the native peoples of the valley and "work began in
earnest." There was a slow buildup of construction in the Principal Group during the Early Classic,
with increasing activity toward the end ofthe period. Finally, during the Full (Late) Classic, Copan's
Acropolis began to assume its final form, and the "last half-century of this period witnessed the full
flowering of the Principal (Group). During this comparatively brief span of years the great Hiero-
glyphic Stairway and Temples 26,11, and 22, all magnificently embellished, were finished" (Longyear
1952:70). For the Postclassic period, Longyear (1952:71) concluded that "The Maya hierarchic cult
left Copan as it came-suddenly and unobtrusively. At the very height of its glory, the Acropolis,
together with its outlying groups, was abandoned by the priests and craftsmen, and most of the
common people also moved away from the built-up areas, probably to the refuge of the surrounding
hills." Further, he states "There was nothing now, to keep the people in the valley, and absence of
post-Classic occupational debris in the vicinity of the Acropolis indicates that they quickly moved
out, possibly to the foothills" (Longyear 1952:71). Here Longyear does not specify whether "the
valley" refers to only the alluvial bottomlands adjacent to the Principal Group, or the larger area
defined by later researchers as the Copan pocket.
Regarding the dating ofthe Late Classic period, Longyear (1952:74) notes "The beginning ofthe
Full Classic Period, as shown above, can only approximately be placed in time. The end, however,
is fairly definite. The last dated monument at Copan (Sculpture G1) was erected in 9.18.10.0.0
(A.D. 800), and shortly after that the Acropolis and other groups in the valley appear to have been
170 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 2, No. 2, 1991
deserted by their priestly rulers." Finally, for the last occupations of the Copan Valley, Longyear
(1952:75) states that "There appears to be a considerable hiatus between the Full Classic and post-
Classic periods. This is indicated by the complete lack of post-Classic deposits in the numerous
tests and trenches dug in the vicinity of the Acropolis. The Copanecos seem to have moved away
from this area following the exodus of the priests; when they next returned, it was at a considerably
later date." Given the archaeological evidence available to him, and the then-current models of
ancient Maya society, Longyear's interpretations made a great deal of sense.
Modern archaeological research at Copan has involved a series of separate but complementary
projects that have spanned the past 15 years. These investigations began with Gordon Willey's
Copan Valley Project (1975-1977), marking the first in a series of programs dedicated to delineating
settlement patterning and settlement change in the Copan Valley (Fash 1986a; Willey and Leventhal
1979; Willey et al. 1978). This work produced the basic settlement typology for the valley used by
all subsequent investigators, and together with subsequent research, outlined the basic ceramic
chronology, including an Early Classic Bijac ceramic complex (ca. A.D. 100400), a Middle Classic
Acbi ceramic complex (ca. A.D. 400-650), and a Late Classic Coner ceramic complex (ca. A.D.
650-850). The Copan Valley Project was followed by the first phase (1978-1980) of the Proyecto
Arqueologico Copan (hereafter PAC I), sponsored by the Government of Honduras and directed
by Claude Baudez, which continued settlement research in the valley, stressing vacant-space testing
and collection of data from all periods of occupation, and which opened investigations in the
Principal Group (Baudez 1983). The valley-settlement work was carried on during the second phase
of this government-sponsored project (PAC II: 1980-1985), directed by William Sanders (1986),
with David Webster as codirector, which focused on the valley's Late Classic occupation and
environment. After the end of PAC II, this settlement research continued until 1988 under the
direction of Sanders and Webster (1989; Webster and Freter 1990a, 1990b; Webster and Gonlin
1988). Since 1985 two new projects have continued investigations in the Principal Group: the Copan
Mosaics Project and the Copan Acropolis Archaeological Project, both directed by William Fash
(see Fash 1988), the latter being a multi-institutional effiort codirected by Ricardo Agurcia, Robert
Sharer, Rudy Larios, and E. Wyllys Andrews (Fash 1989; Sharer et al. 1989). Work has continued
in the surrounding "residential" zones as well, with the North Group Project from Rutgers Uni-
versity, directed by Wendy Ashmore, excavating Groups 8L-10 through 12, (see Ashmore 1989),
and Pennsylvania State University programs continuing at Groups 10E-6 and l lE-7 (Whittington
and Zeleznik 1990) and Group 8N- 11 (directed by David Webster).
THE CONJUNCTIVE METHODOLOGY AT COPAN
These investigations have been implemented by a number of different research strategies, based
on alternative theoretical perspectives, and have produced vast amounts of data. But while each
has been designed to address specific and important questions, no single program can hope to
provide a definitive answer to the largest and most enduring of research problems facing Maya
archaeologists: the origins and demise of Classic civilization. To begin to attack these questions,
many Maya scholars over the past decade have called for a multidisciplinary or "conjunctive"
strategy beginning from the perspective of individual Classic Maya polities (Marcus 1983; Sharer
1978). The longest-runningand most comprehensive example of such conjunctive research has
taken place at Copan, where the reconstruction of local sociopolitical development is being accom-
plished by a combination of archaeological, epigraphic, and iconographic investigations in a cross-
cutting, self-correcting strategy. In this effiort, all forms of relevant evidence, including the results
of past and present settlement and population research, are welcome in order to refine and improve
our understanding of ancient Copan.
Obviously the utility and success of the conjunctive strategy relies on the unique richness of the
Classic Maya historical record, allowing the back and forth testing of conclusions between textual
and archaeological sources. Yet some archaeologists continue to treat Classic Maya research as
"prehistoric." To do so implicitly ignores advances in textual decipherment and the significant
results obtained from a conjunctive methodology that combines archaeology, history, and other
relevant disciplines. We acknowledge that the study of much of the nonelite realm of the Classic
Maya, including the Copan Valley settlement, is strictly speaking "prehistoric" (Webster and Freter
1 990a:66), given the absence of evidence for writing directly associated with most, but not all (see
Ashmore 1989; Webster 1989), of the settlement sample. But viewed holistically, the settlements
of the Copan Valley were for at least 400 years part of a larger and partially literate society. By
including data derived from the historical texts on monuments and architecture at Copan (admittedly
only a pale reflection of the corpus that must have existed in more perishable media) and testing
these findings by archaeological investigations, the Copan research can proceed on a more complete
level of understanding than would have been possible without the existence of inscriptions and
pictorial sculpture.
While we certainly agree that the study of settlement systems currently provides the "most powerful
information available to archaeologists for reconstruction of prehistoric institutions and popula-
tions" (Webster and Freter l990a:66), research at Copan benefits from a broad spectrum of data,
including that gained from both prehistoric and historic disciplines. As all Mayanists know, historical
and iconographic evidence often provide the most explicit information about the upper echelons
of society. The historical sources record interpolity social and political matters, including warfare,
alliances, marriages, and visitations. Within a polity such as Copan, these record specific political
and religious offices, the names and titles of individuals who held them, dates of monuments and
events in the lives of prominent individuals, kinship relationships, the dates, and even the names
and functions of specific buildings (see below)-altogether far more than we could ever hope to
obtain from the archaeological study of a prehistoric community alone. We see these historical data
not as mere ideographic details, but as providing a variety of anthropological implications subject
to archaeological testing.
A current example ofthe significant results realized from feedback between the study ofthe written
and iconographic records and material archaeological remains is the work on Acropolis Str. lOL-
22A, recently identified as the community house of eighth-century Copan (Fash and Fash 1990:
32). Specialists in archaeology, architectural restoration, art, and epigraphy working together were
able to expose, identify, and rearticulate the fallen sculptures and glyphs from this building. These
include 10 large mat designs that identify the structure as the popol na (glossed as "community
house" or "council house" in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Maya documents). It also is
adorned by "9 Ahau" glyphs that probably date the building to the period ending 9.15.15.0.0 9
Ahau 18 Xul (A.D. 746), Ahaulil glyphs ("governance," "act of governing," or "kingdom"), and
eight large hieroglyphs placed on the corners and three sides of the building, which have been
identified as local place names. In addition, cross-legged seated human figures with distinctive chest
and headdress adornments sat in niches above the hieroglyphs; these are probably the portraits of
officials who represented the places or Copan Valley lineages that had a voice in the political
deliberations that took place in the council house.
These iconographic and epigraphic findings are reinforced by other lines of evidence. The archi-
tecture of Str. lOL-22A is consistent with an inferred function of a council house, given features
unlike any other known building in the Acropolis (multiple doorways that lead to a back room with
elevated space for a large number of individuals). According to sixteenth- and seventeenth-century
sources, the popol na were used not only for important political deliberations, but also for periodic
feasts and for instruction in ritual dances (these same functions continue at present day popol na
in rural Quintana Roo, Mexico [Nikolai Grube, personal communication 1990]). In addition, results
of archaeological excavations offier further support from a large midden deposit uncovered just
outside the southwest corner ofthe building. The ceramics from the Str. lOL-22A midden included
both serving vessels and cooking pots, and use-wear analysis of the lithic artifacts by Kazuo Aoyama
reveals that the majority of the obsidian tools had been used for cutting meat or hide. The ceramics
and lithics associated with this building thus provide evidence for food preparation and serving on
a large scale, fully in keeping with the historical and ethnographic evidence. Finally, there is a large
(8.5-x-32 m) low masonry platform directly south of Str. lOL-22A, which has been interpreted as
the setting for ritual dances (Fash et al. 1990).
This example of conjunctive research has greatly expanded our knowledge of the past by dating
and identifying the probable function of a specific building, and thereby providing new information
on sociopolitical organization and offices that can be further tested by archaeological research. For
example, one hypothesis derived from this work is that the Late Classic subdivisions (or paramount-
lineage compounds) of the Copan Valley were given specific names. This should be testable through
excavation of valley residential groups to see if the same name glyphs found on Str. 10L-22A can
be identified in hieroglyphic inscriptions in these valley sites. Importantly, this example demonstrates
how various components of current Copan research-archaeology (including settlement studies),
epigraphy, iconography, and architectural restoration-in combination can provide much more
information than any single discipline could provide in isolation.
The associations of architecture, texts, and iconography encountered at Copan provide powerful
information on questions of history and institutional structure. This has been demonstrated re-
peatedly in the Acropolis research (Fash 1989; Sharer et al. l 989,1990), and was amply documented
in the work on Str. 9N-82 (Fash 1986b; Webster 1989; Webster et al. 1986). Regarding this latter
work, Webster (1989:106) notes that:
If we had only the results of our surveys and excavations and no texts of any kind, we probably would be
able to generate and confirm the same basic model of the place of the House of the Bacabs [Str. 9N-82] in
the larger Maya sociopolitical system at Copan. We would lack, however, the precision and independent
confirmation of chronology derived from inscriptions, as well as detailed insights into the way elite individuals
related to the royal establishment and to each other. And we would certainly have a much poorer concept of
how such elites manipulated ritual and ideology to legitimize and reinforce their positions and vie for authority
and power.
THE ORIGINS OF THE CLASSIC POLITY AT COPAN
We have already mentioned the ideas advanced by early investigators such as Morley and Longyear
that the Classic polity at Copan began with colorization by an elite group from the central lowlands.
This issue is being attacked by continuing excavations in the Copan Acropolis aimed at revealing
the very origins and initial development of this complex associated with the ruling dynasty, but
more research will be needed before we can fully evaluate the Morley and Longyear proposition.
In the meantime, sufficient data exist bearing on the size and organization of the Early and Middle
Classic polity to examine these questions more closely. The size and nature of the early Copan
polity has been the subject of two diffierent reconstructions, one based on settlement data from the
most recent valley research (Webster and Freter 1990a), the other based on a conjunctive approach
using data from both settlement and urban-core data (Fash 1989; Sharer et al. 1989, 1990). In
essence this debate has centered on the size of populations in the Copan Valley during the Middle
Classic Acbi phase (ca. A.D. 400-650), the historical reality of the first 11 Copan rulers recorded
in Copan's texts, and the scale of constructions in the Acropolis associated with these initial rulers
(contemporary with the Acbi ceramic complex).
Copan Valley Research: Sampling Issues and

Population Size in the Middle Classic
The past 16 years of settlement research in the Copan valley have demonstrated that most cases
of pre-Coner (before ca. A.D. 650) occupation are deeply buried and difficult to reach (see below).
"At Copan . . . where earlier phase materials are represented poorly and are difficult to sample, and
where Coner materials are so dominant, understanding the dynamics of the Coner phase settlement
system is essential" (Webster and Freter 1990a:69). While it may be true that understanding the
"dominant" is "essential," we believe that understanding the less dominant and more elusive earlier
settlement remains is also critical if we are to discern the overall evolution of a society and the
settlement systems it used over time.
The sample reported by Webster and Freter (1990a: 73) included sites from all settlement categories
(Types 1X) with a clear preference for small surface sites: "We have long felt that small sites, and
particularly small residential sites, provide more reliable data on settlement trends than large ones
for several reasons: occupations are usually shorter, stratigraphy is simpler, introduction of extra-
neous materials is less of a problem, and most important, representative sampling is accomplished
more easily." While this may well be true, it is also true that because Webster and Freter's survey
and excavations were confined to sites with surface manifestations (mounds, artifact scatters, and
other visible features), the information obtained from those investigations would pertain almost
exclusively to the Coner phase. As they note, "during the Willey-Baudez phases of research it was
recognized correctly that the overwhelming majority of sites located on the surface and/or tested
by excavation was associated with Coner phase pottery, an impression confirmed by all subsequent
work since 1980" (Webster and Freter l990a:69). Thus, while the results they obtained may be
valid for the Late Classic Coner occupation, they may not be necessarily representative in an analysis
of the pre-Coner phase settlement history of Copan.
This very question of"representativeness" was one which vexed all those who contributed to the
valley excavation program during the first phase of the PAC. By that time, it was fairly clear from
the test pitting and horizontal excavations conducted in the bottomlands and foothills north of the
river as part of Willey's project that the visible sites in the pocket dated to Longyear's "Full Classic"
period. Baudez was not convinced that sampling visible architecture was necessarily the correct way
to obtain information on the overall settlement history in the valley, particularly for the earlier
periods. It had become obvious that because of postabandonment soil deposition, surface sherds
in the Copan Valley are fairly scarce (unlike the situation found in many upland areas in Mesoam-
erica), and that sherds and other artifacts from the earlier phases were particularly unlikely to appear
on the surface. As such, Baudez insisted that equal attention be given to areas between visible sites
for sampling the diffierent physiographic zones identified in the valley by B. L. Turner II and his
colleagues (Turner et al. 1983).
The varied and diffierent sampling strategies employed at Baudez's behest attempted to produce
an unbiased, representative sample of the settlement history of the Copan pocket, and did succeed
at finding considerable evidence for pre-Coner occupations in the alluvial bottomlands, and to a
lesser extent, in the piedmont and high river terraces (Fash 1983a, 1986a). The PAC I excavations
revealed evidence of settlement back to Middle Preclassic times in the bottomlands of the Copan
pocket, use of the foothill zones during the Middle Preclassic and Early Classic, and settlements in
the foothills during the Acbi phase (Middle Classic). The area of the modern village (Morley's Group
9) did contain structures and associated Bijac and Acbi ceramics (Early and Middle Classic), verifying
that this was an important settlement locus throughout Copan's Classic period history. The discovery
of fifth- and sixth-century inscribed monuments in Str. 4 of the Principal Group (Cheek and Milla
1983), however, was the first indication that Morley's idea that Group 9 was the original center of
power in the valley would have to be revised. Rene Viel discovered that the large, defensible hilltop
site of Cerro de las Mesas (located 1 km north of Group 9) was founded in the late Bijac or early
Acbi phase and contained significant terrace and other constructions dating to the Acbi phase (Fash
1983a:266-278).
Of further interest, there were great numbers of sites in the Copan Valley buried by the posta-
bandonment sheet wash (in the foothills and upper slopes) and alluvium/colluvium (in the bottom-
lands) found in the areas between (and in some cases beneath) the visible surface sites. Two meters
or more of soil covered Coner phase sites such as Group l OJ- 1 in the foothills north of the Principal
Group, and Group 9M-13 in the bottomlands (recently reinvestigated by Webster; Figure 3), so
one might expect buried pre-Coner phase materials in such contexts as well. Given the considerable
amounts of land found between most visible sites in all but the dense settlement within a 1 km
radius of the Principal Group, and especially in the rural sectors of the valley, it should also be
expected that some of those considerable expanses might show traces of earlier settlements. In this
regard, it is worth noting that with the exception of Cerro de las Mesas and the other large architectural
compounds in the eastern part of the valley, virtually the only loci that produced evidence for
occupations earlier than the Coner phase were those between the visible mounds and mound groups.
As detailed below, the amount of labor represented by the monumental constructions spanning the
entire Acbi phase in the Copan Acropolis is such that a sizable population must have lived in close
proximity to the Principal Group, as had been indicated by the PAC I samples.
In the more than 700 individual loci tested in the PAC I valley research, in an area of approximately
174 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 2, No. 2, 1991]
Figure 3. View of the excavation of Group 9M-13 showing depth of overburden covering Coner pha
struction in the bottomlands of the Copan Valley.
30 km2, it was found that excavations conducted away from visible architecture were more likely
to produce ceramics and features from the pre-Coner phases than those conducted behind structures.
Figure 4 shows how this pattern holds for the Bijac phase (ca. A.D. 100400), and Figure 5 shows
that the same holds true for the Acbi phase (ca. A.D. 400-650). None of the pits in back of structures
or tests of plazas of large visible groups in the foothills and upper slopes show evidence for Bijac
phase occupations or land use. On the other hand, sampling in areas between visible sites did pick
up evidence of Early Classic activities, and in some cases, residential architecture. Similarly, in the
alluvial bottomlands in the east end of the Copan pocket, the pits in back of structures did not pick
up much evidence for Bijac or Acbi occupation, but the large visible sites did, as did the samples
from between visible sites. Testing of the large sites did recover ceramics from the Acbi phase in
.
Figure 4. Map of Bijac phase (ca. A.D. 100-400) settlement in the Copan Valley as revealed b
b x_A Z 1t /f _ t A |_. _ l_ i {Xj?°_UA,*>V?X*\<{P\,5.__l).5o.)____
^.5nO0,MLAr8e
>_:xerl_s. *\a_archil2sxn,' *xtsectural v4) tSsecondar:rn
LJ Contour snte
w-crcondsas .Mod. .cor.
bmED:W
A _ n 5 <1 \ < { TYPESOFSUB-OPERATI
9\ El Mountain
\< ) ) t °^° Lack of evi
< \ r _ Rivers and

<? <t V Archacolo
'<J AC
tlgure 5. Map ot Acbi phase (ca. A.D. 40 -650) set lement in the Copan Val ey as revealed by the PAC I research.
the foothills at Estanzuela (#53 on Figure 5), Petapilla (#132), Rastrojon (#162), and at the site of
Cerro de las Mesas (#59).
In his consideration of PAC I samples, Fash (1983a, 1986a) noted that although the random
samples of the different physiographic zones in the valley were unbiased and were thus "represen-
tative" in that sense, nonetheless they constituted an extremely small sample of the space that was
available for Precolumbian settlement. In fact, it was acknowledged that the small size of the sample
as a proportion of the overall space under study rendered it insignificant in terms of statistical
probability theory (Fash 1983a:429). However, the number of independent cases of settlement loci
studied (slightly over 700) was sufficient to produce consistent patterns in the data, based on a series
of different sampling sampling strategies (test pits in back of mounds, testing large mound sites, and
random and purposive sampling of areas between visible sites). Those patterns were: (1) visible
surface archaeological features date to the Coner phase; (2) extensive overburden exists on Coner
phase remains, but is especially heavy on pre-Coner phase deposits; (3) pre-Coner phase remains
are found in great abundance in the undisturbed sections of the bottomlands of the eastern Copan
pocket; (4) extensive destruction of bottomlands tracts occurred in both the eastern and western
Copan pockets (the destructive force of the Copan River being most obvious in the famous corte
of the Acropolis), eliminating any Precolumbian settlement evidence which might have existed in
those areas; (5) evidence of occupation of the foothills north of the river exists for the Acbi (Middle
Classic) phase, along with land use and probable occupation for the earlier Bijac (Early Classic) and
Uir (Middle Preclassic) phases as well; and (6) evidence of use and occupation of the often extensive
"vacant" areas between visible sites in both the bottomlands and foothill zones of the Copan pocket
exists for both the Coner and pre-Coner phases.
Given these data and patterns, it is not particularly surprising that little, if anything, in the way
of pre-Coner settlements was detected by the PAC II valley research (approximately 700 test pits
were excavated in a 135-km2 area, predominantly though not exclusively in back of structures and
in the plazas of small, visible sites; of these some 200 pits produced obsidian-hydration dates; see
Freter [1988]). This recent research tested 14 percent of the known sites, yielding a sample that is
probably adequate for studying the visible Coner phase settlement in the Copan region. What is
most important to consider, however, is that this sample does not represent a 14 percent sample of
the settlement data for the total space available for occupation during, or prior to, the Coner phase,
when the visible sites in the rural areas of the valley occupy an exceedingly small proportion of the
available land in all sectors. We find it unconvincing to claim simply that earlier occupation is
unlikely in other locations because the visible Coner period rural sites occupy the most "attractive"
topographic settings (Webster and Freter l990a:79). Thus, the sparseness of Acbi period materials
in their sample (18 of 200 obsidian-dated sites or 9 percent) is used to support the claim that pre-
Coner populations were "very small," or "at most 4,000-5,000 people" at A.D. 600 (Webster and
Freter l 990a:79, 81). But the adequacy of the sample based on surface sites (and ignoring intersite
areas) is belied by the PAC I findings of deeply buried pre-Coner materials and both Coner and
pre-Coner remains in areas between visible sites.
A second problem with dating valley occupation from the available site sample is that the amount
of excavation (generally two test pits per site) may be not be sufficient to rule out evidence of pre-
Coner occupation in many surface sites-the possibility for deeply buried earlier occupation should
be left open at least until more extensive excavations are undertaken. As a case in point, evidence
for pre-Coner occupation of Group 8L- 12 was not revealed to its investigators until after two seasons
of excavations (Ashmore 1989:8). Before this work test pits placed in Group 8L- 12 by the Harvard
Project in 1977 indicated only a Coner phase occupation. Given the depth of most pre-Coner
remains, these kinds of results are not surprising, and should be familiar to specialists acquainted
with the history of sampling strategies in archaeology; for example it should be recalled that even
a 50 percent coverage of a .224-ha site by test pits may not yield representative results (Cowgill
1975:266).
With regard to their sample and its representativeness, Webster and Freter (199Oa:73) state that
"The small sites of Type 1 rank and lower provide the most valid reflection of settlement trends at
Figure 5. Map of Acbi phase (ca. A.D. 400-650) settlement in the Copan Valley as revealed by the PAC I
Copan, except for settlement in the restricted zone of the valley floor of the Copan pocket." But
the exception they cite in this statement eliminates the very area that has been known since 1980
to have had the longest settlement history and densest population concentration, along with the
richest alluvial soils in the valley. This area was settled by ca. 1000 B.C. and was continuously
occupied and built up until the political collapse and beyond.
On the basis of all the settlement research conducted in the Copan Valley thus far, we conclude
that human settlements began to be nucleated in the Copan pocket in the fourth century A.D. if
not earlier. The nucleation process began in modest fashion in the Bijac phase (Early Classic) and
then accelerated during the succeeding Acbi phase (Middle Classic), still concentrated in the alluvial
bottomlands adjacent to the Principal Group, but beginning to expand to the foothills. The occu-
pations at the hilltop site of Cerro de las Mesas and at Morley's Group 9 (which possessed inscribed
monuments implying administrative functions as well) show that there were at least two significant
settlements outside of the valley bottomlands by early Acbi times as well. Recent salvage excavations
in the Barrio Buenavista area of the modern village conducted by Joseph Galloy under the direction
of Agurcia and Fash encountered additional Bijac and Acbi phase pottery, and future investigations
at this locus contemplated by the Instituto Hondureno de Antropologia e Historia (IHAH) will
undoubtedly permit a better understanding of Early and Middle Classic occupation in this zone.
In the meantime, though the evidence for a dense nucleated population in the valley bottomlands
and settlement of the modern village area and Cerro de las Mesas in the foothills during the Acbi
phase implies an expanding settlement system, we cannot claim that the picture of pre-Coner
occupation of the Copan Valley is clear. To resolve the question of the density and distribution of
Acbi (and earlier) phase settlements outside the urban core of Copan, much larger samples of the
available habitation space would be necessary, using a combination of probabilistic and purposive
sampling. What we wish to clarify is that it cannot yet be demonstrated that all available space in
the rural areas was uninhabitated or only sparsely occupied in Acbi times, given that such claims
are based on a small sample of visible sites (Webster and Freter l990a:79), and thus represent a
very small proportion of the landscape available for occupation.
The cautionary tale provided here is that the sampling of surface sites does not necessarily provide
a representative picture of overall settlement or population history. As a corollary, caution should
be exercised in using the results of such surface site studies to model land-use and settlement patterns
of areas between (and beneath) visible sites, particularly in areas such as the Copan Valley where
ceramics and architecture from earlier phases are not always represented on the surface.
Copan Acropolis Research: Development and

Size of the Early Copan Polity
Findings from the recent settlement research have been used to draw conclusions about the nature
and development of the Copan politwy (Webster and Freter l 990a:81-82). Again, however, this has
been done without reference to other sources of relevant evidence. Somewhat ironically, the results
of the PAC II work are projected backward in time, to the earlier occupations, events, and settlement
history of the Copan Valley that were apparently beyond the goals of these investigations (Webster
and Freter l990a:69). In regard to the pre-Coner phase Copan polity, and its settlement history,
Webster and Freter (199Oa:82) state:
Our guess is that the later Acbi pocket population was probably as low as 2,000-3,000 people. Given these
figures, as well as the apparent limited architectural activity at the Principal Group before this time, the roles
of the 11 putative "kings" in the dynastic sequence preceding the twelfth ruler, Smoke Jaguar, become
exceedingly problematical. If these recorded rulers were real persons, and if they were actually predecessors
or ancestors of Smoke Jaguar and his successors at Copan (as opposed to other Maya centers to which the
Copan dynasty traced its origins), then they ruled over a very small-scale polity both in terms of subjects and
teITitory.
The basis for concluding that there was limited architectural activity in the Principal Group before
the twelfth ruler (who came to the throne in A.D. 628) is not given, nor is the implicit questioning
of the "reality" of the existence of the 11 "putative" rulers preceding Smoke Jaguar explained. These
assumptions do support the conclusion that Copan had a single 200-year pulse of sociopolitical and
demographic florescence in the Late Classic, beginning with the reign of Smoke Jaguar, as Webster
and Freter state (199Oa:82). Although such a conclusion ignores the evidence for important Middle
Preclassic sociopolitical evolution at Copan (Fash 1988), of more direct concern here, it also ignores
the evidence for the crucial development of the Copan polity in the Acbi period (ca. A.D. 400-
650). Ongoing research and the previously cited data bearing on pre-Coner settlement produced by
pre-PAC II valley test probes and excavations contradict these conclusions by indicating that there
was a well-developed and powerful polity at Copan during Acbi times, ruled by "kings" every bit
as real as Smoke Jaguar. We note that Webster and Sanders have suggested shifting the obsidian
sequence back 50 years, so that the Coner period would begin at ca. A.D. 600, to provide enough
time "for the extraordinarily rapid increase of the early Coner population" (Webster and Freter
l 990a:80). We suggest that recognition of the importance of pre-Coner sociopolitical developments,
including the sizable populations inhabiting the Copan Valley during this period, make such "ad-
justments" unnecessary.
Both previous work in the Principal Group (Becker 1983; Cheek 1986; Guillemin 1978) and
current excavations in the Copan Acropolis, controlled by the well-defined architectural stratigraphy
revealed in the famous corte, or Copan River cut (Sharer et al. 1989, 1990), provide the basis for
important inferences about the timing and scale of activities controlled by the earliest of Copan's
rulers. While most of the basic sources outlining the scale, timing, and events associated with the
early Acropolis were at least potentially available to Webster and Freter (199Oa), including those
by Becker (1983), Cheek (1983), Fash (1988, 1989), Guillemin (1978), and Sharer et al. (1989), we
recognize that some of the results summarized here have come to light since the publication of their
article.
Excavations have documented the construction sequence underlying the eastern half of the Acrop-
olis (Figure 1), including Str. 1 OL- 16, Str. 1 OL-26, and the entire East Court (Str. 1 OL-22 and
adjacent buildings). Temporal control is secured by a combination of stratigraphy, chronometric
180
LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY
[Vol. 2, No. 2, 1991
assessments, associations with ceramics and other artifacts, and newly discovered inscriptions with
Maya calendric dates. Although more work remains to be done and our conclusions are necessarily
provisional, it is now apparent that Acropolis construction began around A.D. 400 with the raising
of a series of monumental platforms and buildings that covered earlier smaller-scale eonstructions.
These monumental construetions probably represent the first royal administrative, residential, and
ritual complex at this locus, as indicated by the scale and elaboration of architecture and assoeiated
epigraphic and iconographic features.
Far from representing "limited architectural activity," the overall size of this initial version of
the Acropolis ("Phase" 4, ea. A.D. 400-500) appears to have covered about the same area as all
subsequent versions ("Phases" 3-1, ca. A.D. 500-800). Exeavations to date have revealed that the
north-south extent of the Middle Classic Acropolis was about the same as it was at the end of
dynastic rule ("Phase" 1, ca. A.D. 700-800), i.e., about 225 m long. The largest single Phase 4
platform exposed thus far, given the field name "Amarillo," measures some 70 m north-south by
68 m east-west by 6 m in height, and once covered the bulk of the southeast quadrant of the
Acropolis (its full eastward extent may never be known, due to destruction by the Copan River).
A platform of equivalent height, dating to this same initial period, has been found to the west of
Amarillo, but its overall size and extent have yet to be traced. North of Amarillo, a lower platform
supported a large complex of multiroomed (unvaulted) masonry administrative/residential type
buildings, underlying the northeast quadrant of the Acropolis. Excavation has defined eight of these
structures thus far, arranged around an east-west alignment of three courts (the only adequately
exposed example, Court B, measures ca. 25 m north-south by 50 m east-west). The exteriors of
these northern buildings were decorated with elaborately modeled and painted stucco reliefs (now
destroyed), and at least one interior painted hieroglyphic text. While these results are preliminary
and will surely be refined by work in subsequent field seasons, they are already sufficient to contradict
the claim of"limited architectural activity" associated with the early Classic Copan rulers, as
advaneed by Webster and Freter (199Oa:82).
The size and elaboration of this initial Acropolis complex seems to us to reflect the power of a
very real political authority at Copan during the very period that the inscriptions tell of the founding
of the royal dynasty and the reigns of the first kings. In fact, if we use the Acbi period population
estimates given by Webster and Freter (199Oa:81-82), when the scale of Acropolis construction is
compared to population size estimates (as a rough measure of available labor resources) it would
appear that the "putative" earliest kings of Copan relied on a labor pool only about 20 percent the
size of the labor force available to the latest kings (based on their estimates of 4,00S5,000 total
population at A.D.600, vs. l 5,000-20,000 total population for A.D.750-800), yet as we have noted
above, it appears that the overall scale of the later versions of the Acropolis was not signifieantly
greater than the earliest. Thus, if the pre-Coner population was as low as Webster and Freter estimate,
then the earliest Copan kings must have controlled a far greater proportion of the available human
energy than did the later kings, at least as reflected in the labor needed to construct and maintain
the Acropolis. This would imply that in a proportional sense, the twelfth ruler, Smoke Jaguar (or
Smoke-Imix{iod K), actually possessed less power and controlled fewer resources than his pred-
ecessors, rather than being responsible for centralizing and augmenting royal authority, as other
lines of evidence had previously indicated. It should be added that once our exeavations are complete
we should be able to make more detailed estimates of the energy requirements for each Acropolis
construction episode, just as one study has already done for a single Phase 1 building, Str. lOL-22
(Abrams 1987).
The more likely alternative, it seems to us, is that for reasons discussed previously, the earliest
Copan rulers actually controlled far larger numbers of people than allowed by the population
estimates for the Acbi period given by Webster and Freter (199Oa:81): 2,00>3,000 for the Copan
pocket and 4,000-5,000 total valley population at the end of Acbi times (ca. A.D. 600). A more
realistic population estimate for the Acbi period (ca. A.D.400-650), taking into account the evidence
for deeply buried settlement remains in the Copan pocket, might be on the order of 8,000-10,000.
A population at this level, or even assuming a slightly lower figure for the early Acbi period, seems
more consistent with the earliest monumental constructions corresponding to Acropolis phase 4 o
ca. A.D. 400-500.
These findings from beneath the East Court are reinforced by contemporaneous activ
in the Acropolis. Excavations inside the pyramidal substructure of Str. 10L-26 (the f
which bears the Hieroglyphic Stairway) have revealed a number of earlier buildings
directly tied into the overall Acropolis sequence devised by Sharer and his colleagues.
constructed during the same initial Acropolis period (Phase 4, ca. A.D. 40>500), and given the
field name "Papagayo," contains Stela 63 erected inside this building by the third ruler, in honor
of the founder of the Copan dynasty. The founder, whose glyphic name reads K'inich Yax K'uk
Mo', is cited on Stela 63 as having performed an important ceremony on the period ending date
9.0.0.0.0 (A.D.435). This date and his name also occur on later Coner phase inscribed monuments,
indicating that this action continued to be considered important far after its first known recording
on Stela 63. The fourth ruler, Cu-Ix, placed a new floor inside Papagayo at the same time he
commemorated a hieroglyphic step at the base of Stela 63. To the east of Papagayo structure and
its associated platform is an earlier, very large platform which in all likelihood is the work of either
the first or second recorded Copan ruler. Still earlier masonry constructions buried beneath this
platform are stratigraphically linked to Ballcourt I, dated to the mid-fourth century by Cheek (1983).
Thus archaeological, as well as epigraphic, evidence exists for important activities for the first, third,
and fourth rulers. What is even more intriguing is that there is sophisticated architecture (including
Ballcourt I) in the same area that probably predates the reign of the later-acknowledged dynastic
founder. Thus, archaeological evidence indicates that other individuals of notable social and political
stature preceeded Yax K'uk Mo', just as has been proposed on the basis of a few very fragmentary
textual references, such as Copan Stela 24 (Stuart 1989).
Given the growing body of evidence from the Acropolis, it appears to us that the initial Copan
kings were not only very real individuals, but were basically indistinguishable from their Late Classic
heirs except by their earlier date of rule? which makes it more difficult to recover the remains of
their activities. As a final comment on the reality of these initial rulers and the size of the polity
they controlled, we note that a recent reinterpretation of the text on the second-earliest dated stela
at Quirigua (Monument 26 at ca. A.D. 493; see Ashmore [1980]; Jones [1983]) argues that rather
than referring to the third and fourth rulers of Quirigua, as originally assumed, the inscription refers
to the third and fourth kings of Copan (Schele 1990). This evidence raises the intriguing possibility
that far from being a "very small-scale polity both in terms of subjects and territory" (Webster and
Freter 1990a:82), Copan controlled Quirigua and its resourcesfrom the vewbeginningofits political
history, rather than as a result of Late Classic expansion as formerly thought (Sharer 1990:106).
Although this latest clue from Quirigua has yet to be investigated further, it raises the very real
possibility that Middle Classic Copan was one of the largest of all known Maya polities in territorial
extent, if not population size. Regardless, the possibility that Quirigua was within Copan's Middle
Classic realm is certainly consistent with evidence gained from all aspects of research at Copan that
strongly supports the conclusion that the period of Copan's Classic florescence dates to a minimum
of 400 years-equivalent to the span of its historically recorded dynasty-rather than the 200 years
proposed by Webster and Freter (199Oa:82).
THE END OF THE CLASSIC AT COPAN
The investigations at Copan since 1975 have made refinements in the ceramic ch
inally proposed by Longyear, but the basic sequence has not been altered. In fact, in
on the Copan ceramic sequence, Viel (1983, personal communication 1991) remarke
for Longyear's original ceramic analyses and the conclusions that he drew from tho
Webster and Freter (1990a:83) refer to Longyear's "good common sense and remarka
Nonetheless, the crucial juncture between Classic and Postclassic in the Copan cera
and its implications for understanding the timing and processes involved in the dem
polity have recently emerged as issues of concern, which we will briefly review her
Dating the "Collapse" at Copan
Viel dated the end of his Coner phase (equivalent to Longyear's Full Classic) on the basis of his
original analysis and the lack of clear evidence for occupations associated with Postclassic ceramics
(as defined by Longyear) from over 700 excavations in the Copan Valley carried out by the PAC I
in 1978-1980 (Baudez 1983). Following Longyear's idea of a relatively rapid abandonment, Viel
(1983:538, 542) allowed some 50 years between the end of monument commemoration (at that
time still believed to be A.D. 800) and the end of the Coner phase. Thereafter, there are two dotted
lines on his chronological chart (Viel 1983:541) between the end of the Coner phase and the beginning
of the Early Postclassic Ejar phase, reflecting the "hiatus" proposed by Longyear between the end
of his "Full Classic" and the beginning of the Postclassic (see above).
Using comparative analysis, Viel dated the onset of the Early Postclassic to A.D. 900, based
primarily on the appearance of Tohil Plumbate pottery, which had been found by Longyear (and
used by him to define the Postclassic), by the PAC I investigations in scattered surface finds, and
at Ballcourt B. The Tohil Plumbate horizon is generally dated to A.D. 900-1200 in southeast
Mesoamerica (Viel 1983:539, 542). Thus, Viel's dating of the end of Coner and the beginning of
Ejar were based on Longyear's original ceramic chronology, placed in the larger regional context of
dated southeastern mesoamerican ceramics.
It should be noted that Viel had no reliable radiocarbon or other chronometric dates to place the
end of this phase in time. Radiocarbon assessments have continued to be problematic at Copan-
Webster and Freter (199Oa:70-71) note that they have some inconsistent dates for their radiocarbon
samples, a problem that has plagued earlier projects. From the moment he initiated PAC II in 1980,
Sanders rightly insisted on the need for a tighter chronological control of the Coner phase ceramics.
Unfortunately, such a ceramic "clock" was never developed, but the obsidian-hydration studies of
Freter (1988; Webster and Freter l 990a) provide the potential for much tighter chronological control
than ceramic dating could ever provide. As noted by Webster and Freter (199Oa:70-71), however,
obsidian-hydration dating has had "mixed results in Mesoamerica," and for that reason, despite
the abundance of obsidian at Copan, Willey, Baudez, and their fellow settlement researchers had
continued to rely on chronological schema derived from comparative studies of the other cultural
and chronological sequences in southeast Mesoamerica.
During the PAC I research, Fash inherited the valley survey and excavations program from Willey
and Leventhal's Harvard Project, and followed the dating of the ceramic phases proposed by the
PAC ceramicist, Rene Viel, in his considerations of settlement history in the Copan Valley (Fash
1983a, 1983b, 1986a). Several key interpretations of the archaeological record were tied to the
chronological placement of the Coner phase. Among them was the idea that the valley test-pitting
data indicated that the bottomlands of the eastern half of the Copan pocket (location of the Principal
Group) were basically filled in with settlements soon after the onset of the Coner phase, and that
the foothills of the eastern pocket were also densely settled by the end of dynastic rule (at that time
dated to A.D. 800). Fash believed that occupation of the fertile bottomlands, the transference of
agricultural activities to the thinner and less productive soils of the foothills and upper slopes of
the valley, and the amount of deforestation and erosion entailed by the agricultural and fuel needs
of the peak population (then estimated at 17,000) would have provoked drastic ecological conse-
quences, entailing system failure and a rapid decrease in population. At that time Viel's estimate
of 50 years for the Coner-Ejar transition seemed like a reasonable timespan for this abandonment
ofthe pocket. In discussing the question ofthe "dissolution ofthe Copan state," Fash (1983b:304)
was emphatic in stating that the ceramic chronology did not allow for much precision in the dating
of the pertinent processes and events:
In the case of Copan, dramatic increases in population size through the Coner phase placed increasing stress
on both the sociopolitical system and the environmental substrate. In Chapters 6 and 7 we examined how
these stresses were responded to in terms of agricultural and settlement systems on the one hand, and increasing
segregation on the other. Here we will provide a model for the manner in which this increasingly hypercoherent
system failed, resulting in rapid devolution and eventual collapse. However, we must offer the caveat that the
data base for the collapse is in general much weaker than that for the rise at Copan. This is due in large part
to the lack of a refined ceramic chronology for the final years of the Late Classic Coner phase (see discussion,
Section VI, Appendix A). At present we can discern what some of the major stresses and defects in the system
were, but the specific timing and interaction of these factors remain to be adequately documented in empirical
terms. As such, the present discussion is at the same time a model and a research design for future investigations
into this problem.
Until recently this is the way things stood regarding the timing for the end of the Classic era at
Copan. Although we indicated in our earlier discussion some difficulties in using their data for
reconstructing the history of settlement in the Copan Valley, we feel Webster and Freter (199Oa,
l 990b) have presented the best possible overview of Late Classic (Coner period) valley settlement.
This is because the nature of archaeological remains and transformational processes in the valley
and the aims of the most recent settlement projects have combined to produce a much more reliable
sample of Coner period sites than those from earlier periods. In regard to their findings from this
sample, they propose extending the end of the Coner ceramic phase several centuries later in time,
thereby dating the final abandonment of the Copan Valley to ca. A.D. 110S1200, based on the
application of obsidian-hydration dating to samples obtained from the testing of large numbers of
surface sites outside the Principal Group in all five sections or "pockets" of the Copan Valley system
(Webster and Freter l 990a:80-82). We feel their proposed extension ofthe Coner phase is potentially
the most important of their results, especially for its implications regarding the collapse issue.
Defining the Classic "Collapse" at Copan
It is clear that the working model of the "collapse" at Copan proposed nearly a decade ago by
Fash (1983b) has been substantially and constructively corrected by the research of Sanders, Webster,
Freter, and their PAC II colleagues. The post-1980 valley work has shown that Fash was more
radical in his materialist-inspired "ecological consequences" model than the case merited. In terms
of process, it is clear that the ecological consequences of Coner phase settlement patterns predicted
to have been a predominant factor in the collapse of centralized dynastic authority were less severe
by the early ninth century A.D. than Fash had suggested in 1983. While the overcrowding and
increasing social segregation in the eastern Copan pocket, as well as the deforestation of the sur-
rounding area entailed by the resident population (Abrams and Rue 1988; Rue 1987), may in fact
have had a role in the destabilization of the political system, nonetheless these factors were not so
devastating as to require the total displacement of the population. After the population peaked in
the first half of the ninth century A.D. (William T. Sanders, personal communication 1990), there
was still enough productive, arable land in the surrounding region for the population to survive-
in slowly declining numbers and progressively less-nucleated communities-for several centuries
thereafter (Webster and Freter l990a, l990b).
In this vein, and in order to clarify which issues and processes are under discussion, we suggest
that the question of the so-called "collapse" should be more precisely defined as a sequence of
processes. The first process was the increasing decentralization of political authority that was seem-
ingly triggered by the shock of the defeat and loss of one of Copan's great rulers at the hands of a
former vassal at Quirigua. The evidence presented earlier indicating that Acropolis Str. lOL-22A
was a council house for the representatives of the different wards or lineages of the Copan polity is
one example of the means used by the succeeding Copan ruler to incorporate the elite leadership
in the decision-making process. The structure of second-tier elite administrators that gained strength
in the wake of this setback (Fash 1988) survived the end of the ancient Copan dynasty and continued
to direct many activities in the Copan valley during the final years of occupation. This process of
political decentralization overlaps and probably contributed to the second process, the collapse of
the centralized dynastic political authority, presently dated at Copan to the unfinished inscription
on Altar L citing the purported accession of a successor to the sixteenth ruler in A.D. 822 (Schele
and Grube 1987). The third process was the demographic decline that occurred in the centuries
following the political collapse, at least in part the result of ecological stress (Abrams and Rue 1988),
as the peak population slowly declined in numbers and redistributed itself across the landscape.
This same pattern of political collapse followed by protracted activity and demographic decline has
been seen at other sites in the Maya Lowlands (Chase and Rice 1985), as at Tikal (Coe 1968),
Quirigua (Sharer 1985), and most recently in the Petexbatun (Demarest 1990), although the specific
LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 2, No. 2, 1991
184
scenario apparent at Copan is not applicable to these other regions. Thus Webster and Freter (199Oa:
82) have added Copan to the roster of lowland sites that indicate that the Classic Maya "collapse"
was an extended process, rather than a sudden catastrophe, played out in most lowland polities
over a period of several centuries (see Sharer 1985:249-252).
The important advances in dating provided by the obsidian-hydration studies in the Copan
Valley settlements, as well as the renewed investigations of epigraphy, iconography, and related
architectural studies in both the valley and the Principal Group, should allow for better control on
the processes and events precipitating the political collapse of centralized authority. Issues such as
the size, distribution, and nature of the population that continued to live in the valley after that
time are best addressed by investigating sites shown to have occupations that postdate the political
collapse. For those interested in the latter issues, the sites in question are now readily identifiable
in both outlying areas and in much of the Copan pocket, thanks to the work of Webster and Freter
(199Oa, l990b) and Webster and Gonlin (1988).
Although Webster and Freter (199Oa: 70-71,80) note the problems that have traditionally plagued
obsidian-hydration dating and that Webster and Sanders "favor shifting the obsidian sequence back
50 years," nonetheless their data do point clearly in the direction proposed and are consistent with
the radiocarbon-dated palynological evidence from the Copan Valley (Rue 1987). Thus it is apparent
that many large sites continued to be oceupied after the political eollapse, as did a great number of
small surface sites in the valley, espeeially those in rural areas. But we feel that the extension of the
Coner ceramic complex by another 200-300 years (essentially doubling its original estimated span)
raises some important questions. Among these is, Why do the sites that produee obsidian dating
to A.D. 800-1200 yield Coner ceramics (Webster and Freter l 990a:80-81), rather than Ejar pottery
(the latter with its Plumbate and other Early Postclassic ceramic markers; see Viel [1983:538-539])?
It is obvious that the definition of, and transition between, these two ceramic complexes needs
reexamination in light of this new chronometric evidence, and the apparent absence of Plumbate
and other well-established Early Postclassic ceramic type and form markers in association with these
late Coner deposits needs to be explained. Thus, while we agree that settlement of the Copan Valley
did continue beyond the ninth century A.D., the actual length of time that occupation persisted
after the political collapse appears still to need refinement by ceramic analyses and further testing
by other chronometric dating techniques, including more of the archaeomagnetic dates mentioned
but not discussed by Webster and Freter (199Oa:78).
From a larger perspective, the Copan evidence has an important bearing on the long-standing
"collapse" issue. The conjunction of data from valley-settlement and urban-core contexts, derived
from archaeological, art historical, and epigraphic sources, allows us to see the "collapse" as a long-
term process of decline at Copan, beginning in the Late Classic and extending into the Early
Postclassic, rather than the sudden catastrophic event traditionally associated with the end of the
Classic period. While local or regional processes may be proposed to explain a pan-Maya Lowlands
collapse (Demarest 1990:21), it seems to us that the specific causes for the demise of the lowland
Classic Maya was due to a conflation of a series of processes that operated within individual polities
over a minimum of several centuries. This is not to say that these loeal and regional proeesses were
not systemically related, along the lines proposed by Lowe (1985), but the Copan evidence does
reinforce the present consensus that there was no single cause-such as invasion, disease, environ-
mental degradation, overpopulation, or warfare-that was responsible for the collapse everywhere
in the Maya Lowlands. The very fact that polities and regions, such as Lamanai in the eastern
lowlands, survived the Classic collapse relatively unscathed (Pendergast 1981), or that specific
processes and timing of"collapse" was different in different areas (see Demarest [1990:14-21] for
an example of the sudden demise of Dos Pilas as eapital of the Petexbatun polity due to conquest),
indicates that we are dealing with a complex and long-operating series of processes rather than a
single and sudden cause for the end of lowland Classic Maya civilization.
CONCLUSION
We have attempted to show how conjunctive research at Copan, as it has developed over a 15-
year period, representing complementary but diverse programs with different objectives, strategies,
and theoretical orientations, nonetheless provides a unique opportunity to explain the developmental
trajectory of the Classic Copan polity, including major questions facing all students of past complex
societies, such as the origins and demise of such systems. Thus we have seen that settlement
archaeology, based on mapping surface manifestations of ancient activity followed by systematic
test-pitting samples of those remains, can provide a reasonable reconstruction of the latest or peak
period of occupation in the Copan valley. But, at the same time, this approach has a greater difficulty,
and may even yield misleading results, when pressed to extend its findings to earlier periods of
occupation. A more accurate and complete picture of Middle Classic Copan emerges when settlement
evidence is combined with the archaeological and historical data from the urban core of the Copan
polity. At the other end of the developmental trajectory, the collapse at Copan is redefined as a
multiple-stage process involving decentralized administration, demise of centralized dynastic au-
thority in the early ninth century, and continuation of occupation for several centuries thereafter
before eventual abandonment of the Copan Valley. This picture emerges from combining results
from the ongoing Acropolis excavations, work in Late Classic elite residential compounds, and
important new dating evidence gained from recent PAC II settlement research.
Of course, since the goal of all scientific inquiry is to build upon knowledge, we hope that this
examination will be seen as a constructive point of departure for improvements in method and
theory in acquiring and interpreting data from complex sociopolitical systems, as well as informative
in the strictly empirical sense. We fully expect that our present understanding of Copan will continue
to be modified by future research. Thus, it is our hope and our conviction that the rich resource of
different data sets from Copan will continue to be successfully combined to provide much more
useful models of settlement history and cultural process in the Copan Valley. To do so requires
patience, flexibility, long-term commitment, and a concerted effort by specialists from different
disciplines who understand the strengths, as well as the limitations, presented by each of the available
sets of evidence.
Acknowledgments. The Copan Acropolis Archaeological Project, some results of which are reported here,
has been funded by IHAH, the National Geographic Society, Northern Illinois University, the University
Museum of the University of Pennsylvania, and several private donors. We are grateful to all these institutions
and individuals for their support. We also thank all the men and women who have participated in the research
at Copan over the past 15 years, all of whom have contributed, directly or indirectly, to the better understanding
of the issues addressed here. Discussions with Ricardo Agurcia, E. Wyllys Andrews, and Rudy Larios have been
helpful in the formulation of this paper. We are especially grateful to Prudence Rice for her editorial advice,
and to Wendy Ashmore, Norman Hammond, Joyce Marcus, David Webster, and three anonymous reviewers
who read earlier versions of this paper and whose criticisms and suggestions have been beneficial to the final
published version.
REFERENCES CITED
Abrams, E.
1987 Economic Specialization and Construction Personnel in Classic Period Copan, Honduras. American
Antiquity 52:485-499.
Abrams, E., and D. Rue
1988 The Causes and Consequences of Deforestation Among the Prehistoric Maya. Human Ecology 16:
377-395.
Ashmore, W.
1980 Discovering Early Classic Quirigua. Expedition 13(1):35-44.
1989 Deceased Maya Rulers and the Celestial North at Copan, Honduras. Paper presented at the 88th
Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association, Washington, D.C.
Baudez, C. (editor)
1983 Introduccion a la arqueologia de Copan, Honduras. Secretaria de Estado en el Despacho de Cultura y
Turismo, Tegucigalpa, Honduras.
Becker, M. M.
1983 Excavaciones en el corte de la Acropolis. In Introduccion a la arqueolog1a de Copan, Honduras, vol.
2, edited by C. Baudez, pp.349-379. Secretaria de Estado en el Despacho de Cultura y Turismo, Tegucigalpa,
Honduras.
Chase, A., and P. Rice (editors)
1985 The Lowland Maya Postclassic. University of Texas Press, Austin.
Cheek, C. D.
1983 Introduccion a las operaciones en la Plaza Principal. In Introduccion a la arqueologia de Copan,
Honduras, vol.2, edited by C. Baudez, pp. l l-23. Secretaria de Estado en el Despacho de Cultura y Turismo,
Tegucigalpa, Honduras.
1986 Construction Activity as a Measurement of Change at Copan, Honduras. In The Southeast Maya
Periphery: Problems and Prospects, edited by P. Urban and E. Schortman, pp. 5s71. University of Texas
Press, Austin.
Cheek, C. D., and D. Milla
1983 La Estructura lOL-4. In Introduccion a la arqueologla de Copan, Honduras, vol.2, edited by C. Baudez,
pp. 37-91. Secretaria de Estado en el Despacho de Cultura y Turismo, Tegucigalpa, Honduras.
Coe, W. R.
1968 Tikal: In Search ofthe Mayan Past. In The World Book Yearbook, pp. 160-190. Field Educationa
Enterprises, Chicago.
Cowgill, G.
1975 A Selection of Samplers: Comments on Archaeo-statistics. In Sampling in Archaeology, edited by J.

W. Mueller, pp. 258-274. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Demarest, A. A.
1990 The Vanderbilt University Petexbatun Regional Archaeological Project: Findings of the 1990 Season.
Submitted to the National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C.
Fash, B., W. Fash, S. Lane, R. Larios, L. Schele, J. Stomper, and D. Stuart
1990 Community Houses and Political Evolution Among the Classic Maya: Investigations of Structure 22A,
Copan. Ms. on file, Department of Anthropology, Northern Illinois University, Dekalb.
Fash, W.
1983a Reconocimiento y excavaciones en el valle. In Introduccion a la arqueologla de Copan, Honduras,

vol. 1, edited by C. Baudez, pp. 229-469. Secretaria de Estado en el Despacho de Cultura y Turismo,
1983b Maya State Formation: A Case Study and Its Implications. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, De-
partment of Anthropology, Harvard University, Cambridge.
1986a Settlement History in the Copan Valley and Some Comparisons with Quirigua. In The Southeast
Maya Periphery: Problems and Prospects, edited by P. Urban and E. Schortman, pp. 72-93. University of
Texas Press, Austin.
1986b La fachada esculpida de la estructura 9N-82: Contenido, forma, iconografia. In Excavaciones en el

area urbana de Copan, edited by W. Sanders, pp. 319-382. Instituto Hondureno de Antropologia e Historia,
1988 A New Look at Maya Statecraft from Copan, Honduras. Antiquity 62:157-169.
1989 Politics, Patronage, and Polity in the Evolution of Dynastic Power in Copan, Honduras. Paper presented
at the 54th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Atlanta.
Fash, W., and B. Fash
1990 Scribes, Warriors, and Kings. Archaeology 45(3):26-35.
Freter, A.
1988 The Classic Maya Collapse at Copan, Honduras: A Regional Settlement Perspective. Unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park.
Gordon, G. B.
1896 Prehistoric Ruins of Copan, Honduras. Memoirs of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Eth-
nology, Harvard University Vol. 1, No. 1. Harvard University, Cambridge.
Guillemin, J.
1978 Estudio y sondeo del flanco oriental de la Acropolis Copan. Ms. on file, Instituto Hondureno de
Antropologia e Historia, Copan, Honduras.
Jones, C.
1983 Monument 26, Quirigua, Guatemala, edited by E. Shortman and P. Urban. Paper 13, Quirigua Reports
II. University Museum Monograph No. 49. The University Museum, University of Pennsylvania, Phila-
delphia.
Longyear, J.
1952 Copan Ceramics: A Study of Southeastern Maya Pottery. Publication No. 597. Carnegie Institution of
Washington, Washington, D.C.
Lowe, J. W. G.
1985 The Dynamics of Apocalypse. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Marcus, J.
1983 Lowland Maya Archaeology at the Crossroads. American Antiquity 48:45o488.

Maudslay, A. P.
1889-1902 Biologla Centrali Americana: Archaeology. Porter and Dulau, London.
Morley, S. G.
1920 The Inscriptions at Copan. Publication No. 219. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington,
D.C.
Pendergast, D. M.
1981 Lamanai, Belize: Summary of Excavation Results 197v1980. Journal of Field Archaeology 8:29-
Rue, D.
1987 Early Agriculture and Early Postclassic Maya Occupation in Western Honduras. Nature 326:6110.
Sanders, W.
1986 Introduccion. In Excavaciones en el area urbana de Copan, edited by W. Sanders, pp. 11-25. Instituto
Hondureno de Antropologia e Historia, Tegucigalpa, Honduras.
Sanders, W. T., and D. Webster
1989 The Mesoamerican Urban Tradition. American Anthropologist 90:521-546.
Schele, L.
1990 Early Quirigua and the Kings of Copan. Copan Note No. 75. Instituto Hondureno de Antropologia e
Historia and the Copan Mosaics Project, Austin.
Schele, L., and N. Grube
1987 U Cit Tok, the Last King of Copan. Copan Note No. 21. Instituto Hondureno de Antropologia e
Historia and the Copan Mosaics Project, Austin.
Sharer, R.
1978 Archaeology and History at Quirigua, Guatemala. Journal of Field Archaeology 5:51-70.
1985 Terminal Events in the Southeastern Lowlands: A View from Quirigua. In The Lowland Maya Post-
classic, edited by A. Chase and P. Rice, pp. 245-253. University of Texas Press, Austin.
1990 Quirigua: A Classic Maya Center and its Sculptures. Carolina Academic Press, Durham, North Carolina.
Sharer, R., D. Sedat, and J. Miller
1989 Toward an Architectural History of the Eastern Acropolis, Copan, Honduras. Paper presented at the
88th Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association, Washington, D.C.
Sharer, R., D. Sedat, and A. Morales
1990 Investigaciones en el patio oriental de la Acropolis de Copan en 1990. Ms. on file, Instituto Hondureno
de Antropologia e Historia, Copan, Honduras.
Stromsvik, G.
1942 Substela Caches and Stela Foundations at Copan and Quirigua. Publication No. 528. Carnegie Insti-
tution of Washington, Washington, D.C.
Stuart, D.
1989 The "First Ruler" on Stela 24. Copan Note No. 7. Instituto Hondureno de Antropologia e Historia
and the Copan Mosaics Project, Austin.
Trik, A. S.
1939 TempleXXII at Copan. Publication No. 509. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, D.C.
Turner, B. L., W. Johnson, G. Mahood, F. Wiseman, and J. Poole
1983 Habitat y agricultura en la region de Copan. In Introduccion a la arqueologla de Copan, Honduras,
vol. 1, edited by C. Baudez, pp. 35-141. Secretaria de Estado en el Despacho de Cultura y Turismo,
Viel, R.
1983 Evolucion de la ceramica en Copan: Resultados preliminares. In Introduccion a la arqueologla de
Copan, Honduras, vol. l, edited by C. Baudez, pp.471-549. Secretaria de Estado en el Despacho de Cultura
y Turismo, Tegucigalpa, Honduras.
Webster, D.
1989 Epilogue. In The House of the Bacabs, edited by D. Webster, pp. 106-107. Studies in Precolumbian
Art and Archaeology No. 29. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C.
Webster, D., and A. Freter
1990a Settlement History and the Classic Collapse at Copan: A Redefined Chronological Perspective. Latin
American Antiquity 1:66-85.
1990b The Demography of Late Classic Copan. In Precolumbian Population History in the Maya Lowlands,
edited by T. P. Culbert and D. Rice, pp. 37-61. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Webster, D., and N. Gonlin
1988 Household Remains of the Humblest Maya. Journal of Field Archaeology 15: 169-190.
Webster, D., W. Fash, and E. Abrams
1986 Excavaciones en el Patio A. In Excavaciones en el area urbana de Copan, edited by W. Sanders, pp.
155-317. Instituto Hondureno de Antropologia e Historia, Tegucigalpa, Honduras.
Whittington, S., and S. Zeleznik
1990 Growth Trajectories of Neighboring Rural Elite Residential Compounds in the Ostuman Pocket, Copan,
Honduras. Paper presented at the 55th Annual Meeting ofthe Society for American Archaeology, Las Vegas.
Willey, G., and R. Leventhal
1979 Prehistoric Settlements at Copan. In Maya Archaeology and Ethnohistory, edited by N. Hammond
and G. Willey, pp. 75-102. University of Texas Press, Austin.
Willey, G., R. Leventhal, and W. Fash
1978 Maya Settlement in the Copan Valley. Archaeology 31(4):32-43.
Received August 2, 1990; accepted May 1, 1991

Sociopolitical Development Copan

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sociopolitical Development Copan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sociopolitical Developments and Methodological Issues at Copan, Honduras: A Conjunctive

William L. Fash and Robert J. Sharer

William L. Fash, Department of Anthropology, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL 60115

Latin American Antiquity, 2(2), 1991, pp. 166-187.

SUMMARY OF RESEARCH AT COPAN

THE CONJUNCTIVE METHODOLOGY AT COPAN

THE ORIGINS OF THE CLASSIC POLITY AT COPAN

Copan Valley Research: Sampling Issues and

A _ n 5 <1 \ < { TYPESOFSUB-OPERATI

\< ) ) t °^° Lack of evi

< \ r _ Rivers and

Copan Acropolis Research: Development and

THE END OF THE CLASSIC AT COPAN

Dating the "Collapse" at Copan

Defining the Classic "Collapse" at Copan

1975 A Selection of Samplers: Comments on Archaeo-statistics. In Sampling in Archaeology, edited by J.

1983a Reconocimiento y excavaciones en el valle. In Introduccion a la arqueologla de Copan, Honduras,

1986b La fachada esculpida de la estructura 9N-82: Contenido, forma, iconografia. In Excavaciones en el

1985 The Dynamics of Apocalypse. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

1983 Lowland Maya Archaeology at the Crossroads. American Antiquity 48:45o488.

Received August 2, 1990; accepted May 1, 1991

You might also like