University of Texas Press

Ethnoecology of the Yucatec Maya: Symbolism, Knowledge and Management of Natural
Resources
Author(s): Narciso Barrera-Bassols and Víctor M. Toledo
Source: Journal of Latin American Geography, Vol. 4, No. 1, ETHNOECOLOGY (2005), pp. 9-41
Published by: University of Texas Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25765087 .
Accessed: 01/10/2013 20:13
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
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.
University of Texas Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of
Latin American Geography.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 129.68.65.223 on Tue, 1 Oct 2013 20:13:18 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Ethnoecology of theYucatec Maya:
Symbolism, Knowledge and Management of
Natural Resources
Narciso Barrera-Bassols1
deGeografia,UnidadAcademicaMorelia. UNAM, Michoacdn,Mexico
Instituto
Victor M. Toledo
enEcosistemas (CIECO), UNAM, Morelia Campus
Centrode Investigaciones
author
Corresponding
Abstract
There is a growing interest worldwide in adopting interdisciplinary approaches for
the
studying the complex and dynamic interplay between societies and landscapes. During
as an
last few years, ethnoecology, broadly defined integrative study of beliefs, knowledge
and practice of a given social entity, has emerged as a useful research method for the
of use and management. Maya people have in
comprehensive understanding landscape
habited the Yucatan Peninsula for the last three thousand years, suggesting that Maya
farmers have successfully managed natural resources, preserving both nature and culture
in the long run. Despite research focusing on Yucatec Maya resource management, un
to their heterogeneous and changing
derstanding of how pre-Hispanic Maya adapted
environment during the past is still limited. There are few studies that fully understand
and explain how contemporary Maya farmers perceive, know, use and manage their land
scapes as a whole. By applying the ethnoecological the inex

approach, this article reveals
tricable links between beliefs, knowledge and management of natural resources among
the Yucatec Maya. The paper concludes by discussing the highly resilient capacity of
Yucatec through examining two main mechanisms: their multiple-use
Maya producers
strategy and their cross-scale concept of health.
resourcemanagement, indigenousknowledge,Mesoamerica,
Keywords: Ethnoecology, landscape, natural
Yucatec Maya, Mexico
Resumen
Existe un creciente interes a nivel mundial
por adoptar enfoques interdisciplinarios
en el estudio de lasmiiltifaceticas entre la sociedad y sus paisajes. La etnoecologia,
relaciones
definida en terminos generales como el estudio de creencias, conocimientos y
integral
una entidad social dada, ha como un metodo cientifico util para el
practicas de surgido
cabal entendimiento de la apropiacion humana de la naturaleza. El pueblo Maya ha habitado
la Peninsula de Yucatan durante los ultimos 3 mil afios, lo cual sugiere que el campesino
ha manejado sus recursos naturales de manera exitosa, preservando naturaleza y
Maya
cultura a traves del tiempo. Sin embargo, existen pocos estudios dedicados a entender y
manera como el usa ymaneja sus
explicar, de integrada, campesino Maya percibe, conoce,
recursos naturales. Al el metodo este articulo revela las inseparables
aplicar etnoecologico,
relacionesque existen entre creencia, conocimiento y practica entre los Maya yucatecos
actuales. Elarticulo finaliza discutiendo la alta capacidad de resiliencia mostrada por los
a traves de dos mecanismos la estrategia de uso multiple y su
Maya yucatecos principales:
concepto multi-escalar de salud.
journal ofLatin American Geography4(1), 2005

10 Journal of Latin American Geography
Palabras claves: Etnoecologa, paisaje, manejo de recursosnaturales, conocimientoindigena,

Mesoamerica,
Maya Mexico
yucatecos,
Introduction
Over the last three thousand years, Maya people have inhabited a heterogeneous
environment: that is the tropical lowlands (and to some extent the highlands) of the
Yucatan Peninsula, of the Mexican states of Tabasco and Chiapas, and
plus portions
Guatemala, Belize and Honduras. This would suggest thatMaya farmers have success
and used natural resources in a mosaic of landscapes,
fully recognized implying knowl
edge and management of local variations in parent material, relief, hydrology, soils, cli
mate, vegetation, and other biotic components.
LJnderstanding of theMaya civilization has evolved and has experimented with a

number of paradigms during the last four decades (Fedick 1996a; Allen et al. 2003; Dun
ning and Beach 2004a). Until the late 1960s, the Maya civilization was recognized as a
complex society supported by extensive, swidden and long-fallow agriculture in a rela

tively homogenous and very limiting tropical landscape setting. However, the "swidden
thesis" was challenged during the late 1970s, when research revealed a differentiated land
scape with varied types of agricultural intensification: mixed cropping, terracing, drained
and raised fields, orchards, forest gardens and other sophisticated hydraulic agricultural
systems.
During the last two decades, new evidence has shown the great complexity of the
ancient Maya world, both in spatial (landscape heterogeneity) and in time dimensions
(ever changing environments). In fact, landscape mosaics with tropical wet and dry for
ests, savannas, palm stands and wetland vegetation types (the last being common features
across the central and southern Maya Lowlands), evolved in an ever-changing environ
ment that fluctuated between
relatively stable periods coupled with unstable ones, due to
long-term climatic changes (Fedick 1996b; Dunning et al. 1998; Gunn et al. 2002a,
2002b).
Most of our fascination with theMaya may be attributed to the fact that the
study
of this civilization creates great potential for diachronic
analysis of the human-landscape
interface: the combined use of and physical
archaeological, geological, paleoecological
geographical data, coupled with evidence about the current management of natural re
sources.
In an effort to explain past phenomena, most ancient Maya research makes fre
quent use of facts, patterns and descriptions of ongoing processes of the contemporary
Yucatec Maya. In this, the of Yucatec Maya resource management becomes crucial,
study
because it helps understand how the pre-Hispanic Maya to the
adapted heterogeneous
landscape mosaic and to the ever
changing environments of the northern Maya Lowlands
(Gomez-Pompa 2003). Thus, research on current practices of the Yucatec Maya peasants
not
only offers relevant data about
agricultural systems and technologies, but also pro
vides outstanding information on management strategies, cognitive systems, and land
views and at household and
scape perceptions, village levels.
Despite the fact that the contemporary Yucatec
Maya is one of the better-known
Mesoamerican cultures in terms of cosmogony and knowledge about nature and resource
use, there are very few studies that fully understand and explain, as a whole, how current
Maya peasants visualize, know and manage their and natural re

surrounding landscapes
sources
(Teran and Rasmussen 1994; Faust 1998; Dunning and Beach 2004b).
Based on a detailed
literature review, this paper synthesizes the relations between
contemporary Yucatec Maya and their surrounding landscapes, using

an
ethnoecological
approach. The basic assumption of this is that the human use of landscapes is
approach
not a mere materialist, but a complex process
techno-productive phenomenon, always

Ethnoecology of the Yucatec Maya 11
mediated by intellectual functions, such as knowledge and cosmology, and organized by

social institutions.
framework: The as a theoretical foundation

Conceptual k-c-p complex
of ethnoecology
can be defined as an nature is per
Ethnoecology interdisciplinary study of how
ceived by humans through a screen of beliefs and knowledge, and how humans, through
their symbolic meanings and representations, use and/or manage landscapes and natural
resources. This allows recognition of the cultural value of the belief-knowl
approach
edge-practice (k-c-p) complex (Figure 1).
Intellectual
appropriation
Material
appropriation
Figure 1. Ethnoecology focuses on the kosmos, corpus and praxis (k-c-p) complex.
or cosmovision,
By focusing on the kosmos, the belief system the corpus, the whole
repertory of or systems, and the praxis, the set of production

knowledge cognitive
practices, ethnoecology offers an integrative approach to the study of the process of
human appropriation of nature (see details inToledo 1992; 2002; Barrera-Bassols 2003).
Ethnoecology seeks to explore the connections, synergies and feedbacks between the
whole repertory of the Yucatec Maya symbols, concepts and perceptions of landscapes
and natural resources, and the set of practical operations through which the material
appropriation of nature takes place.

The as the main aim of
spatio-temporal analysis of the k-c-p matrix, recognized
a and holistic understanding of
any given ethnoecological study, allows comprehensive
the relationships between the three spheres involved in nature's appropriation, which are
geographically and historically contextualized: these are the mindscape, knownscape and
technoscape (Figure 2). The local eco-geographical thought and practice is the result of
the multiple interconnections between the above mentioned three spatiotemporal do
are used as intellectual tools
mains (see also Sauer 1925). Knownscapes and mindscapes

CULTURAL CONTEXT
I <j- Interactions_I
to understand
Figure 2. The landscape concept may be applied using the k-c-p complex
landscape units as socio-cultural constructs (ethnoscapes)
to constantly reorganize the

set of
production activities that have an impact on theman
thus to ever-changing circum
aged landscapes, always reshaping ethnoscapes, according
stances and uncertainties. In synthesis, ethnoscapes must be seen as dynamic, open, hy
brid and complex units that integrate the spatio-temporal dimensions of facts and mean
ings.
A characteristic
of ethnoecology is that it tries to overcome two scientific research
constraints: (1) the obsession of separating intellectual phenomena from practical pur
poses and, as consequence, (2) the tendency to decontextualize local meanings, views,
or economic coor
practices and knowledge by situating them within the epistemological
dinates of modernity (e.g. science and markets) (Descola and Palsson 1996; Hornborg
focuses on the complex process of primary or rural production as a
1996). Ethnoecology
research departure, where humans are seen as social subjects that put into action intellec
tual procedures (knowledge and beliefs), make decisions, and perform practical opera
tions for nature's appropriation. Thus, ethnoecology focuses not just on specific linguistic
or useful
terms, cognitive structures, symbols, perceptual images species and techniques,
but on all the above factors, as forming part of the concrete process through which
humans produce and reproduce theirmaterial conditions. In summary, ethnoecology of
fers an integrated or holistic view and a or oriented
human-ecological socio-ecological
approach, calling for the use of a variety of epistemologies and methodological proce
dures.
Methodology
The Yucatec Maya are one of the well-known indigenous people of Mesoamerica.
A literature review of indigenous peoples from Mexico and Central America, has revealed
that576 (or21%) of some2,700 studiespublishedduringthe 1990s,dealwith theYucatec

a
Maya (Toledo et al. 2002). Such large number of studies about the Yucatec Maya reveal
much research focused on agriculture, soils, ethnobotany, natural resources management
silviculture, hunting and bee-keeping) and ethnology, from a

(including housegardens,
broad perspective.
We selected three kinds of studies for analyzing the k-c-p complex of the Yucatec
Maya: (1) updated and well-informed regional studies about vegetation, flora, soils, cli
to characterize hu
mate, hurricanes, demography, linguistics and land use, which served
man setdements and landscapes of the Yucatan Peninsula; (2) case studies informing
about specific aspects of each one ofthe three ethnoecological domains (symbolism,
In this case, sixtyYucatec Maya communities were identified as
knowledge and practice).
one or more studies some aspects of the k-c-p complex2 (Figure 3 and
having covering
Table 1).
/ (30 ? YUCATAN 0
a? /?^ X &/'
?/ m S ,<&,c........
?j7i, iff
jf CAMPECHE
\% H@ / ^
?x^r- ) @ a ! <sT 71 /
1 1 '
r- If
showing the geographical location of 60 village
Figure 3. Map of the Yucatan peninsula
case studies. For details see in Table 1.
numbering
These information at household

studies offer valuable and village levels on agricul
ture, homegarden, local on soils, relief, climate, vegetation, ecological

hunting, knowledge
succession, plants and animals (principally vertebrates), and about rituals, myths and sa
cred views about nature (Table 1). Most of these community-level studies were carried
out by Mexican scholars, from research institutions located in the Yucatan Peninsula,
showing the increasing interest of regional students in contemporary Maya people; (3)
authored by Yucatec Maya scholars (Canul-Pech 1967; Ucan-Ek et al.
finally,publications
1982; and Dominguez-Ake 1996)
were
especially because
reviewed, these offer an in
depth view of contemporary Maya beliefs, knowledge and practice.

Since our analysis is based on information about the interplay between humans
in theMexican which is the present day
and landscapes portion of the Yucatan Peninsula,
Yucatec Maya area, results, discussion and conclusions of this study relate to the northern
portion of theMaya Lowlands (Fedick and Morrison 2004). Contrasting with the south

ern cover between 40 to 60% of the area, the northern

Maya Lowlands, where wetlands
lowlands are characterized by a lack of rivers and surface water, low rainfall, lower eleva
ETHNOECOLOGICAL INFORMATION OF 60YUCATEC MAYA LOCALITIES (PART 1)
Reality Authors EAR1 Kosmos Cqrjpus

Benito juarcz Ruenes et al. 1995 Puuc-BolonchenMills
Huntochac Ruenes et al. 1995 Puuc-BolonchenHills
Ruenes et al. 1995 Puuc-BolonchenHills
Rucncset al. 1995 Puuc-BolonchenHills
Xcitpil Ruenes et al. 1995 CentralHills
Ruenes et al. 1995 CentralHills
Xcumchei Ruenes et al. 1995 Puuc-BolonchenHills
Hampolol Ruenes et al. 1995 Puuc-BolonchenHills
Kastamay Ruenes et al. 1995 Puuc-BolonchenHills
Ruenes et al. 1
Edzna-Silviruk Sp,Ri, PI, An,
Pich Faust 1998
Hirose 2003 Trough My So,Veg
Dzacauchen Ruenes et al. 1995
Ejido Haro Ruenes et al. 1995
CentralHills
Ixchugal Ruenes et al. 1995
CentralHills
Sta.Elena Ruenes et al. 1995
Puuc-BolonchenHills
S. N. BuenavistajRuenes et al. 1995
Puuc-BolonchenHills
Kanibul Ruenes et al. 1995
NortheastKarst Plain
Chac -choben Ruenes et al. 1995 Uaymil
Los DivurciadoslRuenes et al. 1995Uavmil
Kanrenioc Ruenes et al. 1995
Coba-Okop
et Caribbean Reef &
M. Ocampo Ruenes al. 1995
[EasternCoastal
Ruenes et al. 1995 CaribbeanReefMargin]
&
Tres Reyes An,PI.
QuijanoHernandezi EasternCoastal Ri,My
Veg
& Calmc 2002 Margin
Ruenes et al. 1995 Coba-Okop
Chan Chen Ruenes et al. 1995 Coba-Okop
Ruenes et al. 1995 .!0?.! ~Okop
20 de nov. Ruenes et al. 1995 Three Rivers
Ruenes et al. 1995 Three Rivers
Ruenes et al. 1995 Uaymil
Tenabo Caballero 1992 Puuc-BolonchenHills
Punta Garcia-Frapolli
29 et al. 2005 Coba-Okop
Laguna
Dorruneucz-Ake NorthCoast Sp,Ri, PI, An,
Muxupip 1996 My So,Cl
Oxkintoc Puuc-SantaElena Ri
Rcdfield
32 Chankom & VillaRojasl934 Northeast My, Ri PI,An
Karst Plain
Giballero 1992
Gutierrez 1996 Northeast
Tixcacaltuyub Villa-Roias 1978 Karst Plain
Chacsinkin Hernandez-BrisendQuintana Roo PI,An,
et al. 1982 Depression Su
Cortina -Villar
CentralHills
1995
Flores& Balam
North Coast
1997
Raniirez-Borgia
et al. 2001
Avila-Gomez 2003
38 X-Hazil jorgenson1998 Uaymil
Table 1. Ethnological information offered from 60 case studies (see
geographical location in Figure 3), with aspects related to the Yucatec

EAR: environmental
Maya k-c-p complex.1 adaptive regions of theMaya
lowlands, proposed by Dunning et al. 1998.
tion and more level terrain, and low forest canopy (Fedick and Morrison 2004; Dunning
et al. 2002).

ETHNOECOLOGICAL INFORMATION OF 60 YUCATEC MAYA LOCALITIES (PART 2)

Locality Authors EAR< Kosmos Corpus Praxis
Caballero 1992 Gob -Okop
Caballero 1992 Uavmil Hg
41 |Teran& Rassmussen Gob -Okop PI,An,
Sp,Ri,My Ag, Hor, Bee
1994_ So, Veg
Flores& Balam
1997
Herrera-Castro
42 Xuilub
et al. 1993
Gob -Okop Hg, Ext
Sanchez-Gonzalez
1993
Coba Barreraet al. 1976 Gob -Okop PI, Vc
NortheastKarst
Yalcoba Sosa t990 Sp,Ri,My
Plains
NortheastKarst
Yaxuna Freidel et al. 1993 Sp, Ri,My
Plains
La Torre-Cuadros
Solferino PI, Vc
& Islebe 2003
NortheastKarst
Dzonot Ake Caballero 1992 Hg
Plains
NortheastKarst
Loche Caballero 1992 Hg
Plains
Arias 1980
Isley 1984 NortheastKarst Cl, PI, An, Ag, Hor, Arb,
49 Yaxcaba Ri,My
Flores& Balam Plains So, Ve Bee
1997
Flores& Balam Northwest
Sotuta Ri,My
1997 Karst Plains
Puuc-Santa
Caballero 1992 Hg
Elena
Ucan-Hk NortheastKarst Ag, Hor, Aro,
Pixov Ri,My
et al. 1984 Plains Bee
Puuc-Santa
Maxcanu Caballero 1992 Hg
Elena
Puuc Cl, PI, An, Ag, Hor, Ex,
Sanabria 1986
BolonchenHills So, Vc
Northwest
Chunchucmil Ortega ct al. 1993 Karst Plains Hg
Chunhuhub Anderson 2003 QuintanaRoo

Depression
A vilaCamacho QuintanaRoo Hu
Ortega et al. 1993 An, PI
_Depression
X-Hazil Bello et al. 2000 PI,An, So Ag,Hg,Hor,
Hu
Monti el-Ortega
Sinanche
etal. 1999
Estrada-Medina Northwest
Hocaba Ag
et al. 2004 Karst Plains
Table 1 (continued).
The Maya of theYucatan Peninsula: socio-cultural and geographical

contexts
The socio-cultural context

El Sal
The Mesoamerican region, which includes portions of Mexico, Guatemala,
vador, Belize, Honduras and Costa Rica, is one of the richest biological and cultural areas
of theworld, over 100 a current of some 16
housing indigenous peoples, with population
million inhabitants (Toledo et al. 2002). 0.8 millionYucatec-Mayan lan
Approximately
guage-speaking inhabitants live in the states of Yucatan, Quintana Roo and Campeche,
within theMexican of the Yucatan Peninsula to the last
portion (YP), according popula
tioncensusofMexico (INEGI 2000).

some 24% of the total

The Yucatec Maya account for population of theYP, 90% of them
being bilingual Maya-Spanish speakers. Indigenous population distribution within the three
states is unequal but important. Fifty-three percent of the Yucatan state's population is
Yucatec Maya, which makes it the second most important state at national level in terms
of the percentage of its indigenous population. In Campeche and Quintana Roo, 37%
and 25% of population isYucatec Maya It is likely that the Yucatec Maya
respectively.
is higher than the official estimates, since these use language as the only pa
population
rameter to determine membership of indigenous groups.
Two of the most characteristics of the YP are: (1) its
important demographic
to
relatively low population density (25 inhabitants per km2) compared population density
at national level (50 inhabitants per km2), and (2) its high urban population concentration
(80% of the totalpopulation), coupledwith high ruralpopulation dispersion (98% of

localities). However, it is likely that the actual population linked to primary activities (ag
riculture, catde ranching, fishing and forest production) is higher than the official esti
mates of rural (inhabitants living in localities with less than 2,500 population),
population
as many of the localities between 2,500 and 10,000 inhabitants are or
partially fully in
volved in these production activities. Thus, official estimates offer a biased view of the
Yucatec Maya distribution. It is likely that the vast majority of the rural
geographical
population within the northern Maya Lowlands is of Yucatec Maya origin. Cultural vital
a and permanence of a subsistence strategy character
ity, large population long-standing
ize the contemporary Yucatec Maya people.
The geographical context

The YP is a shelf formed by marine thatwas slightly uplifted during the
limestone
Over an area of 168,000 km2, this flat to
Plio-Quaternary (Ferrusquia-Villafranca 1993).
slightly undulating limestone relief, with scattered hummocks and hillocks {altillos) of
elevations no higher than 400 m, is subjected to karstic processes, with limited groundwa
ter resources. Water does not flow across the surface in streams and rivers in the northern
Maya lowland, but rather seeps into the limestone base and flows underground to the sea.
water levels vary over short distances, on the variations
Underground greatly depending
of the karstic relief. Scattered patches of acidic bottomland soils, clayey and imperme
able, are transformed into shallow lakes or swamps {bajos) during the rainy season. Some
of the bajos, which form at the foot of limestone ridges, are deep enough to hold water
throughout the year. Dissolution depressions, such as dolines and uvalas, or man-made
on the
depressions, locally called aguadas, depend yearly rains to replenish water (Faust
1998).
Climate is tropical with markedly distinct wet and dry seasons and
(AwQ Aw^.
Annual mean
temperature is high (26? C), with slight variations during the year. Annual
rainfall increases from the northwest to the southeast of the Peninsula (500-1,500 mm/
y), ranging from semi-dry to sub-humid and humid tropical. Important portions of the
Peninsula have sub-humid tropical climatic conditions, with a dry season
during the win
ter (November- a season summer
April) and rainy during the (May-October). Rainfall
scarcity for half of the year, rainfall of and shallow soils

irregularity, scarcity groundwater
are the main environmental constraints for agriculture (Ewell and Merrill-Sands 1987;
Hernandez-Xolocotzim et al. 1990).
are to
Soils Inceptisols and shallowmoderately deep, generally alkaline, but reac
tion depends on the karstic relief position, conditions and parent material. These
drainage
soils have formed from calcimorphic alluvial and colluvial sediments, distributed in com
plex patchy associations controlled by the microrelief patterns (Hernandez-Xolocotzim

1959; Robles-Ramos et al. 2004). The
1958; Bautista-Zuniga slighdy undulating karstic

Ethnoecology of the Yucatec 17
Maya
relief of the northern Maya Lowland is a mosaic of dissolution depressions alternating

with rock outcrop mounds with a relative elevation of one to two meters.
are the most common soils in the northern YP et al.
Leptosols (Bautista-Zuniga
2003a). Leptosols are not easy to conventional taxonomies so that almost
classify using
everyone specializing inYucatan soils, including governmental agencies, research agencies
and extension services, uses theMayan soil nomenclature (Ewell 1984; Duch, 1989; Bautista
Zuniga et al. 2003a, 2003b; Estrada-Medina et al. 2004).

Generally, soils are too shallow
and stony to allow agricultural mechanization; therefore, milpa shifting cultivation is the
best-adapted system to the patchy karstic landscapes of the region (Pool-Novelo 1980).
areas
Moreover, high spatial heterogeneity of Leptosol complicates soil inventory, agri
cultural development, agronomic experimentation and transfer of agricultural technol
ogy, among other things (Bautista et al. 2004).

Vegetation distribution follows the climatic zoning of the YP, ranging from low
forests in the dry northwest to tall forests in the humid southeast. Forests are distributed
in a patch-like pattern due to shifting cultivation, with the inclusion of tropical planta
tions and pastures.
The Yucatec Maya appropriation of nature
The cognitive appropriation: the corpus sphere

Yucatec
Maya ecological knowledge (the corpus sphere) is relatively well-known
and well documented. The best repertory of Yucatec Maya knowledge refers to nomen
clature and taxonomy of soils, relief, hydrology, plants (wild and cultivated) and vegeta
tion. Local knowledge of climate, ecological processes or biotic interactions also exists
but has been poorly recorded.
Climate, reliefand soils

The wide variety of Yucatec Maya meteorological and climatic terms demonstrates
a
good understanding of the YP hydrological cycle and zoning, although the full compre
hension of these phenomena requires further analysis. Canul-Pech (1967) recognizes three
main climatic seasons, according to temperature, rainfall presence or absence and season
ality. Temperature, direction and intensity of winds, and rainfall are constantly assessed
around the year and within the day, as these factors are inextricably linked to the success
of Yucatec Maya shifting cultivation. Rainfall is constantly and obsessively monitored
as it is scarce, That iswhy Yucatec
during the annual cycle, irregular and unpredictable.
farmers make use of their astronomical to rainfall and recognize
Maya knowledge predict
as one of theirmain deities to Chaak, the rain God. In fact,Yucatec Maya farmers depend
on their knowledge skills and constandy offer rituals to this uneven meteorological phe
nomenon.
The Maya term for soil isLuum. However, Lu'um also means land, terrain, land
a relational domain that
scape and nature inYucatec Maya language. It is comprehensive
surpasses the scientific concept of soil body, because it considers the karstic landscape as
an a fundamen
integral unit where soil-relief-vegetation relationships and dynamics play
tal role for farming practices Thus, Lu'um is a holistic concept
(see below). reflecting
and processes in the soil mande and on the
pervasive and discrete structures, dynamics
entire landscape, but which also includes a primordial symbolic domain within theYucatec
Maya cosmology.
So far,Yucatec on soils uses the most extensive indigenous ped
Maya knowledge
ological terminology known among all Mesoamerican peoples, including Mestizo popula

tions (Barrera-Bassols and Zinck 2000,2004). More than 80 descriptive terms have been
found referring to soil characteristics, properties and attributes relating to color, texture,
structure, consistency, moisture retention capacity, moisture condition, soil erosion, soil
depth, soil fertility, stoniness, relief position, soil-relief-vegetation relations and anthro
soils. The number of terms used is as revealed in
pogenic descriptive rapidly increasing,
new research (Table 2) (Barrera-Bassols 2003; Bautista-Zuniga et al.
ethnopedological
2004).
Yucatec Maya Yucatec Maya

Soil Terms English Terms Spanish Terms
Etymology
(Luum)
Soils named by color
Box lu 'um Box: lightblack light black soil Suelo negro claro
lik' lu 'um Ek': dark black Dark black soil Suelo negro obscuro
Kan: yellow Reddish-yellow
Katicab lu 'um Suelo Amarillo rojizo
Cab: reddish syrup soil
Chak Kancab In 'urn Chak: red Yellowish-red soil Suelo rojo amarillento
Chak lu 'um Char: dark red Dark reddish soil Suelo rojizo obscuro
) a 'axkomhi 'um Ya'axkom: green Gr soil Suelo verde
Sahkab lu 'um Sahkab: white White soil Suelo bianco
Soils named by texture, structure and consistence
'Itrtkellu Tzekel: flat stone Flat stone soil Suelo pedregoso de la)a
Chid) lu 'urn Chich: gravel Gravellv soil Suelo gravoso
Puus lu 'um Puus: loamy Loamy soil Suelo franco
Taiakei lu 'urn Tatakei: sticky Sticky soil Suelo pegajoso
Kas: half
Kas tatakeilu 'um Slightly sticky soil Suelo medio pegajoso
Tatakei: stickv
Kat lu'um Kat: heavy clay Heavy clay soil Suelo arcilloso pesado
Kuut: fine-grained Fine-grained Suelo fino arcilloso
Kuut lu 'um
whitish clay whitish claved soil v bianco
Tas In 'um Tas: soft Soft soil Suelo blando
Chbchdk lu 'um Chochok: loose Loose soil Suelo suelto, flojo
Buy lu 'um Buy: hardness Harden soil Suelo endurecido
Tutluk' Tul Luk': mud Muddv soil Suelo lodoso, lodo
Soils named bymoisture retention capacity and moisture condition
Dzudzic: to absorb Soil with good Suelo que absorbe
Lu 'uman d~ud%icha
Ha: water drainage bien el agua
Matech uh: to impede
Lu'um matechuh Soil with poor Suelo que no absorbe
Dzudzic: to absorb
d^ttdsjcha Ha: water_ drainage conditions el agua
Ak'akbe' A'kalche': swamp Swampy soil Suelo pantanoso
Kas: half
Kas chnllu'nm Half moist soil Suelo medio mojado
Chul: moist
Tupis: field capacity Soil moisture at Humedad al pun to de
Lu 'umtupisdmli
Chul: moist field capacity capacidad de campo
Hach: excessive Soil moisture at Humedad al punto
l.M 'umhachdml
Chul: moist wilting point de marchitez
Ak': humid Humid and greasy Suelo humedo
Ak' akannak lu 'um
Akannak: fatty, greasy soil Vmantecoso
Table 2. Some soil and land terms commonly and widely used by Yucatec
Maya farmers. Source: Barrera-Bassols 2003.
The reviewof thisterminologyshows the followingaspects (Figure4):While soil

terms referring to relief position, stoniness, texture,
soil-relief-vegetation relationship,
structure and consistency account for 62.5% of the Yucatec Maya soil nomenclature,
terms referring to fertility,moisture retention capacity, drainage regime and color account
for 27.5%. On the other hand, soil terms referring to erosion, depth and anthropogenic

of the Yucatec 19
Ethnoecology Maya
soils include only 10% of the Yucatec Maya soil nomenclature. All of these soil proper
ties and attributes are directly or indirectly related to soil fertility, land management and
workability under shifting cultivation in karstic landscapes. Although Yucatec Maya farm
ers are not aware of are able to
long-term soil formation processes, they recognize and
name soil erosion and fertility depletion when
processes assessing shifting cultivation
practices.
14
12
10
(1) Relief (2) Stoniness

(3) Soil-relief-vegetation (4) Texture, structure and consistence
(5) Fertility (6) Color

(7) Moisture (8) Erosion
(9) Anthropogenic origin (10) Depth
Figure 4. Frequency of YM soil terms related to ten main soil properties.

Source Barrera-Bassols 2003.
Soil identification is closely related to relief, such that this criterion determines the
at least 9 main relief types,
highest number of soil categories. Yucatec Maya recognize
and the understanding of soil-relief relations as a continuum resembles the concept of
soil catena or toposequence a detailed
coined by Milne (1947), and reflects recognition of
the local and micro-local soil heterogeneity and variability (Bautista-Zufiiga et al. 2003b).
Soil depth and stoniness play a critical agricultural role in areas of shallow and marginal
soils, and while the Yucatec Maya farmers recognize the soil as a 3-D body, nevertheless,
the topsoil is considered the diagnostic horizon for the local soil classification.
From the literature review itwas found that the Yucatec Maya recognize some 30
soil taxa, with their corresponding relief types; twelve of them can be considered as main
soil types.Most of these soil types are well represented in theYP and are further clustered
into subtypes. Contemporary Maya soil taxonomy is a rather simple but hierarchical sys
tem, according to ethnopedological research in different Mayan communities of the YP
(Perez-Pool 1984; Sanabria 1986; Dunning 1992; Teran and Rasmussen 1994; Estrada
Medina et al. 2004). The recognition of a large number of soil properties allows Yucatec
Maya farmers to classify soils by the inclusion of soil descriptors, which are not necessar

among all soil taxa. Soil classification is based on color, relief

ily used and contrasted
position, depth, stoniness, drainage, moisture retention capacity, consistence, texture, fer
tility and workability of the topsoil.

Although any comparison between the Yucatec Maya and technical soil classifica
tions is preliminary at this stage, the correlation between soil classes of two contrasting
farmers classify soils on the basis of a continuous as
systems is striking. Yucatec Maya
sessment of the topsoil. Soil classes are determined such as
using qualitative properties
soil fertility, relief, vegetation types and land-use history. Technical soil classifications use
measurable properties of the 3-D soil body, supported by laboratory determinations and
theories on soil formation. Yucatec Maya soil classification is behavioral, relational,
diachronic, utilitarian and local, while technical soil classification
qualitative, is synchronic,
on
measurable, genetically oriented and universal. The first relies agricultural land-use
potential and soil fertilitymaintenance, while the second is based on diagnostic properties
that are not necessarily utilitarian.
However, recent research carried out by Bautista-Zuniga and collaborators (2004),

demonstrates a close correlation between soil types and theWRB soil types along
Mayan
a in the northern YP1 (Figure 5). Estrada-Medina and collaborators
typical toposequence
a hierarchical
(2004) found similar results when constructing Maya soil taxonomy inHocaba
municipality. Results also demonstrate synergies between the classifications systems, which
could be further utilized for agricultural development.
1ST
(ALT1LLOorMOUND) SOIL TOPOSEQUENCE
CHPW1TS ACCORDING TO
13.5-13
Oc'% THE MAYA SOIL NOMENCLATURE
(LADERA
Shallow soils or AND THE WRB
SLOPE)
13.5-12.5
OC %
soils
lntergrade
TAAX
(PLANADA orDEPRESSION)
9- 6OC %
Brown
reddish
brown, Deep soils
andbrown
reddish
soils toredsoils
Red brownish
androckiness.
stoniness
Highest Highrockiness Intermediate Lowerstoniness
and
Lowestbulkdensity andstoniness. rockiness
and rockiness.
Lowbulk lowstoniness. bulkdensity
Highest
density '. Intermediate
bulkdensity
Box liTam(Light blacksoils) Chaltnn .rlaylu'ura (Redto
Ch'oclTol(Blacksoilswith manysmallstones) (Black, flat,Ibrownish
shallow, red. (Reddish
yellow.
Tsek'el(Black, flat,
stonysoils) stonysoils) shallow[< 10cm deep[>10cmdepth]
soils)
or light
|1|
Ch'ich'lu'um(Black, gray brown !depth]soils)
gravellysoils)
PushTum(Blacktograyloamy soils)
Lithicliumic *Lithicchromic
Lithic
hyperskeletik
Leptosols 'Lithicchromic *Eutric Leptosols
Hyperskeletik
Leptosols Leptosols Leptosols chromic
Leptosols
I*Lithic * andEpileptic
Leptosols
*Rendzic Endoleptic
Lcntsols Cambisols_
carbon
'Organic Reference
JWorld
percentage Base
Figure 5. A typical soil toposequence of the northern Yucatan Peninsula, (after:

Estrada-Medina et al. 2004).
flora andfauna
Vegetation,
a detailed on themain types of
The Yucatec Maya house knowledge vegetation of
the YP; most of these can be correlated with vegetation units recognized by botanists (see

Flores 1998; Flores and Ucan-Ek 1983; Flores and Espejel 1994). These include both
a detailed repertory of terms
spatial and temporal units, because Yucatec Maya also have
to
identify stages of vegetation renewal, the ecological succession process which is locally
known as Hubche. Yucatec Maya terms define at least 10 of the 11 main
vegetation types
of theYP (Flores and Espejel 1994); besides, there are at least six terms used to character
ize each forest renewal stage (Figure 6). Yucatec Maya farmers also identify relief-soil
on the
vegetation relationships and processes depending plant ensemble position in both
place and time. In addition, there are numerous key-plant species used
as
ecological indi
cators for productive practices, such as soil fertility indicators.
Ecological Suhuy k'aax

succession (Mature forest)
Ka'anal k'aax
> 50 years
( Kelenche' Kuch or
15-30years Tankab
(Homegarden)
/
/
Ka'anal hubche' Tol-che
^ W-15 years , \Hubche' (Forest corridor)
Ch'aake'en ip
f..V<. ... . Ka'anche
Kambal hub-chu' o \ 1" year
(Seeding table) Hortalizas
f Tamkelen-hubchu'
^ _ \ (Irrigatedagriculture)
\ years^yKV'" 2"* year
aj^<
Kool
f Sak'aab-hubche' (MiJpa)
1 ^2-5 years 3rdyear
Pach-pakal
(Polyculture)
use of natural resources is conducted

Figure 6. The Yucatec Maya multiple by
households and communities as theirmain subsistence strategy.
Botanical the presence of 2400-3000

research shows vascular plant species for the
entire YP, and 2200-2400
for itsMexican portion (Canevalli et al. 2003). This reflects the
high floristic diversity of the region. Two detailed Yucatec Maya botanical knowledge
inventories at the village level reported 920 (Barrera-Marin et al. 1976) and 826 (Anderson
2003) local taxa or "morpho-species". A regional ethnobotanical dictionary documented

Yucatec Maya names and uses formost of the 2166 listed species (Arellano-Rodriguez et
al. 2003), and Flores (1998) reported local names for 88% of the 260 legumes species
(Fabaceae), which is the best represented family in the YP. Similarly, the number of
{Kuch) plant species ranges between 250 and 350 (Jimenez-Osornio et al.
housegarden
1999). Yucatec Maya in
classify plants, locally called Kul, using 16 life-form categories,
cluding trees, herbs, vines, palms, epiphytes, ferns, mosses, lichens and algae (Barrera
Marin et al. 1976; Barrera-Marin
1994; Flores 1998). Life-form categories cross-cut, rather
than include, folk generics and specifics (Anderson 2003).
Research shows that the Yucatec Maya use and manage several
recognize, name,
animal mammals and birds, linked to
species, especially agricultural practices,
homegardening and hunting. Knowledge of fauna shows a deep understanding of ani
and zoological behavior, as these are critical for consump
mal-plant relationships protein

tion (Jorgenson 1998). However, there are no studies dedicated to Yucatec Maya animal
classification. A list of local names of main used animal species
can be found in Schlesinger
(2001).
The praxis sphere: practice

It is widely assumed that the contemporary Yucatec Maya base their livelihood
almost on maize or the
cultivation 1959;
exclusively milpa system (Hernandez-Xolocotzim
Ewell 1984; Teran and Rasmussen 1994). However, although the milpa system is crucial
to
Maya subsistence, itmust be seen merely as a pivotal element in a highly complex
natural resource multiple-use strategy, displayed over the long run. This strategy involves
several production activities in different landscapes and land use systems, such as milpa,
agroforestry, gardening, bee-keeping, hunting, gathering, fishing (in cenotes), and extractive
practices. This multi-strategy land-use continuum is based on the association of managed
forests/cropland/fallow/homegarden/old forest patches, spatially and temporarily orga

nized in a patchwork pattern. The Yucatec Maya a wide
agroforestry continuum provides
array of goods and services during the year cycle for both subsistence and market.
an effective and efficient system since
The Yucatec Maya milpa has proved to be
ancient times (Landa 1982; Perez del Toro 1945). Despite environmental constraints such
as rainfall
scarcity and irregularity, and shallow and stony soils, theMaya milpa still plays
an role within the contemporary resource
outstanding multiple-use strategy. Today, most
Maya farmers combine subsistence and commercial activities, like all Mesoamerican peas
ants. Commercial activities are complementary to the subsistence-oriented
production
(principally represented by milpa, homegardens and hunting), and include bee-keeping,
citrus plantations, horticulture, and timber and non-timber products. In some cases, small
scale irrigation provides surplus to meet regional market needs, but milpa production
a more or less even flow of income
provides throughout the year, minimizing risk under
uncertain market conditions and maintaining long-term security of the farmer's house
hold (Faust 1998).
are low and uneven, the system is maintained because it
Although milpa yields
gives the farmer's household partial control over food security, providing a crucial portion
of the basic consumption needs, and because maize is a sacred food and an element of
Yucatec Maya an number of goods and services are pur
identity. However, increasing
chased with cash income from agro-commercial and off-farm activities (Ewell and Merrill
Sands 1987). The Yucatec Maya ethnoecology reflects the complexity of agricultural ad
to micro-relief and soils at regional, local
aptations heterogeneity variability of marginal
and parcel levels. It also reflects a flexible and dynamic strategy, con
knowledge-based
to cope with environmental and economic scarcities and uncertainties.
stantiy reshaped
Maya milpa includes annual, bi-annual and perennial cultivars with up to 87 differ
ent crops and tree crops within a
single village (Teran and Rasmussen 1994). These in
clude both native and imported domesticated et al. 2003,
plants (Colunga-GarciaMarin
2004). While the milpa system is well adapted to the variable,
patchy and uncertain
agroclimatic seasonality and characteristics of the karstic landscape, local
geo-pedological
farmers adjust the agricultural calendar to the a favorable se
according probability of
quence of first rains, mid-season drought (canicula) and patchy associations of shallow
soils controlled by microrelief at local and 1980; Ucan Ek et al.
parcel levels (Pool-Novelo
1982; Illsley 1984; Perez-Pool 1984; Dunning 1992; Teran and Rasmussen 1994; Faust
1998). Central to this is the assessment and management of forest regeneration for soil
fertility replenishment. Soil fertilitymanagement constitutes the key factor for theYucatec
Maya milpa production (Sanabria 1986; Zizumbo and Sima 1988; Teran and Rasmussen
1994).

In addition to two activities are

agricultural practices, especially important: gar
dening and Several studies show themyriad of plants obtained from housegardens,
hunting.
principally fruits, firewood, medicinal plants and fodder. Floristic richness of these gar
dens fluctuates between 80-90 (Caballero 1992) to 250-276 species (Sanabria 1986; Ortega,
et al. 1993), with a maximum of 387 (Herrera-Castro are
1994). Housegardens occupied
a of domestic animals, most chickens and ducks, which
by variety commonly pigs, turkeys,
are at feasts and rituals.
especially consumed Honey production from stingless bees
(Melipona spp) is also practiced. The Yucatec Maya landscape mosaic also allows hunting
for large and small mammal and bird species. Landscape variety (agricultural fields, fal
lows and mature areas
forests) offers different hunting for domestic consumption.
Studies carried out in four Yucatec Maya villages of Quintana Roo (Jorgenson
1998; Avila-Gomez et al. 1999), show a selected
2003; Montiel-Ortega pool of preferred
game species, including white-tailed deer, brocket deer, collared peccary, white lipped
peccary, coati, pocket gopher, tepevguintle,serete, chachalaca and ocellated turkey (Table 3).
NAMES I X Avila
Sinanche Petcacab
Scientific :
Hazil Camacho
[
Maya | Spanish English
Mammals
Qrthomnys 9.0
pocket gopher
hispiaus
Dasyprocta tsuub sereke 8.0 21

gouti
pnnctata
Agouitipaca jaleb tepescuintle paca 6.0 0.73 27 22
Nasua narica chiik, tejon 28.5 5.1 25

chwe
Dasypus armadillo armadillo 10

novemrinicus
kitam puerco tie white-lipped 0.51

Tayassu pecari Imonte,jahuiHal peccary
Pecari tajacH kitam jabali collar! pecarv 6.8 0.73 14 20
Manama brocket deer 2.7

americana
Qdocoikus venado cola
keh white-tailed deer 4.1 67.6 11 11
virginianus blanca
Tamandua oso
ant bear 0.73
mexicana hormigucro
Felts wieddi tigrillo wild cat 2.2
Birds
Cypturellus thicket tinamou 2.2
cinnawomeus perdiz
Crax rtibra hocotaisan great curassow 2.2
Ixbach
Ortalis vetula chachalaca plain chachalaca 11.'
baach
Agriocharis kuts ipavode montd ocellated turkey 16.1

ocellata
Colinus
4.4
mgjrogularis I yucatec quail
Reptiles
vaax
iCteftosaura black iguana 0.73
spp. ikil iguana
cocodrilo de morelets
Crocodylus aayin 1.4
mortleti pantano crocodile
Table 3. Game species taken by Yucatec hunters from four villages. (Sources: Jorgenson
1998; Montiel-Ortega et al. 1999; Avila- Gomez 2003; Quijano-Hernandez and Calme
2002).

Of interest is that current hunters are roughly harvesting the same species as were
hunted by ancient Maya (Jorgenson 1998). Maya hunters have practiced subsistence hunt
ing for 4,000 years, thus suggesting similar landscape management and some co-evolu
tionary process between Yucatec Maya management strategies and hunted species
more most of these game
(Greenberg 1992; Jorgenson 1998). Yet interesting is that
are not or fre
species only inhabitants of fallow and secondary forests but also regular
quent visitors to the fields The Yucatec strategy shows
milpa (Table 4). Maya multiple-use
that not only garden hunting but milpa hunting is central to survival, making milpa fields
local reservoirs of animal protein.
MILPA CYCLE
PRESENCE
Clearing Burn Plant Maize cob Mature
IN MILPA
SPECIES and plot seeds growing ear corn
FIELDS
felling (2) (3) period (4b)
(1) (4a)
Odocoileus
virginianus Frequent
|(white-tailed deer)
\Ma%amaamericana
Regular
(brocket deer)
Pecari tajacu (collari Very
peeary) Frequent
Tayassu pecari
(white-lipped Ocassional
peccary)
Agouitipaca (paca) Frequent
Dasyprocta punctata
Regular
(gouti)
Dasypus
novemcintcus Ocassional
(armadillo)
Nama narica (coati) Very

frequent
Procyon lotor
Regular
(raccoon)
Tapirus bairdi Ocassional

(bairds tapir)
Ortalis vetula
Regular
(Plain chachalaca)
Doves Regular
Table 4. Presence of 12 selected game species in a Yucatec Maya milpa field
(Source: Saldivia 1994).
The Yucatec Maya evaluation

landscape-use
Yucatec Maya ecological knowledge is based on the analysis of climate-relief-soil
vegetation relations and ecological processes (succession), which enables multiple-use
strategy maintenance. As theorized in previous sections of this study,Yucatec Maya farm

ers in complex ways for production purposes. Their
apply their ecological knowledge
landscape-use evaluation is based on: (1) assessment of soil-relief-vegetation relation
as a factor in the soil
ships fertility status, land productivity and landscape management
according to specific practices, and (2) recording and monitoring of the landscape-use
is managed as an on the
history. Milpa agroforestry continuum, basically depending

Ethnoecology qf the Yucatec Maya 25
natural or fallow. Thus the assessment

replenishment of soil fertility,via forest recovery
of related soil fertility properties is critical and performed in various ways.
Yucatec Maya farmers assess on-site soil-relief?vegetation relationships
to choose
their landscape management units. Each landscape management unit requires diverse and
specific cultivation, agro-forestry, hunting, gathering and gardening practices. Similarly,
landscape management units employ different labor-time allocation during the year and
within several years, depending on the characteristics and dynamics. Perez
biophysical
Pool an land suitability ranking system in the Pu'uc
(1984) found agricultural region.
Assessment was done to the natural fertility of the Mayan soil classes, the
according
potential duration (years) of cultivation and the suitability of each crop and multicropping
system at each parcel.

Yucatec Maya farmers cultivate several plots during the same year and allocate
labor depending on their biophysical characteristics. Diversity of fields and cultivars allow
them tomitigate risks and uncertainties. Faust (1998) found thatMaya farmers from the
Edzna in work on both and fladand to compensate for drought
Valley Campeche hilly plots
and flooding and to prevent crop loss from wind, wild animals, plagues and diseases.
to Cortina-Villar
According (1995), 80% of Mayan farmers from Becanchen in southern
Yucatan state used to crop two or more agricultural fields and managed two to six differ
entMayan soil classes. Fields were selected according to drainage conditions and moisture
retention capacity of each soil class to cope with rainfall irregularity. Becanchen farmers
assessed the productivity of each soil class on the basis of the amount and timing of
rainfall during the year. Hill soils (Ttêkeland K'akab) gave better maize yields under good
rainfall, while bottom-level soils (Ya'axhom and Ak'alche) gave better maize yields under
scarce rainfall. Tzekel and K'akab soils were considered by local farmers as having better
drainage conditions retention capacity than theYa'axhom

and better moisture and Ak'alche'
soils 5). Access to site heterogeneity, maintenance of cropping
hydromorphic (Figure
systems and crop diversity are central to theYucatec Maya subsistence, even though these
areas of land,
require relatively large high labor input and strong communitarian organiza
tion based on reciprocity, to achieve an efficient time-labor allocation (Teran and Rasmussen
1994; Faust 1998).
It takes 15 different agricultural practices to cover the cropping cycle, from field
-
selection to fallow (Perez del Toro 1945; Hernandez-Xolocotzim 1959; Hernandez
Xolocotzim et al. 1990; Varguez-Pasos 1981; Ucan-Ek et al. 1982; Ewell and Merrill
Sands 1987; Zizumbo and Sima 1988; Teran and Rasmussen 1994; Remmers and Ucan
Ek 1996). Yucatec Maya agricultural terminology is rich and complex, reflecting themany
ways milpa is performed according to diverse biophysical settings. Arellano
production
over 1200 Maya terms referring to agricul
Rodriguez and collaborators (1992) recorded
tural practices. Soil knowledge and land management are reflected in this termi
practices
nology.
Yucatec Maya farmers
Perhaps, Sanabria (1986) gaveexample of how
the best
assess for units. Farm
soil-relief-vegetation relationships choosing landscape management
ers from Xul in the Oxtkuzcab name and classify six landscape
municipality recognize,
units according to vegetation type, land-use history, relief type and soil type and subtype
Relief and moisture retention capacity are themain factors used for selecting new agricul
tural and agroforestry plots. Vegetation characteristics are assessed to evaluate on-site soil
fertility status.
Xu'ul farmers recognize 15 vegetation types according to their physiognomy, flo
ristic composition, vegetational succession stage, forest density, and soil-relief position.
combination of these factors allows them to classify six different land manage
Complex

ment units. A brief description of each land management unit is given according to the
local soil fertility and land productivity ranking, using farmers' terminology3 (Table 5).
Sites with evergreen are considered most fertile for
tropical forest (Ya'axk'aax)
agriculture. Vegetables, fruit trees and short-cycle maize varieties are grown after clearing,
on the new on stony and
cutting and burning the vegetation agricultural plot. Forest sites
are suitable for
hilly terrain (Têke/ k 'aax) long-cycle maize varieties, while stony and flat
forest remains (T%eke/kancab k 'aax) are considered as the low
fertility sites for agricultural
purposes. Soil fertility replenishment is assessed according to soil type and the speed of
recovery of herbs, shrubs and trees, which may take up to 40 years. Thus the Yucatec
uses succession processes, but
Maya producer not only distinguishes and manipulates the
speed of such processes for decision-making.
LANDSCAPE UNITS
MILPA
EK EKWM 1PWM IBWM ICHK ITCHB
Short cycle maize >4? >10
Long cycle maize >10 >10 >10
Pachpakal >4 >10 >20 >10

Tol-ch6 >4 >10
Homegarden >10
Bee-keeping >20 >4
Hunting >4
Plant gathering:
Edible >10 >10
Medicine >4
Firewood >4
Forage >3 >10

Tools >20 >20
Wood >20 >4
Others >10 >1 >10
Domestic tools >10
Table 5. Landscape units recognized and managed by Yucatec Maya farmers of Xu'ul,
Yucatan. Numbers indicate years after fallow. Source: Sanabria 1986; Barrera-Bassols
2003.
The Yucatec Maya appropriation: the kosmos sphere

An a on the cosmovision
ample literature sheds good deal of light of the pre
Yucatec a
Hispanic Maya. Research findings reveal complex and rich Yucatec Maya sym
bolic representation of their world (see seminal works of Roys 1965; Thompson 1970;
Coe 1980; Aveni 1992; Freidel et al. 1993; Breton et al. 2003). Archaeological and
a vivid cultural presence
ethnohistorical evidence, coupled with of the Yucatec Maya
the last 3,000 years, a wealth of information on how the structured
during provide Maya
theirworldview and their symbolic representations. The ancient Yucatec Maya cosmos is

well understood and is probably the best-known and fascinating Mesoamerican cosmo
logical world (Figure 7).

However, less research on how and why the contemporary Yucatec
there has been
or
Maya people still maintain and enrich their syncretic cosmovision symbolic world.
There are a few studies that focus on the links between the as
only k-c-p complex, regards
the appropriation of nature (see for example Teran and Rasmussen 1994; Boccara 1997;
Faust 1998 and 2001; Iroshe 2002; Breton et al. 2003, Quintal et al. 2003). However,
findings from this promising research field reveal the richness and complexity of the
in which farmers to balance
contemporary Yucatec Maya kosmos sphere, intend their
'sacred ecology', as elaborated by Faust (1998), and inwhichand apply, in
they conceive
their own peculiar and varied understanding, the notion of socio-ecological resilience
(Holling 2000). The Yucatec Maya conceptualization of land (Lu'um) as a polysemic,
syncretic and multidimensional domain, illustrates the inextricably links within the k-c-p
complex, and shows how farmers perceive and work with their own, syncretic theoriza
tion of world life and worldview, including their ritual representations.
Midday
The sun (Eye of god)
E
LAKIN (Red)
the holy
above
woRi^rr^rri
(Yokulabl)
.,,
W - ' v.>.
Sunrise
i NOHOL
f (Yellow)
CHIKIN (Black)
The Moon (Ear of God)
Midnight
Figure 7. The Yucatec Maya worldview. Of note is that theMaya north

cardinal corresponds to the western notion of the west cardinal point
et al. 2003).
(after Faust 1998; Iroshe 2002; Quintal
The Yucatec Maya land concept as a polysemic, syncretic and multidimensional domain
Lu'um has a polysemic meaning because is commonly used when referring to soil,
land, terrain, territory, landscape, nature and world (Teran and Rasmussen 1994; Iroshe
In fact, it is considered a realm in the Yucatec Maya cosmovision.
2002). comprehensive
However, are to a given discursive and context. Lu'um as a
meanings assigned practical
domain has also a utilitarian value related to food, health and
comprehensive housing,

as a
energy (Faust 1998) and symbolic (aesthetic, sacred and intangible) value (Iroshe
2002). Thus there is no strict separation between the material and the sacred values.
Lu'um has, in addition, a multidimensional connotation because it refers to: (a)
land as a bi-dimensional as a tri-dimensional as
domain, (b) the soil resource body, and (c)
a fourth and domain, that is the sacred one. In fact, Santo Yj4yum or the
having intangible
"Spirit of the Land" is considered one of themost important deities of theYucatec Maya
pantheon, and is still highly venerated.

As a sacred domain, Lu'um a life supporter
symbolizes the following principles: (1)
a home an or
(nature); (2) (sense of place); (3) agricultural parcel milpa (sense of abun
dance), (4) a territory value); (5) awomb (senseof fertility),
(a primordialidentity and (5)
a own as
graveyard (sense of destiny). For example, Yucatec Maya define their territory
"U lu'umilwtntko
Wot the Land of theMaya et al. The seman
(Quintal 2003) (Figure 7).
tic and epistemological richness of the Lu'um domain is also reflected by this holistic
perception, inwhich land is inextricably linked to thematerial and spiritual worlds (Iroshe
2002). Finally, Lu'um is a syncretic domain because the Yucatec Maya polymorphic dis
course about land and its function and behavior, from
synthesizes knowledge acquired
pre-Columbian Maya thought, colonial wisdom and modern knowledge.
Discussion
to the material reviewed in the previous sections, examination of the k
According
c-p complex of the Yucatec Maya shows not only coherent relationships between the
three domains, but reveals key processes which operate as "hinges" in the complex dy
namics of the matrix. The following hinges may be pointed out: (a) the use of symbolic
colors in their plant nomenclature and classification et. al [1976],
(Barrera-Marin reported
one third of the over 900 taxa as a
vegetal being labeled by color); (b) the existence of
of and linked to nature's elements, such as winds, rain, caves,
myriad gods spirits springs,
animals and plants (the number of deities in a well-studied Maya village reached 130
alone, as reported by Teran and Rasmussen (1994); (c) the performance of agrarian cer
emonies throughout the year (the rain-calling ceremony of Chac-Chaac has been reported
from at least 15 villages (Villa-Rojas 1968; Freidel et al. 1993; Flores and Balam 1997); (d)
the sacred geography represented by the cosmic tree and the four world corners, which is
across scales: the human the Kool or milpa,
represented body, the home, the homegarden,
and the whole cosmos, and (e) the recognition of units in the land
soil-relief-vegetation
scape, which operates as a to
key organizer of ecological knowledge, giving meaning
intellectual rationale through practice. These illustrate reciprocal relations be
examples
tween the dimension, the and the ensemble of practices.
cosmological cognitive body
In addition, two seminal processes function as key organizers of Yucatec Maya
landscape management and therefore as resilience mechanisms: a

(1) wise management
of both ecological processes and biodiversity represented by the multiple-use strategy
a
(Figure 6), and (2) guiding concept of health, which is applied across scale. These mecha
nisms express the double relationship that the Yucatec Maya establish with nature: the
first situated in the sphere of the profane, objective and rational
thinking; and the second
to the domain of the subjective, unconscious and sacred rationale. Both guide
belonging
techno-productive and symbolic practice. They appear to be amalgamated in the farmer's
mind, with litde or no separation between the secular and the sacred or mystic
thought,
but in permanent feedback, so to say,mutually determined. The first offers information
about nature through empirical knowledge; and the second deals will problems not cov
ered be the first (the unknown, uncontrollable and unpredictable), through the dialogue
with the supra-natural entities
(gods, deities, spirits). In brief: nature, deities and humans
work together in the eternal production and reproduction of life.

Maya
The multiple-use strategy: the secular dimension of resilience

Any Yucatec Maya producer needs from nature
(a) enough food, energy, medi
cines, water, tools and other goods and (b) commodities, that (c) must be sustained for
time. This some
his/her subsistence, through requires recognition of the environmental
context and the use of skills for Thus knowledge about
adapted landscape management.
physical and biological elements and ecological processes, and suitable landscape manage
ment are central to his/her survival.
Contemporary Yucatec Maya multiple-use strategy demonstrates all the above

mentioned mechanisms. lower per land use unit, but
Multiple-use implies production
as a
higher production of the aggregate landscape, and stands dynamic and permanent
use. Thus, the
system based on the benefits of diversity, when compared with specialized
an to
multiple-use strategy is adaptive response the high variety of landscapes, soils, relief
and biotic elements, and to the ecological process of tropical forests' succession. This
a an idea and
explains the existence of "Maya silviculture", postulated by Gomez-Pompa
almost two decades ago 1987a; 1987b; Gomez-Pompa et al.
colleagues (Gomez-Pompa
1987).
Because natural forces will always tend to restore systems to theirmature stage, the
maintenance cost willincrease with increased management intensity. The Yucatec Maya,
like many other pre-industrial societies, have benefited from forest recovery manipula
tion. The Yucatec Maya take advantage of forest restoration by maintaining landscape
variety, which helps derive benefits from land conversion and from the various fallow
stages, seeking the use of available resources with maximum efficiency. In spatial terms,
maximum utilization is sought through the management of several landscape units. In
the use of a maximum
temporal terms, landscape diversity maintenance complements
number of products offered by each landscape unit, throughout the year. As a result, this
on of all available units
strategy focuses seeking for optimal combinations landscape
(mature forests, housegarden, fallow, shifting cultivation and intensive agriculture) while
maximizing products.
a thus multiple-use functions as a buffering
Variety is risk-avoidance mechanism,
strategy for both environmental uncertainties and hazards, and market fluctuations and
a
surprises. In summary, the Yucatec Maya practice modality of what has been called
based on the multiple use of species and landscape units, re
"adaptive management",
source rotation,
landscape-patch and succession management (Berkes et al. 2000). Adap
tive management is performed inmany other indigenous territories of theMexican tropi
cal lowlands (Toledo et al. 2003). It represents a secular mode of resilience.
The concept of land health: the sacred dimension of resilience

as a
According
to Yucatec
Maya perception, living being. Land
land is considered
health is linked to the food chain, according to a higher discourse that connects health and
well-being of plants, animals and men with soil health (Iroshe 2002). This principle of
interconnection is used to explain the food chain: "If plants, animals and soils are healthy, then
menshouldhehealthf(Vogt,1979,citedby Iroshe,2002. pp.9).
Soil health and soil quality are constandy assessed by means of assigning criteria
the Yucatec Maya soil
used for the human body health, for plants and for animals; thus
uses there is a subde difference in
theory mimicry to evaluate the land health. However,
the conception of land as a living being as compared with plants, animals and men. "Land
never dies as we do; and are also condemned to die... hand is a spirif (Iroshe
plants, and animals
2002. pp. 4). Yucatec Maya farmers consider that land may be degraded and behaves in a
'death stage', but that it 'wakes up', regaining its own quality and health, after fallow and

soil conservation are carried out (Iroshe 2002. pp.

practices (soil fertility replenishment)
70).
as a to be fed and cared for. This function does not
Land, living being, needs
men and {aluxes: owners or
happen by itself, but with help from supra-natural beings
saints that administer natural phenomena). This connotation shows principles of reci
procity and equality; and this iswhy rituals mimic conservation practices to maintain the
(symbolic and material) balance between abundance and scarcity, or weakness and strength.
Connectedness means that all actors should work as a team, otherwise men may
together
not receive the benefits from the borrowed land, and may be punished by nature and the
supra-natural beings (aluxes).
The importance of rituals

The H'men or shaman
(the middleman between spiritual forces and human beings)
are made we will return
represents land-menconnectedness, by affirming that "we of soil, and
as soil we die, and our has been eaten worms" 2002. The
after body by (Iroshe pp. 65,70). principle
of land-men connectedness is central to the Yucatec Maya as it is believed
cosmology,
that the human body is interconnected with all that surrounds him/her: the milpa,
homegarden, plants, forest patches, rocks, soils, water, winds, constellations and stars, and
the sun and the moon. This connection includes other human beings (the household
family, villagers and the Yucatec Maya people), and deities.
In fact, it is commonly said thatmen are allowed to live in thisworld by thewill of
nature and its sacred deities (Quintal et al. 2003). This is the way that the Yucatec Maya
organize their worldview (Figure 7). Cosmic order allows resilience of multiple actors
(nature, men and deities). An example is the relatedness between agricultural rituals and
soil conservation practices.
H'men believe that land and water are also the firstmedicines that God provided
to counteract men's illness.
They say: "water is thefirstmedicine, and lu 'urnis the second one where
are grown, which are the thirdmedicine" is considered as (1)
plants (Iroshe 2002. pp. 66). Lu'um
a curative element, and
(2) a sacred element in the Yucatec Maya medicinal practice. Some
soil classes, such as the Kancab and Chak lu'um are widely used to treat fever and other
diseases. Some are considered
diseases natural or "earthly" diseases {Lu'um kabil), while
others are considered to be forces (lik naal or bad winds).
provoked by supra-natural
Medicinal are
practices commonly used but intermixed with rituals, because is commonly
believed that a person may be cured by offering gifts to lu'um or other aluxes, guided
by
the h'men wisdom and experience. Some of the rituals offered to lu'um are: (1) Loh or
or
"awaking curing the land", (2)Het% lu'um or "curing the homegarden", (3) Hanli k 'oloi
or
"feeding themilpa", (4) Loh corral "curing the domestic animals", (5) Saka'or thanks
to thewind deities, and
giving (6) Chac-chac the rain-asking ceremony. The main difference
between rituals offered to the land and rituals offered to other Aluxes or as
spirits, such
rain, forest, sun, etc., is that an animal is sacrificed during the first.A bull, a 'virgin'
chicken or a cock is sacrificed and buried at the center of the
agricultural plot and offered
as a sacred fertilizer, thatmay allow land to be
highly productive.
It is commonly
thought that blood (red) will nurture land, prevent diseases of men
and/or help them to recuperate from disease. Sacrifice is seen as an exchange or gift to
Santo Lu'um, or the "Spirit of the Land", to reestablish health of a sick person. Red is
conceived of as a female color and
land is also conceived of as female, while white is a
male color and is given to the land when a farmer penetrates
(semen) the soil body with
his lob or digging stick. The mixture of red and white will be then stimulated
by rainfall,
which is also a male force.

Maya
Fertility is the central process whereby resilience ismaintained by the conjunction

of all subjects: the Yucatec Maya farmer, nature and the aluxes, including the "Spirit of the
Land". Work done by these actors will maintain or re-establish the world's order or "re
centertheworld''in Yucatec Maya terms, which means "perpetuation of the world life and
worldview as domains of wellbeing". The communion between
inseparable agricultural
and ceremonial calendars with climatic seasonality and hydrological cycle, as markers of
the Yucatec livelihood, reveals the inextricable link between facts and or
Maya meanings,
the Yucatec Maya k-c-p complex.
The sacred dimension of resilience may be understood when analyzing two rituals
offered to Lu'um. Quintal and collaborators (2003) explain the symbolic meaning of two
of the most complex rituals of the Yucatec Maya syncretic religion: theHet% lu'um ritual
or Loh ritual or or
"feeding the land" and the "awaking curing the land". The first is
as a a farmer, the household members or group of want
practiced petition when villagers
to clear a forest or or when a new house is going to be
plot for agriculture grazing,
constructed, or even when a new section of the is to be for young,
village going opened
families.
It is thought that these activities may drastically disturb the "world balance", thus
certain deities may be offended, and thus may punish these actions. The petition ritual
serves in two main directions: or
(1) to calm down tranquilize those aluxes that may be
human action and to or
provoked by disturbance, (2) inaugurate, found begin important
activities.
The second ritual (Loh) is offered when a "disturbance or disorder" is perceived by
farmers in their agricultural plots, grazing lands, or elsewhere. It serves as a renewal of the
firstpetition made during the Hetz lu'um ritual, but this time it is performed to restore
the "world's order", by imploring and controlling "evilforces" that may not have been
satisfied after the Het% lu'um ritual (Quintal et al. 2003). Loh means "to restore, save or
redeem". The Loh ritual is offered, for example, if an agricultural plot is not performing
well or "gettinglost", provoking diseases among animals and even among household mem
bers, or of the land. A sacred work must be carried out to restore the world's equilibrium
and the original mythical order to "recenter" and "enclose" or redeem the
milpa plot.
A K'eex ceremony is conducted during this ritual to offer gifts as a sacred exchange,
such as a sacrificed chicken. It is commonly believed that the K'eex ceremony, conducted
the h'men, establishes a between Lu'um, the aluxes and the farmer, when
by dialogue
food as a sacred for the land, the deities, and hu
offering exchange, protecting mythical
mans, in return: ({Land is alive, thus itmust befed" (Boccara 1997: I: 45). In summary,
as restoration
procedures, land rituals offer an outstanding example of the
perceived
Yucatec Maya sacred ecology (Berkes 1999), and show the inextricable links between
kosmos, corpus and praxis.
Conclusions
Like many other regions of the world, the YP faces environmental constraints,
three of them being particularly hazardous: (1) absence of surface water streams, (2)
shallow and stony "difficult" soils, and (3) frequent climatic and meteorological distur
bances. For example, 105 hurricanes struck the northern portion of the peninsula and the
Caribbean coast, between 1851 and 2000 (Boose et al. 2003). Linked with the above,
strong winds and fires are also frequent, especially in the forests of Quintana Roo (Snook
1998).
The Yucatec Maya have remained in the YP for over three millennia, despite
environmental constraints and population fluctuations. Although Yucatec Maya popula
at least twice
tions collapsed (during the Classic Maya period and following the Spanish

32 Journal of Latin
American Geography
never vanished as a culture, and in the near future, the

conquest), they completely
will reach one million inhabitants. Yucatec Maya peasants have
established
population
uneven relations with nearby growing urban centers during the last century (such as
Merida and more recendy Cancun), which have induced technological modifications,
cultural transformations and unequal economic The
long-term existence of
exchanges.
the Yucatec indicates that some kinds of mechanisms are present in both the
Maya
internal household and community relations, and in relations between localities and their
allowing the continue reshaping of the Yucatec Maya culture,

surrounding landscapes,
the situation.
despite changes which could destabilize
Since Maya culture has avoided ecological and cultural collapse through
theYucatec
time, it is evident that it has a recovery capacity capable of dealing will different kinds of
disturbances. It demonstrates an to re-organize both social and eco
adaptive capability
logical relations, after significant change.
In other words, Yucatec Maya culture demon
strates high levels of resilience. Resilience is defined as the capacity of adaptive systems
to absorb disturbances (Reldman and Kinzig 2003), which translated to the field of cul
tural history meansthe ability to collectively memorize success and failure,
including the
ways to overcome changes and perturbations.
unexpected
The long-term permanence of Yucatec Maya culture has been extensively researched
and debated from numerous perspectives (see seminal contributions in Harrison and
Turner 1978; Flannery 1982; Fedick 1996; Gomez-Pompa et al. 2003). Although full com
of the successes and failures of the ancient Yucatec Maya goes far beyond the
prehension
objectives of this study, we think that the approach adopted in our research about con
temporary Yucatec Maya-landscape relationships may be useful for scholars exploring

ancient changes and continuities portion of the YP.
in the northern
what has been proposed by other authors (Rappaport
1979; Descola
Following
and Palsson 1996; Hornborg 1996), we think that the long-term permanence
of theYucatec
Maya in the YP can not be solely explained by ideological, cognitive or technological and
factors, but a combination thereof. Thus, we the core of the resil

productive by identify
ience capacity of the Yucatec Maya in their k-c-p matrix. This matrix functions as an
assemblage whereby meanings, facts and practice are in dynamic feedback, and synergies
resulting from these dynamics have both spatial and temporal expression. There is a need
formore detailed and robust research that compares past with present, to fully acknowl
the "Maya not just in the northern Yucatan Peninsula, but in the whole
edge puzzle",
Maya lowland.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to three anonymous reviewers for their critical and helpful com
ments on early versions of this paper. Thanks are also to Jose Salvador Flores, Silvia
given
Teran, Patricia Colunga-GarciaMarin, Gilberto Avila-Gomez, Nicholas Dunning, Timo
thyBeach and Eduardo Garcia-Frapolli, for providing us with several publications. Spe
cial thanks are given to Pablo-Alarcon-Chaires for his permanent technical assistance and
elaboration of the graphics. we are indebted to Margaret Skutch and David
Finally,
Robinson for revising the manuscript's to Arturo
English style. This paper is dedicated
Gomez-Pompa and Alfredo Barrera-Marin (f), two pioneering contributors to the ethno
ecological study of the Yucatec Maya.
Notes:
*A typical soil toposequence of the northern Yucatan Peninsula includes: calcimorphic
soilswith good drainageon thehigherpositions (Nt\altillosormounds); calcimorphic

soils with moderate on

drainage gentle slopes (Chi wits); and hydromorphic soils with
poor drainage on the flat lowlands and bottom-level lands (Taax, planadas and aguadas).
The soil mantle is highly variable along micro-catenas, recurrent at short distances, thus
expressing high soil spatial heterogeneity.
are located within the environmental

tillages adaptive regions (EAR) proposed by Dun
et al. 1998. Kosmos:
ning Sp: sacred spaces. Ri: rituals. My: myths. Corpus: Cl: climate. So:
soils. PI: plants. An: animals. Veg: vegetation. Praxis: Ag: agriculture. Hor: horticulture.
Hg: housegarden. Hu: hunting. Fi: fishing. Ext: extraction. Bee: beekeeping. Afo:
agroforestry. Ca: cattle raising.
units: EK: Ek'lu'um soils developed on kancabal or flatlands; EKWM: Ek'

3Landscape
lu'um soils developed on wits and/or mulu'ch, or hills and hummocks; PWM: Pus lu'um
soils developed on wits and mulu'ch; BWM: Box lu'um soils developed on wits and mulu'ch;
CHK: Chak lu'um soils developed on kancabal; TCHB: Chak lu'um or Têkel box lu'um
soils developed on kancabal.
References
Allen, M.F, S. L. Fedick, A. Gomez-Pompa, and J. J. Jimenez-Osornio. 2003. The Maya

a case In The Lowland Maya Area, A. Gomez
Lowlands: study for the future? Conclusions.
Pompa, M. F. Allen, S. L. Fedick and J. J. Jimenez-Osornio (eds), pp. 623-634. New York:
The Haworth Press, Inc.
Anderson, E. N. 2003. Traditional knowledge of plant resources. In The Lowland Maya
Area, A. Gomez-Pompa, M. E Allen, S. L. Fedick and J.J. Jimenez-Osornio (eds), pp. 533
550. New York: The Haworth Press, Inc.
Arellano-Rodriguez,J. A., R. Rodriguez-Rivera, and P. Uuh Chi. 1992. Glosario de terminos
Etnoflora Yucatanense 7: 1-83.

agricolas Maya-Espanol.
Arellano-Rodriguez, J.A., J. S. Flores,J. Tun-Garrido and M. M. Cruz-Bojorquez. 2003.
Nomenclatura, Forma de Vida, Uso, Manejo yDistribution de las Especies Vegetales de

la Peninsula de Yucatan. Etnoflora Yucatanense 20: 1-815.
Arias, L. 1980. La production milpera actual en Yaxcaba, Yucatan. In Seminario sobre la

Production Agricola en Yucatan. E. Hernandez-Xolocotzim and R.P. Ortega (eds), pp. 259
302. Mexico. Universidad de Chapingo and Gobierno del Estado de Yucatan.
Aveni, M. 1992. The Sky inMaya Literature. New York: Oxford University Press.
Avila-Gomez, G. 2003. Manejo de fauna silvestre en bosques tropicales por ejidos forestales
de Quintana Roo. M.Sc. Thesis, Colegio de Posgraduados, Mexico.
Unpublished
Barrera-Marin, A, A. and R. M. 1976. Nomenclatura

Barrera-Vazquez, Lopez-Franco.
etnobotdnicaMaya. Coleccion Cientifica 36. Etnologia. Yucatan, Mexico: Centro Regional
Sureste INAH.
Barrera-Marin, A. 1994. La taxonomia botanica Maya. In Taxonomia biologica. J. Llorente

and I. Luna pp. 27-38. Mexico D.F.: UNAM/FCE.
(comp.),

Barrera-Bassols, N. 2003. Symbolism, knowledge and management of soil and land re

sources in at
indigenous communities: ethnopedology global, regional and local scales.
Unpublished PhD Thesis 2 vols. Ghent, Belgium: Faculty of Science, University of Ghent.
Barrera-Bassols, N., and J.A. Zinck. 2000 Ethnopedology in a worldwide perspective.An anno
tated bibliography. ITC Publication 77. Enschede, The Netherlands: ITC.
_. 2004. a worldwide view on the soil knowledge of local

Ethnopedology:
people. GeodermaXW (3-4): 171-195.
Bautista-Zuniga, F, Ma. S. Diaz-Garrido, M. Castillo-Gonzalez, and J.A. Zinck. 2004.
Spatial heterogeneity of the soil cover in the Yucatan karst: comparison of Mayan, WRB
and numerical classifications. Paper presented at the International Conference "Soil Clas
sification 2004", held at Petrozavodsk, Karelia, Russia. August 3-9, 2004. IUSS.
Bautista-Zuniga, J.,J. J. Jimenez-Osornio, A. Navarro-Alberto, A. Manu, and R. Lozano.

2003a. Microrrelieve y color del suelo como de Leptosoles
propiedades diagnostico
carsticos. Terra 21:1-11.
Bautista-Zuniga, E, H. Estrada, J. J. Jimenez, and J.A. Gonzalez. 2003b. Relacion entre

relieve y las unidades de suelo en zonas carsticas de Yucatan. Unpublished Manuscript.
Yucatan, Mexico: UADY
Beach, T, N. Dunning, S. Luzzadder-Beach, and V. Scarborough. 2003. Depression soils

in the lowland Belize: on anthropogenic
tropics of Northwestern and natural origins. In
The Eowland Maya Area, A. Gomez-Pompa, M. F. Allen, S. L. Fedick and J. J. Jimenez
Osornio (eds), pp. 139-174. New York, USA,: The Haworth Press, Inc.
Bello-Baltazar, E., M. Macario, and E. I. J.Estrada-Lugo. 2000. Procesos comunitarios en

el manejo de la selva: el caso de un ejido forestal Maya. In ElAjuste Estructural en el
Campo
Mexicano. H. Carton de Gramont (ed), tomo II: pp. 38-55. Universidad Nacional Autonoma
de Mexico. Edicion en CD-ROM.
F. 1999. Sacred
Berkes, ecology: traditional ecologicalknowledge and resourcemanagement. Philadel
phia, USA: Francis and Taylor.
Berkes, F, J.Colding, and C. Folke. 2000. Rediscovery of traditional ecological

knowledge
as 10 (5): 1251-1262.
adaptive management. Ecological Applications
M. 1997. Ees Eabyrinthes Sonores.

Boccara, Encyclopedic de laMjthologieMaya Yucateque. 7 vols.
Paris/Amiens: Ductus/URA 1478. CNRS/Universite de Picardie.
Boege, E. 2004. Acerca de la diversidad biocultural y los recursos biologicos colectivos

de Mexico. SEMARNAT Technical Report. Mexico.
Boose, E., R. Foster, A. Barker Plotkin, and B. Hall. 2003. Geographical and historical
variation in hurricanes across theYucatan Peninsula. In The Eowland Maya Area, A. Gomez
Pompa, M. F. Allen, S. L. Fedick and J. J. Jimenez-Osornio (eds), pp. 495-516. New York,
USA: The Haworth Press, Inc..

Breton, A., A. Monod Becquelin, and M. H. Ruz. (eds). 2003. EspaciosMayas: representaciones,
usos, creenrias.Centro de Estudios Mayas, IIFL. Mexico: UNAM/Centro Frances de Estudios
Mexicanos y Centroamericanos (CEMCA).
Caballero J. 1992. The Maya homegardens of the Yucatan Peninsula: Past, present and
future. Etnoecologica 1(1): 35-54. Online: www.etnoecologica.org.mx.
Canevalli, G., I. M.
Ramirez, and J.A. Gonzalez-Iturbe. 2003. Flora y vegetation de la
Peninsula InNaturaleâ y Sociedad en elArea Maya. P. Colunga-GartiaMarin
de Yucatan.
and A. Larque-Saavedra (eds), pp. 53-68. Yucatan, Mexico: Academia Mexicana de Ciencias
y Centro de Investigaciones Cientificas de Yucatan.
Canul-Pech, P. 1967. Terminos mayas para la denomination de: suelos, vegetation,

topografia, clima, cultivos y aguas. Unpublished manuscript. Merida, Yucatan: Secretaria
de Recursos Hidraulicos.
Coe, M. D., and R. A. Dile. 1980. In the land of theOlmec, vol. 1.Austin: University of Texas
Press.
Colunga-Garcia Marin, P., and D. Zizumbo-Villarreal. 2004. Domestication of plants in

Economic Botany 58 (Supplement): SI 01-SI 10.
Maya Lowlands.
Colunga-Garcia Marin, P., R. Ruenes-Morales and D. Zizumbo-Villarreal. 2003.

Domestication de plantas en las tierras bajas Mayas y recursos fitogeneticos disponibles.
InNaturaleây Sociedad en elArea Maya. P. Colunga-GartiaMarin and A. Larque-Saavedra
(eds), pp. 145-158. Yucatan, Mexico: Academia Mexicana de Ciencias y Centro de
Investigaciones Cientificas de Yucatan.
Cortina-Villar, S. H. 1995. La milpa traditional en Becanchen. In La milpa enYucatan. Un

sistema deproduction agricola traditional E. Hernandez, E. Bello y S. Levy (comp.), tomo 1:
pp. 201-223. Mexico: Colegio de Postgraduados.
Descola, P., and G. Palsson. 1996. Introduction. InNature and Society:Anthropological Per
1-21. London:
spectives,P. Descola and G. Palsson (eds), pp. Routledge.
S. 1996. La en Mexico DE: Letras

Dominguez-Ake, Milpa Muxupip. Indigenas
Contemporaneas.
Los componentesdel medio fisico.

Duch, J. 1989. La conformation territorialdel estado de Yucatan.
Centro de Yucatan. Merida, Mexico: Universidad Autonoma de Chapingo.
Regional
The implications of soil folk taxonomies for agricultural change in

Dunning, N. P. 1992.
Middle America. Yearbook, Conference of Latin American Geographers 17/18: 243-247.
or civilization in
Dunning, N. P. and T. Beach. 2004a. Noxious nurturing nature? Maya
environmental context. In Continuities and Changes inMaya Archaeology: perspectives at the
millennium. Ch. W Golden & G. Borgstede (eds), pp. 125-141. New York and London:
Routledge.
_. 2004b. Fruit of the luum. lowland Maya soil knowledge and agricultural
the
Mesoamerican Research Laboratory 2: 3-14.
practices, journal of Archaeological

Dunning, N. P., T. Beach, P. Farrell, and S. Luzzadder-Beach. 1998. Prehispanic agrosystems

and adaptive regions in theMaya Lowlands. Culture and Agriculture 20: 87-101.
N. P., S. Luzzadder-Beach, T. Beach, J. G. Jones, V. Scarborough, and T. P.

Dunning,
Culbert. 2002. Arising from the Bajos: the evolution of a Neotropical landscape and the
rise of Maya civilization. Annals of theAssociation ofAmerican Geographers 92: 267-283
Estrada-Medina, H., F. Bautista-Zuniga,J. J.Ma. Jimenez, andj. A. Gonzalez-Iturbe. 2004.
Relationship between WRSBSR soil classification and Maya land classification in the
municipality of Hocaba. Unpublished manuscript. Yucatan, Mexico: UADY
Ewell, P. T. 1984. Intensification of Peasant Agriculture inYucatan. New York: Cornell Univer
sity School of Agriculture.
Ewell, P. T., and D. Merrill-Sands. 1987. Milpa in Yucatan.

A long-fallow maize system
in the Maya In
and its alternatives peasant economy. Comparative Farming Systems, B. L.
Turner and S. Brush (eds), pp. 95-129. USA: The Guilford Press.
Faust, B. 1998. Mexican Rural Development and thePlumed Serpent. USA-England: Bergin &
Garvey.
_. 2001. Maya environmental success and failures in the Yucatan Peninsula.

Environmental Science <& Policy 4: 153-169.
new perspectives on ancient Maya

Fedick, S. L. 1996a. Introduction: agriculture and re
source use. In The Mosaic: ancient and resource use. Fedick, S.L. (ed.),
Managed Maya agriculture
pp. 1-14. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
_. (ed.) 1996b. The Managed Mosaic: Ancient Maya resourceuse. Salt

agriculture and
Lake City: University of Utah Press.
Fedick, S. L., and B. A. Morrison. 2004. Ancient use and of landscape in the
manipulation
Yalahau region of the Northern Maya Lowlands. Agriculture and Human Values 21 (2-3):
207-229.
I. 1993. Geology of Mexico: a In Biological diversity of

Ferrusquia-Villafranca, synopsis.
Mexico. Origins and distribution.T P. R.
Ramamoorthy, Bye, A. Lot, and J. Fa (eds), pp. 3
108. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Flannery, K. V. 1982. Maya Subsistence. London/New York: Academic Press, Inc.
Flores, J. S. 1998. Etnobotanica de las leguminosas en la Peninsula de Yucatan: uso y

entre los mayas. Ph.D. Thesis, Mexico DE: Facultad de Ciencias,
manejo Unpublished
UNAM
Flores, J. S., y E. Ucan Ek. 1983. Nombres usados por los mayas para designar
a la
vegetation. Bolettn 10, Xalapa, Mexico: INIREB.
Flores, J. S. and J.K. Balam. 1997. Importance of plants in the Ch'a Chaak Maya ritual in

the Peninsula of Yucatan. 17(1): 97-108.

Journal of Ethnohiology
Freidle, D., L. Schele, and J. Parker. 1993. Maya Cosmos. Three Thousand Years on theShamans
Path. New York: William Morrow and Co.
Gartia-Frapolli, E., E. Galicia, G Ramos-Fernandez and A. Serrano-Solis. 2005. Under
standing Mexican biodiversity conservation through the policy of natural protected areas:
three cases from the Yucatan Peninsula. Submitted to Conservation
Biology.
A. 1987a. On Maya silviculture. Mexican

Gomez-Pompa, Studies/EstudiosMexicanos 3(1): 1
17.
_. 1987b. Tropical deforestation and Maya silviculture: an

ecological paradox.
Tulane Studies in Zoology and Botany 26: 19-37.
_. 2003. Research challenges for the lowland Maya Area. An introduction. In

The lowlandMaya Area, A. Gomez-Pompa, M. F. Allen, S. L. Fedick and
J. J. Jimenez
Osornio (eds), pp. 3-12. New York: The Haworth Press.
S., Sosa, V. 1987. The "Pek Kot": a man-made

Gomez-Pompa, A., Flores, tropical forest
of theMaya. Interciencia 12 (1): 10-15.
L. S. Z. 1992. Garden the Yucatec 1: 22-32.

Greenberg, hunting among Maya. Etnoecoldgica
[online] URL: http:// www.etnoecologica.org.mx.
de roza y dinamica demografica en una

Gutierrez, J. A.1993. Agricultura comunidad
Maya. Etnoecoldgica 2: 35-47. [online] URL: http:// www.etnoecologica.org.mx.
Gunn, J.D., R. T. Matheny, and W J. Folan. 2002a. Climatic-changes studies in theMaya

area. A diachronic
analysis. Ancient Mesoamerica 13: 79-84.
Gunn, J.D., J.E. Foss, W J. Folan, M. del R. Dominguez-Carrasco, and B. B. Faust. 2002b.
Bajo sediments and the hydraulic system of Calakmul, Campeche, Mexico. Ancient
Mesoamerica 13: 297-315.
Hanks, W F. 1990. Referentialpractice. Eanguage and lived space among the

Maya. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press.
Harrison, P. D., and B. L. Turner II. 1978. Pre-Hispanic Maya Agriculture. New Mexico:
University of New Mexico Press.
Hernandez-Briceno, A., J.L. Sanchez-Bianco, and E. Sanchez. 1982. El cultivo del maiz
en Chacsinkin, Yucatan. InNuestro mat%.Vol. 1: pp. 243-287. Mexico, D. E: Museo National
de Culturas Populares. SEP.
Hernandez-Xolocotzim, E. 1959. La In: Eos recursos naturales del surestey su

agricultura.
3. Mexico: IMRNR.
aprovechamiento. E. Beltran (ed.), Vol.
Hernandez-Xolocotzim, E., L. M. Arias, and L. Pool-Novelo. 1990. El sistema agricola de
roza-tumba-quema
en Yucatan y su capacidad de sostenimiento. In Agricultura Indigena.

38 journal of Latin American Geography
Presentey Pasado. T. Rojas and W Sanders (eds), pp. 343-358. Mexico: Ediciones de la Casa
Chata, Vol. 27: CIESAS.
Herrera-Castro, N. D. 1994. Los huertos farniliares mayas en el oriente de Yucatan.

Etnoflora
Yucatanense 9. Yucatan, Mexico: UAY.
Herrera-Castro, N. D., A. Gomez-Pompa, L. Cruz-Kuri, and J. S. Flores. 1993. Los Huertos

farniliares mayas en X-uilub, Yucatan, Mexico: aspectos generales y estudio comparativo
entre la flora de los huertos farniliares y la selva. Biotica 1:19-36.
Holling, C. S. 2000. Theories for sustainable futures. Conservation Ecology 4 (2):7.
A. 1996. Ecology as semiotics: outlines of a contextualist

Hornbog, paradigm for human
ecology. In Nature and Society:Anthropological Perspectives, P. Descola and G. Palsson (eds),
pp. 45-61. London: Routiedge.
Illsley, C. 1984. Vegetation y production de lamilpa bajo roza, tumba y quema en el ejido
de Yaxkaba, Yucatan, Mexico. Unpublished Professional Thesis. Morelia, Mexico:
Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolas de Hidalgo.
Iroshe, J. 2002. La salud de la tierra: el orden natural en la practica medica traditional en

una comunidad de la Peninsula de Yucatan. M.Sc. Thesis. Merida,
Maya Unpublished
Mexico: CINVESTAV.
Jimenez-Osornio, J. J., M. Ruenes-Morales, y P. Montanez-Escalante. 1999.
Agrobiodiversidad de los solares de la peninsula de Yucatan. Red-Gestion de Recursos Natu

rales 14:30-40.
on wildlife in the
Jorgenson, J.P. 1998. The impact of hunting Maya Forest of Mexico. In
Timber, Tourists and Temples: Conservation and Development in theMaya Forest of Belize, Guate
mala andMexico, R. B. Primarck, D. Bray, H. A. Galleti and I. Ponciano (eds), pp. 179-193.
Island Press.
La Torre-Cuadros, M. A., and G. A. Islebe. 2003. Traditional and

ecological knowledge
use of in southeastern Mexico: a case
vegetation study from Solferino, Quintana Roo.
Biodiversity Conservation 12: 2455-2476.
Landa de, B. 1982. Yucatan before and after the conquest.University of Alabama Press. New
York.
C. L. 1933. Archeological discoveries in theMaya area.

Lundell, Proceedings of theAmerican
12 (3): 147-179.
Society
Philosophical
Montiel-Ortega, S., L. M. Arias-Reyes, and F. Dickinson. 1999. La caceria traditional en el

norte de Yucatan: una comunitaria. Revisa de
practica Geografia Agricola 29:43-52.
Ortega, L. M., S. Avendano, A. Gomez-Pompa, y E. Ucan Ek. 1993. Los solares de
Chunchucmil, Yucatan, Mexico. Biotica 1:37-52.
Perez del Toro, A. 1945. La milpa. Merida, Mexico: Gobierno de Yucatan.

Perez-Pool, J.M. 1984. Caracterizacion y utilization de la clasificacion Maya de los suelos

en el de Oxtkuzcab, Yucatan. Professional Thesis. Mexico: UACH.
municipio Unpublished
Pool-Novelo, L. 1980. El estudio de los suelos calcimorficos con relation a la

production
maicera. at the Seminario Sobre Production Merida, Yucatan,
Paper presented Agricola,
Mexico: UACH.
Quijano-Hernandez, E. and S. Calme. 2002. Patrones de caceria y conservation de la

fauna silvestre en una comunidad Maya de Quintana Roo. Etnobiologta 2: 1-18.
Quintal, E. E, J. R. Bastarrachea, F. Briceno, M. Medina, B. Repetto, L. Rejon, and M.

Rosales. 2003. Ulu 'Umil Maaya Winiko 'Ob: La tierra de losMayas. In Didlogos con elterritorio.
Simboliâcion sobre el espacio en las culturas indigeriasdeMexico. A.M. Barabas (Coord.), pp. 275
314. Coleccion Etnografia de los Pueblos Indigenas de Mexico. Serie Ensayos. Mexico:
INAH.
Ramirez-Barajas, P. J.,N. Torrescano-Valle, A. Tecpa-Jimenez, and J.Vazquez-Rodriguez,

2001. Importancia y uso del entorno natural en una comunidad Maya (Petcacab, Quintana
enCiencias
Roo, Mexico) TIP Revista Especialiâaa Qmmico-Biologicas 4 (2): 61-71.
Rappaport, R. 1979. Ecology, Meaning and Religion. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan
Press.
Redfield, R., and A. Villa Rojas. 1934. Chan Kom, A Maya D. C: Carnegie
Village. Washington
Institute of Washington.
Reldman, Ch. L. and A. P. Kinzig. 2003. Resilience of past landscapes: resilience, theory,
society, and the Longue Duree. Conservation Ecology 7 (1): 14-40.
Remmers, G. G. A., y E. Ucan-Ek 1996. La roza-tumba-quema un sistema

Maya:
agroecologico traditional frente al cambio tecnologico. Etnoecoldgica 4-5: 97-109. Online:
www.etnoecologica.org.mx.
Robles Ramos, R. 1958. Geologia yGeohidrologia. In Eos recursos naturales del Surestey su
IMRNR.
aprovechamiento, E. Beltran (ed.), pp. 53-92. Mexico:
New Tulane Press.

Roys, R. L. 1931. The Ethnobotany of the
Maya. Orleans: University
_. 1965. Ritual of theBacabs. Norman: of Oklahoma Press.

University
Saldivia, G. T. 1994. Estudio sobre la relation entre la fauna silvestre y lamilpa en ejidos
496-512.
forestales de Quintana Roo. InMemorias delXII Simposio sobreFauna Silvestre, pp.
Mexico D. E: Universidad National Autonoma de Mexico.
forestal en la comunidad en el sur de

Sanabria, O. L. 1986. El uso y manejo de Xu'ul,
Yucatan. Etnoflora Yucatanense 2: 1-180.
Sanchez-Gonzalez, M. C. 1993. Arboles y arbustos utilizados para lena en la comunidad

de X-uilub, Yucatan, Mexico. Biotica. 69-82.
in
Sauer, C. O. 1925. The morphology of landscape. University of California Publications

Geography 2 (2): 19-54.
and Plants of theAncient Maya. Texas:

Schlesinger, V. 2001. Animals Austin, University of
Texas Press.
Snook, L. 1998. Sustaining harvests of Mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla King) fromMexico's

Yucatan Forests: Past, Present and Future. In Timber, Tourists and Temples: Conservation and
R. B. Primarck, D. Bray, H. A.
Development in the
Maya Forest of Belize, Guatemala andMexico.
Galleti and I. Ponciano (eds), pp. 61-79. Island Press.
Sosa, J. 1990. Cosmological, symbolic and cultural complexity among the contemporary
at Yucatan. In: World Archeoastronomy, A. Aveni (ed.), pp. 130-142. Cambridge Uni
Maya
versity Press.
Teran, S. and C. Rasmussen. 1994. ha milpa de losMayas. Yucatan, Mexico: DANIDA.
Teran, S., C. Rasmussen, and O. May-Cauich 1998. hasplantas de la milpa entre losMayas.
Yucatan, Mexico: Fundacion Tun Ben Kin, A. C.
E. J. 1970. Maya historyand religion.Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press.

Thompson,
Toledo, V. M. 1992. What is ethnoecology?: origins, scope and implications of a rising

1: 5-21. [online] URL:
discipline, Etnoecologica http://www.etnoecologica.org.mx.
_. 2002. Ethnoecology: a framework for the study of indigenous

conceptual
of nature. In Ethnobiology and Biocultural Diversity, J.R. Stepp, F. S. Wyndham,
knowledge
and R. S. Zarger (eds), pp. 511-522. Georgia: International Society of Ethnobiology.
Toledo, V. M., P. Alarcon-Chaires, P. Moguel, M. Olivo, A. Cabrera and A. Rodriguez

Aldabe 2002. Mesoamerican a review of the state of the art. In
Ethnoecology: Ethnobiology
and Biocultural Diversity,]. R. Stepp, F. S. Wyndham, and R. S. Zarger (eds), pp.561-574.
Georgia, USA: International Society of Ethnobiology.
Toledo, V. M., B. Ortiz,

L. Cortes, P. Moguel, and M. J.Ordonez. 2003. The multiple use
of forests in Mexico: a case of
tropical by indigenous peoples adaptive management.
Conservation Ecology. 7 (3): 9 [online] URL: http://www.consecol.org/vol7/iss3/art9.
Turner II, B. L., P. Klepeis, and L. C. Schneider. 2003. Three millennia in the southern
Yucatan for
Peninsula: Implications occupancy, use, and carrying capacity. In The lowland
Maya area, A. Gomez-Pompa, M. F. Allen, S. L. Fedick and J.J. Jimenez-Osornio (eds), pp.
361-388. New York: The Haworth Press, Inc.
Ucan-Ek, E., M. Narvaez Segovia, A. Puch Tzub, y C. Chan Vermont. 1982. El cultivo
del maiz en el ejido de Mucel InNuestro maz\. Vol. 1.
(Pixoy, Valladolid, Yucatan, Mexico).
pp. 243-287. Mexico, D. E: Museo National de Culturas Populares. SEP.
Varguez-Pasos, L. A. 1981. ha Milpa entre losMayas de Yucatan. Merida, Mexico: Ediciones

de la Universidad de Yucatan.
Villa-Flores, A. 2003. Los conceptos de espacio y tiempo entre los grupos mayences

contemporaneos. In Tiempoy realidaden elPensamiento Maya, M. Leon Portilla (ed.), pp. 121
163. Mexico: UNAM.
Villa-Rojas, A. 1987. Los Elegidos de Dios. Etnografia de losMayas deQuintana Roo. Mexico:
Instituto Nacional Indigenista.
Zizumbo, D. and P. Sima. 1988. Las practicas de roza-tumba-quema en la

agricultura
su en la de la selva. InMedio
Maya-Yucateca y papel regeneration ambientej comunidades
indigenas del sureste,R. Uribe (comp.). Mexico: Gobierno de Tabasco y UNESCO.
Zizumbo, D., C. H. Rasmussen, L. M. Arias-Reyes, and S. Teran-Contreras. 1992. La
modernisation de la milpa en Yucatan: o realidad. Merida, Yucatan, Mexico: CICY/

Utopia
DANIDA.


University of Texas Press

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

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

University of Texas Press

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ethnoecology of the Yucatec Maya: Symbolism, Knowledge and Management of Natural

This content downloaded from 129.68.65.223 on Tue, 1 Oct 2013 20:13:18 PM

scapes as a whole. By applying the ethnoecological the inex

journal ofLatin American Geography4(1), 2005

This content downloaded from 129.68.65.223 on Tue, 1 Oct 2013 20:13:18 PM

Palabras claves: Etnoecologa, paisaje, manejo de recursosnaturales, conocimientoindigena,

LJnderstanding of theMaya civilization has evolved and has experimented with a

complex society supported by extensive, swidden and long-fallow agriculture in a rela

Maya peasants visualize, know and manage their and natural re

contemporary Yucatec Maya and their surrounding landscapes, using

This content downloaded from 129.68.65.223 on Tue, 1 Oct 2013 20:13:18 PM

mediated by intellectual functions, such as knowledge and cosmology, and organized by

framework: The as a theoretical foundation

repertory of or systems, and the praxis, the set of production

appropriation of nature takes place.

This content downloaded from 129.68.65.223 on Tue, 1 Oct 2013 20:13:18 PM

to constantly reorganize the

This content downloaded from 129.68.65.223 on Tue, 1 Oct 2013 20:13:18 PM

silviculture, hunting and bee-keeping) and ethnology, from a

These information at household

ture, homegarden, local on soils, relief, climate, vegetation, ecological

depth view of contemporary Maya beliefs, knowledge and practice.

This content downloaded from 129.68.65.223 on Tue, 1 Oct 2013 20:13:18 PM

ern cover between 40 to 60% of the area, the northern

ETHNOECOLOGICAL INFORMATION OF 60YUCATEC MAYA LOCALITIES (PART 1)

Reality Authors EAR1 Kosmos Cqrjpus

Table 1. Ethnological information offered from 60 case studies (see

geographical location in Figure 3), with aspects related to the Yucatec

This content downloaded from 129.68.65.223 on Tue, 1 Oct 2013 20:13:18 PM

ETHNOECOLOGICAL INFORMATION OF 60 YUCATEC MAYA LOCALITIES (PART 2)

Chunhuhub Anderson 2003 QuintanaRoo

The Maya of theYucatan Peninsula: socio-cultural and geographical

The socio-cultural context

This content downloaded from 129.68.65.223 on Tue, 1 Oct 2013 20:13:18 PM

some 24% of the total

(80% of the totalpopulation), coupledwith high ruralpopulation dispersion (98% of

The geographical context

scarcity for half of the year, rainfall of and shallow soils

plex patchy associations controlled by the microrelief patterns (Hernandez-Xolocotzim

This content downloaded from 129.68.65.223 on Tue, 1 Oct 2013 20:13:18 PM

relief of the northern Maya Lowland is a mosaic of dissolution depressions alternating

Zuniga et al. 2003a, 2003b; Estrada-Medina et al. 2004).

ogy, among other things (Bautista et al. 2004).

The Yucatec Maya appropriation of nature

The cognitive appropriation: the corpus sphere

Climate, reliefand soils

This content downloaded from 129.68.65.223 on Tue, 1 Oct 2013 20:13:18 PM

Yucatec Maya Yucatec Maya

Maya farmers. Source: Barrera-Bassols 2003.

The reviewof thisterminologyshows the followingaspects (Figure4):While soil

This content downloaded from 129.68.65.223 on Tue, 1 Oct 2013 20:13:18 PM

(1) Relief (2) Stoniness

(5) Fertility (6) Color

Figure 4. Frequency of YM soil terms related to ten main soil properties.

This content downloaded from 129.68.65.223 on Tue, 1 Oct 2013 20:13:18 PM

among all soil taxa. Soil classification is based on color, relief

tility and workability of the topsoil.

However, recent research carried out by Bautista-Zuniga and collaborators (2004),

Figure 5. A typical soil toposequence of the northern Yucatan Peninsula, (after:

This content downloaded from 129.68.65.223 on Tue, 1 Oct 2013 20:13:18 PM

Ecological Suhuy k'aax

use of natural resources is conducted