[Aztlan] Northern Maya Lowland Communication Routes

[David Hixson]

Dear fellow Listeros,

I'm working on a chapter regarding Lowland Maya communication routes, and I would love to hear your thoughts on the matter.

It has come to my attention (through off-list discussions with an Aztlan list member) that all too often the coastal trade networks of the postclassic period seem to take precident over the more complex and hard-to-pin-down communication networks within the peninsula.

Dr. Tony Andrews (an Aztlan contributor) and others have done a great service to Maya scholars in outlining the loci and vectors associated with coastal trade.  Recently, other scholars have pointed to the possibility of an inland east-west corridor across the northern plains.  A pan-peninsular sacbe' network linking many important sites and regions (see the works of Jennifer Matthews).

Those studying the settlement patterns that interacted with both coastal and inland networks are beginning to wrestle with the question of how far back such networks extend in time, and which avenues might be primary, and which are secondary to site function and location (see the recent dissertation by Jeffrey Glover).

Like Jeff, my research lies between two major hypothesized avenues of communication.  One avenue is the circum-peninsular coastal trade route variously attributed (during the postclassic) to the Putun / Chontal Maya or Itza-controlled networks.  Nodes on this network include the terminal to post- classic sites of Uaymil, Canbalam, and Isla Cerritos (for detailed discussions, see the works of Anthony Andrews, Bruce Dahlin and Raphael Cobos).  

Yet, inland routes (such as the east-west corridor proposed by Jennifer Matthews) may have had more of an impact during earlier periods of Maya history.  The inland route that has been proposed for my region of interest (the western portion of the peninsula) is known as the "camino real" -- essentially a north-south avenue connecting the areas from south of Campeche (such as the laguna de terminos region) to the nose of the Puuc hills and on to Merida (T'ho).

We know from historic accounts that the Camino Real extends back to the conquest period.  It skirted the edge of the puuc hills, but stayed clear of the coastal wetlands, thus constraining the flow of traffic within a corridor of "the path of least resistance".  Yet, during historic times, the maritime route was equally attractive as resources such as salt, fish and hardwoods were being traded from this region to other areas of Mesoamerica.

Now to my questions...

What role do you believe any of these historic routes played during the EARLY CLASSIC period?  Was the Camino Real only a postclassic and historic phenomenon?  Was the coastal route from Laguna de Terminos and extending around the coast of Yucatan active during the earlier periods?  And how would that affect your view of an early classic site located in the middle of both routes?  Is the view from the 16th century and later providing too great of a bias, or can these models provide insight into the communication networks of the Early Classic?

I know I have my own thoughts on the matter, but I would love to hear some thoughts from others. I hope this topic might spark an interesting discussion on Aztlan.

Again, for further readings I suggest (among many others) the works of Anthony Andrews, Raphael Cobos, Jennifer Matthews, Bruce Dahlin, and the dissertations by Jeff Glover and Forrest Hauck, as well as the NWAF publication on "Mesoamerican Communication Routes and Culture Contacts".

-Dave