Classic Maya Seaports: Uaymil, North Campeche Coast

Uaymil: Historical Background

The pre-hispanic settlement of Uaymil, Huaymil or Guaymil is mentioned by the name of "Guayman" in a map dated around 1734 (see Andrews, 1997:6). During the nineteenth century, the region around Uaymil was used for the exploitation of marine resources (fishing) and dye as there was an encampment which "probably served as the coastal center for Santa Cruz ranch" situated 17 km inland (Andrews, 1997:4). According to Millet Cámara (1994; see also Ferrer Berrón, 1978), the Uaymil region and Santa Cruz ranch were connected by a canal. Andrews (1997:3-4), on the other hand, believes that the nineteenth century encampment was more likely situated on Isla del Burro on the coast rather than on the pre-hispanic settlement which is surrounded by mangrove swamp. The next mention of Uaymil occurred when Nazario Quintana Bello carried out a brief visit of the site in 1937 (Benavides, 1988:258). Almost two decades after Quintana Bello’s visit to Uaymil, Edwin Shook (1955:293-294) arrived at the site and mentioned the existence of two structures (numbers 4 and 5 of our map) and the remains of a stela (number 1).

In relation to Structure 4, Shook (1955:293) noted that it consisted of a mound 12 meters high facing the plaza in which was found "in situ the bottom third of a carved stela". An examination of the contour lines and the location of Structure 4 in Uaymil leave no doubt that this was the building described by Shook, although the present mound is 9 meters tall.

As for Structure 5, we believe that Shook (1955:294) described this building, located a few feet to the west of Structure 4 and in the area to the west, which Shook considered to be "the edge" of the site. To some extent, Shook was right to state the latter since Structures 5 and 6 mark the western side of the only architectural complex in the site and face a large plaza which occupied the western half of the settlement. Shook (1955:294) wrote the following about Structure 5: "one partly exposed colonnaded building has a triple entrance formed by two columns, each a single stone reaching to lintel height. The doorjambs and lintels also are single, full-width stones, and the walls are faced with moderately well cut and dressed stone. The structure has two long parallel vaulted galleries with four or more columns acting as medial supports".

An examination of the architectural floor of Structure 5 shows it to be the second structure described by Shook in 1955. During fieldwork in 2001, we were able to document some columns still in situ. Other columns belonging to Structure 5, which have been removed from their original position, are still located near the building.

In his observations of Uaymil, Shook (1955:294) points out the presence of Chichen Slate and Fine Orange ceramics, Puuc style architecture, and one stela. With regard to this monument, Shook (1955:293-294) noted that its back and side faces are smooth. Only the lower part of the stela can be observed where the knees and lower body parts of a person can still be seen.

In 1957 Cármen Cook de Leonard (1959) apparently made a sketch-map of Uaymil and transported to Jaina a capital (number 1) with carved hieroglyphs on two sides (see Mayer, 1984; Figures 2-3). We suspect–due to its dimensions and characteristics–that Capital 1 comes from Structure 2 at Uaymil where we found a second capital (number 2) with the remains of eroded glyphs on one of its sides. Capital 2 is stylistically similar to Capital 1. (Figure 4, Figure 5 and Figure 6)

In the middle of the 1960s, Victor Segovia Pinto (1966) carried out a brief visit of Uaymil. A couple of years after Segovia’s visit, Eaton (1978) collected some surface materials consisting of artifacts made of flint, obsidian, limestone, basalt, bone, shell, and ceramics. Eaton (1978:46-48, 50-54, 57-58, Figures 19-c, 20-a, g, h, 29-c) described 1 complete as well as 1 broken points made of flint; 7 celts made of flint, 5 obsidian blades predominantly of green and light gray color; 11 manos made of basalt (N=5), flint (N=4), and limestone (N=2); 1 celt made of polished gray stone; 3 hammers of unspecified material; 1 manatee rib with incisions; 5 shell celts. Ball (1978:99), for his part, analyzed the ceramic materials collected by Eaton at Uaymil and drew attention to the presence of ceramic types corresponding to the Early Classic, Late Classic, and Terminal Classic periods.

Uaymil is mentioned again in the archaeological literature at the end of the 1970s as a result of the visit carried out by Anthony Andrews (1977:69, 1978:40-43). In this visit, Andrews noted that Uaymil was a civic-religious settlement occupied during the Early Classic, Late Classic and Terminal Classic periods.

Based on the ceramic as well as the architectural evidence, researchers such as Andrews (1977:60; 1997:4), Andrews and Vail (1990:42), Ball (1978:137-141), and Shook (1955) suggested that the peak of Uaymil occurred after A.D. 800 and was contemporary with Chichén Itzá and Uxmal. Our first results from the analysis of the materials collected in Uaymil confirm the proposal and we suggest that Uaymil had a specific function at the time of its peak.

Previous Page  |  Table of Contents  |  Next Page

Return to top of page