Kulubá Archaeological Project 2001 Field Season

Civic Architecture

The analysis of civic architecture in the Kulubá region depends on generic methods such volumetric calculations and distributional studies (Figure 7.1). A much-utilized bridging argument in Maya archaeology holds that the volume of a civic building corresponds to its political importance (Garza T. and Kurjack 1980; Turner et al. 1981). Table 7.1 compares the volume of each site’s largest civic structure. The surprising thing that emerges from this exercise is that the main pyramid at Santa Monica is more voluminous than the largest analogous structure at Kulubá. Granted, there are more civic pyramids at Kulubá than at Santa Monica so the total civic volume is greater at the former site. Nevertheless, it is noteworthy that Kulubá does not have a monumental civic building that dwarfs anything found in its lower-order centers. It is also interesting that Santa Monica isn’t the only site whose civic volume is comparable to Kulubá: the main civic structures at Yokat and Yun Ak are also quite large.

Another aspect of civic centers that can be compared is plaza area. Civic plazas of the ancient Maya were clearly multifunctional and were almost certainly the location of large gatherings for ceremonial purposes and places where trade and exchange took place. Many authors (Adams and Jones 1981; Turner et al. 1981) have also suggested that plaza size is a reliable indicator of a site’s political importance. One way the political power of a particular leader can be measured is by estimating the number of followers the leader had. If commoners massed in plazas to attend elite-sponsored events, then the size of the plaza should indicate the potential size of the gathering. Thus, comparing the size of plazas from one civic center to the next can be used to infer the relative number of followers the elite at each center had.

Turning this argument upside down, Ringle and Bey (2001:276) have suggested that the focus of elite court life may well have been on open plazas instead of within the confined spaces of buildings. In this view, plazas were not necessarily areas where commoners massed to witness state-sponsored events wherein the elite were performing on or inside civic architecture. Instead, civic architecture served as a backdrop for elite activities that took place on the plazas. Thus, the size of a civic center’s plaza can be argued to be roughly proportional to the size of the elite group that once occupied it.

Table 7.2 shows that Kulubá has a much larger plaza than any of the sites mapped in 2001.  If there is a relationship between political power and plaza area, this exercise demonstrates that this power was concentrated at Kulubá and not more evenly distributed throughout the polity. The plaza at Kulubá’s Group C even bests the main plaza at Ek Balam, which measures 9,690m² (Smith 2000).

We are also interested in the arrangement of civic architecture, what Ashmore (1991) calls site planning principles. We were curious to see if there were any "Chichén template" civic plans were present at the sites we mapped. The "Chichén template" consists of main civic pyramids (the Castillo at Chichén) placed conspicuously in the center of plazas (the Gran Nivelación). Looking at the site centers of each site, there does not appear to be any cases wherein the main civic structure was placed within the center of a plaza. The only remote possibility for this is at Ichmul de San Jose (Figure 6.1). Here, Structures 4 and 5 seem to have been built in the center of a large artificial terrace enclosed by Structures 1 and 3.  Yet while arguably found within the main plaza, these two structures were obviously not the main civic constructions at the site. It should also be noted that Kulubá lacks the "Chichén template" civic plan. Instead, its major architectural groups, especially Group C, tend to feature civic buildings ringing central plazas.

None of the civic builds we mapped appeared to be obvious examples of radial pyramids such as the Castillo at Chichén Itzá. All of them either had clues as to a dominant side such as stairways or superstructures on their summit. The only civic structure for which we obtained stylistic clues is Ichmul de San Jose Structure 11.  The numerous colonnetes here indicate that this building was built in the Puuc style. Needless to say, none of the distinct "Toltec" style architecture or iconography found at Chichén Itzá was found in Kulubá’s hinterlands.

Previous Page  |  Table of Contents  |  Next Page

Return to top of page