Archaeological Reconnaissance in Southeastern Campeche, México: 2002 Field Season Report

Introduction

The fourth season of Archaeological Reconnaissance in Southeastern Campeche, México, was carried out from March to May 2002, representing a continuation of the works accomplished in 1996, 1998 and 2001 (Šprajc et al. 1996; 1997a; 1997b; Šprajc and Suárez 1998a; 1998b; Šprajc 1998; 2001). The surveys of the first three seasons resulted in a relatively satisfactory coverage of the area in the extreme southeast of the state of Campeche, between the Río Bec region to the north and the Guatemala border to the south, and between the border with Belize and Quintana Roo to the east and the Calakmul Biosphere Reserve to the west. This territory (approximately between 89º09’ and 89º30’ W, and between 17º49’ and 18º15’ N) belongs to a number of small ejido communities, while the Calakmul Bioshpere is nowadays without permanent population.

While the 2002 surveys were focused on the southeastern part of the Calakmul Biosphere Reserve, some formerly unknown sites in the adjacent area to the east were also examined. Furthermore, at North and South Complexes of Mucaancah, recorded in 1996 (Šprajc et al. 1996; 1997a: 8ff; 1997b: 40ff), a team directed by Daniel Juárez Cossío accomplished emergency consolidation works in recently excavated looters’ trenches: our objective was to prevent a collapse of two important structures, as well as to obtain some information on construction systems and chronological sequences (Appendix 1).

Methodological questions concerning fieldwork strategies and definition of site units have been discussed in the reports of previous seasons (Šprajc et al. 1996; 1997b: 30ff; Šprajc 2001) and need not be repeated here. However, a few remarks about the differences between the surveys within the Calakmul Biosphere and those in the sparsely populated area to the east do seem in order.

The Calakmul Biosphere Reserve was established by a presidential decree in 1989. As a consequence, the greater part of the area was depopulated, and land use and forest exploitation (e.g. chicle and timber extraction) forbidden. The problems that archaeological reconnaissance works have to cope with in this situation are thus twofold. On the one hand, numerous trails that had been in use formerly are now heavily overgrown; only few of them, used almost exclusively by the Mexican army and government officials, remain passable. This obviously means that any expedition must face serious difficulties regarding transport and supplies. On the other hand, and more importantly, the persons who know archaeological sites are difficult to find. Like in previous seasons, our surveys depended heavily on the information provided by the locals. In the area of ejidos to the east, the inhabitants know their lands and are aware of ruins of any notable size. The work depending on informants, however, proved to be much less efficacious in the Calakmul Biosphere Reserve. Most people who used to live or work in the area are now either dead or too old to be able to walk. We did find a few persons who said they knew some ruins and were willing to accompany us, but their search in the changed environment was time-consuming and of limited success; on several occasions they simply did not manage to relocate the sites they affirmed to have seen before. Furthermore, due to the lack of information about the aguadas (water ponds) retaining water in the dry season, our water supplies were, in most cases, limited to those we were able to transport in our pick-up truck. This fact put a serious constraint on our work in uninhabited areas and resulted in unproductive expenditure of time and resources, as we were often forced to travel many kilometers along difficult trails only to resupply ourselves.

The map in Figure 1, below, shows the location of the sites recorded so far in southeastern Campeche. While most of them have been registered in our surveys since 1996 (Šprajc et al. 1996; 1997a; 1997b; Šprajc and Suárez 1998a; 1998b; Šprajc 2001), El Palmar, discovered by Thompson (1936), and Aktunkin, reported by García Cruz (1991), are also included.^[1]  Triangular and circular symbols designate the sites with architecture and the caves, respectively. The sites with architectural remains have been ordered in three categories, following the relatively simple method devised by Harrison (1981: 269) for classifying sites with architecture in southern Quintana Roo. According to his criteria, a "small" site is limited in extent and consists of structures not exceeding three meters in height, a "medium" site has a large number of small mounds, or fewer structures ranging up to 10 m in height, while a "large" site includes more structures of which at least one is higher than 10 m. The three site categories are indicated in Figure 1 with triangles of different sizes. The sites surveyed in 2002 are marked in red. Among them are Altamira and Balakbal, which had been recorded, described and mapped by the Carnegie Institution of Washington expeditions in 1930s (Ruppert and Denison 1943: 42ff, 65ff; cf. Morley 1937: pl. 218; Ruz 1945: 16f), but we visited them in order to verify their location and current state of preservation, particularly of the sculpted monuments. At El Mameyal, first recorded in 1996 (Šprajc et al. 1997a: 10; 1997b: 39f), additional groups of ruins were examined in 2002. At Altar de los Reyes, briefly visited in 1998 and registered as Zapote Bobal (Šprajc and Suárez 1998b: 106f), we surveyed two groups of monumental architecture with a total station; the resulting maps include both contours and conventionally represented structures (Figure 6 and Figure 12, see **NOTE below). Given the limited scope of the project and the fact that only the core areas were mapped, no comprehensive system of structure designation has been elaborated. In order to facilitate further references, only major structures or compounds have been numbered sequentially.

Important note

The web version of this report does not include precise data on the location of archaeological sites, in order not to make this information readily available to potential looters. Therefore, the map in Figure 1 shows neither geographic features nor the coordinate grid. The information on exact location of particular sites has been omitted also in the text and site maps. All these data, including a geographically referenced map of sites based on a satellite image, are incorporated in the printed version of the report, which is on file at FAMSI.

Click on image to enlarge.

Endnote

1. A few other sites have so far been reported in the area, but do not appear in Figure 1, since we did not manage to verify their locations.

**NOTE: The maps of particular sites are in an AutoCAD format, which requires the Autodesk® Express Viewer. With the software installed you will be able to pan across and zoom into selected areas of the maps by right clicking your mouse and using the features in the menu. Click on the button below for the latest version of Autodesk® Express Viewer from Autodesk.com.

Previous Page  |  Table of Contents  |  Next Page

Return to top of page