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

Altamira
The search for Altamira, also reported by Ruppert and Denison (1943: 42-45, Figs. 54-57, pl. 14a), was more complicated. The available informants did not know of it, while Ruppert and Denison’s data about its location proved to be less reliable than in the case of Balakbal. Describing their discovery of the site, they mention that "the ruins are most easily reached from the camp of Alta Mira^[3]  by proceeding along the Alta Mira–Central Buenfil trail for about an hour, and then to the left through the bush for 15 or 20 minutes" (ibid.: 42). Furthermore, a comment in their map of the site specifies the distance and bearing to the aguada and the camp of Altamira to be 1500 m and S32º20’E, respectively. This information indicates clearly that the core area of the ancient city was found northwest of the chicle camp, but disagrees with the coordinates they determined for the site (ibid.: 42, fig. 54), since the latter fall some 1100 m southwest of the camp and the aguada of Altamira.

Assuming there was an error in the determination of coordinates, rather than discarding the rest of the data about the site’s placement, we did not examine the area corresponding to the coordinates but rather the terrain northwest of the chicle camp. Aside from the structure on the west side of the trail to Las Delicias, situated 2 km away from the Altamira camp (Figure 21) and reported by Ruppert and Denison (1943: 44, Fig. 57), we only found some minor mounds. Approaching the lands of La Unión 20 de Junio, an ejido abandoned a few years ago, we realized the site of Altamira might have been identical to the ruins of La Unión, which an inhabitant of the ejido Once de Mayo had mentioned to us. Trying to recall his vague indications, and upon scouring extensive terrains of dense secondary growth (acahuales) during many hours, we finally managed to find the site. Both the coordinates we determined and the distance and azimuth to the abandoned chicle camp of Altamira differed notably from the data given by Ruppert and Denison.^[4]

The site is badly looted. Of the few architectural details recorded by Ruppert and Denison (1943: 42f, Figs. 54-56), only some on Structure XII survive. However, practically all of the sculpted monuments continue to be on the reported spots (ibid.: 42-44, Fig. 54). We recorded their dimensions and photographed them all (cf. Figures 22 and 23).

At the position of Stela 5 marked on Ruppert and Denison’s site plan (1943: Fig. 54), i.e. south of the south plaza, we found no monument; Stela 5 must be the one lying some 50 m eastward and just south of Structure IV, on the spot where no monument is indicated on the map. Stelae 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 and Altars 7 and 8 have been moved from their original positions by looters, but they are still in front of Structure V (ibid.). Stela 11, which we did not see, is probably under a pile of material extracted from the adjacent looters’ trench.

As Ruppert and Denison (1943: 42) noted, the monuments of Altamira are badly eroded. On Stelae 4, 9, 14 (Figure 23) and the one we identified as Stela 5, hardly more than traces of relief carving and glyphic blocks can be distinguished; there are, however, some relatively well preserved glyphs on one part of Stela 10 exposed by looters (Figure 24).

An aguada having some 80 m in diameter is located less than 500 m north of the core area of the archaeological site; to the east the terrain descends to an extensive bajo about a kilometer away.

Endnote

3. The name of the abandoned chicle camp is nowadays being written as "Altamira".

4. These errors notwithstanding, it is only fair to emphasize that Ruppert and Denison’s data about the locations of the sites they report are, for the most part, admirably accurate, particularly if we consider the circumstances they worked in and the instruments they had at their disposal for determining geographic coordinates by astronomical observations. For the sake of illustration, let us recall that an error of 1 arc minute in the vertical angle reading, very easy to commit with theodolites or transits common in those times, corresponds in the geographic latitude determination to a distance of nearly 2 km.

Previous Page  |  Table of Contents  |  Next Page

Return to top of page