Chen K’u: The Ceramic of the Sacred Cenote at Chichén Itzá
Study of the Ceramic Fragments of the Explorations Conducted in the 60’s

Conclusions

Until recently, our knowledge of the cultural history of the Sacred Cenote, based on the partial study of its ceramic, was limited to two major temporal events: the first consisted of materials from the Terminal Classic-Early Postclassic periods, and included luxury and imported ritual objects. The second, dating to the Middle and Late Postclassic periods, evidenced an impoverishment in regard to the opulence of the materials, including mostly cajetes, incense burners and ceramic censers. The occurrence of objects at the Sacred Cenote is due to two reasons: the gradual accumulation resulting from a series of ritual offerings, or either a spectacular act of deposit as a part of a magnificent termination ritual (Brainerd, 1958; Piña Chan, 1970; Ball, 1992; Coggins, 1992).

The ceramic analysis presented here, conducted on the collection of ceramic fragments from the explorations of the 60’s, has enormously broadened the temporal sequence of use of the Sacred Cenote, as we now have evidence of the entire chronological column at the site of Chichén Itzá, spanning the Preclassic, Classic, Postclassic, Colonial and Modern periods. Therefore, we now have a vision closer to the historic reality regarding the use of the Cenote de los Sacrificios of Chichén Itzá. Not only has our temporal vision been expanded, but also, the presence of some ceramic types never found before at Chichén Itzá has been established. Therefore, from the point of view of the ceramics from Chichén Itzá, the ceramic analysis conducted has greatly contributed to our knowledge.

Besides, the ceramic material of the Sacred Cenote has produced, for the first time, a clearly distinctive ceramic collection which we have dated to the Late Classic period and which had not been previously established at Chichén Itzá. Later studies have confirmed this finding, which defines the Late Classic period as the time when the urban development of the city was initiated.

Regarding the functionality of the Sacred Cenote, the study of the ceramic fragments presented here provides materials for a more thorough understanding of the role played by the Cenote in the cosmovision of the site’s inhabitants through its different epochs.

Clearly, always, and from the very beginning, the Sacred Cenote was utilized as a source of water, being its basic and major function, as noted by George Brainerd (1958). Establishing the temporalities and meaning of its ritual function is rather more complicated.

The Sacred Cenote may have been used as a depositary of offerings since the Late Classic period. The ceramic sample of the Motul horizon is one of the major collections of its type, both for the quantity and quality of the objects involved. The reasons why the inhabitants of Chichén Itzá would cast these materials into the Cenote, based only on the ceramic, are not easy to establish. According to the data established here, a re-classification of the non-ceramic objects of that period is required, as well as the iconographic study of this era.

The greatest apogee regarding the deposit of high quality objects in the waters of the Cenote took place during the Terminal Classic and Early Postclassic periods. As shown earlier, the iconography of this era is associated with the god Quetzalcóatl, and the Sacred Cenote would be the last station in the great War-Sacrifice ritual complex to which the great leveling of Chichén Itzá was dedicated. Thus, we understand the Sacred Cenote as a part of a whole and not as an isolated ritual case.

It is very difficult to assess whether these objects were deposited in repetitive acts or through one single action. In my opinion, a series of repetitive acts seems more plausible, but the question remains open to debate.

The last great period of ceremonial activity around the Sacred Cenote corresponds to the Middle and Late Postclassic periods. A significant decline in regard to the quality of objects may have been accompanied by a shift in their meaning. In this case, as shown in the corresponding chapter, the ceramic objects were not cast into the Cenote by the Maya but by Bishop Diego de Landa. Possibly, during colonial times, the Cenote was a place to visit and maybe to conduct rituals somehow connected to Chaac, the rain god.

I believe this work is not yet finished. Certain ceramic groups are yet to be re-examined, and particularly, the study of complete vessels disseminated in different museums must be fulfilled. Future changes to this report will be timely submitted, with the purpose of creating a debate around this fascinating Cenote.

Previous Page  |  Table of Contents  |  Next Page

Return to top of page