Morphological Variation Among the Historic Period Maya at Tipu, Belize

Materials and Methods

The Tipu Historic skeletal population consists of 588 individuals, of whom 253 are intact primary burials, 106 are partly disturbed primary burials, and the rest are extensively disturbed by later intrusive interments. The present study of the Tipu remains utilizes metric data from the long bones of 134 well-preserved adults (71 males and 63 females). Sex estimates for these individuals were derived from multiple non-metric indicators of the skull and pelvis instead of with the discriminant functions described above. Most adults in the Tipu population were young, with few surviving past the age of forty.

Published studies of the Tipu skeletons generally have not focused on finding intra-cemetery variation, but rather treated them as a single population (Cohen et al., 1997, 1994). A notable exception is Jacobi’s (2000) study of metric and non-metric dental traits, in which he describes several pieces of evidence that show burial location was not random and thus may have had social or temporal significance. However, he was unable to find genetic differences between groups of individuals buried in different locations in and around the church. Since the Tipu population was composed of a diverse group of Maya, many of whom had fled the Yucatán, the homogeneity of the population may instead reflect the regional indigenous population rather than identify differences between local populations. Furthermore, temporal variation is also expected to be of marginal importance in defining diversity within the cemetery since archaeological and ethnohistorical evidence suggest that the vast majority of the burials from the Tipu cemetery were likely to have been interred during the church’s use, which spans a period of only about 70 years (A.D. 1568 to 1638).

Since the Tipu cemetery population appears to be quite genetically and temporally homogenous, the present study instead tests for intracemetery morphological variation using archaeological indicators believed to correspond to status-related differences within the community. Status distinctions within the cemetery were tested using two methods. First, individuals with grave goods were compared to unfurnished burials, assuming that only the high status individuals would have been distinguished by grave wealth (Table 1 and Table 2). In this sample, only 24 individuals had grave goods, 17 of them male, and 7 female. Second, burial location in relation to the church was also used as a proxy for status. Miller and Farriss (1979) note that in the Catholic Church in Europe and the New World, placement inside the church was reserved for higher status individuals, especially males, with the most important placed near the altar. Jacobi (2000) identified sex and age biases in different areas in the Tipu cemetery that he attributes to these Catholic burial practices, and possibly as well by traditional patrimonial Maya social organization. For instance, significantly more males than females were placed inside the church and near the altar, and significantly more females are placed outside than inside. Also, while earlier burials were disturbed in some locales, those found around the nave were not, perhaps testifying to their high status.

Excavations of the Tipu church by Graham (1989) revealed a long polygonal structure with parallel sides and an altar at one end. Two general groups were formed by placement either inside or outside of the church (Table 3 and Table 4). Another set of comparisons used subsets based on smaller areas (Table 5 and Table 6). The individuals buried inside the church were divided into two groups: front (i.e., near the altar) and back. The individuals buried outside the cemetery were divided into three groups placed north, south and west of the church. These divisions follow Jacobi’s (2002) study.

Data for these comparisons were composed of 25 measurements taken by Carl Armstrong, Marie Danforth, and by me at SUNY Plattsburgh, where the skeletons are presently curated. Tables 1 through 6 list these measurements, the majority of which are described by Wrobel and colleagues (2002). In addition, the present analysis includes measurements of long bone lengths and medial-lateral diameters that were not included in the article, but which are described by Bass (1995). Tables 1 through 6 list the number of cases, means, and standard deviations of the measurements for each comparison. Because of the fairly small sample sizes, nonparametric procedures (Mann-Whitney test) were employed to test differences between the group means.

Previous Page  |  Table of Contents  |  Next Page

Return to top of page