Evolution of Maya Polities
in the Ancient Mesoamerican System
Claudio Cioffi-Revilla and Todd Landman
 
International Studies Quarterly 43:4 (December 1999)
 
APPENDIX:  Sources and Dates

        Polity formation (“rise”) and termination (“fall”) dates were measured using the operationalizations detailed in the Method section.  The sources used to reconstruct a polity’s (pre)history and estimate its dates of rise and fall differ by levels of chronological precision and proximity to the field evidence.  Primary sources consist of (a) structural, architectural, or other archaeological evidence (e.g., Folan, Marcus, and Miller 1995; Inomata 1994; Webster 1976); as well as (b) textual information in the Mayan language, including hieroglyphic, paleographic, or other epigraphic records pertaining to social and political events (e.g., Berlin 1958; Marcus 1992a; Schele and Freidel 1990; Schele and Mathews 1991).  Thus, both archaeological and hieroglyphic bodies of evidence were used in this study, unlike previous studies that have relied almost exclusively on epigraphic dates (Hamblin and Pitcher 1980; Lowe 1985; Mathews 1985).  In general, archaeological evidence chronologically precedes epigraphic evidence in the formation of a polity.  By contrast, the opposite is generally true in the termination of a polity; archaeological evidence usually—albeit not always—postdates the epigraphic evidence (assuming any extant epigraphy).  Therefore, most dates of formation and termination—albeit not all—are archaeologically determined.  In some cases the last archaeological and epigraphic records for termination are coeval.  In general, epigraphic data (e.g., Schele and Grube 1994) are more critical for estimating events within a polity’s lifespan (e.g., wars, alliances, royal visits) than for formation or termination events.  However, whenever the last terminal event is epigraphic (15 polities, or 21% of the cases),  without subsequent archaeological information for determining polity termination, then the polity termination date was estimated at ca. 30 years (one political generation) after the last extant epigraphic date, which is within the ? 100 year accuracy range of most other dates.  Otherwise, archaeological evidence was used.
 

        Secondary sources contain more interpretation and analysis concerning a particular site or cultural trait (e.g., W. Coe 1990; Fash 1991; Folan 1992; Houston 1993), including discussions of primary material (archaeological or epigraphic).  Tertiary sources are general works with broader spatio-temporal scope (e.g., R. Adams 1996; M. Coe 1993; Coe, Snow, and Benson 1986; Marcus 1995; Sharer 1994; Stuart and Stuart 1993).  As a procedure, data coding began with tertiary sources, to establish an overall chronological framework for each polity, and then proceeded to the more detailed secondary and primary sources.
Numerous primary and secondary sources were used to determine events and dates of polity formation and termination, in addition to communications with the panel of Mayanists acknowledged in Table 1.  To provide some examples of the materials used for each polity case, the estimation of formation and termination events and dates for several cases from among the set of seventy-two polities listed in Table 1 was based on the following sources, in addition to general works:
 

Similar specialized coverage was used for each polity, but focusing only on those sources containing relevant information for estimating formation and termination.  (Obviously the literature on each site contains numerous other aspects, such as ecology, stratigraphy, population estimates, or processes during the lifetime of a polity, some of which are only indirectly relevant for measuring duration.)

 
Return to Abstract
View Data Tables