The Curse of Classic: Rethinking the Agency of Maya Ceramic Production

Summary

This is an abstract from the "Misinformation and Misrepresentation Part 1: Reconsidering “Human Sacrifice,” Religion, Slavery, Modernity, and Other European-Derived Concepts" session, at the 89th annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology.

Rooted in the Eurocentric concept of Classical antiquity, the “Classic” period is considered to have epitomized Maya civilization, standing in contrast to the developments that characterize the periods that came before and after. This dichotomy not only frames the way we categorize ceramic assemblages—the most abundant evidence in the archaeological record—but also influences how we interpret the agency behind ceramic production and consumption. In this paper, I will draw from two case studies to demonstrate that a high level of skills and specialization in the production of fineware ceramics was not a feature exclusive to the Classic period. The first case study focuses on the polychrome vessels from Nakum dating to 100/50 BCE–300/350 CE (Protoclassic period); the technology used to make these locally produced vessels exhibits clear signs of potters’ effort to increase their production with both social and economic value. The second case study highlights the central role played by the potters in making manufacturing decisions in the production of fineware ceramics in the Central Maya lowlands during 800/850–1200/1250 CE (the transition from Classic to Postclassic period), even though the mode of specialization evolved through time.

This Resource is Part of the Following Collections

• Society for American Archaeology 89th Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA (2024)   •
• Misinformation and Misrepresentation Part 1: Reconsidering “Human Sacrifice,” Religion, Slavery, Modernity, and Other European-Derived Concepts

Keywords

Spatial Coverage

Record Identifiers

Abstract Id(s): 38146.0