Yaxha – Guatemala

Posted on 29/08/2023 by Michael

Yaxja

Yaxha – Guatemala

Location

Yaxha was one of the most beautiful cities built by the Maya, not only because of its hilltop location overlooking large expanses of land, but also because of the exquisite proportions of its public plazas. It is situated on the north shore of Lake Yaxha, which forms part of a chain of lakes and water masses in the central region of Peten. Nowadays, it is a well preserved park and many of the buildings have been restored. The archaeological area belongs to the Yaxha-Nakum-Naranjo Cultural Triangle, which gained National Park status in November 2003. It has the maximum legal protection, has had its own administration since 2005 and it charges an admission fee. Visitors enter the site from the east, accessing Plaza C. From there, continue along the Galindo Causeway to Plaza B and the East Acropolis. After these, a group of stepped plazas lead to the core area of the city. There are rest areas and rooms, trails and signs to orient visitors. In 2006 several stelae that had suffered erosion and deterioration were replaced by replicas and the originals are now on display in the visitor centre at the archaeological camp. This part of the site comprises a camping area with a shop selling basic items. To reach the site, take the asphalt road from Flores to Melchor de Mencos (on the Belizean border) and at the town of La Maquina, at marker 62 km, there is a well signposted turn-off onto the 8 km dirt track that leads to the park entrance and Yaxha.

Site description

The city measures 3 km from east to west and boasts over 500 monumental constructions. In the core area are three groups of tall buildings (the North Acropolis, North-east Acropolis and South Acropolis, the latter with six interior courtyards), two ball courts, an astronomical complex (the elongated building on the east side measures 160 m), four plazas with stelae, various vias or streets and other constructions. One via leads from the core area south to the lake (the Lake Causeway); another horizontal causeway, 260 m long, leads north to the Maler Group. This via is composed of containment walls that form a dyke between two plazas with buildings at the same height (the Blom Causeway).

Two additional causeways connect the core area of the site to the East Group (East Causeway and Lincoln Causeway). This part of the city is the highest and is formed by several groups of buildings and a plaza with twin pyramids (Plaza A), the only one of its type outside Tikal. This group is composed of two twin pyramids without temples, one on the east side and the other on the west side of a raised quadrangular space. Both pyramids have four stairways, one on each side. At the north end of the plaza is a building, now minus its roof, formed by walls with a single entrance; this is called the ‘sacred precinct’. Inside is an altar, without any inscriptions, and at one time there was probably also a stela. Situated south of this group is an elongated building. The north and south buildings have been partly restored, pyramid temple 216 in the East Acropolis is the highest point of the city and offers spectacular vistas over lakes Yaxha and Sacnab in the south and the great wetlands in the north.

Yaxha only had one building with visible architecture (Temple 216), which was restored between 1996 and 2002. Following over 15 years of controlled vegetation in plazas and buildings, based on the concept of landscape architecture, visitors can now enjoy the urban space, building 218 in the East Acropolis has also been restored, and other interventions were conducted in Plaza C, Plaza B, Plaza E, Ball Court 1, Courtyard 4 of the South Acropolis, the North Acropolis and the Maler Group.

Yaxha was occupied from the Late Preclassic, as evidenced by the giant masks on the buildings in the North Acropolis. The urban structure dates from the Terminal Classic. The city enjoyed considerable importance during the Classic period as an ally of Tikal, although it was conquered and burned three times by the neighbouring city of Naranjo, 20 km east, and was involved in the so-called ‘war of the stars’ waged against Tikal. In fact, the last ruler of Yaxha was sacrificed at Naranjo in AD 799.

Yaxha had 32 sculpted stelae, the most famous of which can be found in Plaza C (stelae 1 to 6). Stela 6 is currently in storage at the National Museum of Archaeology in Guatemala City. A replica of Stela 11 can be seen in Plaza B, as well as the greatly eroded Stela 36. A replica of Stela 13 can be seen in Plaza A and in Plaza E a replica of Stela 31, known as the Stela of the Birds.

Oscar Quintana Samayoa

From: ‘The Maya: an architectural and landscape guide’, produced jointly by the Junta de Andulacia and the Universidad Autonoma de Mexico, 2010, pp212-213

How to get there:

The entrance to the National Park is only 8km from the main road between Santa Elena and Melchor de Mencos (on the Guatemalan/Belize border) and there are many colectivos that ply that route so getting to the approach road is not a problem. However, it would be difficult to fine any transport for this short distance – and the entrance to the archaeological site is yet another two kilometres away. I ended up contracting a taxi from Melchor and that worked out well but not cheap. But then I’m not good at bargaining and others might be able to negotiate a better price.

GPS:

17d 04’ 34” N

89d 24’ 9” W

Entrance:

Q80 – payable at the entrance to the National Park.

More on the Maya

Ceibal/Seibal – Guatemala

Posted on 23/08/2023 by Michael

Ceibal

More on the Maya

Ceibal – Guatemala

Location

This is the largest site in the River Pasion region in terms of size and number of structures. It is situated precisely at the point where the river bends sharply from the north to the east, finally pouring into the River Usumacinta. The site is situated on a platform of small limestone hills, considerably higher than the level of the river. You can reach Ceibal (Seibal) by National Road 5 from Sayaxche. By motor boat, it takes an hour to sail up the 12.4 km of the River Pasion between Sayaxche and the archaeological site.

Timeline and pre-Hispanic history

Seibal, like Altar de Sacrificios, had a long sequence of occupation commencing at the beginning of the Middle Preclassic. The Real phase, equivalent to the Xe phase at Altar, spanned the same period (900-600 BC). Material from this period was found in Group A, associated with stucco floors and small platforms. Again like Altar de Sacrificios, the materials reveal a farming economy and there are abundant metates and spindle whorls. The remains of terrestrial and aquatic wildlife were also found. Ceramics from the Escoba phase (600-300 BC) appeared in different places at the site, indicating an increase in population. The remains of a small platform and platforms with rooms made of perishable materials probably also date from this period. The first structures that would subsequently form the foundations of Group A date from this time. It is possible to identify this gradual increase of population from the Cantutse period (300 BC-AD 300) and estimate a population ranging between 5,000 and 10,000 inhabitants. Most of the constructions in Group A belong to this phase.

Groups C and D also show evidence of constructions dating from this period, as well as numerous residential structures. The Junco phase (AD 300-500) is poorly represented in terms of constructions. The floors of the Group A plazas were remodelled, the population shrank mid various parts of the site were almost certainly Abandoned. This period was also marked by a hiatus in inscription activity at Seibal and other sites in the region, lasting approximately 50 years (AD 600-650).

Seibal returned to its former prosperity in the Late Classic, during the Tepejilote phase (AD 600-700). This was possibly due to the arrival of a wave of inhabitants from the River Pasion region because there were significant similarities in the material culture at all the sites in the Pasion basin at this time. The Tepejilote reoccupied the domestic mounds built during the Cantutse phase and erected additional platforms.

Group A became the ritual precinct for the community following the renovation and extension of the main structures, and a considerable number of stelae and monuments were sculpted. Group D, also extended and renovated during this phase, may well have been the residence of the ruling family. Although the material evidence indicates that Seibal was a constantly growing community, the epigraphy suggests that it played a less important role on the Petexbatun political scene at the time. The capture and sacrifice in AD 735 of the governor of Seibal, Yich’ak Balam, by Ruler 3 at Dos Pilas are recorded on the Hieroglyphic Stairway at Seibal, and these events ushered in a period of dependence on Dos Pilas that lasted approximately 60 years. After the fall of Dos Pilas and Aguateca, Seibal emerged as the dominant polity in Petexbatun. The occupation during the Classic Terminal, the Bayal phase (AD 830-930), was characterised by the introduction of fine paste ceramics in grey and orange tones, and by a significant change in the iconographic style of the stelae. This change was interpreted some time ago as evidence of the invasion of the region by groups from the Gulf of Mexico. Thanks to a new translation of the hieroglyphic texts, we now know that this time was a period of great political change, caused by the conquest of Seibal by the ruler of Ucanal, Wat’ul Chatel, in AD 830. This governor built a radial monument (Structure A-3) in the centre of the South Plaza in Group A and modified various nearby buildings. He also dramatically increased the number of settlements near the core area. Most of the structures in Group C date from this phase, including the Ball Court. The sudden population increase at Seibal may have resulted from the abandonment of other sites in Petexbatun, such as Dos Pilas and Aguateca. However, this prosperity was short-lived, towards AD 928 the core area of the site was Abandoned, although radiocarbon dates suggest sporadic, scant occupation until AD 1000 or 1050.

Site description

The central part of Seibal is divided into two major architectural groups, A and D, each situated on a hilltop and connected by causeways I and III. Mid-way between the two groups is Causeway II, which leads to a strange circular structure. The settlements concentrated around Causeway II are known as Group C. The other settlements are scattered within a radius of several kilometres from this central area, Group B, thus designated by Morley, is a small courtyard group with a single stela, situated 2 km from the main group. group a is larger, with an approximate surface area of 400 x 200 m, and is composed of several buildings Around two large plazas and a smaller one. The North Plaza is the smallest space and a small passageway between two mounds leads to a stairway which in turn provides access to Causeway IV. This runs parallel to Causeway I for some 80 m and culminates at a small terrace next to Stela 23 and a small sculpted altar, which in the pre-Hispanic period was an important place of worship. The central plaza of Group A is dominated by structures A-14, A-10 and A-24. The first of these is an elongated mound, probably a palatial structure, which is accessed by a stairway opposite the plaza. The first steps of the stairway display sculpted panels. The second structure is a platform that once supported a building made of perishable materials; this was accessed via a narrow stairway leading to a small terrace with three stelae: 5 and 7, with 6 in the middle. Structure A-24 stands 18 m tall and resembles A-10. It is surmounted by the remains of a building (Structure A-3), the most outstanding element in the plaza. This was probably the builders’ intention. Only 6 m high, its walls are covered by modelled stucco and bright colours. Its central location is reinforced by four magnificently sculpted stelae situated at the centre of the four access stairways, one on each side. Situated east of Structure A-3 is a stairway that descends from the platform on which the great plaza lies and lead to Causeway I, which culminates at a large rectangular platform where stelae 14 and 15 are located. Causeway III begins at this point, in an area with 40 structures of varying sizes, including a ball court. This area, which is separate from Group A, is known as Group C. Situated some 400 m from this point, Causeway II cuts through the slope of a small river, veers south for 100 m and culminates at a rectangular platform with a circular platform on which stands a jaguar-shaped rectangular altar in front of the access stairway. Situated some 100 m away, on the other side of a ravine, is group D, built during the Preclassic, abandoned at the beginning of the Classic and reoccupied during the Late Classic. Much smaller than Group A, it consists of several structures arranged around five plazas.

Monuments

Seibal is one of the most important sites in terms of the sheer number of monuments: 31 sculpted monuments, 56 stelae, 22 altars and 2 Ball Courts from the Late Classic. The chief monuments are as follows: stela l. Found by Maler in the late 19th century lying face down near the north side of the South Plaza in Group A. It was erected in AD 869, at the end of its history. Like many of the stelae at this site, the iconographic elements are unusual in the lowlands. For example, the position of the figure returns to an Early Classic pattern: it shows the governor with his feet one behind the other, unlike the representations from this period which showed the main figures with their feet pointing outwards. The sculptural technique employed is also coarser and more rudimentary than the technique just 20 years earlier.

Stela 3. This was first found by the person who discovered the site, Guillermo Arthes, and then by Maler, lying in the middle of a row of six stelae opposite Structure A-6. It was removed from the site during the Peabody Museum Project and is now on display at the National Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology in Guatemala City. One of the most important sculptural works at Seibal, it recalls the style employed in the Campeche region and western Yucatan. The division of the space into small independent fields indicates, like Stela 1, the deliberate adoption of an unusual style for the lowlands. The small upper and lower panels show a group of seated figures deep in conversation. The central figure is simply dressed. It is just possible to make out a date in the 52-year cycle or may, consistent with the dates on other sculptures at the site. The scene depicted probably took place around AD 870.

Stela 6. This is composed entirely of text and represents historical events from AD 771. There is mention of a ruler of Aguateca and an individual from the ruling family at Yaxchilan. Nowadays fragmented, the lower section was found on a small altar by Ian Graham in 1967, who has suggested that it may have been moved from its original place, barely 30 m away, towards the end of the pre-Hispanic period.

Stela 8. This was found lying face down on the ground by Arthes. It was re-erected opposite Structure A-3 and is one of four stela originally erected in AD 849 opposite each side of a platform containing the said temple, which must have been built during this same period. Elaborately dressed, the figure displays ‘jaguar-paw’ mittens and slippers.

Stela 9. The five monuments associated with Temple A-3 (stelae 8, 9, 10, 11 and 21) display fantasy elements for which there is very little precedent in the lowlands sculptural repertoire during the Classic period. The facial elements of this figure are closer to the style of the Classic period, compared with the individuals on the other stelae associated with Temple A-3. The monument was erected in AD 849.

Stela 10. This was found by Arthes in the 19th century, in its original location opposite the north stairway of Structure A-3. It shows the governor Aj Bolon Haabt’al probably officially inaugurating the said temple in AD 849. The garments are unusual for representations of Maya rulers in the Classic period, and the figure is also shown with a moustache – an element that has not been found in other representations from the same period. He holds a ceremonial bar with two heads in the shape of mythological creatures. The text mentions four cities from the period – Seibal, Calakmul, Tikal and Motul de San Jose – which sent individuals to attend the events narrated on the stela.

Stela 11. This was found ‘in situ’ by Arthes opposite the east access stairway on Structure A-3. It commemorates the reinstatement of Seibal as the capital of an independent unit in AD 830, after the fall of the regional capital Dos Pilas. The new governor of Seibal, Aj B’olon Haab’tal, appears under the ‘supervision’ of the governor of the nearby Ucanal: Chan Ek’ Hopet. In 849 this governor dedicated Structure A-3 and the five associated stelae – one inside the building and the other opposite the access stairways. Aj Bol’on Haabt’al appears to have reigned until 889, the last date recorded at the site. We do not know if he had a successor. The archaeology indicates that the revival of Seibal was a short-lived phenomenon, as by around AD 900 the site had been practically abandoned.

Stela 13. This was found by Barnum Brown in 1948, during the exploration works conducted by the Peabody Museum; it was lying with the carved side face up in the middle of a large terrace east of Structure A-24. It was put back in its original position during the Seibal (Peabody Museum) Project in 1967.

Stela 14. Found in 1961, lying on its side and fragmented, at the intersection of causeways I, II and III; it regained its original position during the Seibal Project.

Stela 19. Found by Ian Graham in 1964, face down and approximately 8 m west of the access stairway to Structure A-5. It was put back in this place during the Seibal Project.

From: ‘The Maya: an architectural and landscape guide’, produced jointly by the Junta de Andulacia and the Universidad Autonoma de Mexico, 2010, pp194-197

Getting there:

From Sayaxche; Doing this independently is relatively easy although if you are one person it can add up expensive. There’s no point taking the river route – unless you desperately want to be on the water. This will cost around Q600 – but that will for the boat and it would take a small group. Going by road I was quoted Q300. Again that will be for up to 3 or 4 people. You might be able to negotiate a cheaper price from one of the many taxis that park at the main square.

GPS:

16d 30′ 25″ N

90d 03′ 33″ W

Entrance:

Q60

More on the Maya

El Mirador – Guatemala

Posted on 17/08/2023 by Michael

El Mirador

El Mirador – Guatemala

Location

The archaeological site is situated within the cultural and natural boundaries of the Mirador Basin (2,066.71 sq km), an area protected by Decree 26-97 pertaining to the Protection of the Cultural Heritage of Guatemala. The basin lies in the northern section of the Peten region, very near the Mexican border and adjacent to the Calakmul Biosphere Reserve. This vast region encompasses 29 major archaeological sites and 50 smaller sites, constituting an ancient culture with some of the oldest cities in the Maya area. Its ecosystem – a karst topography of low mountains in the east and south, and less prominent in the west – is home to a rich variety of wildlife and plant species, with wooded uplands combining with plains and swamps. Nowadays, there are no towns or villages within the boundaries of the reserve, although several communities or human settlements emerged around the edges as a result of the chicle or gum industry in the early 20th century. The area does however comprise several forestry concessions: two industrial concerns and five community ones. The two communities closest to the archaeological area are Carmelita and Cruce La Colorada. A number of other communities, such as La Pasadita, Uaxactun, San Miguel La Palotada, La Colorada, Dos Aguadas, Ixhuacut and Caserio El Tigre, are encountered prior to Carmelita. El Mirador is situated in the municipal area of San Andres, in the Peten region. To reach the site, take the rough track from the city of Flores to Carmelita, approximately 85 km. The site lies 64 km from Carmelita and can only be reached on foot or by mule.

History of the explorations

The first reports of the archaeological sites of Nakbe and El Mirador date from 1926 and 1930, when their jungle-covered temples were photographed from the air by Percy Madeira as part of a larger aerial reconnaissance of Maya sites. In 1962, Ian Graham of Harvard University visited the two sites and drew up the first, albeit, partial maps. Four years later, Joyce Marcus dug a series of test wells on platforms, buildings and plazas at El Mirador, Porvenir, Pacaya, Guiro and Tintal. The ceramics recovered from these excavations were analysed by Donald Forsyth in 1978. Between 1978 and 1983 Brigham Young University and the Catholic University in Washington conducted the first systematic excavations and drew up a new map of El Mirador. Bruce Dahlin, Ray Matheny, Arthur Demarest and Robert J Sharer dug new test pits at the site in 1982. In 1987, R. Hansen organised the Nakbe Project and conducted the first archaeological survey of the site since Graham’s visit in 1962. In 1988 the Northern Peten Regional Research Project (PRIANPEG) was launched. This project contemplates systematic archaeological and ecological research throughout the region and encompasses major sites such as Nakbe, Guiro, Tintal, Naachtun and El Mirador, as well as the smaller sites of La Muralla, Porvenir and Pacaya. Since 1997 Richard Hansen has been leading one of the most ambitious and important projects in the Maya area, the purpose of which is to document the origins of the Maya civilisation.

Pre-Hispanic history

The earliest occupation of this region can be traced back to 1000 BC (Middle Preclassic). The oldest evidence corresponds to dwellings made out of perishable materials, with clay floors and post holes dug out of the bedrock. Richard Hansen has dated the boom in population to 700 BC, although the greatest period of development, marked by the construction of monumental buildings, occurred in the Late Preclassic. At the end of this period various events that have yet to be clarified led to the collapse and almost total abandonment of the sites in the region. This phenomenon was as dramatic as the sudden development a few centuries earlier. The latest evidence of occupation at this site corresponds to the Late Classic (AD 700-900), when a group of people built dwellings amid the imposing ruins of the abandoned city. However, these new constructions never achieved the monumental scale of the earlier ones.

Middle preclassic.

The ceramic remains suggest that the social hierarchy that emerged during this period was clearly linked to a strong agricultural base to maintain the increasing population. The pollen samples from this period indicate a strong presence of maize and pumpkin. Meanwhile, the enormous quantities of shell (Strombus pugilis) and obsidian confirm long-distance trade.

Middle and late preclassic.

Nakbe, a nearby satellite town of El Mirador, experienced a boom in construction during this period, characterised for example by the colossal platforms built in both the East and West groups. At the beginning of the Preclassic, the entire Mirador region underwent radical transformations. The most spectacular of these was the new ‘monumentality’ of the architecture. Vast buildings such as the Monos, Tigre and Danta pyramids display extraordinary volume and height. The Tigre pyramid occupies 380,000 cubic metres and the Danta pyramid has over 1 million cubic metres of filling. This period was also marked by a new style and form: the introduction of the triadic pattern, which predominates in the majority of the architecture at El Mirador, Nakbe, Guiro and Tintal and can also be found at Uaxactun, Lamanai, Cerros, Calakmul and numerous other sites. Once it had taken root in the Late Preclassic, this architectural pattern dominated the entire Early Classic.

Between 600 and 400 BC, the Maya at Nakbe and Wakna changed their techniques and began to build much larger structures, great platforms rising to between 5 and 8 m in height, burying the evidence of the earlier occupation beneath tons of stones and filling. In many cases, the platforms were built out of large stones arranged in rows, one on top of the other. Sometimes, however, the stones were used to create a paved floor for the top of the platform, providing a base for the construction of larger buildings. There were also cases where the platform floor did not extend down the stairway of a building, indicating that planning had gone into the construction of the platform and the building.

The Preclassic architecture at the sites in the Mirador Basin, and at El Mirador in particular, is characterised by the use of large blocks of limestone covered with thick layers of lime stucco and painted red (with ferrous oxide pigments). In the main buildings and temples, the central stairways are decorated with panels of masks. The ‘wall’ construction technique – crudely fashioned walls constructed internally on several levels to contain the loose fill of a building – was also widely used during the Middle Preclassic. These walls became quite elaborate, with different angles being used to form adjacent ‘cells’. This technique permitted higher vertical construction and indicates that by the Middle Preclassic sophisticated building methods were already being used in the lowlands. Another innovation in this period was the introduction of apron mouldings in which bevelled blocks projected from the internal wall, forming a cornice that protected the wall below. Sloping walls, resembling finely cut blocks, now began to replace the vertical walls of earlier periods.

There is ample evidence of significant changes in the landscape to control, store and channel water supplies, which were vital for the city. The excavations around the largest buildings at Nakbe have revealed networks of channels for managing water. The lack of aguadas or natural depressions in the Mirador Basin required greater efforts during the dry season to meet the needs of the growing population.

But perhaps the most notable constructions of this period were the causeways, the carefully planned routes with smooth floors, walls and parapets that linked the different cities in the area. These causeways could be up to 24 m wide and in certain places stood 4 m high and were several kilometres in length. All the major causeways that have been researched at El Mirador, Nakbe, Tintal and Wakna were in use during the Late Preclassic. This network of early causeways clearly facilitated the trade of goods, labour and food, and nowadays it provides us with clear evidence of the degree of political complexity in the region from a very early date.

Early classic.

Unlike the situation at other places in the lowlands, Mirador appears to have had a very small population in the Classic era. According to Hansen, this was the result of environmental degradation and the impossibility of sustaining large populations. The only evidence from the Early Classic comes from a small mound on top of the platform in Structure 18 in the West Group at Nakbe.

Late classic.

The greatest manifestation from this period can be found in the mounds, approximately 3 m high, situated around the civic precinct. The residential mounds and largest architecture in the north-west section of the site are known as the Codex Group because of the vast number of vases in the Codex style found in this elite group by looters.

Site description

El Mirador comprises two large architectural groups: the East Complex – comprising the Puma Group pyramids, the Guacamaya Group and the Danta Group (72 m high) – and the West Complex with the Cascabel Group, the Monos Pyramid (48 m high), El Tigre (55 m high) and the Leon Group. There are also outlying residential groups such as La Muerta and El Pedernal. These architectural groups cover a total area of approximately 25 sq km. The two large complexes occupy nearly 4 sq km and are situated in the city centre, next to the Acropolis and other important temples, terraces and numerous domestic plazas, all connected and delimited by a system of walls and raised causeways.

The east complex.

The predominant architectural design in the Mirador area during the Preclassic is known as the Triadic Pattern, which consists of a main building flanked by two, usually smaller, buildings. This design was reproduced to scale as the density of each complex increased. The East Complex at El Mirador comprises a massive architectural sub-group, known as La Danta, composed of a series of colossal platforms or tiers culminating in a summit temple. The base platform measures 350×600 m and stands 7 m tall; it supports several buildings, including a large triadic pyramid known as La Pava – the largest architectural construction in the whole of the Maya area. Recent excavations indicate that it was built during the Late Preclassic (AD 180 according to the radiocarbon date).

The west complex.

This comprises a plaza around which stand the Tigre Group and the Central Acropolis. There are three additional groups on the edge of the complex: Cascabel, the acropolis known as the Monos Group, and the Three Micos Group. The latter group adjoins the defensive wall, which has several entrances. This east side of this complex is delimited by a masonry wall that runs north-south, linking it to the little known Three Micos Group situated to the south-east. In 1982 the excavations conducted on this boundary wall indicated that it had been built in the Late Preclassic. The same excavations also revealed a sculpted monument or fragment of lintel (reused as a wall stone), which seems to come from the top of a Preclassic stela. The complex is dominated by the Tigre Pyramid, which covers an area six times larger than Temple IV at Tikal. There is also a triadic platform (Structure 34), whose stairway is flanked by 3-m-high masks. This is an acropolis type of platform and is surmounted by three temples. The deepest archaeological deposits found at El Tigre have been dated to 300 BC.

Central Acropolis.

Situated immediately east of the Tigre Group, this comprises several buildings, including an elite residence from the Late Preclassic. Construction of the Central Acropolis would appear to have commenced during the Middle Preclassic, although most of it corresponds to the Late Preclassic. As in many other precincts at the site, there is also evidence of constructions from the Classic era.

Monuments

The sites in the Mirador Basin boast a variety of sculpted monuments representing ancestral deities. These basically take the form of high reliefs on stelae and stucco-modelled masks flanking the stairways on the main buildings. One outstanding construction difference between the nine masks discovered at Nakbe is that they were carved in stone and then stuccoed. Most of the Preclassic monuments found in the Mirador area were transferred in the Late Classic from their original position to platforms and residential mounds, but the style, shape and archaeological context leave no doubt that they are much older. To date, the oldest monuments correspond to the Middle Preclassic. The most important sculpted monument is Stela 1 at Tintal, whose analysis indicates that it originated in the Altar de Sacrificios area. The stone weighs at least 6.42 tons and was transported from the confluences of the rivers Pasion and Usumacinta to Tintal, a distance of 110 km.

Rodrigo Liendo Stuardo

From: ‘The Maya: an architectural and landscape guide’, produced jointly by the Junta de Andulacia and the Universidad Autonoma de Mexico, 2010, pp236-239

How to get there:

The only way is on an organised tour as access to the National Park is restricted to those who have passed through the community of Carmelita, the closest public road access to El Mirador (and the other sites in the area). The Carmelita Cooperativa have an office in Flores on Calle Central América. In 2023 the cost of a 5 day, 4 night tour was Q2,800.