In a recent article in Reviews in Anthropology, Rosemary Joyce looks at four recent publications in Maya archaeology and argues that the term "Ancient Maya" is an umbrella term that includes too many disparate ancient societies to be useful or meaningful. "'The ancient Maya' is, fundamentally, an illusory subject that too often stands in the way of a real appreciation of the diversity that art historians and archaeologists are documenting through meticulous work.... [W]ith contemporary understandings of the complexity of identification and misidentification, and recognition long past in general anthropology and specific archaeology that language does not equal ethnicity, it is clearly time for specialists on the deep history of Yucatan, Belize, Guatemala, and Honduras to be freed from the tyranny of a unitary, illusory subject that never existed outside of our texts."
Click on through for the full citation and associated links. The photograph of Chichen Itza is by Jim Gateley (c) 2006.
I posted this quotation the end of last month, before the comment feature was turned on for this blog. I think Joyce's quote is quite inflammatory and well worth thinking about. Does anybody else care to comment on her suggestion about doing away with the 'ancient Maya' tag?
Comments
Dear Kris,
Considering “Courtly Art of the Ancient Maya,” this may very well be true.
I think Professor Joyce objects to looking at all ancient Maya people or groups as being homogeneous…although there were some common features, there was also much diversity within prehispanic Mesoamerica!
Joyce is correct that the term “ancient Maya” is wrong. However, she still maintains concepts like culture in her texts. To me there is no such thing as a Maya culture or any other archaeological cultures you can think of. These are all the remains of 19th century culture area thinking. However, it will be impossible to ditch the concept for practical reasons.