No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Economic Organization of the Ancient Maya
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 December 2015
Extract
The achievements of ancient Mayan civilization in the fields of astronomy, architecture, sculpture, and mathematics have been well documented. Recent research has found that in many respects Mayan culture attained heights originally thought to be nonexistent among the Amerindian populations of the New World prior to the coming of the Europeans. To have reached such cultural levels there must have been established a rather solid economic base which afforded an economic surplus, for a people merely surviving at subsistence levels have little time to appropriate to tasks other than those of seeking sustenance. The purpose of this paper will be to explore, in most elementary fashion, the bases of the economic organization of the Maya; i. e., to attempt to answer how the Maya resolved the four fundamental economic problems any society has to face: (1) the problem of the allocation of resources—what to produce given a relatively scarce resource base; (2) the problem of the organization of production, essentially a technological and administrative issue; (3) the problem of the distribution of production—how factors are recompensed for their productive services; (4) the savings and investment problem—what provision is made for future production. Emphasis should be placed on the rudimentary nature of the essay, because apparently little is known and / or has been written on the economics of Mayan civilization in very specific terms. Those who have studied the Maya have generally been anthropologists, archaeologists, and historians, who have shown more interest in social and political culture, art forms, and religion than in economics. Therefore, what appears below is, more than anything else, a hodge-podge of pieces culled from multi-sources and threaded loosely together.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Academy of American Franciscan History 1973
References
1 Morley, Sylvanus G., The Ancient Maya (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1956), p. 3.Google Scholar
2 Thompson, J. E. S., The Rise and Fall of Maya Civilization (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1954), p. 21.Google Scholar The three part division and the information included in this and the ensuing two paragraphs are taken from pages 20–27.
3 Ibid., p. 23.
4 “To me, one of the greatest mysteries is why Maya culture should have reached its greatest peak in this region so singularly lacking in natural wealth, where man, armed with only stone tools and fire, had everlastingly to struggle with the unrelenting forest for land to sow his crops.” Ibid., p. 26.
5 Subsequent statements will obviously be of a highly generalized nature in terms of space and time, but will usually be relevant to the lowland Maya; i. e., those from the Central and Northern areas. Others divide Mayan civilization into two broad geographic areas labeled the Maya Highlands and the Maya Lowlands, the former corresponding to Thompson’s Southern area and the latter to his Central and Northern areas. See, for example, Willey, Gordon R., “The Patterns of Farming Life and Civilization,” in Wauchope, Robert (ed.), Handbook of Middle American Indians(Austin: University of Texas Press, 1964), pp. 462–463.Google Scholar
6 Thompson divides Mayan history into the followingsequence:
-
(1)
(1) Formative Period: 500 B. C.–325 A. D. Pyramids built and hierarchy begins to emerge.
-
(2)
(2) Classic Period: 325 A. D.–925 A. D.
-
(a)
(a) Early: 325 A. D.–625 A. D. Corbeled vaulting and typical architecture emerge.
-
(b)
(b) Florescence: 625 A. D.–800 A. D. Height of era of sculpture, writing, building, mathematics, and astronomy for lowland Maya.
-
(c)
(c) Collapse: 800 A. D.–925 A.D. Abandonment of ceremonial centers of the Central area.
-
(3)
(3) Interregnum: 925 A.D.–975 A.D. Return to cultural level of Formative period in Central area.
-
(4)
(4) Mexican Period: 975 A.D.–1200 A.D. Itzá establish control, mixing Mexican and Mayan cultures. Rise of secular power.
-
(5)
(5) Period of Mexican Absorption: 1200 A.D.––1540 A.D. Mayapán establishes “empire” in Yucatán. Central rule and tyranny. Mexicans become Maya in religion and speech. Further cultural decline. Thompson, op. cit., pp. 270–271.
7 Ibid., p. 29.
8 Rayfred L. Stevens in Wauchope, op. cit., p. 299.
9 Willey, Gordon R., “The Maya Community of Prehistoric Times,” Archaeology, 8 (1955), p. 18.Google Scholar
10 This is true down to the present. It is estimated that 75 to 80 percent of the diet of the modern Maya is composed of corn in one form or another.
11 Peissel, Michel, The LostWorld of Quintana Roo (New York: E. P. Dutton & Co., 1963), p. 141.Google Scholar
12 Benson, Elizabeth P., The Maya World (New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Co., 1967), p. 60.Google Scholar
13 Meggers, Betty J., “Environmental Limitation on the Development of Culture,” American Anthropologist, 56 (1954), p, 802.Google Scholar
14 Ibid., p. 803.
15 She notes, as have others, the apparent lack of transition in cultural forms between the Formative period and the Classic period, and thus concludes that the Mayan development phase was not of sufficient length to have attained its cultural heights without outside influence. For support see Kidder, A. V., Excavations at Kaminaljuyu, Guatemala (Washington: Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1946).Google Scholar
16 Lewis, Oscar, Life in a Mexican Village: Tepoztlán Revisited (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1951), p. 153.Google Scholar
17 Dumond, D. E., “Swidden Agriculture and the Rise of Maya Civilization,” South-western Journal of Anthropology, 17 (1961), pp. 301–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18 Coe, William R., “Environmental Limitation on Maya Culture: A Re-Examination,” American Anthropologist, 59 (1957), pp. 328–335.Google Scholar
19 Hester, Joseph A., “Agriculture, Economy, and Population Densities of the Maya,” Carnegie Institution of Washington, Yearbook No. 51, 1951–1952, pp. 266–271.Google Scholar For the results of a controlled experiment carried out under conditions simulating Mayan technology in the Yucatán see the continuation of this article in Yearbook No. 52, 1952–1953, pp. 288–292.
20 Dumond, op. cit., p. 304.
21 Cowgill, Ursula, “An Agricultural Study of the Southern Maya Lowlands,” American Anthropologist, 64 (1962), pp. 277–278.Google Scholar
22 Morley, op. cit., p. 47.
23 Wolf, Eric R., Sons of the Shaking Earth (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1959), pp. 77–78.Google Scholar
24 Coe, William R., “Current Research: Eastern Mesoamerica,” American Antiquity, 29 (1964), p. 413.Google Scholar
25 William A, William R.. Haviland, Maya Settlement Patterns: A Critical Review (New Orleans: Tulane University, 1966).Google Scholar
26 Higbee presents a contrasting viewpoint, although it may be outdated due to more recent excavations. “Sometimes it is forgotten that the Maya … were not engaged in commercial agriculture. They had no foreign markets to supply, no large urban populations that were purchasers of food. Crops were grown primarily to provide subsistence for the tiller’s family and to pay his taxes. These taxes were parts of his harvest that the state collected to support civic and religious dignitaries and their retinues of officials, artisans, and servants.” If this opinion is acceptable these few lines basically sum up the Mayan solution to the distribution problem. See Higbee, Edward, “Agriculture in the Maya Homeland,” Geographical Review, 38 (1948), pp. 457–464.Google Scholar
27 The information in this paragraph comes principally from three sources: Morley, op. cit., pp. 140–142; Benson, op. cit., pp. 61–63; de Méndez, Amalia Cardós, El comercio de los mayas antiguos (México, D.F.: Impresora Azteca, 1959), pp. 25–44.Google Scholar
28 de Landa, Friar Diego, Yucatán Before and After the Conquest (Baltimore:The Maya Society, 1937), pp. 34–35. Translated by William Gates.Google Scholar
29 Willey in Wauchope (ed.), op. cit., p. 448.
30 Von Hagen, Victor W., The Aztec and Maya Papermakers (New York: J. J. Augustin, 1944), pp. 10–11.Google Scholar
31 The information on Maya industry is derived from Roys, Ralph L., The Indian Background of Colonial Yucatán (Washington: Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1943), Chapter 8Google Scholar; and Blom, Frans, La vida de los maya (Mexico: 1944), pp. 25–31.Google Scholar
32 Haviland, op. cit., pp. 35–36.
33 Wolf, op. cit., p.78.
34 de Borhegyi, Stephen, “The Development of Folk and Complex Cultures in the Southern Maya Area,” American Antiquity, 21 (1956), p.349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35 Miles, S. W., “Maya Settlement Patterns: A Problem for Ethnology and Archaeology,”Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 13 (1957), p. 241.Google Scholar
36 Cardós, op. cit., pp. 75–76.
37 Roys, op. cit., p. 52.
38 Benson, op. cit., pp. 68–69.
39 de Borhegyi, op. cit., p. 351.
40 Blom, Frans, “Commerce, Trade, and Monetary Units of the Maya,” Annual Report of the Smithsonian Institution (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1935), pp. 431–432.Google Scholar
41 Chapman, Anne M., “Port of Trade Enclaves in Aztec and Maya Civilizations,” in Polanyi, Karl (ed.), Trade and Market in Early Empires (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1957), p. 115.Google Scholar The ensuing discussion of Mayan foreign trade is based on Chapman, Roys, and Cardós.
42 “When Cortés made his famous journey overland to Honduras, the merchants of Tabasco and Xicalango gave him a map … showing a route across the base of the Yucatán peninsula to Nito and the coast towns beyond. From here further routes branched, one apparently along the Caribbean coast to Panama, and the other to the Pacific coast of Nicaragua.” From Roys, op. cit., pp. 55–56.
43 Scholes, France and Roys, Ralph, The Maya Chontal Indians of Acalán-Tixchel (Washington: Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1948),Google Scholar Chapter3.
44 Coe, Michael D., The Maya (New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1966), p. 114.Google Scholar
45 Cowgill, op. cit., p. 279.
46 Gallenkamp, Charles, Maya: The Riddle and Rediscovery of a Lost Civilization (New York: David McKay Co., 1959), p. 157.Google Scholar
47 Toynbee, Arnold J., “The Mayan Mystery,” The Atlantic, 210 (1962), p. 73.Google Scholar
48 Bullard, William R., “Maya Settlement Patterns in Northeastern Peten, Guatemala,” American Antiquity, 25 (1959–1960), p. 365.Google Scholar
49 Gallenkamp, op. cit., pp. 159–161.
50 “The social system … must have possessed a reasonably complex stratification consisting of commoners, kin-group heads, warriors, political officials, bureaucrats, clerks, artisans, merchants, and on the top of the ladder to coordinate them all, a priestly ruling class.” de Borhegyi, op. cit., p. 349. Thus, the case is made for a complex social structure.
51 Willey, Gordon R., “The Structure of Ancient Maya Society: Evidence from the Southern Lowlands,” American Anthropologist, 58 (1956), pp. 777–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
52 Girard, Rafael, El colapso maya y los nahuas (México: 1959).Google Scholar
53 Both were of Mexican origin, but the Pipils had earlier settled along the Guatemalan coast at points south and southeast of the Maya.
54 Throughout history no entire area has been completely abandoned due to earthquakes.
55 Morley, op. cit., pp. 72–73.
56 López, Antonio Ríos, “Nuevas luces para la historia de la cultura maya,” Historia Mexicana, 9 (1959–1960), pp. 176–214.Google Scholar
57 Coe, Michael D., “A Model of Ancient Community Structure in the Maya Lowlands,” Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 21 (1965), p. 97.Google Scholar
58 Altschuler, Milton, “On the Environmental Limitations of Mayan Cultural Development,” Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 14 (1958), p. 195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
59 Ibid., p. 195.
60 Thompson, op. cit., p. 81.
61 Saler, Benson, “Migration and Ceremonial Ties among the Maya,” Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 18 (1962), pp. 336–340.Google Scholar
62 Willey, , “The Structure of Ancient Maya Society,” op. cit., p. 779.Google Scholar