Page 88 - IJPS-7-2

International Journal of
Population Studies Modeling archaeological mortuary assemblages

Hurtado, 1996; Siler, 1979; 1983). This model also has There are several Maya cave sites that have been
been argued to be the most biologically plausible mortality interpreted as including sacrificed individuals. These
model for traditional anthropological populations (Gage, sites include Eduardo Quiroz Cave (Pendergast, 1971),
1988; Wood et al., 2002). Naj Tunich, Guatemala (Brady, 1989), Petroglyph
Cave, Belize (Reents-Budet & MacLeod, 1986), Actun
By choosing model parameters based on Gurven &
Kaplan’s (2007) average for horticulturalist populations, Tunichil Muknal, Belize (Gibbs, 2000), Cueva de Sangre,
Guatemala (Scott & Brady, 2005), La Iluminada and Hun
we arrive at the most plausible model life table for use Nal Ye, Guatemala (Woodfill, 2007). However, many of
in discriminating sacrifice-related assemblage formations these sites only have a few individuals, which make any
from a background mortality process that characterized statistical comparison to them difficult if not impossible.
the populations from which the MTC and CI assemblages Only the Cenote Saratoga at CI, Mexico, has a large
were most likely to be drawn. When combined with enough assemblage to be used for statistical purposes.
the explicit modeling of the probability of observing What is unique about this site and what makes it an
a death using the Monte-Carlo approach described ideal example for the expected demography of sacrifice
above, this paper not only provides a significant step is the ethnohistoric literature that documents sacrifice
forward in understanding the MTC and CI assemblages, occurring there (Tozzer, 1941).
but it also provides new tools for bioarchaeologists
and paleodemographers seeking to understand the 2. Methods
anthropology of similar groups. The approach is 2.1. Data sources
general and paleodemographers who implement this
method may adjust estimates of preservation bias or the Numerous studies on the CI assemblage, Mexico,
specific model life table chosen to fit their purpose. As demonstrated large percentages of infants and men were
such, this paper provides both new insights and new recovered at the site (de Anda Alanís, 2007; Hooton, 1940;
methods to the bioarchaeological and paleodemographic Tiesler, 2007). At least 127 individuals have been recovered,
literature. 88 were children or juveniles under 18 years of age (de Anda
Alanís, 2007). Unfortunately, this dataset could not be used
1.2.2. Demographic patterns of Central America in this study because de Anda Alanís has not yet published
the exact age distribution of his reanalysis. Therefore, the
In addition to the archaeological evidence at the site, original analysis conducted by Hooton (1940) was used as
the known normal burial patterns in the Maya area the dataset in this study. Demographic data used for MTC
further suggest that the MTC assemblage resulted from consists of the 118 individuals (the majority were young
human sacrifice. While caves have been documented adults and children between 5 and 12 years of age) that
as locations of ossuary assemblages, this pattern is have been previously published by the author (Kieffer,
primarily restricted temporally to the Postclassic (950 2015; 2018).
CE-1539 CE) and spatially to the southern periphery
of the Maya area in Honduras and western periphery 2.2. Age adjustments and sample characteristics
in Chiapas, Mexico (Blom, 1954; Ruz, 1968:165). This Methods for assigning ages to skeletal remains are
type of cave burials was suggested by many to be an elite not without uncertainties (Bass, 1995; Sattenspiel &
privilege (Dahlgren de Jordan, 1966; Moser, 1975). This Harpending, 1983; Saunders et al., 1992; 2002) and this
elite appropriation of caves for tombs and elite burial has often allows interval-based estimates of age as the only
been documented throughout Guatemala and Mexico available option. Since demographic analyses of mortality
(e.g., Brady, 1989:348; Burgoa, 1934; Dahlgren de Jordan, are facilitated by assignment of individuals to more fine-
1966; Moser, 1975; 1976; Kieffer, 2009; Thompson, grained groupings, such as 5-year age intervals, data
1938). Ruz Lhuillier (1965) also noted secondary burials utilized in this analysis were subjected to the method of
at cave sites in Guatemala and Yucatan, Mexico. Caves rectangular proration (Brass, 1960; Shryock et al., 1980).
in the Southern Lowlands and Peten, Guatemala, were Rectangular proration is built upon the assumption of
commonly used for sacrifice (Gibbs, 1997; Owen, 2005; rectangularity which assumes that within a 5-year age
Moyes & Gibbs, 2000; Saldana & Kieffer, 2009; Scott & group, every year has equal proportional distribution
Brady, 2005;). Commoner burials are typically found in (Shryock et al., 1980). In this analysis, rectangular
house mounds (Rathje, 1970) and rockshelters (Bonor proration was utilized to assign individuals to 5-year
Villarejo, 1995; Bonor Villarejo & Martínez Klemm, age categories from more coarse-grained ones and the
1995; Glassman & Bonor Villarejo, 2005; Prufer, 2002; summarized counts of deaths by age utilized in the
Saul et al., 2005). remainder of the analysis. The resulting “observed” death

Volume 7 Issue 2 (2021) 82 https://doi.org/10.36922/ijps.v7i2.300