The production of mirror elements in the Maya area

Mirrors are, in fact, composite objects, shaped by a support, with polished tesserae fixed by adhesives (Gallaga M. Reference Gallaga M., Emiliano and Blainey2016a). These objects therefore combine a variety of raw materials: first, the reflective part, mostly using tesserae made of pyrite, a mineral composed of iron and sulfur (FeS₂). However, archaeological materials generally identified as “pyrite” may also correspond to other minerals, such as hematite, magnetite, limonite, and marcasite. Considering that the chemical composition of the mineral was not central to the Mayas, who sought the ability to produce a reflective surface (Blainey Reference Blainey2007:165), we use iron ore here to refer to all metallic material used in the production of mirrors. There are numerous sources of iron ore in the Maya area, largely concentrated in the Highlands, in the region of Cotzal, Quiche (Blainey Reference Blainey2007:168). Blainey locates others in the department of Chiquimula, on the border between Guatemala and Honduras, as well as between the departments of Izabal and Zacapa (Blainey Reference Blainey2007:173), on the Polochic fault and in the Quirigua region (Blainey Reference Blainey2007:174). However, no workshops have yet been identified in any of these regions.

As for the mirror supports, these are predominantly produced in shale (Blainey Reference Blainey2007:196, Appendix A), although there are examples in wood (Blainey Reference Blainey2007:112), limestone, sandstone, or even in ceramics (Inomata and Eberl Reference Inomata, Eberl, Inomata and Triadan2014:103). To date, only one workshop has been found at Pacbictun (Figure 1), in an elite structure dated to the end of the Late Classic, which produced a variety of shale artifacts, presumably intended, in part, for export off-site (Healy et al. Reference Healy, Awe, Iannone and Bill1995:343–345). Analysis of the context showed that although artisans produced mirror supports, no pyrite fragments were found there. This would indicate that the production process of the supports was, in certain cases at least, separate from that of the other stages of mirror production. Finally, research on adhesives has yet to be carried out. It has been assumed that these were mixtures of clay or organic glues (Kidder et al. Reference Kidder, Jennings and Shook1946:126), or even stucco (Keochakian 2001, cited in Gallaga M. Reference Gallaga M., Emiliano and Blainey2016b:13), the exact composition of which is still unknown, but the preparation of which undoubtedly required complex knowledge (Salgado et al. Reference Salgado, Ménager, Arroyo and Freidel2024).

Figure 1. Map of the Maya area, indicating the sites mentioned in the text. Map by J. F. Cuénot.

Regional syntheses show that the vast majority of mirrors recorded in the Maya area come from the highlands of Guatemala, and in particular from Nebaj (Smith and Kidder Reference Smith and Kidder1951), Chama (Kidder et al. Reference Kidder, Jennings and Shook1946), and Zaculeu (Woodbury and Trik Reference Woodbury and Trik1953; Figure 1), indicating that this was probably a production area (Healy and Blainey Reference Healy and Blainey2011:229–230). Iron-ore mirrors are known from Preclassic contexts (Chase and Chase Reference Chase and Chase2006), but most date from the Early Classic (Blainey Reference Blainey2007:62–75; Healy and Blainey Reference Healy and Blainey2011:232). They are fewer in number during the Late Classic, and more widely distributed in the Lowlands (Blainey Reference Blainey2007:197). Interestingly, however, this is the period that corresponds with the few workshops known to date: either in Aguateca (Inomata and Eberl Reference Inomata, Eberl, Inomata and Triadan2014; Zamora Mejía Reference Zamora Mejía2002), in Cancuen (Demarest et al. Reference Demarest, Andrieu, Torres, Forné, Barrientos Q. and Wolf2014), or in Pacbictun (Healy et al. Reference Healy, Awe, Iannone and Bill1995). Thus, the available data on the production of these objects date from a period during which mirrors became quantitatively less numerous in the global register, but more widely distributed in the Lowlands. This raises the question of a possible change in the way in which these objects were exchanged at the time, but also that of the particularity of this production, the involvement of craftspeople in the different stages of their manufacture, and their respective status.

Cancuen and its representativeness in the Lowlands

Cancuen is therefore one of the few known Maya sites showing signs of iron-ore work. The occupation of this city, situated at the border area between Highlands and Lowlands (Figure 1), was very short, being limited to the Late Classic (a.d. 600–800), and it was abandoned in around a.d. 800 (Demarest et al. Reference Demarest Arthur, Andrieu, Torres, Houk, Arroyo and Powis2020b; Forné et al. Reference Forné, Alvarado and Torres2011). One of the characteristics of this site is that numerous workshops and signs of craft activity areas were found in the epicenter itself. Thus, a jade workshop was found in the northern part of the site (Kovacevich and Pereira Reference Kovacevich, Pereira, Demarest and Barrientos Q.2002, Reference Kovacevich, Pereira, Demarest and Barrientos Q.2003) containing more than 60 kg of jade production waste (Andrieu et al. Reference Andrieu Chloé and Luin2014). Furthermore, many indirect indices converge to show that other artisanal activities occurred in the epicenter, as indicated by the presence of pigments concentrated in certain structures (Kovacevich et al. Reference Kovacevich, Quintanilla, Arriaza, Demarest and Barrientos Q.2003), the abnormal concentrations of several hundred drills discovered in others (Andrieu and Quiñonez Reference Andrieu, Quiñonez, Demarest and Martínez2011), the quantity of obsidian cores, and the deposit of 681 cores under a stele 4 km from the epicenter, all of which correspond to a larger production of goods than merely for local consumption (Demarest et al. Reference Demarest, Andrieu, Torres, Forné, Barrientos Q. and Wolf2014). This clearly shows that there was a concentration of artisans in Cancuen who worked, in part, with raw materials from the Highlands and therefore took advantage of Cancuen's strategic position on the border between these two regions (Demarest et al. Reference Demarest Arthur, Andrieu, Torres, Masson, Freidel and Demarest2020a).

Cancuen is not, however, a representative site for the activities of the Maya Lowlands. Indeed, overall there are relatively few workshops of known and studied manufactured goods in the Lowlands in comparison with the quantity of cities excavated there. This is the source of considerable debate and controversy about the organization of artisanal production and the economic functioning of classical societies (Andrieu Reference Andrieu2013, Reference Andrieu, Masson, Freidel and Demarest2020). We frequently observe a distinction between the context of luxury goods produced in epicenters by royal artisans, nobles, or people of high rank (Halperin Reference Halperin2008; Inomata Reference Inomata2001; Reents-Budet et al. Reference Reents-Budet, Guenter, Bishop, James Blackman, Foias and Emery2012) and more common goods, which tend to be produced in relatively modest and small structures, located in residential areas outside epicenters or in secondary centers (Andrieu Reference Andrieu2013; Barrett Reference Barrett2004; Hester and Shafer Reference Hester and Shafer1984; Lewis Reference Lewis, Scarborough, Valdez and Dunning2003; Potter Reference Potter, Sabloff and Henderson1993; Potter and King Reference Potter, King, Ehrenreich, Crumley and Levy1995; Shafer and Hester Reference Shafer and Hester1983; Whittaker et al. Reference Whittaker, Kamp, Ford, Guerra, Brands, Guerra, McLean, Woods, Badillo, Thornton and Eiley2009). Cancuen would therefore be an exception in comparison with the rest of the Lowlands, since the nature of the artisanal production that took place there seems to go beyond the distinction between everyday goods and luxury goods. Indeed, both jade and obsidian cores have been found there in very large quantities, and even jade work does not appear to have been carried out by members of the elite or people of very high status (Andrieu et al. Reference Andrieu Chloé and Luin2014; Demarest et al. Reference Demarest, Andrieu, Torres, Forné, Barrientos Q. and Wolf2014, Reference Demarest Arthur, Andrieu, Torres, Houk, Arroyo and Powis2020b).

It was ascertained very early on that there was also evidence of pyrite working at this site. In her doctoral thesis, Kovacevich (Reference Kovacevich2006) suggested the presence of local production of this material in Cancuen, based on analysis of the material collected between 1999 and 2003 representing 88 pyrite fragments (Kovacevich Reference Kovacevich, Emiliano and Blainey2016:90). Her argument is based on the relative abundance of iron ore in trash middens, and the presence of tesserae in both the manufacturing process and in nodules (n = 17). A study of the distribution of the material enabled her to suggest that this material was worked by members of the non-elite for members of the elite; work she attributes to an emerging category of middle-class craftspeople, as with the working of jade at the same site (Kovacevich Reference Kovacevich, Emiliano and Blainey2016:95).

Problem and method

Since this study, four new iron-ore concentration contexts have been discovered in Cancuen, all located in the northern part of the site (Arriaza et al. Reference Arriaza, Belches, O'Mansky, Garrido, Martínez and Demarest2008; Belches Reference Belches, Demarest and Martínez2009, Reference Belches, Demarest and Martínez2011; Rodas and Quiñonez Reference Rodas, Quiñonez, Demarest and Martínez2011), which allow us to question the organization of the production, both at the site level and its regional integration; but also to question the specificities of the production of luxury goods in the Late Classic, compared with other sites.

However, the study of iron-ore production is difficult, since the high degree of decomposition of this raw material complicates its recognition, and all the more so since this material is worked by cutting, abrading, and polishing, therefore leaving very few traces in the archaeological register (Gallaga M. Reference Gallaga M., Emiliano and Blainey2016a; Melgar et al. Reference Melgar, Gallaga M., Solís, Emiliano and Blainey2016; Taube Reference Taube, Emiliano and Blainey2016). The only accurate way to determine the production process and techniques used in iron-ore work is therefore through microscopic studies (Gallaga M. Reference Gallaga M., Emiliano and Blainey2016b; Melgar et al. Reference Melgar, Gallaga M., Solís, Emiliano and Blainey2016), but no such work has been carried out in Cancuen on iron-ore artifacts to date. Furthermore, pyrite, in particular, is not a stable mineral, and, under the action of water and oxygen, it deteriorates into iron oxide or brown limonite, thus either losing its characteristic luster and taking on a yellowish color, or decomposing. These alterations to the pyrite surface complicate the macroscopic estimation of underpolished parts and make it difficult to distinguish between a finished but weathered artifact and one that would be in the process of being manufactured.

These specificities complicate both the recognition of a workshop and the estimation of the intensity or scale of production (Costin Reference Costin and Schiffer1991, Reference Costin, Feinman and Price2001, Reference Costin, Hruby and Flad2007). Indeed, if we take the usual definition of a workshop, which is the place where specialized production was carried out—in other words, production in greater quantities than for the consumption needs of a residential unit (Clark Reference Clark and Hirth2003; Costin Reference Costin, Feinman and Price2001; Inomata Reference Inomata2001)—this implies a very specific methodological apparatus, and, in particular, quantitative criteria (Clark Reference Clark and Isaac1986, Reference Clark1997) or criteria that would make it possible to determine the degree of know-how involved in such production (Clark Reference Clark and Isaac1986, Reference Clark and Hirth2003; Roux Reference Roux1990) and to estimate the quantities produced. In order to recognize possible iron-ore workshops or manufacturing areas in these circumstances, we have therefore identified several criteria to be used, namely:

• • Concentration: a few isolated tesserae do not indicate on-site production.

• • Contexts of concentration: once broken, a mirror will leave a concentration of tesserae, but will not indicate a production area.

• • Presence of unworked raw material, raw or modified nodules, and their context, depending on whether they may be considered offerings, deposits, or areas of rejection.

• • Presence of unfinished artefacts or production waste and their context.

• • Relationship between the presence of production indices and consumption indices of the artefact (Andrieu Reference Andrieu2013): if a structure has pyrite nodules, but no tesserae in the burials or associated deposits, this could be a clue that inhabitants were not producing for their own consumption.

In light of these elements, we tried to understand the organization of iron-ore production at this site in terms of space, work organization, types of production, and the quantities produced and consumed. To this end, we reviewed the entire Cancuen iron-ore collection (88 pieces from the 1999–2003 excavations that have been analyzed previously, as well as 91 from recent excavations), so as to contextualize all of these productions and determine their representativeness in relation to the rest of the Lowlands during the Late Classic. To this end, we made bibliographical comparisons between this collection and that from Aguateca excavated by Inomata and Triadan (Reference Inomata and Triadan2010; Inomata Reference Inomata, Inomata and Triadan2014) and analyzed by Zamora Mejía (Reference Zamora Mejía2002) and Inomata (Inomata and Eberl Reference Inomata, Eberl, Inomata and Triadan2014).

Composition of the collection and spatial distribution

Between 1999 and 2016, 179 iron-ore elements were collected in Cancuen's epicenter (Table 1). Among these, the tesserae (Figure 2) were the most represented artifacts, with 100 pieces (48 complete, 14 lateral fragments, 38 mesial fragments). The complete shapes (n = 48) are polygonal, with between four and seven edges, measuring 1.2–4.0 cm in length and 0.15–0.40 cm in width. There are 61 nodules (Figure 3) that measure 1–5 cm, 47 of which have a cubic form, and 14 an amorphous one. Finally, the collection also comprises different types of finished objects, such as beads (n = 10) and ear flares (n = 2), in pyrite or iron-ore material, as well as six dental inlays (Belches Reference Belches, Demarest and Martínez2009; Quintanilla Reference Quintanilla2013:103; Figure 4). In addition, there are 13 possible fragments of sandstone support (12 fragments and 1 whole), all of which were found in the same structure (K6-34). The only complete element is circular, 8 cm in diameter, worked on both sides and with two perforations. The degree of fragmentation in the others makes their attribution to the mirror-making production process quite speculative and is based on their flat morphology, and, in two cases, on the presence of rounded edges.

Figure 2. Iron-ore tesserae from Cancuen: (a) N9-7; (b) M10-7; (c) K6-24; (d) M6-12; (e) M9-24; (f) northern group platform; (g) M9-24; (h) J7-7; (i) N10-1; (j) northern group structure D; (k) N9-7 platform; (l) L7-28; (m) L9-8. Photographs by Andrieu; layout by S. Eliès.

Figure 3. Iron-ore nodules from Cancuen: (a) geometric and amorphous blocs from K6-36 (Museo Nacional de Arqueología e Etnología, Guatemala); (b) M6-12; (c) K6-36; (d) M9-24; (e) N9-7; (f) N9-6; (g) N9-6 platform; (h) M6-12; (i) northern group platform; (j) northern group platform. Photographs by Andrieu; layout by S. Eliès.

Figure 4. Other iron-ore artefacts: (a) dental inlay N10-1 (Museo Nacional de Arqueología e Etnología, Guatemala); (b) possible unperforated bead M6-12; (c) bead M9-24; (d) globular bead L9-3; (e) incised bead N9-7; (f) ear flare N9-7. Photographs by Andrieu; layout by S. Eliès.

Table 1. Composition and distribution of Cancuen's iron-ore collection.

The iron-ore objects are distributed in an interesting way. On one hand, some tesserae are scattered around the site, without any concentration. Thus, we find tesserae in a trash midden at the back of structure J7-7 (Barrientos et al. Reference Barrientos, Kovacevich, Callaghan, Morán, Demarest and Barrientos2001:129), on the surface above the palace, or in L9-3; in the construction fill of M9-18 or in that of L7-28 (Arriaza et al. Reference Arriaza, Belches, O'Mansky, Garrido, Martínez and Demarest2008); three others were scattered on the steps of structure N10-1, which could be part of an abandonment deposit (Kovacevich et al. Reference Kovacevich, Cook, Beach, Laporte, Arroyo, Escobedo and Mejía2004b). Others could correspond to a deposit, but of unclear context, as, for example, in the case of the concentration of 10 tesserae in a layer of collapsed construction in the L9-8 structure (Ohnstad et al. Reference Ohnstad, Morgan, Guerra, Berryman, Demarest and Barrientos Q.2003:325), or the discovery of 10 tesserae in a looting hole in the palace, which could correspond to a mirror deposited as an offering (Barrientos et al. Reference Barrientos, Larios, Luin, Demarest, Barrientos Q., Kovacevich, Callaghan, Woodfill and Luin2004).

None of these, however, constitute a clear ritual context, and the absence of iron-ore material in a funerary context is notable, apart from the two cases of burials with dental inlays (Belches Reference Belches, Demarest and Martínez2011; Quintanilla Reference Quintanilla2013:103). This dispersion of scattered tesserae at the site, in structures of diverse rank, could indicate that these pieces did not have the same status as the complete mirrors, since their distribution was relatively even; but perhaps they had a domestic ritual use (Inomata and Eberl Reference Inomata, Eberl, Inomata and Triadan2014:110; Moholy-Nagy, with Coe Reference Moholy-Nagy and Coe2008:56–57). Moreover, their distribution does not indicate any significant consumption of this material in Cancuen. Conversely, the remainder of the collection is concentrated in seven different contexts which alone account for 73% of the iron-ore elements at the site (Table 1). Three of these have already been described in previous publications (Kovacevich Reference Kovacevich, Emiliano and Blainey2016); the other four are from more recent excavations. They all come from structures associated with the Chaman phase (Forné et al. Reference Forné, Alvarado and Torres2011), namely the end of the Late Classic.

K6-34

This structure, of small dimensions (2 × 2 m) and very simple construction, is shaped by a base of stone wall and an access by small steps giving onto a patio, which revealed large quantities of materials indicating various artisanal activities (Barrientos et al. Reference Barrientos, Kovacevich, Callaghan, Morán, Demarest and Barrientos2001:124). Almost all of the pyrite was found on this floor and inside the structure (Figure 5), and comprised 5 pyrite nodules, 31 tesserae, a bead, as well as 13 possible support fragments (Barrientos et al. Reference Barrientos, Kovacevich, Callaghan, Morán, Demarest and Barrientos2001:127) and 39 chert drills (Barrientos et al. Reference Barrientos, Kovacevich, Callaghan, Morán, Demarest and Barrientos2001:126). The traceological analysis of a sample of 20 of these showed that they had been used to drill ceramic, wood, and a soft rock of the soapstone type. In the same structure, the following were discovered: a figurine, an eccentric, 12 pieces of greenstone (9 small beads, 1 figurine fragment, and 2 axe fragments), and a stone anchor. A burial in poor conservation condition was also found there, with no associated offering (Barrientos et al. Reference Barrientos, Kovacevich, Callaghan, Morán, Demarest and Barrientos2001:117; Quintanilla et al. Reference Quintanilla, Chávez, Figueroa, Rodas, Sánchez, Santos, Saravia, Demarest and Martínez2015:246). All of these elements, combined with the proximity of this structure to the palace, indicate that it was undoubtedly a residence belonging to relatively wealthy craftspeople (Barrientos et al. Reference Barrientos, Kovacevich, Callaghan, Morán, Demarest and Barrientos2001:126).

Figure 5. Distribution of the iron-ore artefact concentrations in Cancuen. Map by M. Wolf; layout by S. Eliès.

Cancuen and Aguateca: two different contexts of pyrite working in contemporary sites

Aguateca has been studied in the context of a huge excavation project led by Inomata and Triadan (Inomata Reference Inomata, Inomata and Triadan2014; Inomata and Triadan Reference Inomata and Triadan2010; Inomata et al. Reference Inomata, Triadan, Ponciano, Pinto, Terry and Eberl2002), which showed that it had been abandoned around 810 (Inomata Reference Inomata1997, Reference Inomata, Inomata and Webb2003; Inomata et al. Reference Inomata, Triadan, Ponciano, Terry and Beaubien2001, Reference Inomata, Triadan, Ponciano, Pinto, Terry and Eberl2002)—that is to say, shortly after Cancuen. The rapid abandonment of the site enabled archaeologists to find remains of activity corresponding to a short period, without the material having been cleaned or taken away by its inhabitants (Inomata and Stiver Reference Inomata and Stiver1998; Inomata et al. Reference Inomata, Triadan, Ponciano, Pinto, Terry and Eberl2002), thus making it the reference site for the study of elite production activities.

The Aguateca pyrite collection was the subject of a detailed study by Zamora Mejía (Reference Zamora Mejía2002) and by Inomata and Eberl (Reference Inomata, Eberl, Inomata and Triadan2014), whose data we have compared bibliographically with that of Cancuen. In this site, 591 pieces of pyrite were collected (Inomata and Eberl Reference Inomata, Eberl, Inomata and Triadan2014:96; Zamora Mejía Reference Zamora Mejía2002:Annexes), of which 90% was from structures M7-32 and M8-4 (Zamora Mejía Reference Zamora Mejía2002:Tables 11 and 12). M7-32 is a structure of the royal palace (Inomata et al. Reference Inomata, Triadan, Ponciano, Terry and Beaubien2001) in which nine mirrors were found, some directly associated with tesserae glued together (Inomata et al. Reference Inomata, Triadan, Ponciano, Terry and Beaubien2001). Given the type of context, the abundance of supports and the absence of nodules or artifacts in the process of being manufactured, these tesserae could correspond to mirrors stored in the room where they were used for rituals in the palace (Inomata Reference Inomata2001; Inomata and Eberl Reference Inomata, Eberl, Inomata and Triadan2014:101). This context could, therefore, be considered as a storage place for mirrors, presumably for ritual purposes, rather than a production space (Inomata et al. Reference Inomata, Triadan, Ponciano, Terry and Beaubien2001:294). The other concentration of pyrite relates to structure M8-4, a noble residence near the royal palace (Triadan Reference Triadan, Ponciano, Inomata and Triadan2000), which contained 60% of the site's total pyrite collection (Inomata Reference Inomata, Inomata and Triadan2014:Figure 14.2), which has earned it the designation “the House of the Mirrors” (Inomata Reference Inomata2001:328). In this building and, more specifically, in the southern chamber, 356 pieces of pyrite were found (Zamora Mejía Reference Zamora Mejía2002), together with 10 pallets and 3 pestles, 8 polished axes and numerous lithic artefacts (Aoyama Reference Aoyama2009:79–85), as well as 2 carved bones representing the glyph emblem of Aguateca, and a huunal, symbol of royal power (Inomata Reference Inomata2001:328; Inomata and Eberl Reference Inomata, Eberl, Inomata and Triadan2014). The south chamber of structure M8-4 was therefore the location of a high dignitary's residence, probably a scribe and his family (Inomata Reference Inomata, Inomata and Triadan2014:285; Triadan Reference Triadan, Ponciano, Inomata and Triadan2000; Triadan and Inomata Reference Triadan, Inomata, Masson, Freidel and Demarest2020), and it contains more iron ore than was found in the entire Cancuen site.

However, if we look at the composition of the collection, there are only 20 nodules for the whole site (Inomata and Eberl Reference Inomata, Eberl, Inomata and Triadan2014:96), including 5 in structure M8-4 (Zamora Mejía Reference Woodbury and Trik2002). There is also a wide variety of tesserae morphologies that do not appear in Cancuen. Indeed, the authors identified mosaics with round, straight, annular, cylindrical, oval, conical, square, and rectangular edges in large proportions (Inomata and Eberl Reference Inomata, Eberl, Inomata and Triadan2014:96; Zamora Mejía Reference Zamora Mejía2002:42–44, 66), but also an unpolished tessera, a plaque in the process of polishing, and indices of recycling (Inomata and Eberl Reference Inomata, Eberl, Inomata and Triadan2014:96; Zamora Mejía Reference Zamora Mejía2002:67), which suggests that the inhabitants of this structure were in charge of assembling the mirrors and reworking some tesserae in order to integrate them into other types of artifacts (Inomata and Eberl Reference Inomata, Eberl, Inomata and Triadan2014).

This diversity of tesserae forms, which also distinguishes this collection from that of Cancuen, would be consistent with the idea that the palatial craftspeople mainly received iron ore as tesserae, which they then reworked to adapt them to the desired supports. Indeed, each tessera had to be adapted precisely to the shape of the support so that they could be perfectly joined. It was therefore necessary to rework them once they were placed together. These data, as well as the presence of 13 supports of the same structure, seem to indicate that the craftspeople of Aguateca may have been involved in a more advanced stage of the production of the mirrors: the polishing and reworking of the tesserae in order to adapt them to the various supports. The presence of pallets and pestles could indicate that, in addition to pigment production, the preparation of certain mirror adhesives also took place on the site. Iron concentrations in the soil outside this structure may indicate that the polishing occurred outside the dwelling (Inomata and Eberl Reference Inomata, Eberl, Inomata and Triadan2014:108; Terry et al. Reference Terry, Fernández, Parnell and Inomata2004).

Consequently, the final steps in the crafting of these objects must have occurred in this elite residence, unlike in Cancuen, where artisans appear to have been more involved in working the raw material that they received as nodules. Thus, if we compare the data from these two contemporary and neighboring sites, we observe several quite marked differences. The two sites show clear remains of a production of pyrite objects and, more specifically, tesserae, and in both cases, we observe some other productions, such as beads and ear flares (Inomata and Eberl Reference Inomata, Eberl, Inomata and Triadan2014:Figures 6.16 and 6.12). Multicrafting clearly occurred in the case of Aguateca, since the craftspeople of M8-4 were also dedicated to the working of bone and shell, textiles and figurines (Aoyama Reference Aoyama2007, Reference Aoyama2009; Inomata Reference Inomata, Inomata and Triadan2014:282). However, the social context of production, as well as the scale and level of production, were very different: in Aguateca, a single structure comprised far larger quantities of pyrite than in all of Cancuen, while in Cancuen the production was of less intensity and dispersed over seven different loci. This comparison also highlights a possible difference in the supply of nodules between the two sites. Cancuen received the raw material in the form of nodules, and the scarcity of the supports makes it unlikely that the craftspeople would have arranged and set the tesserae there.

Conversely, the artisans of Aguateca, who had less access to the raw materials, probably reworked tesserae by polishing them and arranging them on supports. Finally, the social context of production also differs. At Aguateca, everything indicates that the artisans were royal elites or very high-ranking individuals (Inomata Reference Inomata, Inomata and Triadan2014; Inomata et al. Reference Inomata, Triadan, Ponciano, Terry and Beaubien2001), whereas at Cancuen, the social status of the artisans was less prestigious. The K6-34 structure was perhaps the most elite one, due to its proximity to the palace; or possibly N9-24, due to its construction quality. However, in all cases, while it is very difficult to apply the usual criteria for the hierarchical classification of structures in Cancuen (Demarest et al. Reference Demarest, Andrieu, Torres, Forné, Barrientos Q. and Wolf2014), nothing indicates that the Cancuen workshops housed royal elites, and, while all show signs of wealth, none exhibit the characteristics of the high elite residences of Cancuen (Jackson Reference Jackson2013). All of this allows us to suggest a possible complementarity between certain sites at the end of the Classic period. Indeed, it indicates a system whereby some cities were more involved in working the raw materials, while others focused more on polishing and adjusting the tesserae on the supports. That would explain the important differences in social status between contemporary craftspeople, located in the same region, and involved in working the same material.

Some technical actions more valued than others?

While the contrast between the social context of the collections at these two sites has already been observed (Zamora Mejía Reference Zamora Mejía2002), it has never been interpreted in terms of the complementarity of tasks, which could explain the social differences between the iron-ore artisans of Cancuen and Aguateca. Indeed, the skill and expertise of the M8-4 artisans lay in the most difficult part of working with mirrors, namely the step of fitting the tesserae together. These need to be re-polished so as to give the illusion of a completely smooth surface (Nelson et al. Reference Nelson, Scheetz, Amado and Prado2009; Smith and Kidder Reference Smith and Kidder1951:44; Woodbury Reference Woodbury, Wauchope and Willey1965:172). The fit between each of the tesserae must be perfect, and therefore needs to be reworked when it is attached to the supports to ensure that perfect fit. “But this was as nothing compared to the work of cutting and grinding to exactly equal thickness, and of beveling for accurate edge-to-edge fit, the many polygonal plates of refractory pyrite crystals with which the face of each was incrusted” (Smith and Kidder Reference Smith and Kidder1951:44). This probably also entailed re-polishing once the tesserae were fixed on their support (Beaubien Reference Beaubien, Inomata and Triadan2014:225). These stages would therefore be more difficult, longer, and, undoubtedly, much more socially invested than the preceding ones. Kidder noted the very high level of craftsmanship required for this work (Kidder et al. Reference Kidder, Jennings and Shook1946), and several authors have suggested that it was handled by royal artisans (Blainey Reference Blainey2007:107, 186; Healy and Blainey Reference Healy and Blainey2011). The Mesoamerican attraction to brilliance has often been emphasized (Stuart Reference Stuart, Guernsey, Clark and Arroyo2010; Taube Reference Taube, Emiliano and Blainey2016), a quality that is acquired through polish. As in the case of jade, it is the abrasion and polishing stages that take the longest (Melgar et al. Reference Melgar, Gallaga M., Solís, Emiliano and Blainey2016) and which require the highest levels of skill. As noted previously (Andrieu et al. Reference Andrieu Chloé and Luin2014), the cultural importance of polishing is demonstrated by the fact that the Florentine Codex lists more than 29 different verbs in Nahuatl to designate the action of polishing (Thouvenot 1986:184). These elements converge to indicate that the polishing stages would be the most socially invested, since they require the longest training and would therefore be more likely to lie in the range of esoteric knowledge or knowledge restricted to elite artists. As in the case of jade, it is clearly the polishing of the material that confers on these mirrors their power and value.

Indeed, this possible complementarity between the stages of the work observed in Cancuen and in Aguateca recalls what has already been perceived for jade, with the same contrasts between the social contexts of production. The jade debitage activities in Cancuen were held in fairly modest residential structures, focused on the preliminary stages in the working of the material, namely the selection of raw materials and the production of preforms probably intended to be exported and worked outside of the site (Andrieu Reference Andrieu2019; Andrieu et al. Reference Andrieu Chloé and Luin2014).

Although the presence of polishers in Cancuen clearly indicates that certain final stages were also held on site, the scarcity of finished jade objects there (in comparison with the abundance of the raw material), as well as the absence of cutting waste specific to the intermediate stages of ear-flare and bead production, indicates that the majority of the production consisted of preforms that were exported to other sites (Andrieu et al. Reference Andrieu Chloé and Luin2014). Moreover, if jade-cutting waste is rare in the Lowlands, or mostly found in cache contexts, such as in Caracol (Chase and Chase Reference Chase and Chase2015, Reference Chase, Chase, Masson, Freidel and Demarest2020) or Tikal (Moholy-Nagy, with Coe 2008:31–32), polishers are relatively frequent. Interestingly, the majority date from the Late Classic and have been found in palatial contexts. For example, apart from Cancuen (Barrientos et al. Reference Barrientos, Larios, Luin, Demarest, Barrientos Q., Kovacevich, Callaghan, Woodfill and Luin2004), they have been found in Naachtun (Andrieu Reference Andrieu, Nondédéo, Hiquet, Michelet, Sion and Garrido2014:509), Nohmul and Caracol (Landry Reference Landry2008), El Peru Waka (Marken Reference Marken2011:268), Calakmul (Domínguez Carrasco et al. Reference Domínguez Carrasco, Folan, Laporte and Escobedo1999), and La Corona (Andrieu and Roche Reference Andrieu, Roche, Barrientos Q., Canuto and Bustamante2014), indicating that the polishing of beads, ear flares, and buttons was carried out in the recipient sites. This method of exchanging preforms, if confirmed, indicates that, in the Late Classic at least, part of the jade corresponding to these specific production processes was exchanged this way (Andrieu et al. Reference Andrieu Chloé and Luin2014; Rochette Reference Rochette2009:234), produced by non-elite workshops, exported to consumer sites and worked locally by royal artisans.

This type of division of work is reminiscent of what is observed for iron ore and would confirm that Cancuen's artisans were more involved in the early stages of several luxury crafts that would be exported to other sites where the last stages were carried out. Indeed, the rare production indices in the epicenters have mostly been those of highly skilled artisans (Aoyama Reference Aoyama1999; Inomata Reference Inomata2001; Inomata and Houston Reference Inomata, Houston, Inomata and Houston2001; McAnany Reference McAnany, McAnany and Isaac1989; Reents-Budet Reference Reents-Budet1994) involved in artwork (Arnauld Reference Arnauld2005; Reents-Budet Reference Reents-Budet1994:164–223), to the extent that it has been suggested that palatial production could be considered as production for own consumption (Webster Reference Webster, Inomata and Houston2001:148), or that it challenges the notion of attached specialists (Inomata Reference Inomata2001), since it was a matter of production entre-soi, by the elite, for the elite.

Conversely, nothing allows us to say that this was the case in Cancuen, where, from our current state of knowledge, the production of jade and pyrite, two of the most valued materials of the Maya area, do not benefit from any particular treatment and, above all, do not seem intended for the artisans’ consumption, or for that of their residential group, or possibly even for the rest of the site, given the scarcity of pyrite elements in a funerary context or ritual deposits. Neither the 60 kg of jade from the workshop (Andrieu et al. Reference Andrieu Chloé and Luin2014), nor the fragments of pyrite discovered mainly in construction fill and trash middens in Cancuen, indicate a special status for unworked raw material. Unlike Aguateca, there is nothing to show that the artisans of Cancuen did produce tesserae for themselves, but rather than that their production was mainly intended for social categories other than their own.