CHAPTER 2 : THE SITEOFCIHUATAN
The nearer edge of the Cerro is approximately 1/2 km NNE of the WCC.
Forming a natural topographic unit approximately 7.5 ha. in area, it has less abrupt slopes than the eastern slopes of the central zone. Today is it one of the most pleasant parts of the site, being well situated with regard to air circulation and visibility. The panoramic view from much of the now cleared hill includes the main pyramid in the WCC, the fronting slopes of the central zone, the flat valley east of the Acelhuate, Guazapa Volcano, low hills to the east and west, and the high sierra on the Honduran border.
San Dieguito, then, is somewhat separate from the rest of the site topographically. It forms part of the nonelite residential zone that appears to encircle the central part of the site. On the basis of surface indications, it resembles other peripheral areas in having an open settlement pattern with scattered structures and terraces. It differs from other peripheral zones in its distances and relative detachment from the central zone.
Development of the 1979 Research
24
The 1979 Field Work 1
The Cerro de San Dieguito was chosen as the main locus of our 1979 field research for the following reasons:
- it fonned a natural separate part of the site, - it had not been previously investigated, - it was more distant from the centers than any
part of the site previously investigated, - it appeared, on the basis of initial evaluation,
to represent a nonelite, essentially domestic sector of Cihuatan, and
- a large number of visible rock alignments appeared to represent structures and rockfronted terraces; artifacts were abundant on the surface.
Two separate field ventures were undertaken. The first, a partial survey of the hill, was designed to elucidate the pattern of settlement and the density of habitation or other structures, to assess the degree of contemporaneity and/or chronological variability on the basis of surface artifacts, and to seek evidence of differential use of space relevant to identifying specialized activities.
The survey took the fonn of mapping features, noting location but not collecting surface artifacts belonging to selected categories such as manos, metates and obsidian and chert nodules. The second, a testing and excavation program, was designed primarily to provide contextual and architectural infonnation about structures that seemed before excavation to embody different construction techniques and which were located in diverse topographic settings.
CHAPTER 2: TIlE SITEOFClHUATAN
The Survey
Time did not allow a full and comprehensive survey to be completed. During the latter part of the season, ground visibility was obscured by the rapidly growing flor amarilla. The location of features and objects noted in the survey are presented in Figure 5.
A large number of cobble alignments following the contours of the hill were regarded as terrace walls. If we count those instances of cobble alignments that cross contour lines as possible structures, we can argue that there are minimally 79 structures on the hill. This estimate is undoubtedly too low because of previous destructive activities and the difficulties in surveying; also, some of the alignments following the contours may be downslope retaining walls for houses that have no other visible features. Such was the case for House 15-2 (Excavation Area B). We did not identify any plazuela groups; however, Fowler, whose random survey Quadrat 15 falls within the San Dieguito survey area, describes a three-mound plazuela group for this quadrat (Fowler 1981:70-73). The more common distributional pattern appears to be one of scattered individual structures and irregularly placed groups of structures, -- a spatial organization that suggests that dwellings and special function structures may have had kitchen gardens or at least a buffer zone surrounding them.
U sing the number of structures noted above (79) for the 7.5 ha area surveyed, we can estimate minimally and roughly an average of nine structures per hectare. The question arises as to what the settlement pattern and density would have been at anyone time. What was the longevity of any single structure? Did rebuilding occur? What is the total time period during which the hill was occupied?
Unfortunately, we lack clear cut answers to any of the questions.
CIHUATAN
CERRO DE SAN DIEGUITO
Scale 1:500 CO/Jtour Interval 1 metre Approximate declination, June 1979
~
/ '~// /
Figure 6. San Dieguito Excavation Areas
-~
() :x:
~
~.. IV
en
~
0
~
"TI ()
~ »
-i ~.
Z
IV VI
26
We observed no indication of rebuilding in the San Dieguito sector either in surveys or excavations. However, the presence of abundant artifacts in the construction fill of Structure 15-1 (Excavation Area A) strongly suggests some temporal differentiation in the building sequence. Our overwhelming impression is of lavish use of space and single occupations of individual structures or as yet undefined groups of structures.
We have no adequate means of short-term dating. By resorting to
if-,
then-, forms of reasoning, we can suggest the following possibilities. Ifwe calculate 100 structures over 7.5 hectares, each occupied for 50 years during a 200 year occupation with a stable popUlation size and density, then only 25 structures would be occupied at anyone time, for an average of one structure per .3 ha or roughly three structures per hectare. By reducing structure longevity to twenty years, only ten structures would be occupied at one time, for an average of one structure per .75 hectare. Adams (1981 :244-45) notes that 25% occupancy has been used traditionally for the Lowland Maya, but he now feels 75% occupancy may be too conservative. If we apply this higher estimate to the San Dieguito data, then we get ten inhabited structures per hectare at anyone time.Permutations of this game are numerous as each variable can be altered within rather broad limits. Improved chronological control is a necessary prelude to more firmly grounded estimates, and this is not available at the present time.
Features recorded during the survey support our initial view that we were dealing with a nonelite zone which, in rather broad terms, can be called residential. Surface,artifacts such as manos and metates indicate basic food processing at a level compatible with the inference that this is a nonelite domestic area.
The observed distributional pattern of surface artifacts did not give indications of specialized production of pottery or stone tools. Surface
CHAPTER 2: TIlE SITE OFCIHUATAN
ceramics belong to the same range of categories as found in excavated contexts. No temporal differentiation could be perceived on the basis of these observations.