Mopan Territory

The Mopan Territory, historically also known as Aycal, was a Postclassic polity of the former Maya Lowlands, in present-day Belize and Guatemala.

Territory of the Mopan Maya Aikal (Mopan Mayan)
c. 950–1720s
Location of the Mopan Territory in the 17th century / marked in light grey, including Chinamita and Muzul Territories / 2023 map based mostly on Becquey 2012 and Feldman 2000 / via Commons
Status	Dissolved
Capital	Mopan / likely now San Luis
Common languages	Mopan Mayan
Religion	Maya polytheism
Demonym(s)	Mopan; Aycal
Government	Confederacy of settlements with aristocratic and theocratic features
Leader
• ca 1697	Taxim Chan / last known
Historical era	Postclassic to Precolonial
• Established	c. 950
• Disestablished	1720s
Population
• ca 1692	10,000–20,000 / estimate
Today part of	Belize; Guatemala
Native name per Jones 1998, p. 21, based on historical name per Thompson 1976, p. 100 and Jones 1977, p. 5. Founding and dissolution dates per Thompson 2019, p. 156 and Jones 1998, p. 420. Map based mostly on Becquey 2012, maps 3, 6 and Feldman 2000, p. xvii. Capital per Jones 1998, pp. 19, 21–22, 433. Common language per Thompson 2019, p. 156 and Thompson 1988, p. 39. Demonyms per von Houwald 1984, p. 263. Government per Jones 1998, pp. 20–21. Leader per von Houwald 1984, pp. 266–267. Population estimate per Schwartz 1990, p. 35.

Geography

The Territory 'lay immediately north of the Manche Chol [Territory] and southeast of Lake Peten,' with the modern town of San Luis, Peten, as the most likely site of ancient Mopan.^[1] Though its full extent remains 'virtually unknown,' the Territory is thought to have stretched north along the Mopan River, thereby encompassing the Chinamita Territory, and east to the Sittee and Sibun Rivers, thereby encompassing the Muzul Territory.^[2] This would situate the Territory directly south of Dzuluinicob, southeast of the Peten Itza Kingdom, east of Lacandon territory, and north and west of Manche Chol Territory. The aforementioned Kingdom, in particular, is thought to have held marked political, cultural, or spiritual influence over the Territory.^{[3][note 1]}

History

Pre-Columbian

Classic city-states in what would later become the Mopan Territory are believed to have met their political and demographic demise during the mid-eighth and mid-ninth centuries of the Classic Maya collapse, with only residual hinterland settlements remaining afterwards.^{[4][note 2]}

Columbian

The earliest Spanish arrival to the Territory may have been Hernán Cortés, who in 1525 is thought to have crossed its northeastern portion.^[5] The earliest Spanish military campaign into the Territory may have been the 1543–1544 Pachecos entrada, which failed due to timely intercession of Dominican friars. The Dominicans' early proselytising efforts in the Territory 'were notably unsuccessful,' though.^[6] This prompted more determined activity beginning in the 1570s, which 'continued throughout the next century.'^{[7][note 3]}

Some or much of the Territory was reportedly attacked by the Peten Itza Kingdom en los últimos años antes de la llegada de los españoles, 'in the last years before the [1697] arrival of the Spanish [to Tayasal],' the latter purportedly seeking to conquer the former.^{[8][note 4]} This is naturally thought to have strained Mopan–Itza relations.^[9]

The Spanish conquest of Peten resulted in the western portion of the Territory being 'militarily bludgeoned into submission at the end of the seventeenth century.'^[10] Coincident and ensuing reducciones throughout the Territory forcibly removed most residents to the newly-Spanish Peten by the 1720s.^{[11][note 5]}

Society

The Territory was dotted by dispersed, riverine hamlets, each consisting of one or a few families of Mopan speakers.^[12] Settlements are thought to have shown 'little evidence of wealth,' for instance, with 'generally a hut of regular house type, although somewhat larger, serv[ing] as the temple.'^[13] Despite this, the hamlets are thought to have been organised into various lineage groups which, in turn, 'clearly constitute[d] an identifiable "people" or larger "nation" living in a contiguous region.'^{[14][note 6]}

Legacy

The earliest description of the Territory in print is thought to have appeared in the 1688 Historia de Yucathan by Diego López de Cogolludo, who credited this information to Bartolomé de Fuensalida, a Franciscan friar who himself likely first got it from an Itza delegation to Tipu in 1618.^[15] Scholarship has advanced little since then, however. As of 2009, the state of archaeological and archival research on the Territory was deemed 'poor,' with the former Mopans described as a people who remain virtually unknown materially and geopolitically except for documentary references or linguistic reconstructions.^{[16][note 7]}

The Territory's residents are deemed the main ancestors of the modern Mopan Maya people of Belize and Guatemala.

Notes and references

Explanatory footnotes

1. So much so that it has been suggested that [b]ien eran sus aliados, o bien su territorio formaba parte integrante del estado de los Itzáes de Tayasal, 'either they [the Mopans] were their [the Itzas'] allies, or their territory [Mopan Territory] was an integral part of the state of the Itzas of Tayasal' (von Houwald 1984, pp. 266–267). Spanish colonial accounts reported that Kan Ek' sólo conocía, aparte de la suya, las "naciones" de los Mopanes, del Tipú y de los Muzules, 'knew only, other than his own, the "nations" of the Mopans, of the Tipu and of the Muzuls' (von Houwald 1984, p. 266). Upon the 1697 fall of Tayasal, at least some of the Territory's caciques were listed in Spanish records as among those who le obedecían a, 'obeyed,' Martín Francisco Chan, nephew of the recently deposed Kan Ek' of Tayasal (von Houwald 1984, p. 265, Jones 1998, pp. 384–385, 418–419).
2. However, as languages of the Ch'olan branch of the Mayan languages family predominated in the southern Maya Lowlands up to the ninth century, while those of the Yucatecan branch arose in the northern Lowlands, mass north-to-south migrations after AD 900 have been proposed to explain the 16th century preponderance of Yucatecan branch languages in the southern Lowlands (Becquey 2012, paras. 8-10). Mopan Mayan is thought to have been the first language of the Yucatecan branch to separate from its sister languages (Rice & Rice 2009, pp. 18, 72, 77–78). Rice & Rice 2009, p. 71 notes, furthermore, that the Territory's residents 'almost certainly were an ancient [Classic southeastern] Petén population,' while Rice & Rice 2009, p. 93 suggests that these early residents may have 'originally [been based] in the eastern [Peten] lakes area (in the Terminal Classic period, for example), [... and only] later pushed southwards and eastwards by the expansionist Itza.'
3. In particular, the early 17th century success of Dominican work in the Manche Chol Territory is thought to have provoked Mopan–Itza military campaigns against Spanish misión towns therin during 1631–1632 (Jones 1998, pp. 49–52).
4. Jones 1998, pp. 56–57 suggests this aggression 'must have been part of an even larger effort to reconsolidate Itza control over the Belize River valley itself,' and further suggests that the Itzas first sought such control via 'one or more wars, beginning in the 1630s, that resulted in the incorporation of the entire region from Yalain to Tipuj [including at least some of the western Mopan Territory] into the larger Itza political sphere.' In particular, Jones 1998, p. 58 suggests 'Mopan, briefly a mission town itself, was probably attacked by the Itzas [in the 1630s] and subsequently incorporated into the Itza political system as an outlying colony whose duty was to monitor the frontier with [Dominican-controlled] Verapaz.'
5. Though at least a residual population in ephemeral, dispersed hamlets is thought to have escaped such fate (Thompson 2019, pp. 30–32, 156, Jones 1998, p. 420). They are believed to have been shortly joined by returning residents and Itza refugees, and eventually absorbed into late 19th century settlements of Mopan and Q'eqchi' refugees (Thompson 2019, pp. 31–32, 156, Jones 1998, pp. 420–421, Schwartz 1990, p. 90, Wilk & Chapin 1988, p. 9).
6. Jones 1977, pp. xv–xvi and Spores 1986, p. 76 suggest the Territory may or likely had some degree of political unity or organisation, and similarly, Jones 1998, pp. 20–21 interprets the term Mopan as a 'political-ethnic designation.' Thompson 1976, pp. 74, 76, though, suggests each hamlet may or likely was 'independent with no evidence of any supravillage organisation.'
7. Jones 1998, p. 19 deemed the Mopans 'one of the least well known, both historically and geographically, of all lowland Maya peoples.' Spores 1986, p. 68 felt there was 'still no thorough examination of [the Columbian history of the Territory] in print.'.

Short citations

1. Jones 1977, pp. 5–7, 25; Thompson 1988, p. 36; Atran et al. 1993, p. 634; Jones 1998, pp. 5–7, 19, 433–434.
2. Jones 1977, pp. 5–7, 21; Jones 1998, pp. 19–22, 168–169, 433–434; Rice & Rice 2009, pp. 12–13.
3. von Houwald 1984, pp. 262–263; Jones 1998, p. 99; Atran et al. 1993, p. 639.
4. Thompson 2019, pp. 30, 70, 156.
5. Thompson 1976, p. 6; von Houwald 1984, p. 255; Jones 1989, pp. 295–296.
6. Spores 1986, p. 68.
7. Jones 1989, pp. 100–101.
8. von Houwald 1984, p. 263.
9. von Houwald 1984, pp. 266–267; Jones 1998, p. 101.
10. Spores 1986, p. 68; Jones 1998, pp. 173, 233; Schwartz 1990, p. 35; Wilk & Chapin 1988, p. 10.
11. Thompson 2019, pp. 30–32, 156; Jones 1998, pp. 408, 420, 516–517.
12. Thompson 2019, pp. 156–157.
13. Thompson 1976, pp. 74, 76.
14. Jones 1998, pp. 20–21.
15. Jones 1998, pp. 19–20.
16. Rice & Rice 2009, pp. 13, 17.

Full citations

1. Atran S, Chase AF, Fedick SL, Knapp G, McKillop H, Marcus J, Schwartz NB, Webb MC (December 1993). "Itza Maya Tropical Agro-Forestry [and Comments and Replies]". Current Anthropology. 34 (5): 633–700. doi:10.1086/204212. JSTOR 2744279. S2CID 147519787.
2. Becquey C (5 December 2012). "Quelles frontières pour les populations cholanes?". Ateliers d'Anthropologie. 37 (37). doi:10.4000/ateliers.9181.
3. Beyette BJ, LeCount LJ, eds. (2017). "The Only True People": Linking Maya Identities Past and Present. Boulder, Colo.: University Press of Colorado. ISBN 9781607325673.
4. Feldman LH, ed. (2000). Lost Shores, Forgotten Peoples: Spanish Explorations of the South East Maya Lowlands. Latin America in Translation / En Traducción / Em Tradução. Durham, N. Car., and London: Duke University Press. ISBN 0822326302. OL 9874598M.
5. Graham E (2011). Maya Christians and their Churches in Sixteenth-Century Belize. Maya Studies. Gainesville, Fla.: University Press of Florida. ISBN 9780813036663.
6. Jiménez Abollado FL (January 2010). "Reducción de indios infieles en la Montaña del Chol: la expedición del Sargento Mayor Miguel Rodríguez Camilo en 1699". Estudios de Cultura Maya. 35: 91–110. ISSN 2448-5179.
7. Jones GD, ed. (1977). Anthropology and History in Yucatán. The Texas Pan American Series. Austin, Tex. and London: University of Texas Press. ISBN 0292703147. OL 18272858W.
8. Jones GD (1989). Maya Resistance to Spanish Rule: Time and History on a Colonial Frontier. Albuquerque, New Mex.: University of New Mexico Press. ISBN 082631161X. OL 2213175M.
9. Jones GD (1998). The Conquest of the Last Maya Kingdom. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press. ISBN 0804733171.
10. Machault J (2018). "Organización y modalidad del intercambio a larga distancia en 'la Montaña' del Petén, siglos XVI-XVII". Indiana. 35 (1): 97–120. doi:10.18441/ind.v35i1.97-120.
11. Rice PM, Rice DS, eds. (2009). The Kowoj: Identity, Migration, and Geopolitics in Late Postclassic Petén, Guatemala. Mesoamerican Worlds. Boulder, Colo.: University Press of Colorado. ISBN 9780870819308.
12. Schwartz NB, ed. (1990). Forest Society: A Social History of Petén, Guatemala. The Ethnohistory Series. Philadelphia, Penn.: University of Pennsylvania Press. JSTOR stable/j.ctv4s7k6r.
13. Spores R, ed. (1986). Ethnohistory. Supplement to the Handbook of Middle American Indians. Vol. 4. Austin, Tex.: University of Texas Press. ISBN 0292776047. OL 18331655W.
14. Thompson AE (December 2019). Comparative Processes of Sociopolitical Development in the Foothills of the Southern Maya Mountains (PhD thesis). Albuquerque, New Mex.: University of New Mexico. OCLC 1156632404.
15. Thompson JE (1976) [first published 1970 by Univ. of Okla. Press]. Maya History and Religion. The Civilization of the American Indian. Vol. 99 (3rd printing of 1st ed.). Norman, Okla.: University of Oklahoma Press. ISBN 0806108843. OL 11114327W.
16. Thompson JE (1988) [first published 1972 by Benex Press]. The Maya of Belize: Historical Chapters Since Columbus (reprint of 1st ed.). Benque Viejo, Belize: Cubola Productions. ISBN 9686233032. OL 1792198M.
17. von Houwald GF, ed. (1979). Comentario. Nicolás de Valenzuela: Conquista del Lacandón y Conquista del Chol. Vol. 2. Berlin: Colloquium Verlag. ISBN 3767804859.
18. von Houwald GF (1984). "Mapa y Descripción de la Montaña del Petén e Ytzá: Interpretación de un documento de los años poco después de la conquista de Tayasal". Indiana. 9: 255–278. doi:10.18441/ind.v9i0.255-271.
19. Wanyerka PJ (August 2009). Classic Maya Political Organization: Epigraphic Evidence of Hierarchical Organization in the Southern Maya Mountains Region of Belize (PhD thesis). Carbondale, Ill.: Southern Illinois University. OCLC 776149169.
20. Wilk R, Chapin M (September 1988). Ethnic Minorities in Belize: Mopan, Kekchi, and Garifuna (Report). Washington, DC: US Agency for International Development. Doc ID PN-ABI-653.

16°44′38″N 89°04′05″W / 16.744°N 89.068°W / 16.744; -89.068