“Elite” is imprecise. (a) Luxury present in record, (b) those who run society? If (b), hard to know from archaeological record alone. Must be reevaluated, especially since existing models of Mesoamerican power are incomplete.
General thinking: the criteria of sumptuousness says: x was not elite. Elites are away from the field and field tools. Wealth and luxury defines an aristocratic, elite class.
Definition of luxury item varies across sites: polychrome pottery is elite for Maya, but also in dumpsters in Tikal.
Other assumptions: stone is more elite than wood. Unless the elite also lived in perishable buildings! Evidence from dental modifications, height, and quality of bones points to eliteness. In short: “archaeological identification of elites is often based on the possession of specific artifact types or traits…” (6)
However. Many people have these traits, and do not correspond to the small number who should be elites. Room for improvement.
Early work: two-division. Now: reinterpretation suggests more complex, with commoners maybe wealthy and nobles maybe till own land. Exists also in-between statuses. Different ‘principles’: kinship and descent; line of work and achievements.
Ethnohistory mixes up. Talks of commoners vs nobles on basis of kinship. From A record, we can see only material wealth. So, problematic to draw conclusions from A observations. The elite will likely be wealthier, but we can’t know if they’re elite. The roles of individuals aren’t necessarily reflected in A record. E-history has shaped how we see M-america. Unfair!
Wide model: “Hereditary noble” or elites live in fancy stone buildings; “plebeians” live in periphery. “Commercialization is not perceived as having played a mayor role in such a society”. Central architectures are for the elite. (But new evaluations show their purpose wasn’t residential!)
Variant model: (still “elite-equals-epicenter”) More complex due to “inferred specialization”. Emerging middle class. Same spatial logic.
Faulty on two points.
Contrasting model: elites distributed throughout. Monumental architecture has “both public and elite functions”. Existed “mosaic quality” to barrios in Teotihuacán, and possibly Monte Albán too. Importantly, “average age of structures” remains the same in Seibai (lowland Maya). Many luxury items widely spread suggests “larger proportion of consumers”.
This is evidence-based and challenges previous notions. Altogether indicates complex and advanced economic system with much state organization. (Role of the state?)
Social organization was not a simple two-class system. We must be careful in assigning elite status to fancy burials. A term “upper class” has been used, but “class” might be inadequate: was Mesoamerica a classed system? Better term: “azmen uinic”, middle men. Avoids connotations of western terms. Anyways, they were a good part of MA-n society.
Occupational specialization is assumed. They were mobile, and perhaps mediated by merchants, probably azmen uinic. We don’t know from A evidence; but the specialized language for laborers, and monetary units, suggests more copmlicated system.
Cannot make quick conclusions: confounded by household size, developmental cycle, etc. How do you tell luxury items from symbols of authority? Greater effor required.
We usually asumme sites fit into hierarchies; such that ranking is cross-local. If so, then specialization in subsidiary locations, and not much in primary places. But hard to identify.
Usually highland MA seen as very stratified compared to lowland Maya; debatable. Can’t really decide who is elite. Surface reconnaisance is typical in highland, which allows quick conclusions; avoid small data. Opposite for Maya, where always mixed excavation and mapping. More data means more problems.
Why always focus on elites? need to understand lifestyle and belief system.
Reconstruction is always incomplete, and misleading to claim it isn’t. Cannot measure single attributes and variables. Maya has shown us how to reconcile site centers with habitation patterns, but thereby raised new questions. Must resolve: where did people live? Elite are important; no matter how they came about, or how we project onto them, they are difficult to identify. Questions: