RICHARD BLANTON -- Ph.D. University of Michigan – Professor at Purdue University    

Dear Jonathan,

It sounds like you have your idea pretty well worked out.  I’m not sure this kind of thinking would apply very well to warfare in the highlands of Mesoamerica (where we often had empires, not just city-states) as much as it might apply to warfare during the Classic Period in the Maya lowlands.  Ross Hassig has two books on warfare—one on Aztec and a more general work War and Society in Ancient Mesoamerica (1992) that would be good sources.  David Webster at Penn State is probably the foremost authority on Maya warfare—he’s at <dxw16@psu.edu>

Good hunting,

Rich Blanton

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

JOYCE MARCUS -- Ph.D. Harvard University – Professor at University of Michigan

Your overarching statement -- that factional conflicts can lead or do lead to war is certainly true in the 5 or 6 cases I know (Zapotec, Maya, Tarascan, Mixtec, Otomi, Aztec, Inka, etc....).  

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DAVID WEBSTER – Ph.D. University of Minnesota – Professor at Pennsylvania State University

With regard to the first issue, I certainly concur with your idea that various self-interested factions and individual ambition played a huge part in Maya politics -- including warfare. Exactly how this worked depends, of course, on how one thinks the political structure of Maya polities was arranged. If it were highly stratified, then much of this was a top-down set of decisions. On the other hand if there were big lineages then I think elites might have had to make decisions that they might rather not have made, but were pressured into by lesser people. I think it is a big mistake to assume that competition and factionalism originates only at the
elite level. The status rivalry dimension of my paper has now been generally adopted by Mayanists, most particularly Arthur Demarist, who also writes a lot about war.
 
With regard to the second issue, the details of factional competition -- dynastic, family, etc. -- have to largely be read between the lines. A good place to get a feel for all this is in the book Chronicles of the Maya Kings and Queens (Martin and Grube 2008).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

STEPHEN HOUSTON -- Ph.D. -- Yale University – Professor at Brown University
 
Alas, we don't have good evidence of any factional politics.  It is likely that
such existed, of course, especially when younger brothers were involved or other
magnates.  I would suggest going through a good general source like Simon Martin
and Nikolai Grube's, Chronicle of Maya Kings and Queens.
 
SDH
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BEN W. FALLAW -- Ph.D. University of Chicago – Professor at Colby College

Dear Jonathan,

That's a provocative thesis.  In terms of what leading scholars would have to
say, there is a healthy range of opinion out there as far as a I can tell.  The
problem is sources-even with the writings "decoded" we have elite public
proclamations, but no "offstage scripts."  Archaeologists are divided, many
would "upstream" what we know of the postconquest Maya....

Best wishes

Ben

ADDITIONAL SCHOLARLY CONFIRMATIONS WILL BE POSTED AS SOON AS THEY ARE RECEIVED