Article Ancient cosmopolitanism: Feminism and the rethinking of Maya inter-regional interactions during the Late Classic to Postclassic periods (ca. 600–1521 CE) Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0) 1–27 ! The Author(s) 2017 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1469605317730628 journals.sagepub.com/home/jsa Christina T Halperin Département d’anthropologie, Université de Montréal, Canada Abstract The consideration of cosmopolitanism in archaeology provides a useful lens for thinking about and expanding how to conceive of inter-regional interactions and experiences of belonging in the ancient world. Previous models in Mesoamerican archaeology often implicitly follow a cosmopolitanism of elite male citizens of the world. In incorporating a feminist perspective to the analysis of inter-regional relations, this paper examines Maya women’s roles in cosmopolitan encounters during the Late Classic to Postclassic periods (ca. 600–1521 CE) with a particular focus on merchant women, clothing as a statement of belonging in a larger world, and the adoption of new cooking practices. Such a perspective underscores the ways in which inter-regional interactions in Pre-Columbian Mesoamerica may have been unevenly and contingently experienced, Corresponding author: Christina T Halperin, Département d’anthropologie, Université de Montréal, Pavillon Lionel-Groulx, 3150 Jean-Brillant, Bureau C-3108, Montreal, MB QC H3T IN8 Canada. Email: christina.halperin@umontreal.ca 2 Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0) rather than homogenously adopted, and that the articulation of different worlds need not require everyone to be highly mobile. Keywords Cosmopolitan, cosmopolitanism, inter-regional interactions, feminism, Mesoamerica, Maya, Pre-Columbian archaeology Cosmopolitanism is rarely invoked in archaeological writing as its current use often refers to various moral philosophies, dispositions of tolerance, and cross-border interactions in today’s global world (cf. Meskell, 2009; Richard, 2013). Nonetheless, the exploration of notions of cosmopolitanism provides a useful lens for thinking about interactions, senses of belonging, and diverse types of broad-scale participation in ancient societies. Previous archaeological investigations of prehistoric inter-regional interactions, such as those inspired by world systems theory, often focus on the exchange of goods across polities and geographical regions (Blanton and Feinman, 1984; Jennings, 2011; Kepecs, 2007; Kepecs et al,. 1994; Smith and Berdan, 2003). Such approaches help designate broad regional patterns, but often treat whole regions homogenously and thus fail to capture human experiences on an intimate, personalized scale. In turn, research on the dissemination of ‘‘international styles’’ and far-reaching religious cults in the ancient world often implicitly privilege the actions and perspectives of elite males whose perspectives appear universal in so far as they dominate most ancient texts and imagery (López Austin and Luján, 2000; Pollock, 1998; Ringle et al., 1998; Smith and Heath-Smith, 1980). Building on post-colonial discourses of cosmopolitanism, this article moves away from universalizing and homogenizing approaches to provide a feminist perspective of Late Classic to Postclassic (ca. 600–1521 CE) Maya inter-regional articulations. Such a perspective reveals previously overlooked aspects of ancient Maya cosmopolitan practices and expressions, such as the roles of female market vendors, female clothing as expressions of belonging in a wider world, and new, far-reaching culinary traditions. I examine these three domains of experience to highlight the diversity of cosmopolitan participation in antiquity, an underlying concern of post-colonial cosmopolitanisms (Appiah, 2007; Beck, 2002; Bhabha, 1996; Breckenridge et al., 2002; Pollock, 1998; Werbner, 2008), and to emphasize that there is no singular understanding of women, a long-held commitment of third-wave feminists (Conkey, 2003; Engelstad, 2015; Geller and Stockett, 2006; Wylie, 1991). The focus on Maya market women, for example, reveals how common peoples, in their informal selling of products, information exchanges, and small-scale movements between households and plaza spaces, facilitated the broad-scale circulation of goods and ideas. In turn, a study of an elite women’s garment, the quechquemitl, highlights one of the ways in which elite women engaged in discourses of worldly belonging (or rejections thereof). Participation Halperin 3 in such discourses, however, was not necessarily limited to those who wore ‘‘international’’ garb, since images of such dress circulated both to distant lands and in the homes of common and elite groups. Finally, the exploration of a particular ceramic form, the comal, underscores the possibility that even banal activities, such as cooking, were wrapped up in the tastes of otherworlds and the tensions of local and foreign identity expressions. The distributions of these practices and forms of expression do not always correlate with international styles on public monuments, nor do they appear uniformly in a given region. In this sense, this study encourages a more open perspective on how long-distance connections and broad-scale senses of belonging were forged in the archaeological past. Ancient and contemporary cosmopolitanisms Despite their differences, archaeological approaches to interactions of PreColumbian Mesoamerica benefit from thinking about several key movements and points of tension in more recent philosophical and theoretical discussions of cosmopolitanism. Much writing on cosmopolitanism revolves around moral philosophies, dispositions of openness to others, the parsing of different value systems, and the ethics of universal reason, which are sometimes challenging to assess archaeologically. Nonetheless, discussions of cosmopolitanism highlight several analytical points of reference that help expand how we might think about interactions in the Pre-Columbian Americas, most notably those from postcolonial perspectives of cosmopolitanism whereby worldly dispositions, values, and identities are held in tension with local and more personalized practices and experiences. In this sense, I do not seek to define particular moments or types of societies in prehistory as cosmopolitan or not, but to consider cosmopolitan discourses as an analytical tool for broadening our conceptions of inter-regional articulations in ancient Mesoamerica. Historically, the concept of cosmopolitanism has reflected the situated perspectives of Western elite men. Some of the earliest references to cosmopolitanism derive from the philosophical writings of ancient Greek philosophers, such as Diogenes of Sinope (400-323 BCE) and Marcus Cicero (106-43 BCE), who pondered the idea of belonging not to a single polity, but to the broader Mediterranean world (Nussbaum, 2010: 29–35; Wallace Brown and Held, 2010: 4–6). The kosmopolites or citizens of the world in Classical Greek times referenced, in particular, privileged male citizens who were free to travel to encounter new people and whose education and literacy created a common basis of understanding between men of different polities. Perhaps the most commonly referenced figure associated with the term cosmopolitan, however, is Immanuel Kant, who wrote of cosmopolitanism in the 18th century as a universal law of humanity upheld by an ethos of tolerance and international law. Rather than a description of a known state of being, cosmopolitanism was a political project by which humanity should aspire (Kant, 2013). Kant’s cosmopolitanism, however, was undermined by his own prejudges aimed at particular non-Western cultures, calling into question whose versions of moral 4 Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0) Figure 1. Map of Mesoamerica with selected sites mentioned in the text. philosophies, whose universal human rights, and whose global forms of governance were worth universalizing (Harvey, 2000). In many ways, archaeological approaches to Mesoamerican interaction spheres implicitly replicate these privileged perspectives of cosmopolitan connections (Figure 1). For example, one influential model of cosmopolitan interactions is the ‘‘Cult of Quetzalcoatl’’ proposed by Ringle et al. (1998; see also Folan et al., 2016; Kowalski et al., 2007; López Austin and Luján, 2000). At the end of the Classic and the beginning of the Postclassic period, no single political force dominated large parts of Mesoamerica, and thus imperial or colonial models of domination and influence are not always appropriate. Instead, the authors propose that the networking of small groups of elite male warriors, priests, and merchants were responsible for the spread of a widespread religion across multiple political, linguistic, and cultural divides. This widespread religion and associated artistic repertoire focused on the culture-hero/deity, Quetzalcoatl (‘‘Feathered-Serpent’’). The presence of feathered serpent imagery as far north as the US Southwest (McGuire et al., 2012; Minnis and Whalen, 2015) and of ceramic effigies of Ehecatl-Quetzalcoatl as far south as Nicaragua underscores the vast extent to which such a belief system spread (McCafferty and McCafferty, 2009). Likewise, other scholars have attributed later Postclassic period ‘‘international styles’’ to the networking, sharing of knowledge, and exchanges between elite male intellectuals who produced similar symbol sets, mythic narratives, and painting techniques (Boone and Smith, 2003; Roberston, 1970; Smith and Heath-Smith, 1980; Vail and Hernández, 2010). These scribes, astronomers, and elite patronized artists, Halperin 5 like the Greek male citizens of the world, shared a common set of practices and knowledge that created connections beyond one’s polity and allowed for a sense of belonging to a common world. Recent work on cosmopolitanism, however, has also underscored how its consideration from diverse perspectives allows for a broader sense of how crosscultural encounters are constituted (Biolsi, 2005; Delugan, 2010; Skey, 1972–2013; Werbner, 2008). While there are a number of strands of post-colonial cosmopolitanism, they all critique the notion that universal ethics and values are above local loyalties and affiliations and instead recognize the importance of these local traditions and identities as a part of the constitution of broad-scale relationships, values, and senses of belonging in a wider world. Rooted cosmopolitanism, for example, emphasizes that one can simultaneously have roots and wings, whereby adhesions to the values and rights of world citizenry are both informed and understood through situated local identities pertaining to nationalities, ethnicities, neighborhoods, and families (Appiah, 2007; Beck, 2002). Likewise, vernacular cosmopolitanism can emerge from the peripheries as much as from the centers of global powers (Bhabha, 1994, 1996). For some proponents of vernacular cosmopolitanism, the concept is less an idea or philosophy than an action or practice with particular histories (Breckenridge et al., 2002), a perspective that has resonance with archaeology. In turn, ‘‘feminist’’ cosmopolitanisms, not unlike ‘‘indigenous cosmopolitanism’’ and ‘‘working class cosmopolitanism’’, seek to explore how women participate in intercultural, international, and global articulations, how women’s rights intersect with and are framed through universal human rights, and how female movements and experiences of world belonging are realized (Stivens, 2008; Werbner and Yuval-Davis, 1999; Yuval-Davis, 2011). It is this latter feminist perspective, in particular, that is largely absent from archaeological discourses on ancient inter-regionalism, even if feminist, gender, and increasingly queer archaeologies have become entrenched in the discipline (Conkey, 2003; Engelstad, 2015; Ghisleni et al., 2016; Voss, 2000; Wilkie and Howlett Hayes, 2008). Feminist archaeologies seek to not just explore women and previously ignored identities in the past, but to interrogate and rework interpretative frameworks. Thus, building on movements in both cosmopolitanism and feminism, this article seeks to rethink inter-regional connections as something forged even in informal settings and places, by decentralized channels, and by diverse peoples, making worldly connections uneven and disjunctive as much as they are uniting. In this sense, the cosmopolitan project is a celebration of pluralism amidst new inter-regional connections. For scholars working in contemporary periods, an underlying value of cosmopolitan idealism is not just the recognition of pluralistic societies, but also a tolerance for difference. Such moral philosophies of openness, however, can be difficult to gauge archaeologically. Isotopic analyses of human bone and teeth among other analyses in ancient Mesoamerica increasingly point to the Pre-Columbian world as pluralistic, challenging our conceptions of ancient 6 Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0) cities and towns as ethnically, culturally, and linguistically homogenous (Freiwald et al., 2014; Price, 2014; Price et al., 2010; Wright, 2005). Some neighborhoods maintained ethnic minority identities for centuries while other neighborhoods were inter-ethnic with people from multiple, diverse homelands living next to each other but whose architecture and artifacts could not be easily distinguished from one another (Manzanilla, 2015; Spence, 2005). Interestingly, the most explicit references to the term cosmopolitan in writings about Pre-Columbian Mesoamerica derive from art historical and image-based analyses of the Epiclassic Classic (ca. 600–900 CE) and Terminal Classic (ca. 830-950/1000 CE) periods (Brittenham, 2015; Folan et al., 2016: 295; Just, 2006; Nagao, 1989). The term is used primarily to describe eclectic art styles in which artistic inspiration and techniques are drawn from multiple cultural areas and political regimes of Mesoamerica. After the fall of Teotihuacan (ca. 550–650 CE), many small, decentralized political centers sought to express themselves not as deriving from a single, dominant power, but as partaking in the political histories, power, and relations of many different regions. While such eclecticism denotes a tolerance of different cultural and political forms of expression, it was not necessarily a peaceful tolerance of ‘‘others’’ since these eclectic mural and sculptural programs were often accented with themes of warfare and bodily violence directed at distinct groups. These contradictions are indeed a part of more contemporary cosmopolitan discourses, as global institutions seeking tolerance and peace, such as the League of Nations and the United Nations, were forged from the horrors of World Wars I and II and engage in violence in the name of global peace. Another aspect of contemporary cosmopolitan interactions are global market materialities and the ways in which every day, banal experiences are constantly inflected with the materials and symbols from foreign places and peoples (Beck, 2002; Harvey, 2000; Kuipers and de Kloet, 2009; Maxwell and Desoucey, 2016). While initially explored within the framework of World Systems Theory and coreperiphery relations (Frank, 1966; Wallerstein, 1991, 2000), the global market economy and the centers of cultural productions are no longer viewed as emanating from a single, dominant center or in neat packages. Instead, ethnicity, money, goods, technologies, ideas, and symbols flow at differing intensities and sometimes along divergent channels (Appadurai, 1990; Heyman and Campbell, 2009; Kearney, 1995; Nonini and Ong, 1997; Vélez-Ibáñez, 2004). Important implications of these perspectives for archaeology are that inter-regional experiences can often be uneven and multi-scalar (Joyce and Henderson, 2010; Stoner and Pool, 2015), and that cosmopolitan experiences can occur even without leaving one’s natal home (Radice, 2015). The incorporation and acceptance of foreign symbols and styles is not always a market-driven imposition or a result of political dominance, but also a matter of acceptance, appropriation, and reworking of the exotic, foreign, and ‘‘other’’. These considerations of choice, unevenness, and scale emerge in the exploration of Maya market women, the quechquemitl, and the comal outlined below. Halperin 7 Maya market women Recent scholarship in ancient Mesoamerica reveals that market economies were an important part of inter-regional interactions—not just on the eve of Conquest in the Late Postclassic period—but during earlier periods as well (Garraty and Stark, 2010; Hirth, 1998; King, 2015; Smith and Berdan, 2003). The charting of such interactions have benefitted from the gathering of large databases on easily sourced materials, such as obsidian, that incorporate hundreds of different archaeological sites and multiple time periods (Braswell et al., 2004; Golitko et al., 2012; Golitko and Feinman, 2015; Hirth, 1998; Stark et al., 2016). These studies challenge simple top-down models of commodity control and underscore the diffuse, networked nature of market exchange that dynamically shifted over time. The subject of market studies, however, often focuses on the commodity or the physical space of the market, often overlooking the actual people who may have distributed such goods. In fact, a good proportion of the people responsible for such diffuse interregional articulations were likely common market women. Despite the critical role of market women in facilitating goods flows and informal information exchanges, ethnohistoric sources as well as Pre-Columbian texts and imagery assert that men were the primary participants in long-distance trade, and in turn served as the reciprocal references for merchant deities (Taube, 1992; Tokovinine and Beliaev, 2013). Perhaps one of the most exemplary references to the cosmopolitanism of the Epiclassic period (ca. 600–900 CE) in Mesoamerica is the image of the Maya Merchant deity on the walls of the Red Temple from Cacaxtla, Mexico, a hilltop site situated in the Central Mexican Highlands (Figure 2). Depicted far from his recognized homeland in the Southern Maya Lowlands, the Maya Merchant deity embodies the cultural and material exchanges between Highland and Lowland cultural groups in Mesoamerica. He is identified by his broad-brimmed hat, jaguar features, and large carrying pack. In his carrying pack are Lowland objects obtained from hot, humid regions, such as turtle carapaces, a gourd-like object, a bundle of cotton mantles, and tropical feathers. Next to him is a cacao tree, another Lowland product. In a non-monetary economy, cacao seeds as well as cloth mantas served as equivalencies of exchange between Mesoamerican peoples (McAnany, 2010). Like the later professional class of Aztec merchants (pochteca) who traveled throughout and beyond the Aztec empire, the Maya Merchant deity trades in low-bulk, high value wealth goods. Yet the long-distance, professional male merchants of the Mesoamerican world were not the only traders and truckers of goods. As Hirth (2013: 89–91) argues using Sahagún’s descriptions of Aztec traders and vendors, the majority of all goods exchange was likely conducted by women and men who served as producer-vendors (small-scale operators who sold what they grew, collected, or processed), retail vendors (those who bought goods from producers/collectors and would sell them (resale) to consumers or to other merchant intermediaries), and itinerant peddlers (mobile retailers who bought items to sell in regional marketplaces as well as house to house). For the Maya Highlands during the 16th century, 8 Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0) Figure 2. Maya merchant deity with cacao tree and merchant’s cargo with broad-brimmed hat resting on top, painted mural, Red Temple, Cacaxtla, Puebla, Mexico (drawing by author). Lawrence Feldman (1985: 20–21) mentions that the professional, long-distance merchants were extremely small in number (only six were known in the last half of the 16th century) (Figure 3). In turn, petty traders, who primarily conducted their business within their own or neighboring market districts, and retailer-vendors, who sold goods they produced themselves, were the beating heart of goods exchanges. For the Classic period, market women are often represented with large, broad brimmed hats, similar to the Maya Merchant deity. The market scenes in the 7th century Late Classic murals of the Chiik Nahb complex at the site of Calakmul showcase market women, many of whom wear the characteristic broad-brimmed hat. They sell anything from clay vessels, to salt, to tamales (Carrasco Vargas et al., 2009; Martin, 2012) (Figure 4(a)). The fact that they are simply dressed and do not appear with royal or noble titles indicates that they were common peoples. Research on Late Classic ceramic figurines from Petén, Guatemala, reveals that two of the most popular anthropomorphic figurine headdress types are those associated with rulers and non-royal market women or travelers (Figure 4(b)) (Halperin, 2014a, 2014b). This juxtaposition underscores two different forms of social commentary on networking: one was officially sanctioned and supported by institutionalized linkages and the other was formed through more unofficial channels and included both kin and non-kin, professional traders, and more informal petty traders and producer-vendors. Such tensions between institutional and more Halperin 9 Figure 3. Map of the Maya area with selected sites mentioned in the text. informal networking and authority are common undercurrents seen in reference to contemporary Maya market women who are harassed by police and clash with local authorities in the assertion of their rights within the public sphere (Little, 2004a, 2004b). While small-scale producer-vendors and more informal market women and men may be seen as rather locally circumscribed, they in fact implicitly contribute to the bulk of inter-regional articulations. For example, Kenneth Hirth (2013: 98) finds that short distance marketing in Mesoamerica created ‘‘multiple intersection 10 Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0) Figure 4. Women with broad-brimmed hats: (a) female aj jaay ‘‘clay-vessel person’’ from Chik Nahb complex painted mural, Calakmul (drawing by Luis F Luin after Carrasco Vargars et al., 2009, Figure 7); (b) Late Classic female ceramic figurine with broad-brimmed hat, Motul de San José, Petén, Guatemala (drawing by Luis F Luin; MSJ2A-5-6-15n). commodity spheres that linked environments of different resource potential.’’ While not linking together long distances directly, long distances were linked through much greater numbers of smaller, linked interactions. In assessing the distribution of ceramics and other products, Eppich and Freidel (2015) argue that Classic period Maya markets were interlocking systems. In this sense, articulation webs provide better models than isolated ‘‘solar’’ or ‘‘dendritic’’ market spheres. As such, Pre-Columbian market women would have informally contributed to the ‘‘global’’ flow of certain types of commodities, such as cloth, even if perishable foodstuffs and bulk items would have had more limited supply chains (Halperin, 2011; McAnany, 2010). As points of articulation between different groups, market women would have also played key roles in information exchange, which operated at faster tempos than scribal texts procured and circulated between royal courts. Scholars of contemporary Maya marketplaces reveal that market women are critical in passing on news, gossiping, and discussing political injustices (Kistler, 2014; Little, 2004b). These exchanges are not necessarily intended to travel far. Nonetheless, they normalize values and disseminate ideas between diverse peoples, a process with accumulative importance. Women themselves may have been the object of exchanges as well, and as such were transported far from their homelands to contribute to the cosmopolitan composition of elite households. The most famous of female slaves is Malintzin, Halperin 11 also known as Doña Marina or La Malinche, who lived during the 16th century and was the companion of and translator for Hernan Cortes. Before being given to Cortes, along with 20 other female slaves, by a ruler in Tabasco, Mexico, it is widely recognized that she came from nobility. She was the daughter of a ruler of Painala, a town near Coatzacoacolos in southern Veracruz, and her mother was the ruler of a nearby village, Xaltipan (Dı́az del Castillo, 1963: 66–67; Glantz, 1994). She was sold or given away as a child when her father died and her mother remarried. As such, she grew up among different peoples in Xicalango, Tabasco, where she became bilingual, speaking the formalized Nahuatl (called tecpillatolli or lordly speech) of her natal family as well as Chontal Maya, one of over 30 Maya languages spoken at the time (Wyllie, 2015: 172). While she eventually learned Spanish and has since become one of the foremost symbols of the production of mestizaje in Mexico (Tate, 2017), she had already been a part of diverse cultural articulations before her encounter with Cortes. Female clothing styles: The quechquemitl While the case of female slaves highlights a forced cosmopolitanism, some ancient Mesoamerican women actively propagated a sense of belonging to a larger world. I argue that some elite Maya women donned the triangular tunic, also known in Nahuatl as a quechquemitl, as a way to promote and legitimize a particular type of political and sacred authority whose efficacy was achieved, in part, through its ‘‘international’’ appeal. As in accession ceremonies that relied on practices and symbols from distant lands (Pohl et al., 2012; Stone, 1989), wearing the quechquemitl may have been as much a performance of worldly and cosmic membership as it was of elite social status and ceremonial import. To date, Anawalt (1982) and Stresser-Pean (2011) have conducted the most extensive research on the quechquemitl, drawing primarily from Late Postclassic and Contact period codices and ethnohistorical sources from Central Mexico. They argue that the quechquemitl was worn by elite women during ceremonial occasions or by female deities, such as Chicomecoatl-Tlazolteotl, Xochiquetzal, and Cihuacoatl. Such ritual associations contrast with the everyday attire of women, the boxy-shaped huipil and skirt. The history of the quechquemitl, however, has strong roots in Central Mexico and Oaxaca, Mexico, where it is commonly depicted on elaborately ornamented female ceramic figurines dating to the beginning of the Classic period (ca. 250–550 CE) (Berlo, 1992: 143; Goldsmith, 2000; Martı́nez López and Winter, 1994; Scott, 2001). By the end of the Classic period, female figures wearing the quechquemitl were widespread throughout Mesoamerica, cross-cutting many more ethnic and linguistic boundaries than previously during the reign of Teotihuacan. While these depictions include female rulers on monuments from Veracruz and the Central Highlands, such as the Maltrata Monolith, the Xico stela, murals from El Tajı́n, and the Xochicalco monument from the Museo Regional Cuauhnáhuac (Morelos) (Brittenham, 2015: Figure 49; Koontz, 2009: 79–86; Wyllie, 2015: 169–172), the bulk of the 12 Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0) data derive from portable ceramic vessels and figurines, such as the widely circulated Plumbate effigy vessels and figurines produced along the Pacific coast of Guatemala (Figure 3) (Shepard, 1978: Figure 29), as well as other figurines of various styles and origins (Butler, 1935: 654–655: Figure 5; Corson, 1976; Drucker, 1943; Ekholm, 1979; Gallegos Gómora, 2003, 2009, 2011; Goldstein, 1979: 69–73, Plates 84, 86, 88, 94, 96, 1994; Haberland, 1989; Patel, 2012; Ruz Lhuillier, 1968; Scott, 1993; Serra Puche, 2001). These trends continue into the Late Postclassic period, as noted by Anawalt (1982) and Stresser-Pean (2011). Figure 5. Postclassic Maya molded female figurines with quechquemitl: (a) figurine with quechquemitl, ornamented collar, possibly holding mirror, Tayasal, Petén, Guatemala, TY165; (b) figurine with quechquemitl and ornamented collar and headdress, Macanché Island, Petén, Guatemala (after Rice, 1987a, Figure 68); (c) figurine with double quechquemitl, skirt, and feathered headdress, Ixlú, Petén, Guatemala IX005 (drawing by Luis F Luin); (c) figurine with quechquemitl, decorated skirt, and necklace, Tipu, Belize (after Graham, 1991, Figure 15). Halperin 13 The spread of this new clothing style, however, does not neatly follow the trajectory of other inter-regional movements, such as the spread of the cult of Quetzacoatl, as identified by the presence of feathered serpents, Venus symbolism, circular shrines dedicated to Quetzacoatl, wind god imagery, carved jade pendant plaques, among other markers (Kowalski et al., 2007; McAnany, 2012; Ringle et al., 1998). For example, at one of the principal centers of the cult of Quetzalcoatl network, the site of Chichén Itzá, Mexico, female deities on sculpted stone panels and women in painted mural scenes wear elaborate skirts with bare chests and/or skirts with huipils rather than the skirt/quechquemitl combination (Joyce, 2000). Likewise, in an analysis of ceramic figurines from Central Mexico during the Early Postclassic (Mazapan phase, ca. 900–1150 CE), Terry Stocker (1983) notes that figurines from Tula, one of the principal centers of the cult of Quetzalcoatl, never don the quechquemitl. In turn, he finds that figurines of the same flat Mazapan style from the southern Basin of Mexico do wear the quechquemitl. Such patterns in the Tula figurine imagery are countered only by two monumental stone sculptures of male deities who wear the quechquemitl. A number of scholars (Anawalt, 1982: 57–58; Brittenham, 2015: 121–127; Koontz, 2009; McCafferty and McCafferty, 1994) have suggested that these and other rare depictions of masculine figures wearing the quechquemitl may represent instances of gender inversion, underscoring that gendered expressions were both malleable and sources of social commentary. In the Southern Maya Lowlands during the Terminal Classic period (ca. 830–950/1000), Maya women may have been aware of the quechquemitl, but in general they appear to have rejected it in their representations of themselves or their deities. Late and Terminal Classic female figurines donning the quechquemitl occur only along western Maya sites, such as Lagatero, Chiapas, the western Pacific coast, and along the Campeche coast (Ekholm, 1979; Gallegos Gómora, 2003, 2009, 2011; Goldstein, 1979: 69–73, Plates 84, 86, 88, 94, 96, 1994; Shepard, 1978). Christina Halperin’s analysis (2017) of 1,642 figurines throughout Petén, Guatemala, documents only a single example of the triangular tunic from a fragmented Terminal Classic Fine Orange figurine from the site of Ixlú, Guatemala. Likewise, none have been documented during this time period from Belize or other regions of the Southern Maya Lowlands (Horcajada, 2011; Joyce, 1933; Sears, 2016; Triadan, 2007; Willey, 1972, 1978). The absence of this clothing style in this region contrasts with other lines of evidence, such as at the site of Ceibal, Petén, Guatemala, where a circular shrine, abundant trade wares, and Central Mexican writing and wind god imagery on its monuments indicate that it was an important node in the cult of Quetzalcoatl (Just, 2007; Lacadena, 2010; Ringle et al., 1998). Nonetheless, later in the Postclassic period, the quechquemitl is commonly found on images of elderly and esteemed females from the Maya area, suggesting that Postclassic Maya peoples did incorporate this clothing style in their visual repertoires. For example, analyses of Postclassic figurines from the sites of Tayasal, Nixtun Ch’ich’, Ixlú, and Zacpetén, Guatemala, reveal that the most 14 Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0) common anthropomorphic figurine type is a female wearing a quechquemitl (Halperin, 2017) (Figure 5). These women appear to be of high status as their clothing and headdresses are elaborate and some are clearly elderly as they possess wrinkles on their faces (Graham, 1991: Figure 15; Halperin, 2017; Rice, 1987: Figure 68). Likewise, the Late Postclassic mural and effigy censer traditions from northern Yucatan, which are considered to have partaken in the ‘‘international style’’ of Postclassic Mesoamerica, depict female deities in skirt and quechquemitl (Milbrath, 2007; Roberston, 1970). While I have invoked imagery of the quechquemitl above as a reflection of the clothing styles certain esteemed and elite women may have worn, the materiality of this imagery should not be overlooked. Some of these images, such as ceramic figurines, were highly portable and a regular part of household inventories of different types of people, both common and elite (Halperin, 2014a, 2017; Masson and Peraza Lope, 2011). The circulation of such figurines to distant regions likely contributed to the cosmopolitan nature of the quechquemitl, allowing many different people to contemplate and take part in the formulation of a particular vision of femininity. For example, while flat-backed ceramic figurines of a female with bi-lobed headdresses and quechquemitl are common from sites in Veracruz in the Gulf Coast region of Mexico (Drucker, 1943: 63–64; Patel, 2012: Figure 7.32; Stark, 2001: 206), they have also been found near Suchitoto, El Salvador, an area often considered marginal in Mesoamerican interaction spheres (Haberland, 1989). Likewise, chemical provenience studies of ceramic figurines, in general, underscore that these objects were exchanged or taken beyond the region in which they were produced (Halperin et al., 2009; Overholtzer and De Lucia, 2016: 171; Sears, 2016). Such circulations are quantitatively but not necessarily qualitatively different from global materialities of media today. For example, Cosmopolitan magazine, which has international editions in multiple languages, globally promotes the idea of the modern woman as young, thin, progressive, and sexually-liberated in the same way that Mesoamerican ceramic figurines may have promoted a particular vision of feminine authority. The circulation of images does not require people to be highly mobile themselves. Rather, Cosmopolitan magazine (and others like it even if their names do not explicitly evoke the notion of cosmopolitanism!) brings a Western vision of modern femininity to the grocery check-outs, bathrooms, and bedrooms of ordinary men and women. In turn, men and women all over the world participate in the consumption, reworking, and rejection of such visions of femininity in their daily and ritual practices. Such informal circulations are what Ulrich Beck (2002) refers to as banal cosmopolitanism, since they emerge through everyday practices. Culinary practices: The comal Another setting often considered central to contemporary cosmopolitan experiences (Garcı́a, 2013; Heldke, 2006; Maxwell and Desoucey, 2016) but largely Halperin 15 ignored in archaeological studies of inter-regional interactions is the kitchen, a domain that is largely associated with women in Mesoamerica (Ardren, 2015; Brumfiel, 1991). Since food and drink are so intimately tied to ideas of self (e.g., for many people insulting what one eats is tantamount to insulting someone directly), what and how food and drink are prepared and the practices surrounding their consumption are intimately part of the expressions and performances of belonging in the world. For contemporary supermarkets in France and the UK, Maxwell and DeSoucey (2016) suggest that one way a growing gastronomic cosmopolitanism emerges is when foreign food products and foreign prepared foods are no longer exoticized and become familiar parts of quotidian food regimes. In this last case study, I examine not the spread of food products themselves, but the adoption and spread of a culinary technique, the banal practice of toasting, as a complement to other forms of inter-regional engagements that were occurring at the end of the Classic period. Toasting as a culinary technique can be examined through the appearance of a flat ceramic griddle, also known as a comal (Figure 6). The comal is a large flat plate and is sometimes equipped with handles. Its interior is smoothed while its exterior may be either smoothed or possess a rough surface since it is the exterior that is exposed to heat. While toasting can be done through various means and types of equipment, the comal represents the formalization of such practices. Today, the comal is synonymous with the making of maize tortillas, one of the most essential and basic elements of the Central American and US Southwestern diet (Fournier, 1998; Morton, 2014; Taube, 1989). Nonetheless, many different foods can be toasted on comales (Staller et al., 2009; Thompson, 1930: 99–100). The toasting of seeds and nuts can release oils and bring out flavors during the cooking process. The toasting of cacao beans helps release the husk from the bean and is essential for developing the flavor of cacao drinks. Toasting is also useful in reheating foods, such as tamales. Like painted murals or particular styles of monumental architecture, cooking practices too may have been a way to incorporate foreign influences or, alternatively, to assert expressions of self in a new setting. Although comales were ubiquitous during the Postclassic period in Mesoamerica and were used most prolifically for making tortillas (Brumfiel, 1991; Fournier, 1998; Stark et al., 2016), they were not an entrenched aspect of culinary practices in all regions before this period. It was not until the end of the Classic period, in particular, when women in the Maya area began to incorporate the use of the comal into their cooking regimes. Small percentages of comales (under 10% but usually less than 2% in comparison to other vessel forms), indicate that such cooking tools were minor cooking implements and perhaps were used to prepare more specialty foods (Aimers, 2002: 205–208; Ashmore, 2007; Bill and Braswell, 2005; Braswell and Prufer, 2009; Gonlin, 1994; Hendon, 1987: Table 5.12; LeCount, 2010: 147) (compare, for example, Postclassic Aztec comales, which form between 17% and 27% of ceramic assemblages by the Late Aztec period at some sites in Central Meixco (Brumfiel, 1991: Table 8.4)). 16 Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0) Figure 6. Toasting equipment: (a) reconstruction of Early Postclassic comal from Tula, Hidalgo, Mexico (drawing by author after Diehl 1983: Figure 24); (b) early 20th century cacao toasting comal from San Antonio, Belize; (c) early 20th century tortilla toasting comal from San Antonio, Belize (drawing by author after Thompson, 1930, Plate XVIII-4, -5). Since the earliest tradition of comales derives from Central Mexico and Oaxaca (Blanton et al., 1993; Fournier, 1998; Müller, 1978), it is often assumed that these regions are the origins of influence for comales in the Maya area, and thus the sources of inspiration for new ways of cooking (Ardren and Lowry, 2011: 440; Taube, 1989: 33). Nonetheless, what is considered foreign can be quite contingent and disjunctive (Joyce and Henderson, 2010; Stoner and Pool, 2015). For example, the appearance of the comal in Southeastern Peten and Belize (Aimers, 2002; Bill and Braswell, 2005; LeCount, 2010: 147) during the Late and Terminal Classic periods (ca. 700–950 CE) may have equally emerged through engagements with peoples and practices further south, such as Quirigua, Guatemala, and Copan, Honduras, where comales were a more regular part of cooking implements from Halperin 17 at least 550 CE (Ashmore, 2007; Gonlin, 1994: Table 4.7, Table 4.9; Hendon, 1987: 352: Table 5.12). These new culinary cooking techniques may have been associated with explicit incorporations of new food preferences and tastes, such as the adoption of tortillas, changing how people engaged with food. For example, the spread of cacao beans from the Mesoamerica Lowlands to the arid US Southwest was not just about the dissemination of a raw ingredient. Some cooking practices of making cacao drinks, such as the frothing of the drink to make a foamy top, may have also been an important part of the experience of otherworlds (Crown and Hurst, 2009: 2112; Green, 2010). Alternatively, the banal cosmopolitanism of some cooking practices may have been more about the sharing of knowledge between cooks and expressions of self while cooking than the explicit adoption of a foreign dish. Like the quechquemitl, the incorporation of the comal was not universally adopted (Taube, 1989). For example, at the site of Chichén Itzá, comales form a small percentage of Sotuta-phase (ca. 800–1050 CE) ceramic forms, but are absent at other contemporary neighboring sites in the Northern Lowlands (Bey and Ringle, 2007). Likewise, archaeologists have documented comales at Late/ Terminal Classic Pusilhá, Belize, but they are absent from ceramic inventories at extensively excavated neighboring sites in southern Belize, such as Uxbenka and Lubaantun (Bill and Braswell, 2005: 308–309; Braswell and Prufer, 2009: 48). For western Belize, LeCount (2010: 147) suggests that comales were a component only of royal kitchens at the site of Xunantunich during the Late and Terminal Classic period. In contrast, women from both elite and commoner households from Copan, Honduras, toasted foods on comales during this time (Gonlin, 1994: Table 4.7, Table 4.9; Hendon, 1987). In this sense, at the end of the Classic period, comales may have helped articulate a taste for exotic or foreign food preparations in some regions while in other regions, they may have been considered an essential part of the making of local, everyday foods. These different understandings of regional differences were, of course, fluid. For example, in more contemporary periods the toasted corn tortilla has become embroiled in new types of articulations, such as between Latino and Anglo-American worlds (Morton, 2014). Conclusion Cosmopolitanism reminds us that we are never fully isolated in this world and that any understanding of our social selves involves a constant tension of local and global senses of belonging. For Pre-Columbian Mesoamerica, these tensions were constantly reworked as people and goods moved across the landscape. The cosmopolitan encounter, however, is more than just moving bodies and things, since different peoples experience the world in different ways. A feminist perspective, in particular, underscores that inter-regional articulations may have occurred in unexpected places: in kitchens, among informal or petty market vendors, and in the dress (and media of dress) of esteemed and elderly women. While these 18 Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0) articulations may be related to other political, economic, and religious processes, such as the influence of particular religious-cults or the political alliances between sites expressed in monumental architecture, they do not necessarily occur in lockstep. Thus, widespread patterns do not always mean universal, homogenous incorporation. Furthermore, as the case of Malintzin highlights, some cosmopolitan articulations may have been forced, while others were actively sought. As the eclectic monumental artistic programs of Central Mexico reveal, reception of foreign symbols and styles cannot always be equated with tolerance and openness to others. By overlooking more informal and less specialized female and male market vendors during the Classic and Postclassic periods, we may be over-privileging how some information and some types of goods were disseminated over great distances. Frequent small-scale goods and information exchanges implicitly brought different cultural worlds together. In addition, cosmopolitan experiences need not always involve long-distance travel for all people, but could be tied to the choices of wearing certain clothing styles or in preparing foods in particular ways during a particular moment of time. As Martha Radice (2015) suggests, we should not confuse mileage with mindsets, since the assertion and negotiation of difference is as much about perception as it is about goods and people who come from afar. Indeed, the notion of foreign and ‘‘other’’ is situated, contingent, and fluid. Assessing perception in the ancient world is not without its challenges. If we do not critically consider it, however, our understandings of inter-regional articulations in Pre-Columbian times may implicitly replicate a narrow view of elite male citizens of the world or one of circulating goods divorced from the diverse people who both move and consume them. Acknowledgements Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the University of McGill Department of Anthropology Speaker Series and the 13th Annual University of Tulane Maya Symposium. I am grateful for the feedback at these venues as well as the helpful comments of three anonymous reviewers. All errors are my own. Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Funding The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. References Aimers JJ (2002) Cultural change on a temporal and spatial frontier: Ceramics of the Terminal Classic to Postclassic transition in the Upper Belize River Valley. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Tulane University, New Orleans. Halperin 19 Anawalt P (1982) Analysis of the Aztec quechquemitl: An exercise in inference. In: Boone Hill E (ed.) The Art and Iconography of Late Post-Classic Central Mexico. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library & Collection, pp. 37–72. Appadurai A (1990) Disjuncture and difference in the global cultural economy. Theory, Culture and Society 7(2): 295. Appiah KA (2007) Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers. New York: W. W. Norton. Ardren T (2015) Social Identities in the Classic Maya Northern Lowlands: Gender, Age, Memory, and Place. Austin: University of Texas Press. Ardren T and Lowry J (2011) The travels of Maya merchants in the ninth and tenth centuries AD: Investigations at Xuenkal and the Greater Cupul Province, Yucatan, Mexico. World Archaeology 43(3): 428–443. Ashmore W (2007) Settlement Archaeology at Quiriguá, Guatemala. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. Beck U (2002) The cosmopolitan society and its enemies. Theory, Culture & Society 19(1–2): 17–44. Berlo JC (ed.) (1992) Art, Ideology, and the City of Teotihuacan. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC. Bey GJ III and Ringle WM (2007) From the bottom up: The timing and nature of Tula-Chichén Itzá exchange. In: Kowaleski JK and Kristan-Graham C (eds) Twin Tollans: Chiche´n Itzá, Tula, and the Epiclassic to Early Postclassic Mesoamerican World. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collections, pp. 377–419. Bhabha HK (1994) The Location of Culture. New York: Routledge. Bhabha HK (1996) Unsatisfied: Notes on vernacular cosmopolitanism. In: Garcı́a-Moreno L and Pfeiffer PC (eds) Text and Nation: Cross-Disciplinary Essays on Cultural and National Identities. Columbia, SC: Camden House, pp. 191–207. Bill CR and Braswell GE (2005) Life at the crossroads: New data from Pusilha, Belize. Research Reports in Belizean Archaeology 2: 301–312. Biolsi T (2005) Imagined geographies: Sovereignty, indigenous space, and American Indian struggle. American Ethnologist 32(2): 239–259. Blanton R and Feinman G (1984) The Mesoamerican World System. American Anthropologist 86(3): 673–682. Blanton RE, Kowaleski SA, Feinman GM, et al. (1993) Ancient Mesoamerica: A Comparison of Change in Three Regions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Boone EH and Smith ME (2003) Postclassic international styles and symbol sets. In: Smith ME and Berdan FF (eds) The Postclassic Mesoamerican World. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, pp. 186–193. Braswell GE, Gunn JD, Carrasco RD, et al. (2004) Defining the Terminal Classic at Calakmul, Campeche. In: Demarest AA, Rice PM and Rice DS (eds) The Terminal Classic in the Maya Lowlands: Collapse, Transition, and Transformation. Boulder: University Press of Colorado, pp. 162–198. Braswell GE and Prufer KM (2009) Political organization and interaction in Southern Belize. Research Reports in Belizean Archaeology 6: 43–54. Breckenridge CA, Pollack S, Bhabha HK, et al. (eds) (2002) Cosmopolitanism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Brittenham C (2015) The Murals of Cacaxtla: The Power of Painting in Ancient Central Mexico. Austin: University of Texas Press. 20 Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0) Brumfiel EM (1991) Weaving and cooking: Women’s production in Aztec Mexico. In: Gero JM and Conkey MW (eds) Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, pp. 224–254. Butler M (1935) A study of Maya mouldmade figurines. American Anthropologist 37: 636–672. Carrasco Vargas R, López V and Martin S (2009) Daily life of the ancient Maya recorded on murals at Calakmul, Mexico. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106(46): 19245–19249. Conkey MW (2003) Has feminism changed archaeology? Signs 28(3): 867–880. Corson C (1976) Maya Anthropomorphic Figurines from Jaina Island, Campeche. Ramona, CA: Ballena Press. Crown PL and Hurst WJ (2009) Evidence of cacao use in the prehispanic American Southwest. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106(7): 2110–2113. Delugan RM (2010) Indigeneity across borders: Hemispheric migrations and cosmopolitan encounters. American Ethnologist 37(1): 83–97. Dı́az del Castillo B (1963) The Conquest of New Spain. London: Penguin Books. Drucker P (1943) Ceramic Stratigraphy at Cerro de las Mesas, Veracruz, Mexico. Bulletin 141. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Bureay of American Ethnology. Ekholm SM (1979) The Lagartero figurines. In: Hammond N and Willey GR (eds) Maya Archaeology and Ethnohistory. Austin: University of Texas Press, pp. 172–186. Engelstad E (2015) Gender, feminism, and sexuality in archaeological studies. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences 9: 764–767. Eppich K and Freidel DA (2015) Markets and marketing in the Classic Maya Lowlands: A case study from El Perú-Waka’. In: King EM (ed.) The Ancient Maya Marketplace: The Archaeology of Transient Space. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press, pp. 195–225. Feldman LH (1985) A Tumpline Economy: Production and Distribution Systems in SixteenthCentury Eastern Guatemala. Culver City, CA: Labyrinthos. Folan WJ, Bolles DD and Ek JD (2016) On the trail of Quetzalcoatl/Kulkulcan: Tracing interaction routes and networks in the Maya Lowlands. Ancient Mesoamerica 27(2): 293–318. Fournier P (1998) El complejo nixtamal/comal/tortilla en Mesoamérica. Boletı´n de Antropologı´a Americana 32: 13–40. Frank AG (1966) The development of underdevelopment. Monthly Review 18(4): 17–31. Freiwald C, Yaeger J, Awe JJ, et al. (2014) Isotopic insights into mortuary treatment and origin at Xunantunich, Belize. In: Wrobel GD (ed.) The Bioarchaeology of Space and Place: Ideology, Power, and Meaning in Maya Mortuary Contexts. New York: Springer, pp. 107–139. Gallegos Gómora MJ (2003) Mujeres y hombres de barro: Figurillas de Comalcalco. Arqueologia Mexicana 11(61): 48–51. Gallegos Gómora MJ (2009) Las Figurillas de Chinchicapa: Producción, Representaciones, y Asociación de Materials en una Unidad Habitacional del Clásico Maya en Tabasco. Unpublished manuscript. Gallegos Gómora M (2011) Las Jóvenes Oradoras: Participación de la Mujer Prehispánica en la Religión Maya. In: Rodfı́guez-Shadow MJ and López Hernández M (eds) Las Mujers Maya en la Antiguedad. Mexico: Centro de Estudios de Anthropologı́a de la Mujer. Halperin 21 Garcı́a ME (2013) The taste of conquest: Colonialism, cosmopolitics, and the dark side of Peru’s gastronomic boom. Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Anthropology 18(3): 505–524. Garraty C and Stark BL (eds) (2010) Archaeological Approaches to Market Exchange in Ancient Societies. Boulder, CO: University Press of Colorado. Geller PL and Stockett MK (eds) (2006) Feminist Anthropology: Past, Present, and Future. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Ghisleni L, Jordan A and Fioccoprile E (2016) Introduction to ‘‘binary binds’’: Deconstructing sex and gender dichotomies in archaeological practice. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 23(3): 765–787. Glantz M (1994) La Malinche, sus padres y sus hijos, 1st ed. México, DF: Colección Jornadas. Facultad de Filosofı́a y Letras, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Goldsmith KC (2000) Forgotten images: A study of the ceramic figurines from Teotihuacan, Mexico. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of California, Riverside. Goldstein MM (1979) Maya figurines from Campeche, Mexico: Classification on the basis of clay chemistry, style and iconography. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Columbia University, New York. Goldstein MM (1994) Late classic Maya-Veracruz figurines: A consideration of the significance of some traits rejected in the cultural exchange. In: Robertson MG and Fields VM (eds) Seventh Palenque Round Table, 1989. Austin: University of Texas Press, pp. 169–175. Golitko M and Feinman G (2015) Procurement and distribution of Pre-Hispanic Mesoamerican Obsidian 900 BC–AD 1520: A social network analysis. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 22(1): 206–247. Golitko M, Meierhoff J, Feinman GM, et al. (2012) Complexities of collapse: The evidence of Maya obsidian as revealed by social network graphical analysis. Antiquity 86(332): 507–523. Gonlin N (1994) Rural household diversity in late classic Copan, Honduras. In: Schwartz GM and Falconer SE (eds) Archaeological Views from the Countryside: Village Communities in Early Complex Societies. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, pp. 177–197. Graham E (1991) Archaeological insights into colonial period Maya Life at Tipu, Belize. In: Thomas DH (ed.) Columbian Consequences: The Spanish Borderlands in Pan-American Perspective. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, pp. 319–335. Green JS (2010) Feasting with foam: Ceremonial drinks of cacao, maize, and Pataxte cacao. In: Staller J and Carrasco M (eds) Pre-Columbian Foodways. New York: Springer, pp. 315–343. Haberland W (1989) Mazapan-like figurines from El Salvador. In: Michelet D (ed.) Enqueˆtes sur l’Ame´rique Moyenne: Me´langes offerts à Guy Stresser-Pe´an. Mexico: Études Mésoamericaines XVI, CEMCA, INAH, pp. 81–90. Halperin CT (2011) Late classic (ca. AD 600–900) Maya textile political economies: An object history approach. In: Little W and McAnany PA (eds) Weaving Across Time and Space: The Political Economy of Textiles. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press, pp. 125–145. Halperin CT (2014a) Maya Figurines: Intersections between State and Household. Austin: University of Texas Press. 22 Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0) Halperin CT (2014b) Circulation as place-making: Late Classic polities and portable objects. American Anthropologist 116(1): 110–129. Halperin CT (2017) Temporalities of late classic to postclassic (ca. 600–1521 CE) Maya Figurines. Latin American Antiquity. Halperin CT, Bishop RL, Spensley E, et al. (2009) Late Classic (A.D. 600–900) Maya Market Exchange: Analysis of figurines from the Motul de San José region, Guatemala. Journal of Field Archaeology 43(4): 457–480. Harvey D (2000) Cosmopolitanism and the banality of geographical elvis. Public Culture 12(2): 529–564. Heldke L (2006) Beyond cosmopolitanism and localism. Appetite 47(3): 390–390. Hendon JA (1987) The Uses of Maya Structures: A Study of Architecture and Artifact Distribution at Sepulturas, Copan, Honduras. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Heyman JM and Campbell H (2009) The anthropology of global flows. Anthropological Theory 9(2): 131–148. Hirth KG (1998) The distributional approach: A new way to identify marketplace exchange in the archaeological record. Current Anthropology 39(4): 451–476. Hirth KG (2013) The merchant’s world: Commerical diversity and the economics of interregional exchange in highland Mesoamerica. In: Hirth KG and Pillsbury J (eds) Merchants, Markets, and Exchange in the Pre-Columbian World. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, pp. 85–112. Horcajada P (2011) Aproximación al análisis iconográfico de las figurillas cerámicas de la ciudad maya de La Blanca (Petén, Guatemala). Estrat crı´tic: revista d’arqueologia 5(1): 369–378. Jennings J (2011) Globalizations and the Ancient World. New York: University of Cambridge Press. Joyce RA (2000) Gender and Power in Prehispanic Mesoamerica. Austin: University of Texas Press. Joyce RA and Henderson JS (2010) Being ‘‘Olmec’’ in Early Formative period Honduras. Ancient Mesoamerica 21(1): 187–200. Joyce TA (1933) The pottery-whistle figurines of Lubaantun. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 63: xv–xxv. Just BR (2006) The visual discourse of ninth-century stelae at Machaquila and Seibal. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Tulane University, New Orleans. Just BR (2007) Ninth-century stelae of Machaquilá and Seibal. Report submitted to the Foundation for Advancement in Mesoamerica Studies, Inc. Crystal River, FL. Kant I (2013) Ideal for a universal history with a cosmopolitan purpose. In: Reiss H (ed.) Kant: Political Writings, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kearney M (1995) The local and the global: The anthropology of globalization and transnationalism. Annual Review of Anthropology 24: 547–565. Kepecs S (2007) Chichén Itzá, Tula, and the Epiclassic/Early Postclassic Mesoamerican World System. In: Kowalski JK and Kristan-Graham C (eds) Twin Tollans: Chiche´n Itzá, Tula, and the Epiclassic to Early Postclassic Mesoamerican World. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library & Collection, pp. 129–149. Kepecs S, Feinman G and Boucher S (1994) Chichen Itza and its Hinterland: A worldsystems perspective. Ancient Mesoamerica 5: 141–158. King EM (ed.) (2015) The Ancient Maya Marketplace: The Archaeology of Transient Space. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Halperin 23 Kistler SA (2014) Maya Market Women: Power and Tradition in San Juan Chamelco, Guatemala. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Koontz R (2009) Investiture and violence at El Tajı́n and Cacaxtla. In: Koontz R and Orr H (eds) Blood and Beauty: Organized Violence in the Art and Archaeology of Mesoamerica and Central America. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, pp. 73–95. Kowalski JK, Dristan-Graham A and Dristan-Graham A (2007) Twin Tollans: Chiche´n Itzá, Tula, and the Epiclassic to Early Postclassic Mesoamerican World. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Harvard University Press Kowalski, J.K. Kuipers G and de Kloet J (2009) Banal cosmopolitanism and The Lord of the Rings: The limited role of national differences in global media consumption. Poetics 37(2): 99–118. Lacadena A (2010) Highland Mexican and Maya intellectual exchange in the Late Postclassic: Some thoughts on the origin of shared elements and methods of interaction. In: Vail G and Hernández C (eds) Astronomers, Scribes, and Priests: Intellectual Interchange between the Northern Maya Lowlands and Highland Mexico in the Late Postclassic Period. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library & Collection, pp. 383–406. LeCount LJ (2010) Maya palace kitchens: Suprahousehold food preparation at the Late and Terminal Classic site of Xunantunich, Belize. In: Klarich EA (ed.) Inside Ancient Kitchens: New Directions in the Study of Daily Meals and Feasts. Boulder: University Press of Colorado, pp. 133–160. Little WE (2004a) Outside of social movements: Dilemmas of indigenous handicrafts vendors in Guatemala. American Ethnologist 31(1): 43–59. Little WE (2004b) Mayas in the Marketplace: Tourism, Globalization, and Cultural Identity. 1st ed. Austin: University of Texas Press. López Austin A and Luján LL (2000) The myth and reality of Zuyuá. In: Carrasco D, Jones L and Sessions S (eds) Mesoamerica’s Classic Heritage: From Teotihuacan to the Aztecs. Boulder: University Press of Colorado, pp. 21–84. Manzanilla L (2015) Cooperation and tensions in multiethnic corporate societies using Teotihuacan, Central Mexico, as a case study. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112(30): 9210–9215. Martin S (2012) Hieroglyphs from the painted pyramid: The epigraphy of Chiik Nahb structure sub 1-4, Calakmul, Mexico. In: Charles Golden SDH and Skidmore J (eds) Maya Archaeology 2. San Francisco, CA: Precolumbia Mesoweb Press, pp. 60–81. Martı́nez López C and Winter M (1994) Figurillas y Silbatos de Ceramica de Monte Alban. Oaxaca City: INAH. Masson MA and Peraza Lope A (2011) Figurillas y diversidad social en Mayapán. In: Joyce RA, Gómora JG and Hendon JA (eds) Localidad y Globalidad en el Mundo Maya Prehispanico e Indigena Contemporaneo: Estudios de Espacio y Genero. Mexico, DF: Instituto Nacional de Antropologı́a e Historia, pp. 119–137. Maxwell R and Desoucey M (2016) Gastronomic cosmopolitanism: Supermarket products in France and the United Kingdom. Poetics 56: 85–97. McAnany PA (2010) Ancestral Maya Economies in Archaeological Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. McAnany PA (2012) Terminal Classic Maya heterodoxy and shrine vernacularlism in the Sibun Valley, Belize. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 22(1): 115–134. 24 Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0) McCafferty GG and McCafferty SD (1994) The conquered women of Cacaxtla: Gender identity or gender ideology? Ancient Mesoamerica 5(2): 159–172. McCafferty GG and McCafferty SD (2009) Crafting the body beautiful: Performing social identity at Santa Isabel, Nicaragua. In: Halperin CT, Faust KA, Taube R, et al. (eds) Mesoamerican Figurines: Small-Scale Indices of Large-Scale Phenomena. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, pp. 183–204. McGuire RH, Glowacki DM and Van Keuren S (2012) Pueblo religion and the Mesoamerican connection. In: Religious Transformation in the Late Pre-Hispanic Pueblo World. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, pp. 23–49. Meskell L (ed.) (2009) Cosmopolitan Archaeologies. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Milbrath S (2007) Mayapán’s Effigy censers: Iconography, context, and external connections. Report submitted to the Foundation for Advancement in Mesoamerica Studies, Inc. Crystal River, FL. Minnis PE and Whalen ME (eds) (2015) Ancient Paquime´ and the Casas Grandes World. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Morton PE (2014) Tortillas: A Culture History. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. Müller F (1978) La Ce´ramica del Centro Ceremonial de Teotihuacan. Mexico: Instituto Nacional de Anthropologı́a e Historia. Nagao D (1989) Public proclamation in the art of Cacaxtla and Xochicalco. In: Diehl RA and Berlo JC (eds) Mesoamerica After the Decline of Teotihuacan A.D. 700–900. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, pp. 83–104. Nonini DN and Ong A (1997) Chinese transnationalism as an alternative modernity. In: Ong A and Nonini DN (eds) Underground Empires: The Cultural Politics of Modern Chinese Transnationalism. New York: Routledge, pp. 3–33. Nussbaum MC (2010) Kant and cosmopolitanism. In: Wallace Brown G and Held D (eds) The Cosmopolitanism Reader. Malden, MA: Polity Press, pp. 27–44. Overholtzer L and De Lucia K (2016) A multiscalar approach to migration and social change at Middle Postclassic Xaltocan. Ancient Mesoamerica 27(1): 163–182. Patel S (2012) Journey to the East: Pilgrimage, politics, and gender in postclassic Mexico. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of California, Riverside, CA. Pohl JMD, Fields VM and Lyall V (2012) Children of the plumed serpent: The legacy of Quetzalcoatl in ancient Mesoamerica. In: Fields VM, Pohl JMD and Lyall V (eds) Children of the Plumed Serpent: The Legacy of Quetzalcoatl in Ancient Mesoamerica. Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles County Museum of Art, pp. 15–49. Pollock S (1998) The cosmopolitan vernacular. Journal of Asian Studies 57(1): 6–37. Price TD (2014) New isotope data on Maya mobility and enclaves at Classic Copan, Honduras. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 36: 32–47. Price TD, Burton JH, Sharer RJ, et al. (2010) Kings and commoners at Copan: Isotopic evidence for origins and movement in the Classic Maya period. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 29(1): 15–32. Radice M (2015) Micro-cosmopolitanisms at the urban scale. Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power 22(5): 588–602. Rice PM (1987) Macanche´ Island, El Pete´n, Guatemala: Excavations, Pottery, and Artifacts. Gainesville: University of Florida Press. Richard FG (2013) Thinking through ‘‘vernacular cosmopolitanisms’’: Historical archaeology in Senegal and the material contours of the African Atlantic. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 17(1): 40–71. Halperin 25 Ringle WM, Negrón TG and Bey GJ, III (1998) The return of Quetzalcoatl. Ancient Mesoamerica 9(2): 183–232. Roberston D (1970) The Tulum murals: The international style of the late postclassic. Verhandlungen des XXXVIII Internationalem Amerikanistenkongresses 2: 77–88. Ruz Lhuillier A (1968) Costumbres funerarias de los antiguos Mayas. Mexico, DF: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Scott S (1993) Teotihuacan Mazapan Figurines and the Xipe Totec Statue: A Link between the Basin of Mexico and the Valley of Oaxaca. Nashville, TN: Vandervilt University Publications in Anthropology. Scott S (2001) Terracotta Figurines from Sigvald Linne´’s Excavations at Teotihuacan, Mexico. Stockholm: National Museum of Ethnography. Sears E (2016) A reflection of Maya representation, distribution, and interaction: Ceramic figurines from the late classic site of Cancue´n, Pete´n Department, Guatemala. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Kentucky, Lexington. Serra Puche MC (2001) The concept of feminine places in Mesoamerica: The case of Xochitecatl, Tlaxacala, Mexico. In: Klein CF (ed.) Gender in Pre-Hispanic America. Washington D.C: Dumbarton Oaks, pp. 255–284. Shepard AO (1978) Plumbate, A Mesoamerican Trade Ware. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Microfilms International. Skey M (1972–2013) What does it mean to be cosmopolitan? An examination of the varying meaningfulness and commensurability of everyday ‘‘cosmopolitan’’ practices. Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power 20(3): 235–252. Smith M and Berdan FF (eds) (2003) The Postclassic Mesoamerican World. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Smith ME and Heath-Smith C (1980) Waves of influence in Postclassic Mesoamerica? A critique of the Mixteca-Puebla concept. Anthropology 4: 15–50. Spence MW (2005) A Zapotec diaspora network in Classic-period Central Mexico. In: Stein GJ (ed.) The Archaeology of Colonial Encounters. Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research, pp. 173–206. Staller JE and Carrasco MD (2009) Pre-Columbian Foodways: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Food, Culture, and Markets in Ancient Mesoamerica. New York: Springer. Stark BL (2001) Figurines and other artifacts. In: Stark BL (ed.) Classic Period Mixtequilla, Veracruz, Mexico. Austin: SUNY Albany and University of Texas Press, pp. 179–220. Stark BL, Boxt MA, Gasco J, et al. (2016) Economic growth in Mesoamerica: Obsidian consumption in the coastal lowlands. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 41: 263–282. Stivens M (2008) Gender, rights, and cosmopolitanisms. In: Werbner P (ed.) Anthropology and the New Cosmopolitanism. Oxford: Berg Publishers, pp. 87–110. Stocker TL (1983) Figurines from Tula, Hidalgo, Mexico. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Illinois, Urbana. Stone A (1989) Disconnection, foreign insignia, and political expansion: Teotihuacan and the Warrior Stelae of Piedras Negras. In: Diehl RA and Berlo JC (eds) Mesoamerica after the Decline of Teotihuacan, A.D. 700–900. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collections, pp. 153–172. 26 Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0) Stoner WD and Pool CA (2015) The archaeology of disjuncture: Classic period disruption and cultural divergence in the Tuxtla mountains of Mexico. Current Anthropology 56(3): 385–420. Stresser-Péan C (2011) Des veˆtements et des hommes: une perspective historique du veˆtement indige`ne au Mexique. Paris: Riveneuve. Tate J (2017) La Malinche: The shifting legacy of a transcultural icon. Latin Americanist 61(1): 81–92. Taube KA (1989) The maize tamale in classic Maya diet, epigraphy, and art. American Antiquity 54(1): 31–51. Taube KA (1992) The Major Gods of Ancient Yucatan. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collections. Thompson JES (1930) Ethnology of the Mayas of Southern and Central British Honduras. Chicago: Field Museum of Natural History. Tokovinine A and Beliaev D (2013) People of the Road: Traders and Travelers in Ancient Maya Words and Images. In: Pillsbury J and Hirth K (eds) Merchants, Markets, and Exchange in the Pre-Columbian World. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, pp. 169– 200. Triadan D (2007) Warriors, nobles, commoners and beasts: Figurines from elite buildings at Aguateca, Guatemala. Latin American Antiquity 18(3): 269–293. Vail G and Hernández C (eds) (2010) Astronomers, Scribes, and Priests: Intellectual Interchange between the Northern Maya Lowlands and Highland Mexico in the Late Postclassic Period. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library & Collection. Vélez-Ibáñez CG (2004) Malinowski award lecture, 2003: Regions of refuge in the United States: Issues, problems, and concerns for the future of Mexican-origin populations in the United States. Human Organization 63(1): 1–20. Voss BL (2000) Feminisms, queer theories, and the archaeological study of past sexualities. World Archaeology 32(2): 180–192. Wallace Brown G and Held D (2010) Editor’s introduction. In: Wallace Brown G and Held D (eds) The Cosmopolitanism Reader. Malden, MA: Polity Press, pp. 1–14. Wallerstein I (1991) World system versus world-systems: A critique. Critique of Anthropology 11(2): 189–194. Wallerstein I (2000) The Essential Wallerstein. New York: New Press. Werbner P (ed.) (2008) Anthropology and the New Cosmopolitanism. Oxford: Berg Publishers. Werbner P and Yuval-Davis N (1999) Introduction: Women and the new discourse of citizenship. In: Yuval-Davis N and Werbner P (eds) Women, Citizenship, and Difference. London: Zed Books, pp. 1–38. Wilkie LA and Howlett Hayes K (2008) Engendered and feminist archaeologies of the recent and documented pasts. Journal of Archaeological Research 2006(14): 243–264. Willey GR (1972) The Artifacts of Altar de Sacrificios, Vol. 64. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Willey GR (1978) Artifacts. In: Willey GR (ed.) Excavations at Seibal, Department of Peten, Guatemala. Cambridge, MA: Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, pp. 1–189. Wright LE (2005) Identifying immigrants to Tikal, Guatemala: Defining local variability in strontium isotope ratios of human tooth enamel. Journal of Archaeological Science 32(4): 555–566. Halperin 27 Wylie A (1991) Gender theory and the archaeological record: Why is there no archaeology of gender? In: Gero JM and Conkey MW (eds) Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, pp. 31–54. Wyllie C (2015) In Search of Tamazunchale: ‘‘Place where the woman governs.’’? In: Faust KA and Richter KN (eds) Huasteca: Culture, History, and Interregional Exchange. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, pp. 168–187. Yuval-Davis N (2011) The Politics of Belonging: Intersectional Contestations. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications. Author Biography Christina T Halperin is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Anthropology at the Université de Montréal. She has conducted archaeological field investigations, laboratory analysis, and museum research at numerous sites in Guatemala, Mexico, and Belize since 1997. Her research examines ancient Maya politics from the perspectives of household political-economies, gender, materiality and everyday life. Halperin has published extensively on topics such as Classic Maya textile production, ceramic figurines, chemical analysis of polychrome pottery, and landscape archaeology.