I
Introduction
Group 7F-1 is located on a knoll at 7F: S207 E170, 1,250 m SE of the Great Plaza of Tikal, 340 m SW of Str. 6F-27 (Temple of the Inscriptions), and 195 m S of the Inscriptions Reservoir. Originally mapped as a collection of adjacent platforms and courts, with two templelike structures on the E, two very small structures on the W, and three more substantial ones on the N, S, and towards the center of the group (TR. 2:fig. 1), subsequent plane-table survey (TR. 11:Str. 7F-29 through 36) modified this only by adding one more structure (7F-34). Larger and more complex than any other group in Sq. 7F, this one is also noteworthy for the presence of a carved monument (since moved to the Tikal Museum). Discovery of this St. 23 (in December, 1956) prompted the first controlled excavations undertaken by the Tikal Project (TR. 1:16). Early in 1957, as part of efforts to record all carved surfaces (TR. 12:41), Vivian L. Broman and William R. Coe cleared debris from the lower part of the stela (TR. 1:16; TR. 2:27). Discovering that its base was missing, they continued digging in hopes of finding it, and perhaps an associated altar (TR. 2:fig. 3). Neither was discovered, but what did emerge from this early work (Op. 3A, reported in TR. 2) were glimpses of offertory and mortuary practices at Tikal, insights into monument mutilation and reuse, data on Terminal Classic activities, and hints of the complexities to come once investigation of the site center got underway. No problems were solved, but several were raised, not the least of which concerned the nature of each structure, and how the group functioned. No further work was undertaken, however, as by 1958 the focus of attention had shifted to the Great Plaza and North Acropolis.
When work resumed in Gp. 7F-1, it was as an off-shoot of the program of small structure investigation (TR. 12:26–31). In 1963, Marshall J. Becker sought to confirm that examples of what came to be called “Plaza Plan 2” could be found in all parts of the central 9 km2 of Tikal (TR. 12:29), and Gp. 7F-1 was one of those selected for testing (as Op. 3B and C). Noting the large size of Str. 7F-30, Becker thought that it might be the product of a longer and more complex construction history than any other “Temple on the E” so far excavated (reported in TR. 21). This, and the possibility that adjacent 7F-31 might predate 30, made them good places to look for information on the early development of “Plaza Plan 2.”
The 1963 excavations, like those of 1957, raised more questions than answers. Although Gp. 7F-1 could be interpreted as the residence of people of wealth and high social standing, who maintained their own private “temples,” the presence of an impressive chamber burial (Bu. 160) so far from the center of Tikal suggested that it could also be interpreted as an example of what William R. Bullard called a “minor ceremonial center.” These he saw as elements in a regional political and religious hierarchy, responsible for the administrative and ceremonial affairs of particular zones, but answerable to a higher center of “church” and state. According to Bullard (1960:359–360), minor centers should be appreciably larger than house compounds but smaller than major centers, ordinarily including one or more pyramidal structures arranged in company with lower buildings around one, two, or three adjacent plazas. Vaulted range-type buildings may be present, but should not form extensive compounds. Group 7F-1 meets these criteria (cf. also TR. 2:fig. 1 with Bullard 1960:fig. 3), and its lavish “tomb” suggests some sort of link to the seat of government and religion at the heart of Tikal.
Paradoxically, it was curiosity as to what lay beyond the confines of the TR. 11 map that prompted further investigation of Gp. 7F-1, which seemed to resemble in size and complexity some of the small outlying sites that Tikal Project personnel were just then (1964) beginning to explore (TR. 13:xi). The presence of carved monuments at some of these—El Encanto, Jimbal, and Uolantun—focused attention anew on St. 23 and also on St. 25, from nearby Gp. 7F-3 (TR. 8 and 20A). At the time, the prevailing idea was that both had been dragged from somewhere on or near the Great Plaza, even though Linton Satterthwaite had suggested that there might have been two centers of early monument erection at Tikal (TR. 3:74–75). Building on his suggestion, I put forward the hypothesis that the original placement of both St. 23 and 25 was somewhere in Gp. 7F-1, which may have had a function analogous to that of an El Encanto or Uolantun. The precise nature of that function, of course, remained unknown.
In a final effort to solve the puzzle of Gp. 7F-1’s purpose, I carried out a third season of excavation in 1965. Since all previous work had been done in or near Str. 7F-30 and 31, most of this work was devoted to the others, especially 7F-29, 32, and 35 (Op. 3E, 3F, 3G). Three others (7F-33, 34, and 36) were only tested (Op. 3I, 3H, 3J); one of them (7F-34) proved not to be a structure at all. The two “temples” 7F-30 and 31 were not entirely neglected, however, as they were probed in front for plaza floors by which they might be linked to other construction, to learn more about the buried construction that Coe and Broman (in TR. 2) labeled “Feature 3,” and to seek evidence (which was never found) for the original setting of monuments in front of the building beneath which Becker had found the chamber burial, 160 (Op. 3B, 3C, 3D). I have since regretted not digging more here, for as will be seen in part II herein, there are still loose ends. On the other hand, project resources were limited, and further investigation of the two “temples” would have come at the expense of knowledge about other elements of the group. Moreover, it is now certain (for reasons given in part VI) that neither St. 23 nor 25 originally stood in Gp. 7F-1, but were moved there from epicentral Tikal later in the history of the group.
Preparation of this report, like the excavations on which it is based, was accomplished in three stages. A first draft was prepared and circulated to Becker and Coe in 1968 for their criticism and comments. At the same time, plans and sections were sent to John McGinn for drafting. All three individuals had important things to say and questions to raise that proved vital to completion of the report, although other commitments prevented further work until 1974. It was then that Clemency Coggins began asking questions about the group and its burials that she needed answered for her study of painting and drawing styles at Tikal. By then, too, there was a pressing need to straighten out various “messes” in the burials and caches that had been pointed out by Coe. Spurred on by the need to provide both individuals with reliable information, a thorough reconsideration and revision of the earlier effort was undertaken. This was encouraged by Coggins’s work, which opened up new interpretive leads; although not all of her hypotheses have been borne out, her questions of me, and her answers to my questions of her, have been as important to the completion of this report as have Becker’s, Coe’s and McGinn’s comments and criticisms.
Following this revision, a summary article on Gp. 7F-1 was published (Haviland 1981), but the full report was again set aside in favor of other priorities (including completion of TR. 20); contributing as well was my discomfort with reconstructions of Str. 7F-30 in its various forms. Not until 2011 was work resumed on TR. 22, by which time it was thought that a fresh look at 7F-30 would be beneficial. Unfortunately, numerous uncertainties remain, which are spelled out in its write-up. With the benefit of hindsight, it is clear that further extensive excavation of this evident temple should have been carried out.
This publication, which has as its central purpose the recording of all data from the Op. 3 excavations, is concerned as well with a series of hypotheses. In broad outline, these are that, from late Early Classic times until its abandonment, Gp. 7F-1 was an elite residential group that included houses, ceremonial structures, and perhaps servants’ quarters. It was founded, upon the death of one of Tikal’s Early Classic rulers, by his co-ruler, who moved here when he died and buried him in an elaborate tomb.
