A Test and Falsification of the “Classic Ch’olti’an” Hypothesis: A Study of Three Proto‐Ch’olan Markers

Abstract

This paper constitutes a test of the Classic Ch’olti’an (Pre‐Eastern Ch’olan) hypothesis for the linguistic affiliation of the standard language of Classic Lowland Mayan hieroglyphic texts from ca. a.d. 200–900 proposed by Houston et al. (2000). Newly assessed linguistic evidence suggests that the proposed Eastern Ch’olan innovations supporting the Classic Ch’olti’an hypothesis may in fact be shared retentions from Proto‐Ch’olan‐Tzeltalan and Proto‐Ch’olan. This paper also reviews the proposals for the identification of Eastern Ch’olan and Western Ch’olan vernacular markers at a variety of ancient cities by Justeson and Fox (1989) and Lacadena and Wichmann (2002), among others, and suggests that the late and geographically circumscribed appearance of these traits indicates that Proto‐Ch’olan had not fully diversified—into distinct languages—by the end of the Classic period. It is concluded that it was a form of Pre‐Ch’olan or Proto‐Ch’olan that served as the basis for the standardization of Classic Lowland Mayan writing during the Late Preclassic period, by a.d. 200, and that the diversification of Proto‐Ch’olan was more likely a Postclassic (a.d. 900–1521) phenomenon, one exacerbated by the political and demographic collapse at the end of the Classic period.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 42 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.