Kuchkabal

A kuchkabal (Mayan pronunciation: [ˈkutʃ.ka.bal], plural: kuchkabalo'ob, literal translation: 'province,' 'state,' 'polity') was a system of social and political organisation common to Maya polities of the Yucatán Peninsula, in the Maya Lowlands, during the Mesoamerican Postclassic. There were somewhere between 16 and 24 such provinces just prior to the Spanish conquest of Yucatán.^{[note 1][note 2]}

The kuchkabalo'ob, 'provinces,' were located in the Yucatán Peninsula of the Maya Lowlands, bounded by a northwest-to-southeast trending crescent, stretching along the base of the Peninsula, from the Bay of Campeche to the Bay of Honduras.^[1] To the west, the provinces bordered settlements of Chontal, Nahuatl, and Zoque speakers in eastern Tabasco, eastern Chiapas, and western Campeche (beyond Laguna de Terminos).^{[2][note 3]} To the southwest and south, they bordered settlements of Chol speakers in western Peten, northern Alta Verapaz, northern Izabal, northern Copan, northern Santa Barbara, and western Cortes (before the Ulua River).^{[3][note 4]} The provinces thereby encompassed all six districts of Belize, the Guatemalan department of Peten, and the Mexican states of Campeche, Quintana Roo, and Yucatán.

Some recent scholarship, employing a revised understanding of the provinces, has proposed to situate the latter only within those portions of the Peninsula predominated by Yucatecan Mayan speakers.^{[4][note 5]} Consequently, the limits of the provinces' territory have been proposed as a northwest-to-southeast trending diagonal, from Champoton to the Belize River, resulting in an expanse covering only the aforementioned Mexican states, and the Belizean districts of Corozal, Orange Walk, and Belize.^[5]

Current knowledge of the historical antecedents of the provinces 'is fragmentary and extremely vague for the period prior to the middle of the fifteenth century.'^{[6][note 6]} Nonetheless, some post-conquest Maya accounts claim 'Chichen Itza had formerly governed the entire country [Peninsula] for about 200 years,' while other such accounts rather claim 'that Uxmal, Chichen Itza, and Mayapan ruled the area during this length of time,' and furthermore, some such accounts claim that Mayapan ruled the Peninsula during a later period.^[7] The former claim has been described as 'more or less true of most of northern Yucatán [Peninsula],' while the last claim has been deemed partially accurate, as there is 'some evidence that northern Yucatán from the Gulf of Mexico east to Cupul was, for a time at least, subject to a joint government located at [Mayapan, though] it is doubtful that its hegemony included Campeche and Champoton [and, further,] it appears possible that it did not extend to the east coast of the peninsula.'^{[8][note 7]} In case such a centralised government existed at Mayapan, its rule would have been disrupted upon the city's destruction 'about a century before the final Spanish conquest.'^{[9][note 8]} It has been further suggested that Nahuatl- or Chontal-speaking settlers, who appear to have come predominantly from Tabasco, may have influenced the constitutions of emerging provinces.^[10]

Hispano-Maya hostilities first broke out in Ecab, capital of the eponymous province in Cape Catoche, in 1517.^[11] The Spanish conquest, however, did not properly start until 1527, and was 'an arduous enterprise lasting twenty years.'^{[12][note 9]}

Many of the provinces were organised as unitary states, governed by a single halach winik, 'governor.'^[13][4] However, some were rather organised as a confederacy of batabilo'ob, 'towns,' 'more or less closely knit,' and governed (jointly or severally) by the respective batabo'ob, 'mayors.'^[14] And further still, some 'seem to have been merely collections of towns in a given area, whose relations with one another are largely a matter of conjecture.'^{[15][note 10]} Thus, broadly, provinces were organised either as unitary or federal states, with varying degrees of cohesion.

The provinces were first subdivided into constituent towns.^[4] Larger towns were further subdivided into kuchteelo'ob, 'wards,' though 'little' is known about these second-order units.^{[16][4][note 11]} Consequently, the civil service of all provinces featured offices for first-order subdivisions (the province's towns), while that of at least some provinces further featured offices for zeroth-order (the province itself) or second-order (a town's wards) subdivisions.^[4]

The halach winik, 'governor,' present only in unitary provinces, exercised sovereign legislative, executive, judicial, military, and religious authority over the same.^[17] Their government is thought to have been invariably based in the capital.^[18] Notably, the office was responsible for military defence, foreign policy, home policy (effected via the provincial mayors), serious or inter-municipal civil and criminal court cases, and certain religious ceremonies.^[19] Particular attention is thought to have been paid to the maintenance of the territorial integrity of the province, and that of its constituent towns.^[18] For instance, in 1545, Nachi Cocom, colonial governor of Sotuta, is known to have 'personally made a survey of his entire frontier and conferred with various Cochua and Cupul [mayors] who lived close to his borders, evidently discussing local differences of opinion in regard to the frontiers.'^[18] Similarly, in 1557, Kukum Xiu (also known as Francisco the Montejo Xiu), colonial governor of Mani, held a conference at Mani (city) for his and neighbouring mayors to determine the limits of the province and its constituent towns.^[18]

The office, at least in some unitary provinces, is known to have been the prerogative of the leading noble house, with tenure held for life, and passed from father to first-born son.^{[18][note 12]} The officeholder is thought to have been entitled to an allotment of slaves, annual tribute from each town and household (typically produce or other merchantable goods), and court fees when acting as chief justice.^{[20][note 13]} Said remuneration is thought to have been 'sufficient [...] to live in considerable state.'^{[20][note 14]} The officeholder is, additionally, thought to have acted as mayor of the provincial capital, and been entitled to that office's remuneration.^[21]

The governor does not seem to have had a dedicated advisory council, though it has been suggested that either senior officers of the capital, or some of the provincial mayors (especially those related to the governor), may have or likely acted as privy counsellors, being 'consulted on provincial affairs.'^[20][4][22]

The batab, 'mayor,' present in all provinces, exercised executive, judicial, and military authority over a batabil, 'settlement.'^[20] Notably, the office was responsible for military defence, the building code, farming regulations, non-serious or intra-municipal civil and criminal court cases, and for executing provincial home policy.^[23] However, the office's authority is thought to have varied across provinces.^[23]

In unitary provinces, relatives of the governor are thought to have enjoyed precedence for mayoral office, as the governor held the power of appointment to said office in such provinces.^{[21][note 15]} Additionally, suitable first-born sons of an outgoing mayor are similarly thought to have enjoyed precedence for office.^{[24][note 16]} In federal provinces, the mayoral office's rules of succession are thought to have been similar to those for the office of governor in unitary provinces.^[23] The officeholder is thought to have been entitled to annual tribute from each household (in federal provinces) or to a farm and to miscellaneous farming-and-household services (in unitary provinces), and court fees when acting as magistrate (in all provinces).^{[20][note 17]} Furthermore, the officeholder is thought to have been 'treated with great ceremony and attended by many people' both at home and abroad.^[25][26] For instance, it is thought to have been customary, during lay celebrations, for the town's residents to attend to the mayor, 'bowing before him [the mayor], opening a lane for him to pass, [...] spreading their mantles in front of him [and] protect[ing] his head from the sun with great fans of bright feathers.'^[25]

The mayor does seem to have had a dedicated advisory council, namely, the town council, composed of local aldermen or councillors. He is believed to have further employed or relied upon a number of local civil servants or officeholders.

The ah kuch kab, 'alderman or councillor,' present in all provinces, was a member of the town council who reviewed mayoral instructions or decisions for either assent or dissent, with the former thought constitutionally necessary for the execution of any such.^[27][28] In federal provinces, the council are thought to have constituted 'the chief check' on mayoral authority.^[23] In larger towns which were further subdivided into wards, each such ward was assigned to an alderman, who was further tasked with taxation and 'other municipal affairs' within said ward.^[25][4] In at least some provinces, officeholders were appointed by the mayor, and tended to be 'rich and capable' men.^{[25][note 18][note 19]}

The ah kulel, 'deputy or delegate,' present in all provinces, was a local civil servant who assisted and deputised for the mayor and council, in both official and private capacities, by attending to the mayor at their personal residence, conveying official instructions to town residents, and acting as advocates or prosecutors in magistrate's court.^[23][4] The office is known to have 'definitely ranked below' that of an alderman or councillor, but above that of bailiffs or constables.^[23][29]

The ah hol pop, 'chamberlain or steward,' present in at least some provinces, is thought to have been responsible for the popol na, 'town hall,', where residents 'assemble[d] to discuss public business and [to] learn to dance for the town festivals,' and which is thought to have housed the town's pop, 'ceremonial rug,' which served as 'a symbol of authority.'^[30] Notably, in at least some towns, the chamberlain or steward is known to have discharged the office of mayor.^[31][32]

The tupil, 'bailiff or constable,' present in at least some provinces, is thought to have exercised law enforcement authority, similar to that of a Spanish alguacil or 'minor peace officer.'^[31] The bailiffs are known to have been the lowest-ranked civil servants, with the office described as '[e]vidently [...] not a position filled by members of the nobility.'^[31] At least some officeholders are known to have rendered menial service to senior civil servants, for instance, by serving as provision carriers during trips by the governor, or by maintaining the town's grain stores.^[31]

The nakom, 'non-commissioned officer or captain,' present in at least some provinces, were 'special' war officers, thought to have held joint (with the mayor) command of the town's troops during times of war.^{[33][note 20]} Officeholders were 'installed in office with great ceremony,' held tenure for three years, and maintained a demanding social and dietary regimen.^[34] For instance, while in office, the captain was required to '[eat] no meat but the flesh of fish and inguanas, [...] never [be] intoxicated, remai[n] continent, and [have] little intercourse with his fellow townsmen.'^[34] Officeholders are thought to have 'probably had much influence in declaring war, for persons who had suffered injury away from home came to him to complain and seek revenge.'^[34] Notably, Nacahun Noh, a captain of Saci, is known to have 'received gifts of shell beads from people living as far away as Tizimin who wished to conciliate him and avoid war with his town.'^[35]

The holkan, 'enlisted ranksman or specialist,' present in at least some provinces, is thought to have been a wartime office responding to the municipal troop's joint commanding officers, the mayor and captain.^[36] The specialists were selected from among the troops for extraordinary military merit by the captain, and were remunerated only during wartime, partly from the captain's personal funds, and partly from municipal funds.^[36] They were additionally entitled to spoils of war, and to 'a certain licence,' for a period upon their return from a campaign, to service and entertainment from the town's residents, often to the latter's 'annoyance.'^[36]

It has been suggested that ah k'ino'ob, 'priests,' 'should probably also be considered members of the town government.'^[37] For instance, the prophecies or interpretations of the ah chila'no'ob, 'prophetic or divinatory priests,' were routinely used to determine matters of state and economics, are further deemed to have 'evidently [been] an important factor in the reception accorded to the Spaniards in the various [provinces].'^{[38][note 21]} Furthermore, in colonial times, when the Franciscans, Inquisition, and Provisorato de Indios, had 'more or less broken down' the pre-Columbian priesthood, caciques (i.e. mayors) and 'other important men' are known to have assumed the duties of divination or prophecy.^[39][40] Similarly, all priests are thought to 'have had more authority than the temporal rulers' when enforcing religious observances or punishing religious delinquency.^[41]

Hispano-Maya records do not provide evidence of centralised ecclesiastic organisation in any of the provinces.^[42] Nonetheless, it has been suggested that, 'most probabl[y, ...] something of the sort existed.'^[42] Particularly, in unitary provinces, it is thought that the governor may have assumed the office of ahaw kan, 'archbishop or bishop,' at least in Mayapan, where the former undertook the examination of candidates for priesthood, and the appointment and investiture of priests for the province's towns.^[42] In federal provinces, ecclesiastic affairs 'may have been purely a local matter.'^[39]

The clergy do not seem to have been entitled to tithes.^[41] Rather, they are thought to have been compensated by voluntary offerings (of provisions, currency, or miscellaneous goods), or by regular fees for religious services.^[41]

This section needs expansion with: details regarding legislative and executive authority. You can help by adding to it. (December 2022)

The provinces are thought to have only held courts of original jurisdiction, with all judgments deemed final and thus not subject to appeal.^[43] The mayors held original civil and criminal jurisdiction for non-'serious' or intra-municipal claims, while the governor held such jurisdiction for 'serious' or inter-municipal ones.^[43] Judicial proceedings were presided over and decided by the mayor or governor, with local deputies serving as advocates for the claimants, and further officers serving various court roles.^[44] Notably, court proceedings seem to have included only oral arguments, judgments seem to have been final in all cases, and oaths for sworn testimony seem to have 'consisted in calling down misfortunes on one's own head if a [given] statement were false.'^[45] Civil claims were brought 'for injuries committed without malice,' including, for instance, manslaughter, negligence, and 'the provocation by a husband or wife resulting in the suicide of the other spouse.'^[44] At least for cases of manslaughter, if court-awarded compensation were not settled, it seems that the claimant's family were authorised to summarily execute the defaulting defendant by ambush, though this is thought to have been rarely necessary.^[44] Criminal cases were brought for, among other crimes, murder, arson, adultery, and theft.^[46] Criminal sentences are thought to have included primarily death or enslavement, as milder sentences (e.g. flogging or imprisonment) do not seem to have been commonly employed.^[44] Nonetheless, leniency might be shown to youth, women, and members of the upper classes.^{[46][note 23]} Court fees, consisting of 'customary gifts,' were paid by litigants and petitioners to the presiding justice.^[20]

The provinces are thought to have been 'constantly at war with one another,' success in war being a principal source of the nobility's claim to authority, and of the economy's enslaved labour.^[47] The governor led the provincial troops as commander-in-chief.^{[citation needed][note 24]} These were organised according to their town of origin, with the corresponding mayor and captain as joint commanding officers, and the specialists as special forces.^[35] Wars are thought to have typically been short battles, waged during daytime in the wet season (specifically, between October and January, 'when there was little or no agricultural activity'), and to have typically occurred on inter-provincial causeways.^[36]

War parties, led by the mayor and captain, often 'set out quietly, hoping for a surprise attack.'^[36] Parties were preceded by scouts, who 'blew whistles and conch shells, beat their wooden drums, and pounded large tortoise shells with deerhorn sticks' upon locating the enemy.^[36] Hand-to-hand combat ensued, to the tune of 'war cries and loud insults [...] often of an obscene character.'^[36] The battle's primary aim was usually the enemy's captivity, with prisoners being 'bound to a wooden collar or yoke, to which a longer rope was attached,' and thereby lead to their captors' townsmen.^[36] Additionally, if the mayor or captain were slain in battle, the losing side would 'sl[i]ng their shields on their backs and retrea[t],' with the winning side's soldier responsible for the death being 'especially honoured' for their feat.^[36]

As surprise assaults were common, a town's defences typically included seasonal sentinels stationed at various border sites.^[36] Furthermore, as parties typically advanced along causeways, these were barricaded 'at strategic points [by semicircular, camouflaged] walls of dry stone and palisades of heavy timbers bound together by lianas, [with built-in defensive posts] from which arrows could be shot and darts, spears, and stones could be hurled at the approaching enemy.'^[48] Additionally, some towns were further fortified by dry stone walls, ramparts, ditches, and even agave hedges.^{[49][note 25]} Furthermore, though there is 'no direct evidence of military alliances' among any of the provinces prior to Spanish conquest, 'there can be little doubt that such existed,' for instance, between Cupul, Cochuah, and Sotuta, during their allied assault on Spanish forces at Mérida in 1542.^[50] There is also some evidence of extra-regional military alliance, for instance, between Chetumal and the [non-provincial] settlements on the Ulua River, as '[a]fter the Spaniards were driven out of Chetumal [...], an expedition of fifty war canoes from this [province] came to assist the natives living on the Ulua River in Honduras in their resistance to the Spanish invaders there.'^[51] Similar alliances have been proposed between some provinces in the southwestern portion of the Peninsula, and [non-provincial] settlements in Tabasco.^[52]

Religious functions are thought to have formed an important part of the duties discharged by senior civil servants across the provinces.^[28] For instance, '[m]any important ceremonies were not performed at the temple, but in the private oratory of the batab [mayor] or some other wealthy person of high rank.'^{[53][note 26]} Furthermore, some or many nobles or senior civil servants purported to hold exclusive favour with certain gods, especially Kukulkan, such that offerings to said gods could not be made directly, but rather required the intercession of one such noble or office holder.^[54] For instance, both office-holding nobles and priests presided over a pan-regional, annual, five-day festival to Kukulkan at Mani, where the god was worshipped 'with unusual pomp and ceremony, since he was the special patron of these warlike rulers.'^[55]

At least some religious ceremonies are thought to have incorporated state functions. For instance, year's-end ceremonies for the coming year, presided over by clergy at temples, and described as 'perhaps the most important [of the various recurring religious rites],' are known to have involved '[e]laborate formalities [...] in dismissing the old [civil service] incumbents and installing the new in office.'^[56]

The system of land tenure employed across the provinces has not been fully elucidated.^[57] The system is commonly described as 'communal ownership,' following accounts by Gaspar Antonio Chi.^{[57][note 27]} Though details regarding the purported 'communal ownership' are still debated, it is commonly agreed that 'there was no private ownership of land.'^{[58][59][note 28]} For instance, a deed of sale dated 1561 records 'an individual title to a tract of land and its conveyance "to the principal men of the town here at Ebtun," ' with the vendor further noting that the conveyed title 'is the "title of the forest of my ancestors." '^[60] Similarly, at least some majority-Maya colonial towns are known to have held joint ownership over land within town limits, with town lots owned by the municipality, but fruit trees in orchards (and possibly, similar improvements to land) owned privately.^[60]

It has been suggested that either the nobility or the commons reserved the right to remove their government from office for breaches of duty or propriety, such as a senior officer's 'becoming arrogant and disdainful of his people, demanding a high tribute, making slaves of the people, oppressing the poor, or conducting himself wantonly.'^{[61][note 29]} It has been further noted that the nobility may have fostered the commons' belief in such a right for pecuniary gain. For instance, the mid-fifteenth century rebellion against the governor of Tutul Xiu, then based in Mayapan, was publicly justified by the sovereign's 'arrogant and disdainful attitude towards his people,' but privately led by noblemen who may have rather sought to break the governor's monopoly on the lucrative slave trade with non-provincial settlements in Ulua, Honduras.^[62]

A tri-partite first-order horizontal subdivision, into nobles, commoners, and slaves, is commonly given for societies across the provinces.^[63][64] Second-order horizontal subdivisions are also likely. For instance, commoners seem 'to have had an upper and a lower fringe,' though there is 'little information' regarding these.^[65] Additionally, however, a multi-partite first-order vertical subdivision, into various ch'ibalo'ob, 'extended families or patronymic groups,' is also given for such societies.^[66] Such groups, which cut across the nobility and commons, are thought to have 'contributed greatly to social solidarity,' as members 'of the same patronymic considered themselves to be of the same kin and treated one another as such.'^{[66][note 30]} Each such lineage or house is thought to have had its own patron deity, and its own codex recording genealogy, membership, and related matters.^[67]

The almeheno'ob, 'nobility,' 'constituted the ruling class, filled the more important political offices, and were not only the most valiant warriors and members of the military orders but also the wealthiest farmers and merchants.'^[63] As many, if not all, priests are thought to have belonged to the nobility, such that the nobility subsumed civil, military, economic, and religious leaders, this social class is thought to have 'control[led] most fields of human activity.'^[63][64] Noble families were known for paying 'much attention to their genealogy,' particularly if this could be traced to the nobility of Mayapan.^[63] Such families were further thought to have 'had a secret lore handed down from father to son, a sort of ritual in which many words had a concealed meaning not understood by any except the initiates[, the knowledge of which] was an important evidence of noble descent.'^[63]

The commoners, who 'made up the vast majority of the population,' were 'the free workers [...], including the artisans, fishermen, and small farmers and merchants generally.'^[65] The commons seem to have been further subdivided into upper, middle, and lower 'fringes,' the former consisting of wealthier commoners, the middle fringe of poorer commoners, and the lower fringe of serfs.^[65] Commoners, particularly wealthier ones, are thought to have enjoyed some, albeit limited, esteem and agency.^[65] For instance, at least in some provinces, they are thought to have held non-noble titles.^{[65][note 31]} Furthermore, at least in some provinces, they are thought to have enjoyed pre-eminence in official tables of precedence, and their relatives are thought to have been eligible for the civil service via a standardised exam.^[65]

The slaves 'most of [whom belonged] to the nobles or wealthy commoners,' were men, women, and children of the commons of settlements outside the province who had been captured in battle.^{[65][note 32]} Indeed, it is thought that one of the principal motivations for war 'was the desire to capture slaves.'^[65] Slaves were traded within and between provinces, as 'a large slave traffic existed.'^[66] Male slaves were typically employed for heavy manual labour in agriculture, fisheries, construction, and trade, while female slaves were typically employed in domestic service.^[66] They are thought to have been 'subjected to severity and harshness, and frequently sacrified at [...] religious festivals.'^[66] For instance, skeletal remains of several sacrificial victims recovered from the Sacred Cenote 'revealed some indications of malnutrition and definite evidence of abuse for a considerable period prior to death.'^[66]

The province's merchants are commonly thought to have been 'central participants' in the flourishing Mesoamerican maritime and overland commerce, providing both goods and shipping facilities to a trade network stretching from the Aztec Triple Alliance to northern Honduras (at least) or Panama (at most).^[68] The coastal capitals of the Ecab, Chikinchel, Cozumel, and Chetumal provinces are thought to have served as principal trans-shipment hubs for 'immense canoes' loaded with salt, textiles, honey, flint, and feathers for export, or metals, cacao, precious stones, obsidian, and pelts for import.^[69]

Not all Postclassic Maya states or polities in the Lowlands, or even within the Yucatán Peninsula, are deemed kuchkabalo'ob, 'provinces,' by scholars.^[70] Additionally, there is much disagreement regarding which polities did nor did not constitute a province, and regarding details of their constitution, extent, organisation, and related matters.^[70] The accompanying table lists all entities recognised as Postclassic Maya states or polities in the Lowlands, and, for each, indicates whether these have or have not been considered provinces.

Upon conquest, the newly established province of Yucatán 'not only allowed [the provincial nobility] to survive, but gave it definite and even liberal encouragement,' at least within encomienda, reducción, and misión settlements.^{[71][72][note 54]} The pre-Columbian nobility, and by extension, some or large parts of the institutions and offices they formerly held, were preserved in colonial times by confirmation of noble status, precedence for local civil and military offices, and grants of special privileges.^{[73][74][note 55]} For instance, the noble house of Xiu, of Mani, were routinely confirmed 'the rights, privileges, and exemptions hereditary in the [Xiu] family' by Spanish governors, and furthermore, kept their municipal offices (now as gobernadores or caciques), held special status as señores naturales, and often held special licences or commissions (e.g. to lead the native militia, or to bear arms).^[75] Similar concessions were afforded to the nobility of, and in some instances to non-noble office holders from, at least, Ah Canul, Ah Kin Chel, Ceh Pech, Chakan, Hocaba, Sotuta, and Tutul Xiu.^[76][77]

One such office, that of mayor or alcalde, was further authorised by the parliament of British Honduras in the mid-nineteenth century, upon an influx of Maya refugees from the Caste War, and remains, as of 2022, an office in various village councils across Toledo, Belize.^{[citation needed]}

Scholars have long been intrigued by the nature of these [provincial] polities, as their characteristics offer potential insights into the nature of the organisation of prehispanic Maya society. Despite this interest, however, fundamental questions about the provinces remain. How would we classify them in modern terminology? (As native states, primitive city-states, confederations of towns, or chiefdoms?) How many were there? (Estimates [as of 1984] vary between sixteen and twenty-four.) What was the extent of their domains? The last question has been, for practical reasons, the most pursued.

— Anthony P. Andrews in a 1984 literature review for the Journal of Anthropological Research.^[78]

The earliest non-Maya attempt to 'reconstruct the political geography of the preconquest Maya' is credited to Diego de Landa's 1566 Relación de las cosas de Yucatán.^[78] However, it is rather Ralph Roys's 1957 Political Geography of the Yucatan Maya which, by the late twentieth century, became the 'most widely accepted reconstruction of the political geography of contact-period Yucatán.'^{[79][80][note 56]} However, by the 1980s, the state of knowledge in the field was still not considered settled, with several as-yet-open questions being deemed 'substantial,' and existing knowledge presenting 'a large number of contradictions.'^[70]

Scholars have customarily conceived of kuchkabalo'ob, 'provinces,' as 'territorial units,' in keeping with sixteenth century Hispano-Maya thought.^[81][80] Recently, however, they have tended to eschew this rigid view (of territorially-defined provinces) in favour of more fluid ones (of provinces defined by their jurisdiction, for instance).^{[82][80][59][note 57]} Consequently, competing senses of the term kuchkabal are employed in recent literature, namely, the traditional kuchkabal-as-a-territory, and the innovative kuchkabal-as-a-jurisdiction, with the former emphasising a province's fixed extent or footprint, and the latter its dynamic networks or relations of authority.^{[81][note 58]}

18°56′48″N 89°24′52″W / 18.946795397365936°N 89.41450723863842°W / 18.946795397365936; -89.41450723863842