DID THE MAYA BUILD ARCHITECTURAL COSMOGRAMS?

Michael E. Smith

I criticize recent applications of the "cosmogram" concept to ancient Maya architecture and cities. Although cosmograms- graphic representations of aspects of the cosmos-are known from Late Postclassic and early colonial Aztec and Maya sources, there is no textual suggestion that buildings or cities were viewed as cosmograms. Numerous authors, how eve^ assert confidently that architectural cosmograms abounded in Classic Maya cities. I examine known cosmograms, describe recent studies of architectural cosmograms, and discuss problems that occur when highly speculative interpretations are phrased as confident empiricalfindings.

Hago una critica del modelo de "cosmograma" aplicado a la arquitectura y las ciudades rnayas. Hay cosmogramas (mode- 10s grdjicos de aspectos de la cosmovisidn) en las fuentes aztecas y rnayas de 10s periodos Postcldsico Tardio y colonial tem- prano, pero no hay evidencia en textos de que la gente antigua consideraron edificios o ciudades como cosmogramas. Muchos autores, sin embargo, ajirman con seguridad que habia cosmogramas arquitectdnicas en las ciudades mayas. Discuto cos- mogramas conocidas, describo estudios recientes de cosmogramas arquitectdnicas, y discuto 10s problemas que ocurren cuando se expresan interpretaciones muy especulativas como resultados empiricos fuertes.

n 2003 Ipublished a comment (Smith 2003) on concept of the "cosmogram.~'Althoughthis term has a report by Wendy Ashrnore and Jeremy Sabloff been used in Mesoamerican studies for some time I(2002) in which I criticize their interpretations now (Freidel and Schele 1988b; MCluzin of possible cosmological influences on Maya city 1987-1 988), I could find no explicit definition of it planning. At the time of writing (2002), I was until 2004.' In a glossary to a textbook, Hendon and unaware of an impending explosion of publica- Joyce offer the following definition: "Cosmogram. tions on Maya cosmology and city planning the fol- A representation of the entire universe through syrn- lowing year. In. comparison with the work of bolic shorthand or artistic metaphor" (2004:326). Ashmore and Sabloff, most of these studies are This definition seems to depart slightly from cus- more speculative and less grounded in empirical tomary usage within the field of Mesoamerican data. Yet, unlike the cautious and judicious lan- studies, where cosmogram typically refers to a guage of Ashmore and Sabloff's article and prior graphical representation of particular aspects of cos- publications by Ashmore (e.g., 1989,1991,1992), mology (rather than "the entire universe"). The these recent works are phrased in the language of dominant meaning of cosmogram prior to the fluny confident, well-supported research conclusions. of the "new cosmogram studies" in 2003 focused My purpose here is not to continue to criticize cos- on depictions of directional cosmology. Most or all mological interpretations of Maya city plans (my ancient Mesoamerican cultures had a four- views should be clear in the 2003 comment) but, directional symbolic-spatial cosmology. The cardi- rather, to point out the degree to which poorly sup- nal directions--each associated with particular ported speculations are being treated like estab- deities, colors, birds, trees, and other symbolic ele- lished empirical findings. I find this trend troubling ments-were important components of Mesoamer- and worthy of public discussion within the schol- ican mythology, cosmology, and ritual practice arly community. (Boone 2000; Brotherston 1976; Carrasco 1999; The studies I am concerned with focus on the Le6n-Portilla 1963; L6pez Austin 2001). Michael E. Smith .Department of Anthropology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-2402 ([email protected]) Latin American Antiquity, 16(2), 2005, pp. 217-224 Copyright0 2005 by the Society for American Archaeology 21 8 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY pol. 16, No. 2,20051

A number of Late Postclassic and early colo- rich exposition, their use of numerous examples in nial sources depict four-part cosmological scenes diverse media from many sites, coupled with an that have been called cosmograms. A clear discus- explicit and clear logic of argument, suggests to me sion of these can be found in Aveni's work in a sec- that this is a rigorous and convincing analysis (see tion labeled "The Union of Time and Space in also Freidel and Schele 1988a; Freidel et al. 1993; Mesoamerican Cosmology" (2001: 148-152). Four Schele and Freidel 1990). The "new cosmogram" of these cosmograms are illustrated in Figure 1.The studies, in contrast, are based on the untested first two images are complex cosmological scenes assumption that Maya directional cosmology was from the Maya Codex Madrid (Figure 1A) and the expressed in many or most buildings and cities. But central Mexican (Borgia Group) Codex FejCrvhy- what is the evidence for this? Mayer (Figure 1B) that incorporate multiple lev- The most common interpretations of Maya els of symbolism about the 260-day ritual calendar architectural cosmograms focus on the layouts of and the iconography of the cardinal directions. key architectural compounds and whole cities. In These scenes have been much analyzed by some cases individual buildings or compounds are Mesoamerican iconographers and others (e.g., interpreted as cosmograms, including the Mur- Aveni 2001:148-152; Boone 2000; Brotherston cielagos group at Dos Pilas (Demarest et al. 1976). The third image (Figure 1C) is a depiction 2003:142) and the east court of the Acropolis at of the Aztec 52-year calendar round in the form of Coph, which has been labeled "a giant cosmo- a circle and cross, with the cardinal directions gram" (Fash 1998:250). In other cases, the layouts labeled on the four sides. The fourth image, the face of entire cities are interpreted as cosmograms of the "Aztec calendar stone," is less often called a (although that phrase is not always used). For exam- cosmograrn, but inTownsend7s(1979:63-70) inter- ple, at Uxrnal, "the quadrilateral layout and approx- pretation this monument fuses imperial ideology, imate correspondence of the principal buildings to the calendar, and the four cardinal directions. His the cardinal points represents an effort to replicate description of the central message of the monument the well-documented quadripartite organization of is labeled "Time, Space, and the Ascendancy of the Maya cosmos" (Kowalski and Dunning Tenochtitlan" (1979:63). 1999:280); the same phrase is repeated by Kowal- Most scholars agree that the four images in Fig- ski (2003:215).2 ure 1 are pictorial symbols of Maya and Aztec Reputed Maya cosmograms are not limited to directional cosmology. Each one incorporates time buildings. At Tikal, for example, four reservoirs (in the form of one or more calendrical systems), "located approximately in the cardinal directions" space (the four directions), and a number of addi- formed "a water cosmogram of the site7'(Scarbor- tional symbolic and mythological elements. In ough 1998:154-155). Tate labels certain monu- short, these are cosmograms. Depictions of the ver- ments at Yaxchilan as "cosmogram stelae" tical elements of Aztec cosmology as shown in the (1992: 101, see also 119,131-132). Sacbes (raised Codex Vaticanus A (Codex Vaticanus 1979: Fig- causeways) are also called cosmograms: "Serving ures 1-7), analyzed by Quifiones Keber (1995), as axis mundi, sacbeob may have represented the might also be called cosmograms, as might other MI@ Way. . . . [Sacbeob] served as cosmograms, spatial-temporal images in Aztec codices and mon- or models, of the Maya universe" (Shaw 2001 :266). umental sculptures (Boone 2000; Townsend 1979; Even the bodies of Maya kings could be cosmo- Umberger 1998).A quartered circle figure common grams! "Thus not only the temple centers from at Teotihuacan and other Classic period sites may which they ruled but also the rulers' bodies them- also be a cosmogram (Coggins 1980). selves constituted living terrestrial cosmograms" Freidel and Schele (1988b) published the earli- (Gossen 1996:295). The word cosmogram is evi- est explicit application of the cosmogram concept dently so appealing today that some scholars have to Classic Maya society. They identify recurring decided to use it to replace the term cosmology: sets of iconographic elements in sculptures and ste- "The sun rising in the east, climbing to the zenith lae as representations of the ancient Maya cosmos. at noon, setting in the west, and passing through Although my lack of iconographic training pre- the nadir at night, united the tripartite vertical and vents me from following all of the details of their four-part horizontal divisions of the world into a COMMENTS 21 9

Figure 1. Conquest-era Mesoamerican cosmograms from Maya (A) and Aztec sources (B-D). A: Cosmological scene from the Codex Madrid (Anders 1967:75-76); the image is from Bricker and Vail 199:41, after Villacorta C. and Villacorta 1976:374, 376. B: Cosmological scene from the Codex FejkrvLry-Mayer, p. 1 (Burland 1971:l); drawing by John M. D. Pohl. C: Calendar wheel from Book of the Gods and Rites and the Ancient Calendar, by Fray Diego Duran (1971: plate 39, copyright 1971 by the University of Oklahoma Press. D: The so-called Aztec calendar stone; drawing by Emily Umberger. All images used with permission. holistic cosmogam" (Christie 2003:292). Was the bead in a Cop& ballcourt "provides a rnicrocos- cosmos itself viewed as a model of the cosmos, or mic model of the universe, with the bead repre- does the author just mean "cosmology," not "cos- senting the earth and the shell the cosmic ocean" mogam"? (Fox 1996:486). A newly discovered cache at the site of Cival Closely related concepts include the "axis has been interpreted as a cosmogram (Estrada-Belli mundi" and the world tree: '"The Castillo and the et al. 2003). John G. Fox (1996) makes similar cos- Cenote Ch'en Mu1 formed the axis rnundi (the pri- mological interpretations of caches, although he mordial mountain-cave) of Mayapfin, virtually does not use the term cosmogram. For example, a standing between cosmic planes at the beginning cache with nine obsidian blades demonstrates that of time" (Pugh 2003:943); also, "the five serpent ballcourt features symbolized the Maya underworld temples at Mayapan form a quincunx layout, which (Fox 1996:485), and a cache with one shell and one represent the quadripartite division of the Maya 220 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY pol. 16, No. 2,20051 universe" (Pugh 2001:255). And at Xunantunich, ogy must have been expressed in architectural set- the buildings and plazas are interpreted as a world tings. They identify .a case in which buildings or tree (Yaeger 2003: 132). features seem to have some kind of cardinal ori- By 2003, usage of the architectural cosmogram entation or arrangement and then assert confidently concept was rampant in the Mayaregion, and it had that the building/compound/city/reservoir/stelaein spread to Oaxaca (Joyce 2004; MCluzin question formed a cosmogram. Authors of most of 1987-1988), CentralAmerica (Graham 2003:29 1), these studies offer little or no iconographic or epi- and even the Andes (Swenson 2003:274). The graphic evidence for the presence of a cosmogram uncritical acceptance of this concept now appears or cosmological symbolism in the settings they in popularized accounts: "The ceremonial center analyze. They rarely step back to consider the larger was not just the political heart of the kingdom, it issue of whether Mesoamerican cosmograms were was also the sacred center of the polity and was ever expressed in architecture and urban ~lanning.~ designed as a cosmograrn, re-creating the Maya Contributors to a recent special section of the world order" (Foster 2002:229). CambridgeArchaeological Jouml considered the Tourtellot et al. take the notion of the cosmo- question, "Were cities built as images?'(Carl et al. gram to a higher spatial level by interpreting the 2000). The answer is that in some ancient urban distribution of settlements as a cosmogram: "We traditions, cities and buildings were clearly planned argue that the middle-level sites around La Milpa and constructed as cosmograms. Evidence is par- are organized in a concentric and cardinally aligned ticularly strong for ancient China, India, and Thai- cosmogram" (2003:95). I find the use of the pre- land (see Smith 2003:222). In other urban sent tense here significant. In most models, the cos- traditions, such as in Mesoamerica, there is little or mogram is asserted to be an ancient phenomenon no explicit evidence for this practice. The v that archaeologists try to identify today in the ruins archaeoastronomical research reviewed by Sprajc of ancient Maya cities. By phrasing their cosmo- (this volume) provides strong empirical support for gram interpretation in the present, not the past, the astronomical alignments of buildings. The ques- however, these authors unwittingly suggest the tion of whether buildings and cities were viewed most reasonable interpretation of the phenomenon: as models of the cosmos requires inferences con- Maya architectural cosmograms are modem phe- siderably more speculative in scope. I am unaware nomena, invented by scholars to satisfy their desire of any explicit statements in the ethnohistoric or to reconstruct ancient cosmology from fragmentary epigraphic sources for direct cosmological influ- evidence. I am flabbergasted at some of the quotes ences on Mesoamerican architecture or urbanism. above for presenting highly speculative interpreta- Given the importance of directional cosmology tions as if they were reasoned and unproblematic in ancient Mesoamerica, it seems likely that cos- conclusions based on empirical evidence. mology may have played a role in architectural I find this trend troubling from a methodologi- symbolism and perhaps even in the design and lay- cal viewpoint. These studies contrast with Ash- out of buildings and cities. But in the absence of more's methods. She starts with empirical the kind of clear and direct evidence available for distributions of buildings and architectural com- areas like China and India, scholars need to pounds within Maya cities, identifies spatial pat- approach this question cautiously with rigorous terns (e.g., north-south orientations, the placement and explicit methods. My major criticism of the of ballcourts), and then provides cosmological new cosmogram studies is that few of the authors interpretations for those patterns. My criticism of describe their hypothetical architectural cosmo- her work focuses on the subjective and irnpres- grams using the language of caution and hypothe- sionistic nature of her methods, which have proved sis; instead, they use the language of confident difficult to replicate or validate. $rajc (this vol- conclusions. Rather than simply assert that the ume) provides another example of a rigorous Maya had architectural cosmograms, however, approach to the topic of cosmology and city plan- scholars should undertake empirical research ning. designed to test this notion. Promising directions The new cosmogram studies, on the other hand, include the work of Ashrnore (1986, 1989, 1991, start with the assumption that directional cosmol- 1992, 2002; Ashmore and Sabloff 2002) and the COMMENTS 221 numerical data on building ali$nrnents assembled not understand the astronomical details, but the by Aveni and Hartung (1987), Sprajc (2000,2001), argument seems rigorous and plausible. Neverthe- and others. less, it seems to me that these data provide only ten- Discussions of ancient Mayan architectural cos- uous support for inferences that go beyond the mograrns appeared at a rate of approximately one notion that the buildings and streets of the Aztec publication per year between 1996 and 2002. In capital were aligned with astronomical phenomena. 2003, a plethora of such studies appeared (my count They certainly do not permit the inference that of nine works in 2003 does not include unpub- Tenochtitlan was viewed as a model of the cosmos. lished conference papers, Internet postings, and Yes, there was astronomical influence on the city's theses). In my view, these confidently phrased spec- layout, and yes, astronomical phenomena were ulations are harmful to the discipline of Mesoamer- related to various Aztec cosmological beliefs and ican studies. They set a bad example by suggesting landscape practices. But in the absence of textual to students and the public that poorly grounded confirmation, the conclusion that Tenochtitlan was speculation can pass for acceptable scholarship in a cosmogram requires a leap of faith that exceeds our field. cautious empirical inference. I second Sprajc's call for greater interaction V ~~ilogue:Reply to Sprajc between archaeologists and archaeoastronomers. Although the situation has improved since dis- The underlying motivation for both of my works- cussed over a decade ago by Kintigh (1992) and the critique of Ashmore and Sabloff (Smith 2003) Aveni (1992), there is still much that can be done. and the present opinion piece-is to encourage rig- I am certainly among those archaeologists guilty orous and explicit methods in the analysis of the of not paying sufficient attention to archaeoas- relationship between cosmology and urban plan- tronomy. The topic of the political uses of astro- v ning in ancient Mesoamerica. I do not deny the nomical data by elites, touched on in Sprajc's influence of cosmology on ancient architectural comment, is a promising avenue for joint research, practice, but this relationship needs to be demon- and there are many others. Archaeoastronomical v strated empirically, not simply assumed. Sprajc research alone, however, will not permit the iden- (this volume) suggests that archaeoastronomy pro- tification of architectural cosmograms in ancient vides just the sort of empirical demonstration I am Mesoamerica. calling for. v I agree with Sprajc, up to a point. I suspect that Acknowledgments. I thank Cynthia Heath-Smith, Robert Rosenswig, and Anthony F. Aveni for helpful suggestions on we may differ in our views of just how far earlier drafts of this article. The comments of three referees archaeoastronomical data allow us to go in recon- were very helpful in clarifying my arguvment, and I benefited structing patterns of ancient cosmology. Archaeoas- from the opportunity to read Ivan Sprajc's contribution tronomy does have the ability to identify before making final revisions. cosmological influences on ancient building and v settlement alignments. Sprajc provides a clear and References Cited succinct overview of the kind of rigorous research Anders, Ferdinand on this issue conducted by scholars such as Anthony 1967 Codex Tm-Cortesianus (Codex Madrid): Museo de Aveni, Stanislaw Iwaniszewski, Clive Ruggles, and Adrica Madrid. Codices selecti phototypice impressi, himself. I thank gprajc for his discussion of the Vol. 8. Akademische Dmck- u. Verlagsanstalt, Graz, Aus- tria. complexities of the topic of astronomical align- Ashmore, Wendy ments at Tenochtitlan. Although I was aware of his 1986 Peten Cosmology in the Maya Southeast: An Analy- 2001 monograph on central Mexican astronomical sis of Architecture and Settlement Patterns at Classic Quirigua In The Southeast Maya Periphery, edited by orientations, I did not consult it in preparing my Patricia A. Urban and Edward M. Schortman, pp. 3549. articles. This was a scholarly lapse on my part, and University of Texas Press, Austin. I apologize. v 1989 Construction and Cosmology: Politics and Ideology in Lowland Maya Settlement Patterns. In Word and Image in I tentatively accept Sprajc 's interpretation of the Maya Culture: Explor&.ons inlanguage, Writing,and Rep- astronomical significanceof the layout of Tenochti- resentation, edited by William F. Hanks and Don S. Rice, tlan. I use the word tentatively because frankly I do pp. 272-286. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. 222 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 16, No. 2,20051

1991 Site-Planning Principles and Concepts of Direction- 1980 The Shape of Time: Some Political Implications of a ality among the Ancient Maya. Latin American Antiquity Four-Part Figure. American Antiquity 45727-739. 2: 199-226. Demarest, Arthur A., Kim Morgan, Claudia Wolley, and Hec- 1992 Deciphering Maya Architectural Plans. In New The- tor L. Escobedo ories on the Ancient Maya, edited by Elin C. Danien and 2003 The Political Acquisition of Sacred Geography: The Robert J. Sharer, pp. 173-184. University MuseumMono- MurciClagos Complex at Dos Pilas. In Maya Palaces and graph, Vol. 77. University Museum, University of Penn- Elite Residences: An InterdisciplinaryApproach, edited by sylvania, Philadelphia Jessica Joyce Christie, pp. 120-153. University of Texas 2002 "Decisions and Dispositions": Socializing Spatial Press, Austin. Archaeology. American Anthropologist 104:1 172-1 183. Durh, Fray Diego Ashmore, Wendy, and Jeremy A. Sabloff 1971 Book of the Gods and Rites and The Ancient Calen- 2002 Spatial Orders in Maya Civic Plans. Latin American dar. Translated by Fernando Horcasitas and Doris Hey- Antiquity 13:201-215. den. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Aveni, Anthony F. Estrada-Belli, Francisco, Jeremy Bauer, Molly Morgan, and 1992 Nobody Asked, but I Couldn't Resist: A Response to Angel Chavez Keith Kintigh on Archaeoastronomy and Archaeology. 2003 Symbols of Early Maya Kingship at Cival, Petkn, Archaeoastronomy and Archaeology News 6: 1,4. Guatemala. Antiquity Online. Available at http://antiq- 2001 Skywatchers: A Revised and Updated Version of Sky- uity.ac.uk/ProjGall/es~da-bellit,accessed February 2004. watchers of Ancient Mexico. University of Texas Press, Fash, William L. Austin. 1998 Dynastic Architectural Programs: Intention and Aveni, Anthony F., and Horst Hartung Design in Classic Maya Buildings at Copan and Other 1987 Maya City Planning and the Calendar. American Sites. In Function and Meaning in Classic Maya Archi- Philosophical Society,Transactions, Vol. 76, Pt. 7. Philadel- tecture, edited by Stephen D. Houston, pp. 223-270. Dum- phia. barton Oaks, Washington, D.C. Benson, Elizabeth P. (editor) Foster, Lynn V. 1981 Mesoamerican Sites and World-Views. Dumbarton 2002 Handbook to Life in the Ancient Maya World. Facts Oaks, Washington, D.C. on File, Inc., New York. Boone, Elizabeth H. Fox, John Gerard 2000 Guides for Living: The Divinatory Codices of Mex- 1996 Playing with Power: Ballcourts and Political Ritual ico. In In Chalchihuitl in Quetzalli, Precious Greenstone in Southern Mesoamerica. Current Anthropology Precious Quetzal Feather: Mesoamerican Studies in 37:483-509. Honor ofDoris Heyden, edited by Eloise Quiiiones Keber, Freidel, David A., and Linda Schele pp. 69-82. Labyrinthos, Lancaster, California. 1988a Kings in the Late Preclassic Lowlands: The Instru- Bricker, Victoria R., and Gabrielle Vail (editors) ments and Places of Ritual Power. American Anthropolo- 1997 Papers on the Madrid Codex. Publications, Vol. 64. gist 90547-567. Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University, 1988b Symbol and Power: A History of the Lowland Maya New Orleans. Cosmogram. In Maya Iconography, edited by Elizabeth Brotherston, Gordon P. Benson and Gillette Griffin, pp. 44-93. Princeton Uni- 1976 Mesoamerican Description of Space, LI: Signs for versity Press, Princeton. Direction. Ibero-Amerikanisches Archiv 2:39-62. Freidel, David A., Linda Schele, and Joy Parker Burland, C. A. 1993 Maya Cosmos: Three Thousand Years on the 1971 Codex Fej6rva'ry-Mayer: 12014 M. City of Liverpool Shaman's Path. William Morrow, New York. Museums. Akadem. Dmck- u. Verlagsanst., Graz, Austria. Gossen, Gary H. Carl, Peter, Barry Kemp, Ray Laurence, Robin Coningham, 1996 The Religions of Mesoamerica In The Legacy of Charles Higham, and George L. Cowgill Mesoamerica: History and Culture of a Native American 2000 Viewpoint: Were Cities Built as Images? Cambridge Civilization,edited by Robert M. Carmack, Janine Gasco, Archaeological Journal 10:327-365. and Gary H. Gossen, pp. 290-320. Prentice-Hall, Engle- Carlson, John B. wood Cliffs, N.J. 1981 A Geomantic Model for the Interpretation of Graham, Mark Miller Mesoamerican Sites: An Essay in Cross-Cultural Com- 2003 Creation Imagery in the Goldwork of Costa Rica, parison In Mesoamerican Sites and World-Views,edited Panama, and Colombia In Gold and Power in Ancient by Elizabeth P. Benson, pp. 143-216. Dumbarton Oaks, Costa Rica, Panama, and Colombia, edited by Jeffrey Washington, D.C. Quilter and John W. Hoopes, pp. 279-299. Dumbarton Carrasco, David Oaks, Washington, D.C. 1990 Religions of Mesoamerica: Cosmovision and Cere- Hendon, Julia A., and Rosemary Joyce monial Centers. Harper and Row, New York. 2004 Glossary. In MesoamericanArchaeology: Theory and 1999 City of Sacnjke: The Aztec Empire and the Role of Practice, edited by Julia A. Hendon and Rosemary Joyce, Violence in Civilization. Beacon Press, Boston. pp. 323-33 1. Blackwell, Oxford. Christie, Jessica Joyce Joyce, Arthur A. 2003 The Tripartite Layout of Rooms in Maya Elite Resi- 2004 Sacred Space and Social Relations in the Valley of dences. In Maya Palaces and Elite Residences: An Inter- Oaxaca In Mesoamerican Archaeology: Theory and Prc~c- disciplinary Approach, edited by Jessica Joyce Christie, tice, edited by Julia A. Hendon and Rosemary Joyce, pp. pp. 291-3 14. University of Texas Press, Austin. 192-216. Blackwell, Oxford. Codex Vaticanus Kintigh, Keith W. 1979 Codex Vaticanus3738. Codices Selecti.Akadernische 1992 I Wasn't Going to Say Anything, but Since You Asked: Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt, Graz, Austria. Archaeoastronomy and Archaeology. Archueoastronomy Coggins, Clemency Chase and Archaeology News 5:1,4. COMMENTS 223

Kowalski, Jeff Karl 2003 Cities of Violence: Sacrifice, Power and Urbanization 2003 Evidence for the Functions and Meanings of Some in the Andes. Journal of Social Archaeology 3:256-296. Northern Maya Palaces. In Maya Palaces and Elite Resi- Tate, Carolyn E. dences: An Interdisciplinary Approach, edited by Jessica 1992 Yarchilan: The Design of a Maya Ceremonial City. Joyce Christie, pp. 204-252. University of Texas Press, University of Texas Press, Austin. Austin. Tourtellot, Gair, Gloria Everson, and Norman Hamrnond Kowalski, Jeff Karl, and Nicholas P. Dunning 2003 Suburban Organization: Minor Centers at La Milpa, 1999 The Architecture of Uxmal: The Symbolics of Belize. In Perspectives on Ancient Maya Rural Complex- Statemaking at a Puuc Maya Regional Capital. In ity, edited by Gyles Iannone and Samuel V. Comell, pp. Mesoamerican Architecture as a Cultural Symbol, edited 95-107. Monograph, Vol. 49. Cotsen Institute of Archae- by Jeff Karl Kowalski, pp. 274-297. Oxford University ology, University of California, Los Angeles. Press, New York. Townsend, Richard F. LeQ-Portilla, Miguel 1979 State and Cosmos in the Art of Tenochtitlan.Studies 1963 Aztec Thought and Culture: A Study of the Ancient in Pre-Columbian Art and Archaeology, Vol. 20. Dumb- Ndhuatl Mind. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. arton Oaks, Washington, D.C. L6pez Austin, Alfredo Umberger, Emily 2001 Cosmovision. In The Oxford Encyclopedia of 1998 New Blood from an Old Stone. Estudios de Cultura Mesoamerican Cultures: The Civilizations of Mexico and N&uatl28:241-256. Central America, Vol. 1, edited by David Carrasco, pp. Villacorta C., J. Antonio, and Carlos A. Villacorta (editors) 268-274. Oxford University Press, New York. 1976 Cddices mayas. 2nd ed. Tipografia Nacional, MBluzin, Sylvia Guatemala City. 1987-1988 Ancient Zapotec Calendrical Cosmogram. Wheatley, Paul Archaeoastronomy 10: 139-147. 1971 The Pivot of the Four Quarters:A Preliminary Enquiry hgh, Timothy W. into the Origins and the Character of the Ancient Chinese 2001 Flood Reptiles, Serpent Temples, and the Quadripar- City. Aldine, Chicago. tite Universe: The Imago Mundi of Late Postclassic Maya- Wiesheu, Walburga pan. Ancient Mesoamerica 12:247-258. 1997 China's FitCities: The Walled Site of Wangcheng- 2003 A Cluster and Spatial Analysis of Ceremonial Archi- gang in the Central Plain Region of North China In Erner- tecture at Late Postclassic Mayapan. Journal of Archaeo- gence and Change in Early Urban Societies, edited by logical Science 30:941-953. Linda Manzanilla, pp. 87-105. Plenum, New York. Quiiiones Keber, Eloise 1999 Urban Genesis in China: A Brief Reevaluation of 1995 Painting the Nahua Universe: Cosmology and Cos- Wheatley's City-=-Temple Thesis. Wall andMarket: Chi- mogony in the Codex Vaticanus A Part 1. Introduction and nese Urban History News. Available at Translation. Latin American Indian Literatures Journal www.albany.edu/mumford/Center-Act~wd-market.html, 11:183-204. accessed January 2004. Rauchhaus, Irmgard Yaeger, Jason 1994 Cosmobiology. In The Astrology Encyclopedia, edited 2003 Untangling the Ties that Bind: The City, the Coun- by James R. Lewis, pp. 147-155. Visible Ink, Detroit. tryside, and the Nature of Maya Urbanism at Xunantunich, Rykwert, Joseph Belize. In The Social ConstructionofAncient Cities,edited 1976 The Idea of a Town: The Anthropology of Urban Fonn by Monica L. Smith, pp. 121-155. Smithsonian Institu- in Rome, Italy, and the Ancient World. Princeton Univer- tion Press, Washington, D.C. sity Press, Princeton. Scarborough, Vernon L. 1998 Ecology and Ritual: Water Management and the Notes Maya. Latin American Antiquity 9: 135-159. Schele, Linda, and David Freidel 1. Before I found the definition in Hendon and Joyce's 1990 A Forest of Kings: The Untold Story of the Ancient (2004) glossary, all I could find was the definition of cosmo- Maya. William Morrow, New York. gram in astrology: "Cosmograrn is the cosmobiological term Shaw, Justine M. for horoscope. The foundation for casting the cosmogram is 2001 Maya Sacbeob: Form and Function. Ancient the zodiac, through which the Sun moves in one year" Mesoamerica 12:261-272. Smith, Michael E. (Rauchhaus 1994:147). 2003 Can We Read Cosmology in Ancient Maya City 2. Kowalski and Dunning (1999) do not use the term cos- Plans? Comment on Ashmore and Sabloff. Latin Ameri- mogram, and two reviewers of this manuscript rightly pointed can Antiquity 14:221-228. out that their argument is considerably more rigorous and 2004 Fonn and Meaning in the Earliest Cities: A New convincing than many of the other studies I consider in this Approach to Ancient Urban Planning. MS on file, Depart- article. Because this is a brief opinion piece, I do not have ment of Anthropology, University at Albany, State Uni- space to provide a full discussion of the views of each of the versity of New York, Albany. authors I criticize. For a more extensive treatment of the topic Sprajc, Ivan of ancient city planning, see Smith 2004. 2000 As&onomicalAlignments at Teotihuacan. Latin Amer- 3. There-is a tradition of cosmological interpretations of ican Antiquity 1 1:403-415. 2001 Orientaciones astrondmicas en la arquitectura pre- Mesoamerican urban layouts (see Benson 1981), but the lack hispbnica del centro de Mkxico. Colecci6n Cientffica,Vol. of concrete evidence to support those interpretations is strik- 427. Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Mex- ing. To take just one example, Carrasco (1999:4346) ico City. includes a section titled "Architectural Parallelism of Swenson, Edward R. Macrocosmos and Microcosmos" in his book on 224 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 16, No. 2, 20051

Tenochtitlan, but it includes no evidcnce for such parallelisni doubts have recently been cast on Wheatley's analysis of apart from his own interpretations. hImy accounts (e.g.. ancient China, his main case study of the cosmological Carlson 198 1) rely on the universali>tic models of scholars importance of cities (Wiesheu 1997. 1999). like Rykwert (1976) and Wheatley (197 1) who asszrt that a11 ancient cultures had sacred. cosmologically grounded cities and towns. Apart from the anthropological naiveti and empir- Received Febt-LLU?16, 2004: Accepted Februa? 9, ,7005; ical inadequacy of such universalistic notions, empirical Revised :March 3, 2005.