CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE

VISUAL D'~GES IN " PAST INTO PRESENT

A thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Antru-opology

by Linda Joyce Edlund ..--"""',.

i I I I l I June, 1977

' '---·------~·----~------·····-·--·-··~-~··---·-···-·-··-·---" .----" ·~-·------1 ! i I I

The Thesis of Linda Joyce Edlund is approved:

Lynn.- ~J)• Nason

Robert S. Ravicz (nate) · "

i I I t California State University, Northridge I

!l ! 1 1 l l l ! ! ! L------~~--·-·------·------~----"'--"·----~1

ii r-·-~=---..... --~------·------·---·--•m.--1 ~

ACKNOWLE.IXH1ENT S

I I am grateful for the helpful suggestions and I1 encouragement of Carol Mackey and Lynn Mason, and of my i committee chairman, Robert Ravicz. I also wish to thank I my parents for their patience and support. I li

I I I j i

/ ; I ! l ---~·----1 iii --·-----·~·=-·------~------·---·-·---~··--~--·"~) j 1r t

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgments • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • iii

Abstract • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • v Introduction • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 Preclassic Olmec • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 18 Classic Hay a .. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 43 Postclassic Aztecs • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 58 Present-Day Mesoamerica • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 73

Conclusion , • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 100 Bibliography • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 103

i I i I t l

iv ABSTRACT

VISUAL IMAGES IN MESOAMERICA

PAST INTO PRESENT • ! by I Linda Joyce Edlund :t-'JB.ster of Arts in Anthropology I I The primary concern of this thesis is to examine I the ancient art of Mesoamerica and to compare its form to I the folk art of Mesoamerica today. In presenting the i "art of Me:Y...ico," art historians typically start with the I fantastic ancient sculptured pieces and then proceed to I the paintings of the Mexican Revolution that hang in I museums today. A premise of this paper is that ancient i cultures produced great sculptures and monumental architecture, but not for the sake of art. In ancient Mesoamerica, art had a religious function. As an analogy to ancient times, a similar kind of art can be found in present-day Mesoamerica in the Indian. populations. It too relates to religious beliefs. . I

L__ ,.,..,....-~ ...... ,.~,k£:-" • ~-.,...... --·------~-~------..---~- .. ---~~...._, ...... _T_.,~,...... , .....J

v r------~--" j In this paper, I am suggesting that the essential characteristic of the art of the past is its association with the sacred and that this characteristic continues !

The nature of art in the past will be seen by

Olmec, Classic Maya, and Postclassic Aztecs. Aspects focused upon include a discussion of who the artists may I have been, what the art represents, and the treatment it received. This then will be compared to what I believe may be called "art" in present-day Mesoamerica. I! I I I

I i I I I ! I

I I l ! I I I l ! l

'----~-,-·--· ------·-'-·-~-·---~· --~------,··-.J Vi --~-----

INTRODUCTION

In presenting the "art o:f Mexico," art historians typically start with the :fantastic ancient sculptured pieces and then proceed to the paintings o:f the Mexican Revolution that hang in museums and galleries today. I

believe that by examining the ancient art o:f Mesoamerica, I the same kind o:f art produced in the past can be found in l . j the present. A premise of this paper is that ancient 1 cultures produced great sculptures and monumental I1 architecture, but not :for the sake o:f art. In the past, I as well as the present, art reflects the culture in which I it is found. Moreover, art is a phenomenon o:f culture i I and functions in it (Dark 1967). Generally, it is I accepted that all cultures produce some :form of art, 1 l although many cultures may not have a concept o:f it l I (Mills 1971: 97). While art is not exc1usi vely stimulated by religious·

,:,1 beliefs, "it cannot be denied that the religious element

1 1 has had a strong influence on all' artistic creation" I 1 (¥ruensterberger 1971: 3). Firth ( 1966: 31) says, "The I importance o~ cannot be denied in supplying both ' i a stimulus to artistic creation and a rich body o~ ! content, both subject matter and symbolism."

I,_..~.~-..,--- ...... -..-~-·. ....u------.-...... ------.-----.. ~·'~--_,_,;;.

1 2

In ancient Mesoamerica, art had a religious function. '; In Bernal's (1969a: 83) words: "It was an art of the sacred, done in honor of the ." As an analogy to ancient times, a similar kind of art can be found in contemporary Mesoamerica in the Indian populations and it too relates to religious beliefs. The purposes of this paper are: first, to examine which cultural institutions are reflected in ancient art and which in

art of the past is its association with the sacred and that this characteristic continues to infuse the art of l the present. ! The nature of art in the past can be found in the I l cultures of the Olmec, the Maya, and the Aztecs. By I looking at a sample of the plastic arts of these three I cultures, certain aspects can be seen or at least speculated upon - for example, what the art represents, the treatment it received, and who the artists were. This: ; ; then will be compared to what I suggest may be called the i

1 "art" of the present. I This is not to say that the art will be the same or I identical in the past and present, as there are changes I I from period to period and each culture is distinct. I L_ ____ , ___ c•-·--~·-•-••"""''' 3

r - , -~·------~·· .. ·----~-=~~~~--~~~~ l There is also a difference in the way of life of the I peoples. In addition to this, ancient art was dictated by a polity; today, it is not. However, there is a continuity linking the past to the present despite colonization and acculturation, and this is expressed in the art. A clear-cut definition of art that is universally acceptable is difficult to formulate. \Vhile attempting to find a definition, Gerbrandes (1957: 3) commented: For what is art? At first sight one is inclined to suppose that the meaning of this concept must be clear to every one without further ado. Yet when it is attempted to give a concrete answer to the question what art really is, considerable difficulties arise. And indeed, once formulated, it soon proves that the answer is by no means satisfactory to everyone. A creation does not have to be beautiful to be defined as art. A work of art may be admired or appreciated in a museum where it is out of context, but i 1 it can only be understood "in the light of its cultural l origins" (Sieber 1971 : 127). As Gerbrandes ( 1957: 5)

1 suggests: -i No doubt art and beauty are intimately linked, but it is not permissible to conclude from this that art may be equated I with beauty or vice versa. This equation, I though, still so prevalent, contributes greatly to the general confusion when ! evaluating the concept of art. I Perishable or ephermeral works must also be included; I in this definition of art, as they "often reveal the \'/hole l LI ______4

more permanent works of art, they too reflect the beliefs

of the culture of which they are a part. i ! ! i Before proceeding to discuss the components of art l in Mesoamerica, past and present, it is necessary to note two points. First, what is being called "a:z:'t" may not be considered as such by the culture that produced it. As has already been mentioned, objects were not created for the sake of art. Second, because categories such as sculpture and painting have been set up by art historians in western European civilization, there is a tendency to reduce objects to these terms "as if these were

automatically the categories which all artists must use 11 (Forge 1973: xv). I have used these categories where I can apply them to the art of the past; however, in showing the continuity with the present, I have used categories which I consider to be their replacements. What may be defined as art in Mesoamerica is made up of several components, or traits, which relate to one another, and sometimes overlap. These can be found in the art of the Olmec, the Maya, and the Aztecs, with parallels in present-day art. These components may be listed as follows: 1. anonymity of artists 2. theme relating to religious beliefs I I 3. ceremonial function I t__ ,______~----·------J 5

4. treatment 5. sacred context The first trait - anonymity of artists - characterizes both ancient and modern art. Although the position of the artist differs in the past and present, I the production of art remains anonymous. In fact Bernal I (1969a: 75) remarks, "We do not know the name of a single i artist in any Mesoamerican culture." It has been suggested that the Olmec artists were I specialists, who_may have travelled from site to site l (Heizer 1971, Kubler 1971) or who were possibly I professional workers maintained by the community (Kubler I 1962). Whatever their position, the specific identities I of these artists are not known. Moreover, their art is I no·l; personal, but relates to the whole society. I It is generally agreed that I~ya artists were I highly-trained and held a special position in society, 1 probably ranking second (skilled sculptors) and third

1.1

! (specialized artisans) in social class (Weaver 1972: 165). ! i l I Individua~ artists were not important in themselves, but 'i served "as the implement through which the gods and chieftains were honored" (Benson 1967: 93). The art of the Aztecs was attributed to a group of I individuals, even when produced by one man, and no single I name of an artist is known (Bernal 1969a). There were L~::_:_r_::ta_ _::_:rke~ directly for the em::_~~ s______j 6

~~s~hold ·~~higie others belo~ to ~ulla~~ost :;;;k;~--·~""""' at home where they could also watch over their crops (Thompson 1940) • Today, the work of the artists remains anonymous, however, unlike the past, art is not dictated by the state, and it is rare to find full-time craft specialists. Nost peoples of Mesoamerican villages today are devoted to the cultivation of crops such as corn and beans, and there is little need for artists to constitute a specialized occupational class. Full-time craft specialists can be found in the villages of Tzintzuntzan and Tonola, where pottery-making comprises over 50% of the occupations. The Otomi Indians of San Pablito,

I 1 Pueblo, supplement their economy by the production of I bark paper, which is manufactured exclusively by women as part-time artisans. Finally, Proskouriakoff (1971: 137) suggests that

"the work o~ artists reveals more clearly than any other I human activity the character of their training, the traditions they follow, and in some degree their status and function in society." This appears to be true of I both ancient and modern artists, both of \vhich have I remained anonymous. ~.~ The second trait - theme relating to religious 1 beliefs - refers to the strong influence religion had and ! I continues to have on subject matter and symbolism. i i ~----...... _.., __ ._,_~--·"· ... ~'·------""--"'--..------_,. .. .,,.,...... ,.,_..... , •.._.,..,_ .._"""".~----,....._ ...--.-.-J 7

~--~~ad range of themes are de;:~:~~ t:-<~"#·: I were-jaguar motif is represented throughout Olmec art on l a wide variety of objects. The were-jaguar is represented l by a combination of human and jaguar features, a concept derived from the mythical union of a human and a jaguar, which presumably resulted in offspring combining features of both. There are several sculptures in Olmec art that may depict the mythical basis of this theme, although due I to poor preservation, their true sigirlficance remains I uncertain.. It appears that the art of the Maya was even more I influenced by religious beliefs than was that of the I Olmec. Spinden ( 1957: 15) states that Maya art 11might I almost be termed the concrete expression of the religion." I Huma.ll. and animal forms were depicted in a natural way, l and were combined with grotesque symbolism. These

I grotesque forms were not mere elaboration, but functioned I to express "aspects of reality that could not be 'l-~, pictorially presented" (Proskouriakoff 1965: 471). I Sculpture, painting, and architecture were embellished 1 by religious symbolism, and as Spinden (1957: 15) says, j "no minor object was too humble to receive decorations I with religious significance." I The lives of the Aztecs were so dominated by li religion, that in order to understand their art, it is I necessary to kno>< something about their religious beliefs. i L----~-----·------______j 8

r----~--- -·~·~--·------~·--:---~-~-1 I Reflected in their art, which expresses the concept of a i religion wherein life is sustained only by death, is the that their very existence depended on the gods. I In fact, nearly every major deity in the Aztec was represented by a stone idol (Nicholson 1971), some !1 of which portray a masked interpretation of a and his

1 1 2 1 human ::P::s:::a::::, (::: ::t :: ~:day is stimulated by

1 religious beliefs. For example, the symbolic objects f i ! arranged and placed on altars, and the images of saints I and their decorations are influenced by religious I concepts, which vary in degrees from village to village. l The third trait - ceremonial function - can be i found throughout ancient and modern art, and in some I instances it is interrelated with the fourth and fifth traits - ritual treatment and sacred context. This characteristic can be 'seen in creations tha-t appear to have had, or have, a ceremonial purpose. For example, it has been suggested that the sites

of San Lorenzo and were gigantic sc~lptural projects which had a ceremonial function. San Lorenzo is composed of ravines and ridges which Coe at first I thought were caused by erosion. They were subsequently l found to be artificial and man·~made, leading Coe (1968: l 44) to call the site "an artifact on a gigantic scale." IJ The largest structure at La Venta, a cone-shaped mound of . ·-~"-··-~· ---~------·~-·-···-·-~-·-·------·-~~-J 9

~-~-----~---~~-~~..-.. ~..._,r:_.~...... ,.~· ...... ,.-~-""--""' I clay and earth measuring about 100 feet in height, is ! made up of alternating ridges and valleys, which are so l evenly placed it appears that they were deliberately made.! l Heizer and Drucker (1968: 54) hypothesize that the cone was made in imitation of a Tuxtla cinder cone, and served as 11 a surrogate for a familiar and ritually important form.u Stone carvings were made in both monumental as well as miniatvxe sculpture. Suggestions as to who is

portrayed by the colossal heads vary, however, it is generally believed that they represent actual men, possibly leaders or priests. The were-jaguar motif is depicted on the so-called altars, however, the precise function of these monuments is not known for certain. The jaguar is represented on the stelae, sometimes encircling human figures in his open mouth. The ceremonial function of these pieces, including jade objects, can be seen in the way in which they were treated and the context in \'Fhich they \'/ere placed. .At I both the San Lorenzo and La Venta sites, stone monuments I were broken or defaced and then ceremonially buried. This \vill be examined further in the discussions of rituallI

trea~ment and sacred context. Ceremonial function can also be seen in the cav-es I l of and Oxtotitlan, where paintings have been

I 1.: j identified as Olmec (Gay 1967; Grove 1969). It has been . L __... __ ~-""""-"--·--=------"" . 10

----~--~~----...---....,.,.__ _ _,__UI",;_ _..J!":~~""""~-""~ suggested that Juxtlahuaca cave, which extends 4,000 feet l

underground, had a religious function, probably serving ,1

1 as ceremonial chambers (Grove 1972). Oxtotitlan, where 1

the paintings appear near the mouth of the cave, possibly J ! "functioned as a shrine to water and fertility" (Grove l 1970: 31). Among the paintings at both caves are I representations of the jaguar, one of which at Oxtotitlan l l possibly depicts a sexual union between a jaguar and a human. ! With the Maya, ceremonial function can be understood: I in terms of the ceremonial center, where "immense sums of ·~ ~ energy and resources were expended for religious structures and accouterments" (Culbert 1973: 64). Tikal typified the height of development of a I Classic Maya city, and served as an urban center, also I acting as a ceremonial center and supporting a permanent I resident population5 Tikal consists of temple-crowned j pyramids, palaces, shrines, plazas and platf'orms, market I 1 places, residences, causeways, ballcourts, reservoirs, I I and temescales for ritual sweat-bathing. Concentrated I 1 about ceremonial precincts are sculptured and plain stelae!

I and altars. In addition to this, there are buildings I I ·I oriented to the cardinal directions. The twin-pyramid I I complexes, of which seven are known at Tikal, are examples! I of this, and were associated with stone monuments. It is j I possible that these complexes served a religious or I L-----~· ·------~----,..---.. ~------~------·-----·----·-·..1 11

--~--=-l r::r~~~ function (Hunter 1974). ! I I With the Aztecs, stone and wooden idols can be seen as examples of art that had a ceremonial function. By the time of the Conquest, idols-were used extensively throughout central Mexico. The function of idols is related to the way in which they were treated and the context in which they were placed. This will be discussed' further under the fourth and fifth traits.

Ceremonial function can be seen in present-day art \ I I in altars and images of saints. The altars, which vary i in form from village to village, serve as a place of l . Like Aztec idols, the images of saints represent: sacred beings, are given offerir~s, and are situated in I sacred places. Through them, thanks are given to the saints to maintain prosperity and protection. This too will be further discussed as ritual treatment and sacred I context. The fourth trait - ritual treatment - refers to the "special treatment" given a work of art in relation to its ceremonial purposee For example, it may receive offerings, or act as offerings. Or, something may be done\

to it to change (i.e., destroy) its shape for ceremonial !l I purposes. This trait may also be closely related to the t fifth trait - sacred context. 12

e- --~-- - -- ~--=------.,.,...--:-~,.....,...-...... ,.,-.~"''''''"'"':l:>l"'') bury them. Hundreds, if not thousands, of pieces still l; remain at the sites of San Lorenzo and La Venta (Clewlow 1974). At San Lorenzo, heads were knocked off figures; altars and stelae were mutilated; and colossal heads were defaced. Several of the pieces were accompanied by offerings of serpentine axes and blanks for axes, and concentrations of sherds. In addition to this, the Olmec buried g5.gantic mosaic jaguar masks of serpentine blocks as offerings, never intending for them to be displayed. I J Ritual treatment among the Maya can be seen in the l f offerings that stelae and altars received. At Tikal, both; i plaj.n and carved stelae were erected with cached offerings l placed about and under their bases. Offerings include l, j I exotically-chipped flints and obsidians, shells and shell j I beads, jade beads, pottery vessels, human teeth, and bone I pieces. When a stela was erected, an offering was usually placed with it. Also, offerings apparently accompanied

found solely with altars (W. Coe 1965). \fuere several

Il I I I the stelae, so that pottery vessels accompanied one I and flints and obsidians accompanied another. i 1 I The Aztecs also gave offerings to their stone idols l!: ~-~~-.---·~·------.. ---·--~--~·--J 13

,----=~~-----~~--~-~-~~~--~~~--, I and altarst in the form of human hearts and copal. The l I extent of these sacrificial offerings can be seen in Diaz j I i del Castillo's (1956: 219-220) description of what Cortes observed when he was allowed to see Montezuma's idols: There were some braziers with incense which they call co pal f and in them they are burning the hearts of three Indians whom they had sacrificed that day, and they had made the I with smoke and copal. All the walls of the oratory were so splashed and encrusted I with blood that they were/black, the floor I was the same and the whole place stank vilely. I I Ritual treatment can also be seen in wooden idols, I many of which were used in Late Po stclassj_c times by the i I Aztecs. T\vo figures, a male and a female, found near I what had been the eastern shore of the Basin of Nexico, may have been decorated to represent different gods at different times, depending on the ritual occasion (Nicholson and Berger 1968). It has been suggested that paper objects were attached by a thread of maguey fiber through perforations at the armpits (Ibid.). As was mentioned, ritual treatment in present-day Mesoamerica can be seen in images of saints and altars. j Like their predecessors, the images are given offerings j and are adorned with some kind of dress" In Zinacantan, l offerings consist of flowers and candles. Dress consists I of silk brocade robes, which must be washed and incensed Ii regularlyt and ribbons, mirrors, and necklaces of ancient l 1 and modern coins. and candles are given as j offerings in Chan Kom. In addition to this, the sa~t2 of 1

•. .,.-.. ..,.,.....,...... ,_--~~~~--.. --~--~ -----~---·-~-~ ----..-:::,_._._.....,_._ . ..,.,...,...,._. __~ .... ~--~ ...... ~~ . r-"~-~·-·~-~~-=~-·----~--->--·----~=----~-----~"·.··----=·-··,·-·········c.--, I a new settlement is received with a novenario and a ' l l,iaraJl~, which are prayers and dance. ~ Ritual treatment can also be seen in the Tarahumara Easter ceremonies, where a wooden figure of Judas, a fertility figure, is carved one week prior to Easter week (Lopez 1974). The figure is dressed in \llestern-style , clothes, which will be ripped off when he is attacked in ! I the ceremonies .. Almost every house in Mesoamerica had its own altar.· Exmuples of offerings to these altars include pine boughs, ·

ear·s of corn, bird beaks, flo·wers, and feathers.

The fifth trait - sacred context - is related to ceremonial function and ritual treatment, and refers to the position or placement given a creation. Subsequent to defacing and destroying their monumental sculptures, the Olmec buried them. At San Lorenzo, burial after mutilation was in an alignment that

suggested vJhere additional stone monuments \'lould be found.; In addition to this, Coe (1968) that they were not destroyed where they were finally placed, as there

"VJ"ere no chips or hunks o:f sculptures lying around.. As was mentioned, they were also accompanied by, or acted as, offeringso Sacred context among the Haya can be seen in the upright free-standing stelae and their associated altars. l 1 Stela(~ were not set haphazardly, but were given a l tJ<~_,.,.,.,..,.-,R.<"<:>•"'"'~--..-~...._....,,,.,.""""~·--"'~~---""-'-"""..,_._~_.,.,....,.-,_,..,.,...... -,.....,~___,.,-'~>..._W~·.-GU>..,.-.,...•-~•--"'""""',•-=''"'-"'"""""''"'-"'""~ ....,.-,..,...... ,....._. •. ..-.-,.,_,.~.,.,-~-·,_.. ~_,.~,-·~·••~••"~" 15

11'"'''""""-'""'.t """"'"'""'"'_...,~'"'_...._....,._~"'-"""'"'~o_.._.._.,._.,~~,_-...... ,.._-""'-.,...._. ---.~,.~--'"""'"'""-""""'~-~-"""~"·"~-F·,,~..,..,.,._,._~-.,~><'<'~;;,.,~~·>'•''"'"'~'-"·"·" I prominant position in ceremonial centers. They \V'ere 1 I placed in front of important buildings in courts and 1 plazas, and each was usually accompanied by an altar. l 1 When a stela was carved, its altar was also carved. Also,

! ! like the Olmec, the Maya placed offerings with their stone' I i monuments. ! The Aztecs placed their idols in temples and sacred I places, where were performed before them. Again, they are associated w.ith offerings. Cult objects such as sacrificial stones and stone vessels for the deposit of human hearts \'/ere also placed in religious structures. In Mesoamerica today, sacred context can be found in the same type of position as it was in ancient times. Offerings are also associatede For example, in Zinacantan, mountains, caves, and waterholes are considered ·to be sacred places. Crosses are laid at the foot and summit of sacred mountains, and serve as

11 doorwaysn to ancestral gods. Placed in caves and beside ' waterholes, crosses serve as a means of reaching the Earth Ov.mer, who lives beneath the surface of' the earth. ·where there is to be ritual activity, there must be three crosses togethero In fact, these crosses can be j 1' interpreted as providing the sacred context - Where no I crosses exist, "the three-cross combination can be created; I 1 ri-tually by simply placing three pine boughs in the i ground 11 (Vogt 1970: 13)~ i ! } ! l L-·········-·---~-----·-~~.---~--~---~-- .. ··--~---· ~---~-"~-·--·-·~=~-~-~------~-----·---·~-~~-~-,··-····-·--··-··-·······-·····, ...... ) 16

r--·~---~--~·~=-~~~~----~---~--~-~------~··-·=-··~=~·•M•~~·-·~--~-~~-''"'•W<"·<'•·,,·, I In the following chapters, the art of the Preclassic I Olmec, Classic Maya, and Postclassic Aztecs will be

ex'"'"· ...... edA I.I ..... n~J· .... . The characteristics of the arJG of these I cultures vlill then be compared to the art of present-day I ! lVIesoamerica., As was mentioned above, I am suggesting, I and \'fill try to show that, the essential characteristic I of the art of the past is its association ·wi 'th the sacred

and that this characteristic also describes the art of the presente The art ·of the Olmec will be discussed first, inclttcUng ·\'lho the artists may have been, the were-jaguar motif and what it possibly represents, and a description of several categories of their art. It will be seen that this art was closely influenced by :celigious beliefs,

which. also influenced the treatment given to much of thei:t'

art.. These are traits which can also be found in modern~·

day art&

In the next chapter, the art of the }~ya is described:f including a discussj.on of the artists, the ceremonial center, and several clasf:les of their art, Again, i.t will be seen that art was influenced by religious -beliefs, vthich also ini'luenced the placement given to art., The art of the IVJ:aya further demonstrates that art was not produced for the sake of art.,

The following chapter describes aspects of A~tec j art r \"Jhlch again were in:fluenced by rel.tgious beliefs" j • '-······-~---~·-·· ..... ------~-"~~---~·-·--·------·-~··-~-·--·--·----~··· ···~-...... _...... -··-"" -··--... - ...... ' 17

r-'""~-~~--·-·=··-=~~·~·-~------~·-·-~----~--·~~----·~~--=·--···"~······ ...... w .._, ___ ...... ! Various aspects of their art are examined, including a · look at the artists, and a discussion of the sculpture, emphasizing stone and wooden idols. A continuity with the past can be found in these idols, which parallel the images of saints today. ! I Aspects of present-day Mesoamerican art are examined lin the final chapter of this pape~, including the artists,' I / the ceremonial center, and several forms of the art. It ! I v1ill be shov.m that the characteristics vrhich define ! f

charactc:n:·izes the art of the past., and continues to describe the art of the present.

I l.. ~.-~--·-·-···-·---~-~------~--~-· ----~~---~----~------~-·---~~--·-·"·-··-··- .. PRECLASSIC Oll1EC

The art of the Olmec was closely influenced by their~ religious beliefs, not only in what was portrayed, but

also in hov! it was treated. I believe that this is an indicator of what may be called art, and can be found in present-day Mesoamerica alsoe In this chapter, various aspects of Preclassic Olmec art will be discussedt including the were-jaguar motif and what it possibly

represents, vlho the artists may have been, and a

description of several categories of the art~ Also e.xa..mined are the sites of San Lorenzo and La Vent a, which were poss1b1y sculptural projects on a grand scalee The Ol.mec seem to have been obsessed with artistic prochwtion

and the mutilation of much of their art. A qua..'1.tity of it was created to serve as great offerings, and was not mea.nt to be seen or admired. This treatment of their art

is examined in examples from the sites of San Lorenzo an.d

La Venta ..

IN~l{ Olmec art is the earliest knovm art in I'lesoam.erica, havir~ no known antecedents. It seems to have appeared by about 1200 B.Ce "with all its formal .iconographic 1 and. technical aspects fully developed" (Coe 1973: 1 ).. Recent

18 19

f""··--0·-----=~~~---~----~~--~~~-----~-·----,-...~~----·---~-"-~·------··-·····"''"·• 1 I studies, however, suggest that Olmec culture developed I gradually. In fact , Rei zer ( 1971 : 56) says that what has I been identified as Olmec at sites such as San Lorenzo and

La Vf~nta aoes not represent a beginning, 11 but rather a clima.x.n ·With recent discoveries, the picture of Olmec society may be developing into "a society obsessed with monumental art, both its maldng and breaking" (Clewlow

1974: 11). The art of the Olmec was 11 an integral part;" of their religion, reflecting both religious and cultural belief's (Grove 1970: 5). Their style and technical mast{-:!ry can be seen in the gigantic basalt heads and

altars as well as the miniature jade carvings~ It is possible that the artistic range goes beyond th.i.s, vli th entire sites as sculptural projectso

Willey ( 1966: 98) suggests that ceremonial cente~cs

arose in IVIesoamerica 11 in response to population increase and out of a desire to maintain and symbolize kinshi.p and

religious 1J.nity. 11 An area located in what is now southern- Veracruz and western Tabasco on: the Gulf Coast is knovm. as -the Olm·sc heartland. This region appears to be the important center of Olmec activity. Coe (1965a: 679)

points out that this area probably has 11 the highest density of pre-Columbian sites per square kilometer in

Mesoamerica .. n I ! l\Iost of' the known monumental sculptures have come !•-<~<"OC>•"·~·-•-•o·----·------•·-·-~--··-·---· ---·-·-~·--••o-----~------••--·-·--··-~••"""-·~--•·-~-~---···•••• .-.~·-••>< 20

r·~=~~¥.-h~~~-~--6--·-· ~~-··------~----~-·~···~ .. -·w·.,...•• .,•...... •• , •.. ! . 1 from three sites in the heartland - San Lorenzo, La Venta,

I1 and Laguna de los Cerros, located near the Tuxbla I l\1ountains, a cluster of volcanoes. A few Olmec-style monuments have also been found at Tres Zapotes and Nestepe. The Olmec style differs from other Nesoamerican styles both in its iconographic content and in some of

its formal qualities. Portrayals are realistic. Even the pieces that represent mythological beliefs "are

carried out with a 'realistic' intent 11 (~V:i.lley 1962: 2). Space is an important element and Olmec art tends to be uncluttered. Lines are curved; corners are rounded. These two properties lead to the monumental appearance

o:f Olmec art, and as Coe ( 1965b: 749) says, 11 No matter how small the object, it always looks much larger than it

really is. 11 Even the smaller objects have this impact .. Engraved lines were widely used, generally to add a little detail, however fine detail is almost always absent.

v/ERE-JAGUAR MOTIF The Olmec style appears on a wide variety of objects, including monumental basalt sculptures, small jade and serpentine figurines, masks, axes and celts, ceramic figurines and vessels, pottery stamps, and ~.~ paintings and murals in caYes, The central theme of Olmec art is the were-jaguar I! f l l·-··---·-····-.------·~·-~·····"------·~---~--~--~.~-·--·--~----···--··---~-~------"-'""~·-····-~····· ..··' 21

r~~-~~,_~,------~-~·--~=-~-·=-,·~"<-··~~--u·~=--~--~~---·~="~'''<>'•·~-~--··-··: ! ' I concept. The were-jaguar is represented by a combination I of jaguar and human features, and is most often expressed j as more human than jaguar in total characteristics (Willey 1962: 2). Frequently, the human features have an infantile quality. The were-jaguar infant has pu£fy features, w.ith a cleft at the top of its head; a mouth with a prominant ; 1 upper lip and with the corners of the mouth drawn down; fangs; snarling mouth; and sometimes, cla-v1s. The body is

obese, sexless, and human. The adv~t were-jaguar has a cleft in its head; fangs; snarling mouth; sometimes, flamelike brows; and infrequently, a pointed beardo The spectrum of \'!ere-jaguar forms ranges from purely jaguar

to those \vi th just a trace. Coe (1965b: 751) says!! "We have no definite knowledge in tradition and no inscriptions to guide us in seeki:ng out the mythical basis of Olmec iconography. 11 There are certain sculptures, however, that indicate what might underlie and its art. Scenes depicting a human and a jaguar together are rare in Olrnec art (Grove 1969: 422; 1972: 18). According

to Stirling 11 a mutilated sculpture which he discovered, Monument 3 at Potrero Nuevo, depicts a jaguar copulating

v1ith a woman., Stirling (1955: 19) describes this apparent union as: I The £igure o£ the woman is represented lying i i , __ .,._,...... ,.,..,.....,.,,,.,~, ...... , ...... ~--..;::-...... -.,. .... -.....,,...... __..,-= __ ,... _,..,.,...,._ ....,..,....._~.....,...,. ---~""~.._.,.___ ,.....,.. __ .,...... "'_~-...... --...--~""'---""'" ___...... ____..""""'"--= ..-~~---"'-= _,_____ ,,...... ,~- 22

r~.. ------~~=·---~-~---·~--~------·-~-----'>-~-~-~---~-,~-·-· .. ,.~--<-~-"~~-~-~-- ! on the back with knees drawn upward along l the abdomen and with bent elbows, the hands j extending upward. The head, hands, and , feet are missing. The body of the jaguar I is missing except for the hind feet, the I lower part of a double back ornament, and I the tail. Ornaments in the form of bands I with a decorative attachment in the rear ! are \vorn about both ankles. l Coe (1965b: 751) comments that "the realism of the

monument leaves no question about his interpretation~" Another monument, Monument 1 at Rio Chiquita, also discovered by Stirling, represents the same concept. Clewlow (1974: 84) observed this piece and describes the two, now headless figures: The upper figure is squatting upon the lower figure in a position which perhaps could indicate that the two were havir~, had just had, or were about to have, sexual intercourse. The head was broken off the top figure&.~ The arms are broken of.f, but a trace of · .fingers on the right breast of the lower figure indicates that the left hand of the upper figure may have at one time grasped it. The left bx·east of the lov1er figuxe is sagging and misshapen ••• The right leg is kneeling and extends back along the le:ft side. 1J:lhe right toes are positioned on the lower :figure's ches·t jus·l; to the side of' the breast. The lower figure lies flat on its back with its arms to the sides. The head is broken off in a fracture •• aThe legs of the lower fig~re are crossed at the bottom as if lo~Jking in the upper to a sexual position. In the footlock of the lower figure, the right foot is positioned over the top of the left foot. The lower figure is apparently nude. But, as Clewlow says, it is difficult to interpret this piece as sexual for several reasons. First, genitals are 23

I ' ~ .. ~:o~~--P:~~:;~:;-;:::::~-i t-~:-::;:~t :;:-~~a:~-,-~~-~---"~~~~~:: I figure is female Third, "The position is one which is

I anatomically di:l':icult, i:l' not impossible, to realize I (Ibid.: 85). He says it could be interpreted as a ' victorious warrior over his victim. In his observation, Clewlow noted that the objects in the breast area are indistinct and eroded, and could have been clothing or possibly some other object- This union of jaguar and human would have then resulted in infants combin.irlg features of both, in varying degrees. But, as no sexual organs in either monument can be seent it is possible that they represent the victor and the fallen.. What they are remains un:proveno Bernal (1969b: 67) says, the monuments nare in such a poor state of preservat:lon that it is impossible to describe their true significance with absolute certainty." This is not the only interpretation of the were­ i l jaguar motif. Furst (1968) suggests a metaphysical I interpretation, comparing the jaguar to the shamane He ! uses e-thnographic eviden.ee of South American tropical

1 forest cultures as a source to interpret the iconographyo i I ~'he dangerous and beneficial qualities of the jaguar, I Furst says, do not come from its own an.imal I characteristics, but :!'rom "its inherent I ' / attributes 11 (Ibid.: 148): _ j

'"-~···-.------·----~-~---'-'""'-''"--~--~~---·---·-·----~·~·----~---.. ~~···-·-··~··-·---·~··--·~~----·---· .... ·------·-"-'"·-····-·-·"' 24

r~-~.. ,_~~~-~---~~~~--~~~-·~,~~.'~~--·---~··-~-~·····,--~c·~·"~--····~~--~····•••&·<>·•·i

j The jaguar :L s i.n fact a ma.no e • equivalent : 1 only to one category of men who alone i possess supernatural powers: the shamans. 1 Moreover, shamans and jaguars are not I merely equivalent, but each is at the same I time the other. l I In addition to this, Fvxst (Ibid.: 170) says: 1 ! .... the feline characteristics become a kind of badge of offi.ce, the manifestation of the supernatural jaguar qualities inherent in l priest or shaman, t.L:is spiritual bond and identity \

jaguar form, and rarely purely animal (I"bid~: 148; Coe 1965b: 751 ) •

There ha,ve been several suggestions as to who the

OL11ec artists may have been. Generally, it is felt that the artists were specialists.. As Kubler (1962: 71) puts

it, the sculptures 11 can have been carved only by professional sculptors relieved from all other v.rork, and.

maintained by the cornmunity .. 11 Heizer (1971: 54) and Kubler (1971: 161) have suggested that the Olmec may have had travelling sculptorsll v1ho went f:r·om site to site. Heizer (1968: 22) also suggests that if the colossal heads from the different localities in the heartland were sculpted 25

~--~·---·'-'-'''"''•--~~-•-'•-•=••c~-==~•~~~~u--~--=-~-•~-~,~~~---·~~=«~·•••="~""''-'·"'''"'' o' ·•··, l ) groups of sculptors, who were aware of what their fellows ware doing elsewhere and who were engaged in a free

exchange of conventions of representation. 11

2~.~~-~ AS S_Q.lJIJPrURAL PROtTECT s It he.s been suggested that the sites of San Lorenzo c-tnd La Venta were scu1J}'!iu_"t'al projectse Coe (1968: 44)

has called San J,orenzo "an artifact on a gigantic scale., n The construction of the J.1a Venta pyramid indicates that

j:t too l.s a gigantic sculptural project.

San JJorenzo is located in southern Veracruz in the Coatzacoalcos River drainage basin. It is the earliest of the Olmec sites, its main occ:upation lasting from around 1150 B.Co to 900 B.C .. (Ooe 1970). After its abandonment, La Vent a became the ne\•J Olmec center ( Coe,

Diehl? and Stuiver 1967).

The site of San Lorenzo is made up of a plateau \vi th ridges and ravines. The plateau rises about 50 meters abcve surrounding savannas, which is inundated each yecu:: during the rainy season. The escarpment on the eastern side is more-or-less even, but the northwest, west, and

south s.ides are out by deep ravines. Coe first thought:

the ravines \\!ere na natural product of erosion of the sand-and-gravel ooverecl plateau" (1968: 44). However, he

found that they were artificial, "created by the construc-tion of enormous mound-like ridges which jut out 26

r·=-~~--,~··--·~~---=~-~-,~-~-~~--~-~~~-~-·~·-~a~-~-·"---==·~-~·"--.-···..... ,. ... ,,~,»~=·~"-'''"' l from the s.ite on those sides" ( Ibid~ ) ... There are many mounds on the plateau, the central cluster of which is aligned on a north-south axis. La Venta is situated on a small swampy island along the Tonola River. The stoneless island is about 5 square I kilometers in size$ The ceremonial center was built about 1000 B.C.,, abandoned by 600 B§C., and was therefore partially contemporaneous with San Lorenzo (Heizer 1968: 14; ''deaver 1972: 55 L The largest structure at La Venta is a cone-shaped mound of clay and earth that measures about 100 feet in height (Heizer, Graham, and Napton 1968: 133). In July, 1967, Heizer and Drucker observed the actual form of the La Venta Pyramid for the first time, after having viewed it many times before. This time, most of the heavy vegetative growth had been cleared avmy. They found that it is not a pyramid at all, but a fluted cone, with ridges and valleyso Heizer and Ikucker found that the exterior of the

La Venta pyramid 11 was marked by a series of depressions j that sloped downward and outwarde •• producing a surface l which bore ten long, ri.dge-like formations that ran from I i top to base and which alternated with ten parallel

I 11 I depressions in a quite regular ma:l:mer ('1968: 52-53)., I They belieYe that these alternating ridges anrl valleys I I were deliberately made because they are so evenly placed., I : l ~...-~ .. ~_.,~,_,.""',_.'.;>0':"0"<~""'""""-'"'...,.._.,__~.'n-~--=·~"L'-<•>~'""<.V...--~-o·--<' ....-....~.~-"-'''-'••··<~-~·~ l :?..7

!i'''._.,_.._.,~--·--

pyra.mid 11 was an artifact made ln imitation of a Tuxtla cinder cone, and that it was erected at this major ritual centreco.in order to serve as a surrogate for a familiar l and ritually 1mportant form. 11 They note (Ibid.) the ! similarity in appearance between the La Venta cone and l ; 1 the cinder cones in the Lake Catemaco region of the Tuxtla

1, l'Iountai:ns: ~ i Some of these cinder cones ex.hi bit erosion gullies running from the crater rim to the base and these are strongly reminiscent of the more formalized and regular channels or flutings of the La Venta pyramid. We note the interesting fact, which may or may not be fortuitous, that the proportions of the 1)asal diameter and height, as well as the angle of the slopi:n_g side of these cinder cones, are almost identical to the same features of the La Venta Pyramid. San I·orenzo and La Venta, thent show hmv far the artistic range of the Olmec may have gone, vuth entire sites as gigantic sculptural projectse In fact, the Olmec seem t;o be obsessed with artistic production, and as will be seen, with mutilating what they produced also.

Nost of the gigantic stone monuJnents were carved of basalt, which was quarried from volcanic mountains located about 80 air miles west of La Venta and San Lorenzo 28

r--·~"-~~,~~·~~----=••s-~·~~~---=~-·--·-··~---~-,~-~· -=~.,---~.·-"•Mc_H_·=M>>< ·~·., ! l (\'Ieav-er 1972: 54). Stones weighing as much as 30 tons I were apparently floated down the rivers on rafts to such

II sites as La Venta and San Lorenzo. I Williams and Heizer (1965) suggest that the main l l source of basalt used in monumental sculptures was from I 1 an eroded Pliocene volcano, the Cerro Cintepic, along the I 1 southern flanks of the Tuxtla ·1·1ountains.

QQlo_s,lial HQ..~g,fl The colossal heads have been found only in the heartland, at La Venta, San Lorenzo, J.Jaguna de los Cerros, '. Trr;s Zapotest and Nestepe.. These sculptures \'fere fashioned as heads, and never had bodies. The height

ranges from just under 5 feet to over 9 feet 11 with an average \ve5.ght of 18 tons. Features are infantile, with wide thick lips, and a broad :nose.. The free-standing heads are portrayed wea.ri:ng · a helmet-like headdress, \'lhich may be either elaborate or plaine Most o:f the heads have ear ornaments, a circular earspool or a rectangular bar, which either passes t:hrot.lgh, covers, or dangles beneath the ear lobe .. Expression varies from stern to placid, and there is one which is smiling (Stirling 1965: 733). Speculation on the purpose of these free-standing heads varies. Stirling (Ibid.) suggests that the realistic treatment of features indicates that they ! t__ -~~··-"-·--····~----~--~~- __."~------·---~--~--~--~·-·-·-~-~---~-~" ~--··---.. -·--·- -· ~--" ---. '. \ 29

r··~r----···-~... ~,-~~·~· -·-~·-·~· ~·~·---~~~~--~--~-~-<-·~--~~~·~'"--··· .. ''''""~""""~"·'"·•· e •.•.• ,., ! depict men, and not gods, and ft~thermore, that they are ! ' probably portraits of prominant leaders, as each has indivldual quality. Coe (1968: 74, in discussion) feels that they must be portraits of living people and served as "monuments to living people, or perhaps to people very recently dead, or, at least, monuments to lineage powere" Heizer (1971: 59) believes that those represented in the La Venta colossal heads are "direct representations of members of the authority group at La Venta and therefore leaders of the society of people who built the mounds and transported the multi-ton stones from their distant sources", and more specifically, possibly priests.

Al ta.:r.s --~....,_.- ttfutars 11 is the name given by Stirling to the monumental sculptures that resemble massive s·tione tables with solid bases. Altars consist of a thick tabletop that projects at the front and ends, and is supported by a lo\ver rectangular block. Size ranges from 11 i feet long and 6 feet high (Nonument 14, San Lorenzo) to 4 feet l ·i 6 inches wide and 3 feet 9 inches high ( Altar 6, La

I Venta) e Typica~ly, there is an arched niche at the front l in which sits or from which emerges a life-sized human Il l figure, carved in full round. The seated figure usually I holds a were-jaguar in.fant or some object. At the front 1 and sides of the base and on the edges of the tabletop l 1 may be additional scenes, carved in low relief. For

L~--"""'•"'••='.,...... ,."""~-"-"'<-~•...-_...... ,.,...,.,,~,~~.._...,,-='~'-'~..,...... ,...... ~...... ,.,.,.,.._,c__ ,...=<4¥""_.,.,..,. .. _...~,_,._...-...... ,..,___._...,..,...,. __<=~=""<">=--· ..,_..,.,,_..,._,_. .,~~•._..,...__.-..,..,..~-,_~,.,_~,.-=..·.'"<>'.o'~'"""-·"-'"'"'"'-~•·o•-'"<~~-~•" 30

r·"exanipie-;~-"tile=~·sc'e~e;-;;a.y~b~--,~~f.. f~iih~--~~tj~:fs·~·~~~;;··~·~~~t~·a-···;;········. I standing human figures. Altar 5 at I,9. Venta is a.n example of this type of altar. In the arched niche is a. seated figure, carved in full round, which holds a were-jaguar infant in his arms. Carved in lov,r relief on the ends of the altar are four human adults, each holding a smaller jaguar figure. Ca:r.ved on the front of the top of Altar 4 at La Venta is a jaguar face. Behind this face, stretching across the surfaces is a raised area, which Stirling ( 1943: 54) says seems to indicate "that a jaguar skin thrm•m

across the altar is represented. 11 This is a feature which · occurs on most 01mec altars (Grove 1973: 131). There is no evidence that what are called altars actually functioned a8 altars (Clew1ow 1974: 122). Representations on certain altars (such as Altar 5 at La Venta) have been interpreted as possibly depicting infant

sacrifice* But, Grove (1973: 129) says, "~!here is little evidence ••• that the Olmec practiced sacrifice, and these large monolithic altai's are too large to have served as sacrificial stones.u Instead, Grove (Ibid.: 135) suggests

that the altars are thrones~ vli th the raised area

functioning a.s the seat .. l Stelae ~---Olmec stelae are carvings made on tall free-standing ) I slabs of stone~ Height ranges from less than 3 feet t.._ ...... "'·-···-··· .... -...... -...... ~..-·- -··---.---..-··-··---··-'""·~-~~--~"~~--· ·-,~---.,.-~ ...-. .. ~----- ·-"~... ~ ...... -...<'-• .... __...... _...... "· 31

rc;;:~ent 19 at La Venta; to 1-;.;-~~t·~~~~e~a A at.~r~-s-~·~-l I Zapotes). A basic theme is that of _the jaguar mask. A I related theme is that of an open feline mouth, with human I figures depicted inside. Stela D at Tres Zapotes is an example of this

1 second type. It represents a jaguar head with open mouth,; I and with three human figures carved in low relief on the j flat center surface, or back of the jaguar mouth. Above I these figures, c~~ed in higher relief, is, as Stirling ! (1943: 14) describes it, "what looks like a pot-bellied I 1 gnomelike figure, placed horizontally, facing downward." Stela 1 at La Venta also represents "the open mouth of a jaguar" (Ibid.: 50), this time with a single human

I figure, possibly a,:nude woman (Ibid.; Clewlo\'T 1974: 76) I carved inside, in almost full relief. The panel abo-ve

II the figure shows a stylized jaguar face, while below the feet are a series of defaced serrations, which Stirling I [ (1943: 50) feels are meant to be teeth.

I Jade Objects I Above all, the Olmec cherished jade. Objects of I jade were presented as offerings in burials and in caches I to the gods (Stirling 1 961 : 52) • In stirling' s opinion, these pieces were "never surpassed either in workmanship or quality of/material" (Ibid.: 43-44). ! The Olmec used a variety of jade called jadeite, a ! i l L______! ·------·~··' 32

r--·- 1 silicate of sodium and aluminum, with color ranging from bluish-green to bluish-gray. The greatest amount of objects found come from La Venta. Of these, two types seem to have been favorites - an emerald-green variety and a translucent deep variety, called diopside jadeite. The former was used to make tubular and spherical beads and the latter ·«as carved into figurines and ceremonial awls. The most abundant variety of jade at La Venta was a pale gray-green variety. Axes were made of this material, some with small veins of green. Several hundred jade and serpentine celts have been found in caches at La Venta (Drucker 1952). Most of the jade pieces are a pale bluish-gray. Some are mottled or

1 even in color. Those of serpentine are larger in size, ., and many of them are "more crudely made than those of jade" \Ibid. : 165). Drucker libid.) believes that eelts must have been considered as valuable or had ceremonial importance, rather than having a utilitarian purpose.

TREATI•1ENT OF ART OBJECTS Both the San Lorenzo and La Venta sites contain stone monuments which had been broken or defaced and then ceremonially buried by the Olmec. According to Clewlow, the two sites "produced many more stone monuments/than had been expected, and it is likely that hundreds, if not 1 I l ! thousands, of pieces remain at each site" (1974: 19-20). I I L------'"------~----·--J 33

~--I~e--19_6_6_a_n_d--19_6_7~e-x-c-~~-~-o-n_s_a_t_S_an--~-~:·~:zo~~-"-; I Coe (1968) ~ound stone carvings that had been broken-up

and buried in a red gravel floor o~ the San Lorenzo Phase, in an alignment that suggested where other stone monuments would be found. In this ritual destruction, which occurred about 950 B.c., heads were knocked off figures before burial; altars and stelae were mutilated; and, colossal heads were defaced. In addition to this, offerings of serpentine axes and blanks for axes, and concentrations of sherds were found with several of the pieces. At La Venta, an identical pattern of destruction can be found. Axe-grinding marks and the smashing off of large chunks and flakes are the same at both sites (Ibid.: 63). In his 1968 investigations at the Stirling Group, southeast of the La Venta pyramid, Heizer had a work crew penetrate into a loosely laid sand surface at spaced intervals with T-handled steel probes. He came across numbers of stone monuments, "many of them broken and ritually placed" (Clewlow 1974: 11), at a depth of about 3 feet. In Heizer's words, nwe continued the probing and marked each spot where stone was struck with a sapling I stake . After a day we were working in a maze of stakes" l1 I (Heizer Graham, and Napton 1968: 142). l L_ T:e Olmec destroyed their monuments_W1_· _th---·-~----J :34

~nsiderable effort ( Coe 196tl: 77, Stirli;;- in ---··-·~=-·l j discussion). Coe (Ibid.: 72, in discussion) says: I don't know how they did it. They must have hauled some monuments up on great tripods and dropped them on others. It is the only way that some of those flakes could have been knocked off. Grove (1973: 129) comments: The size of the fragments missing from some of the altars would have required a destructive force far greater than clubs or axes, something more in the nature of a prehistoric pile driver. ; ' The placement of the monuments "was definitely done with ceremony" (Coe 1968: 76, in discussion). None of them were destroyed in place. Coe found no chips or hunks of the sculptures lying around (Ibid.). Also, as was mentioned, they were buried in line, along with what j appear to be offerings. Drucker \Ibid., in disucssion)

I adds that the monuments "were not just smashed to bits I and thrown around as though there were no longer any religious attitude toward them, but, after having been broken, they were really given a very special treatment I which involved a lot of labor." The extent of Olmec efforts to bury art offerings I I ! can be seen in another La Venta find. Two great i subterranean pits on the southern margin of the I I I ceremonial court each contain a gigantic mosaic jaguar ! mask of serpentine blocks and stone and clay fills. Il One pit measures 49.5 by 20 feet, and 16.25 feet I L.~·---·---· __,.,....__ ...... =-- ...! 35

------·-~···~-, ,--- ·j l deep. The other measures 77 by 77 feet at the top, 63 by 66 feet on the bottom and 13 feet deep. There were 50 tons of dressed green serpentine blocks deposited in 6 layers on the floor of this pit {Heizer 1968: 10).

The blocks of one mosaic mask had been laid on a i l thin layer of asphalt, and under this was a tough l l brownish-yellow clay. Further below this was 11 a carefully' i 1 prepared foundation" (Drucker 1952: 75) of compact stone I l I rubble. This consisted of fragments of serpentine and 1 rock held together with clay. Drucker reports, "The stone fragments were so thoroughly compacted and interlocked as to be almost impossible to remove" (Ibid.: 56). l The pits and their contents are either wholly or mostly underground. As Heizer (1968: 10) describes it: I Only the two small, low platforms of I unfired adobes, which capped the fill pits on the southern edge of the Court, provided any surface indication of the subterranean features. The pits and their contents were, in short, not intended as monuments to be seen and admired, but as great offerings which were meant to be hidden from view. This special ceremonial treatment of stone sculptures and their placement in "a great center of ritual 11 (Heizer 1971 : 59) adds an essential element in determining what should be viewed as art. An object was not simply sculpted or carved. It was placed and treated

in certain special ways, and with no small effort. ~Iuch I 1 _,I 36

r of the art was produced as offerings, and was n-e~;-;;;n-t'~' to be on display or admired, except by gods. As with the motifs depicted, it appears that treatment and placement of art objects were also tied into and influenced by I :::::::u~eliefs.

1 Olmec art in the form of paintings has been found I l in caves in the Mexican state of . Paintings i. were identified as Olmec in 1966 in Juxtlahuaca cave, and I I again two years later, about 30 kilometers north, in I Oxtotitlan cave. There are two known jaguar

1 representations in Juxtlahuaca cave, and three from I Oxtotitlan (Grove 1972: 161). j Juxtlahuaca cave extends 4,000 feet from its ! entrance through passageways and halls to the farthest I·point reached by the Olmec. The paintings and line l drawings probably date at about the same time as those of Oxtotitlan, that is, between 900 and 700 B.C. (Grove 1970: 29). In addition to jaguar representations, there are those of human figures and a serpent. Colors used include red and yellow ocher, and a carbonaceous black. About 3,400 feet from the entrance is the first hall of paintings. The hall measures about 100 by 40 feet. '\ ) Depicted in Painting 1 are two human figures, one standing' . and looking down upon the other, who is much smaller and ! l.~eated.:__ The standing figure wears a pel~~----J 37

~ ...... -~a --=------~_._""""'"",.._...... ,...,_..-c:r.u'-"~"'-'"'"'-'""~""""'--'-.....,-•"""""'~'--,..__, I shoulder, the tail hanging between the legs of the figure. The pelt is completely black except the tail which is spotted. The same spots, in the for.m of ovals and black spots, also appear on arm and leg coverings worn by the figure. Gay (1967: 31) describes the two as "apparently engaged in a ritual." Beyond the hall, 3,900 feet from the entrance, in a series of passageways, are two naturalistic drawings. One is a black line drawing that measures 1 foot 4 inches high and 2 feet wide. Depicted in it is "a feline head j partially superimposed on a serpent head, both in profile" I (Ibid.: 33). The other drawing is done in red and measures 3 feet 6 inches high. Depicted in it is a human male figure, wearing a loin cloth and holding I! l unidentifiable objects in his hands. This figure "had an easy flowing line and indicates an appreciation of I anatomical details" (Ibid.). Gay feels that these two I drawings might be sketches. Two animals are depicted in a large room 4,000 feet from the entrance. One is of a 7-foot serpent. It is portrayed vert.ically as its form follows the natural contour of the rock, a large slab that projects from the wall. The body and tonque are painted red, with details of the head done in black. Facing this painting is an unidentifiable animal, L____which measures_ 3 feet high, and 4 feet 3 inches wide. 38

,---~ -~~·--~----~-. I Gay (Ibid.: 34) feels that it may be disguised as a feline because "although painted red, it \'Tears a spotted pelt." ! On an ear of the animal itself are two black spots. l ! The Oxtotitlan paintings are situated in the mouth I l of the cave, in two shallow grottoes which open onto a j broad cliff face, and on the face of the cliff itself. There are three distinct types of paintings - two large polychrome paintings on the cliff face, small black paintings in the north grotto, and simple red designs in the south grotto. As was mentioned, the date for the Oxtotitlan cave paintings is probably between 900 and 700 B.c. Placed high on the cliff face, above the mouth of the south grotto is a large polych-rome mural, Nural 1, which measures 3.8 meters wide by 2.5 meters high. Grove

1 (1970: 8-9) conunents that "its execution must have pre/ l sented a difficult task to the original artists." The ! mural shows a human figure, dressed elaborately, and I 1 seated on a large stylized jaguar-monster face. An arm I of the seated figure is raised and a leg dangles over the face of the jaguar, partially covering one eye. Colors

I1 used are red-brown for the body, and red, blue-greens and i 1 I ocher for the dress and ornamentation. I Within the cave's north grotto are a cluster of l

paintings, collectively referred to as Painting 1. They I1 are painted in black, with traces of red. \\'hat was in i I ____ _j L------·--- 39 r:dnam.. e~p-oe.n:fetdhaense paintings was revealed to Gr~~e when h;--~-~l I area in order to take photographs. Depicted l in Painting 1d, which covers an area o:f about 1.5 by 1.5 I1 meters, is an Olmec-:faced human male :figure, standing I beh..i.nd a snarling jaP'uar The human :figure is painted I 0 • I almost entirely in black, with the exception o:f his :face, i l I headdress, and pubic area, Grove (Ibid.: 17-18) describes· j these two :figures: While the :figure is :frontal, the head :faces l toward the jaguar (which :faces to its right). The person 1 s right arm is raised to11mrd the jaguar's head, while his left arm extends back and downward. The human :face is quite I! Olmec, with a slightly drooping mouth and an eye that is an elongated slit. 1 l The jaguar ••• appears in a semi-erect position, its right hind leg resting upon an obscure, scroll/like object, while its highly stylized left :foreleg extends :frontward ••• The entire jaguar is shown in profile, but, curiously, I the artist made an attempt to depict the head o:f the jaguar in a half-turned position ••• The animal's mouth is open and snarling. Teeth are indicated and traces of red paint occur in the mouth area ••• The body o:f the jaguar is covered with a series o:f :flow-like spot motifs, as well as some scrolls. Grove (Ibid.: 18) believes that this painting illustrates a sexual union between a jaguar and a human. In his description, Grove (Ibid.) continues to say, "The jaguar's tail passes to the pubic area o:f the person; in addition, the human phallus extends to the rear area o:f

the jaguar. 11 The paintings :from the caves o:f Oxtotitlan and i 1 J~_:tlahuaca are in the Olmec style and are apparentl~----., ..., 40 jrelated to religious beliefs. Grove (Ibid.), f~·~~"~;;;_;~l';:~; speculates that the human figure seated upon the jaguar head in Mural 1 at Oxtotitlan represents a person associated with the concepts of rain, water, and agricultural fertility. He suggests that Oxtotitlan cave "functioned as a shrine to water and fertility" (Ibid. : I1 j 31) and describes the cave's grottoes as occasionally containing shallow lagoons during the rainy season which

1 occasionally overflow into the fields below (1969: 422). I In addition to expressing water and fertility concepts, I Grove sees an expression of mythical origins. He I compares the paintings to the altars with niches, saying, j "Below the jaguar-monster mouth on the altars are cave- l I like niches, while below the mouth of the jaguar-monster I in Mural 1 is the actual cave of the south grotto" (1970: I

1 31). While the paintings of Oxtoti tlan appear near the I mouth of the cave, those of Juxtlahuaca occur deep within I the cave. It has been suggested that they probably I decorated ceremonial chambers (Grove 1972: 161). Gay I (1967: 34) suggests that Juxtlahuaca cave was used for '· religious purposes, "principally because caves provided a I semiarchitectural environment" and because "the I penetration into a seemingly inaccessible domain 1 intensified the impression of magical power connected 1 with sacred rites." 1. ____ 41

This chapter has ranged over a variety of topics in discussing Olmec art, including a description of the were-jaguar motif, speculation on who the artists may have been, a look at the sites of San Lorenzo and La Venta, and a description of several categories of the art. Also discussed was the way in which much of the monumental stone sculpture was treated. The following summary emphasizes the principal conclusions made which relate to what will be seen as art in present-day IJiesoamerica.

I The art of the Olmec was closely influenced by their ! I religiou~beliefs. Though a wide range of themes are I !l depi.cted, the union of human and jaguar "is given the ! Il most explicit. representation yet discoverede1 (Lathrap 1 1971: 13). Certain sculptures portray this mythical union: I 1 of human and jaguar which presumably resulted in infants l combining both jaguar and human features •. This were- !l jaguar motif is represented throughout Olmec art, on both l monumental and miniature pieces, and as paintings in

Il caves. I ! The Olmec appear to have been obsessed with art, ~ both its production and destruction. Their artistic I range may possibly extend to entire sites as gigantic

II. sculptural projects. At La Venta, Heizer and Drucker (1968: 54) hypothesize that the pyramid was made to serve I as tta sur~ogate" fora -Tuxtla cinder cone. In addition I..__ __ 4-2

r---.------·----~-~-=·-" r • f ~ to this, both San Lorenzo and La Venta probably contain "hundreds, if not thousands" o:f stone monuments, still awaiting discovery (Clewlow 1974: 20). Religious beliefs also influenced the treatment

given by the Olmec to muoh o:f their art. l-1any o:f the stone monuments were ritually mutilated and then buried. The ef:fort made in destroying the giant basalt monuments was considerable. At San Lorenzo, their subsequent burial; was in an alignment that suggested where additional stone monuments would be :found, and at times included what has been interpreted as offerings. The fLmction o:f some of the art can be interpreted from offerings at La Venta where enormous serpentine jaguar masks were found buried in pits. These serve as

examples to show that some of the art was produc~d... aEi l offeri~ and was not intended to be seen or admired. l I

I I l L----~·--- -·-----~----·------" ___j ,------~----···"---~--~

CLASSIC MAYA

It appears that Maya art was even more influenced by religion than was the art of the Olmec. It was developed to a high degree of complexity in sculpture,, painting, architecture, and decoration. In this chapter, various aspects of Classic Maya art will be examined, including a discussion of the ceremonial center, a look at the artists, and a description of several categories of the art. The orientation of buildings at Tikal to the cardinal directions demonstrates a pattern which can be seen in Maya settlements today. In addition to this,

stelae and altars were given prominant positions in

ceremonial centers. This will be seen as further defini1~ what will be called art in the present. Also discussed are the offerings that accompanied them. Finally, the Bonampak murals are seen as a form o:f art that represents not only ritual activity, but also aspects of daily life.

INTRODUCTION Maya art appears to have been even more inspired by

religious beliefs than was the art of the Olmec. In fact, ! Spinden (1957: 15) says that Maya art "might almost be I termed the concrete expression of the religion, since... I no minor object was too humble to receive decorations L--·---· 43 44-

------~----~--,_,~,_~,>CGo.~ r· ~ l with religious significance." The Classic Period of the Maya lasted over a span of six centuries, from about A.D. 300 to 900. During this time, there is an increase in population, development of cities, more elaborate ceremonial centers, widespread trade, and an increase in stratification. The Maya social structure was complex, with civic, religious and military leaders at the top, artisans and merchants in the middle, and peasants on the bottom. A cultural change toward the end of the slxth century divides the Classic into an Early and a Late Period. During the Classic, the Maya inhabited the Yucatan peninsula, part of the Mexican states of Chiapas and I Tabasco, most of Guatemala, parts of Honduras and El Salvador, and all of British Honduras (Belize). The Maya I' area is divided into three zones - the Northern area, the Central area, and the Southern, or Highland area - each distinct culturally and geographically. Cultural development moved from one area to another •. Benson (1967: 21) suggests: li l ••• the Highland, or Southern, area probably i } gave the impetus to the development of Maya j culture; the civilization developed to its 1 I highest peak in the Central area; and its I last flash of glory took place in the I Northern area. Art was developed to a high degree of complexity l'

1 in sculpture, painting, and architecture. Despite having i l J 45

r-;;nly ~rimiti~e-tools to work \dth, Maya arlist;";;;;;;._t;;;i--! I a unlque artistic tradition displaying originality, I :prodigious vigor, and/incredible aesthetic refinement" ! I (Galle1~amp 1976: 81-82). Tools were made of stone, wood,i, I bone and shell, as metal was unknown to the Classic Maya •.

ARTISTS Generally, it is felt that Maya artists were highly trained craftsmen who were attached to the ceremonial I centers, and who had a special position in Maya society. I . ! Benson (1Y67: 93) additionally suggests that they were not important in themselves, but only "as the implement I through which the gods and chieftains were honored." j ! Subject matter, including depictions of' costumes i l i and ornamentation, changed very little duril~ the Classic Period. Changes are observable mainly in the style of representation (Brainerd 1954: 59). Benson suggests that this rather slow change in style and techniques may be due to the nature of the social structure in which Maya artists lived (1967: 93).

THE CERENONIAL CENTER Tikal typifies the height of' development of a Classic Maya city, its peak lasting f'rom A.D. 692 to 751 (Cu.lbert 1973). Its decline came about A.D. 810 - 830, and it was virtually abandoned by A.D. 909 (Willey and Shimkin 1973). i L_ ----·----~··---.-! 46

~ deep in a rain -:f;;~~t in northeas·t~;n-«=~--~·~-,

Peten, Tikal served as a large urban center, acting as a ceremonial center and supporting a permanent resident To a certain extent, the pattern o:f Tikal is

63). Population is estimated to have been 45,000, with 39,000 inhabiting the 63-square kilometer core area (Ibid.: 64). In addition to this, W. Coe (1975: 795) says that Tikal was "heavily populated over an area o:f 50 square miles. Rarely were :family compounds more than 500 yards apart." He estimates that at its height, the / population may have been over 40,000 - "a figure that might be halved or doubled in view of the uncertainties in such calculations" (Ibid.). The society of Tikal was complex and stratified, with noble families residing in elaborate compounds and using nearby temples as family shrines (Ibid.). Whether or not Tikal \•ras truly urban, "the site certainly fulfilled ceremonial functions for a large population, · I .j I ::: ::::;::u:~:~:t::::~;n:c:::::::::t::r;c~x::::e~973: I I 64). I I Tikal consists of temple-crowned pyramids, palaces, l_:_hrin~la:as _and plat:forms, market places, resi~enc~.J 47

r-~auseways, ballcourts, reservoirs, and temesc~:"~-~·~-·~. ritual sweat-bathing. Sculptured and plain stelae and 1l I altars, usually paired, are concentrated in and about I , ceremonial precincts. There are also hundreds o£ burials I and cached offerings. At the core o£ Tikal are the East, West, and Great Plazas, and the massive complexes o.f the North and Central Acropolis. Located in the Great Plaza, and dating .from the Late Period, are two temples - Temple I, or the Temple,

o£ the Giant Jag~ar, and Temple II, the Temple o£ the Masks. These two temple-pyramids stand about 145 and 125 I I .feet, respectively, above the Great Plaza (W. Coe 1967: I 28, 36). Together with lower buildings, plazas, and I courts, they .form a central ceremonial cluster, from which three causeways lead to other groups of buildings

and structures (Weaver 1972: 15~). The Temple of the Giant Jaguar was constructed of limestone about A.D. 700 above a large vaulted-chamber tomb. In the tomb were offerings o£ jade, alabaster, pearls, pottery, shells, and bone slivers, some carved with hieroglyphic inscriptions. The Great Plaza, called "the heart of ancient Tikal" (W. Coe 1967: 27), dates from Late Preclassic. It consists of four superimposed floors of plaster, the earliest having been laid about 150 BwC., and the latest, about A.D. 100. Temples I and II face each other across L 48

the plaza, and between them to the north is the North Acropolis. This huge platform has a 2 !-acre base consisting of 16 temples, one on top of the other, with almost 100 buildings buried underneath dating from the Pre- and Early Classic. Orientation of buildings to the cardinal directions can be seen in Tikal's unique Late Classic twin-pyramid complexes, of which seven are known. Generally, a complex consists of tv10 "essentially identical" pyramids situated about a plaza, one to the east, the other to the west (Ibid.: 77). Stone monuments are associated with l each of these complexes. Paired stelae and altars, always: I plain, face the east pyramid. A carved stelae and altar are placed in the open interior of a walled enclosure at the north side of the plaza. On the south side of the I plaza is a low building with nine doorways, facing north into the court. The precise purpose of such complexes is difficult to say, however they may have served a ceremonial function (Hunter 1974: 66). Nevertheless, the placement of the twin-pyramid complex and its stelae and I I altars demonstrates an orientation of Maya structures to I the cardinal directions, a pattern which will be seen in present-day Zinacantan.

STONE SCULPTURE L___ M~t Maya sculpture, whether in woo=~:.:__ 49

~----~ ·------·'"--"~~M.

l,,l· rather than sculptors (1959: 92). · Where Preclassic Olmec .sculpture tends to be uncluttered, Classic Maya sculpture appears to be almost chaotic. In Coe's words, it has "a notorious horror I vacui; the idea is to fill up everything rather than leave I I blanks" (1965b: 749). On the other hand, Proskouriak:off I I (1965: 471) says: The feeling ••• that Maya sculpture is overelaborate, and the common tendency to style it as 'baroque' is probably due to an inability to grasp its forms readily and to appreciate the scheme of their relations. Human and animal forms, depicted in a natural way, were combined with grotesque symbolism. The grotesque forms were not mere elaboration, but functioned to express "aspects of reality that could not be pictorially I presented" (Ibid.). In the Early Classic, sculpture seems to have been I preoccupied with the symbolic character of the subject matter at the expense of naturalism (Brainerd 1954: 60). Forms are simple and static. In the Late Classic, the style became more elaborate and refined, with more attention given to detail. Finally, toward the end of thel i Classic, over-all composition became the main concern of ~ I the style. I I L .-...... ,..,....._.,.____ .,_...,.._~~"''*'-·"'"_""t 50

!stelae and Alt_a_r_s------~------~---~~"-·1

Stelae are upright free-standing monuments made from a single slab of stone. Most measure from 5 to 12 feet high, however there are some that measure over 30 feet. They were usually accompanied by round drum-shaped altars, also made of stone. On Early Classic stelae, figures and ornaments are portrayed in a way that presents characteristic features, and not in the way they actually appear (Proskouriakoff 1965: 473). On the front of most stelae, a single male figure is depicted, with hieroglyphic inscriptions carved on the back, and sometimes on the sides. Typically, the shoulders of the figure face front, with the head and J lower part of the body in profile, and the feet positioned; one behind the other. Often a headdress with huge

.,! earplugs encircles the face, fastening under the chin.

Oftentimes, realistic representation is sacrificed for an i angle that best exhibits an object's charanteristic attributes. Few monuments have been found that date from the latter part of the sixth century, due to either a hiatus in production, or possibly sampling error. Production of stelae is partictliarly absent (Benson 1967: 75). After A.D. 600, a larger number of stelae than ever were I produced, which, in addition to being more elaborate, I I I j 1 were taller and wider. L-~--...--·--· ------···--·-·J r~-----·· ~ I In the Late Classic, an emphasis on realism developed, along with a continuation of symbolism. Figures are carved in high-relief, and at Tikal, women are represented for the first time. Poses are less rigid than in the Early Classic, and many figures lean or bend at the waist. The body of the main figure was carved facing front, with the feet pointing outward, and with the head sometimes in profile. Figures wore feathered headdresses. For a long time, it was thought that these figures depicted deities, however accompanying inscriptions indicate that some, if not all, of them were representations of members of ruling families (Easby and Scott ·1970: 207; Proskouriakoff 1965: 4-71 ). The elaborate • headdresses and costumes were not merely decorative, but "abound with symbolic motifs that are also recognizable as hieroglyphic elements and that expressed, when used in sculpture, the same specific meanings" (Easby and Scott 1970: 207). The placement of Maya stelae and altars serves as an indicator in further defining what will be called art in the present. These stone pieces were not set haphazardly, but were given a prominant position in ceremonial centers. Stelae were placed in front of i.mportant buildings in courts and plazas, and each was I usually accompanied by an altar. Moreover, when a stela l 1 '-·---~---~~--~-· ------"'------·---~' 52

was carv·ed, its altar was also carved (W. Coe 1967: 39). The placement of stone stelae and altars by the Maya extends back to Precla.ssic times. A Maya stela with an altar at its base, possibly dating back a century and a half before Christ, has been found at the site of Abaj Takalik in southwestern Guatemala (Koue 1976: 3). These I two pieces were recovered alor~ with more than 50 Maya I ·monuments, some of which possibly date back to 500 or 600 B.C., by Heizer and Graham and a team of Berkeley I archaeologists. These monuments were nlined up in front I ! of earthern constructions," suggesting the site was a I ceremonial center (Ibid.). I Like the Olmec, the Maya also placed offeri~s with thelr stone monuments. At Tikal, both plain and carved I stelae were erected with cached offerings placed about and under their bases. Caches consisted of exotically- I chipped flints and obsidians, shells and shell beads, occasionally jade beads, pottery vessels, human teeth and bone pieces. In the Late Period, caches included nine chipped flints and nine incised obsidians. Flints I were chipped to represent profiles of human faces; obsidians were incised with depictions of gods. Ordinarily, when a stela \'Tas erected, an offering was placed with it (\'1. Coe 1965). In addition to this, offerings probably accompanied the stela and its altar as a unit, since offerings have not been .found solely with 53

-·--.. ----·<=="1 .\ ; altars (Ibid.). l i J When a group of stelae were erected simultaneously, l an offering was placed with at least one stela, as if it belonged with the whole group. Also, offerings might be divided into types among the stelae, so that pottery vessels accompanied one stela, and flints and obsidians accompanied another. That stelae and altars were placed in prorninant positions in ceremonial centers, and were accompanied by offerings, demonstrates the place of "art objects" to the Classic Maya.

PAINT~ Ag_t

nBonampak" is a name suggested by IVlorley in the place of the label "Ruin 10," previously given by Giles Healey, the first non-Maya to view the painted_ murals ?.t the eastern Chiapas site in 1946. At that time, it was be;ing used as a shrine by the modern Lacondon Indians. 11 Bonampak" is a Maya word meaning "painted walls." Bonampak consists of 11 major buildings on an acropolis, a courtyard, and several mounds. It is "a small, carefully laid out, compaot siteu (Ruppert et • .§.!_. 1955: 11). The Bonampak murals, painted about A.D. 800 (Ibid.: I 65; Coe 1966: 101 ,) demonstrate that Maya art depicted I I L·-~------· ______j 54

r -N---~---· ------~~-~·~~···~··~ aspects of everyday life of the Maya, and was not ~ restricted to representing only members of the ruling families. The murals give insight into the pattern of life during the Classic period. Furthermore, Proskouriakoff (Ruppert et. al. 1955: 42) suggests the murals depict scenes which the Maya artists may have witnessed themselves. In comparing the Maya sculptured monuments to the paintings, Proskouriakoff says that both are concerned with ritual, but the paintings "gave much greater scope to the artist to incorporate in his work observations of things normally perceived and random commentary on evei".rday living" (Ibid. : 41 ) • When the same subject matter is covered in sculpture, it is as unrelated incidents. The murals give a fuller picture of what life was like than the sculpture and, in addition to this, correct conclusions drawn from them (Ibid.: 65). The murals are placed in three rooms of one building, the Temple of the J>aintings. Together, they seem to tell a connected story, as some of the characters appear in more than one scene. Background colors suggest where the action was taking place. Blue indicates sky and therefore outdoors; red is used for interior scenes; and green sv1irls outlined in red indicate vegetation in battle scenes. What each scene depicts and the sequence of events j i '"------~-----···--·---·---~·· __ , .. ! 55

r---~~·~· -----~.. ~---~~~"1 I in the rooms is not completely understood, but Thompson ' (Ibid.) interpreted the events in what he thought was a logical order. This included four main events. First, in Room 1, impersonators of the gods of the earth prepare for a dance; second, in Room 2, a small settlement is raided and prisoners are captured; third, also in Room 2, prisoners are arraigned; and fine.lly, the climax in Room i· 3, a sacrificial ceremony and dance is celebrated. The I ! first three events seem to lead to the fourth. In the scene of the sacrificial ceremony, there is I a body lying face down on steps, with wrists either being bound or unbound by attendants. Above the naked body is a person holding what is probably a ceremonial . According to Thompson (Ibid.: 56): We can reasonably assume that the sprawling body is that of a victim who has just been sacrificed, and that the body has been rolled or dragged dovm the steps. The individual with the celtlike implement presumably performed the deed, and the two attendants probably held the victim's hand and feet in the style traditional for representations of . One of the striking features of the murals is their naturalism. Lines are pure and accurate. Figures are shown in profile, frontward, or "twisted with almost unlimited freedom of posture" (Brainerd 1954: 62). l!,aces are turned in profile. Facial expression and gesture are even shown on minor characters. Hands are portrayed in a wide variety of positions, sometimes suggesting I ·------·-·------~J t"-:6)

---~~~~ conversation. The Bonampak murals are valuaole both as works of I art and as a source of information on the life style of I the Jv1aya. They are also important in confirmir~ archaeological evidence that the Maya practiced human I ! sacrifice. Though concerned with ritual activity, they l gave artists a chance to include aspects of everyday life in their work.

SUMHARY This chapter has dealt with various aspects of Classic Maya art, including a discussion of the ceremonial: i center, a look at the artists, and an examination of i l several forms of the art. Also discussed was the position! ; given to stelae and altars in ceremonial centers, which, like the monumental sculpture of the Olmec, were also accompanied by offerings. In the following summary, the principal conclusions made in this chapter, relating to what will be called art in present-day Mesoamerica, are

Maya art was 57

,.. ------"-i I Grotesque symbols combine with natural human and animal ; I forms to express "aspects of realit~ that could not be I pictorially presented 11 (Proskouriakoff 1965: 471). ' Religious symbolism embellishes sculpture, painting, and architecture, and as Spinden says, "no minor object was too humble to receive decorations with religious

11 significance ( 195 7: 15). T.o a _certain extent, the plan of ceremonial centers is very much like that of Maya settlements today. Tikal served as an urban center, also acting as a ceremonial center and supporting a permanent resident population. Its buildings and associated monumental sculptures were oriented toward the cardinal directions, a pattern which can also be found in present-day Mesoamerica.

Religious beliefs influence~~he placemen~ given~ art objects. Stelae were placed in prominant positions in ceremonial centers in front of important buildings in courts and plazas. In addition to this, each was usually

accompanied by an altar. T}l§._Maya, lik~ the Olme.c, al@. .El.aced offerinz,s with their stone monuments. I The art.of the Classic Maya further demonstrates that art was not produced for the sruce of art, but served iI

as an expression of religious beliefs, As with the Olmec, i not only did religion and ritual inspire the subject I matter of an object, but it also influenced where the object would be placed. I L -·-· ~------~--·---J '------~------·------·--~~~•=e-~ l POSTCLASSIC AZTECS

The lives of the Aztecs were so dominated by religion, that in order to understand their art, it is necessary to know something about their religious beliefs. j The Aztecs believed that their very existence depended on I the gods, and this concept is reflected in their art, which was almost exclusively of a religious nature. Both life and death are symbolized, however, the death theme seems to prevail. In this chapter, various aspects of Postclassic Aztec art will be examined, including a look ! I at the artists, and a discussion of the sculpture, with ani l emphasis on stone and wooden idols. Idols were used ! extensively throughout central Mexico by the time of the Conquest and can be seen as predecessors to the images of l saints and crosses in modern Mesoamerican villages. I Finally, paper-makir~ is considered as a form of art I which continues to the present-day, both in technique and i ritual function. I

The art of the Aztecs reflects the complete domination of their lives by religion. In fact, in order to understand their art, it is necessary to know something! Labout their religious belief._s_.__ ob-jects of art w:~ no_t__ j

58 59

r- -·- ---,"~·,,---~=~""="·· I produced for their beauty alone, but were made "to honor the gods who were intermediaries between man and the infinite power of the universe" (Vaillant 1941: 155). To the Aztecs, man's very existence depended on the gods, and consequently their art was almost exclusively of a religious nature. The Aztecs began their wanderings in A.D. 1168, this date according to their own records. They came from the north of Mexico, owning no land. In their migration, they became aggressive warriors and in time they were

highly fea~ed. Driven from one place to another, they took refuge on a lake shore, and finally moved to a few swampy islands in a lake. According to their legends, they were led there by Huitzilopochtli, Hummingbird on the Left, their tribal war god, who ordered them to settle where an eagle sits on a cactus with a serpent in its beak. There they would build their temples and offer htunan victims to the sun as nourishment. Aztec knowledge went back as far as sixth century Teotihuacan, but no further. In Soustelle's (1970: xv) words: ••• for them the pyramids of Teotihuacan ••• were built by the gods at the beginning of the world, at the same time they created the sun and the moon. For them all the highly civilized arts, sculptures, architecture, engraving, feather-mosaic work, ·the invention of the calendar, were due to the former inhabitants of Tula, the ' L__ ,___ ,_:oltecs, wh_:_:ached the heigh~-of :h~~·--·-J 60

For the Aztecs, Quetzalcoatl and the Toltecs had found the arts, sciences, and agriculture which they inherited. Nearly all Aztec art expressed the concept of a

religion wherein life was sustained only by death. All J l Aztecs lived under the threat of doom and this they wardedi off as long as possible with human blood and sacrifice. From birth, every child was indoctrinated with war, I 1 blood and death. As Kubler (1962: 51) expresses it, I "Death by sacrifice came to be an expected and even I desirable end, for which art, poetry, and religion all ! I prepared the victims with an endless, pervasive .. I 11 1I justification of its necessity. l l To the Aztecs, the sun was the source of all life.

I, Unless it was nourished with human blood, it might set, and never reappear the following day. The Aztecs were so

I fearfUl of this that as mar~ as 50,000 victims were I sacrificed to the sun god each year. Toward the time of I, the Conquest, during the reign of Axayacatl, 20,000 I victims were sacrificed at the dedication of the Great 1 Temple at Tenochtitlan ~Madsen 1960: 118; Weaver 1972: I 256). i 1' Because of the prevalence of the death theme, Aztec I I art has often been described as being macabre. This is l I 1 I not the case, however, when the cultural values that ,li, L~ro~~_:d·~-~nderstood. The death t~~~n~~---··~---·---c~... 61

r-----·------,·---~~~~~·-··"______,, ___ 1 exalted, but conveys "more o:f the sense o:f resignation in ! the :face o:f the necessity o:f death to promote and sustain

I1 li:fe 11 (Nicholson 1971: 133). Life is also symbolized, and is often expressed in :fertility deities, especially in the :form o:f :female idols.

ARTISTS Aztec artists were known as the tolteca, after their Toltec ancestors whom they believed had discovered all their art. Their social class was one step above the common people, and it seems they "Vtere "very well pa.idn

and received 11 very considerable remuneration" (Soustelle 1970: 69).

Scu~ptors, painters, weavers, feather workers, goldsmiths, potters, and lapidiaries were all different

kinds o:f artisans. Some were highly regarded, belongir~ to guilds and not subject to taxes. There were craftsmen who worked directly for the emperor's household, although most carried out their work as an additional trade. The

latter worked at home where they cou~d also tend their crops (Thompson 1940: 94). In addition to this, sons usually succeeded their fathers at the same craft, but only if they were also found to be competent (Anton 1969: 103). The Aztecs believed that artists were born and not ') 6"· r~rtl.~t;~nd-th~· ;~;d~~ti~-;-~ft~eir ~·~-:-··:r~- addition to

I this, the artist had to bear his destiny in mind, guide

1 himself, and make himself worthy of such a destiny. He ! had to converse with his heart. ·Sahagun's (Ibid.: 168-

1 169) informants describe the true artist: The artist: disciple, abundant, multiple, restless. The true artist, capable, practicing, I skillful, maintains dialogue with his heart, meets things with his mind. The true artist draws out all from his I heart; I v10rks with delight; makes things with calm, I with sagacity; works like a true Toltec; composes his objects, works dexterously; invents; arranges materials; adorns them; makes them adjust. i The carrion artist works at random; sneers I at the people/ makes things opaque; brushes across the l surface of the face of things; works without care; defrauds people; is a I thief. I I ST01TE SCULP.rURE I Stone carn1ings were primarily associated with, or I provided adornment for religious structures. Colossal 63

-k-'<<<·····•·<·--·····-·-· ··---~··'''"' --~-~--- -~------"-···-·---"~--~---~__ .. ~--.-----· ·-----·-·····- . Carving was in the round or in relief, or a rl 1 combination of both. Representations are highly realistic; j and have been described as awesome and terrifying (Weaver ; 1972: 249). In addition to this, the iconography is highly standardized and various complex symbols can be

found throughout the carviP~s. I The Toltec tradition was the greatest single I j influence on the Aztec style of stone carving, however the! I Aztec style became much more realistic and technically l,' polished. It impact is even greater, and as Nicholson I (1971: 118) says, "it is a more mature and sophisticated ! scuJ.ptural art, a child which has surpassed its parent. 11

I1 Ido.l.§.

J Stone idols were used extensively throughout central:

!.. i Mexico by the time of the Conquest. In fact, nearly everyl 1 I major deity in the Aztec pantheon was represented (Ibid.: I 1 1_21>. They were placed in temples and sacred places, ! where rituals and were performed before them. Just as the present-day Mesoamerican villagers give offerings and thanks to their images of saints, the Aztecs ! I did likewise with their stone idols, only with human hearts. For example, when Cortes \'ll'as allov1ed to view two altars at Tenochtitlan, he saw braziers containing copal and burning hearts alongside the gold and jewel-covered i.dols. vlhen he tried to tell :r.1ontezuma that they were 64

---~-~,~- .. ~-~-~--- .. -·---,-~ .. ·---,~-·····~~-~~--~--~~"----~-~-----···,··-~-"~ -··: ..... __ ...... _...._1 r ev11, Montezuma repl1ed: i . ", •• if I had known that you >

or diorite, measuring a few centimeters in height 9 to I :figures of' basalt and volcanic stone \vhich measure over 2 i meters high. The degree of workmanship also varied

as many v1ere mass-produced, probably .for use as household deities. ! The poses are generally rigid and static, and as l Nicholson (1971: 128) says, this is "well in keeping with ! their idol function." lYiost :figures stand with :feet l! planted firmly and eyes straight ahead; some sit with legs!

crossed; and others kneel. Some wear elaborate costumes 1 and ornaments while others are portrayed nearly nude, wearing simply a loin cloth. I Most idols were portrayed basically realistic with human male and :female characteristics. Hovmver, some I combine symbolic images with human characteristics, and I the detail is still realistic. For example, the :figure o:f! Coatlicue, which measures 8 i feet high and weighs about I 12 tons, has two serpent heads placed :face to face, and ,. I wears a skirt of snakes, and a necklace with a human skull~ t-~----""'"·""""""""----·--~---·~-··--···--·-----~------~---·- --·--·----~---~ .. ·------.. ·--·-·) 65

~------·------,,~~--~~----·-·----~=·---·-·-·•=•-~w'"··~ '''' _,,,.,, ..,~,,.'•cl ! hands and hearts.. The was thought of as po\verful and awesome, and the sculptors transmuted those qualities to stone (Vaillant 1941: 163). Kubler (1962) suggests that idols reflect a masked i interpretation of a god and his human representative. ]'or: l example, at planting time a youth chosen to represent Xipe. Totec, Our Lord the Flayed One, the god of newly planted I seed, was sacrificed and flayed. A priest was then se'lfv'U I into his skin "in a symbolic enactment of the live seed I \1Ti thin the dead husk, designed to induce and compel the I renewal of' the earth's fertilityn (Ibid.: 58). In thj_s way, the force contained in the skin was transferred I through the priest to the god. The idol circulated among l people as a kind of token for future growth. In Kubler's (Ibid. : 59) vmrds: The god manifested his presence through an agent clad in godly attributes, who, during the festivals of the god, mingled vdth the people. Thus he was a living and moving cult image, of which the stone replicas were immobile representations, kept like capital reserves in the vault-like temple chambers. ' Some of the idols are crude and plain and therefore di.fficult to recognize, but most can at least be placed into general categories. Since agricultural deities comprised the majority of the Aztec pantheon, it is not surprizi11g to find that the fertility deities,

pa~ticularly maize, earth, water, and rain, were most I often represented. The fertility theme also predominated , ' . i l--·-·----~---~~---·---·-----"·----~------~------·-·--·-·~-·--·J r~~~g ~ th:-~~0~-~~~es w~~~-;~~~ p~:~uct~-~-~--~~ ··~~·-~~-·~···

and water and combinations of these (Nicholson 1971: 127).

WOOD CARVING Idols Many of the idols used in the Late Postclassic were o:f wood, hmvever few have been found d.ue to systematic destruction by Spanish and poor preservation (Nicholson and Berger 1968: 5).

~'wo figures, a male and a female, were found. together in the early 1960s, during construction work in an area close to what had been the eastern shore of the Basin of Mexico, where many offerings had been thro\v.n into the lake to propitiate rain and water deities. Both pieces \"/ere probably carved by the same artisan and date

from the fourteenth century - 11 A more precise date is not possible because of the character of the variation in the

radiocarbon content in tree rings during this time period" i (Ibid.: 13). Details on the female figure indicate that she represents Chalchiuhtlicue, Lady Precious Green, goddess of water, storms, and fertility. The figure, measuring 53 centimeters high, wears an ankle-length blue skirt and carries a large disc in front. A small hole located at I each armpit perforates through the torso. The eyes are

I hollow slits, and had probably contaJ.·· ned some kJ." nd of . L_,...... ___. __••~.,..,.., ____..'-""""'"_,_'...,._·---- ·-~-1>'•-~---=--·-•.,...---,.~~·~~--.-...... - ... ~,...-..,.,, ____..,_,__.,_..,, . ...,.'"""'"....,_.,._..,,.,___.,,..-, .. ,,~~ .. -.,_...... _,~--r.'.-.•~•·--"'•l 67

·=----·-·~·------~--~-~~- ----===--.r--~---··<~''""-'''"'~~·~·;

1r inlay. On the lower portion of each cheek is a painted · I black rectangular shape. This is a common feature of fertility deities, although most are in the form of either. a stripe or two parallel stripes (Ibid.: 11). The male .figure, measuring 54.5 centimeters, is nude. and carries a large disc almost identical to the one the female figure carries. These discs possibly held obsidian mirrors or stone mosaic plaques \Ibid.: 21). As on the female figure, there is a small hole at each armpit that i j perforates through the body. The eyes contain shell i I I inlays and there are holes in the earlobes for ornaments. I The hair is painted blue-green, marked with vertical black I lines. The head and face are very similar to that of the I ! female figure, however, the body is somewhat more i 'I realistically depicted. It is not known who this figure I represents since identifying markings have been lost from l I it. l These wooden figures are reminescent of the figures o.f saints in present-day Mesoamerican villages in two ways. First, both represent sacred images. Second, it is possible that the two idols were decorated, just as present-day images of saints are dressed. Nicholson (Ibid.: 16) speculates that through the perforations at the armpits uwas threaded a thin cord of maguey .fibre, on which could have been hung or attached the rectangular l rubber-spattered papers.u Paper ornaments were usually , ! ! ·- -~--~-·------·~------·------.-----~-----·--··----.. --.. -----~·) 68

r---~--·--· -·~~'..a<-""'"~----~-_,..,; __,••---·-· ..,.,.,,..,,...,..U..._.,.-;.>.O:_A..._"_~.,...... ,_.,.,_ • ._ .. ,._,~,.,..,_,.."'-'"'<~"".T ..._,,...,._o_...-.!•-~·~<-w\ I , 1 part of the decoration of the water goddess and fertility deities, and it is probable that they decorated the female idol (Ibid .. : 11). Nicholson (Ibid. : 16) further suggests

that the male figure may be a "dummy, 11 and that the "insignia and ornaments were periodically changed, depending on the ritual occasion, so that they could .

represent different deities at different times. 11

P.APER -:tvr.AKI NG Paper objects were used to a great extent by the Aztecs in Postclassic times (Marti 1965). Sacred paper decorations and costumes were used in ceremonies in the form of cone-shaped headgear, imitation hair, breech clouts, undergarments, stoles, and flags. As an offering,

paper.· wa3 tipped '\

gods and to record, preserve and implement the power of

the rulers. 11 The finest paper was undoubtedly reserved for the priests, writers and artists and their codices, calendars and histories (Von Hagen 1957). The remainder \'lfas offered

in the market place ~ in rolls and sheets, and as paper

1 scraps and fragments tipped with copal or decorated with ·• _..,,...... ,_._._,__,.,,_ --·--~---.---.-.~---...----=---'-"'--' • ...... _...,"""''"""'• .. ,__•_...,..,..,.~-·--~-...... _...... ,....., ...... ,..,,._....,,...... ,.,..__._...... ,_.,..,...,._,_.,.,=-«-•-~...-~.A•,->r'" _.._.,.f rd~oPS- ~. ~::~~b:~~~=ez provi:es ::-::-::-·------1 information that tells what materials and tech1uques are i still being used in a few Mesoamerican villages today. Hernandez, a Spanish scientist and nattrralist, whp I travelled throughout the highlands and lowlands of Mexico

1 for five years beginning in 1570, observed the papermakers: I I at work in Tepoztlan. l In Von Hagen's (1944: 36) translation, Hernandez I described the processes used: I l "To fashion the paper, they cut ••• the larger branches from the tree ••• these are softened I in water and allowed to soak all the night on I the river banks. On the following day the outer bark is removed and cleaned of its outer l crust with rock iplanches 1 shaped for the l l purpose, grooved with striations, and with a i bunch of willovJ twigs passed through a hole ! ancl twisted for a handle. The bark is beaten out thoroughly \vi th these stone beaters. It is thus rendered pliable. After this it is I cut into strips which are easily joined I together by beating the bark again with a

,.l smoother stonec They are then polished (by means of a xicaltetl), and so finally 'l 1 fashioned into sheets of two dodrans (1s 1 inches) long and one and one-half dodrans / ( 13 ~ inches) wide. 11 , Xicaltetl are stone celts that resemble irons. These were

.·,' heated, and pressed onto the paper, closing its pores and giving it surface. According to Hernandez, the bark is from the

a.Il.l~&uahuitl, which literally means paper-tree in Nahuatl. I He reported "'The ~aquahuitl ••• is a large tree with I ' ' ! leaves like a fig tree and white flowers and fruits ! L~ .. ~-~------·------.-~--~-~---·----·-··· .J 70

r- .....--~··--· ------.... -.~-----q-~·-"w-..·····~-·-··.···-; ! arranged in clusters' 11 (Ibid.).

1,! What the Aztecs called ~atl belongs to the genus

Ficus and this word ~or tree came to mean the same as the paper made from it. Paper was made from the bark of many

species of wild fig and there are more than fi~ty species throughout I·'Iexico. The town of Amacozti tlan on the Rio Amacuzac in the state of Morelos was the center of paper manufacturing. Paper became an important article of tribute. 24-,000 resmas, or 480,000 sheets by the Aztec system, were to be brought annually to Tenochtitlan lVon Hagen 1957: 181).

Details of the ritual use o~ paper is learned from the descriptions given by Sahagun, who observed the

customs, beliefs, ~~d skills o~ the Aztecs. For example, I in the festival in honor of , an ornament I "consisted of an enormous piece of paper, twenty fathoms

(six feet each) long by one in width, and one finger thick .. This paper was cm"'ried by a number of strong men Iin front of the image, holding it on either side 11 (Sahagun; 1971: 85). In sacrifices to the gods, Sahagun (Ibid.: 159) I! I reports: When they sacrificed a slave or a captive, I his owner or master gathered the blood (of the victim) in a bowl (jicara), threw a white paper into it, then visited all the 1 , statues of the "demons 11 (gods), and ! I smeared this blood-soaked paper over their 1 L----··--~-·-~-·---~------·------·------~· --"--~-----.. ----.. --'"· ..---- .. ·---·~--·--·-·· .. · 71

r·---~·-·-----.. --·~-.,····-.. ,... ~--- ··- ...... -· ._, _____ ,_,..~-~-- .. -~ .. ---~~---=~~-~~~-~-·~~---·-----. ! mouths; others dipped a stick in the blood 1 and painted the mouth of the idol (statue) l with that. ij Paper-making continues in Mesoamerica today, and 1 artisans use the same plants and essentially the same I processes. In addition to this, paper objects are still

1 used in ceremonies and for ritual purposes. i I 1 SU.[\1}1ARY i - In this chapter, various aspects of Postclassic Aztec art have been discussed, including a look at the artists, and an examination of the sculpture, specifically stone and wooden idols. The art of making paper objects

was also discussed. The following su~ary emphasizes the main conclusions made which relate to what will be co.l.led art in present-day Mesoamerica. The art of the Aztecs reflects the complete domination of their lives by religion. In fact, in o.rd.!r£ to understand their art, it is necessa:a to know S0!!!!3thing__ about their _r-eligiQ_us beliefs. To the Aztecs, man's very existence depended on the gods who were "intermediaries between man and the infinite power of the universe" (Vaillant 1941: 155)G An inevitable doom was warded off with blood and sacrifices to the sun, the source of all life. Sacrificial death was a necessity, and art, poetry,

1 and religion prepared victims for this end (Kubler 1962~ ! 51). I Idols were used extensively throughout central

,j;,<•o, "--'" ·-·--•·'""''• >-•"•••••~~-=--,.~·<••••>"·~-----~·=~·'"--''"• >' ••-•Co ><.,, •"- <,•.-.~.~•••''-' •• ~...... -~_,_ __ ....,._._, • ....,...... -. __ .,,..,.-'<0,....,....,"'"""-"-'-•~----"*"=••~~.....,~-=- ...... ,._, ... J-o'o~ .•-~- « ,, ••• '~"', ,• ,,>••--'- ,,~. •.--••~,,.•, • 72 r·:::: ::d t::::::::::::::::::=:-:;·-· l villages,_ the Aztec ido.l_s were sac:r:ed images that.. .r.eceiveq I 1 of'fer.i.J:~.gs to \vard off evil and to give thanks. In I addition to this, prnamentati9.J1..m"'l have b!:_en att?>ched to

I ~ooden figur~§, reminescent of the way in which present=

day i~ages ,~re dre~se~. Paper objects were used extensively by the Aztecs

in ceremo~ies and as tribute in Postclassic timeso ~

techniquef?_~IJ..d materials used in l{aper··makj..,pg ha.,Y!t

~~j;he present-day in a few l'•lesoamericqn

~&~~· In addition to this, 12a12er objects still .!l.av.Q a ritual functionc The axt of the Postclassic Aztecs further demonstrates that art was deeply influenced by religious beliefs. As with the Olmec and the Haya, subject matter

was inspired by religious concepts, and again, art was not created for the sake of art. Offerings also accompanied many of the stone monuments.. It is this . 1 association between objects and religion that "llill define 1

what I call 11 art" in present-day Mesoamerica. f"---~-,--~-~~---~-~------··--·~··""''''····-·····-"~·-·--·····"'.-., ... ,., .... ,, I

PRESENT-DAY l'1ESO.Al'1ERI CA

1, IN.CRODUCTION I "Art" in present-day l'1esoamerica reflects both I ancient Indian and European religious beliefso As an 1 outcome of the Conquest, when the Spanish enforced their I religion on the Indians, pagan beliefs fused with ! , producing varying reactions. On the whole, { ! Catholicism is the dominant religion throughout Latin .America - "F-rom the Rio Grande to Patagor1ia the cult of the Virgin Mary is the core of religious loyalty; the same/saints are honored on the same days and in essentially the same fashion, and the same Mass draws the faithful each Sunday" (Foster 1960: 3-4). There was "an astonishing similarity in ritual and , symbol" between the pagan beliefs and Christianity, and I this eased the transition from the old to the new religion. i' ! I (Wolf 1959: 171). However, the Aztecs and Maya developed contrasting patterns of reaction to the new religion. I The Aztecs fused their own beliefs with Catholicism, I abandoning their pagan rites. The Maya, on the other I hand, "retained as the meaningful core of their ! religion, \vhich became incremented with varying degrees l of Catholicism" (Nadsen 1967: 370).

'---·------~ny~~~~~e-· old pagan beli~~~ ~1er-~- ~~intai~~-~-.. ~~------

73 74-

f-""'-'=....,.~...... 0·"'"~-~'>---·~,.,.. ~"'""'"'""'~"~""-~""""'"'----~~--....~--.... ,__,_..._.._ ... ~~A••'"""""'-"·""~~···~=«:1J30.-o.. ,.< . .,_...._... 9 •o,;,__.,,_~~,. I the Maya as their religion fused with Christianity, i Ithereby creating a religion having "new rites and concepts' which are neither the one nor the other" (D. Thompson 1 1 1960: 5). The Spanish friars, half of whom could not

I speak ~aya proficiently and therefore could not

1 communicate with the IVfaya, "wanted complete and i:r:nnediate I• conversion to a religion which the lYiaya could not l I understand and complete rejection of an old one which had I I been theirs for centuries 11 (Ibid. : 12). To further add to the confusion that the Maya must have felt, pagan shrines were converted to Christian temples, churches were built on pyramids, and the Catholic calendar coincided with days meaningful to the Maya. In some instances, Catholic concepts have served to reinforce ancient Maya beliefs. The religion and values of the Maya survived the Conquest virtually intact 11 to become the backbone of resistance to Christianity" (:C.1adsen 1967: 382)& The Naya had no need for a new religion, and in some areas, Christian concepts were accepted \'lhere they would no·t

impair nati1re belief or were "molded to fit the needs and predispositions of the Indians" (D. Thompson 1960: 22). The Aztecs, on the other hand, were more j_nclined to accept new religious concepts, as their own religion had been created llfrom numerous invading tribes through a long process of syncretism" (Madsen 1960: 115). The 75

sacrifice -were destroyed in the Conquest, resulting in abandonment of their pagan rites and a fusion of their beliefs with Christianity. The Aztec and Catholic differed in concepts, but were similar in forms of worship. Spanish saints resembled Aztec deities as both were portrayed by ! images and received offerings, worship, public

I processions, and had special importance in a religious I I calendar. Also, both were sought for rain, good crops I ! and health. The saintsf hovmver, were thought to be ! perfect, benevolent beings, while the Aztec gods P~d a

I dual nature, primarily malevolent (Ibid.: 128)~ !' l The Aztecs accepted Catholic forms of worship

1 because they were useful, compatible, and could be Noreover, the I interwoven with pagan religious riteso I Indians believed that by following Catholic ritual they I would "gain the material benefits previously obtained by l pagan ceremonies" (Ibid.). I The degree to which Christian and pagan elements have blended varies from area to aTea, and from village to vi.llage. As Tax (1952: 290) says, "the people who had : I least to lose lost least. The people who were most highly' i civ1lized were acculturated most rapidly." I ! \ To a certain extent, art, like religion, is l reflective of the past. As in the past, it is tied j1 l____ ""··----.---~~~,--·----~·- ·----~-----·---·~-·--~---~,-·-·"·••·"! 76

A continuity can be seen between the idols of the past and the present-day images of saints, when form, function,, and treatment are considered. Also examined are the altars of today, vrhich can be thought of as art, just as

the so-called altars of the past \ver~~. \vhilo the materials and techniques are not the sarne, both have ritual function, and are decorated \vi th religious symbolism.. Finally, the paper-making industry is discussed. In this art, the materials and processes used ' are essentially the same as they were in the past.

I l ' I ARTISTS 1 I Most peoples of I1esoamerican villages today are I devoted to the cultivation of crops, and, unlike the past,'

Il it is rare to find full-time craft specialists. In the Zapotec town of Ixtepeji, for example, virtually the entire population is involved in the production of corn I and beans, -v,rhich is near a subsistence level (Kearney 1972: 4). I' Economic organization is simrlle in Chan Kom, a Maya I village on the Yucatan peninsula, and no member of the

<..., , ... .,w~~-•-=-,.,.-..-_,.....,o.,.,~~..,...-.~~_....,.,...... _. .. _,.~...,.>k"<'_,_,,...-..-,-..-..-"""'-"'-~------_,_"',...__.,...~.,.-,..,._ •. _,.,.....,._...,.._~.. ~-··~··A'•.,._,.'"-~-...__,...,.._.;;,.-,...._..-.,,__,...... ,."._•••·•• ~--~·•, -·• . .-.-., ... Tl

r···-·-~---~--~--~---~~~-~--~~----·~---·-»=•~-~"·~-~~"•MN>~~···-»>•>-•<>'">p,_.,.,,., j community lives by trade (Redfield and Villa Rojas 1962: 68). There is no man who does not grovl maize for "to abandon one's milpa is to forsake the very roots of life" (Ibid.: 51). Also, there is no vmman who does not keep house or cook. In addition to this, most men also keep bees. Nigratory artisans \'Till either come to the village I or will be sought by villagers in the nearby town of I 1 Valladoli.d.

1,. Full-time craft specialists can be found in the

1 i I villages of Tzintzuntzan and Tonola, where pottery ' production comprises over 50% of the occupationso In Tzintzuntzan, agricultural land is in short supply, and 55% of the families earn most, if not all, of their income-.

from making pottery (Foster 1967: 38)~ vlliile the bulk of : production is utilitarian, much more artistic ware is also: made "in increasing quantities and styles to meet domestic and foreign tourist demands" (Ibid.: 42). Tona1tecans believe that to me]{:e pottery is their destino (destiny), and in Tonola, 53% or the income ls derived either in part or entirely from pottery-making (Diaz 1966). The craft involves the whole family and there is no specific division of labor - "Certain kinds of jobs are considered to be men's vrork and others to be within the province of women ••• but the rules are not ironclad and none of the pottery activities are forbidden j to anyone because of sex" (Ibid.: 156). l.~----·~··--. ·-··----~-~------~--··-----·~·-~------·~-·------~---.. --····------~·-·--·--- 78

r···-~---~-·--~~---·-. --·--·---~~~w··~ .. ~------'·--·-·~~·~·-~-"'-~ ·················· . · Despite the fact that pottery-making in Tonola · comprises a major part of the town economy, being a farmer• is ranked higher than being a potter. Moreover, farming takes precedence over pottery-makin.g and where "there is a conflict between the fulfillment of a pottery contract and the immediate need to perform a farming task, the former is allowed to slide" (Ibid.: 158). The Otomi Indians of San Pablito, Pueblo, who still ma'ke paper as their ancestors did, serve as an example of part-time craft specialists. Their economy, based on corn and the manufacture of articles of women's clothing for

trade, is supplemented by the production of bark paper.

This latter craft is done 11 at night or during those parts

of the day vvhen there is little else to do 11 (Von Hagen 1944: 57). In addition to this, paper is manufactured ! ! exclusively by women, and is done individually, not j collectively (Marti 1965). J l Although the position of the artist differs in the I past and present, and there is no need or opportunity for 1 artists to constitute a specialized occupational class over most of Mesoamerica today, the creation of their work remains anonymous. As in the past, objects created today are not of a personal or individual nature, but relate to the society from which they stem.

THE HODERN CERF..i'~'IONIAL CENTER --·-~-~ I The modern ceremonial center is discussed at this 1.. ··-·-~·· ~--~-.---~-----··------~--~-.....,---~-----·-·---· ~~-·-······--··········. 79

.{----...... ,,.....,._~-----~""'""""---~""'-'~·"'-·"""'- ,,.-.,..-..,·""'-~-'=*'<.... --'-_, •• ~,.__,,•• .,..,..,, ....:-,,,_,_.,_=e>-.>-_.~ • .:•.... ~······,<·····~···, I point for two reasons. First, it follows a pattern introduced in ancient times; and second, it demonstrates the sacred context in which modern-day art is placed. Vogt (1970: 17) calls Zinacantan "a classic example of an ancient type of Maya settlement.u It is a ceremonial center with outlying hamlets .:i.n which most of the population lives. However, the ancient pattern has been changed somewhat by the Mexican municipio political structure. Political as vvell as religious officials serve. their tours of duty at the municipio's administrative

center of the ceremonial center, called the ~e Also, there i.s a town hall, or a cabildo. Catholic churches have replaced the temples and pyramids. There

1 are also a few small Ladino stores. The settlement

pattern in the hamlets, or Q.ar~j_E,?_§., has changed less,

altho~gh there are Catholic churches in three of them. Other than this, says Vogt ( 1969: 155), "the basic settlement pattern seems to have changed little since the time of the Conquest." Zinacantan is situated to the west of the Ladino town of San Cristobal Las Casas, the principal market I place and political center for the Tzotzi1, and covers an lI area of 117 square kilometers. The population is l approximately B,ooo, with 7,600 living in 15 scattered 1_ ha~ets, and the other 400 living in the ceremonial center, 1. 200 of which are permanent residents (Vogt 1969). I . ~ L~-·-~-•·--·------·------~--~·-~---·-·--··--•·---•-•><·•-•••••••·•-••·--•·•w.} ao

r~~~~-·-... 5~,__.,...,.,._.,_?...... _...,.~ .... - ..... ~--~...... ---~.._._=,._..~..,.,-= ...... ,..._=,,,."""' ... "'"'·""'""'".o..l""' ..... ''""''~~--...... ,c·. .,...,,,,l ! ; 1 The ceremonial center, called. Hteklum, is situated · I at 7, 000 feet in a well-watered valley, and is surrounded Iby pine- and oak-covered limestone and volcanic mountains. I In the center are three Catholic churches, the 11 homes" of the saints - San Lorenzo, San Sebastian, and the Hermitage of Senor Esquipulas. In all three churches, the main altar faces west, so that persons praying face east, the direction in which the most important ancestral gods are believed to live. I ZinacantanCenter can. literally be thought of as the· I eenter of all Zinacantan. The Zinacantecos conceive their, world to have the shape of e large cube, the center of the upper surface being called mishik' balamil - the "navel of' the world.n This is represented by a low mound of earth

-j located in the Center. Nearby is a shrine to which l I pilgrimages are made by the Zinacantecos who bring

1.' 1 offerings of candles, copal, and prayers. There are hundreds of wooden crosses in Zinaca.ntan on church tops and in churchyards, on house tops and in patios outside of the houses, beside and above waterholes,; in caves, at the foot and summits of mountains, at grave heads in cemeteries, on the edges of hamlets and around the edges of the ceremonial center. Vogt (1970: 12) comments., "The casual visitor to Zinacantan always comes away with the impression that he must have visited one of the most solidly Catholic communities in the world." 8•1

~---."----~-~------· -~--·------~-"-~----~·---.. ~·-·-"~"-···=g·"~·-·-·"·" j Crosses and cross shrines in Zinacan-tan can be j thought of as works of art just as the altars of anci.ent Mesoamerica are. They are laid in sacred places, receive

o~ferings, and have a ceremonial function. Mountains, caves, and waterholes are considered to be sacred places, and provide a sacred context for the I art. Ancestral gods are believed to reside inside almost j all mountains, from majestic ones like Ba~~ilal Muk'ta

! TI..:'s§. (Senior JJarge Mountain) to those more like hills, ! such as~ ~ishtoval (San Cristobal Mountain). Each ! i' mountain has special interior features and ritual I f1mctions, and is classified as male or female. Cross i shrines are laid at the foot and summits of sacred ' mountains and serve a;3 11 doorways 11 to ancestral gods. Caves, \vaterholes, and limestone si11ks are

classified together as "openings 11 and serve as a means of reaching the Earth Owner living beneath the surface of ..L""vne ; earth. It is by way of cross shrines placed in these areas that the Earth Owner "receives his oi'ferings of candles and liquor" \Ibid.: 13)., There must be three crosses together in any kind of ritual activity. Where only one cross stands, for example, the house cross, or where there are two crosses, as in the case of the cross shrines at the :foot or top o:f

mountains, a second and third ~ may be created simply I by adding pine boughs to the side of the one, or two

L------··-·------·---··~--.. --.. --- 82

----~-·-·----•-· ---~·~-~---·-•~-~- ~~---w-,~•=-~=·~·<•'-~'•'-=""·""'~~>·•.··••···~~

r1 wooden crosses. Further, Vogt (Ibido) has noted that if l a ritual must be performed where no crosses exist, "the three-cross combination can be created ritually by simply

placing t:h.ree pine boughs in the ground. n According to Vogt (1969: 389), it is not the wooden cross, but the pine boughs and flowers which "really provide the needed symbols.n This combination, he (Ibid.:' 586) suggests, was probably used to decorate their ancient· idols, and today the cross can hardly be seen when the decorations are placed on it.

A set of sym~olic elements are utilized in conjunction with the cross sl1rine in any kind of ritual activity where there is to be communication with the gods.:

1 These "provide a sacred context in which the communication· i can take place 11 (Vogt 1970: 13). I The first element nichim, translated as "flower," i includes pine boughs, pine needles, red geranium blossoms, I . ! and a variety of other plants which vary with the type of I ceremony. Three freshly grown boughs cut from the tops of pine trees are tied to the three crosses; bundles of red Ii I geranium blossoms are tied to the boughs at the level of I the cross arms; and, a fresh carpet of pine needles is

Il laid in .front of the shrine. ~ ! Incense, the second element, must also be burned in l a censer, called "place of burning embers, 11 in ritual j activity. Balls of resin and chips of wood are burned

!______~------·-· ~ 83

,.--~~----~--~-~~---~~--~~--~-,--~-~·'-=-~~~-·=·-"'·"'·'-·~-j ! together at the shrine, and must be burning before the ritual party arrives and prayers begin. The third symbolic element is £OSh, a rum distilled from brown sugar. By drinking it, participants are prepared for communication with gods. In a drinking ritual, a highly patterned sequence of behavior is followed, 'vhich varies only slightly in different ceremonies. Prayers and offerings of candles and black chickens are then made to the gods& It is believed that the "" of the candles and chickens provide sustenance I ! for the gods "who will be so pleased with these offerings I I that they \rill reciprocate by restoring the 'inner soul' of a patient, by sending rain for a thirsty maize crop, or by eliminating any number of evils and setting things right for the Zinacantecos" (Ibid.: 16). The pattern of Zinacantan is very much like that of Tika..l in Classic times. Buildings are oriented to the cardinal directions and churches can be seen as replacing temples and pyramids. The cross shrines, like the stelae and altars of the 11aya, are laid in special places and receive offeringso They also have a ceremonial function and are decorated with specific symbolic elements. I It appears that in Zinace.ntan the pre-Columbian j bellefs and symbols have persisted, v1i th the Catholic I patterns being modified to suit the purposes of the , L-----~----..·-·~··-·-·,--~ ------~-----,--~------·--~~~-·------~------.. ·-- .. -·»J 84-

r--n'>··~~----"··~-~,--~· --~-- -"~-~-~-·~----·-~----~~--··-"~·~··=·······""···•·«"""" ! Zinacantecos. After Vogt had been doing fieldwork there for a few seasons, he (Ibid.: 12) says, it became "more and more apparent that Zinacantecos were not Catholic peasants with a few Maya remnants left in their culture, but rather that they were Maya tribesmen with a Spanish· Catholic veneer - a veneer that appears to be increasingly thin the longer we do fieldwork with the culture."

--I}~~GES OF SAI1~S- The images of saints in present-day Mesoamerican villages may be thought of as "art" in the same way as the idols which preceded them, when form, function, and

treatment are considered. I believe that, like their predecessors, the images are given offerings and are situated in sacred places. Through their images, thanks 1 are given to the saints to maintain prosperity and J I protection. As one informant from Amatenango del Valle I I says, "All of the goods which we enjoy - the corn, beans, j and \vheat that we eat, the animals which work for us and I I gtve us food are the gifts of the Lord Spirits" (Nash 1970: 197). l 1 Saints and their images vary :from village to village,' I as do the beliefs about them and the treatment which they i j l receive. Images range from a simple wooden cross housed l ~ 1 in a little shrine to realistic human figures which are I 1 dressed in ribbons and robes and are paraded through the j tom1~ Degree of workmanship also varies as a cross of ...-~-~"'~""-.--~,.,.,_,_. __, ____ """___,"',_.~.. ~_,.,...., ...... ""~-"-~=-,...~--~-·------·"'-'" ...... __.,._,_.,..,,..,.. ____ ...,.,____ ~--~~------._.,.._--=,._,._""""""""'~-----"--···~, .... " .. '"-"""""--··«'-~"··· 85

~~~~~~~r~p~·--·----·~·-·-~--

1 A saint may be closely identified with its image, as: it is in Chan Kom. The guardians of the village are called santos and are generally thought of as beneficent. I j When a new settlement is founded, a new santo is made as

1 protector. It may be in the form of a wooden cross or a I carved effigy. The latter is usually selected from the i' stock of a man who makes santos in the nearby town of i I Valladolid. In Chan Kom, a santo is thoug~t of as one

with its image, and 11 it is probable that tvm effigies of the same name are regarded as two distinct supernatural personages" (Redfield and Villa Rojas 1962: 108). In Zinacantan, the images are htunan-like figures of saintsj called santoetik, which vary from one to six feet in height. Most are housed in the three churches in the ceremonial center and are dressed in long silk robes. The female saints additionally wear items of Zinacanteco dress such as pink-and=white striped shawls and ribboned

~ith ! necklaces. The male saints are additionally adorned I bright-colored ribbons and tassels. I ~ehe statue of San Lorenzo, patron saint of ! Zinacantan, stands gazing up over the main altar of San I 1 Lorenzo church. It is dressed in a silk brocade robe, i ~ '"ith long silk ribbons, and mirrors, anQ. with a shiny ! halo around the head. During major fiestas, a sacred I I necklace of ancient and modern coins is placed around the ! L---~~·-----0'·-·--~---~~· . 86

The Zinacantecos regard their saints to be "gods of extraordinary power, with souls located in the statues" (Vogt 1969: 361). The clothes o:f the images must be washed and incensed regularly. In addition to this, the figures are bathed with water from sacred waterholes. Like the ancient idols, the modern-day images are also given offerings. In Chan Kom, offerings consist of prayers and candles, and the village fiesta. A.fter a

§arrt~ is selected to protect a new settlement and is blessed by the town priest, it is taken to the village

it will v!atch over, and is received with a no~~ario and

a i~~.. These are two essential elements of the village fiesta ancJ are "offerings" to the santo. The nov-enario ---~·

consists of nine evenings of and the ~ is a

dance that tru(es place where the ~anto can watch. During fiestas in Zinacantan, which last for three days, offerings of flowers and candles are brought by families to the saints. The image of a saint is usually placed in a prominant position in the church, so that I families can get close to it. Flowers are placed in a I basket near the statue or on the altaro The hem of the ! image's robe is taken by each member of the family, ! I touched to the forehead and then kissed. The v1hole family l I the>i kneels, lights their candles, placing them on the ,

'!' floor in front of the saint, and prays intensely for ' I t .-..--.. =~" •• ,..._,._...... _,_,,.._.,-_..~- ...... -.o.~""""'d_,....,,... ______,..,.,_...... ,,...... ,.,.._""~--...--~--~·- '-'="',.._,.... ______

r-~~------·=-~~~----~-~-~----~-·------~-~·-·-~--~·-~"··-~··· ·- .·. ··-"·········--······· . l fifteen to thirty minutes .. Another side of the treatment which images recetve can be seen in the Tarascan community of Ihuatzio. The j_mages of saints are treated in much the same way as important and influential members of the community. The commissioners, or carguereros, in charge of the images keep them in their houses. In fact, \'lhen a man accepts an image into his house, it is a sign that he has accepted his appointment as commissioner •

.Al·l;hough the saints 11 are of an order different i'rom that of the villagers themselves," they are a part of the

daily life of the community ( Zantv1ijk 1967: 147). When villagers believe that they have fulfilled their obligations to the saints and haYe not received re·vrards, they feel justified in "punishing" their images. According to Zantwijk (Ibid.): The principle of reciprocity, ,.,hich plays such an important part in the social life of the villagers, to a certain extent also determines their relationship with the 11 saints", or one might also say the "gods"~ Offerings are brought to the gods in the expectation of a re·ward: adequate rainfall, recovery from illness, success in social relations, a good catch of fish, fair earnings from trade, etc. If the offerings and the devotion shO\m remain unrel'rarded, the gods concerned are sometimes abused; in some cases their images are beaten or dragged along through the dust. Often such gods are threatened with reprisals. l Another example o:f an image and the treatment it l receives can be :found in the carved wooden statue of L~ ...... ----·~------~-~·--~---~------~------~------~----~---·~- ---·-·------·------·------·-···--· ...... 88

r·-----~-·-"----"·-·· ~----~-~---~=··----=-~~.. ~-·~·-~--~--~~--~'"-"""--=----·"··~-~~-·--····w·-···--··"·••, li Judas,. a central figure- in the Tarahu.mara Easter ! ceremonies. It is carved one week prior to Easter week, and the person selected to do the carving gains 11 a certain.

amount of prestige •• ~for not all people have the

capability or the tools to perform this necessary task: 11

(Lopez 1974~ 3). Certain :features of the statue are realistic, although "the techniques, ability, and lack of time, all

act to inhibit the creation of refined realism 11 on facial fcattrres (Ibid.: 4). So that Judas can see what is done for him, white gravel, charcoal, and green glass are used to depict realistic eyeso Teeth are inserted into the mouth, so that he can consume the offerir...gs of food macle to hime Animal teeth, usually those of a pig, are placed in small holes in the mouth, however when these are not available, wooden replicas are used instead. Cow's halr is used for the head, moustache, and pubic areao

~1 he general :form of the figure is shaped by an axe, with the less important aspectsy such as the feet, being mao.e by an assistant to the carver. A sa\'!, rasp, and knife are used to add detail.

The carving goes on :for several days, \vi th the i. carving of the phallus being made last. vfuen the details ·Ii are completed, it is inserted above the gonads, which are

I 11 1 deliberately large, for the Tarahumara. Judas is a lustful I I t._ ..,._,__,. ~-·~ ...... ,_,.._.,,_._=----~ ...... -~..-.---·--·~.._~ ..... ~,~...-.-.~~...... ~ ... ---- ... ,._.._,.,,.__._...... -_• ..,.,""""_,.,..._,.....,,.,. __ .,..,,.._=-=-~-·,..,...~~~·~,...--.,..,..,.-- ~~., ...... --.~~""""""'""'-"-'••-~~-~=-~-·~·-·- .. _... _, .. ,., •• 89

style clothes, which will be ripped off when he is attacked later in the Easter ceremonies. Judas is a very important part of the Tarahumara Easter ceremonies, and if he was not included, "crops would not come up out of the ground, animals would not reproduce, and babies would not be born" (Ibid.: 9) .. Lopez (Ibid.) suggests that the figure's primary function is that of a :fertility figure, and possibly also originally referred to the sun. The images of present-day r·1esoamerican saints are influenced by religious beliefs in form, function, and treatment, just as the ancient idols were. Offerings are given to these figures in the expectation of rewards and to give tha:nks • -.ALTARS l I The altars of present-day l'1eooamerica can be thought I of as 11 art," just as the massive stone tables of the I ! I OJ.mec, labE:lled 11 altarstt by JVlatthew Stirling, were. While the materials and techniques are not the same, religious I symbolib'ID and ritual func-t;ion are elements which appea-r in both the past and the present., The altars of today serve as a place of worship where offerings are made, and

They range from 90

.------··"'"'""~·-=~--4~~""-, r simple, consisting of just one or two stones on which copal may be burned, to very ornate, with an emphasis on aesthetic expression. Almost every house in Mesoamerica has its own altar,' no matter how poor the furnishings may be. The simplest, for example that of the Chinantec, consists of a small table against the wall covered with flowers, candles, and images (Weitlaner and Cline 1969: 537). The most important furnishing in the house of the Tzeltal is the small altar where the cross that protects

1 the house is found \Villa Rojas 1969a). The altar may be made simply of tree trunks and is generally ornamented with pine needles. Sometimes the figure of a saint is I1 I placed near the cross. I The altar is also an important part of the house I furnishings to the Kekchi (Villa Rojas 1969b). Placed on I it is the image of a saint, along with offerings of I flowers, ears of corn, bird feathers, and bird beaks. I In Mitla, a Zapotec town east of , the house I altar is simple both in form and kinds of adornment. In many houses it is the only table, and villagers eat from l the ground (Parsons 1936). The "table" may be of solid construction or merely of one or two boards set on sticks. ' There are several saints on every house altar, usually represented by prints or colored lithographs; sometimes j by an oil painting or an image. These are placed toward ! ~--·~ .. 91

rth~·~ack. of the ~~r-. _A_b_o_u_t_t_h_e._m_ar_e_t_w_o·--o-r_m_o_r_e-va~~s··--·, I1 of flowers, particularly chamomile, the "flower of the saints." Sometimes these flowers are fresh, but more often they are dried up and withered. Also on the altar are candlesticks, or bottles that serve as candleholders. There is also a three-legged clay censer on the altar, or, it may stand below on the ground. Wheat straw and bunches / of seed corn are either placed on the altar, or hang from l above, from the roof or a beam. I Many other kinds of things are found on altars in I l'Ii tla. In Parson's (Ibid.: 28) words: 11 The altar is I often used merely as a convenient dump for odds and ends that may sometime come in handy, an untidy spot in a room otherwise kept tidy." For example, she (Ibid.) comments on \

There is a noticeable lack of stone carving in

of some of the finest work in stone produced by the pre-

Conquest builders. 11 On a hillside in the fields between Mitla and

Matatlan stands La ~ ~ Milagro, or Cross of Miracle. Pilgrimages are made to this stone cross on New Year's Eve, when villagers pray for what they want in the coming year. The top of the cross is adorned with white and pink flowers. Baskets filled with seeds of corn, beans, and melon, ears of corn and small magueys are set in the

foliage covering part of the cross, or ~ ~' as it is called. There are many censers and candles clustered at the base. While the ancient form of stone carving does not L _ ___,______,_) 93 r;~-s~, miniature representations of things desi;ed~;----­ created in stone in Mitla. The villagers build small fires and then nwith the little stones of the hillside they proceed to make miniature representations of what 1 l they long for - houses, animals, poultry, beehives, fields and crops, money" (Ibid.: 233). Representations of houses are realistic. Parsons I (Ibid.) describes these prayer-images: The houses are perhaps the most realistic, 1l built in the characteristic square or ! oblong form with twigs or split cane to ! represent the thatch roof, or with stones l for tilesa •• There is a door and in some ! houses even the altar has been set up. In one house there was a shelf with dishes. I I looked inside several houses for a

'1,· swinging cradle, said to be the prayer 1 for offspring, but found none. We did 1 find a corncob wrapped with cloth which I represented an infant ••• Next the miniature living-room is the detached cook shed. Animals important to subsistence are also created in stone. For example, a loaded burro is represented by a "stone with a smaller stone on either side, the two little stones balancing, and tied with a bit of fiber" l (Ibid.: 234). A corral of stones encircles sheep, goats, I and pigs, which are represented by a heap of stones. As was seen in the prayer-images of houses, stones are not the only materials used in representations. Straw represents corn; bits of maguey represent itself; and

little paper bags filled with soil represent sacks of i I grain. I --·~-... ~~--=-· 94

------····--~~·-.....,-=···~·~-.~1 1 Like the altars of the past in Nesoamerica, the altars of today are comprised of religious symbols, are placed in important positions, and receive some kind of offerings. In order to understand them, as in the past, it is necessary to know something about the religious concepts of the times.

PAPER-MAKING San Pablito, an Otomi village in the State of Puebla, is the only important continuing paper-making center in 1<1exico. vlhile the men procure the bark, the women alone manufacture the paper. Their work is done individually. l The process is essentially the same as it was in I the past. First, the bark with the inner fibers is l separated from the tree. Next, the outer bark is removed I by hand. 'rhe fibers are washed in order to remove the I sap. Fibers for future manufacture are dried and stored. I Fibers used are then boiled for several hours over a slow fire, in water containing nixtamal, a lime-water residue I from soaked maize kernals. The softened fibers are cooled' and are ready to be made into paper. I Strips of fiber are laid on a smooth wooden board. Next, these are pounded with a grooved beating-stone, I similar to the planches used in Aztec times. Finally, the- i l:aper:_ still sticking to the board, is laid in the sun to 1 ___ _j 95

~r--dry--.--T-h_e_s_i_z_e_an_d_t_h_J.-. c_k_n_e_s_s_o_f_t_h._e_p_a;;d~~~;-~;h;W$-····

amount of fiber and the size of the wooden board. Paper is manufactured for , and for an

annual ceremonial feast called ~ Costumbre (Von Hagen 1944: 58). In this ceremony, paper dolls, munecos, and­ cut-out symbols are placed on an isolated table for the Spirit of Fiontezuma, in the belief that he will return - someday. In magical rituals, certain paper figures are made j for different beings - spirits of water, plants and I I animals, and good and bad souls. Light and dark paper ! I is used symbolically. The dark colored paper is i I associated with black . White and light colored

paper is used in \'lhi te magic, "in order to cou...'1.teract the effects of dark magic" (Fiarti 1965: 152). In the last few years, one of the older women of San Pablito has added a new design to the paper, a paper inlay. "Paper paintings" are created when "a contrasting colored paper in the desired motifs, black on white or vice versa, is drawn, pounded and dried into the original

wet sheet u (Ibid.: 161). The different motifs are derived ~ I from the surroundings and beliefs, including wild flowers, i l double-headed birds with snakes in their beaks, and lizard-like figures. These motifs reflect many of the beliefs ancestral to the Otomi paper-makers and I villagers. L______96

,------~·------1 I SffiVIf1ARY I This chapter has dealt with various aspects of the folk art of present-day Mesoamerica, including a discussion of the position of artists today, an examination of the modern-day ceremonial center, and descriptions of the images of saints and altars. The art of making paper objects, which is essentially the same as in Aztec times, was also discussed. In the following summary, aspects of present-day Mesoamerican art which , relate to ancient art will be emphasized. i i Like the art of ancient Mesoamerica. the folk art I of today is closely influenced by religious beliefs. j Reflected in varying degrees are ancient Indian and ! European religious concepts. As an outcome of the I i Conquest, pagan beliefs fused with Christianity, producing different reactions. The Aztecs abandoned their pagan I rites and fused their beliefs with Catholicism. The Maya, · /on the other hand, •retained paganism as the meani:ngful j core of their religion, which became incremented with varying degrees of Catholicism" (Madsen 1967: 370).

~though the position of artists differs in the £ast

and pr~sent, the creation of their work remains anonymous

tod~. Unlike the past, it is rare to find full-time craft specialists, as most peoples of I•Iesoamerican l:::~a::s 0:::a~:r:e:::~te:0 ::v::: ::l::v:::o:a::.c::::cts .

~ ...... ,.,..,.___ ...... k~,.,.--.-k.. ~ •. ~~~ 97

r,~-~--~------~--·----·-- -··------~---·-----"'···~-- ~ today are not of a personal or individual nature, but ! reflect the beliefs of the society that produces them. The plan of the contemporary Maya ceremonial center !§ very much like that of Classic times. The pattern of Zinacantan is similar to that of Tikal, and like Tikal, it demonstrates the sacred context in which art is placed. Buildings are oriented to the cardinal directions and churches can be seen as replacements for temples and I pyramids. Like the stelae and altars of the ancient Maya, : modern-day cross shrines are laid in sacred places and ! receive offerings. They are also decorated with specific i l symbolic elements and have a ceremonial function. l I Religious beliefs also influence the ~lacement and §Eec~aJ trea~~ent given a work of art. The images of I saints today receive offerings to ward off evil and to ! give thanks just as the ancient idols did. Offerings in I 1 I Chan Kom, for example, consist of prayers and candles. f In Zinacantan, offerings of flowers and candles are brought by families to the saints at fiesta time. Images I are dressed in long silk robes, ribbons, and tassels. I During major fiestas, a necklace of ancient and modern I coins is placed around the neck of the image of San I Lorenzo, patron saint of Zinacantan. In Ihuatzio, when expected rewards are not received, villagers feel

justified in 11 punishing 11 their images of saints - "in some: I cases their images are beaten or dragged along through thei 1..--.------~------·--·-·--·-·__! 98

r~us;(;ant:;-~~)-.----·----~---"~-~-·~, ... ,

l Religious s~bolism and ceremonial function are characteristics that describe both ancient and modern

~american art. As in the past, the altars of today serve as a place of worship where offerings are made. i While many of the materials are the same from village to village, there is variation in decorations and adornment. I For example, in Zinacantan, three symbolic elements - flowers, copal, and rum - are utilized in conjunction I with the cross shrine in any kind of ritual activity I involving communication with the gods. On New Year's Eve, pilgrimages are made to L~ ~

d~ Milagr~, a stone cross on a hillside in the fields I! i between Mitla and Matatlan. Miniature representations of J l things such as houses, crops, animals, and money are made I I by the villagers out of little stones and other materials. These little prayer-images symbolize what villagers want I in the coming year. Although not used extensively as in Postclassic

I times by the Aztecs, the ari of paper-making has continu~,

to the presen~ da;y in a few IVJ:esoamerican.. villages. The techniques and materials used have remained essentially the same. In addition to this, paper objects are still used for ceremonial and ritual purposes. What has been described as art in this chapter I demonstrates the relation between art and religion in

L-~-·------~- ---·--- 99

r-----~------·----~·~--~---~~---·-w----·-···-·-. j Nesoamerica today - a relation which I believe also 1 characterizes the art of ancient Mesoamerica. Like in the past, art is not created for the sake of art, but has a religious function.

I'-·---~_., ____ ,.~------1 l I I CONCLUSION

By examining tbe ancient art of Hesoamerica, a similar kind of art can be found today in the Indian populations. Like the art of the past, it too relates to religious beliefs. A premise of this paper is that I ancient cultures produced great sculptures and monumental architecture, but not for the sake of art. Also, it is I l generally accepted that while many cultures may not have ! a concept of art, all cultures produce some form of it (Mills 1971: 97). In the cultures of the Preclassic Olmec, Classic j Maya, and Postclassic Aztecs, art had a religious ! 1 function. Religious concepts influenced not only subject

1! matter, but also the special treatment and placement given. l! a work of art. I am suggesting that the essential 1 1 characteristic of the art of the past is its association

1I with the sacred and that this characteristic continues to 1 I infuse the art of the present. l The art of the Olmec was "an integral part n of their. l i religion, reflecting both religious and cultural beliefs (Grove 1970: 5). This is the earliest known art in i i i Mesoamerica, having no known antecedents. With recent 1 l i I discoveries, the picture of Olmec society may be I L----~-- - ______)

100 101

i-~·~~----· ~"~"-·"-·~--~~~--~ ... - ! developing into "a society obsessed with monumental art, I

11 I both it e making and breaking ( Clewlow 1 974: 11 ) • Both the San Lorenzo and La Venta sites contain stone monuments which had been broken or defaced and then ceremonially buried by the Olmec. Moreover, this destruction was made with considerable effort. At San Lorenzo, burial after

jl' mutilation \'Tas in an alignment that suggested where additlonal stone monuments would be found. Several of

these pieces were also accompanied by offerlr~s of

of sherds. The art of the Maya further demonstrates that art was not produced for the sake of art, but had a ceremonial I function. Not only did religion inspire the subject l matter of an object, but it also influenced where an I I object would be placed. Ceremonial centers such as Tikal provided a sacred context for much of the art. For I example, stelae were not set haphazardly, but were placed I in prominant positions in front of important buildings l in courts and plazas, and each was usually accompanied by an altar. Like the Olmec, the 11aya also placed offerings I with their stone monuments. The art of the Postclassic Aztecs additionally shows how deeply influenced ancient art was by religion. Like l the art of the Olmec and Maya, subject matter was inspired l_by reli~i~us concepts, and again, art was ~~~:~e~~~ f~~.,.j •J02

,-~~--.-~. 1 the sake of art. In fact, the lives of the Aztecs were I so dominated by religion, that in order to understand I their art, it is necessary to know something about their religious beliefs. A similar kind of art can be found in contemporary I Mesoamerica in the folk art of the Indian populations. Like the art of ancient Mesoamerica, the art of today is I also influenced by religious concepts. Subject matter / I reflects varying degrees of both ancient Indian and I 1 ! European beliefs. The placement and special treatment I i given to modern-day art is also affected by religlous I beliefs. The images of saints today receive offerings

li just as the ancient idols did. An essential i l characteristic of present-day art is that it has a religious function, and again, as in the past, it is not I! created for the sake of art. I I I i I BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anton, Ferdinand 1969 Ancient Mexican Art. New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons. Benson, Elizabeth P. 1967 The Maya World. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company. Bernal, Ignacio 1969a Individual Artistic Creativity in Pre-Columbian Nexico. In Tradition and Creativity in Tribal Art. Daniel P.~iebuyck, ed. Berkeley; University of California Press. Pp. 71-83. 1969b The Olmec \vorld. Berkeley: University of California Press. Brainerd, George w. 1954 The . Los Angeles: Southwest Museum. Cle'\'.rlovT, Jr., c. William 1974 A Stylistic and Chronological Study of Olmec Monumental Sculpture. Berkeley: University of California. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility, no. 19.

Coe, Ivlichael D. 1965a Archaeological Synthesis of Southern Veracruz and Tabasco. In Handbook of r'liddle American Indians. Robert Wauchope and Gordon Willey, eds. Vol. 3. Austin: University of Texas Yress. Pp. 679-715. 1965b The Olmec Style and its Distribution. In Handbook of I"liddle .American Indians. Roberr- Wauchope and Gordon Willey, eds. Vol. 3. Austin: University of Texas Press. Pp. 739-775. 1966 The Maya. New York: Praeger Publishers. 1968 San Lorenzo and the Olmec Civilization. In Dumbarton Oaks Conference on the Olmec. Elizabeth

103 104

P. Benson, ed. \1/ashington: Trustees for Harvard University. Pp. 41-78. 1970 The Archaeological Sequence at San Lorenzo Tenochti tlan, Veracruz, I'~Iexico. In 1/fagnetometer Survey of the La Venta Pyramid ana-other Papers on Mexican Archaeology. Berkeley: University of California. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility, no._ 8. Pp. 21-34. - 1972 Olmec Jaguars and Olmec Kings. In The Cult of the Feline. Elizabeth P. Benson, ed~ Washington: Trustees for Harvard University. Pp. 1-12. 1973 The Iconography of Olmec Art. In The Iconography of }fiddle American Sculpture by Ignacio Bernal and Others. New York: The Metropolitan Huseum of Art. Pp. 1-12.

Coe, Michael D.; Richard A. Diehl; and ~tinze Stuiver 1967 Olmec Civilization, Veracruz, Nexico: Dating of the San Lorenzo Phase. Science 155: 1399-1401. Coe, \'Iilli am R. 1965 Caches and Offertory Practices of the Maya Lo·wlands. In Handbool( of I·1iddle American Indians. Hobert 'i'lauchope and Gordon Vlilley, eds. Vol. 2 • .Austin: University of Texas Press. Pp. 462-468. 1967 Tikal: .A Handbook of the Ancient Maya Ruins. Philadelphia: The University Huseum, University of Pennsylvania. 1975 Resurrecting the Grandeur of Tikal. National Geographic 148: 792-795. Covarrubias, Miguel 1957 Indian Art of Mexico and Central America. Ne'VT York: Alfred A. Knopf. Culbert, T. Patrick, ed. 1973 The Maya Dovmfall at Tikal. In The Classic ¥~ya Collapse. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. Pp. 63-92. Dark, Philip 1967 The Study of Ethno-Aesthetics: The Visual Arts. In Essays on the Verbal and Visual Arts. June Helm, ed. Seattle: University of Washington Press. Pp. 131-148. 105

Diaz, IVIay N. 1966 Tonola: Conservatism, Responsibility, and Authority in a Mexican Town. Berkeley: University of California Press$ Diaz del Castillo, Bernal 1956 The Discovery and Conquest of Hexico 1517-1521. A.Po Maudslay, trans. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Drucker, Philip 1952 La Venta, Tabasco: A Study of Olmec Ceramics and Art. Washington: Smithsonian Institution. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 153. Easby, Elizabeth K. and John F. Scott 1970 Before Cortes: Sculpture of Hiddle .America. New York: The I"letropoli tan Museum of _/U't • .l!"'irth, Raymond 1966 The Social Framework of Primitive Art. In The Many Faces of Primitive Art: A Critical Anthology. Douglas Fraser, ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice­ Hall, Inc. Pp. 12-33. Forge, Anthony, ed. 1973 Introduction. In Primitive Art and Society. New York: Oxford University Press. Foster, George M. 1960 Culture and Conquest: America's Spanish Heritage. Chicago: Quadrangle Books. 1967 Tzintzuntzan: r1exican Peasants in a Changing World. Boston: Little, Brown and Company. Furst, Peter T. 1968 The Olmec \vere-J aguar 1·1otif in the Light of Ethnographic Reality. In Dumbarton Oaks Conference on the Olmec:- Elizabeth P. Benson, ed. Washington: Trustees for Harvard University. Pp. 143-178.

Galler~amp, Charles 1976 Maya: The lliddle and Rediscovery of a Lost Civilization. New York: David NcKay Company, Inc. Gayt Carlo 1967 Oldest Paintings of the New World. Natural History 76: 28-35. 106

Gerbrandes, AaA. 1957 Art as an Element of Culture, Especially in Negro-Africa. Leiden: E.J. Brill. Grove, David C. 1969 Olmec Cave Paintings: Discovery from Guerrero, Mexico. Science 164: 421-423. 1970 The Olmec Paintings of Oxtotitlan Cave, Guerrero, :rvrexico a \'lashington: Dumbarton Oaks. Studies in Pre-Columbian Art and Archaeology, no. 6. 1972 Olmec Felines in Highland Central Hexico. In The Cult of the Feline. Elizabeth P. Benson, ed7 Washington: Trustees for Harvard University. Pp. 153-164. 1973 Olmec Altars and . Archaeology 26: 128- 135. Harvey, H.R. and Isabel Kelly 1969 The Totonac. In Handbook of I~ddle American Indians. Robert \'lauchope and Evon Vogt, eds. Vol. 8. Austin: University of Texas Press. Pp. 638- 681. Heizer, Robert F. 1968 New Observations on La Venta. !n Dumbarton Oaks Conference on the Olmec. Elizabeth P. Benson, ed. Washington: Trustees for Harvard University. Pp. 9-40. 1971 Commentary On: The Olmec Region - Oaxaca. In Observations on the Einergence of Civilization in Mesoamerica. Robert F. Heizer, John A. Graham and C. \'l. Clewlow, Jr., eds. Berkeley: University of California. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility, no. 11 • Pp • 51 -6 9 • Heizer, Robert F., and Philip Drucker 1968 The La Venta Fluted Pyramid. Antiquity 42: 52- 56. Heizer, Robert F., John A. Graham and Lewis K. Napton 1968 The 1968 Investigations at La Venta. J~ Papers on Mesoamerican Archaeology. Berkeley: University of California. Contrj_butions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility, no. 5. Pp. 127-154. 107

Hunter, C. Bruce 1974 A Guide to lVIaya Ruins. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Kearney, I•1ichael ·1972 The v'linds of Ixtepeji: \1orld View and Society in a Zapotec Town. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. Kirchhoff, Paul 1952 Mesoamerica: Its Geographic Limits, Ethnic Composition and Cultural Characteristics. In Heritage of Conquest by Sol Tax and Others. Glencoe: The Free Press. Pp. 17-30. Koue, Don 1976 The Oldest Date in the :Hew \•/orld. California Nonthly. Oct. : 3. Kubler, George 1962 The Art and Architecture of Ancient America: The Hexican, Maya, and Andean Peoples. Baltimore: Penguin Books. 1971 Commentary On: Early Architecture and Sculpture in I•1esoamerica. In Observations on the Emergence of Civilization in I•'Iesoamerica. Robert F. Heizer, John A. Graham and C. VI. Clewlow, J·r., eds. Berkeley: University of California. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility, no. 11. Pp. 157-168. Lathrap, Donald W. 1971 Complex Iconographic Features Shared by Olmec and Chavin and Some Specul.ations on Their Possible Significance. Paper read July 31, 1971, at Primer Simposio de Correlaciones Antropologicas Andino - Nesoameri.cano. Salinas, Ecuador. Leon-Portilla, Iviiguel 1963 Aztec Thought and Culture: A Study of the Ancient Nahuatl ~·1ind. Jack E. Davis, trans. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Levi-Strauss, Claude 1963 Structural Anthropology. Claire Jacobson and Brooke G. Schoepf, trans. New York: Basic Books, Inc. Lopez, Raul A. 1974 The Role of Judas in Tarahumara Easter 108

Ceremonies. Unpublished manuscript. l~adsen, vlilliam 1960 Christo-Paganism. In Nativism and Syncretism. Hunro s. Edmonson, ed. l'lew Orleans: Tulane University, }liddle American Research Institute. Pp. 105-1 79. 1967 . In Handbook o:f Ivliddle 1unerican Indians. Robert Wauchope- and Manning(' Nash, eds. Vol. 6. Austin: University o:f Texas Press. Pp. 369-391. r-iarti, Samuel 1965 Precolumbian Paper Paintings. Ethnos 30: 144- 162. Mills, George 1971 Art: An Introduction to Qualitative Anthropology. In Anthropology and Art: Readings in Cross-Cultural Aesthetics. Charlotte M. Otten, ed. Garden City: The Natural History Press. Pp. 66-92. Morley, Sylvanus G. 1956 The Ancient Naya. Third edition revised by George VI. Brainerd. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Muensterberger, Warner 1971 Some Elements of Artistic Creativity ~~ong Primitive Peoples. In Art and Aesthetics in Primitive Societies.-Carol F. Jopling, ed. New York: E.P. Dutton and Co., Inc. Pp. 3-10. Nash, June 1970 In the Eyes o:f the Ancestors. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Nicholson, Hen~y B. 1971 Najor Sculpture in Pre-Hispanic Central 111exico. In Handbook of Middle American Indians. Robert Wauchope, G. Ekholm, and Ignacio Bernal, eds. Vol., 10. Austin: University of Texas Press. Pp. 92- 134. 1973 The Late Pre-Hispanic Central lviexican (Aztec) Iconographic System. In The Iconography o:f Middle American Sculpture by Ignacio Bernal and Others. Ne'lrl York: The Netropolitan :Museum of Art. Pp. 72- 97. 109

Nicholson, Henry B. and Rainer Berger 1968 Two Aztec Vlood Idols: Iconographic and Chronologie Analysis. Washington: Dumbarton Oaks. Studies in Pre-Columbian Art and Archaeology, no. 5. . Paulme, Denise 1973 Adornment and Nudity in Tropical Africa. In Primitive Art and Society. Anthony Forge, ed. New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 11-24. Parsons, Elsie Clews 1936 Mitla: Town of the Souls. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Prescott, William H. 1966 The History of the Conquest of Mexico. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. (First published in ·1843). Proskouriakoff, Tatiana 1963 An Album of Maya Architecture. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. 1965 Sculpture and Najor Arts of the Jvlaya Lowlands. In Handbook of ~~ddle American Indians. Robert Y/au.chope and Gordon v/illey, eds. Vol. 2. Austin: University of Texas Press. Pp. 469-497. 1968 Olmec and Naya Art: Problems of Their Stylistic Relation. In Dumbarton Oaks Conference on the Olmec. Elizabeth P. Benson, ed. Washington: Trustees of Harvard University. Pp. ·119-134.

1971 Studies on ~liddle American Art. In Anthropology and Art: Readings in Cross-Cultural Aesthetics. Charlotte M. Otten, ed. Garden City: The Natural History Y£ess. Pp. 129-137. Redfield, Robert and Alfonso Villa Rojas 1962 Chan Kom: A l'laya Village. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. (First published in 1934). Ruppert, Karl; J. Eric S. Thompson; and Tatiana Proskouriakoff 1955 Bonampak, Chiapas, Mexico. Washington: Carnegie Institution of ·v/ashington .. Sahagun, Fray Bernardino de 1971 A History of Ancient f!Iexico: Anthropological, 110

lYlythological, and Social. Fanny R. Bandelier, trans. Detroit: Blaine Ethridge-Books. Sieber, Roy 1971 The Aesthetics of Traditional African Art. In Art and Aesthetics in Primitive Societies. Carer­ F. Jopling, ed. New York: E.P. Dutton and Co., Inc. Pp. 127-131. Soustelle, Jacques 1970 Daily Life of the Aztecs: On the Eve of the Spanish Conquest. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Spinden, Herbert Joseph 1957 f.1aya Art and Civilization. Indian Hill.s: The Falcon 1 s Wing Press.

Stirling, r1atthew \'1. 1943 Stone Nonuments of Southern Mexico. Washington: Smithsonian Institution. Bureau of .American Ethnology, Bulletin 138. 1955 Stone lVionuments of the Rio Chiquita, Veracruz, Mexico. vlashington: Smithsonian Institution. BtiTeau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 157.

1961 The , Artists in J'ade. I.~ Essays in Pre­ Columbian Art and Archaeology by Samuel K. Lothrop and Others. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Pp. 42-59. 1965 Monumental Sculpture of Southern Veracruz and Tabasco. In Handbook of l~ddle American Indians. Robert Vlauchope and Gordon ';•Iilley, eds. Vol. 3. Austin: University of Texas Press. Pp. 716-738. Tax, Sol 1952 Summary for the Twenty-Ninth International Congress of Americanists: The Major General Propositions as to the Culture That Distinguishes J.Y1exico and Guatemala from Other Parts of the World, \.Yi th Some Attention to the Problems of Nethod in Treating the Cultures of This Area, Past and Present. In Heritage of Conquest by Sol Tax and Others. Glencoe: The Free Press. Pp. 282-298. Thompson, Donald E. 1960 Maya Paganism and Christianity. In Nativism and Syncretism. 111unro 3. Edmonson, edo New 111

Orleans: Tulane University, Middle American Research Institute. Pp. 1-35. Thompson, J. Eric S. 1940 l'lexico Before Cortez: An Account of the Daily Life, Religion, and Ritual of the Aztecs and Kindred Peoples. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. 1954 The Rise and Fall of I'.Iaya Civilization. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. 1970 Maya History and Religion. Norman: Universtty of Oklahoma Press. Vaillant, George c. 1941 Aztecs of Mexico: Origin, Rise, and Fall of the Aztec Nation. Garden City: Doubleday, Doran and Company, Inc. Villa Rojas, Alfonso 1969a The Tzeltal. In Handbook of ~liddle American Indians. Robert \vauchope and Evon Vogt, eds. Vol. 7. Austin: University of Texas Press. Pp. 195- 225. ·t969b l\1aya Lowlands: The Chontal, Chol, and Kekchi. In Handbook of r/Iiddle American Indians. Robert Wauchope and Evon Vogt, eds. Vol. 1. Austin: University of Texas Press. Pp. 230-243. Vogt, Evon z. 1969 Zinacantan: A Maya Community in the Hig~lands. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University F-£ess. 1970 The Zinacantecos of Mexico: A Modern Naya Way of Li:fe. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Von Hagen, Victor W. 1944 The Aztec and Maya Papermakers. New York: J.J. Augustin. 1957 Sun Kingdoms of the Americas. Cleveland: The World Publishing Company. Weaver, Muriel Porter 1972 The Aztecs, Maya, and Their Predecessors. New York: Seminar Press. Weitlaner, Roberto J. and Howard F. Cline 112

1969 The Chinantec. In Handbook of Hiddle American Indians. Robert \vauchope and Evon Vogt, eds. Vol. 7. Austin: University of Texas Press. Pp. 523- 552. Willey, Gordon R. 1962 The Early Great Styles and the Rise of the Pre­ Columbian Civilization. American Jblthropologist 64: 1-14. 1966 An Introduction to American Archaeology: North and Middle America. Vol. 1. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Willey, Gordon R. and Demitri B. Shimkin 1973 The 1:-iaya Collapse: A Summary View. In The Classic 1'1aya Collapse. T. Patrick Culbert, ed. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. Pp. 457-501. \'lilliams, Howell and Robert F. Heizer 1965 Sources of Rocks Used in Olmec Monuments. In Sources of Stones Used in Prehistoric l"Iesoamerican Sites. Berkeley: University of California. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility, no. 1. Pp. 1-39. Wolf, Eric 1959 Sons of the Shaking Earth. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Zantwijk, Rudolf A. 1967 Servants of the Saints: The Social and Cultural Identity of a Tarascan Community in Nexico. Assen: Van Gorcum and Company.