Classic Mayan Mestizaje1

Gerardo Aldana, University of California, Santa Barbara

Since their inception in the mid- Chican@ communities. Without going twentieth1 century, Chican@ Move- into extensive study here, the source of ments have made various appeals to the taboo partially resides in the Mesoamerican cultural production. recognized ethical violations at times Gloria Anzaldua and Alurista, for inherent to anthropo- and archaeo- example, each make frequent references logical inquiries. Examples of these to Aztlan (the mythic homeland of the violations are manifold, but Linda Mexica/Aztecs) as a source of Chicana/o Tuhiwai Smith gives an excellent review indigenous identity (Anzaldua 1989; of the issue in Decolonizing Alurista 1989). In a Chicana critique of Methodologies from a Maori perspective the Chicano Movement, Ana Castillo (1999).3 This essay does not intend to invoked the Mexica deity Coyolxauqui address explicitly the nature or extent of to unpack the complexity of Chicana/o the taboo; rather, it aims to present an identities from a feminist perspective alternative access to indigenous (1994). Chican@ mural art is also filled investigation that has only recently with iconography derived from become available. In particular, I Mesoamerican art, notably the “re- suggest that Classic Mayan hieroglyphic membered” Coyolxauhqui within inscriptions allow Chican@ scholarship “MaestraPeace” on the Women’s to engage indigenous history in a new Building in San Francisco and the forum. Quetzalcoatl and Coatlicue imagery in Moreover, in this essay, I Chicano Park in San Diego.2 For the demonstrate that a critical aspect of most part, however, these and many Chican@ epistemologies finds other Chican@ appeals to precedent in the case of a particular have concentrated on artistic and Classic Mayan dynasty’s political self- literary representation. Quite notably, fashioning. Within the inscriptions of these efforts have often made a Copán (Honduras), we confront textual concerted effort to avoid engaging and iconographic evidence for a anthropological and/or archaeological Precontact mestizo identity. In order to scholarship on ancient Mesoamerica. make this case, I first review the political Indeed, anthro- and archaeo-logies context providing the source of this have in many cases maintained mestizaje and then focus on its explicit something of a taboo status within representation by the fifteenth member

1 This article originally appeared in translation been lightly revised and updated for this as “El Chicanismo del Imperio Antiguo Maya” venue. in NERTER: Revista dedicada a la literature, el 2 See Guisela Latorre’s Walls of Empowerment: arte y el conocimiento, no. 5-6, 2003, pp. 43-49. Chicana/o Indigenist Murals of California. I wrote it in English, and the journal editors University of Texas Press, 2008. translated it, which in part led to the 3 Malinowski 1967, Stevenson 1970, Tierney misleading title suggesting there was an 2000 do not even begin to scrape the surface, empire within Classic . It has but do demonstrate the basis of the protest. 72 Aldana

Figure 1: View from the Pyramid of the Moon at , looking south along the Miccaotli (‘Street of the Dead’). The structures around the plaza in the foreground are all constructed with the distinctive talud-tablero façade. (Photo by the author) of the Copán royal dynasty. After who took the name Yax K’uk’ Mo’.4 considering these representations, this Most of what we know about this essay moves on to discuss the k’uhulajaw5 comes from texts com- ramifications of identifying parallels to missioned long after his reign, but Chican@ ideo-logies within indigenous archaeologists also have recovered the histories, advocating a new discourse location of his burial chamber (Fash between anthropo- and archaeo-logies 1991:93-96). Of particular note here is and ethnic and indigenous studies as an that Yax K’uk’ Mo’ brought his foreign enterprise of critical importance to the material culture with him for represent- responsible development of each. tation at Copán. Most conspicuously, the structure in which his body would Ancient Copán be laid to rest was built in a style unlike The Classic Mayan dynasty of Copán any other at Copán. For this building, was founded circa AD 400 by a foreigner he commissioned a talud-tablero façade

4 The transcription of Mesoamerican languages which counters traditional scholarship’s into the Latin alphabet has led to a few notable implicit reliance on Christianity for its idiosyncrasies. The letter ‘x’ represents the interpretation of religiosity and instead moves sound ‘sh.’ The apostrophe represents a toward an indigenous interpretation. Therein, ‘glottal stop,’ making the consonant or vowel I read k’uhulajaw as ‘one who speaks with ‘pop.’ authority among the k’uh,’ where k’uh refers to 5 The Mayan word ajaw is often translated as those entities often translated colloquially as ‘ruler’ or ‘king’ and the prefix k’uhul- as ‘divine’ ‘gods’ but might be better represented as or ‘holy’ (e.g. Sharer 2006; Coe 1999). For a ‘forms of power.’ more nuanced treatment, see Aldana (2014), rEvista, Volume 5, Issue 2 73 tying him directly to the great Central Classic Teotihuacano forms (Fash Mexican city, Teotihuacan (Fash 1998:227). In monument and ceramic 1998:227). (See Figure 1) possession, therefore, Yax K’uk’ Mo’ was Teotihuacan was that great first demonstrating his affiliation with this metropolis in Mesoamerica, growing in Mesoamerican metropolis in his own earnest by the first century AD, and cultural and political representation to peaking between AD 300 and 600. the people of Copan. Teotihuacan was in ruins by the time of The entry of Teotihuacanos and their

Figure 2: Google map of Mesoamerican region with cities referred to in the text highlighted. the Aztecs; but only 20 miles from material culture into Mayan lands and Tenochtitlan, it was well known to politics beyond Copán has been Aztec emperors and Motecuhzoma recognized for some time. The Xocoyotzin was said to visit the site Preclassic archaeological record at regularly. Kaminaljuyu () and the Early Further corroborating the link of Yax Classic record at (Guatemala) that K’uk’ Mo’, the Copan k’uhulajaw, to first revealed these interregional Teotihuacan, the University of connections to archaeologists have been Pennsylvania archaeologist Robert treated since the first half of the Sharer recovered offertory vessels from twentieth century (Kidder et al 1946; Yax K’uk’ Mo’s burial chamber that took Proskouriakoff 1993; Coggins 1993). (See 74 Aldana Figure 2) What has come to light is that an examination of these recent recently are some of the later Classic developments demonstrates a Mayan treatments of these much earlier resonance between Classic Maya and events. Principally, two developments Chicana/o consciousnesses.6 have transformed our understanding of Critical within Stuart’s translation of Late Classic Mayan politics at Copán. the Altar Q text was the recognition of a First, in 2000 offered a referenced place. The hieroglyphic text complete translation of the text of notes that Yax K’uk’ Mo’ first became a Copán “Altar Q”. This cubical altar sits prince at a foreign location (Stuart in front of Structure 10L-16 and was 2000). He then left that place, commissioned by the sixteenth member journeying for 152 days, before arriving of the dynasty to commemorate his own at Copán. The place from which he accession to the throne. (See Figures 3 & came thereafter provided his legitimacy 4) Second, excavations of Structure 10L- for rulership, telling us two things. For 26 at Copán revealed a text unique in one, we have an historical statement the Mesoamerican archaeological that Yax K’uk’ Mo’ was a foreigner, thus record, which also made appeal to corroborating the inference that Teotihuacan. My argument in this essay

Figure 3: front face of Altar Q, in front of Copan Structure 10L-16. K’inich Yax K’uk’ Mo’ (center left) hands the scepter of rulership to the 16th member of the dynasty, Yax Pahsaj Chan Yopaat (center right). Photo by the author.

6 Here I follow Chela Sandoval’s development of consciousnesses as useful frames of studying communities (2000). rEvista, Volume 5, Issue 2 75 William Fash and Sharer had made based on architecture and ritual artifacts (Fash 1991). Second, we recognize that the author of the text— centuries after Yax K’uk’ Mo’s reign— was still cashing in on the currency of the dynastic founder’s foreignness. That is, the Early Classic connection of the Mayan dynasty to Teotihuacan was politically relevant even in the Late Classic period (a span of almost 500 years). Interestingly, this relevance was not of consistent value throughout the interim period. After the initial entry of Teotihuacanos into the Maya region, Teotihuacano architecture, icono- graphy, and artifacts fall out of the scene throughout Mayan lands. Only later— after the fall of Teotihuacan (ca. AD 600)—is there a renewed interest in the foreign culture within Mayan royal legitimization schemes (Stuart 2000; Aldana and Fash 2001). This renewed interest in Teotihuacan provides the focus of our study at Copán. In particular, the fifteenth k’uhulajaw of Copán commissioned a 1992). Art historian Barbara Fash has monument testifying to the inter- regional connection (Fash 1991:80). This work came on the heels of his predecessor’s short reign, during which the fourteenth k’uhulajaw found himself in a unique position. His predecessor, the thirteenth k’uhulajaw, the famed Waxaklajun Ubaj K’awiil, had been captured by the army of nearby Quirigua (Guatemala) and was killed (Fash 1991:139-151; Stuart 2000; Schele and Freidel 1990). If ever there were a need for dynastic legitimation, this was it. Figure 4: a) top of Altar Q; b) first two columns of The fourteenth k’uhulajaw’s text on Altar Q; c) second pair of columns on response to his predecessor’s death was Altar Q. (Photo, drawings and transcription by two-fold. First, he commissioned a the author.) Popol Naj (‘Council House’) in an effort detailed the ways in which this to consolidate noble power (Fash et al construction served to maintain the 76 Aldana position of the dynasty among the local ensure the fealty of the nobility. Each nobility in a time of crisis (Fash et al demographic group received its own 1992). Ruler 14’s second response was to version of the message (cf. Aldana erect a tremendous monument to the 2007:131). glory of the dynasty. This took the form For the properly initiated, yet of the widely-recognized Temple of the another appeal had been made to Hieroglyphic Stairway—less illustri- Teotihuacano culture. Although the ously known in the archaeological text along the Hieroglyphic Stairway literature as Structure 10L-26. The faces was long enough to impress anyone, of each of the steps on the front of this there was an even more intriguing building (over 60 of them) were carved inscription housed within the temple at with a single narrative hieroglyphic text the top of the structure. Herein do we (hence the name). The overall theme, confront the intellectual appeal to not surprisingly, is that of the history of Teotihuacano culture. Around an inner the Copán dynasty. Although it has not doorway of the temple, one confronts an yet been completely translated, events inscribed text. Per convention, the text in the lives of nearly all 15 Copán kings was written in paired columns; defying are noted in the inscription (Stuart convention, however, a literate Mayan 2000; Fash 1991:79-81). But what would not have been able to read the concerns us here is not the text of the text. Although one column very stairway. ornately recorded the dedication of the Vertically spaced along the steps structure using full-figure hieroglyphs,7 were Copán royal figures dressed in the other column was actually not royal attire. Their regalia belied a hieroglyphic writing. (See Figure 5) consistent theme: prowess in war. All Instead, the sculptor had taken the figural representations on the Stairway hieroglyphs of the legible text, and were outfitted in warrior attire, and in “translated” the imagery into every case, this warrior regalia Teotihuacano iconography. Stuart has incorporated Teotihuacano-derived imagery (Schele and Freidel 1990:319; Fash 1998:254). Here, the Copánecos were tapping into the prolific Late Classic association of Teotihuacano imagery to military prowess. With these sculptures, Ruler 15 was reminding his populace that, although his predecessor had been defeated, the kingdom of Copán historically held great martial Figure 5: goggle-eyes, stylized nose and Teotihuacan headdress on the left-hand figure; on power; perhaps Ruler 15 hoped to allay the fears of the commoners as well as

7 Mayan hieroglyphic writing is made up of simplified, including only diagnostic elements, images, most of which do not correspond or they can be full human or zoomorphic iconographically to the sounds they figures representing a sound or word represent—i.e. it is not a type of Rebus writing depending on the artist/scribe’s purpose. in which the picture of an eye can stand for the “Full-figure” hieroglyphs refer to the latter, vowel sound ‘I.’ The images, however, can be more ornate forms of writing (cf. Coe 1999). rEvista, Volume 5, Issue 2 77 the right are the Mayan full-figure glyphs for u- rested upon the military and intellectual B’AAH. (Illustration by the author.) potency of Teotihuacan, the other upon the dynastic structure that defined shown that this is actually not Mayan royal politics. If they were to Teotihuacano writing, but might be give up the Teotihuacano aspects, the better understood as a Teotihuacano Copanecos would enter into the model “font” for Mayan writing (2000). The of hegemony maintained by , take home point for us is that the appeal and so enter the regional hierarchy set to Teotihuacan was not only military— by them. as on the statues positioned along the Herein do we encounter the above- stairway—but intellectual as well. promised reference to Classic Mayan The latter point should not surprise mestizaje. Namely, the simultaneous one familiar with Classic Mayan appeal to both Teotihuacano and Mayan hieroglyphics. Explicit depictions of the cultures as a means of political and early–arriving Teotihuacanos to Tikal ideological identification resonates with and Copán, for example, represent them modern Chican@ maintenance of a as warriors (Schele and Freidel 1990:162, culturally-multiple personality. In Fig. 4:26). But the hieroglyphic texts at Chican@ nationalist literature and art each site reveal an intellectual (as in Mexican post-revolutionary war component to their arrival. At both cultural production), references to the Copán and Tikal, the establishment of indigenous are often heavily Teotihuacano warrior hegemony brings romanticized appeals to a “lost” culture. with it the introduction of a new title: Affiliation with European-derivative kalomte. I have argued elsewhere that cultures, however, are perceived as this title betrays a different necessary for survival (Sandoval 2000) conceptualization of government from and so form a vital component of that “traditionally” Mayan (Aldana 2001; Chican@ identities. Similarly, by the Aldana and Fash 2002; Aldana 2006). Late Classic, the great city of Rather than focus attention on a single Teotihuacan had fallen, and so could polity, the kalomte title appears to unite only be accessed through local histories several (relatively) equal polities in one and teachings. Like the Toltecs for the hegemonic structure. Such a structure Aztecs, Teotihuacanos were envisioned directly contradicted the imperial by the Maya as militarily mighty yet structure maintained by their enemy: intellectually gifted. Also resonating the Peten city known as Calakmul (cf. with Chican@ appeals to indigenous Martin and Grube 2000:104; Aldana culture in a stance against “majority 2006). American” culture, the Copánecos Through the kalomte title and incorporated Teotihuacano culture as a Teotihuacano imagery, the Maya of means to distinguish and position Copán were demonstrating a dual themselves against the Maya of cultural subscription. The commoners Calakmul. were undoubtedly culturally and Notice that in each of these cases, we biologically Maya, as were the vast are not considering a process of majority of the nobility. Ideologically, “syncretism” or assimilation, but an however, the legitimacy of the state active maintenance of conflicting rested on a split foundation: one foot entities within a single body. To a 78 Aldana significant degree, such a cultural all visages comprising it. Analogously, identity makes sense within an the Gestaltian image is neither one nor indigenous Precontact world-view. For the other recognizable construct, but one, we might appeal to the Postclassic the composite image. Chican@s may be Mexica self-construction as “tolteca- viewed as two different people chichimeca”; they did not subsume their depending on the focus of the identity into one lifestyle or the other observer—either expatriot Mexicans (or only. Second, Mesoamerican deities Central Americans), or marginalized were nothing like Christian or Euro- Americans. Chican@s themselves, pagan gods. As Susan Gillespie and however, like Classic Copán royalty, Joyce Marcus have recently argued, require that they exist as the composite Mesoamerican deities were not unique image… and more.8 in identity over time or space. The “same” deity, Tezcatlipoca, for example, The point of this essay has not been to was represented differently by different philosophically derive a Mesoamerican/ Nahuatl communities at the time of Chican@ theology. Here, I have only contact with cross-Atlantic cultures sketched the outline of a new font of (Gillespie and Marcus 1998). Likewise, research within Chican@ culture. we see in the “Histoire du Mechique” Namely, I here appeal to a unique record that the “god” Tezcatlipoca was able to accessible to modern scholarship: exist as his companion spirit (or through Classic Maya hieroglyphic nagual), without giving up his identity inscriptions, we are able to access or will (de Jonghe 1966). Similarly, the indigenous arguments as they were Sun is given multiple identities in Aztec constructed for indigenous audiences. “religion” without causing ideological Such a perspective provides a rich chaos. resource for understanding the I would like to suggest that in some indigenous components of Chican@ sense, Mesoamerican deities were like identities/consciousnesses. Rather than Gestaltian images. That is, for a given resorting only to reconstructions of ceremony, or in a given mythological Mesoamerican ideologies by anthro- account (mythistory), one visage of a and archaeo-logies, Chican@s may now deity was perceived/presented. In some access Mesoamerican thought through other scenario, another visage might be recorded history. given primacy. Different “gods” qua I propose further that part of the different visages then constituted a problem that anthro- and archaeo- single Mesoamerican deity, with the logies have had in reconstructing representation dictated by the ritual indigenous cultures stems from the perspective introduced—not unlike necessary translation between modern conceptualizations of reductionistic, scientific ideologies and ‘intersectionality.’ The deity itself, the complexly composite phenomena therefore, was both the individual they attempt to address within visage perceived as well as the totality of Mesoamerican cultures. The fact that a

8 I would now, 15 years after writing this essay, point. I will, however, now save that for a later include a section on Chicana Feminism and project. Intersectionality to more fully elaborate this rEvista, Volume 5, Issue 2 79 reductionistic, scientific ideology Conference on Archaeo-astronomy resides within one of a Chican@’s and Astronomy in Culture. Arizona consciousnesses presents an intriguing State Museum, Tucson, pp. 237- 258. possibility for research at the 2014 “An Oracular Hypothesis: the confluence of Ethnic and Indigenous Dresden Codex Venus Table and the Studies and Anthropo- and Archaeo- cultural translation of science,” in logies. Indeed, it may well be that Archaeoastronomy and the Maya. G. significant advances in either discipline Aldana and E. Barnhart, eds. Oxbow will only come from collaboration Books, Oxford, pp. 77-96. between them. In this way, Chican@s will gain access to a tremendous well of Aldana, Gerardo and William L. Fash. information about Mesoamerica while 2001 “Art, Astronomy and Statecraft archaeologists will obtain access to of Late Classic Copán.” Paper translators for some of the more vexing presented at Science, Art, and “epiphenomenal” problems they Religion in the Maya World, a confront. conference at Copán, Honduras on 14 Through the texts of Late Classic July. Copán, I have attempted here to present an example of what a bridge between Alurista. these disciplines might look like and to 1989 “Myth, Identity and Struggle in suggest some of the potential that lay Three Chicano Novels: Aztlán… within. I propose that research in this Anaya, Mendez, and Acosta” in vein not only augments literary and Aztlán: Essays on the Chicano artistic Chican@ appeals to our Homeland. Rudolfo A. Anaya and indigenous past, but that it also will aid Francisco A. Lomelí, editors. in the clarification of Chican@ University of New Press, epistemologies and political conscious- Albuquerque. nesses. Anzaldua, Gloria. Bibliography 1989 “The Homeland, Aztlán/El Otro Aldana, Gerardo. Mexico” in Aztlán: Essays on the 2001 Oracular Science: Uncertainty Chicano Homeland. Rudolfo A. in the History of Maya Astronomy. Anaya and Francisco A. Lomelí, Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard editors. University of New Mexico University. Press, Albuquerque.

2002 “Solar Stelae and a Venus Castillo, Ana. Window: Science and Royal 1995 Massacre of the Dreamers: Personality in Late Classic Copán.” Essays on Xicanisma. Penguin Archaeoastronomy, no. 27 (JHA, Books, New York. xxxiii (2002)), pp. S30-S50 Coe, Michael. 2006 “Lunar Alliances: Shedding 1999 Breaking the Maya Code. Light on Conflicting Classic Maya Thames & Hudson, New York. Theories of Hegemony,” in Proceedings of the Oxford VII Coggins, Clemency C. 80 Aldana 1993 “The Age of Teotihuacan and Its 1967 A diary in the strict sense of the Mission Abroad” in Teotihuacan: Art term. Harcourt, Brace and World, from the City of the Gods. Thames & New York. Hudson, New York, pp. 140-155. Martin, Simon & . De Jonghe, Edouard. 2000 Chronicle of the Maya Kings and 1966 “Histoyre du Mechique: Queens: Deciphering the dynasties of Manuscrit Francais Inédit du XVIe the Ancient Maya. Thames & Siecle” in Journal de la Société des Hudson, New York. Americanistes, tome II, 1905, Johnson Reprint Corp., New York, pp. 1-41. Proskouriakoff, Tatiana. 1993 Maya History. University of Fash, Barbara, William Fash, Sheree Texas Press, Austin. Lane, Rudy Larios, Linda Schele, Jeffrey Stomper, and David Stuart. Sandoval, Chela. 1992 “Investigations of a Classic Maya 2000 Methodology of the Oppressed. Council House at Copan, Honduras” University of Minnesota Press, in Journal of Field Archaeology, vol. Minneapolis. 19, pp. 419-442. Sharer, Robert. Fash, William L. 2006. The Ancient Maya. Stanford 1991 Scribes, Warriors, and Kings: University Press, Stanford. The City of Copán and the Ancient Maya. Thames & Hudson, New York. 1998 “Dynastic Architectural Prog- Smith, Linda Tuhiwai. rams: Intention and Design in 1999 Decolonizing Methodologies: Classic Maya Buildings at Copan and Research and Indigenous Peoples. Zed Other Sites” in Function and Meaning Books, New York. in Classic Maya Architecture. Dumbarton Oaks, pp. 223-270. Stevenson, Matilda Coxe. 1970 The Zuñi Indians; extract from Gillespie, Susan D. and Rosemary A. the twenty-third annual report of the Joyce. Bureau of American Ethnology. 1998 “Deity relationships in Meso- Washington, Govt. Print. Off., 1905. american cosmologies: the case of Johnson Reprint Corp., New York. the Maya God L” in Ancient Mesoamerica, v. 9, no. 2, pp. 279-296. Stuart, David. 2000 “The Arrival of Strangers: Kidder, Alfred V., Jesse D. Jennings, and Teotihuacan and Tollan in Classic Edwin M. Shook. Maya History” in Mesoamerica’s 1946 Examinations at Kaminaljuyu, classic heritage: from Teotihuacan to Guatemala. Carnegie Institution of the Aztecs. Edited by David Washington, no. 561, Washington, Carrasco, Lindsay Jones, and Scott D.C. Sessions. University Press of Colorado, Boulder. Malinowski, Bronislaw. rEvista, Volume 5, Issue 2 81 Tierney, Patrick. 2001 Darkness in El Dorado: How Scientists and Journalists Devastated the Amazon. W. W. Norton & Company, New York.