MAYA FEU DAL SOSIHY AND THE PRESCOES AT
BOMMPAK

Thesiis Jar the flame of M. A
MICHIGA” STATE UM‘IEERSJTY
3mm 1-: FARNESS

met;

on... finnom...¢. "‘._

 

Y
R
A
R
B
I
L

Michigan T rate

University

 

 

 

    

.
a
‘ ,
r
1

   
 

#3» -~ . {33

‘APR 1 2 1995
é W

1 W "
",v

NCV gig-’JWé!

0611310 32m

 

ABSTRACT

Maya Feudal Society
and
The Frescoes at Bonampak

by Sherly F. Farness

The discovery of three rooms of frescoes at
Bonampak in the Chiapas Highlands of Mexico was
exceedingly significant, albeit disturbing, for it
forced a reevaluation of the structure of Maya
society. To pre-Columbian scholars, the murals'
informal as well as ceremonial scenes, with their
mixture of the peaceful and the violent, seemed to
indicate that the Maya were not the gentle, peace—
loving people they were so long considered. They
appeared, rather, to be warlike and blood-thirsty
as their neighbors. In addition, notions of Maya
leadership also were subject to revisions. Once
regarded as members of the nobility working in close
cooperation with the priests, kings were now looked
upon by some researchers as exercising their powerful
rule in purely secular governments.

The purpose of this thesis is to consider the

available evidence relating to Maya culture, with

particular emphasis on the visual presentation in the

Bonampak frescoes, in order to arrive at the most
valid view of Maya societal organization and the
nature of Maya kingship. This thesis is concerned,

then, with the content as well as the aesthetics of

the murals at Bonampak.

MAYA FEUDAL SOCIETY
AND
THE FRESCOES AT BONAMPAK

BY

Sherly F. Farness

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Art

1967

In 1946 three rooms of frescoes were discovered
at Bonampak in the Chiapas Highlands of Mexico. It
was a momentous discovery of Classic Maya painting,
and the result of this find was a reexamination and
reevaluation of the religious, political, and social
organization of Maya civilization and of the products
of its artistic output. The frescoes, dating from
about 800 A.D., present a series of narrative scenes
that seem to combine secular events with a religious
observance, if such a clear distinction can be made
considering that the civil and the religious in Maya
culture are like the two sides of a coin, hardly
separable. It is the content of these murals as an
expression of the structure of Maya society and its
leadership in particular rather than a pure concern
with their aesthetic nature that forms the basis of
this study.

Bonampak, located in the Central Highlands of
eastern Chiapas between the Jatate and Usumacinta
Valleys, (see Illustration 1), was not a major reli—
gious center and yet it was organized on a plan typical

of Maya settlements.1 Except for the core a Maya

 

1Michael D. Coe, The Maya, Frederick A. Praeger,
New York, 1966, p.

 

 
  
 

A dfiy‘or Chssic Ceufi’z . .
. other JWf dasslc Catfrv5
I—Areas 95‘9":ny Culiw‘e .55 ’

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Illustration 1

center is a rather loosely organized accretion of
buildings and dwellings. The core, however, consists
of plazas and courtyards around which are stone struc-
tures placed upon a series of stepped platforms. The
most important architectural entities were placed on
some high point or acropolis overlooking all below.
Built of limestone blocks over a rubble core their

few rooms were corbelled and plaster-covered.

Bonampak followed this general pattern. Its
large plaza measured 295 x 365 feet3 and was surrounded
by buildings (see Illustration 2). On the south side
of the plaza rose the acropolis, 141 feet high, and
built on a hill terraced in three parts. The temple
containing the frescoes stands on the second terrace
and, considering its dominant location, has been
appropriately labeled Structure 1. The structure
itself was excavated by John H. Bourne and H. Carl
Frey in 1946, but the murals were discovered some
three months later by Giles G. Healey, in May 1946,
in the course of doing a film for the United Fruit

Company.4

 

2Coe, Op. Cit., p. 50.
3Karl Ruppert, J. Eric S. Thompson, and Tatiana
Proskouriakoff, Bonampak, Chiapas, Mexico, Carnegie
Institute of Washington,1955, p. III

 

4
Agustin Villagra, Bonampak: La Ciudad de los Muros
PintadosJ Anales del Instituto Nacional de Antropologia

 

e Historia, Supplemento Vol. 111, Mexico City, 1949,p. 9.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a min
a :,
111:... .3; J
a in: .
1.- m
m.
31::dele - nu.
Jul.” {I .—
Full'lll- |.I -. I;

 

 

 

.m :3 .xmaasssm
quaonoumoaq «28

I
._ ----—

 

.-—-—_ — ~.—-.——— — --——-a——-———— —_—— —— _ —-——_— ——.- .-

Illustration 2

Although Structure 1 is 55 feet long the three
rooms within it measure about 15 x 8-% feet each,
their small size a necessary result of using the
corbel vaulting system which does not structurally
allow the spanning of great spaces. It was on the
inward slanting walls of these small rooms that the
plaster or white ground was laid for the frescoes.
This ground was apparently the product of mixing a
finely ground lime mortar with a dilute solution of
the chichebe plant, a hard-finished surface being
obtained by rubbing with a smoothing stone or ka.5
There may even have been a pink or green tint added,
which was occasionally done on backgrounds for mural
painting.6 Pigments were obtained from a variety of
sources. Blacks, for instance, were ground from
carbonized resins, copal incense, and the resin from
the chacah tree.7 The chacte tree provided red and
brown colors by using the red splinters or the chips

of the heartwood and the tinted tree sap itself.8

 

5Edward H. Thompson, People of the Serpent, Capricorn

Books, New York, 1965, p. 184.

 

61bid., p. 185.

7Ibid., p. 186.

81bid., p. 185.

Chacte pigment is very versatile for, when mixed with
the sap and latex of the chucum and habeen trees,
many shades and effects are possible.9 As a matter
of fact, the sap and latex of the chucum were used
as an agent for hardening the lime surfaces of walls
and platforms.10 The beautiful blues of Maya
paintings came from the anil family of plants although
modified by the addition of certain saps, and the
carrying agent for the pigments was either water
and/or the white of the jungle pheasant's egg.11 A
primary source of yellow pigment was the achiote fruit,
although pieces of fustics (from the Mulberry tree
family) boiled and strained were another source.12
Each color had its symbolic as well as its
decorative value. Virtue, chastity, the heavens (and
thus religion) attach themselves to blue. The quetzal
blue, with its greenish quality is the symbol of the
Sacred Serpent, Kukulcan. Fertility, growth, and life

are associated with green. In its symbolic value,

 

9Edward H. Thompson, Op. Cit., p. 185.

1oIbid.

 

lllbid.
lzlbid.

 

 

yellow moves in two directions at once, for it also
represents gold.

"It was the color symbol for anger, for the
passions, for defiance and war and, by ex-
tension, for death. When corpses are
depicted their color is always a pallid
yellow. Gold was also depicted as yellow,
but this was because it had the color of
the sun. In fact, the word in Maya meaning
gold pieces is X'Takin - excrement of the
sun — which giygs their idea of the origin
of the metal."

0f such materials, then, did the Maya artist create
his fresco scenes at Bonampak, unfolding a sequence
of events in an almost theatrical manner, which is
emphasized by the illusionistically painted shallow
space reserved for the figures. There seems to be
no question as to their narrative nature and realistic
presentation, giving the forms an uncanny immediacy.
Mr. Tonkin maintains that this is "objective realism"
as opposed to "subjective symbolism"14 but there is
every likelihood that neither is applicable. A more
accurate phrase might be "objective symbolism," for

the realistic representation of a form does not pre-

clude a symbolic content.

 

13Edward H. Thompson, Op. Cit., p. 185.

14Robert Tonkin, The Bonampak Murals, Thesis for M.A.,

Michigan State University, 1964.

 

Using bold, dynamic and expressive lines to define
contours and filling the delineated forms with rich
color, the artist has filled his walls with many figures
and has documented four acts in what seems to be a
commemorative drama. Shown are the preparations for a
ceremonial dance, the capture of enemies, the arraign-
ment of prisoners, and the performance of a final
ceremony that is religious in nature.

The first room, devoted to Act One, has several
scenes relating to the preparations for the coming
ritual dance. The east and south walls show members
of the nobility in floor-length white capes with the
triple shell ornamentation symbolic of the earth placed
in a triangle on their chests.15 Two are conversing
and the rest appear to be listening.

On the west wall the halach uinic, or high chief,

 

is seated cross-legged on a raised dais, his wife and

daughter to either side. The halach uinic issues

 

commands to the male servant responsible for the care
of the chief's son, shown on the south wall, while a
female servant crouching before the throne listens
intently. The royal family appear to be both spec-
tators and participants in this ritual observance.
Three lesser lords or priests, batabs, seen on

the north wall are shown in the process of dressing

 

15Villagra, Op. Cit., p. 18.

with the aid of their personal attendants. Testifying
to their high rank are their jaguar-skin loincloths,
their quetzal-feather headdresses, the bracelets, anklets,
earplugs and green collars. Green is significant here
in that it suggests the jade so precious to the Maya,
and to the Mesoamericans in general, and refers also
to the color of the quetzal feather. Of the servants,
attendants, and slaves, in varying number and rank,
some are busy with necessary tasks, others engaged in
conversation. Among this group a few are of noble
blood which is indicated by their wearing of jaguar—
skin clothing.

All of the above scenes appear in the upper
register, the lower register of each wall being re—
served for the representation of a large number of
musicians and performers. The performers include three
completely and ceremoniously clothed batabs flanked by
twelve music makers, two parasol-bearers, and six
impersonators of the gods. Two more parasol-bearers
and a number of attendants appear in another area of
the lower register almost as though waiting for a
theatre cue. Among the music makers can be seen a
whistler, a drummer, two trumpeters, three tortoise-

shell heaters, and five rattle—shakers.16 Grouped

 

16J. Eric S. Thompson, Op. Cit., p. 49.

10

in front of these stand the six impersonators of
terrestrial deities, identifiable by the water lilies
in their headgear.17

In the lower register of the west wall the three
batabs appear again flanked by many figures on either
side, serfs, parasol-bearers, servants, and those of
higher social rank as well. This group gives the
distinct impression of being a reappearance of the
similar group from the upper register, the simul-
taneous showing of the same people in different scenes.

Room two is devoted entirely to the enactment
of the raid and to the judgment of the captives,18
the north wall being reserved exclusively for the
latter. The other three walls show warriors with
wooden axes, stone-pointed spears, and some with
trumpets and rattles to raise the furor that incites
attackers to action and frightens the enemy. In
rather naive fashion the opponents are shown with
distorted bodies and without weapons, indicating at
once their non-Maya status and their lack of fighting

skill. Maya raiding practices were designed to

 

17J. Eric s. Thompson, Op. Cit., p. 49.

18
Villagra, Op. Cit., p. 21.

11

procure victims for their sacrifices to the gods, not
to slay a dangerous enemy on the battlefield. De-
picting the enemy being grasped by the hair by a Maya
warrior was the simple indication of capture.

' The judgment scene occupies the north wall. There

 

the halach uinic as judge, juror, and possibly execu-
tioner, flanked by his nacoms, or warlords, is shown
on top of a pyramidal structure at the base of which
are armed guards. Between these two groups are nine
prisoners, some pleading, some undergoing a ritual-

istic blood-letting.19

There is a prone figure in
a diagonal position, and a severed head on some leaves
with no visible body around to which it might have
been attached, and no sure indication of who might
have been the executioner.

The final act occupies all of the third room.
Again there is the pyramid with lords of high rank
on top. Lords wearing jade pectorals are seated
cross-legged in front and appear to be engaged in
idle conversation.

The interesting practice of venesection is shown

being performed by the royal family in the upper

 

19J. Eric S. Thompson, Op. Cit., p. 54.

12

section of the north wall. Venesection is a cere-
monial rite whereby the tongue is pierced by a sharply
pointed bone or thorn and the blood is collected on
bark paper.20 This sign of self—sacrifice was prob-
ably a necessary preparation for certain religious
rituals, rituals apparently climaxed by the dances
that formed such an integral part of religious worship.
The wall opposite shows attendants with upraised
clubs and litterbearers carrying an aged city chief-
tain whose facial distortions and jaguar apron
suggest he is an impersonator of a deity, very prob-

ably Mam,21

one of the terrestrial deities, since
figural distortion is one of his attributes. In this
way the god himself can witness the ceremonies in his
and his confreres' honor.

This is, of necessity, only a partial description
of the many figures and events represented in these
frescoes. To go into greater detail would be to

deviate from the main purpose of this study, an exam-

ination of the role of the halach uinic and of Maya

 

leadership. It is important at the moment to consider

 

ZOJ. Eric s. Thompson, Op. Cit., p. 52.

211bid., p. 55.

13

that since these rooms were so small and narrow they
must have functioned only on ceremonial occasions and
were probably entered by a select group. And the

very fact that such magnificent frescoes as those at
Bonampak were painted in rooms not only rarely entered
but so ill-lit as to make them barely visible, or only
visible by torchlight, raises questions as to purpose.
Why were they painted? For whom? Are they commemor-
ative? And if so, of what? Commemoration of a specific
event presupposes an historical consciousness at least
to the extent of an awareness of specific happenings

as epiphanic. But before attempting to suggest answers
to questions that must relate to social and religious
concepts it might be well to explore the archeology of
the Maya, with particular emphasis on the aspects that

influenced development in the Chiapas region.

Although the Maya followed an evolutionary path
uniquely their own, they nevertheless shared some

things in common with the other Mesoamerican cultures.

14

Among these are included:
"...hierog1yphic writing, books of bark paper
or deerskin which were folded like screens, a
complex permutation calendar, a game played
with a rubber ball in a special court, highly
specialized markets in which chocolate beans
were used as money, an emphasis upon self-
sacrifice and mutilation, and a pantheon which
included a rain god as well as a gulture hero
known as the Feathered Serpent."2
In addition, the Indians of Mesoamerica believed in
a multi-level heaven and hell, in the orientation
of the world to the four cardinal points, the four
points as well as the center of this world having
its specific color and god. These groups also had
a particular way of preparing maize that is not found
elsewhere in the New World.23 To this extent, then,
the Maya were like other groups of Central America.
Among the first to collect information on the
Maya were Diego de Landa, a sixteenth century Franciscan
bishop who wrote on all aspects of Maya life, and Fray
Antonio de Ciudad Real, who kept an account of his
travels in the last decades of the same century.

According to Coe "real interest in Maya remains only

began after the publication,in a London edition of 1822,

 

22Coe, Op. Cit., p. 18.

23Ibid.

 

15

of the brutal 'explorations' which Captain Del Rio
had inflicted upon the site of Palenque in the late
eighteenth century."24
From the archeological view, credit must be
given to many people and institutions in successive
stages. John Lloyd Stevens, diplomat and lawyer, and
his friend Frederick Catherwood, a topographical expert,
explored between 1839 and 1842; Ernst Fbrstemann
studied the Maya calendrical script; Alfred P. Maudslay's
publication of Maya inscriptions aided chronological
studies; and a long list of museums, universities and
institutes have excavated major Maya sites over a
period of many years. To attempt to reconstruct the
origin and development of Maya culture is to draw on
many diverse, and sometimes questionable, opinions.
Since the Maya exhibit the epicanthic fold at the
inner corner of the eye and, at birth, the Mongolian

25

spot, a bluish to purpolish patch at the base of the

spine which fades or is gone by the tenth year, they

have been identified with the Asiatics who migrated

26

across the Bering Strait. Coe refers to McQuown,

 

24Coe, Op. Cit., p. 27.

25Sylvanus Morley, The Ancient Maya, Stanford University
Press, Stanford, CaIifornia, 1958, p. 24.

Gordon Willey, An Introduction to American
Archeology, Vol. I, Prentice-Hall, Inc., New Jersey,

W9.

26

16

who, because of linguistic studies, "believes that
the very first Maya were a small Indian tribe of North
American origin, distantly affiliated with some peoples

."27 It

in southern Oregon and northern California..
seems to be generally accepted, however, that by the
third millenium B.C. the Maya, comprising a distinct
language group, had settled in Guatemala. Of the
earliest times little is known, but over the years
many groups exerted an influence on their development,
and some of these will be touched on.

One of the earliest known cultures in the Chiapas
area, a farming culture, is the Ocos, dating back to
the Early Formative period (1500-800 b.c.). Although
it is an open question as to whether the Ocds were a
Maya-speaking people, there seems little doubt, in
terms of archeological studies, that they contributed
heavily to Maya civilization.28 Basic is the Ocos
house, which is regarded as a possible precursor of

the Maya pyramid, its pole walls covered with mud, white—

washed, and raised on a low platform against flooding

 

27Coe, Op. Cit., p. 32.

281bid., p. 45.

17

by the summer rains. It may indeed be that
"All temples in pre-Spanish Mesoamerica, even
the towering pyramids of the Maya Lowlands, are
essentially nothing more than a magnification
of the humble peasant dwelling - the simple
rectangular house on its own flat mound."29
A significant aspect of agricultural communities
and settled life is the seemingly inevitable special-
ization of labor, the priest or religious practitioner
just as much a specialist as, say, the potter, and of
infinitely greater importance, since his capacity to
liaison between human and godly forces may have made
all other activities possible. It is very likely
that at first the houses of leaders of the community
were used for priestly rites; with time greater struc—
tures were built for the purpose, rising ever higher
toward theheavens on a larger and larger mound,
finally becoming the temple that served many villages.
Under the floors of the temple platforms great nobles
were buried and"the evidence at hand suggests that
this could have taken place already by Ocos times,"3O
i.e. by 850 B.C., indicating a strongly evolved
ceremonialism. This may have been unique to the Ocds,

for by the Middle Formative period, that is,from

800—300 B.C., the Highlands and Lowlands, though

 

29Coe, Op. Cit., p. 32.
301bid., p. 45.

18

supporting heavy populations,31 have yet to show proof
of the existence of writing or architecture, art being
confined to the production of pottery.

It is a matter of wonder, then, that in just this
period the Olmec civilization, centered at La Venta
on the Gulf Coast of Mexico, was at its height and
produced in great numbers what is regarded as the first
identifiable deity of the Mesoamerican pantheon, the
rain god, whose form unites the snarling jaguar and
the crying human child. But it was neither their deity‘
nor their massive architectural complexes that were
the primary influences on the Maya. It was the highly
elaborate and accurate Long Count calendar and the
development of writing that the Olmecs bequeathed, no
small inheritance to be sure. Maya calendrics, as it
pertains to religious ritual, is a subject that will
be discussed in greater detail later in the course of
this study.

Archeological investigation indicates that the
foundation for Maya culture was only firmly established
in the Middle Formative period when Maya—speaking

peoples spread throughout Mesoamerica. But of true

 

31Coe, Op. Cit., p. 46.

19

Maya civilization, with its "vaulted masonry architec—
ture,...naturalistic painting and relief style, Long
Count calendar, and hierogylphic writing"32 there is
no sign yet. It was between the Late Formative (300
B.C.-l50 A.D.) and Proto-Classic (150-300 A.D.) that
these characteristics of the Classic Maya evolved.

Of particular interest in the transitional period
between the Late Formative and Proto—Classic is the
Izapan civilization which centered in Chiapas also.33
The cultural link between the Izapa and Maya is not
linguistic, but the Izapa Long-lipped God can be
discerned in Chac, the Maya rain god, though in some-
what altered form.34 Also, the Izapan art style is
'highly painterly" and "emphasizes historical and mythic
scenography with great attention to plumage and other

costume detail,"35

characteristics which seem to carry
over into Maya work.

Another Late Formative site equal in importance
to the Izapa was Kaminaljuyd, a center for the

Miraflores people "whose rulers must have possessed a

 

32Coe, Op. Cit., p. 51.

33Ibid., p. 60.

34Willey, Op. Cit., p. 106.
35

 

Coe, Op. Cit., p. 61.

20

formidable economic and political power over much of
the Maya highlands at this time."36 Tomb exca-
vations indicate luxurious living on the part of the
rulers. More significant, however, was their con—
struction of the flat-topped stepped pyramids with
broad front stairways; these served funerary purposes.
This solidly establishes a pre-Classic origin for the
pyramid as funerary architecture.

This brings us, rather arbitrarily to be sure,
to the Classic Period (300-900 A.D.), supposedly a
New World Golden Age, but like the Grecholden Age
not entirely tranquil. All evidence points to
wealth, trade, prosperity and sumptuous living, at
least for the nobility when they weren't in active
combat. Suggestions by Coe would indicate war as a
major occupation of the Maya,37 which contradicts
the more general notion that they were an essentially
peaceful and harmonious-living people. Coe claims
that contrary to previous assumptions, Maya govern-
ment was completely secular; it was not a rule by

priests.38 This makes his a rather lonely voice, for

 

36Coe, Op. Cit., p. 64.
37Ibid., p. 74.

33Ibid.

21

no other scholar seems to share this View. Nevertheless,
the Maya were formidable warriors and the warlord a
major governmental figure.

On the basis of archeological and cultural differ—
ences, the Classic Period is divided into Early and
Late, with 600 A.D. being the approximate date separating
the two. A major influence on the Maya at this divi-
sional time was the culture at Teotihuacan in Central
Mexico, a culture established by the first century A.D.
and ending abruptly at the end of the seventh. By the
fifth century, however, they had established their
hegemony in the highlands of the Southern Area of
Guatemala. In that area, at least, "Maya ways of doing
things were replaced with Mexican."39 But the Central
Area, too, was very possibly under the domination of
Teotihuacan, as revealed by excavations at Tikal. Of
particular interest is a stela found there that dates
from about 500 A.D., bearing a relief portraying

"...a great Maya personage, loaded down with

jade ornaments almost to the point of obscuring
him, who carries in the crook of his left arm
the head of a god wearing in its headdress the
Tikal 'Emblem Glyph'. On either side is a
standing warrior whose dress and ornament...
brands him as a foreigner from Teotihuacan.

One of the’shields shows the face of the great
Teotihuacan Rain God, Tlaloc."40

 

39Coe, Op. Cit., p. 81.

4OIbid., p. 84.

22

All of this points to the likelihood that at this

time even the Central Area of Guatemala may have been
paying tribute to the lords of Mexico and not to their
own.

It is not always possible to trace Teotihuacan
influence at other Maya centers in the Central Area
and it may have been restricted to the Tikal-Uaxactun
section. However that may be, there was a period of
great upheaval at the end of the sixth century, probably
a result of internecine wars. By the seventh century
Classic Maya culture seems to have been reestablished

in full strength.41

With regard to the organization of Classic Maya
society, there is no documentary evidence. General
conclusions have been drawn largely from the pictorial
art of the Classic period and from what little is known
of Post-Classic forms, although the latter must also

be regarded as indirect evidence. It is remarkable,

 

41Willey, Op. Cit., p. 137.

23

therefore, that so much seems to have been pieced
together, as witnessed by the multitude of books
on various aspects of Maya life.

The most recent studies have abandoned the concept
of "empire" in relation to Maya civilization in favor
of the "city-state" concept.42 And it does, indeed,
seem most appropriate considering the agricultural
village life that formed its economic basis as well
as its governmental form. The villages, in turn,

"were organized into larger territorial units with
leadership focused in ceremonial centers or politico-
religious capitals."43 These centers seem to have
exercised control over lesser centers within a given
region. Although paved roads and causeways connected
many of these,44 they were apparently for ceremonial
purposes, and the primary paths of movement of ideas
and knowledge, as well as goods, was by overland trails
and by water routes. The pochteca, or merchants,
served as a source of news as well as merchandise.

Yet it seems more than likely that priests, too, moved

between centers, for "ideas freely interchanged between

 

42Willey, Op. Cit., p. 136.

43Ibid., p. 86.

44Charles Gallenkamp, Maya, Frederick Muller, Ltd.,
London, 1960, p. 79.

24

cities, as well as certain innovations in cosmology
and ceremonialism."45 This would also account for
the fact that writing, calendrics, architecture and
art were so homogeneous over such a large area, and
"this argues for much travel and exchange of ideas
among the ruling priests."46
The above quotation brings us directly to the
question of Maya leadership. Morley is somewhat
confusing, for he appears to contradict himself by
making references to "ruling priests" and yet stating
"It is probable, however, that when the Maya

civilization was at its peak, leadership and

administrative functions were confined to

the nobility and the priesthood."47
If it is true that priest and noble conducted the
affairs of state, the next seemingly logical conclu-
sion is the apparent close tie between the royal and
the theological representatives. This raises questions:
are they indeed separate and distinct beings, the
priest and the noble lord, or does one being, the ruler,

embody both aspects in his one person? Is there a

prescriber and an activator, someone who divines the

 

45Gallenkamp, Op. Cit., p. 87.
46Morley, Op. Cit., p. 46.
47Ibid., p. 33.

25

secrets of the gods and transmits them to the temporal
ruler of the city—state, who as leader and warrior

sees to their fulfillment? In the actual working out

of the Maya system this division holds true, and a

variety of necessary activities were within the functional
sphere of specialists, as we shall see. Yet, the

question raised earlier as to whether the halach uinic

 

was also the chief priest is answered by Morley also

when he says "it is likely that the halach uinic was

 

the highest ecclesiastical authority as well."48 This
would make Classic Maya government a theocracy, with

the halach uinic embodying in his person both secular

 

and sacred power, and
"...there is every reason to believe that the
priests of a highly organized and dogmatically
inflexible igligious cult ruled the central
Maya area."
This is further emphasized in art works, in which

the symbols of the halach uinic vary depending on which

 

of his aspects is being represented. The Manikin Sceptre
in the right hand and the round shield in the left indi—

cate the administrator. The Manikin Sceptreuin the shape

 

48Mor1ey, Op. Cit., p. 145.

491bid., p. 144.

I “Il|.‘||||

26

of a small human form with a long curling nose and
one leg ending in the head of a serpent.50 The
Double-Headed Ceremonial Bar, usually held in front

of the breast, is the halach unic's priestly emblem,

 

although on occasions he impersonates the deity by
wearing his symbolic mask. A spear, throwing stick

or club is the sign of the halach uinic in his
t.51

 

military aspec

Halach uinic ("true man" in Maya) was defined in

 

a sixteenth century manuscript as "king, emperor,
monarch, prince, or great lord."52 Another dictionary
translates this as "governor or bishOp."53 At any

rate, there is no doubt that the halach uinic was a

 

territorial ruler endowed with considerable power.
He ruled with the aid of a council of chiefs, priests,

and special councilors, or ah cuch cabob.54 The

 

batabob,the local or village chiefs, were probably

 

50Mor1ey, Op. Cit., p. 145.

5?;21g;, p. 146.

5?;pgg;, p. 145.

53J. Eric S. Thompson, The Rise and Fall of Maya

Civilization, University of’dklahoma Press, NBrman,
1954, p. 81

 

 

54Morley, Op. Cit., p. 145.

27

appointed by him and these chiefs supposedly "stood
in a sort of feudal relation to him, most of whom
were no doubt his close blood relations."55
Moving from the upper to the lower portion of
the social scale, the ordinary farmer stood in a
feudal relation to everyone above him. He contributed

to the support of the halach uinic, the village chief,

 

and the priests by giving a percentage of what he
produced and by working on the construction of the
numerous buildings that comprised the ceremonial
complex.56 But many things were done for him in
return, for it is in the nature of a feudal societal
structure that the ruling class bears heavy respon-
sibilities for the well-being of everyone in its
domain, and the battle against all malevolent hindering
forces is constant. It was necessary to know what
circumstances would occasion good or evil action from
the gods, and this knowledge resided with the priests.
"Certainly they were custodians of the
esoteric and scientific knowledge of the
civilization. They were the astronomers,
astrologers, and historians. They understood

the hieroglyphic writing and manigglated
the complex calendrical systems."

 

55Morley, Op. Cit., p. 145.

56Ibid., p. 158.

57Willey, Op. Cit., p. 131.

28

Man was entirely dependent on the gods, gods of
time, the heavenly bodies, and agriculture. But Maya
religion was dualistic in nature, benevolent gods
opposing malevolent ones, and complex rites of prayer,
fasting and sacrifice were absolutely necessary to
prevent an evil or ill-timed event. Often the dualism
of positive and negative seems to have resided within
the same god.

"They had gods of the rain - Chacs, who

sprinkled the earth with water from gourds

to cause rain or, if they were angry,

emptied them all at once to cause floods..."58
Obviously the complexity of the Maya pantheon is
abetted by having separate names for the light and
dark sides of their deities. The struggle between
the opposing forces of good and evil was not solely
for control of the destiny of the world but also for
the soul of man. To the Maya, the soul was immortal,
and after death, went to heaven or hell, depending on
the quality of the life lived.

"The Maya Paradise was a place of delight,
without pain or suffering, and with an abund-
ance of delicious food and drink. Here the
ceiba tree grew, under which warriors killed
in battle, sacrifidal victims, women who had
died in childbirth, and suicides could rest
forever. Others went to Mitnal, an underworld

where demons tortureg people with cold, hunger,
thirst, and misery." 9

 

53Miguel Covarrubias, Indian Art of Mexico and Central
America, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1957, p. 220.

 

59Frederick A. Peterson, Ancient Mexico, George Allen
and Unwin, Ltd., London, 1959, p. 142.

 

29

The Maya had their creator god, Hunab Ku, but
with his active work done in some remote past time,
he seems to have retired in favor of his son, Itzamna,
who stood at the head of the Maya pantheon. He shares
the quadruplicity of other Maya gods by being associated
with the four world directions and their colors. Yet
his four—ness mystically merges into one-ness, a concept
familiar in the Christian Trinity.

Itzamna is probably best regarded as Lord of the
Heavens, Lord of the Day and Night. In another mani-

60 He is credited

"61

festation he also becomesthe Sun God.
with being "the first priest and inventor of writing,
and figured largely in New Year ceremonies. Yet
Itzamna shared the dual aspect of other Maya deities.
As Lord of the Night, he passed into the underworld,
took on the color black and was associated with death.62
But Itzamna never assumed the importance of the Rain
God, Chac, whose good will was constantly sought through
ceremony and sacrifice. For the farmer, rain is

synonymous with creation and life, and for the "Maya

 

6°Mor1ey, Op. Cit., p. 195.

611bid., p. 196.

62J. Eric S. Thompson, Op. Cit., p. 227.

3O

farmer whose paramount interest was his cornfield,
Chac was the all important deity."63 But there

was always the god of death, Ah Puch, standing behind
9222, the god of rain, and thus life, so great care
was necessary in performing ritual; accuracy was
sublimely important.

The Maya gods seem innumerable. There were sky
gods and earth gods, gods of the underworld, gods of
the trades, even gods of inanimate objects such as
the god of the flint or obsidian blade.64 Many of
these gods shared the quadruplicity already mentioned
in connection with Itzamna, and the duality of
benevolent and malevolent. This was complicated
further by the duality of age and sex, for a god
could appear as young or old, male or female.65

Of paramount importance in Maya life was the
deification of periods of time and of numbers. The

uinals, the 20-day Maya months, were gods, as were

the numbers assigned to the days. In fact, deification

 

63Morley, Op. Cit., p. 197.

64J. Eric S. Thompson, Op. Cit., p. 232.

65Ibid., p. 233.

31

in this case is a fine example of the slippery quality
of the gods of the Maya pantheon. Thompson sums it

up nicely when he says:

"The days were in a way embodiments of gods,
such as the sun and moon, the maize deity,
the death god, and the jaguar god, which were
drawn from their various categories to be
reassembled in this series. The numbers
which accompany the days were also gods and
perhaps correspond to the thirteen sky gods,
though they are also in the same sequence
as thirteen of the day gods. The fact that
in this series of thirteen occur gods of the
underworld or surface of the earth does not
seriously militate against their identification
as the original thirteen gods of the heavens,
for Maya deities pass elusively from one
region to the other. Similarly, all periods
of time appear to have been regarded as gods,
and Maya divinities form and re-form in
bewildering aggroupments, thereby supplying
the priest-astrologer with means to hedge on
his prophecies..." 6

Maya calendrics constitutes a study of major
proportions. No less than five known calendars were
in use at the same time: the 260-day calendar, the
solar calendar, the lunar calendar, the Venus
calendar, and the so—called Long Count calendar. Each
of these combined a knowledge of astronomy, mathematics,
and astrology with religious concepts and rites. The
calendric symbols, too, may have been the sacred origin
of the development of hieroglyphic writing. Maya
time-period glyphs have a strange animation, most
appearing to stand on feet, which serves to accentuate

their "passage of time" quality. (See Illustration 3)

 

66J. Eric s. Thompson, Op. Cit., p. 232.

 

32

  

.1 AN 7x 731’ JILL-1.1V

   

Illustration 3

33

While the Maya "shared certain calendric notions
and principles with other Mesoamerican peoples...,
they were outstanding elaborators in this intellectual
field."67 Yet with all the practicality that calendars
and the measurement of time suggest, there is still a
mythical and mystical strain that runs through Maya
consciousness. Units of time were thought of as burdens
bringing good or ill fortune, and the gods were the
bearers. Time, too, was not just the time of this
world, for the Maya believed that the world had incar—
nated several times before, and this may account
for the mystical merging of past and future in their
prophetic chants.68
Interestingly enough, the 260-day calendar was not
based on the movement of heavenly bodies; it was a
purely intellectual construction.
"It works on a permutation principle of 13
numbers and 20 day names which revolve about
each other so that the same number and name
recur in combination every 260 days."69
This 260-day calendar constituted a sacred divinatory
year, the Tzolkin,70 which meshed with the solar

calendar of 365 days in such a way as to produce a

calendar round of 52 years, a complete sacred cycle.

 

67Willey, Op. Cit., p. 132.

68J. Eric S. Thompson, Op. Cit., p. 14.

69Wi11ey, Op. Cit., p. 132.

7OMorley, Op. Cit., p. 38.

34

The Maya Long Count calendar, like the solar,
lunar, and Venus calendars, was based on astronomical
knowledge. In addition, it used the mathematical
concepts of place enumeration and zero, along with the
Maya vigesimal counting system which used the number
20 as a complete unit. The Long Count calendar
counted days from a starting point in the mythical
past and could be extended indefinitely into the
future. It was a highly accurate system, and may have
been initiated as a means of keeping chronological

71 but was apparently discarded shortly before

records,
the Spanish Conquest in favor of the less cumbersome
Short Count method.72

If all these calendars were in use at the same
time, it strongly suggests a Maya mind of anagrammatic
inclination and a dire need for the clarification the
priests might supply. The Maya were extremely super-
stitious and everything was fraught with omens: dreams,
the flight of birds, and especially numbers. The
number 13 that figures so importantly in the 260—day

calendar and in the number of Gods of the Upper World,

was regarded as a lucky number and appears in ceremonies

 

71Mor1ey, Op. Cit., p. 241.

72Willey, Op. Cit., p. 136.

35

in which "offerings of thirteen loaves of bread,
thirteen bowls of food, and thirteen cakes made of
thirteen layers each are prepared."73 A God of
the Upper World could not be offended by refusing
him sustenance; calamity would surely result. This
is almost the equivalent of the Grimm Brothers tale
of Sleeping Beauty, and the dire consequences of not
inviting the thirteenth fairy to the banquet.
As already indicated, the Maya used the calendar,
particularly the tzolkin, for all aspects of life.
"It includes the conditions of religious duties
and religious conduct; it is a moral code, a
social and agrarian order, commercial law,
civil code, the Magna Carta of the Maya world,
the rules governing relationships not only
between the individual and God, but also the
individual and the State. To a certain degree
it also regulated taxes."74
A certain percentage of all monetary gain from
business ventures was due the gods, the propitious
days for such ventures having been determined by the
priests.
The foregoing discussion should reveal the necessity

for priestly stratification. The chief priest of a

religious center, the Ahau Kin Mai, had duties that

 

 

73Morley, Op. Cit., p. 38.

74Paul Westheim, The Art of Ancient Mexico, Doubleday
and Co., Inc., New York, 1965, p. 178.

 

36

were both administrative and tutorial.75 He assigned
priests, after examination, to specific locations and
work. But he also "taught hieroglyphic writing,
genealogy, ceremonies for the cure of sickness,
calendrical computation, astronomy, divination, and

the ritualistic round.76

He officiated only at major
ceremonies. In addition, he acted as chief advisor
to the halach uinic. Since celibacy was not required
of priests, except prior to special religious obser-

vances, the Ahau Kin Mai married, had a family life,

 

and his eldest son succeeded him in office. The

Ahau Kin Mai was not only knowledgeable, but busy!

 

The Ah Kin, the common priest, performed the
necessary daily rituals, made divinations from the
hieroglyphic books, and it was he who received the
heart of sacrifical victims from the hands of the
23222, who performed the actual sacrifice and removed
the heart. The 22225, because of his function, was
not particularly esteemed by the people.77 Four
EEEEE’ aids to the 23222, held down the sacrificial

victim. They had additional responsibilities, however,

 

75J. Eric S. Thompson, Op. Cit., p. 249.

761bid.
77

 

Morley, Op. Cit., p. 156.

37

helping at puberty rites, lighting the fire at the
New Year festival, and anointing the idols with blood
at the required times.78
Another group of priests were the chilanes, who
were greatly respected for their visionary capacities.
They were "prophets, astrologers, and soothsayers...
and induced visions by narcotics."79
Maya religious ceremonies and rituals seem to
have been ordered according to a pattern that included:
"...(1) preliminary fasting and abstinences,
symbolic of spiritual purification; (2) selec-
tion by priestly divination of an auspicious
day for the rite; and at the ceremony itself:
(3) an expulsion of the evil spirit from the
worshippers; (4) incensing of the idols;
(5) prayers; (6) the sacrifice, if posséBle,
of some living thing, animal or human."
Dancing, feasting, and drunkenness were looked forward
to at the conclusion of the ceremony.
It has been generally thought that the use of
idols and the need for human sacrifice was minimal
among the basically peaceful Maya until the intro-

duction of new gods and rituals by the invading Mexicans

in the tenth century, A.D. The discovery and examination

 

78Morley, Op. Cit., p. 157.

79Peterson, Op. Cit., p. 143.

80Morley, Op. Cit., p. 206.

38

of the frescoes at Bonampak have altered this older
view and
"...give us a new insight into the ceremonial
life and culture of the ancient Mayas of the
Classic period...and corrects many former
dogmas, such as their abhorrence of warfare
and human sacrifice, the low position of their
women, and an overemphasis on religion. It
shows that the Maya feudal class was as ruthless
and military-minded as its contemporaries in
the rest of Middle America."81
The attitude expressed by Covarrubias may be the result
of an excessive evaluative swing to a relatively opposite
pole of thought. Closer examination of the frescoes,
especially since they have all the earmarks of a sort
of mystery drama, may serve to negate the two extreme
views and ultimately bring about a construct of Maya

life falling somewhere in between.

Because large areas of the murals at Bonampak were
encrusted with lime, photographs of all the walls were
not possible. By applying kerosene, however, the lime
was rendered temporarily transparent and over a period
of time two sets of water color copies were made. One
set, by Agustin Villagra Caleti, is on exhibit in

Mexico City at the Museo de Antropologia.82 The other

 

81Covarrubias, Op. Cit., p. 262.

82Ancient Maya Paintings of Bonampak, Mexico, Carnegie
Institute of Washington,Supp1ementary Pub. #46,
Washington, 1955, p. 8.

39

set was done for the Carnegie Institution of Washington
by Antonio Tejeda Fonseca and is being preserved at
Harvard University's Peabody Museum of Archeology and
Ethnology.83 The reproductions of the Tejeda water-
colors appended to this study are one-sixteenth the
size of the original murals.84 While they are in no
sense accurate stylistic reproductions of the painted
originals, they do catch something of their quality
and their approximate color, and they do chronicle the
full extent of the subjects and activities represented.
The two photographs, Plates I and II, were taken

from Mexico - Pre-Hispanic Painting, published by the

 

New York Graphic Society in cooperation with UNESCO.
The originals were taken by Giles G. Healey. The photo—
graphs are included to show the nature of the present
state of preservation of the frescoes, as well as to
give a more accurate indication of their style.

In terms of making comparisons between the murals
at Bonampak and other pre-Columbian paintings, not a
great deal can be said. What remains of ancient "Mexican

and Maya painting is still extremely meagre and sketchy."85

 

83Supplementary Publication #46, Op. Cit., p. 3.
841bid.

5

Jacques Soustelle and Ignacio Bernal, EDS., Mexico:
Pre-Hispanic Painting, the New York Graphic Society
by arrangement withUNESCO, 1958, p. 7.

4O

 

Plate I

41

 

 

 

Plate II

42

It is more than likely that frescoes were used fairly
extensively to decorate the many temples and buildings
of the ceremonial centers, but under the relentless
weather, with its bleaching sun and heavy rains, and
the equally relentless hand of man, whether invading
native groups or Spaniards, most have vanished.

Of the paintings that do remain, those at Teotihuacah
and Monte Alban for example, and the illuminations in
the few surviving codices from the post-Classic period,
there are certain stylistic similarities that link
them to the frescoes at Bonampak and, taken together,
suggest a commonality of technical approach that
makes them immediately identifiable as Central American.
The dominating stylistic factor is a fluid, expressive
line, an overwhelming attention to the silhouette, and
the absence of concern with perspective and Chiaroscuro.
In spite of a splendid range of colors, the essence
of the style seems to be calligraphic, or glyphistic.
Yet there are distinct differences in the qualitative
effect of paintings from area to area, and these dif-
ferences suggest a corresponding difference in
psychological outlook.

Religious motifs and a strong sense of the austere

I I
pervade the paintings at Teotihuacan and Monte Alban.86

 

86
Soustelle and Bernal, Op. Cit., p. 9.

43

Here the sacred and the formal go hand in hand. At

Bonampak, on the other hand, there is an extraordinary

mixture of the sacred and the secular, the formal and

the informal. It may be as Westheim suggests, that

for the Maya "the religious is not the exclusive

goal and meaning of the artistic production; that along

with the religious, relegating it to second place and

at times substituting for it completely, rises the

esthetic, the fascinating experience of the esthetic."87

This would make the art of the Maya rather "baroque"

as opposed to the "classic" art of Teotihuacan and

Monte Alban where, supposedly, religion dominated all,

where "the old and the traditional was the sacred..."88
Is it true that "respect for the sacred tradition

did not exist in Maya art, or, if it did, it was easy

to bypass it"?89 How can this statement be reconciled

with another by the same author saying that "The Maya

pe0ple were filled with a profound religiosity, even

more profound if possible than that of the peoples of

the Central Plateau"?90 If religiosity is a criterion,

then perhaps Maya painting is more "classic" than

 

87Westheim, Op. Cit., p. 155.
881bid.
89Ibid.

 

9°Ibid., p. 177.

44

supposed.

What is it about the Bonampak frescoes that has
provoked so much commentary, often conflicting commentary?
Soustelle and Bernal sum up their provocative nature,
stating the representational elements that are novel
and that have resulted in extensive study and an attempt
to reconstruct Maya life within the new framework
revealed.

"Bonampak is a sort of pictorial encyclopedia

of a Maya city of the VIIth century; the city
comes to life there again, with its ceremonies
and its processions, its stiff and solemn
looking dignitaries weighed down by their
heavy plumed adornments, its warriors clothed
in jaguar-skins. Lively or violent scenes are
there displayed side by side with gracious,
familiar pictures of daily life. A complete
cross-section of society - women, children,
servants, musicians, warrior chiefs, dying
prisoners, masked dancers - that is what these
painters.gisucceeded in depicting on those
walls..."
In addition to a liveliness of linear style, there is
also an attempt at foreshortening and a naturalistic
representation of forms that is generally acknowledged,
admired, and considered as possibly unique in Maya
painting. This, however, is purely speculative.

It is obvious that the most impressive aspect

of the Bonampak murals has been their so-called "naturalism."

It has been repeatedly stressed that the scenes pre-

sented were in all probability personally witnessed by

 

91Soustelle and Bernal, Op. Cit., p. 9.

45

the artist92, and that he did not hesitate to include
vignettes of what went on behind the ceremonial scenes,
so to speak, in a way that suggests an awareness of
the aesthetics of form.93 In addition, there is the
informality of conversational groups, people dressing,
orders being issued to servants, as well as a great
sense of action, generated to a large extent by hand
gestures. Many of the scenes and figures draw a strong
emotional response as well. Yet the occasion must
have been a serious one, forln one is seen even smiling.

In actual fact, the interpretation of what is
being represented in these frescoes also lies in the
speculative realm. Even on purely visual grounds
there are questions. In Rooms 1 and 3, for example,
there are several important people whose sex is

impossible to determine.94

In the large sense, there
has been little difficulty in assigning general titles
to the four basic acts and giving general descriptions
to the scenes. To be anything more than broad, however,

is exceedingly difficult. A case in point is in the

scene of the arraignment of prisoners where three men

 

92Proskouriakoff, Op. Cit., p. 42, and Supplementary Pub.
#46, Op. Cit., p. 11.

93Proskouriakoff, Op. Cit., p. 42.

94Supplementary Pub. #46, Op. Cit., p. 17.

46

are shown whose hands drip blood. Did the rather
well-dressed man near them do something to cause them
to bleed? And, if so, how and why? No fingers seem
to have been cut off, no bark-cloth paper to indicate
the collection of blood for some ceremony, and there
seems no evidence that the Maya removed fingernails
for the fun of it.

The "what" and the "why" of many objects repre-
sented in the murals is discussed at some length by
Thompson in his ethnological notes,95 where it is
evident that possibilities are being explored but
definite identification is avoided. Since complete
accounts of Maya ceremonies do not exist, a good deal
of guesswork has gone into tentative explanations.
Even though "no positive elucidation of the scenes can

be offered,"96

some of the guesses by Maya specialists
seem to be solidly grounded. The nature of a man's
clothing, or a glyph in his eye, may make him readily
identifiable to an expert. On the other hand, some
statements are questionable.

Particularly difficult to deal with is the insis-

tence that esoteric symbolism is essentially absent

 

95Thompson, pub. #602, Op. Cit., pp. 60-64.

96Supplementary Pub. #46, Op. Cit., p. 17.

47

or unstressed,97 forms being "presented by the artist
as data of his observation rather than as symbols."98
Yet in the descriptions there are constant references
to the meaning of symbols. The appearance of the
water lily evokes the comment that it "is the emblem
of the abundant earth, both its surface and interior,
and is worn by the gods connected therewith."99 The
sign in the eye of a god impersonator is referred to
as "a symbol of germination and fertility."100 If
the artist recorded what he saw in this case, his
vision was indeed extraordinary!

There is no reason to suppose that the Maya
departed from ancient custom in the case of Bonampak.
Traditionally, the artist was either under the direct
supervision of a priest or was himself a priest.

Westheim makes a direct referencelo the community

support of the artist "as a member of the clergy."101

 

97Proskiourakoff, Pub. #602, Op. Cit., p. 41.

98Ibid., p. 43.

99Thompson, Pub. #602, Op. Cit., p. 49.

10° Ibid. , p. 50.

10IWestheim, Op. Cit., p. 43.

48

As artists they were strictly regulated. They
"...remained isolated while they worked...
they were confined to huts built exclusively
for this purpose, where no one was allowed
to see them and where they underwent a
peculiar ritual in which they burned copal,
drew their own blood as an offering, fasted,
and abstained from sexual intercourse."102
Surely as a priest the artist at Bonampak must have
been aware of the meaning of his symbols and used
them consciously. In spite of the naturalism and
informality of the murals, then, it seems more
than reasonable to concur with Covarrubias when he
says that "Maya art was rigidly restricted to the
representation of ceremonial and religious ideas.
Consequently it is only natural that it grew into a
symbolic, highly decorative art at the service of an
urban priestly aristocracy."103

An examination of the frescoes reveals a definite

hieratic organization. The halach uinic is always

 

identifiable either by his position in a compositional
group, by the magnificence of his clothing, or by the
intensity and sternness of his expression. Each
stratum of Maya feudal society is reflected in a

similar manner. Indication of rank is often by

 

lonestheim, Op. Cit., p. 41.

 

103Covarrubias, Op. Cit., p. 226.

 

49

placement in relation to the halach uinic, by dress,

 

or by occupation. There is a definite chain of

command. Orders are issued by the halach uinic and

 

passed from person to person as indicated by the
turned heads and the hand gestures.

Viewing the frescoes as the glorification or
apotheosis of a priest-king,104 each act would appear
to stress one of his major functions. This is not

altered by the possibility that the halach uinic was
105

 

already regarded as divine in his lifetime, and
there is every chance that the genealogy taught by

the Ahau Kin Mai was to establish a divine right to

 

rule.

The scenes of Act One present the halach uinic

 

in the role of overseer. His duty is to see that
ritual preparations follow the required pattern so
that the gods will not be offended. Simply garbed,

he watches and commands from his dais where he must be
looked up to and obeyed. Upon him depends the well-
being of the people, for he is the mediator between

them and the gods.

 

104Covarrubias, Op. Cit., p. 227.

105Westheim, Op. Cit., p. 185.

50

Act Two appears to be the glorification of the

military aspect of the halach uinic. He is ela—

 

borately costumed in a sleeveless jerkin of jaguar-
skin, the heelguards of his sandals are of jaguar-
skin, even the front end of his long spear is wrapped
in jaguar-skin. 11f jaguar-skin clothing is a symbol
of dignity, he is well invested. The king becomes

the invincible warrior, an expression of the superhuman.

Part of the halach uinic's responsibility as

 

king was his judicial function. In Act Three he appears
on top of a pyramidal structure in the role of judge.
His military costume has here been embellished by a
large jade pectoral and aspectacular headdress with
long quetzal feathers. With him rests the decision
as to which of the captives will be sacrificed to the
gods and which will become slaves.

In one scene of Act Four the role of the halach

uinic becomes one of self-sacrifice. By his act of

 

venesection he gives his precious blood to the gods.
Another scene reveals him as the passive but majestic
onlooker. Before him the ceremonial dance takes place,
a dance that somehow stands in a symbolic relationtn

106

the sacred calendar, and the rhythm of time becomes

the rhythm of the dance. What could be more pleasing

 

106peterson, Op. Cit., p. 206.

51

to the gods of the tzolkin?

The building in which these murals were painted
is undoubtedly a funerary monument. Granted that the
artist painted what he had seen. But, rather obviously,
he painted from memory, and there is little question
that his memory encompassed a series of similar scenes
that were repeated at intervals in the ceremonial cycle.
That these scenes were chosen to be represented on the
walls of such small chambers rarely entered and seen
by few, suggests something other than the narrative
commemoration of a single historical event. They
appear, rather, to stand forever for the ceremony itself,
a poetic reenactment stretching into infinity. There
the divine ruler forever participates, forever stands
before his people as lord and bishop in an eternal

epiphany.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Burland, C. A. The Gods of Mexico, G. P. Putnam's
Sons, New York, 1967.

 

Carnegie Institute of Washington, Ancient Maya Paintings
of Bonampak, Mexico, Supplementary Puincation #46:
Washington, 1955.

 

Coe, Michael D. The Maya, Frederick A. Praeger, New
York, 1966.

Covarrubias, Miguel. Indian Art of Mexico and Central
America , Alfred A. Knopf, N. Y}, 1957.

 

Dockstader, Frederick J. Indian Art of Central America,
Cory, Adams and Mackay, London, 1964.

 

Gallenkamp, Charles. Maya, Frederick Muller Ltd.,
London, 1960.

 

Morley, Sylvanus. The Ancient Maya, Stanford University
Press, Stanford, caliTOrnia, 1958.

 

Peterson, Frederick A. Ancient Mexico, George Allen
and Unwin, Ltd., LondOn, 1959.

 

Rivet, Paul. Cites Maya, Albert Guillot, Paris, 1954.

 

Ruppert, Karl, Thompson, J. Eric S, and Proskouriakoff,
Tatiana. Bonampak, Chiapas, Mexico , Carnegie
Institute of Washington,Pub1ication #602,
Washington, 1955.

 

Soustelle, Jacques and Bernal, Ignacio, eds. Mexico -
Pre-Hispanic Painting, The New York Graphic Society
by arrangement with UNESCO, 1958.

 

Thompson, Edward H. People of the Serpent, Capricorn
Books, New York,

 

Thompson, J. Eric S. The Rise and Fall of Maya
Civilization, University of dklahomaPress,
Norman,71954.

 

 

52

Maya Archeologist, University of Oklahoma
Press,-N0rman, 1963.

 

 

Tonkin, Robert. The Bonampak Murals, Thesis for M.A.,
Michigan State University, 1964.

 

Villagra, Agustin. Bonampak: La Ciudad de los
Muros Pintados. México City: Ana1es del Instituto
Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, 1949.

 

 

Willey, Gordon R. An Introduction to American Archeology,
Volume I, Prentice-Hall, Inc.’New Jersey, 1966.

 

Westheim, Paul. The Art of Ancient Mexico, Doubleday
and Company, Inc., New York, 1965.

 

53

NHL.

V. AN

.

 

.‘JJ‘ :1

.l )1 1. . . .1. .4. .r. A.
m. H! .I ..a. is“ “MW-D m Ami...“ II. 1 v...‘( a. , . .

9.1.

it“

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

Painting by
Antonio Teiedo
of the mural in
Room 2, Structure
1, Bonampak.

Carnegie Institution
of Washington

 

.hl‘

O

HICHIGQN STRTE UNIV. LIBRQRIES

||||||| ||||1| 1| “1| ll I'll 111111
9 8 14

312 31023 84