Peccaries in Ancient Maya Economy, Ideology, and Iconography

a thesis presented by

Diana Fridberg

to

the Department of Anthropology

in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree with honors

of Bachelor of Arts

Harvard University

Cambridge, Massachusetts

March 2005

1

Introduction: Omnipresence and Ambiguity

Peccaries, animals closely related to Old World pigs, are native throughout

Central America. These stout, bristly animals have been hunted by most and given

symbolic meaning by many of the indigenous groups that have shared their

habitat. One of these groups was the ancient Maya, a civilization that inhabited

the eastern third of Mesoamerica and was characterized by shared deities, glyphic

writing, and architectural forms (Fash 2001). Peccaries are not uncommon in

Maya contexts; their modified and unmodified remains are found throughout the

chronological and spatial range of ancient Maya sites, in association with apparent

ritual activities and burials, and in residential areas, kitchens, and middens.

Depictions of the animal are found in pre-Contact ceramic art and mentioned in

post-Colonial ethnographies (Donkin 1985). Despite the frequency with which

peccaries are associated with the Maya, the possibility that peccaries were

considered to be something more than a source of meat has never been fully

considered.

That the ancient Maya did associate certain animals with social categories

or religious themes is well known. Of those animals that unquestionably

possessed symbolic associations in Maya thought, one of the most consistently

utilized is the jaguar. The spotted cat and its pelt were deeply connected to

kingship in Maya consciousness. While few animals appear to have been laden

with the degree of intense socio-religious meaning possessed by the jaguar, some

2

animal species are repeatedly depicted in association with supernatural figures,

social rank, and overarching themes of daily and ritual life (Foster 2002:179).

Through this research, I intend to address the question: in what ways were

peccaries not only food for the Maya, but food for thought? In doing so, the

biology and physical uses of peccaries will be considered in combination with

iconographic representations. Peccary remains and imagery will be taken as

evidence of their intentional utilization rather than their mere presence in the

landscape. This will aid in the construction of a holistic analysis of the animal’s

place in ancient Maya life.

The dietary importance of peccaries is demonstrated by the repeated

presence of their remains at Maya sites. While the presence or absence of bones

may not be taken as an absolute indicator of peccary consumption in a given

location, a survey of these locations will help illuminate the continued

procurement of peccaries. In the absence of contextual evidence suggesting that

these remains are not the result of butchery, it may be assumed that the majority

of these specimens represent consumed peccaries. By reviewing the material in

this way, the spatial and temporal spread of peccary consumption by the Maya

may be illuminated.

Once evidence for this physical use has been established, a consideration

of the ways in which the ancient Maya depicted peccaries will be undertaken.

Though not among the most common species depicted, peccaries may be seen in a

variety of naturalistic and fantastical poses and situations in Maya ceramic and

sculptural art. In these representations the animals may appear as both passive and

3

active participants in ritual activity, anthropomorphized, and in the company of

supernatural entities. Through evaluation of the ways in which peccaries are

depicted in Maya iconography, some tentative suggestions of the symbolic

meanings they may have held will be drawn.

Information on the physical and possible symbolic uses of peccaries will

serve as a basis for the interpretation of two fragmentary, incised skulls unearthed

from Tomb 1, Copán, Honduras in 1892 and currently held at the Peabody

Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University. Considered “one of

the finest works of Maya bone carving ever discovered,” the more intact of the

two skulls has received considerable attention since its discovery (Fash 2001:52).

Incised upon this skeletal medium is a complex set of glyphic texts and images,

one of which shows three running peccaries. The status of this object as both a

physical skull of the animal and a depiction of peccaries makes it particularly apt

for the study of peccary-related symbolism.

As a test case for theories of the animal’s symbolic meaning, and to

demonstrate the utility of assigning meaning to the species, the Copán skulls will

be analyzed with regard to their status as peccaries. Both depicting and

constructed of peccary, the skulls are likely associated with any symbolic

connotation that did exist at the time. Applying the suggested connotations

possessed by the animal will therefore serve both as a test for these meanings and

a tool for the interpretation of the artifacts. By assessing peccaries as both a food

source and as a medium for holding symbolic meaning, the significance of

peccaries in the Maya world and in these two skulls will be elucidated.

4

Chapter 1: Peccary Zoology

Peccaries are mammals in the order Artiodactyla (Reid 1997). They are of

the suborder Suiformes and infraorder Suina, animals with two-chambered, non-

ruminating stomachs, along with their closest relatives, pigs and boars (Family

Suidae). The Family of peccaries, Tayassuidae, only exists in the New World

(Emmons 1997). Three genera, each with a species, exist: the collared peccary or

javelina (Dicotyles tajacu), the white-lipped peccary (Tayassu pecari), the and

Chacoan peccary (Catagonius wagneri).1

Peccaries are pig-like in appearance, with an elongated, mobile snout,

stocky body, and bristly pelage. However, members of Tayassuidae have several

features that differentiate them from Suidae, including relatively longer and

thinner legs, shorter tails, and smaller hooves (Nowak 1999). They are further

distinguished by their downward-pointed canines and the presence of a dorsal

scent gland that excretes a musk when the animal is excited (Emmons 1997).

Peccaries also have legs better suited for running, with fused metatarsals and a

fused radius and ulna. (Gottdenker and Bodmer 2003).

Collared and white-lipped peccaries are found in the Maya area, while

Chacoan peccaries are only found in South America (Reid 1997). Collared and

white-lipped peccaries are also morphologically more similar to each other than

1 Within the Family there is some controversy regarding proper classification of the three peccary species. Morphologically, the collared and white-lipped peccaries are more similar and have frequently been put together in the genus Tayassu, but genetic studies support a three-genera classification of Dicotyles (collared peccaries), Tayassu (white-lipped peccaries), and Catagonius (Chacoan peccaries). Nomenclature adhering to this model will be used when referring to the different types of peccary (Gottdenker and Bodmer 2003).

5

either is to the Chacoan peccary. These two species are quite similar, though not

identical, in terms of appearance and behavior.

Morphology

Collared peccaries (Fig. 1.1) are smaller and lighter in color, on average,

than white-lipped peccaries (Fig. 1.2). D. tajacu is the smallest of all peccary

species (Gottdenker and Bodmer 2003). Adults weigh 14–30 kilograms (kg), with

a body length of 0.75–1 meters (m) and mean shoulder height of 0.44–0.50 m.

Individual T. pecari are larger, with an average adult weight of 20–50 kg , body

length of 0.9–1.3 m, and shoulder height of 0.44–0.60 m (Nowak 1999). Both

species have dark, bristly fur with characteristic white or cream-colored patches

from which the species’ common names are derived. D. tajacu’s dark gray-brown

fur is marked by a “collar” of lighter fur from shoulders to chest, and T. pecari’s

darker black-brown fur is marked by a light patch along the lower jaw and throat

(Reid 1997).

Fig 1.1: Collared peccary (D. tajacu) adult and infant (Reid 1997:Pl. 42).

6

Fig. 1.2: White-lipped peccary (T. pecari) adult (Reid 1997:Pl. 42).

Distribution and Habitat

The collared peccary has a larger geographical distribution than the white-

lipped peccary (see map, Fig. 1.3). D. tajacu also exploits the widest range of

habitats of the three peccary species (Gottdenker and Bodmer 2003). They are

found from the southwestern United States throughout Central America and south

to Argentina, inhabiting forests of all types, grasslands, and deserts in lowlands to

3000 m (Emmons 1997; Reid 1997). T. pecari exist from Mexico south to

northern Argentina (Emmons 1997). They exhibit less variation in habitat than do

collared peccaries, seeming to depend more on dense forest environments (Nowak

1999).

Though the foods available differ with their habitats, the two species are

both omnivorous and consume many of the same things. D. tajacu primarily root

and graze for food, sometimes digging holes in search of underground plant parts

or seeds (Gottdenker and Bodmer 2003; Eisenberg and Redford 1999). Their diet

may include fruit, nuts and seeds, invertebrates, small vertebrates, succulents,

tubers, and young plants (Emmons 1997; Eisenberg and Redford 1999). T. pecari

7

also roots and grazes. They are primarily frugivorous but also may eat nuts and

seeds, invertebrates, small vertebrates, lizard eggs, and carrion (Gottdenker and

Bodmer 2003; Nowak 1999). T. pecari is especially suited to eating extremely

hard seeds and nuts, as it has the strongest jaw of any species of peccary (Reid

1997). The wide variety of foods eaten by collared and white-lipped peccaries

permits them to make use of any food sources available as their herds travel.

Behavior

Both species of peccary are gregarious, traveling in groups containing

males and females of all ages. Herd size in both varies with habitat. On average,

D. tajacu travels in herds of 2–15 individuals in Neotropical forests and 5–30 in

the deserts of the southwestern United States (Gottdenker and Bodmer 2003).

They are usually seen in smaller feeding groups of 2–5 individuals (Reid). T.

pecari forms larger groups on average; in South America, white-lipped peccaries

form the largest group of any terrestrial mammals on the continent (Eisenberg and

Redford 1999). These herds may be 50–300 individuals or more (Emmons 1997).

In general, collared peccaries are found in smaller groups with a larger

geographical representation, and white-lipped peccaries are found in a smaller

area but in larger groups. For both species, herding helps protect peccaries from

predation. Within their habitat, both collared and white-lipped peccaries are

subject to hunting by humans, pumas, and jaguars, the latter two of which are the

largest carnivores in the area (Donkin 1985). While they do not typically attack

8

humans, an entire herd may retaliate if a member is injured or attacked (Nowak

1999:1066).

Interaction within peccary herds is dependent on their excellent senses of

smell and hearing. Both species possess rather poor vision and depend on scent

and vocalizations to communicate location between individuals and groups (Reid

1997). The source of scent in each is the dorsal musk gland, which may be rubbed

against rocks or trees, marking group territories. The pungent odors emitted are

unique to each species, as are the set of vocalizations each has to show alarm,

aggression, or to keep in contact with group members (Nowak 1999).

Interaction between adults and young in the herds are markedly different

between the two species. Collared and white-lipped peccaries have similar

reproductive biology; both average two offspring per litter, may breed year-round,

and have polyestrous females. However, collared peccaries show much greater

potential for interaction between the young and adults. Female collared peccaries

may nurse infants of other herd members, and adults may come in contact with an

infant. No such interaction is permitted by white-lipped peccary females. The

very protective white-lipped peccary dams are never separated from their

offspring and may exhibit aggressive behavior to keep even members of their own

herds away from their young (Gottdenker and Bodmer 2003).

With their large herds, strong scent, and constant vocal communication,

peccaries were conspicuous cohabitants of the ancient Maya. Their high visibility

facilitated human attempts to locate peccaries, usually during the hunt.

9

Fig 1.3: Locations of mentioned sites and distribution of collared and white-lipped peccaries (modified from Fash 2002:Fig. 1)

10

Chapter 2: The Role of Peccaries in Maya Subsistence A variety of plants and animals were part of the ancient Maya diet.

Cultivation of maize, squash, beans, and other crops was supplemented by the

gathering of wild fruits. Domesticated turkeys and dogs provided some meat, but

the majority was obtained by hunting (Pohl and Feldman 1982). The ancient

Maya hunted a wide variety of animals besides peccaries, including deer, turkeys,

mollusks, fish, armadillos, birds, turtles, eggs, iguanas and other fauna (Foster

2002).

Both white-lipped and collared peccaries have been historically considered

desirable game animals. Yielding up to forty pounds (collared) or fifty pounds

(white-lipped) of meat per adult individual, peccaries contribute significantly to

human diet in some areas (Nietschmann 1973). With a taste described as similar

to “fatless pork chops” when roasted, peccary flesh is relatively high-quality meat

in a relatively large package (Tharp 2001).

Peccary meat may have also played a role in reciprocal interactions

between individuals and groups. The exchange practiced by extant Maya groups

is rooted in pre-Contact tradition. Pohl draws this parallel, stating, “Among the

present-day Maya reciprocity is practiced, and gifts of food, especially meat,

signify the affirmation of social relationships. Meat was one of the special gifts

offered to the Spaniards when they arrived… [D]istribution of meat among kin

and class lines is likely to have been characteristic of Maya life in earlier times”

(1976:82). Peccary meat was likely included in such offerings due to the size of

individual animals and the relatively high quality of the meat. Whether consumed

11

by the individual or given as a symbol of respect, the flesh of peccaries

undoubtedly played an important role in the lives of many pre-Contact Maya.

Acquisition and Preparation

In order to obtain peccary meat, the ancient Maya likely employed a

variety of hunting strategies. The use of a noose to capture peccaries is depicted in

the Codex Tro-Cortesianus (Madrid Codex). In these illustrations, the animals are

attached to a small, bent tree by a noose around the foot (Fig. 2.1). This style of

trap is likely similar to a 20th century snare described by Gann in which a noose is

rigged to a “springy young sapling” and used to jerk captured animals off the

ground (1918:24). In addition to this snare and other types of traps, bow- and

spear-hunting were likely employed (Healy 1983). Evidence from the island of

Laguna de On supports the use of projectile weaponry in peccary hunting.

Peccaries contributed significantly to local food production on the island, where a

collection of projectile points was found in association with a sizeable animal

butchering site (Masson 1999). Use of snares or projectile weapons would have

ideally prevented the hunter from having to engage the animal at close range—an

important factor when considering their sharp tusks and loyal herds. Despite the

risk of injury when dealing with peccaries, some attempts may have been made to

obtain them without hunting from wild herds.

12

Fig. 2.1: Depictios of ensnared peccary in the Codex Tro-Cortesianus (Madrid Codex) (Donkin 1985)

The similarity of Tayassuidae to their close relatives, the Old World pigs,

makes it tempting to assume they possess a similar suitability to being tended by

humans. Structures thought to be animal pens have been found at a number of

sites in association with large numbers of deer, dog, or turkey bones (Pohl and

Feldman 1982). While there is no evidence to suggest that peccaries themselves

were domesticates, contemporary practices suggest that they may have been kept

in the pre-Contact era.

Capturing young peccaries and raising them in captivity is practiced by

contemporary groups, and there is some indication that this was practiced in the

past. Ethnographic accounts record instances of peccaries being kept as pets or

being raised and fattened for later consumption (Nietschmann 1973). When hand-

raised, peccaries are notably loyal and Pohl notes that they are “said to make the

best ‘watch dogs’” in communities where they are kept. They may also be trained

to come when called (1976:203). In one twentieth-century account, it is claimed

that young mammals raised in captivity would be breast-fed by women when they

13

refused to eat (Kirchhoff 1963). The capturing of young animals for later

slaughter may aid in attempts to get the most meat from an individual animal.

After reaching maturity, growth decreases while feed must be provided at the

level necessary for an adult of the species. Control of an animal from its early life

may allow slaughter to be targeted at the maximum carcass return weight to

fodder cost.

Such control, and its related advantages, could have occurred despite the

undomesticated state of the animal. Occasional exploitation of captured young

peccaries would have had some of the same benefits of a maintained herd without

the drawbacks of sustained animal husbandry. The concerns of adult feeding,

maintenance of an adult breeding population, and management of propagation are

eliminated with this strategy. Pohl remarks that “domestication may in fact be

regarded as an inefficient strategy, at least for the Maya. Animals available to the

Maya would have been particularly difficult to feed, maintain and propagate”

(1976:221). Unfortunately, there is no single structure type that may be identified

conclusively as a peccary pen. The lack of evidence for domestication of

peccaries, however, may not be considered a reliable indicator for rejecting this

method of exploitation by the Maya.

Meat cooking practices among the Maya included steaming, roasting,

barbecuing, and stewing. For large animals like peccaries, barbecuing or roasting

the carcass over a hearth was likely the most frequent method used (Foster

2002:336). Since after slaughtering a peccary or other large animal, one would be

left with a sizeable amount of meat, it is likely that at times peccary meat was

14

consumed after being smoked to prevent spoilage. This may have been achieved

using a technique similar to one recorded in an ethnographic account from the

early twentieth century. Gann documented that the preservation of meat among a

contemporaneous Maya community involved hanging joints of meat within a

closed shack constructed of palm leaves, under which were burned cedar chips.

He attests to the efficacy of this method, noting that “in about 24 hours the meat is

sufficiently cured to last for several weeks. If it is wished to preserve the meat for

longer periods the process [may be] prolonged and salt may be rubbed in”

(1918:21).

While reconstructions of specific acquisition and preparation methods is

likely unfeasible, the end result—human consumption of peccaries—may be

detected archaeologically through zooarchaeological analysis.

Archaeological Evidence for Peccary Consumption

Peccary remains have been excavated from sites throughout the Maya

Lowlands. Recovered material from the full range of spatial and temporal

contexts indicates the continued procurement of peccaries. While drawing

conclusions about the specific dietary contribution of the species is made difficult

due to imperfect preservation of skeletal material, the archaeological record

indicates that peccaries were commonly hunted and eaten by the ancient Maya.

15

A Note on Problems of Retrieval

The taphonomic processes to which remains may have been subjected

include cycles of burial and exposure, animal gnawing, human modification,

trampling, soil acidity, disruption by invertebrates and plant roots, and the effects

of the elements. In the hundreds of years since the occupation of a given site,

these destructive processes have unquestionably eliminated much of the skeletal

material, peccary, human, and otherwise (Lyman 1994). A further consideration

is the state of the bone when it was first discarded. Cooking destroys some of the

organic matter of bone. Roasting creates less brittle bone than boiling, but both

processes make the bone more fragile. The more cooking the bone is subjected to,

the more brittle its final condition; extensively boiled bone is far weaker than

bones that were only boiled for a short time, for example (Chaplin 1971).

Therefore, if peccaries are represented in the archaeological record due mostly to

their use as food, it may be assumed that most peccary bones were deposited in a

state already weakened by the cooking process unless meat was removed before it

was cooked. Despite these complicating factors, peccary remains have survived to

indicate the animal’s consumption. The following examples from Preclassic,

Classic, and Postclassic Maya settlements illustrate the chronological depth of

peccary use.

Preclassic (1300 BCE–100 CE)

Remains of collared peccaries and indeterminate species are reported from

both Altar de Sacrificios and Seibal, Department of Peten, Guatemala. The

16

material was discovered from Middle and Late Preclassic contexts (Pohl 1976:Fig

4.2). At Cerros, in northern Belize, peccary remains have been found throughout

the site’s early occupation (275–50 BCE). Moreover, analysis of material from

the latter part of this period (100–50 BCE) shows a significant increase in the

quantity of peccary remains (Carr 1986).

Classic (250–900 CE)

The remains of both collared and white-lipped peccaries were reportedly

found in “general diggings” at Uxmal, Yucatán, Mexico (Kidder 1947:60). At the

Selin Farm Site, eastern Honduras, peccary remains have been discovered in

material that spans the occupation of the site (300–1000 CE), found in quantities

sufficient for Healy (1983) to conclude that peccaries were a “staple” food of this

community. Though the recovered skeletal material was not sufficient to make a

species designation, the area’s forest setting would have provided an ideal habitat

for white-lipped peccaries (Healy 1983).

Late Classic designation has been given to a number of sites based on

contextual evidence. Peccary remains of indeterminate species have been

recorded at Copán (Collins 2000), and both collared and white-lipped peccary

remains have been identified at Seibal (Pohl 1976). Wing (1975) reports the

presence of collared peccary remains, including teeth, maxillary, and postcranial

fragments at Lubaantun in association with Late Classic Material. At Altar de

Sacrificios, skull fragments and several teeth identified as white-lipped peccary

17

were found in fill or refuse dating to the Late Classic to Post Classic (Pasión to

Boca-Jimba phases) (Olsen 1982).

Postclassic (900–1300 CE)

Finally, skeletal material is found at a number of Postclassic sites as well.

Masson (1999) reports evidence of peccary utilization at Laguna de On island,

though no species designation is given. The remains of collared peccaries

dominate the faunal assemblage at the island site of Cozumel (Hamblin 1984). A

minimum number of 191 individuals, either collared or unidentified peccaries,

have been discovered. As white-lipped peccaries are not thought to have been

present in the Cozumel area, it is likely that the unidentified remains are also

those of collared peccaries, which are still found on the island (Hamblin 1984).

Remains of both species have been discovered at both Tikal and Macanche.

Curiously, skulls and mandibles were prevalent among the remains uncovered at

Macanche (Pohl 1976:Fig. 4.2). The preferential preservation of cranial elements

is also seen at Flores. An abundance of the faunal material recovered from

Postclassic Flores consists of peccary remains, within which skulls and mandibles

were also prevalent. More than any other site, residents of ancient Flores appear

to have had a partiality for peccaries, such that peccary remains represent one

third of the faunal assemblage. Of the remains identified to species, all were

found to be collared peccary. White-lipped peccaries were not observed, but two-

thirds of the peccary assemblage could not be identified to species (Pohl,

1976:114).

18

The ancient Maya consumed peccaries in each era, but is unclear which

members of society had access to their meat. Some believe that elite control of

economic resources implies their control of larger game, including peccaries.

Contextual Inference: Elite Meat?

Those with the power to control resources will frequently have access to

higher quality foodstuffs. Sociocultural considerations and values help define the

diets of group subsets (Dincauze 2000:479). As one of the larger and richer game

animals in the Maya area, peccary flesh may have been one of the more desirable

available meats. If elites had preferential access to game, we would then expect

more peccary remains to be found in elite contexts.

Masson’s (1999) analysis of faunal remains from the Postclassic site of

Laguna de On Island has revealed a generally positive correlation between

presumed status and the number of large animal remains. She reported that a

“disproportionately high concentration of peccary remains were found in the

residential/ritual areas that contain artifacts comparatively indicative of higher

status inhabitants” (101). The author also suggests that elites may have been

responsible for the redistribution of meat from large game to other members of

society. This conclusion is drawn from the higher proportion of large animal

remains in the elite district and evidence of butchering practices in this otherwise

elite setting—a preponderance of cranial and foot elements of peccary, along with

crocodile, tapir, and deer and a collection of projectile points (Masson

1999:106)— and a lack of such elements in other areas of the site. This is in line

19

with the idea that those with greater social power had preferential access to higher

quality sources of meat.

Collins’ study of Late Classic Copán (600–900 CE) reveals a use trend

different than that discovered at Laguna de On. While both were less than 1%,

comparison of faunal remains from the palace complex 10L-2 and the lower status

area known as Las Sepulturas showed a slightly higher proportion of peccary

elements from the non-elite area. 0.11% of remains from Group 10L-2 were

identified as peccary (19 specimens) compared to 0.41% of the faunal remains (33

specimens) at Las Sepulturas (2000:152-3). More surprisingly, all nine of the

worked bone fragments identified as peccary that were investigated in the study

were from the lower status area (154). However, the small difference in

percentage values and large number of unidentified large animal remains that may

be peccary may mean that this was a difference of degree and not of kind.

Determining whether or not a particular animal was preferentially

consumed by elites is frequently attempted using such contextual studies. In her

study of faunal remains from Aguateca and Petexbatún, Emery notes that “the

distinction must be made between accidental and intentional emulation of high-

status animal use patterns, and that distinction is not easily made even with a

superb archaeological data set” (2003:510). For example, lower-status members

of society may have prepared the meat later consumed by elites, causing the

deposition of preferentially consumed carcasses outside of a high-status area.

Additionally, floors of elite residences were often swept, ridding them of debris

including that from meals. Emery also suggests that the relative status of a food

20

product may be correlated with the degree to which those in power can control the

population. Therefore, preferential consumption of peccary meat may have shifted

with variations in political power (2003:512). Because of these theoretical

considerations, it is unclear when or if peccary meat was associated with elites.

The wide distribution of peccary remains demonstrates that their

consumption was a common occurrence. While it remains unclear whether or not

peccary meat was considered a high-status food, it is clear that they were

consumed across the Maya Lowlands.

21

Chapter 3: The Ritual and Cosmological Roles of Peccaries

While unmodified skeletal remains may serve as dietary indicators across

time, by themselves they are unable to communicate information regarding what

non-economic relationships ancient people had with the animal. To investigate

this question, ethnography or human creative output in the form of writing or art

must serve to bridge the gap. In the case of peccaries, this entails consideration of

ancient Maya cosmology and religion. Examining the representations of peccaries

within these contexts may reveal religious aspects assigned to the animal.

In order to consider the place that peccaries occupied in the spiritual world

of the ancient Maya, it is necessary first to consider what is known of their

cosmology. According to Maya origin mythology, the earth was considered to be

a turtle floating in a primordial sea. Beneath the water’s surface existed the nine

levels of the watery underworld, Xibalba; above lay the thirteen layers of the

celestial heavens. Supernatural power permeated all parts of the universe and was

especially concentrated at the edges of the world’s four cardinal directions and at

the sacred trees and caves forming gateways between the realms (Wagner 2001).

The three-stone hearth where creation began was present in the stars of Orion’s

belt (Freidel et al. 1993). The Milky Way crossed the sky as a two-headed serpent

(Sharer 1994), meeting perpendicularly with the World Tree that formed the road

to the underworld (Schele and Freidel 1990:66). These and other celestial bodies

were physical manifestations of supernatural power and were used to divine the

22

future and explain the present. Universal order was observable in their animate

but predictable nature (Sharer 1994).

Despite the perceived boundaries between the levels of the upper, lower,

and visible worlds, spiritual power was not restricted to the supernatural realms.

Spiritual essence or its potential existed in all things animate and inanimate,

including landscape features, weather, celestial bodies, plants, and animals. Only

part of this pervasive force was contained in deities, who appeared in

anthropomorphic or zoomorphic guise (Sharer 1994). Under this organizing

principle of each creature as a holder of power, animals obtained associations

with certain deities and occurrences. Peccaries appear in Maya art in a number of

different contexts. While not the most frequent subject in any media, they are

shown in naturalistic, abstract, and anthropomorphized forms, frequently in ritual

situations, and clearly were considered important in the Maya worldview.

Channeling the Peccary: Wayob

The logograph deciphered by Houston and Stuart (1989) as way (pl.

wayob) is believed to represent the ancient version of the modern Maya “co-

essence.” Similar to the Nahua concept of a tonal or naugal, wayob are spiritual

alter egos in the form of animals (Houston and Stuart 1989:1). The glyph

identified as way is relatively common on Classic Period vessels and frequently

accompanies depictions of unusual creatures, including composites of different

animals, deity-like figures, and other supernaturals (Houston and Stuart 1989:7).

Anthropomorphized, fantastic, and composite animals are thought to have been

23

the most common way type. It is believed that the characteristics of a way

creature echoed in the personality and physical health of its human counterpart

(Eberl 2001).

Animal species used for way creatures were broken down into

subcategories based on variations in attributes. The jaguar, a way creature

commonly associated with kings, had roughly fifteen different aspects, including

the water, fire, and cloud jaguar, each with different attributes (Eberl 2001:313).

A peccary with volutes emerging from its nostrils and wearing a death’s eye

collar or scarf around the neck appears on a number of vessels and is identified in

one instance as a “fire peccary” (Grube and Nahm 1994:698) (see Figs. 3.1, 3.2,

and 3.3). Oddly enough, while the flame-like projections emerge from creature’s

nostrils, this may not be what was intended. The accompanying glyphic text from

vases K-1001 (Fig. 3.1) and K-1743 (Fig. 3.2) reads: “k’ahk’ ti’ chitam, or ‘fire is

the food of the peccary’” (M. Zender, personal communication 2005). As they

emerge directly from the nostrils, this is an apparent inconsistency. Regardless of

their intended origin or destination, the protruding curls are further identified as

flames by occasionally being painted red (Grube and Nahm 1994:698). The “fire

peccary” may represent a subcategory of peccary wayob.

24

Fig. 3.1: Rollout photograph of codex-style vase (K1001) depicting “fire peccary” (Kerr 1989).

Fig. 3.2: Detail from polychrome vase K1743 showing “fire peccary” with red “flame” volutes and death’s-eye collar (Kerr 1998).

These animal doubles could be manifested in several ways. Ancient Maya

warriors were thought to become or channel these spirits during battle (Freidel et

al. 1993). Most frequently, however, rituals were responsible for this change.

Outside the context of war, autosacrifice, dancing, and alcohol or hallucinogens

were used. Shamans and elites could use these methods to transform into or call

25

the spirits into a concrete form (Eberl 2001). Sometimes enema funnels were used

to increase the volume of intoxicants administered and hasten inebriation (Grube

2001). A peccary is in attendance on a polychrome vase (Fig. 3.3) depicting,

among other creatures, a water-lily jaguar toppled in a position suggestive of

intoxication holding an enema tube (Kerr 1997).

Fig. 3.3: Section of design from K7525. Note the prone water-lily jaguar at left. A peccary with a human face on its back is located on the right-hand panel (Kerr 1997).

Loud vocalizations are associated with ritual use of hallucinogens in

Mesoamerica. These “cosmic howls” may be linked linguistically to the peccary:

In Colonial Yucatec the "God of Inebriating Beverage" (referred to in the vocabulary sources simply as vino is known as akan ('vino y dios del vino (Swadesh et al. 1970:33). A homophonous Yucatec word akan means 'to howl, moan, bellow'. Significantly ak, a root that is sonically identical to the root in both of the above words for 'howl' and '(God of) Inebriant', is the word in Yucatec not only for 'arched', but also for both the 'turtle' (whose shell is rubbed to produce a moaning sound according to Landa), and for the peccary ("wild pig", jabali, javalina, which due to its "drumming sound" is described as having a drum on his back" by Mayan informants, and which is named in Mixe-Zoquean languages with descriptive terms for "throwing oneself about"). Numerous Mayan languages record some part of this apparent linguistic and symbolic relationship between the turtle and the wild pig and the howl or groan (Stross and Kerr 1997:357).

26

This homophonic relationship may reflect ancient symbolic links between

peccaries, way creatures, and ceremonial inebriation and provides the potential for

another shade of meaning when considering the “fire peccary.” In this linguistic

light, the fiery scrolls emanating from the open-mouthed animals may be seen as a

graphic representation of the powerful, ecstatic howl of individuals transforming

into their wayob through ritual intoxication.

An animal or animal-human composite creature may be most easily

identified as a way on ceramic vessels in which it is accompanied by the text u

way, literally, “he sleeps” (Graña-Behrens and Grube 2001:438). This glyphic

indicator of way status is not always present, but not every human depicted with

animal costume is necessarily representing a way creature. Elites are frequently

pictured with animal headdresses, and it is unclear whether or not this indicates

the individual possessed a way of the same species. Dancers in animal costumes

and masks may be recognizing certain wayob, but this is again unclear. Images

that are widely accepted as representations of physically manifest wayob tend to

share certain characteristics; one potential indicator is the wearing of tight-fitting

pants, as Maya men wore loincloths and not form-fitting lower garments (Foster

2002:190).

Through the concept of wayob, peccaries and other animals were used to

define and lend spiritual power to the identity of individual humans. Animals

were also used in turn by humans, who used animal sacrifices to reinforce the

power of the gods.

27

Sacrifice and Ritual Offering

The ordering of the cosmos and the supernatural beings that inhabited it

were dependent on human action for their sustenance. Especially important were

those rites undertaken by members of the ruling elite (Schele and Freidel 1990).

Blood was a major currency for interaction, and royal bloodletting and human

sacrifice were most valuable. Human blood was not, however, the only substance

used to nourish the otherworld. In addition to valuable materials and objects,

animal blood and flesh was given in offering. Meat held worth as a food product,

and animal blood was sometimes used in a manner similar to that of humans

(Sharer 1994).

Ritual use of Tayassuidae is evident based on available archaeological

material. Animal sacrifice among the Maya is well documented, and peccary

remains have been recovered from sacred and ritual sites (Pohl 1983). The

iconography of some ceramic pieces also suggests the privileged status of the

animal by the reverential manner in which peccaries or pieces of their flesh are

treated. A Late Classic vase decorated with an image of hunters in fantastic dress

shows one bearing a peccary haunch by suspended by a carrying cord. This

manner of carrying the haunch coupled with the extraordinary garb of the human

actors suggests that the gathering and intended use of the meat may have been

imbued with a special status. A similar treatment may be found in the suspension

of rubber balls seen in some images of the ballgame. That the figure carries the

peccary haunch in a manner that avoids physical contact with his person may

indicate that it was intended for sacrificial offering (Stone 2002:35). Similarly,

28

K414 (Fig. 3.4), a polychrome vase of undocumented provenance, suggests ritual

sacrifice by the way the peccary is presented. It depicts a procession of men

bearing objects in front of them, one of which is a peccary (Kerr 1974). Ritual use

of peccary flesh is made indicated in part by the way human subjects interact with

it in the piece.

Fig 3.4: K414. Procession with of men with staffs and animals. A man bearing a peccary is at left

(Kerr 1974).

Use of European pigs in a present-day festival may illuminate one role that

peccaries played in ancient ritual. Pohl (1981) has suggested that the existing cuch

or cargo ritual that takes places in many current Maya communities is the modern

incarnation of pre-Contact ceremonial activity. In this ritual the burden referred to

as cuch or cargo, which Pohl interprets as an embodiment of fertility and

agricultural prosperity, is transferred from the past year’s holder to his successor.

This event is preceded by the raising of a tree or pole in a sacred space where later

a bullfight will occur. The bull’s capture and death are accompanied by priestly

appeals for good fortune on behalf of the community. The bullfight drama marks

the end of the year for the Chortí of Guatemala and frees the gods of rain and

maize to rest after their year of service. The final rite of the festival occurs after

29

much feasting. During the Dance of the Pig’s Head a decorative pole representing

the cuch is passed to the one responsible for the next year’s celebration. Pohl

suggests that the bull and pig used in the observance are substitutions for deer and

peccary used in pre-Columbian rituals.

The cuch ritual is a fertility rite and ritual renewal in which the

responsibility of continuing the ceremony and maintaining the welfare of the

community is placed in the hands of a single person. If the cuch ritual is the

modern equivalent of an event that happened in the pre-Columbian world, it is

logical to assume that the peccary, as a close relative, played the part of the pig in

observance. Additionally, if one accepts that the modern cuch ceremony has its

origin in a pre-Columbian observance of similar action and meaning, the peccary

may be accorded the association with the concepts that the ritual embodies. The

peccary may then be seen as a representative of and actor in the drama of

agricultural prosperity and rejuvenation.

Evidence for the association of peccaries with fertility and renewal is not

limited to the cuch rite. Their repeated portrayals and connections with the creator

god Itzamna, the Sun God, and the Maize God in art and religion imply a

continued relationship between the peccary and these deities or supernatural

forces.

30

Divine Connections

Itzamna

Itzamna (also referred to as God D) was the highest in the hierarchy of

gods, ruling over day and night (Sharer 1994). A creator deity, Itzamna was

associated with heaven, earth, and the world tree that connected them (Taube

2001). In some instances, Itzamna is shown riding on the back of a peccary (Fig.

3.5 and 3.6).

Fig. 3.5: Detail of vase K1991 (Schele #3544). Itzamna rides the peccary

(Freidel et al. 1993; Fig. 2.25).

Fig. 3.6: K2946. Painted clay container in the form of a peccary. The lid is the rider, probably

Itzamna (Kerr 1986).

31

K’inich Ahau

Peccaries are also portrayed in connection with the sun god K’inich Ahau

(God G), a powerful deity who represented the day aspect of Itzamna (Fig. 3.7,

Fig. 3.8). The sun god was associated with war, sacrifice, and the authority of

nobility (Sharer 1994). He was also connected to reincarnation by the sun’s daily

crossing of the sky (Taube 2001). In modern ethnographic accounts, it is said that

the sun is borne across the sky by a deer during short winter days and by two

slower-moving peccaries during the longer days of summer (Milbrath 1999:268).

Fig. 3.7: Drawing (Schele #5512) of sun god paddling canoe across water. The legs of the vessel

are in the shape of downward-facing peccary heads (Freidel et al. 1993:84, Fig. 2.18).

32

Fig. 3.8: K6594 and K6995. Incensario stands from Palenque featuring the Sun God. Immediately

above his face on each is the sculpted head of a peccary (Kerr 2000).

Maize God

The youthful Maize God (God E) was connected to reincarnation and

regeneration by the observable patterns of annual growth and harvest. With the

harvesting of maize he died, and with new plantings he was reborn. This cyclical

nature of life echoes the Maize God’s death, rescue from the underworld by the

Hero Twins, and resurrection. In images of his rebirth, the Maize God is depicted

sprouting forth from a rift in a mountain, turtle shell, or the back of a peccary

(Wagner 2001) (Fig. 3.9).

33

Fig 3.9: The Maize God emerges from the cleft back of a peccary. In his hands are held a paint pot

and brush (Freidel et al. 1993:84, Fig. 2.19a).

Itzamna, his Sun aspect K’inich Ahau, and the Maize God were

benevolent deities and supporters of mankind. Creation and recreation

characterized their roles. Depicted in created art, they were also present in the

tapestry of the night sky. The peccary’s associations with these gods may have

awarded peccaries a place beside them in the heavens.

Constellations

Several researchers have argued for the existence of a peccary

constellation as part of a Maya zodiac. Three sources have served as the primary

texts for this discussion: Las Monjas at Chichen Itzá, the Paris Codex, and the

Bonampak murals. A façade on Las Monjas (the Nunnery) at Chichen Itza depicts

a skyband with apparently zodiacal animals including the peccary (Milbrath

1999). A table on pages 23 and 24 of the Paris Codex conveys a five-year

almanac split into 13 28-day periods. Thirteen animal figures are distributed

34

through the upper and lower margins, two of which are unidentifiable due to

damage (Tedlock 1999). On the north wall of Structure 1, Room 2, at Bonampak,

a row of cartouches is painted above an image of the city’s victorious king

overseeing the sacrifice of war captives. Of these images, all are human except for

a depiction of a turtle and an image of peccaries, said to be copulating. Miller

(2001) hypothesizes that their location above the sacrificial scene indicates that

the event began at dawn. Application of information from other inscriptions in

codices and on buildings and ceramics to the framework suggested by these

sources has led to three star groups being considered as the most likely candidates

for the location of a peccary constellation.

Gemini and Orion

Ak ek’, the “turtle star,” has been identified as one of the most important

constellations in the Maya night sky (Milbrath 1999). The dual meaning in

Yucatec of “turtle” and “peccary” for the word ak means that Ak ek’ can then be

interpreted as referring to a star associated with the turtle or the peccary.

Additionally, the name ak was given in Colonial era dictionaries to sets of stars in

both Gemini and Orion, and it is not clear which constellation is described by

which animal, if they are related at all (Milbrath 1999:268).

Gemini’s claim to the peccary constellation is largely derived from

ceramic images. Freidel et al. (1993) cite pottery featuring Itzamna paddling a

Cosmic-monster canoe and note that if his path is considered to be east-west,

Itzamná may be considered to be sitting where the peccaries are—in Gemini at

35

the eastern end of the Milky Way (1993:91–92). They also present the existence

of many peccary-legged vessels as further evidence (see Fig. 3.7). These

tetrapodal, lidded vessels have water imagery painted on their bottoms and

molded downward-facing peccary heads for legs. The authors interpret this as

imagery of “the sun riding the ecliptic across the Peccaries of Gemini” (1993:82).

This conclusion is questionable, however, since not all peccary-legged vessels

have sun imagery.

One interpretation of the cartouches at Bonampak designates Orion as the

peccaries and Gemini as the turtle (Schele and Miller 1986:217). This may be

supported by ethnographic information from the Lacandón, who define Orion as a

pig and surrounding stars as its piglets. Additionally, as Milbrath notes, “For

thousands of years, the period that Orion was invisible in conjunction with the

Sun coincided with the time of maize planting, and its reemergence in June

correlated with the sprouting maize” (Milbrath 1999:268). Given the iconographic

and mythological association between the turtle, the peccary and the Maize God,

it would therefore be reasonable to infer a connection to Orion was attributed to

one of these animals.

Leo

Synthesizing imagery from the sky band on Las Monjas, the murals at

Bonampak, and a zodiacal almanac in the Paris Codex (p. 23–24), Bricker and

Bricker (1992:171) arrive at the conclusion that the peccary is associated with the

eastern stars of Leo. The Paris Codex zodiac relates thirteen constellations, yet

36

two are worn away. According to Bricker and Bricker’s interpretation, the sky

band at Las Monjas suggests that one of these signs was a peccary, and the

ordering of signs at Bonampak indicates that this corresponds to the first of the

effaced spots in the zodiac (178). They support this conclusion by comparing the

star glyphs of the Bonampak cartouche of copulating peccaries to the arrangement

of bright stars in Leo. It is additionally notable that Regulus, Leo’s brightest star,

disappears shortly after the solstice given the accounts of peccaries as the sun’s

bearers around this time (Milbrath 1999:268).

The scarcity of recognizable, accepted art and texts indicating a Maya

zodiac and incomplete preservation of those that do exist leaves the location of a

“peccary constellation” open to interpretation. The search may not be even

confined to consideration of Gemini, Orion, and Leo only. In her examination of

the Paris Codex and inscriptions on a ceramic vessel, Ershova (1998) assigns the

peccary to Sagittarius (in Aveni 2002). While Sagittarius as the peccary has

garnered little support, the absolute designation of the animal’s place in the

heavens appears unlikely without the advent of further sources.

Cosmic Peccaries

Peccaries participate in Maya spiritual life in both active and passive roles.

They are shown as mere animals, pieces of the natural world and objects of ritual

sacrifice, but they are also accorded spiritual power when portrayed as wayob. By

examining the myriad ways in which they were represented, it becomes apparent

37

that peccaries were frequently associated with the positive aspects of a cyclical

universe.

Their connection with gods of fertility and abundance is in line with their

status as a food animal, especially one that tends to forage on crop fields. While a

peccary constellation has not been satisfactorily identified, the major

contenders—Leo, Gemini, and Orion—are all visible in the summer sky. Orion

and Gemini are particularly close to the major landmarks of the night sky

associated with creation and the underworld. It is even possible that the peccary

was always visible in the heavens, pulling the sun by day and marked in the stars

by night.

Despite their relative scarcity in iconographic portrayals when compared

to those of certain other animals, peccaries may be found throughout Maya ritual

life and religious thought.

38

Chapter 4: Introduction to the Copán Peccary Skulls

Arguably the most famous use of the peccary in Maya artistic expression

is found in the elaborately incised peccary skull from Copán, Honduras. While

two fragmentary skulls were also unearthed from Tomb 1, the more complete

specimen’s text and complex iconography have attracted most of the attention

given to the burial. No other carved peccary skulls have been recovered in the

Maya area, lending special importance to those from Tomb 1.

Historical Background

The Honduras Expedition sponsored by the Peabody Museum was one of

the first groups to excavate at the ruins of Copán, in the southeastern Maya

Lowlands. This Classic Maya center was the seat of the royal dynasty that ruled

surrounding areas from the early fifth to early eighth centuries CE (Fash 2001).

The Honduras Expedition, led by Marshall H. Saville and John G. Owens,

embarked with the instruction of curator and museum director F. W. Putnam that

“search should be made for the ancient burial place.” Putnam’s directive was

fulfilled almost immediately (Putnam 1891). Tomb 1, so named because it was

the first excavated at Copán, was excavated by Saville from January 22–25, 1892

(Saville 1892). Later discoveries of tombs in the area earned this region just south

of the Copán acropolis, now referred to as Group 10L-2, the name El Cementerio

(Fash 2001).

39

Despite the impressions of the initial excavators, Group 10L-2 was not

built as a mortuary complex. Research indicates that the Group was home to Yax

Pasaj, the last king of Copán, his family, and retinue. Yax Pasaj ruled from his

accession on 9.16.12.5.17 (2 July 763 CE) until his death around 9.19.10.0.0 (6

May 820 CE) (Fash 2001:80). Three monuments to his early reign were found in

Group 10L-2, linking the ruler to this physical space (Fash 2001:271). Although

first occupied during the Late Preclassic, construction of the major structures and

plazas of the area did not begin until the Late Classic, when a group claiming

connection to the dynastic founder of Copán established a residential complex

there. The system of buildings and courtyards created a palace that was also a

neighborhood for the ruler and his family and included inhabitants of varying

social status (Andrews et al. 2003). Many of the existing buildings are thought to

have been elite residences due to their size and proximity to the Acropolis, and all

were erected duing the Late Classic Coner phase. Indeed, Group 10L-2 contains

inscriptions referencing the ruling members of Copán society. At some point,

however, the power of the lineage waned, and refuse was no longer collected in

10L-2. Apparently intentional burn marks on some of the structures and indication

of use right until the destruction of some collapsed buildings suggest a violent end

to elite residence in El Cementerio (Andrews and Fash 1992).

Tomb 1 was discovered “90 feet south of the Main Structure, and about

the same distance east from Mound 36, in an open court” (Saville 1892:1). A

masonry construction with two chambers, the tomb housed the remains of two

individuals. While masonry tombs are not uncommon at Copán, few have more

40

than one chamber (Longyear 1952:40). The special status indicated by this

construction is supported by the quality of its associated grave goods, which

included a dog’s head effigy vessel and other ceramic vessels, modified and

unmodified animal bones, obsidian, jadeite, ochre, and shell. Within the city of

Copán, most burials, including Tomb 1, are dated to the Coner ceramic phase that

spanned the late and Terminal Classic (Webster 1997). Further ceramic analysis

by Bill (1997) narrows the dating of this tomb to what she terms the “Acbi/Coner

transition subphase,” placing the date of the tomb between 600 and 650 CE (392).

The discovery of the peccary skulls and their placement in the tomb is

described in an excavation record book:

Near the corner B. on the stone floor were found two skulls of some animal. These were broken in a number of pieces. Number one was nearest the southern wall, with the top of the skull on the stone floor. The other was with the top of the skull up, and close to no. 1. This was more destroyed than the first one but had some very fine hieroglyphs carved on it. They were carved and evidently intended for vessels (Saville 1892:34).

In addition to the written documentation, photographs and drawings were made of

the more intact skull (Saville 1892). While members of the expedition were

ordered to label and describe each artifact discovered at the site, the amount of

attention paid to this object testifies to the amount of admiration and weight given

it by the excavators, and, presumably, the extent to which it was a desirable piece

for the Museum’s collection. It is even implied in the records that the skull

fragments were among artifacts smuggled out of Honduras without the knowledge

of the government overseers of the excavation (Owens n.d.:9–10). Frequently

displayed since their removal from Copán, the peccary skulls have continued to

generate a great deal of interest.

41

The decoration, rather than the media of the objects is what did and

continues to generate enthusiasm for the skulls. Carved bone is not uncommon;

bone was widely used by the Maya for the manufacture of both utilitarian and

non-utilitarian objects. The physical properties of bone coupled with its

availability made bone a sensible medium for the creation of tools like awls, pins,

needles, and hooks, all of which have been documented at Maya sites (Robicsek

1972). Particularly apt for use in creation of perforators, long, thin implements of

bone are stronger than similar objects of wood or stone (LeMoine 2001:3).

Decorative and ritual pieces were also crafted from the material. Sculptural

pieces, beads and other objects of personal adornment made of bone have been

found, some of which display very careful craftsmanship. In their study of Maya

calligraphy, Coe and Kerr (1998:139) note that some of the finest examples of this

art are those incised into bones, some of which are very small. This medium was

used for tools as well as the incised, relief, and full round pieces made of bone

that represent one aspect of Maya non-monumental sculptural art (Dixon 1958).

While objects created with peccary remains make up only a small percentage of

the total carved and worked bone for which species determinations can be made,

its relative absence appears to be commensurate with the generally low proportion

of peccary remains found in middens.

42

Iconographic Analysis of the Peccary Skulls

At the Peabody Museum, the more fragmentary skull was given the object

number C202; the more complete example, C201. These numbers will be used

when referring to the pieces.

C202

Two noncontiguous cranial fragments are designated under the Peabody

Museum number 92-49-20/C202. Designed using bas relief, they are stylistically

different from the incised scenes on C201. The first piece, a partial mandible, has

a two-glyph phrase as its only decoration (Fig. 4.1a). Marc Zender translated

these glyphs as “u-baak aj-?-naah” or “it is the bone of Aj-?-Naah,” where Aj-?-

naah refers to an unknown lord (personal communication 2005). It is unclear if

the undeciphered name is that of one of the individuals interred in Tomb 1.

Nevertheless, there is the implication that this object was of some significance.

The majority of incidences where such phrases are found occur on massive

architectural forms rather than portable objects. Houston and Taube suggest that

those smaller objects of organic material, clay, or stone marked with a possessive

phrase were very important to the named individual, citing the discovery of such

objects in tombs (1987:38).

43

Fig 4.1:Fragments of skull C202. Images by Peabody Museum Collections Department

The second fragment from C202 shows the upper portion of a winged

supernatural with characteristic features of Itzamna as the Principal Bird Deity

and K’awiil, also known as God K (Fig. 4.1b) (M. Zender, personal

communication 2005). The Principal Bird Deity is represented in the Popol Vuh

as a giant bird defeated by the Hero Twins in the Underworld. In many images,

especially those from the Late Classic period, this god is conflated with the

creator deity Itzamna. It has been suggested that the Principal Bird Deity may

have served as an avian manifestation of Itzamna during this time or alternatively,

that the Bird God was the way creature of Itzamna (Bardawil 1976; Miller and

Taube 1993). The figure on this skull fragment may be identified as a

manifestation of the god by its wings, which bear resemblance to other Late

Classic images of the Principal Bird Deity’s plumage (Bardawil 1976). K’awiil,

a b

44

the god of nobility, is also sometimes associated with Itzamna. The figure on the

skull fragment bears the long, upward-curled snout and smoking headdress of the

ruling lineage deity (Sharer 1994).

The interpretation of this figure as an amalgam of the Principal Bird Deity,

Itzamna, and K’awiil fits with what is known about these gods. The link between

Itzamna and the Principal Bird Deity, a denizen of the Underworld, give the

creator deity a link or claim to existence to this realm dominated by his opposing

force, the death deity, God A (Bardawil 1976). Through his manifestation as a

bird, Itzamna gains access to the world of the dead (Taube 2001). K’awiil, as the

lord of the ruling class, is necessarily associated with this bridging between the

worlds of the living and dead due to the role deceased and living nobles were said

to play in maintaining the status of the cosmos. While purely speculative due to

the break in the piece, the curved shape from which the conflated deity is

emerging may be part of a quatrefoil design. The association between the

quatrefoil design and caves in Mesoamerica has been traced back as far as the

Olmecs, and caves were considered openings or bridges to the Underworld

(Miller and Taube 1993).

C201

The artist who carved the inscriptions on this skull, now designated with

the Peabody Museum number 92-49-50/C201, made use of artificial boundaries

and natural delineations created by the form of the bone to yield four

iconographic “packages” (Fig. 4.1). The central quatrefoil disc that rests on the

45

crown of the skull is flanked by two curved pictorial units to the rear and one

toward the snout. The lines between groups of images are not static; the skull is

both broken into these clusters of elements and unified by rounded glyphs that lie

between the more pictorial images. In order to facilitate the interpretation of the

iconographic package presented on the skull, it shall be examined by division of

the design into “scenes” based on the physical location of the images and, where

applicable, glyphic text. Those glyphs that do not appear to be related to nearby

images will be discussed separately. By deconstructing the full image in this way,

themes and discrepancies may become more readily apparent.

46

Fig. 4.2: The imagery and text of the C201 peccary skull. (Drawing by Barbara Fash; in Fash 2001)

The Three Peccaries

The first image, located on the left occipital side of the skull, shows three

running peccaries (Fig. 4.3). They are depicted in a naturalized manner and

display the bristly heads, hairy bodies, and prominent snouts characteristic of the

animal. The varied head and foot positions of the peccaries and the upward

sweeping line under their feet indicate their motion, while their arrangement with

47

respect to one another excludes the interpretation that they are copulating,

negating that particular zodiacal connotation.

Fig. 4.3: Detail of running peccaries from C201. Photo by Peabody Museum Collections Department.

Fig. 4.4: Detail of ritual clowns from C201. Photo by Peabody Museum Collections Department. The Festive Clowns

Opposite the running peccaries, on the rear left portion of the skull, are

two figures and a short text (Fig. 4.4). Taube (1989) identifies the actors in this

scene as ritual buffoons; he interprets the monkey-like figure as a personified pa

glyph. Simian in appearance, this pa figure exhibits a dark body noted by

crosshatching and the “forward-sweeping crest of hair” above the figure’s

headband commonly depicted on spider monkeys (Taube 1989:365). Like many

48

other pa characters seen on vessels, however, the figure on the peccary skull has

no crosshatching at the wrists and around the eyes and mouth—indicating the

cuffs and facial holes of a costume—and he lacks a tail (Taube 1989:360). Two of

the three glyphs next to this figure may be read k’an pa (Taube 1989:366). Zender

identified the third as winik or “man,” making the full phrase k’an winik pa, or

“yellow/precious man pa” (personal communication 2005).

The pa character frequently appears in festival situations when

encountered in Maya pottery; he is often accompanied in Late Classic

polychromes by another animal, here, a jaguar, presumed also to be a costumed

human (Taube 1989:365). Both are involved in festive celebration. In this case,

the pa actor carries a musical rattle, and the jaguar character holds an enema jug

in his paw. These two objects were utilized in festivals and ecstatic rituals. Music

is thought to have accompanied ceremonial inebriation, often achieved through

alcoholic enemas (Taube 1989). A variety of anthropomorphized and naturalistic

animals frequently accompany these scenes, often bearing enemas and making the

music meant to heighten their psychic effect (Hellmuth 1985). The possession of

a rattle and enema jug by the two characters in this scene suggests that it is meant

to evoke such an ecstatic ritual.

Deer Death and Animal Associates

The central focus is a skull-headed God A variant with vestigial antlers

and a conch shell, bearing a large burden on a tumpline (Fig. 4.5). Grube and

Nahm (1994) identify him as “Deer Death” (u ku chi kimi), a frequently depicted

49

skeletal way figure. Deer Death always bears a conch shell and is often seen

bearing a bundle. His connection to deer is shown by small antlers or the presence

of a deer head on his merchant pack (1994:705). Representations of this death god

variant may be further subdivided depending on the detail. For example,

“Thunder Deer Death” shows Cauac markings in addition to the antlers and cheek

patches present in portrayals of deer (Zender 2000:1041).

Fig. 4.5: Detail of “Deer Death” from C201. Photo by Peabody Museum Collections Department. The death god is flanked by two animals. On the right side of the image, a

bird hovers near the supernatural being’s head. While the species is not

identifiable, the bird is depicted naturalistically, without the anthropomorphism of

the composite creature on the left. This animal is generally identified as a deer by

the presence of a deer-like ear and vestigial antler, but it also possesses the long

tail of a feline or monkey. Regardless of what animal it is meant to represent, this

50

figure is clearly supernatural. Its upright pose and human attire when combined

with its proximity to the skeletal way suggest it too represents a way creature.

Two sets of glyphs are located in close proximity to this scene. Between

this deer-like creature and the Death God and directly under the deity’s conch

trumpet is a two cartouche phrase that may be read as sac wayib xook, “white soul

shark” or “white sleeping shark” (M. Zender, personal communication 2005). The

meaning of this phrase is unclear; while the text is located in close proximity to

two possible way creatures, neither one of them has any characteristics indicating

their association with a shark. The “ground” underneath the feet of the two

supernaturals helps to frame and separate a second phrase. Possibly forming part

of the “floating text” discussed later, the phrase may be translated u hachil ahau

blank, or “his carved thing” where “his” refers to the individual named in the next

two cartouches (M. Zender, personal communication 2005). Unfortunately, only

the first cartouche containing the title (ahau) is visible. The place where the

individual’s name was presumably recorded is absent.

Central Quatrefoil

The central focus of the skull’s imagery depicts two lords facing a stela

and altar (Fig. 4.6). Seated on jaguar skin-covered cushions, the lords, wearing

belt ornaments similar to those seen on ballgame players and emblematic

headdresses, flank the monument. The stela rising from the zoomorphic altar is

crossed with what appear to be knotted bindings. Above the stela is a four

51

cartouche text. The scene is bound by a quatrefoil frame, indicating an association

with a cave (Miller and Taube 1993:57).

Fig. 4.6: Detail of central quatrefoil from C201. Photo by Peabody Museum Collections Department.

Stuart’s reading of this caption provides an explanation of the action

portrayed in this scene. He translates the text as “1 Ahaw 8 Ch’en (is) the stone-

binding (of) [ROYAL NAME] (1996:156).” The mentioned date refers to the

Period Ending on 8.17.0.0.0 (21 October 376 CE). “Stone-binding,” read as

k’altun, is defined by Stuart as a ritual commemorating the passing of twenty 360-

day tuns. During this ritual, a commemorative stela would be bound with cloth or

paper; wrapping an object in such a way has been tied to the idea of containing or

protecting sacred essence. Its representation on the peccary skull places the two

nobles as overseers of this event and ritual commemoration (Stuart 1996).

52

An apparent temporal discrepancy is revealed by the actors in this drama.

The glyph indicating the presiding lord’s name refers in other sculpture at Copán

to “Foliated Ajaw,” a very early ruler, but in this instance it probably refers to a

different individual with the same name. The right-hand figure may be a depiction

of this individual. The man on the opposite side of the altar wears a macaw

headdress, which, as Stuart notes, “approximates the pre-accession name of the

founder: K’uk’ Mo’ Ajaw (Quetzal-Macaw Lord) as recorded on Altar Q.

8.17.0.0.0 would certainly be an early date for K’uk’ Mo’ Ajaw, falling about

fifty years before his accession day, but not an impossibility, given that we have

no record of his age at any point in history” (2004:223). The possibility of his

presence is supported by analysis of remains uncovered in the Hunal burial,

thought to be the grave of Yax K’uk Mo’. The skeleton thought to belong to the

ancient lord show advanced age at the time of death (Fash 2001:84). This suggests

that a very young K’uk Mo’ may indeed have been alive during the depicted

event.

Interpreting the central quatrefoil has been difficult due to the ambiguity

present in the relationship between the actors and the recorded date, the absence

of information about this apparently later “Foliated Ajaw,” and for many years,

the confusion generated by the lack of an acceptable interpretation of the “stone-

binding” sign. Its relationship to the surrounding images and text are subject to

the same uncertainty (Stuart 1996). However, some things are apparent. A ruler,

possibly the dynastic founder, is the one responsible for a ritual that orders the

53

universe as it marks time. This is witnessed and supported by creatures from the

human world and the Underworld that surround the quatrefoil.

Floating Text

Several cartouches dot the skull and do not appear to relate to surrounding

imagery. Presumably, they are part of a larger text apparent when the skull was

complete. Four round cartouches are located between the skull’s scenes, with

evidence for the existence of a fifth where the piece suffered breakage (Fig. 4.6).

The Peccary Skulls as Text

The peccary skulls are particularly appropriate subject material for an

investigation of the animal’s place in Maya thought. Not only is the peccary

physically used as a medium to convey the object’s glyphic and iconographic

message, but C201 itself contains a reference to peccaries. The presence of these

animals in the design of C201, coupled with the fact that two similarly worked

skulls were found together in the absence of other decorative bone objects,

implies that use of peccary skulls to convey this iconographic and glyphic

message was intentional.

Attempting to evaluate what message was intended is difficult. So little of

C202 remains that interpretation is limited and must be extremely cautious. The

search for meaning in C201 is complicated by the diversity of surrounding scenes.

No actor or action is repeated between these areas. Without this explicit glyphic

54

or iconographic evidence, the skulls’ implicit themes must be used when

considering the possible relationships shared by the C201 scenes.

Fig. 4.6: Translation of glyphic texts on peccary skull C201 (Drawing by Barbara Fash (Fash 2001:Fig. 24). Translations by Stuart 1996; Taube 1989; M.

Zender, personal communication 2005).

55

Chapter 5: Interpretation of the Copán Peccary Skulls

The combination of human, animal, and Underworld creature imagery on

the C201 peccary skull forms an odd assortment. Virtually all previous readings

of this image complex have devoted most of their attention to the human actors

discretely bound within the quatrefoil at the center of the piece. Although the two

peccary skulls were found together, one of them bearing an illustration of the

animal from whence it came, the running peccaries to the above and left of this

frame and other surrounding images are frequently ignored. The peccary’s

presence on skull C201 provides a strong argument for intentionality in the

selection of peccary as the medium for these inscriptions. Analyses of the object

focusing on its human action are illuminating, but they do not answer a

fundamental question: When the artist selected a medium for this imagery, why

were the skulls of peccary chosen above those of other animals?

Based on previously noted symbolic associations of peccaries in the Maya

area, all images on the piece will be incorporated in an attempt to form a holistic

interpretation of the C201 skull’s iconography. A similar consideration will be

given to the extant fragments of skull C202. Evaluating the skulls in this way will

elucidate the peccary’s relevance to the glyphic and iconographic messages

inscribed in them.

56

C201: Interpretation

Peccary skull C201 simultaneously depicts natural and supernatural

worlds. Relationships between the assortment of scenes seem to go no further

than their shared focus on the historical event. Due in part to this, most prior

interpretations of the skull have therefore focused almost exclusively on the

bounded, central quatrefoil. While these readings are crucial to understanding the

event that this piece likely commemorates, considerations of surrounding scenes

must be given weight when interpreting potential meaning of the object as a

whole.

Investigations of the central medallion’s text and imagery have resulted in

similar but not identical interpretations of its action and meaning. The currently

accepted interpretation of the central scene is that it represents a Period Ending

stela-binding ceremony (Stuart 1996). Prior to the translation of the k'altuun

glyph, the scene was interpreted as depicting an accession ceremony, a stela

dedication ritual, and as part of an unknown k’atun or tun ending ritual (Pohl

1983; Taube 1989; Bassie-Sweet 1991). As discussed in chapter 4, the two human

figures responsible for the stela-binding are members of the ruling class, one of

which may represent Y’ax K’uk Mo’, who may not have been alive at the same

time or at the time that this particular Period Ending took place.

The image’s quatrefoil frame is accepted as representing the entrance to a

cave. However, whether this indicates action within a physical cave, evokes the

access to the underworld given by caves, or both has been subject to debate.

Caves are known to have served as the setting for ritual activities in Mesoamerica,

57

and given the framing of the action, it is reasonable to infer that the ceremony

depicted on the peccary skull did as well (Pohl 1983). Bassie-Sweet extends this

idea and suggests that the stela shown represents a stalagmite, despite the

presence of a carved altar. She cites evidence for ritual use of stalagmites as stela-

like monuments in the Lowland Maya area (Bassie-Sweet 1991:111–112). Freidel

et al. (1993) ignore the physical possibility of a cave completely and focus instead

on the quatrefoil as representative of a portal to the Underworld:

The incised scene shows the dedication of a stela, but the point of view represented is from the other side of the portal. It is as if the gods and the ancestors were looking at humanity from the Otherworld. Some of the animals cavorting around this portal are peccaries. I checked the ‘Ek-Way position of the Milky Way and found that it has the peccaries of Gemini above its northeastern horizon and the scorpion of Scorpius peeking up out of its southwestern horizon. I compared this sky pattern to the drawing on the skull from Copan and found, to my delight, that peccaries were sitting on its northeastern side just as they do in the sky on this night. The greatest of the Classic Maya portals to the Otherworld is also found in the night sky” (Freidel et al. 1993:87).

This connection between the peccary skull and a theorized peccary constellation

is interesting, but insufficient evidence is presented to accept it. The questions

surrounding a possible peccary constellation remain unanswered. As there are no

other images on the skull suggesting the depiction of a cosmic map, this reading

requires too great an assumption be made. Rejecting this component of their

interpretation, however, does not invalidate the rest of their argument. Reducing

prior analyses to their basic ideological components, the quatrefoil frame is

regarded as a representation of the border between the human world and the

Underworld.

58

An Underworld setting is indicated by the supernatural figures who inhabit

it, especially the figure identified as Deer Death. As a variant of the Underworld-

ruling God A, Deer Death is associated with the end of life and the Underworld.

The deity is separated from the accompanying anthropomorphized animal

supernatural by text that references the otherworldly way creatures or the place of

sleeping that they inhabit. This scene may therefore be considered as situated in

the Underworld.

While the bird depicted hovering behind Deer Death bears no graphic

indicator marking it as an Underworld denizen, its proximity to the otherworldly

beings implies that it accompanies them. The placement of the running peccaries

and ritual clowns does not necessarily require this assumption, especially as the

actors in these two scenes are not inherently supernatural. Given the naturalistic

depiction of the peccaries and an interpretation of the monkey and jaguar-like

figures as illustrations of costumed humans, these two scenes are oddly dissimilar

to Deer Death’s clearly supernatural tableau.

Rather than being explicitly designated as residing in this world or the

Underworld, the running peccaries and ritual clowns appear to be liminal figures.

They seem to cross the boundary between the human and supernatural realms.

The jaguar and monkey-like pa characters are seen elsewhere in Maya art in their

function as ritual clowns. The tools they carry—the rattle and enema tube—are

known to have been used during ceremonies in order to achieve an ecstatic state

and facilitate human contact with the supernatural. The costumes worn by the

clowns give the appearance—but not the reality—of transformation into a non-

59

human state. The three-peccary scene may also be related to crossing this

boundary between the living and the dead, albeit more subtly. Running and

bristling, the creatures appear lively, animated, and completely lacking any

indication that they are anything more than the animals they represent. Viewed in

context, however, they are cavorting on the remains of a dead peccary. Although

speculative, this reading fits with the messages implied by the imagery they

surround.

The “scenes” inscribed on C201 take place in more than one setting and

feature both natural and supernatural actors, but the messages they encode may be

synthesized into a unifying theme. The imagery of this piece depict: A) a

boundary between the human world and the Underworld; B) a time-marking

ceremony performed by members of the ruling class; C) ritual actors whose

clowning, music, and administration of inebriants helped create the altered state

from which the Underworld could be more readily accessed; D) supernatural

inhabitants of the Underworld; and E) dynamic, living peccaries that exist in

sharp contrast to their skeletal canvas. By highlighting these interpretations, the

intersection of the human world and the supernatural world of Deer Death, and

the ability to cross between the two, is brought to the forefront. The central

quatrefoil forms this boundary and focuses the viewer’s attention on those

responsible for crossing it: the two elites participating in the stela-binding

ceremony, one of which may exist in the underworld. This transition is aided and

emphasized by the peccaries and clowns who exist somewhere between the two

realms. Unifying the imagery of C201 is the concept of a junction between the

60

human and supernatural worlds, brought about by ritual activity marking the

passage of time.

As discussed in chapter 3, an investigation of their representations in

Maya art suggests that peccaries were associated with certain aspects of a cyclical

universe: abundance, fertility, and renewal. In their performance of the stela-

binding ceremony, the human actors are not only marking the end and beginning

of a k’atun; they are enacting a rite intended to sustain the order and continuance

of the universe. In this way, peccary skull C201 manifests the ideology of sacred

renewal and continuity through elite agency.

C202 Interpretation

The C202 fragments may express a similar theme. The glyphic text of the

first piece indicates its ownership by an elite member of society. As such, it

pertains to an individual who, especially if relation to the ruling lineage is

assumed, had a greater capacity to interact with Underworld powers. The second

fragment’s compound god may be considered emblematic of this relationship. By

combining physical aspects of Itzamna, the Principal Bird Deity, and K’awiil, the

image implies a similar combination of these deities’ spiritual powers and

associations, including creation, the Underworld, and nobility. However, while

these associations may be inferred from the image preserved, far too little of the

skull exists to draw any but the most tentative of conclusions. Without knowledge

of the rest of the skull’s design, it is only possible to guess at the meaning

intended by the artist who fashioned C202.

61

The Value of Emphasizing Ak

Before a human artist incised images upon them, C201 and C202 were

crania of an animal that inhabited both the natural and supernatural landscapes of

the Maya world. Considering the connotations that peccaries appear to have had

in Maya thought focuses the thematic interpretation of the peccary skulls. The

cyclical nature of time is evoked in C201 by the Period Ending ritual and

superimposition of the living animals on a dead peccary. The theorized link

between contemporaneous and deceased humans only adds a dimension to this

thought. The discrepancy between the inscribed date and the estimated age of the

tomb may indicate that C201 is an heirloom object or a piece commemorating an

earlier ritual. Depicting a deceased ancestor or ritual performed in the past

establishes a connection between the creation of the artifact and an earlier time

and links individuals and their actions across this temporal divide.

Study of their presence in Maya art implies that peccaries were associated

with the renewal of time and the bounty this ensured. As creatures that exist in

both realms, their images cross the boundary between this world and the

Underworld, making the selection of a peccary skull as the medium for these

images particularly apt. In selecting peccary skulls for these representations, the

artist or artists drew upon the symbolic meanings of peccaries to affirm and

reinforce the effect of depicted actions. Peccaries help to bridge the boundary

between two worlds, just as jaguars do.

62

Conclusion: All-Purpose Peccaries

By acknowledging the varied representations and uses of peccaries in

subsistence, manufacture, and art, it has become clear that peccaries were more

than just a food source to the ancient Maya. Peccaries were one of many animals

whose flesh, bones, and likenesses were utilized for functional and ritual

purposes. As part of natural world imbued with spiritual power and sacred

meaning, they were capable of possessing symbolic connotations in addition to

their identity as a source of sustenance. Examination of the actors, events, and

themes present in artifacts which contain references to peccaries illuminate these

possibilities, suggesting that these animals may have been imbued with symbolic

connotations applicable to common themes in Maya iconography: elite agency,

rebirth, and the interconnectedness of the natural and supernatural worlds.

With these associations in mind, the compilation of imagery on the Copán

peccary skulls becomes more readily accessible. On these objects, the same

themes may be seen uniting the human, animal, and supernatural figures and their

actions. Human actors access the Underworld and its power through ceremony.

Ritual clowns assist the crossing with ceremonial alcohol and music to the

supernatural realm inhabited by Deer Death and his fantastic animal companion.

Creating a powerful yet subtle connection between the worlds of the living and

dead are three vibrant peccaries, depicted on the same animal’s lifeless skull. The

peccary in this sense both creates and reinforces the theme of communication

between the living and dead seen in the skull’s greater imagery.

63

While these conclusions are drawn, they should not be considered absolute

statements of a singular meaning attributed to the animal in Maya thought. It is

unlikely that peccaries were meant to have symbolic meaning in each artistic

representation. However, the apparently thematic nature of their imagery argues

for consideration of the peccary as another animal whose purpose in ancient Maya

consciousness transcended that of its flesh. Those whose future studies involve

materials depicting peccaries should therefore be mindful of the possibility that

such connotations existed.

Both sustenance and symbol, peccaries were important features of the

Maya landscape. Their presence could be seen in their hunted herds as well as in

the company of gods and ancestors. Physical remains and ancient depictions

reveal that sometimes a peccary is just a peccary; sometimes it is something more.

64

Works Cited Andrews V, E. W., and B. W. Fash

1992 Continuity and Change in a Royal Maya Residential Complex at Copan. Ancient Mesoamerica 3:63–88.

Andrews V, E. W., et al.

2003 A Multipurpose Structure in the Late Classic Palace at Copan. In Maya Palaces and Elite Residences: An interdisciplinary approach. J.J. Christie, ed. Pp. 69–97. The Linda Schele Series in Maya and Pre-Columbian Studies. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Aveni, A.

2002 Reaching for the Stars: Linda Schele's Contributions to Maya Astronomy. In Heart of Creation: The Mesoamerican World and the Legacy of Linda Schele. A. Stone, ed. Pp. 13–20. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press.

Bardawil, L. W.

1976 The Principal Bird Deity in Maya Art- An Iconographic Study of Form and Meaning. In The Art, Iconography & Dynastic History of Palenque Part III. M.G. Robertson, ed. Pp. 1–17. Palenque Round Table. Pebble Beach, California: Robert Louis Stevenson School.

Bassie-Sweet, K.

1991 From the Mouth of the Dark Cave: Commemorative sculpture of the Late Classic Maya. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

Bill, C. R.

1997 Patterns of variation and change in dynastic period ceramics and ceramic production at Copán, Honduras. Ph.D., Tulane University.

Bricker, H. M., and V. R. Bricker

1992 Zodiacal References in the Maya Codices. In The Sky in Mayan Literature. A. Aveni, ed. Pp. 148–183. New York: Oxford University Press.

Carr, H. S.

1986 Faunal utilization in a late Preclassic community at Cerros, Belize. Ph.D., Tulane University.

Chaplin, R. E.

1971 The Study of Bones from Archaeological Sites. London: Seminar Press.

65

Coe, M. D., and J. Kerr 1998 The Art of the Maya Scribe. New York: Harry N. Abrams. Collins, L. M.

2002 The Zooarchaeology of the Copan Valley: Social Status and the Search for a Maya Slave Class. Ph.D., Harvard University.

Dixon, K. A.

1958 Two Masterpieces of Middle American Bone Sculpture. American Antiquity 24(1):53–62.

Donkin, R. A.

1985 The Peccary- With Observations on the Introduction of Pigs to the New World. In Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. Pp. 1–152, Vol. 75. Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society.

Eberl, M.

2001 Death and Conceptions of the Soul. In Maya: Divine kings of the rainforest. N. Grube, ed. Pp. 310–319. Cologne: Könemann.

Eisenberg, J. F., and K. H. Redford

1999 Mammals of the Neotropics: The Central Neotropics. Volume 3. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Emery, Kitty F.

2003 The noble beast: status and differential access to animals in the Maya world. World Archaeology 34(3):498–515.

Emmons, L.

1997 Neotropical Rainforest Mammals: A Field Guide. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Fash, W. L.

2001 Scribes, Warriors, and Kings: The City of Copán and the Ancient Maya. London: Thames and Hudson.

Fash, W. L.

2002 Religion and human agency in ancient Maya history: tales from the hieroglyphic stairway. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 12(1):5–19.

Foster, L. V.

2002 Handbook to Life in the Ancient Maya World. New York: Facts on File Inc.

66

Freidel, D., L. Schele, and J. Parker 1993 Maya Cosmos: Three Thousand Years on the Shaman's Path. New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc.

Gann, T. W. F.

1918 The Maya Indians of Southern Yucatan and Northern British Honduras. Volume 64. Washington: Government Printing Office.

Gottdenker, N., and R. Bodmer

2003 Peccaries (Tayassuidae). In Grzimek's Animal Life Encyclopedia. M. Hutchins, D.G. Kleiman, V. Geist, and M.C. McDade, eds. Pp. 291–300, Vol. 12–16, Mammals IV. Farmington Hills, MI: Gale Group.

Graña-Behrens, D., and N. Grube

2001 Glossary. In Maya: Divine kings of the rainforest. N. Grube, ed. Pp. 428–439. Cologne: Könemann.

Grube, N.

2001 Intoxication and Ecstacy. In Maya: Divine kings of the rainforest. N. Grube, ed. Pp. 294–295. Cologne: Könemann.

Grube, N., and W. Nahm

1994 A census of Xibalba: A complete inventory of Way characters on Maya ceramics. In The Maya Vase Book: A corpus of rollout photographs of Maya vases. J. Kerr, ed. Pp. 686–715, Vol. 4. New York: Kerr Associates.

Hamblin, N. L.

1984 Animal Use by the Cozumel Maya. Tuscon: The University of Arizona Press.

Healy, P. F. 1983 The Paleoecology of the Selin Farm Site (H-CN-5): Department of

olón, Honduras. In Civilization in the Ancient Americas: Essays in Honor of Gordon R. Willey. R.M. Leventhal and A.L. Kolata, eds. Pp. 35–54. Cambridge: University of New Mexico Press and Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University.

Hellmuth, N. M.

1985 Principal diagnostic accessories of Maya enema scenes. In Ritual enemas and snuffs in the Americas. P.A.G.M. de Smet, ed. Pp. 137–148. Latin American Studies, Vol. 33. Amsterdam: Centre for Latin American Research and Documentation.

Houston, S., and K. Taube 1987 "Name-Tagging" in Classic Mayan script. Mexicon 9:38–41.

67

Kerr, J.

1974 K414. In Maya Vase Database: An archive of rollout photographs. A procession suggesting sacrifice of animals, peccary and deer: FAMSI.

—

1986 K2946. In A Precolumbian Portfolio: An archive of photographs. Itzamna and Peccary, Vol. 2005: FAMSI.

—

1989 K1001. In Maya Vase Database: An archive of rollout photographs. CX, peccary and turkey: FAMSI.

—

1997 K7525. In Maya Vase Database: An archive of rollout photographs. An unusual vase with the PSS on the lower register. The water lily jaguar balances an enema tube: FAMSI.

—

1998 K1743. In Maya Vase Database: An archive of rollout photographs. Polychrome, Vol. 2005: FAMSI.

—

2000 K6594 and K6995. In A Precolumbian Portfolio: An archive of photographs. Maya Palenque Incensarios, Vol. 2005: FAMSI.

Kidder, A. V.

1947 The Artifacts of Uaxactun, Guatemala. In Publications, Vol. 576. Washington: Carnegie Institution.

Kirchhoff, P.

1963 The Tribes North of the Orinoco River. In Handbook of South American Indians. J.H. Steward, ed. Pp. 481–493, Vol. 4. New York: Cooper Square Publishers, Inc.

LeMoine, G.

2001 Skeletal Technology in Context: An Optimistic Overview. In Crafting Bone: Skeletal Technologies through Time and Space Proceedings of the 2nd meeting of the (ICAZ) Worked Bone Research Group, Budapest, 31 August –5 September 1999. A.M. Choyke and L. Bartosiewicz, eds. Pp. 1–7. BAR International Series, Vol. 937. Oxford: Archaeopress.

Longyear, J. M.

1952 Copan Ceramics: A Study of Southeastern Maya Pottery. Volume 597. Washington D.C.: Carnegie Institution of Washington.

68

Lyman, R. L. 1994 Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Masson, M. A.

1999 Animal Resource Manipulation in Ritual and Domestic Contexts at Postclassic Maya Communities. World Archaeology 31(1):93–120.

Milbrath 1999 Star Gods of the Maya. Austin: University of Texas Press. Miller, M.

2001 Understanding the Murals of Bonampak. In Maya: Divine kings of the rainforest. N. Grube, ed. Pp. 234–243. Cologne: Könemann.

Miller, M., and K. Taube

1993 The Gods and Symbols of Ancient Mexico and the Maya: An illustrated dictionary of Mesoamerican religion. London: Thames and Hudson.

Nietschmann, B.

1973 Between Land and Water: The Subsistence Ecology of the Miskito Indians, Eastern Nicaragua. New York: Seminar Press.

Nowak, R. M.

1999 Walker's Mammals of the World. Volume II. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Olsen, S. J.

1982 An Osteology of Some Maya Mammals. Volume 73. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Owens, J. G.

n.d. “To Professor F. W. Putnam, Director of the Peabody Museum Honduras Expedition.” Box 92-49. Peabody Museum Archives, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

Pohl, M.

1976 Ethnozoology of the Maya: an analysis of fauna from five sites in the Peten, Guatemala. Ph.D., Harvard University.

—

1981 Ritual Continuity and Transformation in Mesoamerica: Reconstructing the Ancient Maya Cuch Ritual. American Antiquity 46(3):513–529.

69

— 1983 Maya ritual faunas: vertebrate remains from burials, caches, caves, and cenotes in the Maya lowlands. In Civilization in the Ancient Americas: Essays in honor of Gordon R. Willey. R.M. Leventhal and A.L. Kolata, eds. Pp. 55–103. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.

Pohl, M., and L. H. Feldman

1982 The Traditional Role of Women and Animals in Lowland Maya Economy. In Maya Subsistence: Studies in Memory of Dennis E. Puleston. K.V. Flannery, ed. Pp. 295–311. New York: Academic Press.

Putnam, F. W.

1891 “To Messrs. Saville, Owens, Price and Dodge of the Honduras Expedition of 1891–2.” Letter dated November 5, 1891. Box 92-49. Peabody Museum Archives, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

Reid, F. A.

1997 A Field Guide to the Mammals of Central America and Southeast Mexico. New York: Oxford University Press.

Robicsek, F.

1972 Copan: Home of the Mayan Gods. New York: The Museum of the American Indian, Heye Foundation.

Saville, M. H.

1892. “Record Book, Archaeological Work. COPAN. 1891–92.” Box 92-49. Peabody Museum Archives, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

Schele, L., and M. E. Miller

1986 The Blood of Kings: Dynasty and Ritual in Maya Art. Fort Worth: Kimbell Art Museum.

Schele, L., and D. Freidel

1990 A Forest of Kings: The Untold Story of the Ancient Maya. New York: Morrow.

Sharer, R. J. 1994 The Ancient Maya. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Stone, A. J.

2002 Sprials, Ropes, and Feathers: The iconography of rubber balls in Mesoamerican art. Ancient Mesoamerica 13:21–39.

70

Stross, B., and J. Kerr 1997 Notes on the Maya Vision Quest Through Enema. In The Maya Vase Book: A corpus of rollout photographs of Maya vases. B. Kerr and J. Kerr, eds. Pp. 349–361, Vol. 2. New York: Kerr Associates.

Stuart, D.

1996 Kings of stone: A consideration of stelae in ancient Maya ritual and representation. RES 29/30:149–171.

—

2004 The Beginnings of the Copan Dynasty: A Review of the Hieroglyphic and Historical Evidence. In Understanding Early Classic Copan. E.E. Bell, M.A. Canuto, and R.J. Sharer, eds. Pp. 215–247. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology.

Taube, K.

1989 Ritual Humor in Classic Maya Religion. In Word and Image in Maya Culture: Explorations in Language, Writing, and Representation. W.F. Hanks and D.S. Rice, eds. Pp. 351–382. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.

—

2001 The Classic Maya Gods. In Maya: Divine kings of the rainforest. N. Grube, ed. Pp. 262–277. Cologne: Könemann.

Tedlock, B.

1999 Maya Astronomy: What we know and how we know it. Archaeoastronomy XIV(1):39–58.

Tharp, M.

2001 Javelina hunters seek togetherness in the wild. In U.S. News & World Report. Pp. 52.

Viel, R.

1993 Evolución de la Cerámica de Copán, Honduras. Tegucigalpa, D. C.: Instituto Hondureño de Antropología e Historia.

Wagner, E.

2001 Maya Creation Myths and Cosmography. In Maya: Divine kings of the rainforest. N. Grube, ed. Pp. 280–287, 289–293. Cologne: Könemann.

Webster, D.

1997 Studying Maya Burials. In Bones of the Maya: Studies of Ancient Skeletons. S.L. Whittington and D.M. Reed, eds. Pp. 3–12. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.

71

Wing, E. S.

1975 Animal Remains from Lubaantun. In Lubaantun: A Classic Maya Realm. N. Hammond, ed. Pp. 379–383. Peabody Museum Monographs. Cambridge: Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University.

Zender, M.

2000 A study of two Uaxactun-style tamale-serving vessels. In The Maya Vase Book. J. Kerr, ed. Pp. 1038–1055, Vol. 6. New York: Kerr Associates.