Mexican archæology : $b an introduction to the archæology of the Mexican and Mayan civilizations of pre-Spanish AmericaJoyce, Thomas Athol
History
Mexican archæology : $b an introduction to the archæology of the Mexican and Mayan civilizations of pre-Spanish America
Joyce, Thomas Athol
Mayas -- Antiquities; Mexico -- Antiquities
The position which must be assigned to the Zapotec raises a question of
considerable interest. Their indebtedness to Maya culture is obvious
from the consideration of a large proportion of their architectural
remains and their art, but certain peculiar features make their
appearance. In the first place, no migration legends are recorded,
while the fact that certain localities were held to be the entrance
to the underworld rather emphasizes the “indigenous” nature of the
population. Again, though cremation makes its appearance among the
later Maya, the Zapotec, for religious reasons, held out against it,
practising, in the main, secondary burial. Finally, certain forms of
ornament applied to architecture (as at Mitla) and to pottery (as at
Cuicatlan) are unique in this part of America. Of interest is the
fact that the geometric ornament at Mitla finds an exact parallel
in the stucco decoration of some of the early ruins of the Peruvian
coast, while the designs of the Cuicatlan pottery reproduce with
equal exactness a favourite textile ornament belonging to the same
region. Certain of the Peruvian coast-dwellers preserved traditions
of immigration by sea, and these combined facts might be taken as a
vague indication of early coasting-voyages down the west coast of
America. It would be rash to put this forward as a definite theory,
but at any rate further investigations in this direction might prove
of great interest. The Zapotec at one period seem to have extended
considerably further north than in later times, and to have been
driven south by the Mixtec who at least contained an immigrant
element. The peculiar slab discovered at Placeres del Oro seems to
bear some affinity with Zapotec reliefs, but here again the “Peruvian”
character of the decoration is paramount. Affinities with Peruvian
archæology extend into Michoacan, where the practice of providing the
mummy-pack of the dead with a false head prevailed, and similarities
with Peruvian beliefs may be seen in the Mexican custom of providing
the deceased with a dog to convey his soul to the underworld, and
in ill-treating dogs during eclipses of the moon. Resemblances also
exist between the Peruvian and Maya cultures; certain stone reliefs
showing a figure seated in a niche have been found at Manabi in Ecuador
(where again traditions of immigration by sea survive), which look
very like travesties of some of the Piedras Negras stelæ; while the
famous monolith discovered at Chavin de Huantar in the Andes bears
a very distinct “Maya” stamp, though it is related also to the art
of the Nasca valley. But great caution is necessary in dealing with
similarities of this nature, which may arise from no more than a common
psychology, and may bear witness only to the “American” basis shared by
both cultures.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account