86
‘wide rooms indicate a Classic Puue Colonnette style, ap-
proximately occurring between 770-925 A.D.
It has to be mentioned, that from Xtablakal alleg-
ely originate tw similar, looted and unprovenanced carved
Socrway columns depicting human figures, accompanied by
hieroglyphic texts. Both monuments are preseily i private
collection in Mérida (Mayer 1981-28; 1984, No, 116,No. 82)
and onexhibitin the Misco de! Pueblo Maya in Daiilchaltan
(Mayer 1981-28; 198664, No. 101), Some authors refer to
both columns a stemming from Xtblakal, but there exists
ro definite evidence ofthis assignment.
References
Barer Vigne, Aled (ed)
981. Diciomaro Mays Cordemex Mare-Eiaa Epa Maye Edo
es Coderes. Nid
Maer Teche
1997 Penns Yea. Ete by Hanns 3. Prem. Geb. Manner.
Beri
Maye Kat Hebert
981 Clan ha Rolf Colm, Acom Rooks. Remon, Califor
1986 Maye Moran Sculpre of Untrown Provenance le Mle
Arerc. ig Kut-Enedice von Femme, Beta
1997 Kommesione Funct In: Han rem (e)Teokore
Maer, Penile Yacatn, p 271-307, Moneta Aerie
(Gee Maer. Bein
Contributions
The Maize Goddess in the Teotihuacan pantheon
Zoltan Paulinyi
The identity of the deity represented in the sculpture tadi-
tionally known as the “Water Goddess” (Figure 1) remains
a challenge to this day for researchers into Teotihuacan ico-
‘ography. Its gigantic dimensions lead us to suspect that
represents an important deity, but the few attbutes possessed
by the work make its interpretation a difficult task. The first
‘ttempt at interpretation was by Hermann Beyer (1965: 422),
‘ho perceived thatthe motif representing water in stylized
waves appearing on the border of the clothing ofthe sculpt-
ced figure shows similarity to a representation of the Aztec
‘water goddess, Chalchiuhtlicue. Although Beyer refrained
from identifying the sculpture with the Aztec goddess, on
the evidence ofthis motif other authors later considered the
sculpture —at least hypothetically to be a representation of
CChalchiuhtlicue, or the water goddess of Teotihuacan (€-2
‘Bemal 1949: Il; Kubler 1975: 44-35; Coe 1984: 97; Matos.
1990: 81). Hasso von Wining (1987, 1: 136-140) on the other
hand considered this same sculpture, as well as (wo others, t0
bea representation ofthe deity which appears in the murals of
the Tlalocan Patio at Tepantitla(Teotibuscan), wich in turn
fas been interpreted as the Teotihuacan version ofthe Aztec
goddess Nochiguetzal (Pasztory 1973). Subsequently, these
‘murals and sculptures were merged by Janet Berlo (1992
137-138) and Esther Pasziory (1997; 87-89, 99), together
with other images, to construct the "Great Goddess”, a sup-
posed principal Nature deity belonging to the Teotihusean
pantheon. As Ihave discussed elsewhere, the time has come
to review the existence of this “Great Goddess" (Pauliayi
2006), allowing the “Water Goddess” - dissolved in the
‘conographically hazy ensemble of the "Great Goddess" 10
recover an independent existence, even though her character
‘may remain uncleae.~ Finally, in contrast o the authors men-
toned above, Annabeth Headrick 2007: 23-43) has proposed
that the “Water Goddese" might bea representation ofa rer.
Considering the collective, almost anonymous nature of po
tical power in Teotinuacan, her proposal does-not seem t0
‘me t be convincing
rmenicon @ WLXXXY
‘Sculptures ofthe goddess
[Aste nature ofthe deity represented in the “Water Goddess
sculpture i unknown sofa, forthe purposes of the present
analysis [wil refer to er as the “godess with the rectangu-
lar headdress, in allsion to one of her most characteristic
formal attributes. Few representations of this goddess are
preserved: the most important image is the "Water God-
ess” statue itself which was found tothe south-west ofthe
Pyramid of the Moon (Figure 1), Another sculpture ~ slighty
under 1 m tall ~ isin the Arensberg Collection ofthe Phila
delphia Museum of Art, also representing the godess at full
length (Figure 2). A third sculpture shoul lso be mentioned
here, which stands close tothe central platform ofthe Plaza
‘ofthe Moon in front ofthe Pyramid ofthe same name (Solis
tal. 1982: photo 3). Although there sno doubt that it must
‘be the monumental representation of some poddess, itis so
‘mutilated that more exact interpretation is impossi: ata
vents. it gives the impression of a sculpture similar to the
“Water Goddess"
Tes likewise probable that in the smal elit shown in
Figure 3 we may observe the front of the head of the deity
und investigation, with her rectangular headdress and 3
tose piece, but no facial features. I would further soem that
the goddess — orher moral representatives — were also carved
in Various smaller stone sculptures; these are female figures
wearing a quechquemril~the characteristic female garb of
Mesoamerica —and sie, whose fat, rectangular headdesses,
together with the retieulated motif on thee skits, resent. as
we shall se later, similarities to the atbutes ofthe “Water
Goddess” (here Figure 4; Easby - Scott 1970: fig. 18; Sothe-
‘y's 1990, May 2: fg. 213; Basler - Brummer 1928: plate
74)
1 do no include among the representations ofthe goddess
withthe rectangular headdress the gigantic and heavily dm
aged Coatlinchan sculpture. consider, despite the proposals
‘of von Winning (1987, 1: 139) and Berlo (1992: 137-138),
that itis impossible to say with any certainty whether it
might have been a representation of the goddess: we cannot
‘Avon 2013Fig. 1. Monumental sculpture ofthe god- Fi
‘ial deAntropologa, México (Coe 1984 rio Artece2008:185)
Figure 67)
ven establisi its ex, It kill ~ practically its only recognis-
ale attribute — might also belong to a male personage, and
Aifers from the skirt of the two sculptures of this goddess
‘mentioned above.
In fact, the only pioces which represent beyond doubt the
poddess withthe rectangular headdress are the two full-length
statues mentioned previously (Figures 1 and 2), We do not
know the position of either of these in the chronology’ of
‘Teotihuacan, Both are in a geometric style which preserves
the shape ofthe cuboid blocks from which they were carved,
more markedly in the case ofthe gigantic sculpture, In both,
the figure of the goddess stands on a pedestal formed of a
large, rectangular block, and in both the godless wears the
same rectangular headdress, skirt and quechquemit! with a
feathered border, as well as feathered sandals, A eavity may
bbe observed in the breast ofthe gigantic sculpture, no doubt
fo receive a stone heart as in sculptures of Aztec deities. As
wwe have already mentioned, round the borders of the cloth
ing ofthis sculpture we may observe a symbol representing
water in line of stylized waves, Furthermore, the skirt bears
‘horizontal band covered with a reticulated motif. Neither
of these two attributes is observed in the smaller sculpture
(Figure 2). The headdress is divided horizontally into two
parts and the top is covered by a low, flat par, divided cen-
rally into a left and a right half. The jewellery worn by the
large godess consists of round ea-flaes attached 1 vertical
ribbons, a necklace with several strands, and bracelets. The
smaller statue does not wear bracelets but has enormous
hands. It should be noted also that this sculpture preserves
the remains of polychrome paint on white stucco: the face,
body and clothing ~ at least the quechquemit! were red; the
carflares, necklace and feathers were green
2, Seulpture ofthe godess in the Arensberg
‘esa ('Water Goddess") in the Museo Na- Colletio, Philadelphia Museum of Ant (El lmpe- (Easby-Scot 1970: Catalogue W118)
Fig. 4, Possible sculpture of he goddess
Fig 3. Possible representation of the hend ofthe gockens ina ree
(Gerrn-Pastory 1993, Catalogue N° 6)
‘The goddess with the reetangular headdress has few
iconographic atributes to tellus anything about her identity
If we observe the large, horizontally carved hands, which
could contain objects, we may suppose that she was consi
ered to be the giver of important goods to her worshippers.
Thus our goddess presents similarities to the deities which
appear in Teotihuacan painting, scattering water, soeds and
riches with their hands. The rows of waves onthe borders of
the sktt and the quechgtimit! correspond to the most eon-
‘mon symbol in Teotihuacan ar; it appears in the most varied
contexts, The rectangular headdress on the other hand is
very exclusive; nothing similar appears in Teotibuacan art in
general, However, if we observe the rectangular style of the
two sculptures ~ which converts forms which are naturally
8788
Fig. The “Offerings Mura” in the Temple of Agric ute (Miler
1973; figure 69)
Fig. 6 Representation of tales on a Teothuscanoid vessel from
‘Kaninaljuyi (Kidder etal. 1946: figure 1023)
‘curvilinear into staigh lines itis possible that the headdress
‘represented may also have been circular or curvilinear eal
ity (cE Beyer 1965: 423).As for the colous, the presence of
sedis very striking
“Turningto the reticulated motion the goddess” sir there
‘re afew examples of moi which might be comparable to
‘this, most often a an aquatic context. For example, similar
interwoven lines forming articulated pater appear on the
lothing ofthe Rain Goddess (Miller 1973:fig. 360), and the
‘Water Goddess of Tepanitla aso appears to present his motif
‘00 the elements hanging from her headdress (Kubler 1967:
fig 5) We also find what appearto be interwoven pattems of
rigid elements; in a group of morals at Teil, series of fig-
ures can be seen dressed as jaguars and set nan aquatic envi-
‘ronment, whose shieldsas wel asthe eicular elements nd
‘thers hanging from their headdreses~ are covered by gid
‘wit retangular spaces. Elsewhere we find the interwoven
patemon the fonts andthe hanging pars a the headdress
‘of a group of figures in the Great Compound (Miller 1973:
Figs. 147-180), Allthese elements hanging from headdress
‘are similar to one another.
The Offerings Mural
Tn our search for the identity of the goddess with the rec~
‘angular headdress, we must go beyond her representations
jn sculpture and look at the Offerings. Mura ithe Temple
fof Agriculture (figure 5), which probably dates tothe Late
“Tlamimilolpa phase (Millon 1992: 422: ca. 300-400 A.D),
‘This mural shows two identical cult images, represented 1
‘being much larger than the worshippers who are approach
‘with offerings. They ake the shape of elongated frontal busts;
‘the heads bear no facial features but do have nose pieces with
exon
8 WLOKY 6
Fig. 7lmage ofthe goddess ChicornecSat or Xilonen nthe Codex
Borbonicus (Césice Borbénico 1991-29). The goddess has a red
‘minted face clothing and adorment which are predominantly ed,
‘nd articulated motif on the sit
fangs: they also wear car-flares and many-stranded necklaces.
‘Te shape ofthe bust may bed othe act that in Teovibus-
‘an murals, perins represented fontally always appear in
this manner. The headdress rectangular and both the head-
‘dress and body bear horizontal geometrical bands. Each im-
age stands ona sub-ectanglar base, which in tum i placed
above two horizontal stripe of water
thas been proposed for some time that the two cult im=
ages pained inthis mural are potsit of such monumental
sculptures as the "Water Goddess" (Toseano 1982: 211-213;
Kubler 1975: 38), Its my opimion thatthe two cult images
tot only present the same monumental characte, but that
they infact are portraits of sculptures ofthe goddess with
the rectangular headdress, Tis statement is based on various
observations. The rectangular shape of the headdresses of
these images i similar to that ofthe "Water Goddess" culp-
ture the reader is reminded that headdress of this kod are
exceptional in Teoihwacan an. The horizontal bands on the
bodies and headdresses ofthe images appear to be a goo
‘metrical version ofthe row of waves adorn
the clothing ofthe sculpture under discussion. The two cult
image in the mural are placed above sips of water, which
‘would seem to suggest the lnk between our goddess withthe
‘eetangular headdress and that element. The noe-piece with
fangs signifies ap atribute of wate, since i appears i-
tate the shape ofthe test ofthe Rain God, and is associated,
among others, withthe Wates Goddes of Tpanti (Palin
2007250) Finally, the question arises as to whether the dual-
ity represented by the two images in the Offerings Mural has
to-do with the division into two alves(e-rght) of the top
tart of the headdress of the sculptures ofthe goddess with
the rectangular headdre
‘Auge 2018,