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 2013Fig. 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 8788 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,