[Aztlan] questions regarding Stuart's book on Palenque Str. XIX

[Justin Kerr]

Dear Dr. Just,
You may wish to take a look at a number of crocodilian objects in the
database http://research.famasi.org/kerrpotfolio.html such as number 8750
(just type in the word crocodile.) Granted there are no inscriptions on
these objects, but they are a very small representation of how this creature
was presented. For some years now, I have argued that this crocodilian
particularly those with the "yax" symbol on his nose; probably represent
some form of the creature known as Zipacna from the Popol Vuh. The fact that
there is an ax event makes sense in that Zipacna is destroyed. 
Vase K1607 shows Hun Ajaw presenting the head of the crocodile tree to
Itzamna. The head of the creature rests in a cache vessel bringing to mind a
lip to lip cache vessel excavated in Tikal. (No. 4878) in the database as
above.
Justin   




-----Original Message-----
From: aztlan-bounces at lists.famsi.org [mailto:aztlan-bounces at lists.famsi.org]
On Behalf Of Bryan R. Just
Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2006 4:00 PM
To: Aztlan at lists.famsi.org
Subject: [Aztlan] questions regarding Stuart's book on Palenque Str. XIX

I've finally had the chance to read Dr. Stuart's fascinating new book on the
New Palenque Structure XIX inscriptions, and had several questions stemming
from it I thought worthwhile to pose in this venue.  

 

A)  First off, it seems another shift has occurred in our understanding of
spelling conventions for vowel length in Classic inscriptions.  I was
surprised to see several words transcribed with short vowels I had thought
were marked for long vowels;

 

Tun

K'awil

Janab

 

Can anyone provide some guidance as to these spellings, and perhaps a
reference to relevant articles?

 

B) On p. 107, Dr. Stuart discusses an undeciphered 'bent arm' glyphic
element (from the T. XIX platform) that seems to me directly analogous to
the 'woe is me' gesture used by captives and mourners on sculptures and
ceramic vessels.  As Dr. Stuart noted, it appears in collocations in the
Dresden that have led to glosses of 'affliction,' which seem appropriate for
the gesture as it appears in the art.  I'm just curious if others may agree
with the analogy, and if it may inspire any readings of the glyph.

 

C) This is of greatest interest to me.On pp. 69ff and 177ff, there is
discussion of the curious 'axing' event of the Starry Deer Crocodile.  I was
struck by the similarity of the phrasing to inscriptions at Dos Pilas and
Aguateca, as Dr. Stuart also pointed out.  What wasn't mentioned, however,
is that in those latter examples, it is not a crocodilian that is axed, but
K'awil - apparently specifically Seibal's patron deity (or an effigy
thereof).  GI may also be implied, as the two gods commonly appear fused or
paired in the inscriptions at Seibal, both as 'patron deities' of the site.
Now, in those contexts, the same phrasing u-ts'i-ba-IL / u-pa-ti /
K'AWIL[GI?] is used. I'm curious whether anyone has any thoughts about this
phrasing when applied not to a crocodilian, but to K'awil.  Might the
'written back' of an object characterize it as an effigy?  Possibly also
related, the Starry Deer Crocodile, as Dr. Stuart discusses, seems to have a
hole on its back.  This brought to my mind the famous 'Hombre de Tikal,' a
small, now beheaded sculpture bearing both inscriptions and a cylindrical
void on its back.  Does anyone know of other examples of references to
written/painted backs and or objects with holes on their backs?

 

Bryan

 

 

Bryan R. Just, Ph.D.

Pre-Columbian Art History

 

_______________________________________________
Aztlan mailing list
Aztlan at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/aztlan