[Aztlan] Tortuguero Mon 6 fragments

[Michael Grofe]

Good questions, Ed,

Concerning the missing fragments of Tortuguero Monument 6, I'd also like to
know where fragments E and F are, as well as fragment B and the entire
missing left side with the Initial Series, which as far as I know has never
been found.

As for some nice images of fragment G, see the Mesoweb photo archives. There
are several close-up images there taken by Joel Skidmore at the Carlos
Pellicer Museum in Villahermosa (2001):

http://www.mesoweb.com/photo/view.asp?act=viewdata&i=20&s=tortuguero&ext=n&sit=1&incnot=n&id=20&expert=y&sAND=&sANDNOT=

Regarding the important question of whether fragments E, F, and G are part
of Tortuguero Monument 6, I think we can say that they are for several
reasons. From reading Gronemeyer's thesis, downloadable at Wayeb (link
below), we can see that TRT 6 was originally a T-shaped monument. The
central text is mostly intact (though fragment B is also missing in the
Villahermosa photos), while the left branch of the T (presumably with the
Initial Series) is missing. The right branch consists of fragments E, F, and
G. We can see the indentations where the left and right panels of the T fit
together with the central text, though they don't seem to line up perfectly
in Sven's drawing - though they might if all of the fragments are put
together again.

Furthermore, at the end of the central text, in blocks L16-L17, we see the
distance number 8.0.7.7, and this counts back from the important building
dedication date 9.11.16.8.18, 9 Etz’nab 6 K’ayab, in blocks I7-I8, to the
first date we find in fragments E, F and G, 8 Chuwen 9 Mak, in blocks N1-M2.
This would correspond to the LC 9.03.16.01.11. (The building dedication
itself is anchored to the known accession date of B'ahlam Ajaw on
9.10.11.3.10, mentioned in F6-E7).

This same building dedication event on 9.11.16.8.18, 9 Etz’nab 6 K’ayab, is
also used as the base from which the distance number in M5-P1 counts forward
to 4 Ajaw 3 K'ank'in and 13 Bak'tuns in 2012. This DN is 3.8.3.9.2, found on
fragments E, F, and G.

So I think we can safely say that fragments E, F, and G are indeed part of
Tortuguero Monument 6. Now, if we only could find the Initial Series and the
missing text, we might have a better understanding of the rest of this
interesting text.

Here's a link to Wayeb to download Gronemeyer's thesis:

http://www.wayeb.org/resourceslinks/wayeb_theses.php

I'd also love to know if anyone tracks down the location of the missing
fragments.

Cheers,
Michael



>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Ed Barnhart" <edbarnhart at mayaexploration.org>
> To: "'michael ruggeri'" <michaelruggeri at mac.com>, <aztlan at lists.famsi.org>
> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 09:06:00 -0500
> Subject: [Aztlan] Tortuguero Mon 6 fragments
> Dear Listeros,
>
> While I was reading about Tortuguero Mon 6, the only text in the Maya world
> said to have recorded the date Dec 21, 2012 AD, I learned an important
> detail of its story.  According to Sven Gronemeyer's 2006 book "The Maya
> Site of Tortuguero, Tabasco, Mexico - Its History and Inscriptions", the
> monuments fragments are not all together.  Some are in Villahermosa, others
> are in the United States.
>
> The text section that actually makes up the statement including 2012 is in
> three fragments - E, F, and G.  Fragment G was brought to Villahermosa in
> 1958 (along with fragments A and D), but E and F were first recognized in
> the possession of Los Angeles art dealers sometime after the year 2000.
> They were sold to a gallery in Boston and then sold to a private collector.
> Their current location is unknown!
>
> I have concerns and questions.  First questions - does anyone on our list
> actually know where fragments E and F are?  Who owns them now?  I have a
> photo of fragments E and F that Mark Van Stone shared with me, but I can't
> find a photo of fragment G, only drawings based on Ian Graham's original
> drawings.  Does anyone have photos?
>
> Now my concerns - first, how sure are we about the idea that fragments E,
> F,
> and G actually fit with fragment A? If they were found in separate places,
> has anyone actually fitted them together?  Considering E and F are in the
> possession of private collectors and A is with INAH Tabasco, I doubt it.
> Looking at the drawings, the glyphs don't seem to line up right, and
> fragments E, F, and G have a border beneath them that does not continue
> into
> fragment A.  In point of fact, we cannot even verify where these fragments
> came from.  Graham reported that local informants said the fragments were
> found sealing a burial.  However, only some of them made it to Villahermosa
> in the 1950's.  The others surfaced in theta USA, in private collections
> decades later.  Essentially, they are unprovienenced artifacts.
>
> Let me clarify that I do believe fragment G is a real artifact, and there
> is
> enough text on it alone to believe it refers to the date Dec 21, 2012 AD.
> However, I am questioning if it is actually part of Tortuguero Mon 6.  In
> fact, Graham originally identified separately, as the only known fragment
> of
> "Mon 7."  I am also questioning the identity of fragments E and F, and
> whether they really fit with fragment A.
>
> Given the hype about 2012, these little fragments have actually become
> quite
> important.  Can anyone speak to the concerns I've brought up?  John, I
> imagine you have something to say :)
>
> Curious, Ed
>
> PS.  Sorry Aztlan moderators, I know you've had a belly full of 2012.  This
> is really an archaeology question, I swear!
>
> Dr. Edwin Barnhart
> Director, Maya Exploration Center
> 7301 Ranch Road 620 N
> Suite 155 #284
> Austin, Texas 78726
> (512) 350-3321
>
>
>