Survey of Talking Cross Shrines in Yucatán and Quintana Roo

Introduction

The "Talking" Cross is stated in the literature as having revealed itself, that is historically first appeared, during the Caste War of Yucatán in the 1850’s. What is of primary relevance today, beside the historical importance of the inception of the talking cross cult, is the meaning given these devices in the everyday lives of the "traditional" Yucatec-Maya people. In order to gauge the symbolism of the Maya cross, my ethnographic survey focused on Yucatec Maya villages that participate in what may be pre-Columbian pilgrimage routes (Konrad 1991) and have direct historical connections to the Caste War of 1847 (Bricker 1981).

Though the major communicating cross shrines appear to derive from the Caste War (Dumond 1985; Reed 1964); these same shrines are presently known to be active 150 years after their inception (Aguilera 1998; Burns 1983:20 and 73; Sullivan 1989:200-222). However, the degree to which beliefs and rituals surrounding cross shrine worship today differs from better documented 19th century cross phenomenon (Bricker 1981; Dumond 1985; Reed 1964) is poorly understood.

Based on my ethnographic, archaeological, and iconographic research (Aguilera 1999), communicating cross symbolism reflects historically traditional elements that I consider to have roots in ancient Maya ideology and iconography, for example the Cross Group at the Classic period site of Palenque (Cohodas 1976; Schele 1974), fused with more recent conventions. Scholars have extensively demonstrated that the "axis mundi"/"world tree" and communicating objects/oracles were central to pre-Columbian Maya religion (Baudez 1991; Freidel 1975; Roys 1933; León-Portilla 1968; Newsome 1991; Schele 1976; Taube 1992; Thompson 1970; Tozzer 1957; Vogt 1992), as well as other Mesoamerican religions (Burgoa 1934; Byland and Pohl 1994; Callaway 1990; Caso 1956 and 1969; Ricard 1966). My research supplements these investigations by ethnographically documenting how elements of ancient Maya cosmology have been transformed and/or revitalized by Maya descendants.

In my analysis I combine both a Geertzian and Turnerian approach to the analysis of the communicating crosses and juxtapose this with a brief analysis of the Catholic crucifix in order to better comprehend Maya religious continuity. Geertz (1973) has argued that culture is not locked in people’s heads, but rather is embodied in public symbols through which members of society express their world view, and that such symbols are cultural transmission vehicles. I readily agree and would add that this pertains not only to symbolic action but also to iconic transformations represented in art and history.

Regarding iconic symbols and their associated rituals, Turner (1969:15) stated that the "ritual process" expresses societal values, and that embedded within these rituals are what is most important to a particular culture. He was skeptical of any anthropological research which does not as a preliminary analyze the symbols used by natives. Turner viewed culture as "die hard" with society being a symbolic field of drama and metaphor, and that while on the surface contemporary cultures may have what appears to be no connection to their past, they nevertheless carry "memories" of images and related cumulative experience phenomena (see Hunt 1977:7-9).

Previous Page  |  Table of Contents  |  Next Page

Return to top of page