BOOK REVIEWS

Carlos M. Lpez Los Popol Wuj y sus epistemologas: Las diferencias, el conocimiento y los ciclos del innito Quito: Abya-Yala, 1999. 294 pp. Review by Gustavo Verdesio

n Los Popol Wuj y sus epistemologas, Carlos M. Lpez undertakes a very difcult but necessary enterprise: to clarify fundamental aspects of the genesis and structure of the book known throughout the centuries as the Popol Vuh. His analysis begins with an exhaustive survey of the extant bibliography, which allows us to put in perspective his own contribution to scholarship on the Maya-Quiche text. Later, he describes the objective of his investigation as detecting the continuities and ruptures the text shows with regard to the epistemologies that dominate its different parts. His theoretical model starts from the assumption that there are certain continuities in the ways a community views both the world and itself. These continuities are made possible by the successive accumulation of ideological substrata that slowly form what Lpez terms epistemological banks (27). It is precisely by investigating the content of these banks that he will be able to formulate hypotheses on the possible stages of the Popol Vuhs formation and transformation (ibid.). It goes without saying that such a research enterprise faces a series of difculties, among them the fact that the language in which the Popol Vuh was written and the worldview it conveys are completely lost today; the absence of extant metatexts that could help the interpreter decipher obscure words in the Maya-Quiche original (a difculty not faced by scholars investigating the works of such other past cultures as, say, the Ancient Greek) (ibid.); the difculties created in the texts transliteration from a pictographic register to a document written in the Roman (Western European) alphabet (28); and, nally, the different epistemological foundations of Lpezs discursive practice and the texts
N e p a n t l a : V i e w s f r o m S o u t h 2.2 Copyright 2001 by Duke University Press
407

408

Nepantla

(ibid.). To help him overcome this last obstacle, Lpez vows to be constantly vigilant of his own interpretive practices in order to prevent his Occidental background from interfering with the deciphering of the Popol Vuh (ibid.). Lpezs initial hypotheses include his contention that there is not a unitary ideological and epistemological system throughout the book. Instead he nds epistemological changes corresponding to the various social transformations undergone by the culture that produced it (29). The other basic idea inspiring his investigation is that the Popol Vuh can be read on three great discursive planes: the cosmogonic, the ritual-phenomenological, and the sociopolitical (ibid.). Finally, Lpez states his intention to focus on those conceptual patterns that have survived the changes made to the manuscript over the centuries: the dual dynamics, the preference for a unitarian view of the universe and the creatures that populate it, and the understanding of knowledge as something that is not alien to the matter of which beings and things are made (ibid.). At the end of his bibliographic survey in chapter 1, Lpez concludes that an alternative organization of the parts that comprise the Popol Vuh can be proposed (54). He starts his reexamination of the texts structure with a propedeutic revaluation of the term most frequently used to designate his object of study: bookwhich is not the most appropriate word for the Popol Vuh (55). The original Quiche, tzih, is so polysemous that it cannot be translated into modern Western languages without losing a wide range of connotations present in the original (55). Another question that must be answered before the internal organization of the text can be elucidated is who wrote it. According to Lpez, the evidence available seems to suggest that the authors belonged to the priestly class. Nevertheless, this does not mean that the text represents only one classs perspective: it is also the book of a community (56). Following, in part, the organization proposed by Villacorta, Lpez offers a classication of the fragments that comprise the document: rst, the cosmogonic stories recounted in numbers 783 and 54065, the date of which is not certain, although it could be deduced that they belong to the preclassic period (the years 300600 a.d.); second, the passage that narrates the adventures of the twins Hunahpu and Xbalanque (numbers 84539), which corresponds to the middle and late classic period (600 900); and third, the historic tales (numbers 540892), whose historical period would correspond to the years 12001524 (5859). Besides these three clearly differentiated sections, Lpez nds two additional kinds of textual planes: the metatextual clarications by one of the scribes (numbers

409

Book Reviews

16) and the repeated interventions of the manuscripts copyists throughout the years (60). According to Lpez, this variegated group of fragments is, in actuality, a series of texts that reproduce intellectual elaborations belonging to different stages of the Quiche communitys history (64). Having established his model for describing the manuscripts structure, Lpez begins studying the different epistemologies reected by each of the textual fragments. He chooses to start from the most recent section, the one that narrates the historical events, because it is the one closest to our present and, no less important, because it is the one that most strongly interpellates present-day Maya-Quiche communities (69). He then works backward until his analysis reaches the most ancient part of the manuscript. In the more recent historical narratives, Lpez sees a series of foundational myths whose purpose is to justify the possession of lands by a sector of the Quiche community (71). That group used these narratives to legitimize a state of affairs that had been affected by a situation of instability: the subjection of the entire community to the Spanish invaders (ibid.). The situation of enunciation of the stories as they appear in the text is complex: they are determined by the Spanish desire to get knowledge about the native system of social organization and by the friars need to obtain information about their future converts worldview. In that context, the myths narrated by the text can be considered as an attempt to negotiate with the conquistadores (ibid.). That is to say, these stories are not told only to serve the Spaniards but also to advance the cause of those who wrote the manuscript: the myths present genealogical lines that offer textual proof of the Quiche nobilitys purity of blood; this allows the nobles both to aspire to better treatment from the Spanish authorities and to reafrm their authority in relation to the rest of the indigenous ethnic groups (7172). In other words, these legitimation narratives were written by members of the nobility in the context of a situation of oppression similar to the one to which they had subjected other groups (72). In this way, Lpez introduces the reader to a text that deals with problems related to militarism and hegemony. The Quiche, whose Toltec heritage was widely acknowledged, were the dominant group in the region. As such, they decided to appeal to unity as an antidote to their loss of hegemony that was the consequence of the triumphal arrival of the Spaniards (73). But the unity the Popol Vuh proposes is based on domination: it is a contract with Tojil, a protective power whose authority comes from heaven (76). Lpez shows us that, interestingly enough, there are no allusions to Tojil in the rest of the surviving texts from other communities

410

Nepantla

in the Quiche-dominated region. This is almost certainly due to the fact that those other peoples did not adhere to the hegemony narrative, centered around Tojil, that the Popol Vuh scribes proposed (ibid.). In addition to the protection contract, this narrative appealed to a supposedly common origin that should serve as the basis for the unity of all the peoples in the region (77). That common origin had East as its point of departure (ibid.). Unication, in this narrative, required that the superiority of one group over the others be acknowledged, precisely the ideology that the Popol Vuh tries to justify (81). The sacrice to Tojil is interpreted, then, as a sign of subjection to the Quiche (93). In this sense, sacrice can be considered as an institution that represents the ties between two human communities (96). Another Maya-Quiche concept, nawalism (that is, the manifestation of the living in diverse forms, be they human or animal), combines the idea of the multiple with the one of the individual, thus legitimating the multiplicity of the originally divine power that concentrates in a single point that may take the shape of a chief, a warrior, a sage, or a witch (99). In sum, the idea of the nawal expresses unity in diversity (100). The episodes that narrate the twins saga deal, instead, with themes related to binarism understood as a symmetrical and reversible process. The reversibility of binarisms suggests that behind symmetry there is transformation, which becomes the point of departure of a series of cycles of actions (117). One of the ways in which this concept manifests itself is through the incorporation of one of the antagonists into the other. Both in Quiche social life and in the Popol Vuh, such incorporation takes the form of exogamic practices (118). In Lpezs interpretation, this kind of practice strengthens hegemony (119). The main theme of the chapter on the twins is that in Quiche cosmology there is a dynamic principle that is enacted through all that exists (130). For the Quiche, the universe included one force that ruptured things and another that conserved them; the crossing of these two forces caused the kind of genealogical mutations one sees in the twins saga (131). This worldview is what gives foundation to a knowledge theory based on the idea of development: knowledge is neither xed nor fully accomplished from inception; rather, it evolves and is completed as lifebe it cosmic or humandevelops (134). In this worldview, then, knowledge is closely tied to power, as shown in the episode in which the twins defeat the lords of Xibalba (135). Their goal is to avoid falling into the traps that cost their parents their lives; by learning how things work in Xibalba (the underworld),

411

Book Reviews

they are able to pass the ordeals established by its lords. Thus, the cosmogony Lpez reconstructs proposes a predomination of antagonisms and movement, as well as a knowledge that is never perfect but that must be perfected throughout time (139). In the chapter dedicated to the early divinities of what could be called (inaccurately, in my opinion) the Quiche genesis, one nds what for Lpez are the deepest levels of the Maya way of understanding the world (148). In this fragment, neither the twins nor Xibalba appear, despite their being divinities themselves; instead, only divinities with origins in the sky are talked about. This can be explained in three different ways: (1) the genesis dates from a very ancient period, (2) the tales had been left in the custody of a religious caste that kept them occult, and (3) the genesis and the beliefs it contains may have lost currency by the colonial era, when the manuscript was written (ibid.). These hypotheses are not mutually exclusive; on the contrary, each supplements the others. Whatever the explanation for the absences, Lpez sees in this fragment the idea that transformation is the permanent state of things and that knowledge is at the center of the fragments theology (149). The actual origin of that genesis is not in the divinities but in the cosmos itselfthe plethoric vacuum, in Lpezs words (ibid.). This means that there is no single force that gives birth to the universe but instead that there is a fragmentary and diverse origin: multiplicity substitutes for the absolute, succession replaces the immutable, and the perfectible, the perfect (ibid.). In other words, genesis is the action of the universe itself that starts moving and, in so doing, begins to germinate (167). It is an open genesis in which successive frustrated attempts are slowly perfected with each retrial, a genesis that starts in more than one point at the same time and that never becomes a closed, nished process (167). In this universe, gods are not predetermined or immutable essences, nor are they the rst cause of the living; rather, they are pure potentiality: the innite possibility of combination of all the elements in the cosmos (171). They are gods who need to create other beings in order to complete their own existence (176). For that completion to be accomplished, they need to acquire the knowledge necessary for the creation of beings. Only in this way can they be sure that the beings will turn out exactly as they want them to. Indeed, the gods are frustrated in several attempts before nally creating human beings correctly. It would even seem that the gods knew in advance that they were not going to be able to create a perfect human being in their rst try (179).

412

Nepantla

Another important element in the genesis is seeing. When the gods realize that their creation is almost as perfect as they are, they deprive it of far-reaching eyesight in order to make sure that they are still superior (192). For in Quiche culture, according to Lpez, to see also means to know (ibid.). Yet, to talk is also part of the process, because for the human beings to be exactly as the gods desire they must be able to express themselves: only then can they worship their creators (193). The gods of the Quiche pantheon need that worship and human beings need divine protection, which creates something like a reciprocity between thema reciprocity different from the one between Tojil and the other, subjected ethnic groups of the region: in this case, one of the components of that relationship is the notion of tribute, something that is absent in the genesis (ibid.). Thus, in this section of the manuscript the human beings condition can be described as the manifestation of a life able to relate to the universe (198). This is because in Quiche culture, nature is understood as something with which human beings should live in harmony (187). This harmony manifests itself, for example, in one of the failed attempts of the genesis, when the imperfect creatures (the wooden men) are absorbed by the rest of creationthey become monkeys, a category that already existed in the universe (188). Lpez sums up his reading of the Popol Vuh by saying that, as a whole, one notices in the manuscript a passage from a worldview that privileges multiplicity and polyvalence (genesis) to one that is based on unity and centralization (the historical part); the passage from a cosmogony of equilibrium and harmony among all the parts of the universe to another that reects a groups attempts to avoid disintegrationa disintegration caused, in this case, by the arrival of the Spaniards (211). Los Popol Wuj y sus epistemologas includes several appendices that contain references to Quiche cosmogony found in chronicles written by Spanish friars, a list of the titles of different editions of the manuscript, a catalog of the diverse ways scholars have organized the text, reference to pottery related to the twins saga, and a synthesis of the most popular translations of the genesis divinities (21764). There is no doubt Lpezs book is a very serious, well-researched investigation undertaken with responsibility and great respect for the Amerindians who are the descendents of the tradition represented by the Popol Vuh. The knowledge of the past of the American continents indigenous cultures is one of the most important tasks for those of us who study colonial Latin America. Deciphering the mechanisms Europeans use

413

Book Reviews

to construct alterity is very important, but we also have to pay attention to the other side of the cultural clash. Both Walter Mignolo (1992) and Rolena Adorno (1988) called for more studies of Amerindian cultures a decade ago but, in spite of their efforts, the eld is still dominated by studies of texts of European origin. This is one more reason to welcome Lpezs important contribution. His representation of Quiche cultures symbolic universe throughout its diverse historical stages has the advantage of being an attempt to interpret that culture from within its own (non-Occidental) cognitive patterns. Of course, this is a very difcult (if not impossible) task, but the attempt is itself worthwhile. In this respect, his cognitive operation bears some resemblance to Inga Clendinnens (1991) investigation of the Aztecs. Both projects urge us to unburden ourselves of our Occidental ideological baggage and try to immerse ourselves in a totally alien culture. Yet, unlike Clendinnen, who uses an exiguous textual corpus (Bernardino de Sahagns Florentine Codex) as her only source, Lpez consults all the information sources about Quiche culture available to him. He does not hesitate to use the analysis of illustrated pottery (pieces that depict episodes of the saga of the twins Huhnahpu and Xbalanque) or the results yielded by the most recent archaeological investigations conrming the chronology of the historical narratives. In spite of our belonging to language and literature departments dominated by a deeply rooted textualism, we Latin American colonial studies scholars need to orient our efforts in the same direction taken by Lpezs work. We must enhance our methodological arsenal and abandon our disciplinary isolation. We do not know as much as we think, and we ignore more than we should. Investigations like Lpezs are a breath of fresh air for our language and literature departments. Having said that, I believe Lpezs book may be similar to Clendinnens work in another respect, at least in relation to its attitude toward indigenous pasts. In Clendinnens research, one can see an approach that privileges the study of Aztec culture as it was before the Conquest. In other words, her apparent aim is to decipher a very complex culture at its most glorious moment, emphasizing the Aztecs beliefs and worldview before the Europeans arrival. This approach, very legitimate by both academic and moral standards, nonetheless betrays a touch of exoticism that manifests itself in the very selection of the object of study. That is, it is apparent in the privilege conferred on one cultural stage of the ethnic groupits most glorious oneover the others. I repeat, this kind of investigation is absolutely legitimate and even necessary. However, I believe such an attitude betrays a certain fascination with an interesting culture

414

Nepantla

that, because it has points of contact with ours in organizational matters, is more intelligible to usthey had a state, an army, and a bureaucracy, among other recognizable civilized traits. That fascination may obscure the image of present-day descendants of that culture in our cognitive horizon. In this respect, Clendinnens work is diametrically opposed to that of James Lockhart, who attempts to recover the ways in which the Nahuas adapted to Spanish domination, thus giving us clues to the process through which Mesoamerican Amerindians culture has evolved into its modernday form. I believe the attitude I see in Clendinnens book can be detected in Lpezs effort, albeit in a much less pronounced way. And I insist that I see it developed to a far lesser degree because Lpez is also interested in later, less glorious historical stages of Quiche society (as we see, for example, when he analyzes the section of the manuscript that deals with historical events). In spite of all that, a certain fascination with Quiche cosmogonyas depicted by the segment Lpez calls the genesiscan be perceived. Needless to say, the very term genesis indicates that, at least in this instance, Lpez has failed to leave behind his Western cognitive background. But even leaving that detail aside, it is evident that Lpez gets very excited at the reconstruction of the ancient Mayas worldview as described in the oldest fragment of the manuscript; however, if I am not mistaken, the textual evidence to which he resorts gives little foundation for some of his lucubrations on the way the Maya-Quiche understood the world. For example, when he says that the gods are not understood as beings but, perhaps, as signs related to a system of visual metaphors, it is difcult to see how the evidence he uses supports his claims. I think his hypothesis is reasonable, but it is almost impossible to prove in a persuasive or conclusive way. This kind of interpretation may result from a growing enthusiasm for a culture that Lpez clearly respects and admires. As Ive already said, however, there is plenty of information about the other stages of Quiche cultural development in Lpezs book to compensate for his fascination with reconstructing pre-Columbian Quiche epistemology. For one thing, a historical perspective is never absent from his book. Moreover, Lpezs respect for the descendents of the Maya-Quiche is conrmed by his repeated declaration that his analysis of their sacred text should not be interpreted as irreverence or as an attempt to contradict the interpretations of that text made by modern-day Amerindians, whose legitimacy he recognizes without reservation (102). Nor does he want his efforts to be read as part of an agenda that pretends to solve our present problems by resorting to the archaic past of a given culture. Nevertheless,

415

Book Reviews

he makes it very clear that, although the epistemologies of the Popol Vuh cannot be thought of as solutions for the present, they can suggest ideas for the elaboration of new strategies for human life (214). One of the implicit questions I have tried to respond to here is why this kind of study should be written today. One reason, I repeat, is the disequilibrium that exists in our knowledge of the two sides of the colonial cultural clash. I might add that, because scholars in the eld of colonial studies are faced with the problem of the representation of the Otheror the subalternnot only as academicians but also as subjects educated in Western culture, books like Lpezs are very useful. His work shows a renewed respect for Amerindian subjects that translates into an understanding of the importance and validity of indigenous knowledge for the rest of humankind. The most important aspect of Lpezs effort, however, is his solidarity with peoples who created symbolic universes too long despised or neglected by our Western culture.

References
Adorno, Rolena. 1988. Nuevas perspectives en los estudios coloniales hispanoamericanos. Revista de crtica literaria latinoamericana 14.28: 1128. Clendinnen, Inga. 1991. Aztecs: An Interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mignolo, Walter D. 1992. The Darker Side of the Renaissance: Colonization and the Discontinuity of the Classical Tradition. Renaissance Quarterly 45.4: 80828.