Ancient Mesoamerica

http://journals.cambridge.org/ATM

Additional services for Ancient Mesoamerica:

Email alerts: Click here

Subscriptions: Click here
Commercial reprints: Click here
Terms of use : Click here

The Return of Quetzalcoatl

William M. Ringle, Tomás Gallareta Negrón and George J. Bey

Ancient Mesoamerica / Volume 9 / Issue 02 / September 1998, pp 183 - 232

DOI: 10.1017/S0956536100001954, Published online: 10 October 2008

Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0956536100001954

How to cite this article:

William M. Ringle, Tomás Gallareta Negrón and George J. Bey (1998). The Return of Quetzalcoatl. Ancient Mesoamerica, 9,
pp 183-232 doi:10.1017/S0956536100001954

Request Permissions : Click here

Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/ATM, IP address: 134.114.138.130 on 05 Jun 2015

Ancient Mesoamerica, 9 (1998), 183-232
Copyright © 1998 Cambridge University Press. Printed in the U.S.A.

THE RETURN OF QUETZALCOATL

Evidence for the spread of a world religion during
the Epiclassic period

William M. Ringle/ Tomas Gallaneta Negron, b and George J. Bey IIIC

department of Anthropology H Sociology, Davidson College, Davidson, NC 28036, USA
b
Centro Regional de Yucatan, Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Apartado Postal 1015, Merida, Yucatan, Mexico
department of Sociology and Anthropology, Millsaps College, Jackson, MS 39210, USA

Abstract

Continuing analysis of the site of Chichen Itza suggests that its construction dates primarily to the Late Classic period, ca.
A.D. 700-1000, rather than the Early Postclassic. This paper examines the implications of this redating for the well-known
"Toltec" problem. Since Chichen largely antedated Tollan-phase Tula, we conclude that what is usually identified as Toltec
imagery in fact dates to an earlier Epiclassic horizon extending from Morelos and Puebla to the Gulf Coast and Yucatan. Chichen
Itza, we suggest, was the eastern node in a network of shrine centers dedicated primarily to Quetzalcoatl/Kukulcan. This network
transcended political boundaries and included such sites as Cholula, Cacaxtla, El Tajin, Xochicalco, and ultimately Tula. The
Quetzalcoatl cult is manifested by a specific complex of traits and seems to have expanded militarily with messianic vigor.
Pilgrimage was also an important activity at these centers. This cult axis apparently continued into the Postclassic period, and was
responsible for the distribution of the Mixteca-Puebla art style. In Yucatan, Mayapan would seem to have assumed Chichen's
position as the major Yucatecan node, although accompanied by several new shrines along the Caribbean coast.

Like Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl I do solemnly prophesy a return, a
repeated return to this problem on the part of many future stu-
dents, building steadily upon the work of one another. (Nich-
olson 1976:44)
The period between A.D. 700 and 950—variously known as the
Late Classic, Terminal Classic, and Epiclassic—is usually consid-
ered to be a period of Balkahism arising in the wake of Teotihua-
can's collapse. It continues to be debated whether centers such as
Cholula, Tajin, Teotenango, and Xochicalco were instrumental in
the demise of Teotihuacan or emerged to take advantage of power
vacuums left in their respective regions, but clearly no one of these
centers ever rivaled the size or influence of Teotihuacan. Paradox-
ically, students of the period have noted that a variety of cultural
traits were widely shared during this period of political fragmen-
tation (see Berlo and Diehl [1989] for a recent summary). Such
traits are found not only in and around the central highlands, but at
sites in both the Maya highlands and lowlands, and as far afield as
the adjacent societies of northern Central America.
Although these traits are well known, scholars have been less in-
clined to speculate as to the causes behind such extensive sharing.
General models of exchange or elite emulation have commonly been
invoked, but these do little to address the specific forms taken by such
sharing. This caution does not hold for the Early Postclassic, which
for many years was taken to be the most distant horizon for which
there was ethnohistorical evidence. Scholars such as Alfonso Caso,
Paul Kirchhoff, and Wigberto Jimenez Moreno pioneered the cor-
relation of newly available archaeological evidence with ethnohis-
torical migration records to explain cultural similarities. Although
this method met with some success, notably in distinguishing Mix-
tec and Zapotec remains, it proved difficult to identify groups such
the Nonoualca, the Olmeca-Xicalanca, and the Itza with either ar-
chaeological remains or with later ethnic groups. Particularly thorny
were the issues of the location of Tollan and the identity of Que-
tzalcoatl. Although the former was generally resolved in favor of Tula,
Hidalgo, it never proved possible to adequately untangle the archae-
ology, history, and myths associated with the "Feathered Serpent,"
despite the enormous literature it engendered.1
Among Mayanists of that same generation, a parallel concern
was with the identity of Kukulcan and the phenomenon of Chi-
chen Itza. Given statements in the chronicles concerning the de-
parture of Quetzalcoatl from central Mexico for the east and parallel
statements recording the arrival of Kukulcan in Yucatan from the
west, in addition to artistic and architectural similarities to Tula,
Chichen Itza seemed to represent one of the clearest cases of cul-
tural intrusion in Mesoamerica. Explorations of the east coast of
Yucatan and of Mayapan demonstrated that "Mexican" influence
was not confined to Chichen, a point again seemingly confirmed
by ethnohistorical references to Mexican mercenaries in the con-
flicts of the Late Postclassic.
1
Lopez Austin (1973), Davies (1977), and Gillespie.(1989) are some
of the more recent treatments of the Quetzalcoatl problem. We were un-
able to consult Florescano's (1993) recent treatment. Gillespie presents an
extended hermeneutical treatment of the sources, concluding that the meld-
ing of the mythological and historical components probably occurred dur-
ing the late imperial and early colonial periods.

183
184
Figure I. Mesoamerican sites mentioned in the text and the proposed region of cult activity [after Tamayo and West 1964:Figure 2].
Despite three-quarters of a century of archaeological investiga-
tions, the nature of that linkage remains unclear. More progress
has not been made primarily because of basic chronological un-
certainties that are severe enough to call into question the direc-
tion of the influence (e.g., Kubler 1961). The fundamental stumbling
block has been aligning ethnohistorical and iconographic evi-
dence for a Toltec presence at Chichen Itza, presumably during
Tula's Tollan-phase florescence of A.D. 950-1200,2 with radiocar-
bon, epigraphic, and architectural evidence suggesting Chichen was
contemporary with the other Late-Terminal Classic centers of
northern Yucatan, ca. A.D. 700-1000. One way this was resolved
in earlier chronologies, which privileged ethnohistorical informa-
tion, was to divide the city into spatially and temporally segre-
gated Old and New Chichen (e.g., Tozzer 1957). Old Chichen was
earlier, ethnically Maya, and literate, whereas New Chichen was
"Toltec" and lacked hieroglyphic inscriptions. Ball (1979) and Ro-
bles Castellanos (1990), on ceramic grounds, and Lincoln (1986)
on architectural and iconographic grounds, demonstrate that these
divisions could not be sustained and that there was a generally
uniform material culture in both areas.
A related problem concerns the identity of the Itzas, a group
that chronicles indicate arrived at Chichen Itza during katun 6 Ahau
or 8 Ahau, either from the east or the west, after a lengthy peregri-
nation. It was generally assumed that the Itzas were equivalent to
the Toltec invaders, but identifying their homeland and their ar-
chaeological correlates has proved extremely difficult. Perhaps the
most celebrated solution is J. Eric Thompson's (1970) Putun hy-
2
Diehl (1983) and Healan (1989) appear to favor a terminal date about
a century earlier, although Cobean, the project ceramicist, prefers the tra-
ditional boundaries. Bey, project ceramicist for the Tulane Tula project
(directed by Healan), believes the Tollan phase may well predate A.D. 900.
Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey
1XJ
pothesis, but this model too has its detractors (Kremer 1994). The
Itzas of course show up later in the central Peten at Tayasal, claim-
ing direct descent from groups of northern Yucatan, but unfortu-
nately these ties are equally murky.
For several years, some researchers in northern Yucatan have
argued for greater overlap between Chichen Itza and the other Ter-
minal Classic centers of Yucatan. As reviewed below, some of us
have advanced the position that most construction activity at Chi-
chen Itza may have ceased as early as A.D. 950-1000, though oc-
cupation probably continued for some time after (Cobos P. 1995;
Ringle et al. 1991). This paper represents an attempt to come to
terms with the cultural implications of this revised chronology, in
particular the near impossibility that Tollan-phase Tula stood as a
donor culture. We therefore endorse Cohodas's (1989) contention
that Chichen Itza was an Epiclassic city. That is, a full understand-
ing of its distinctiveness can come only from an appreciation of its
participation in the still poorly known network of centers flour-
ishing along the Gulf Coast and inland to Puebla and Morelos be-
tween A.D. 700 and 1000 (Figure 1). Most of the traits usually
considered "Toltec," we contend, are in fact Epiclassic in origin.
To anticipate our conclusions, we suggest that a quite specific
mechanism was responsible for these commonalities, the spread
of a regional cult3 focused upon Quetzalcoatl/Kukulcan in his as-
3
In this paper, we loosely equate "world religion" and "regional cult,"
the former in the same sense that Mesoamerica is designated a "world sys-
tem." Here we mean to indicate the adoption of a belief system by several
politically and ethnically independent polities throughout a highly devel-
oped culture area. A world religion also has the sense of a belief system
embodying "universal" truths that transcend the concerns of any single
ethnic or political member. "Regional cult" is perhaps the proper anthro-
pological term. We follow Burger's (1992:192) discussion of the Chavin
Return of Quetzaleoatl
pects as Feathered Serpent, as Venus, as wind god, and as a patron
of merchants and leaders. This cult, initially stretching from west
of the Basin of Mexico to eastern Yucatan, reflects the centrality
of Quetzaleoatl in later ethnohistoric texts from throughout Me-
soamerica, although again we would date many of the events as-
sociated with Quetzaleoatl in these texts to the Epiclassic. Clearly,
there are even earlier instances of feathered-serpent worship, no-
tably at Teotihuacan, but the new cult is marked by a distinctive
constellation of traits that may mark it as a doctrinal change or
schism.
The cult was based upon the establishment of a network of ma-
jor shrines that transcended ethnic and political divisions. In keep-
ing with the dual nature of Quetzaleoatl, Chichen Itza would seem
to have been the chief eastern node and Cholula its western coun-
terpart, later to be supplanted by Tula. El Tajfn apparently was
another major node. Major shrines attracted pilgrims from a wide
hinterland and acted as loci of political legitimation, but their sim-
ilarities were not due simply to the worship of a common deity.
Rather, this religion seems to have spread by means of the active
founding of new cult centers, often fortified and often by means of
aggressively militaristic proselytism. To this secondary tier we
would assign Xochicalco, Cacaxtla, and Uxmal, among others.
Given that regional domestic cultures and the worship of local
gods usually continued unaffected, the cult probably did not in-
volve extensive population movements and replacements, but
instead spread from several centers by means of mercenaries, pil-
grimage, and local political alliances. Ethnohistorical evidence
and limited material remains suggest that commercial linkages
also may have been important. In many cases, the intervention of
cult allies seems to have been actively solicited by local elites as
part of their personal political strategies. Thus, it may be more
useful to look at the many shadowy ethnic groups and their move-
ments in the ethnohistorical literature as perhaps instead refer-
ring to the religious identities associated with the spread of new
ideologies.
Repercussions from the spread of this cult, we maintain, con-
tinued to be felt throughout the Postclassic and were influential in
the rise of Tula, the spread of the Mixteca-Puebla style,4 and the
conflicts among the Postclassic kingdoms of Yucatan. There has
been considerable disagreement as to the place of origin of the
Mixteca-Puebla style and its general significance during the Post-
classic (see the review of this topic by Nicholson and Quinones
cult, itself based upon Werbner's (1977) definitions of such systems gen-
erally. A regional cult is a set of religious beliefs and practices midway in
scale between local cults and (modern) world religions. Nevertheless, re-
gional cults may be strongly universalistic at the same time that local sys-
tems continue to be tolerated. We endorse Firth's (1996) comment that
millenarian cults, of which the Quetzaleoatl cult may be an example, "are
marked by a theological tolerance in which God is assisted by local spirits
of varying power" and Burger's (1992) notion that regional cults facilitate
the freer movement of goods and people with cult boundaries. Burger
stresses the generally open and peaceful nature of regional cults, whereas
we believe the Quetzaleoatl cult was strongly linked to militarism.
4
By "Maya" style, we refer to the more curvilinear, naturalistic figural
style associated with the Late Classic lowland Maya, particularly the sub-
style of paintings and sculptures within the Usumacinta drainage. Mixteca-
Puebla is primarily a Postclassic painting style associated most notably
with the Mixtec codices, but also manifested in polychrome-pottery dec-
oration. Our use is somewhat loose (see Nicholson and Quinones Keber
[1994] for a recent review), but traits include a rather rigid figural style
rendered in flat washes of vivid colors outlined in black, and a distinctive
standardized set of symbols. By "Mexican," we refer primarily to Early
and Late Postclassic styles that owe much to Teotihuacan and to the Mixtec-
Puebla style, but again with distinctive iconography and emphases.
185
Keber [1994]). Except for Cholula, the presumed heartland of the
style was peripheral to the great states of Mesoamerica, yet it flour-
ished and spread to points as distant as eastern Yucatan and heav-
ily influenced the art of the Basin of Mexico. We suggest that it
represents the art style associated with the remnants of the Epi-
classic Quetzaleoatl cult axis. Thus, we prefer Donald Robert-
son's (1970) characterization of it as the "International style."
Association with the Quetzaleoatl cult provides a firm historical
explanation for the prestige and distribution of this style: in our
view, the Early International style is heavily Maya-Toltec, whereas
the Late International style is Mixteca-Puebla.
CULT EXPANSION AND THE MIXTEC CODICES
By way of introduction, and to show that this cult was claimed by
native pre-Conquest chroniclers to have been central to their own
origins, we here briefly discuss the earliest events in the Mixtec
codices. Although narrated from a Late Postclassic perspective,
these stories are nevertheless useful as a framework for looking at
the archaeological record, for the vividly illustrated themes of re-
ligious proselytism, pilgrimage, militarism, placemaking, and po-
litical alliance all find striking resonances in the Epiclassic. They
are also useful for establishing some of the basic cult parapherna-
lia that appears repeatedly in the iconography of the Epiclassic
cult network. This discussion concentrates on the introduction of
the cult as described in the Codex Nuttall. A new chronology de-
veloped by Emily Rabin5 places these events in the tenth century,
about a century after most of the evidence discussed below and
contemporary with Tula's ascendancy. Conceivably, they may have
been even earlier (Caso [1979] would place these events squarely
in the Epiclassic), but the nature of the events is of greater impor-
tance. Attention to the types of stories told about Quetzaleoatl is
crucial to understanding their historical significance.
Two early events stand out in the first 20 pages of the Codex
Nuttall. One is the descent from heaven of a Lord 12 Wind "Smoke
Eye" and his founding of certain important locations. The codi-
ces, however, make it clear that there were even earlier inhabit-
ants: the "stone people" whom the Mixtecs fight in the second major
event, the "War of Heaven." Both events appear intimately related
to the introduction of the cult in the Mixteca.
The foundation events are described on pages 18 and 19 of the
Codex Nuttall (Figures 2 and 3), where 12 Wind descends (twice)
from two different heavenly skybands. Marked as a priest by his
black paint, 12 Wind bears a temple fastened on his back with a
pair of twin snakes, in our eyes commemorating the divinely spon-
sored transport of the cult temple to a new location. The temple is
specifically marked as a Quetzaleoatl temple by the twin entwined
serpents, common to many of the images discussed below.
In addition, he and his companions carry several objects of rit-
ual importance: incense pouches, weapons (specifically a shield
and three atlatl darts), a sacrificial perforator (page 19), two cer-
emonial staffs or banners (Caso's Xipe and Venus staffs), a stick
for starting the sacred fire, and, finally, a sacred bundle. The place-
ment of the staffs, fire stick, and bundle before the temples on
these pages then marks their founding. As will be seen, the pouch,
weapons, and staff (probably a war banner) also figure promi-
nently in Epiclassic cult iconography.
5
Because her work has not yet been published, we here follow Byland
and Pohl's (1994a:Appendix 2) summary of her findings.
186
Feathered Serpent Lord 12 Wind
Temple
Staff of "Xipe"
Staff of "Venus"
Figure 2. Detail from Codex Nuttall, page 18: Lord 12 Wind and the First Descent from Heaven [Anders et al. 1992a).
On both pages 18 and 19, 12 Wind is also shown making an
incense offering before what is believed by some to be a fire ser-
pent (xiuhcoatl) or a place name. Because similar icons may be
found in the Codex Borgia (page 38) and on the Santa Rita murals
of Belize, this argues against the place-name interpretation. They
are more likely an iconic representation of other structures typi-
cally associated with the Quetzalcoatl cult. One-half of what ap-
pears to be a ballcourt protrudes from the serpent's mouth, and we
believe the crenelated, circular body behind its head represents the
round structures (and their roof almenas) associated with Ehecatl.
(Byland and Pohl [f994a:Map 14] illustrate one such structure from
a site adjacent to Hua Chino.)
A brief inspection of pages 18-19 reveals the prominence of
feathered-serpent imagery. On page 19,12 Wind receives his charge
(a temple and fire stick) from an ancestral pair—both of whom
wear feathered-serpent outfits, although 4 Alligator also seems to
have coyote characteristics. On the previous page, a different an-
cestral pair prevails, but in an underwater (or cave) scene at the
bottom of the page, 5 Vulture converses with and pays homage to
the woman 3 Flint "Shell Mantle," an important Mixtec ancestor.
The reed place glyph signals that this occurred at Apoala, an im-
Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey
portant place of dynastic origin in the codices. Both are dressed in
Quetzalcoatl regalia; she in the "monster-maw" headdress to be
discussed later, and he in a feathered-serpent headdress. Follow-
ing this, the bundle and staffs are transferred to a temple at the
upper left, also marked by a feathered serpent.
The descent scene on page 19 is a prelude to a complicated wed-
ding scene between the hero 12 Wind and Lady 3 Flint at "Insect
Hill/Hill of the Wasps." According to Byland and Pohl (1994a: 111),
this place was the "predominant Classic period occupation zone in
the Tilantongo valley and the southern Nochixtlan Valley." From
the space accorded it, this union was clearly a central dynastic event
in the codex, marking the union of a human and divine on the one
hand, and of local and external authority on the other.
The second important early event is the "War of Heaven," which
follows immediately after the wedding. This event is led by the
hero 9 Wind, whom both Caso (1979) and Nicholson (1978) iden-
tify with Quetzalcoatl. Their opponents, many of whose bodies
are painted with red stripes, are the "stone men" or fiuhus. These
stone men are associated with pre-Mixtec residents of the land in
colonial accounts (Antonio de los Reyes, quoted in Byland and
Pohl [1994a:l 1]), perhaps the Classic-period followers of the re-
Return of Quetzalcoatl
Fire Stick
XL.
-i-Ui.Li
Figure 3. Detail from Codex Nuttall, page 19: Lord 12 Wind and the Second Descent from Heaven (Anders et al. 1992a).
ligions of Monte Alban III or Teotihuacan. Following Anders et al.
(1992a:90), this war is thus probably a mythologized version of
the defeat and displacement of earlier ideologies and indigenous
people by the adherents of Quetzalcoatl. It is also intriguing to
note that the defeated opponents shown in a battle mural on the
Temple of the Warriors, Chichen Itza, also have striped body paint
(Morris et al. 1931:Plate 139), although the scene is too fragmen-
tary to determine if there is any connection between the two.
As Byland and Pohl (1994a: 11-13) indicate in their discussion
of this event, the version of this same conflict represented on Co-
dex Nuttall 3-4 involves men from Apoala, the origin place men-
tioned above, but on Codex Nuttall 20-21 fighting takes place at
the Hill of Wasps, associated with the marriage of 12 Wind on
page 19. Thus, the War of Heaven takes place in the two places
associated with the cult bringer 12 Wind, suggesting that the latter
is also related in some fundamental way to Quetzalcoatl. Since
founders often have a "Wind" calendrical name, it may be that a
deity's aspect is conveyed by the coefficient associated with the
day name, a suggestion that receives some support from the Epi-
187
Fire Stick Temple
classic glyphic system discussed below. Finally, it should be noted
that both 9 and 12 Wind are active participants in these earthly
events, suggesting that the conflation of Quetzalcoatl the god and
man was not confined to post-Conquest accounts.
ETHNOHISTORICAL ACCOUNTS
OF QUETZALCOATL
Similar themes are echoed in the ethnohistorical sources. A par-
ticularly important set of stories is associated with Cholula, claimed
by several authorities (e.g., Duran 1971:128-129,133) to have been
the principal city of Quetzalcoatl. Although the Historia Tolteca-
Chichimeca (Kirchhoff et al. 1976) suggests that Quetzalcoatl only
began to be worshiped after the arrival of the Tolteca-Chichimeca
in A.D. 1168, Alva Ixtlilxochitl (1975:1:529) ascribes the cult to
the preceding Olmeca-Xicalanca, a group also said to have founded
Cacaxtla. In a passage strongly reminiscent of the War of Heaven,
the Olmeca-Xicalanca arrive by boat from the east during the third
epoch of creation, eventually settling along the Atoyac River. A
188
few giants from the previous age remained and began to oppress
them, so that they rose up, killed and ate them.
Then [the Olmeca-Xicalanca] being in greater prosperity, a man
arrived in that land called Quetzalcoatl and by another name
Huemac, virgin, just and saintly; he who came from the east and
taught morality and initiated fasted, avoiding vices and sin; [he
was] the first who set up and established the cross to which they
called "god of rain and of health." Seeing what little fruit came
from teaching these people, he returned from whence he came,
and at the time he left, said he would return in times to come in
the year 1 Reed, and that meanwhile his teachings should be re-
ceived and his sons be lords. These lords would possess the land
and many other things that afterward were clearly manifested.
Once he was gone from that place came the destruction of the third
age and then was destroyed that monument so memorable in the
city of Cholula, that it was like a second Tower of Babel that the
people were building, so that afterwards they built a temple (those
who escaped the destruction) to Quetzalcoatl, whom they set up
as god of the air. [Then begins the fourth, or Toltec, epoch in Ix-
tlilxochitl's account] [Alva Ixtlilxochitl 1975:1:529-530],
Although recalling some of the Toltec Quetzalcoatl myths, the
importance of Ixtlilxochitl's narrative is the suggestion that Que-
tzalcoatl was an important deity prior to the Toltec horizon, per-
haps during the Epiclassic, and that his cult may have arrived from
the east, rather than from the Basin of Mexico. Although Rojas
(1927 [1581]:160) disagrees, claiming a western origin, Alva Ix-
tlilxochitl is supported by Las Casas (1966:53), who reaffirms that
"Quetzalcoatl was the great god of the city of Cholula," and that
"according to their histories, he came from Yucatan to Cholula."
Furthermore, his narrative, like that of the Codex Nuttall, re-
flects placemaking as a central activity of Quetzalcoatl. Such place-
making is legitimized by framing military conquest in terms of
cosmogonic myths involving the replacement of half-human pre-
decessors. His bloodline also provides a genealogical charter for
the future elites. Just as important, however, in both narratives Que-
tzalcoatl is a builder of temples and sacred spaces. Ixtlilxochitl
implies that the Great Pyramid was in some way linked to Que-
tzalcoatl—because they were building it when he left—and, in-
deed, archaeologically the end of Olmeca-Xicalanca rule may be
marked by its abandonment and the smashing of some of its altars
during the Postclassic transition. Ceramic changes, however, sug-
gest a more gradual transition (McCafferty 1996a:310, 312). A pos-
sible explanation for this apparent contradiction might be that this
destruction resulted from ideological conflict that did not neces-
sarily involve ethnic replacement.
Quetzalcoatl/Kukulcan figures prominently as a founder of cit-
ies elsewhere, as well. Landa states that Kukulcan founded both
Chichen Itza and Mayapan, whereas, according to Francisco Her-
nandez's (1921 [1545]:213) confused account, a "Cocolcan" brought
the faith to Cozumel in ancient times. In the north, Topiltzin Que-
tzalcoatl was of course the central figure of Tula, sometimes as a
founder and sometimes as a late ruler who left the city for the
east. Described as a wandering pilgrim or holy man much like
Quetzalcoatl-Huemac of Cholula, previous scholars have argued
that the various Quetzalcoatls may simply have been priests of
that deity. This is not unlikely; as mentioned, several of the an-
cestral figures associated with town foundings and conquests were
named "Wind." However, we would argue that the wandering city-
founder Quetzalcoatl is better viewed as a later etiological at-
tempt to explain the spread of his cult, uniting in a single figure
several historical episodes probably separated by centuries.
Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey
THE CHRONOLOGY OF THE EPICLASSIC
Prior to a discussion of the iconographic and architectural parallels
between the proposed cult centers, some comment on the chronol-
ogy of the Epiclassic is necessary, particularly the reasons for as-
signing Chichen Itza to the period (Figure 4). The Temple of the
Plumed Serpent, Xochicalco, and the Cacaxtla Acropolis indicate that
stylistic influence from the Maya lowlands was particularly intense
in Puebla, Tlaxcala, and Morelos during the Epiclassic period. Al-
though Maya influence is generally confined to mural and sculp-
tural decoration, or to such small portable objects as jade pendants,
Lind (1994: 98), following an earlier suggestion of Paddock, be-
lieves that some of the earliest Cholula polychromes also show strong
influences from Late Classic Maya polychromes of the southern low-
lands. These polychromes, which Lind believes are ancestral to the
Mixteca-Puebla style, date from his Aquiahuac phase (A.D. 950-
1150), and, so, somewhat after the Epiclassic, but he notes these
boundaries are tentative. (McCafferty [1996a:310] would date the
onset of polychromes at least as early as A.D. 900.)
The dating of such influence is extremely suggestive if Chichen
Itza experienced a Late-Terminal Classic florescence, as dis-
cussed below. Major activity at Xochicalco is now thought to have
been restricted to a relatively narrow window between A.D. 750
and 900 (Gonzalez Crespo et al. 1995; Hirth 1989), approximately
contemporary with Cacaxtla's apogee of A.D. 650-850 (Molina
Feal 1995). Cholula is longer-lived, and its dating more problem-
atic, but McCafferty's (1996a, 1996b) recent discussions posit sig-
nificant activity during the Epiclassic. Activity there and at Cacaxtla
may reflect ethnohistorical claims that both were originally Olmeca-
Xicalanca. El Tajin also had a lengthy occupation, but construc-
tion activity during the period A.D. 700-1000 was high (Wilkerson
1987). Noteworthy are construction of the South Ballcourt and
buildings of Tajin Chico during the later stages, followed by gen-
eral abandonment around A.D. 1000. Dating of the Pyramid of the
Niches is uncertain, but the iconography of its panels parallels that
of the South Ballcourt, and so it may have been refurbished during
the Epiclassic as well.
There is some suggestion that specific cult activities at these sites
may cluster nearer to A.D. 800. Santana Sandoval and Delgadillo
Torres's (1995) reconsideration of Cacaxtla's florescence suggests
that both the Great Platform and its murals were built very close to
A.D. 800. At Xochicalco, the Temple of the Plumed Serpent was con-
structed over an existing plaza floor and contained within it two ear-
lier substructures (Saenz 1963), suggesting the final stage was late
in the site's history. The famous stelae were also cached with a fine-
orange vessel (Saenz 1961), most probably during the ninth cen-
tury. Recent extensive excavations and restorations at El Tajin have
led Brueggeman and Ortega Guevara (1989:168) and Lira Lopez
(1990) to claim that all major construction dates to a relatively nar-
row window between the ninth and eleventh centuries, wholly within
the Epiclassic and initial part of the Early Postclassic periods and sup-
ported by two radiocarbon dates of A.D. 887 and 944. These authors
also argue that deposits originally thought to be Late Classic or Early
Postclassic cannot in fact be seriated, as has been argued for the ce-
ramics of Chichen Itza.
If true, this suggests that El Tajin had a trajectory very much
like that of Chichen Itza, which also appears to have undergone
explosive growth as a cult center during the Epiclassic, only to be
abandoned at its close. The traditional estimate for the end of Chi-
chen Itza is ca. A.D. 1200, based in part on statements in the Chi-
lam Balam chronicles that Chichen Itza was abandoned or destroyed
somewhere between katuns 6 and 8 Ahau. By that time, the long
Return of Quetzalcoatl 189

Maya Long Sotuta-sphcre

count (G.M.T ) Yucalan Yucatan Seibal Taj in Cholula Monte Alban' Teoienango Valley of Mexico Xochicalco Tula

5 Muerte
Late Tenochlitlan
Chollan L. Monte Palacio
Tases Cabezas Alban V

Tases Early I
Chollan 4 Fuego
Cuihuacan Fuego
Hocaba-
Tases El Ctisto
E. Monte ^ ^
Alban V
Late
Hocaba-
Tlachihualtepetl H
Sotuta Mazapan

islaB 3 Viento
Middle ^ ^
10.6.0 Tlachihualtepetl
^ — * • • " '
10.4.0 —
10.2.0 Cehpech Bayal Monte Alban
IV Coyotlatelco G Term Corral
Sotuta 2 Tietra (Late)
Early
Tlachihualtepetl
Tepejilote Corral
Isla A G
9H0
1 Agua Mctepec

Monte Alban
Illb Prado
Xolalpan F
Cacahuatal (Late)

'Winter (1989) believes M A [lib IV runs from around A D 600-800, followed by an unknown ceramic period M A V begins about A D. 1250

Figure 4. A chronology of Mesoamerican sites, A.D. 500-1500. Data from Seibal (Sabloff 1975:Figure 4 ] ; Tajin (Wilkerson 1987];
Cholula (McCafferty 1996a, personal communication 1996]; Monte Alban (Marcus and Flannery 1996:Table 3 ] ; Teotenango [Vargas
P. 1975:231]; Valley of Mexico [Sanders 1981:Figure 605]; Xochicalco [Hirth and Cyphers Guillen 1988]; Tula [Mastache and Cobean
1989:Table 2].

count had ceased to be recorded, but a maximal overlap with Toltec
Tula suggested the katun 10.19.0.0.08 Ahau (A.D. 1204). Because
of the ambiguity of the short count, however, other positions at
intervals of 256 years are possible. Edmonson (1986:52), for in-
stance, favors the previous cycle, 10.6.0.0.0 8 Ahau (ca. A.D. 948),
a placement we favor since it is the earliest instance following the
latest hieroglyphic dates at Chichen (and elsewhere, for that matter).
Carnegie ceramicists labored with mixed results to accommo-
date their information to the series of ethnic replacements sug-
gested in sixteenth-century documents. Robert Smith's (1971)
classic statement of the ceramic chronology of northern Yucatan
posited three sequential ceramic complexes during the Postclassic
(Figure 5). The Sotuta complex, judged coextensive with the Early
Postclassic and lasting to approximately A.D. 1200, was identified
with the ascendancy of "Mexican" Chichen and was believed to
follow the Late-Terminal Classic Cehpech "slateware" complex,
viewed as an indigenous industry. The Sotuta was followed by the
Hocaba complex, lasting to perhaps A.D. 1300, and then by the
Tases complex, which lasted until the conquest. Smith also iden-
tified a transitional Hocaba-Tases complex, but admitted diffi-
culty in its identification.
As is well known, Smith's chronology has been under attack for
the past 20 years. Most researchers in the area now accept that
Sotuta ceramics had a limited regional distribution and over-
lapped to some extent with the production of Cehpech ceramics at
other sites, thereby pushing activity at Chichen back into the Late-
Terminal Classic. What is less well appreciated is that the follow-
ing Hocaba phase/complex is also problematic. As defined by Smith,
the Hocaba phase lasted between A.D. 1200 and 1250-1300 and
shared many of its major wares, especially redwares and un-
slipped wares (Payil, Mama, and Panaba groups), with the follow-
ing Tases complex, which occupied the remainder of the Postclassic.
Thus, it is, of itself, an incomplete complex, being distinguished
from the Tases complex principally by the higher frequency of the
Kukula Cream Group (Peto Cream Ware) and the absence of San
Joaquin Buff Ware, as well as differences in the frequencies of
other minor wares and several modal changes.
There are good reasons for believing that Peto Cream Ware ap-
pears considerably earlier than A.D. 1200. Small amounts of Peto
Cream were found in the structural fill of the Uxmal ballcourt in
association with Muna Slate and caches of fine orange and Sotuta
pottery. If dated by the ballcourt ring inscription, these can be no
later than A.D. 905 (Kelley 1982:15; Kurjacketal. 1991:156). Ra-
diocarbon dates from Balankanche Cave (Andrews IV 1970; An-
drews IV and Andrews V 1980) also indicate the appearance of
Peto Cream prior to A.D. 1000, while those from Isla Cerritos (An-
drews et al. 1988; Gallareta Negron et al. 1989) are not long after
(Table 1). These dates are particularly significant in that Isla Ce-
rritos is thought to have been an Itza port, and the Balankanche
charcoal was in association with "Toltec"-style censers and tripod
bowls.6 It is noteworthy that Tollan types were being imitated here
6
A broken Peto Cream basin was found was found with the Offering
of Group II, which was unusual in having applique decoration probably
like those of the "Toltec" censers (Andrews IV 1970:60). Although unable
to decide whether the vessel was intrusive or part of the offering, Andrews
IV noted that it was identical in paste and temper to that of the "Toltec"
censers. In view of the early Peto Cream dates at Isla Cerritos, it would
seem to be contemporary with the censers and the radiocarbon date.
Another coarse-paste bowl (Andrews IV 1970:44, Figure 37a) is also
possibly Peto Cream and was made "obviously in imitation of Modified
Florescent Slateware." The presence of Modified Florescent/Sotuta vessels
in the caves is further evidence for the overlap of these traditions. Finally, a
Sotuta-Hocaba date is indicated by the presence of spindle whorls. As
Andrews IV (1970:61-62) notes, those from Balankanche are identical to
those from Chichen, and at that site and Dzibilchaltun provenienced spindle
whorls are associated with black-on-cream (Peto Cream) ceramics.
190 Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey

CHICHEN ITZA MAYAPAN NON-ITZA

NORTHERN YUCATAN
1500 Smith Revised

1400

1300
Hocaba

Hocaba-Tases
1200 Complex

Figure 5. Comparative chronologies of north-

ern Yucatan during the Late Classic and Post-
1100
classic periods.
Sotuta-Hocaba
Complex

1000

900

800
o

700

in a Hocaba or Hocaba-Sotuta—rather than a Sotuta—context, as
evidenced by an associated fragmentary Peto Cream vessel.
The significance of Peto Cream is that it is found at Chichen
Itza almost exclusively in postconstruction debris (Brainerd
1958:57; Ringle et al. 1991; Ruppert et al. 1954),7 a pattern re-
cently confirmed by Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia
7
Although he did not quantify his results, Brainerd (1958:34-45) men-
tions several locations (e.g., the Mercado, the Southwest Colonnade 3D 10,
the Northeast Colonnade, Sweat Bath 3E3, Temple of the Wall Panels)
with substantial Peto Cream fractions. None, with the exception of a pos-
sible single sherd in a dais from the Mercado, was from within a structure.
The exact frequency of Peto Cream ware in Smith's Chichen excava-
tions is muddied by the uneven and incomplete report made of those ex-
cavations. He states that "many sherds of the Hocaba Ceramic Complex
were encountered on or near the surface together with the later Tases Ce-
ramic Complex pottery. Only 21 sherds were found in the five trenches
used to establish the Sotuta Ceramic Complex. These occurred on or near
the surface" (1971:193). In the description of those excavations, Ruppert
et al. (1964:287) state that "Cut 13 was the only one which appeared to
harbor post-Toltec-Chichen [post-Sotuta] ceramic types, including . . . black-
on-cream vessels similar to those found in the lower levels of the principal
period of occupation at Mayapan. These types occurred both below (21
percent) and above (48 percent) a well preserved floor." (Smith [1971:260]
later noted that this corresponded to only 2 and 35 sherds, respectively.)
Ruppert et al. (1954:288) conclude that "The reason for finding almost no
material later than the Toltec-Chichen Period in the nineteen cuts is pre-
sumably that the permanent occupation of Chichen Itza terminated at or
near the end of that period."
(INAH) excavations in the Mercado by Agustin Pefia C. (cited in
Peraza Lope [1993:400]) and elsewhere (Cobos P. 1995; Peter
Schmidt, personal communication 1996). (Peto Cream Ware was
also rare in the recent collections of Lincoln [1990:220, 324].) Chi-
chen clearly was not abandoned during the Hocaba phase, because
postconstruction debris is often substantial, yet, just as clearly, it
was a center past its prime—with little in the way of new con-
struction and the cessation of hieroglyphic inscriptions. In this sense,
we can say that there was virtually complete overlap of construc-
tion activity at Chichen with the Florescent (Puuc) architectural
style of northern Yucatan.
The site was not abandoned, however, because the Hocaba de-
posits of Chichen, as with those from several northern Maya sites,
show the persistence of earlier ceramic groups (i.e., Cehpech and
Sotuta) mixed with Peto Cream, but lack Tases wares such as Maya-
pan Red. In contrast, the earliest Hocaba levels at Mayapan are
accompanied by Mayapan Red (cf. Smith 1971 :Tables 2-4). These
Hocaba-Tases deposits are dated to late in the thirteenth century
by a radiocarbon sample (see Table 1, Sample GrN-452) from be-
low early plaza floors antedating the Castillo (Andrews IV and
Andrews V 1980:Table 4; Pollock 1962:8-9; Proskouriakoff
1962a: 118). Associated with Hocaba-Tases deposits, it would there-
fore seem to mark the latter part of the Peto Cream tradition, rather
than its inception according to traditional schema. Hocaba is thus
better identified as a ceramic subcomplex overlapping late Cehpech/
Sotuta assemblages as well as certain early Postclassic (Tases) de-
posits (see Figure 5).
Return of Quetzalcoatl 191

Table 1. Relevant radiocarbon dates from northern Yucatan

Calibrated Midpoint
Site/Sample Location Phase Laboratory No. Uncalibrated Date (B.P.) & 1-Sigma Range

Chichen Itzaa
La Iglesia Sotuta TBN-313-2 1350 + 70 A.D. 636 (663) 690
Casa Colorado Sotuta TBN-313-3 1340 + 70 A.D. 642 (666) 758"
La Iglesia Sotuta TBN-313-1 1170 + 70 A.D. 776 (883) 961
Las Monjas east Sotuta LJ-87 1140 ± 2 0 0 A.D. 670(891) 1040
El Castillo Sotuta Y-626 1160 + 70 A.D. 780 (886) 969
El Castillo (rerun) Sotuta Y-626-bis 1140+ 100 A.D. 780(891) 1000
Balankanchea
Balankanche Hocaba-Sotuta LJ-272 1090 ± 200 A.D. 690(968) 1160
Balankanche (rerun) Hocaba-Sotuta P-1132 1072 ± 5 1 A.D. 896 (979) 1012
Balankanche Hocaba-Sotuta LJ-273 1090 ± 200 A.D. 690(968) 1160
Balankanche (rerun) Hocaba-Sotuta P-1133 1028 ± 42 A.D. 979(1009) 1023
Uxmala
Monjas north bldg. Cehpech? GrN-613 1065 ± 120 A.D. 870 (982) 1040
Kabahc
Manos Rojas Hocaba? INAH-1028B — A.D. 1210 ± 30 (calibrated?)
Manos Rojas Hocaba? INAH-1107A — A.D. 1210 ± 40 (calibrated?)
Isla Cerritosd
Str. 13, TP17-L7 Hocaba-Sotuta Beta-14085 850 ± 60 A.D. 1056 (1209) 1253e
Str. 8, TP12-B7 Hocaba-Sotuta Beta-14083 940 ± 60 A.D. 1018(1039) 1166
Str. 8, TP12-L4 Hocaba-Sotuta Beta-14082 970 ± 60 A.D. 1007(1027) 1157f
Str. 13, TP17-L7 Sotuta Teledyne 1-14244 1100 ±80 A.D. 880(960) 1012
Str. 23, TP7-L9 Cehpech Beta-14081 1290 ±70 A.D. 663 (685) 782
Mayapan"
Castillo trench Hocaba-Tases GrN-452 700 ± 115 A.D. 1227(1279) 13948
Str. R-87 beam Tases GrN-1166 640 ± 55 A.D. 1280 (1295) 1394"
Str. 21 beam Tases GrN-450 355 ± 130 A.D. 1430(1489) 1660
Tulum"
Str. 21 Lintel 9 Y-393 880 ± 60 A.D. 1039(1166) 1225
San Gervasio'
Str. 3 vault beam ext. Tases? M-719B 480 + 200 A.D. 1280(1431) 1640

Note: All dates (re)calibrated using CALIB, version 1.3 (Stuiver and Remier 1987), using thier 20-year atmospheric calibration table.
"From Andrews IV and Andrews V (1980:Table 4).
"Multiple intercepts: A.D. 642-717 (1308-1233), 742-758 (1208-1192).
c
From Carrasco and Perez (1996).
d
From Andrews et al. (1988), Gallareta Negron et al. (1989:Figure 6), and Andrews (personal communication 1997).
'Project members thought the sample was contaminated and the resultant date too late.
'Multiple intercepts: A.D. 1007-1060(943-890), 1077-1125(873-825), 1136-1157 (814-793).
"Multiple intercepts: A.D. 1227-1325 (723-625), 1336-1394 (614-556).
"Multiple intercepts: A.D. 1280-1326 (670-624), 1335-1394 (615-556).
'This date is suspect because another sample (M-719A) was taken from the core of the beam but yielded a date that was centuries younger.

The final point to be made about Peto Cream is that it has a
relatively restricted distribution, the reason for which is their close
formal similarity to Sotuta prototypes (Kepecs 1994; Smith
1971:204-205). The Sotuta sphere is confined to Chichen, the
northeast coast, and a relatively narrow corridor between them
(Kepecs and Gallareta Negron 1995:Figure 2), suggesting that it
faithfully mirrors the Itza exchange network and, perhaps, ethnic
distribution (Ringle et al. 1991). The Cupul Survey Project (An-
drews et al. 1989) reported 25 sites with Xcanchakan Black-on-
cream and/or Plumbate and Kukula Cream between the coast and
Chichen. Susan Kepecs (1994) has found Peto Cream Wares abun-
dantly represented in the neighboring Chikinchel region, an area
previously manifesting substantial levels of Sotuta ceramics. In
much of the rest of the interior, Peto Cream is infrequent, as are
earlier Sotuta sherds. Peto Cream sherds are virtually absent in
collections from Coba (Robles Castellanos 1990) and Ek Balam
(Bey et al. 1998). In addition to being found at Chichen, Peto
Cream has been identified at Mayapan, settled by a Cocom fac-
tion from Chichen, and along the northeast and east coasts, par-
ticularly Cozumel, where Cupul families also ruled and were said
to be intimately linked to Chichen Itza. Robles Castellanos (1987),
in fact, suggests that Peto Cream is the best diagnostic of Itza
presence. However, if our chronology is correct, the "Itzas" must
also be represented by Sotuta ceramics, because by the time Peto
Creams finally did appear, Chichen was on the wane. It is inter-
esting, however, that although Chichen was in decline, the for-
mer Sotuta network persisted in distributing Peto Cream Ware.
Because radiocarbon (see Table 1) and epigraphic (Tables 2 and
3) dates from Cehpech and Sotuta contexts date no later than the
tenth century, and because the earliest dates for Peto Creams range
192 Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey

Table 2. Relevant hieroglyphic dates

Site/Structure Description Long-Count and Calendar Dates

Chichen Itza
Temple of the Initial Series lintel 10.2.9.1.99 Muluc 7 Sac
Las Monjas lintels [10.2.10.11.7] 8Manik 15 Uo
Akab Dzib lintel [10.2.1.0.0 12 Ahau 18 Sac]
Casa Colorada hieroglyphic band [10.2.0.1.96] Muluc [12 Mac], [10.2.0.15.3] 7 Akbal 1 Ch'en a
Temple of the Four Lintels Lintel 1 (face and front) [10.2.12.1.8] 9 Lamat 11 Yax
Lintel 2 (face and front) [10.2.12.2.4] 12 Kan 7 Sac
Lintel 3 (face and front) [10.2.12.1.8] 9 Lamat 11 Yax
Lintel 4 (face and front) [10.2.12.2.4] 12 Kan 7 Sac (?)
Temple of the Three Lintels Lintel 3 [10.2.10.0.0] 2 Ahau 13 Ch'en
Caracol hieroglyphic band (?) [10.3.0.15.1] 3 Imix9Zip
stela or panel [10.3.17.0.0] 11 Ahau 18 Uo
High Priest's Grave [10.3.5.3.0] 2 Ahau 18 Mol"
Temple of the Hieroglyphic Jambs [10.2.15.2.13] 9 Ben 1 Zac/[1O.O.2.7.13] 9 Ben 1 Sac
Great Ballcourt hemispherical stone [10.1.15.3.6] 11 Cimi 14 Pax (?)
Temple of the Owls capstone [10.2.13.13.1] 4 Imix 14 Zip
Tomb of unknown location capstone [10.3.8.14.46] Kan 1 Pop
Hacienda water-trough lintel [10.1.17.15.3] 11 Ben 11 Cumku (?)
Halakal lintel [10.2.0.7.9] 9 Muluc 7 Pop (?)
Yula Lintel 1 (face and front) [10.2.4.8.4] 8 Kan 2 Pop (?)
Lintel 2 (face and front) [10.2.4.2.1] 2 Imix 4 Mac and [10.2.4.8.12] 3 Eb 10 Pop
Uxmal ballcourt rings [10.3.15.16.14] 2Ix 17/16 Popc
Quen Santo/Sacchana, Chiapas Stela 1 [10.2.5.0.0] 9 Ahau 18 Yax
Stela 2 [10.2.10.0.0] 2 Ahau 13 Ch'en

Note: Dates from Kelley (1982), Stuart (1989), Griibe (1994); bracketed dates are implied; katun 10.1.0.0.0 (A.D. 849-869), katun 10.2 (A.D. 869-889), katun 10.3 (A.D. 889-
909).
"Note contrast with 14C date).
"Per Wagner (1995) and Cobos (1995).
c
East ring, after Kelley (1982:15); west ring probably one day later.

between A.D. 900 and 1000, we place the cessation of monumental
activity at Chichen at ca. A.D. 950-1000. This agrees well with
Edmonson's placement of the apocalyptic katun 8 Ahau at
A.D. 948, although Chichen continued as a community for perhaps
another century and survived as a shrine until the conquest. The
obvious problem is that this provides an overlap of only about 5 0 -
100 years between Sotuta-phase Chichen and Tollan-phase Tula,
although recent evidence discussed below may add another 50 years
to the overlap.
CULT ARCHITECTURE AND ICONOGRAPHY
Supporting this chronological realignment is the fact that many, if
not most, of the more prominent "Toltec" images from Chichen
appear within this interregional Epiclassic horizon. Moreover, these
cross-cultural similarities are not due to happenstance, but instead
are structured in a manner consistent with the spread of a religious
movement, in this case a cult dedicated to Quetzalcoatl. Epiclassic
feathered serpents may be found on monuments throughout the
cult axis at Xochicalco, Cacaxtla, Maltrata, Veracruz (Medelh'n
Zelin 1962), northern Yucatan, the southern highlands of Chiapas
and Guatemala, and, to a lesser extent, at Cholula (McCafferty
1996b: 13) and Tajin (Figure 6). It might be objected that feathered
serpents are not uncommon in Mesoamerica from at least the be-
ginning of the Classic period, the most famous example being the
Temple of the Feathered Serpent at Teotihuacan, currently dated
to ca. A.D. 150 (Lopez Austin et al. 1991). We agree with this, and
we will touch on the origins of the cult below. Beginning in the

Table 3. Relevant ethnohistoric dates

Calendar Date Event Long-Count Date Date A.D.

katun 6/8 Ahau

6 Ahau founding of Chichen 9.14.0.0.0/10.7.0.0.0 A.D. 711/957
8 Ahau founding of Chichen 9.13.0.0.0/10.6.0.0.0 A.D. 692/948
katun 8 Ahau abandonment of Chichen 10.6.0.0.0/10.19.0.0.0 A.D. 948/1204
katun 13 Ahau founding of Mayapan 10.10.0.0.0/11.3.0.0.0 A.D. 1027/1283
Return of Quetzalcoatl 193

Venus/Star Glyph

Figure 6. Feathered serpents from Epiclassic sites: [a] Maitrata, Veracruz [Berlo 1989:Figure 25]; [b] Xochicaico, Temple of the Plumed
Serpent [Miller 1991:Figure 18 [drawing by V. Smith]]; [c] Chichen Itza, Upper Temple of the Jaguars (Marquina 1964:Lamina 267); (d)
Chichen Itza, Temple of the Chacmool (Morris et al. 193l:Figure 259].

Epiclassic, however, the locus of the cult changed; feathered ser-
pents were associated with a new complex of traits that we believe
marked a change in ideology.
In traditional Mesoamerican fashion, stepped pyramids form the
essential architectural focus of these cult centers, but their specific
dedication to the cult of Quetzalcoatl helps to explain various ar-
chitectural peculiarities. In studying the symbolism of an earlier
such pyramid, the Temple of the Feathered Serpent at Teotihua-
can, Lopez Austin et al. (1991) demonstrate the importance of ca-
lendrical symbolism. One of their central conclusions about the
Teotihuacan facade is that the two heads represent Quetzalcoatl
and Cipactli, the primordial earth monster, which in turn symbol-
ize the 260- and 365-day calendars. This, then, may bear out state-
ments in such ethnohistorical sources as the Historia de los
mexicanos por sus pinturas (Garibay K. 1985:25) that Quetzalco-
atl was one of the deities responsible for the invention of the di-
visions of the year.
The authors note similar symbolism in several Epiclassic pyr-
amids. Cosmological and calendrical symbolism is evident in the
quadripartite radial plan of the Castillo at Chichen, and in its nine
194
a b
Figure 7. The Castillo, Chichen ltza: [a] final form, (b] substructure [Marquina 1964:Laminas 261, 263],
tiers and 365 stairs (see Figure 7).8 Although radial pyramids have
a long history in the Maya area, most are relatively early and none
is on the scale of the Castillo—although it was, of course, later
replicated at Mayapan. Such symbolism is also common at Cho-
lula. In addition to having nine tiers, Building Stage 2a of the Great
Pyramid at Cholula (Figure 8, top) had a radically radial plan, with
staircases along the entire length of all four sides. On the north
side was a prominent stairway of 52 steps (McCafferty 1996b:6).
This suggests considerable time depth to Rojas's (1927 [1581]: 162)
statement that, at the close of each Calendar Round, nobles from
throughout the land would converge on Cholula to offer tribute
and sacrifice to Quetzalcoatl.9 Unfortunately, Stage 2a of the Great
Pyramid is poorly dated: Peterson (1987) suggests it was Epiclas-
sic, whereas McCafferty implies that it was earlier.
Calendrical symbolism is also suggested by the 365 niches of
the Pyramid of the Niches, El Tajin (Figure 8, bottom). Since it
8
In the Histoire du mechique (Garibay K. 1985:103), the ninth heaven
is the realm of Quetzalcohuatzin, evidently a form of Quetzalcoatl.
9
Coggins (1987) has also noted possible new fire imagery at Xochi-
calco, Chichen ltza, and elsewhere. Her strongest Epiclassic evidence is
the presence of xiuhmolpilli, or burning cane bundles, on reliefs from these
two sites and from Piedra Labrada, Veracruz (Figure 23a.3). It will also be
remembered that the fire stick for the New Fire ceremony was one of the
objects presented to 12 Wind by the feathered-serpent ancestors in the Co-
dex Nuttall (see Figure 3).
Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey
E J
i
<•
was stripped of much of its sculpture, evidence that it was dedi-
cated to Quetzalcoatl is circumstantial, but a general association
of niched pyramids with feathered serpents is provided by the Mal-
trata monument (Figure 9a). Garcia Payon's (1951:Plano 6) exca-
vations showed that the temple on top of the Pyramid of the Niches
consisted of sculpted panels framed by horizontal and vertical
friezes. These friezes are composed of interlocking scrolls and ser-
pentine motifs, some with feather ornaments, in which various crea-
tures are enwrapped. Ellen Spinden (1933) was convinced that the
scroll serpents were images of Quetzalcoatl, but most recent com-
mentators have been more cautious. Nevertheless, several details
do suggest Quetzalcoatl associations. First of all, the scroll ser-
pents typically occur along the edges of scenes, as do feathered
serpents elsewhere. In several of the frieze fragments, canids are
enwrapped in the scrolls (Figure 9b), perhaps related to Xolotl or
the coyotes of Chichen and Tula. Other frieze fragments bear star/
Venus glyphs (Kampen 1972:Figures 13a-f), ollin signs (Kampen
1972:Figures lOf, 12g, and 13i), images reminiscent of schema-
tized monster maws, or the enigmatic descending god that seems
to have Venus associations (Kampen 1972:Figure 10a, g).10
10
Although Taube (1992c:Figure 18) notes that several diving gods
have Maize God imagery, examples from Tulum and the Dresden Codex
(page 58) show clear feathered serpent/Venus associations as well.
 Return of Quetzalcoatl
195

— ^

\ -^

• fcW-TSj

90/-

ye..
Tn Mr—1

Figure 8. Some major Late/Epiclassic pyramids: top, section and plan of Building Stage 2a, Great Pyramid, Cholula (Marquina
1964:Lamina 36, McCafferty's [1996b] stage designation]; bottom, Pyramid of the Niches, El Tajin [Wilkerson 1987].

Warfare and human sacrifice are perhaps even stronger themes

Huitzilopochtli emerged to slay his sister Coyolxauhqui and her
of the Temple of the Feathered Serpent at Teotihuacan (Cabrera followers. If Sharp (1978) is correct in relating step frets to ser-
Castro et al. 1991, Taube 1992b). In addition to the many sacrifi- pent imagery, the Temple of the Niches would have a homologous
cial burials associated with the temple, Taube (1992b) has dem- staircase.
onstrated that the "Cipactli" heads more probably represent the
Within these contexts, the pairing of Quetzalcoatl and Tlaloc
war-serpent headdress, related to similar images from the Maya
(often with a trapeze-ray head ornament; Figure 10a) is so consis-
lowlands (see also Stone 1989; Sugiyama 1989), and, as will be
tent in the Epiclassic that it is something of a misnomer to refer
seen, to the Quetzalcoatl cult. There is, however, much additional
only to a Quetzalcoatl cult (see later). This pairing reflects the her-
evidence that the major Epiclassic cult pyramids were war tem-
itage of what Schele and Freidel (1990) have termed Tlaloc-Venus
ples. The serpent balustrades of the Castillo, Chichen Itza, and the
warfare—first appearing in the Maya area during the Early Clas-
Temple of the Plumed Serpent, Xochicalco, mark these buildings
sic, but with a strong resurgence in the Usumacinta-Pasion drain-
as symbolic coatepetl like the Aztec Templo Mayor, the place where
ages in the Late Classic (Stone 1989). (The pairing is also important
196
J tpi pnni
/'or
Rgure9. Images suggestive of feathered-serpent cult presence in Vera-
cruz: [a] Maltrata Monument, Veracruz (Berlo 1989:Figure 25] ; [b] coy-
ote(?) friezes, El Tajin Pyramid of the Niches (Kampen 1972:Figures lie
and e).
at Teotihuacan.) In the Maya lowlands, however, it is only during
the Epiclassic that typical feathered serpents and the "Mexican"
form of the Venus glyph (Figure 6a) begin to supplant other Venus
imagery, such as the Maya Lamat sign.
The Epiclassic, in fact, marks the advent of many insignias and
costume elements of Postclassic warfare. Jaguar and eagle warrior
societies, and prowling coyotes, appear by the ninth century at Ca-
caxtla, Chichen Itza, Xochicalco, and, perhaps, the Building of the
Columns at El Tajin. The facade of the first Chichen Castillo may
indicate that the horizon was even earlier (Figure 11). (Ethnohis-
toric documents also indicate their importance in Cholula, al-
though their time depth is unclear [Rojas 1927 (1581)].) The symbol
of the shield and triple atlatl darts, known from Teotihuacan times
and as a ritual object in the Mixtec codices (see Figure 2), became
widely distributed in the Epiclassic cult region. A more restricted
variant, the shield and intertwined arrows, is found only at Tajin
and Chichen Itza (Figure lie) (Spinden 1933). One particularly
widespread costume element was the "broad-brimmed hat," which
probably also grew out of Teotihuacan haberdashery (Figure 12)
Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey
and was probably also part of a war costume. Taube (1992c) notes
that these appear on images of Chac during the Classic period, but
Figure 12a-b demonstrates that Tlaloc was the wider association,
probably a reference to that aspect of Tlaloc-Venus war imagery.
A related theme is the depiction of standards or war banners,
which Koontz (1994) demonstrates is a major theme of both the
Pyramid of the Niches and the Mound of the Building Columns at
El Tajin. He shows that the two intertwined feathered serpents of
Pyramid of the Niches Panel 8 and the Structure 4 "ballcourt
marker" (Figure 13a-b) are actually circular standards or banners,
and, in the case of the latter monument, also function as a stand for
such objects. Koontz's analysis stops short of linking these to Que-
tzalcoatl, although the clear feather nose and tail ornaments of these
twin serpents strongly suggest this identification.
Evidence from elsewhere supports this view. It will first be re-
membered that the Staff of Venus was a key object of ritual power
set up before cult temples in the Codex Nuttall (see Figures 2 and
3). Taube (1992b) has shown that, at Tikal, banners were placed in
front of the war serpent (Tikal Temple 1, Lintel 2), which also has
reed/Tollan signs in the frieze below it (Taube 1992b). Circular
standards surrounded by feathers like those of El Tajin are clearly
associated with feathered serpents at Chichen, and possibly some
of the jades from the cenote (Figure 13c-d). Finally, Landa (Toz-
zer 1941:157-158) states that the month of Xul was dedicated to
Quetzalcoatl, which after the fall of Mayapan was celebrated only
in Mani. Other provinces, "in recognition of what they owed to
Kukulcan," presented four or five magnificent banners of feathers
which were placed on top of the temple. Such activities occurred
during no other month." This may be why standards (although of
a different sort) were set up in front of seated feathered-serpent
warriors in the Upper Temple of the Jaguars murals at Chichen
Itza (Figure 14a) (Coggins and Shane 1984:Figure 19; see also
Morris et al. 1931:478, Figure 423).
Koontz (1994) has further shown that several of the Mound of
the Building Column reliefs from El Tajin depict legitimation cer-
emonies involving the transfer of banners or standards. One of these
is the feathered, circular standard already associated with Quetzal-
coatl (Figure 14b). Another standard is of the twin, intertwined
snakes common in so many cult-related images (Figure 14c), par-
ticularly the facade of the substructure of the Castillo (Fig-
ure 1 lb). Thus, although standards may not be exclusively linked
with Quetzalcoatl, the association is strong.
The themes of warfare and sacrifice also interpenetrate another
ancient Mesoamerican institution, the ballgame, which was trans-
formed into a centerpiece of the Epiclassic Quetzalcoatl cult. The
conjunction of these cult themes is perhaps best symbolized by
another panel from El Tajin (Figure 15a), in which a figure in ball-
player costume holds both the incense bag of the priest and the
feathered staff of the Quetzalcoatl warrior. Because ballcourts are
not known archaeologically from Teotihuacan, although they are
represented on the Tepantitla murals (Taladoire and Colsenet 1991),
the fusion of this institution with Quetzalcoatl worship may have
been a fundamental change in cult practice. Seeing the ballcourts
of the major shrine centers as pan-Mesoamerican cult monuments,
rather than simply an attempt to impress the locals, helps explain
both the number and elaborateness of these courts at El Tajin, where
11
Among the Aztecs, banners were important in the festival of Pan-
tecuhtli, dedicated to Huitzilopochtli. This again reflects the homologies
between Quetzalcoatl and Huitzilopochtli.
Return of Quetzalcoatl
Ml
there are at least 11 (Wilkerson 1991:48), and Chichen Itza, which
has 13 (Kurjack et al. 1991:150). Ringle and Bey (1992) have pre-
viously discussed the Great Ballcourt in segmentary terms, noting
the conjunction of the lesser courts with sacbes and temple assem-
blages, a common northern Maya pattern. But this alone cannot
explain the vastness of that structure, or its distinctive iconogra-
phy and architecture.
Elsewhere along the cult axis, Wilkerson (1991:48) states that
the Late to Epiclassic was also a time of greatly intensified ball-
court ritual in southern Veracruz. Ballcourt construction associ-
ated with cult iconography also heightened during the Epiclassic
in the Cotzumalhuapa region of Guatemala (Parsons 1991); de
Montmollin's (1997) recent survey of Upper Grijalva ballcourts
suggests a mixture of indigenous and "Mexican" court plans. The
presence of both plans at several sites may reflect the intrusion of
a new ballcourt ideology.
The traits identified as "Mexican" in late Maya courts by Co-
hodas (1991) are perhaps better identified as aspects of the cult
version of the game, given their scarcity in the Basin of Mexico
itself. Architecturally, I-shaped courts with defined end zones, wide
alleys, rings, and vertical playing walls are favored, but not ex-
197
Figure 10. Tlaloc and Quetzalcoatl associations: [a] Uxmal, Adivino (Toz-
zer 1957:209]; (b)Temple of the Big Tables atlantean figure (Tozzer 1957:
Figure 215); (c] gold mask from the Cenote of Sacrifice (Tozzer 1957:
Figure 216]; (d) Lord 9 Wind/Quetzalcoatl supporting the heavens above
a Tlaloc image, Codex Vienna page 47 [Anders et al. 1992b].
clusively so. Wilkerson (1991:48) notes that these were particu-
larly popular around El Tajin, and of course are characteristic of
the Great Ballcourt of Chichen. The I-shaped court with a defined
end zone is also shared with the courts of Tajin, Xochicalco, Monte
Alban, Teotenango,12 and Tula. This contrasts with the other
northern-lowland courts, including several of the smaller Chichen
courts, which have sloping taluds, a relatively narrow alley, and
no defined end zones. Despite this, several clearly also have asso-
ciations with Quetzalcoatl. All northern courts associated with Que-
tzalcoatl are oriented north-south.
The use of extensive carved panels to line playing alleys is com-
mon to Chichen Itza and Tajin, as is the use of feathered serpents
to border these panels (Kampen 1972:Figures 29 and 31). (Feath-
ered serpents also decorated the upper playing walls of the Uxmal
12
Reyes V. (1975:135-136) dates the ballcourt to the 3 Wind phase
(A.D. 950-1162). Mazapan influence in this phase suggests a Postclassic
date, although Coyotlatelco influence is present early in the phase. It is
probably contemporary with the Tollan-phase courts of Tula, although the
Teotenango reports are admittedly preliminary.
198 Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey

Rgurell. The Castillo substructure facade: (a) Marquina's (1964:Lamina

263) reconstruction; (b) detail of central image (Tozzer 19S7:Figure 86); (c)
shield and arrow medallions from Chichen Itza (left) and El Tajin (right)
(Tozzer 19S7:Figures 82-83); (d) eagle and coyote panel, Temple of the
Plumed Serpent, Xochicalco (Seler 1991a:Figure 35).

court [Ruz Lhuillier 1958].) Wilkerson (1991) also identifies the Cult ballgame iconography particularly emphasizes the mar-
Tajin descending god depicted on many of these panels as Venus. tial and sacrificial aspect of the cult (e.g., the murals of the
This head appears on several panels of the South Ballcourt and Temple of the Jaguars). Although human sacrifice is evident in
terminates the serpent scroll friezes from the North Court. some Late Classic lowland Maya ballgame reliefs, these gener-

Figure 12. [facing page) Epidassic "broad-brimmed" headdress: (a-c) Temple of the Chacmool, Chichen Itza (Taube 1992c:Figures 5c~-d;
Tozzer 19S7:Figure 671); (d) Uxmal Stela 14 (Morley and Brainerd 1956:Figure 41); (e) Cerro de las Mesas Stela 4 (Stirling 1943:Fig-
ure 14c); (f)Tonina captive (after Yadeun 1992:102); (g) Maltrata,Veracruz (Berlo 1989:Figure 25); (h)Tonala, Chiapas (Jimenez Moreno
1966:Figure 86).
Return of Quetzalcoatl 199
200
ally emphasize the game itself. In contrast, the act of sacrifice
following play is central to reliefs from Chichen, Veracruz,
and Cotzumalhuapa. The use of snakes to depict spouts of blood
from beheaded ballplayers is found in Veracruz at Tajin and Apari-
cio, and also at Chichen, alone of all the Maya sites (Fig-
Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey
Figure 13. War standards images: [a] El Tajin pyramid of the Niches Panel
8 (Castillo Pena 1995:Numero 29); (b) El Tajin Structure 4 panel (Castillo
Pena 199S:Numero 184]; (c) Upper Temple of the Jaguars, Chichen Itza
(Tozzer 19S7:Figure 129); (d) Quincunx jade from the Sacred Cenote, Chi-
chen Itza (Proskouriakoff 1974:Plate 38).
ure 15b-d) (Cohodas 1991; Wilkerson 1991). These reliefs seem
to meld creation myths tied to the Maize God and stories from
the Popol Vuh (see Freidel et al. 1993:Chapter 8; Koontz
1994:130-139) with central Mexico theogonies emphasizing Que-
tzalcoatl.
Return of Quetzalcoatl 201

Quetzalcoatl warrior Quetzalcoatl warrior

Banners

c o

Figure 14. Epiclassic standards and staffs: [a) Upper Temple

of the Jaguars mural (Tozzer 19S7:Figure 6 0 ] ; (b) Mound of
the Building Columns, El Tajin (Kampen !972:Figure 33c];
[c] Mound of the Building Columns, El Tajin (Castillo Pena
1995:Numero II].

Costume and ballgame equipment also serve to distinguish well as yokes and hachas. Stone yokes and hachas are distrib-
the cult version of the ballgame. Ballplayers from Tajin, Apari- uted throughout the network in Epiclassic contexts, from the cache
cio, Uxmal (Kowalski 1990), Chichen, and Cotzumalhuapa hold in the Camara de Ofrendas, Xochicalco (Saenz 1961), through
or wear a special hand piece not used by Maya ballplayers, as their presumed heartland along the Gulf Coast up the Usuma-
202 Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey

Rgurel5. Ballgame sculptures associated with the cult of Quetzalcoatl/Kukulcan: (a] El Tajin Pyramid of the Niches Sculpture 4
[Kampen 1972:Figure 18a]; [b] panel from Aparicio, Veracruz (Wilkerson 1991:Figure 3.6]; (c] El Tajin Temple of the Niches Sculpture
7—note snakes on right fragment [Kampen 1972:Figure 19a]; [d] panel from the Great Ballcourt, Chichen Itza (Schele and Miller
1986:Figure VI.3].

cinta. (Although depicted in sculpture, none has ever been found
in Yucatan, to our knowledge.) At Palenque, Ruz Lhuillier found
many examples of Gulf Coast hachas and yugos within late,
crude rooms and subdivisions of the Palace, including a steam
bath (Ruz Lhuillier 1952:50, 58, 65-66). Yokes and hachas have
also been found at several locations along the Guatemalan Pa-
cific coast, including several from the Cotzumalhuapa region
(Parsons 1969:Plates 20, 21; Thompson 1948:Figures 19 and 20),
the Guatemalan highlands (de Borhegyi 1965:36, Note 46),
and even as far south as Quelepa, El Salvador (Andrews V
1976), where they are associated with the appearance of
ballcourts.13
13
Ceramically, Quelepa's Lepa phase is also marked by fine-paste ce-
ramics, which Andrews V (1976:184) views as derived from Veracruz types.
He also notes the appearance of biconical, studded censers. Both are part
of our hypothesized cult ceramic complex. It is interesting to note that at
Piedras Negras, Guatemala, the only context in which fine-orange ceram-
ics were found was near the ballcourt (Butler 1935:20). These deposits
also consisted of ladle censers and slateware-like sherds.
Return of Quetzalcoatl
The emphasis on the ballgame stems in part from its impor-
tance as a test of elite legitimacy. Both Topiltzin-Quetzalcoatl and
Huemac are recorded as falling from grace due to the loss of a
ballgame (cited in Gillespie 1991:340), whereas in the Codex Nut-
tall (page 44) 8 Deer plays the "Toltec" in an important test of his
leadership. Byland and Pohl (1994a:158-160) illustrate parallel
scenes from the Codex Colombino II and the Codex Borgia, where
possession of the sacred bundle is directly dependent upon suc-
cess on the court. As they note, this is part of a series of accession
rituals that replicate the original founding of the Mixtec area by
9 Wind, whom many identify with Quetzalcoatl. At sites such as
El Tajin and Chichen, the many ballcourts suggest that large-scale
competitions may have accompanied cult rituals, perhaps akin to
an olympiad.
The ballgame was only one aspect of a sharp escalation in the
representation of human sacrifice. Chacmools, another anomalous
trait from Chichen, are also sporadically found along the shrine
axis. Best known are those from Tula, which are probably later,
but Wilkerson (1991:65) notes their depiction in the Tajin South
Ballcourt reliefs. Marquina (1964:451) mentions "a type of chac-
mool that carries a tecpatl in the left hand and supports a large
block of stone on its abdomen and legs" at Misantla, Veracruz, a
site with Tajin-style architecture and an important Epiclassic mon-
ument. Other undated examples have been found in Cempoala,
Tlaxcala, and Patzcuaro (Seler 1992:139-140); further afield, a
chacmool from Quirigua has long been known. Seler (1991a:87,
Figure 64) also found a sculpture, apparently displaced from Xochi-
calco, which had chacmool characteristics. Although the sculpture
apparently stood upright originally, the female figure was dressed
in the monster-maw headdress and, like other chacmools, bore an
offering bowl on her stomach. Other sacrificial features making
their appearance at Epiclassic sites include tzompantlis and skull
friezes.
THE SACRED CENOTE
Although Tlaloc and Quetzalcoatl had strong links with warfare
and destruction, both had equally significant associations with
water and, by extension, fertility. At Teotihuacan, Quetzalcoatl
swims through a watery realm on the facade of the Temple of the
Feathered Serpent and drips water over the trees of the Techinan-
titla murals (Benin 1988). Annabeth Headrick (personal commu-
nication 1998) believes that this may refer to the demiurge
Quetzalcoatl swimming through the waters of chaos prior to his
(and Tezcatlipoca's) raising of the sky (Garibay K. 1985:32), as
might the Cacaxtla serpent borders (Figure 16a). A famous de-
piction of a similar creation myth involving Quetzalcoatl and
Tlaloc comes from the initial pages of the Codex Vienna (Fig-
ure lOd). The pre-creation waters may also be depicted on an-
other panel (Figure 17) from the Temple of the Niches, El Tajin,
which shows a Tlaloc-like figure holding a basket above a rep-
tilian creature. The identification of the latter as Quetzalcoatl seems
to be signaled by the feathered tail ornament and the presence of
front feet, like the feathered serpent from the Temple of the Chac-
mool (Figure 6d).
The Sacred Cenote of Chichen Itza was surely the most im-
portant location associated with this facet of Quetzalcoatl and
was a pilgrimage point of highest importance for the Epiclassic
cult. The jades collected from its depths demonstrate that this
cenote was specifically dedicated to that deity and further link
Chichen to the other putative cult centers. They may also be the
best evidence for pilgrimage. An Epiclassic date, however, would
203
seem to conflict with some opinions as to the date of the material
dredged from the Sacred Cenote. For both Brainerd (1958:44-
45) and Ball and Ladd (1992), ceramic evidence suggests a Late
Postclassic ritual use, because earlier (Sotuta) sherds are from
storage vessels indicating everyday use of the cenote as a water
source. However, analysis of the jades suggests earlier ritual ac-
tivity. Proskouriakoff (1974:14-15) firmly held to a "Toltec" date
of deposition, maintaining that the jades found embedded in co-
pal balls adhering to Late Postclassic bowls were all small and
simple in form, never stylistically Late Classic. Furthermore, very
few jades were discovered in the Mayapan excavations, and none
was figural (Proskouriakoff 1962b). We agree with Coggins and
Shane's (1984) placement of these within their Early Period I
stage of cenote use, because a substairway cache from the Cas-
tillo includes several types also found among the jades of the
Sacred Cenote (Figure 18) (Erosa Peniche 1939; Marquina
1964:Foto 428). Coggins dates Early Period I to the ninth cen-
tury, with a second substage continuing until A.D. 1150. We be-
lieve it may have started up to a century earlier, given the complex
building history of most buildings at Chichen, and that the sec-
ond substage is doubtful given the lack of Hocaba ceramics in
either Brainerd's or Ball and Ladd's analyses.
Proskouriakoff's (1974) study of the cenote jades shows that
those with designs tended to be either plaques or beads. A number
of the Chichen jades undoubtedly represent feathered serpents of
one sort or another. Numerous beads and plaques depict feathered
serpents—either singly, twinned, or paired with a human or ani-
mal in compositions recalling the friezes of Tula and Chichen Itza
(Figure 19). An interesting group of small items labeled "insect
bodies/dubious parts" by Proskouriakoff (1974:Plate 50) is far more
likely to be miniature rattlesnake rattles, perhaps sewn onto cloth-
ing or cloth snake effigies (Figure 19b). There, thus, appears to be
strong prima facie evidence linking the cenote with the cult of Ku-
kulcan. Several other beads bear "Ik" symbols, perhaps referring
to "air" or "wind" and the Ehecatl aspect of Quetzalcoatl (Fig-
ure 19c).
Most of the figural jades show a surprisingly restricted set of
types (Figure 20, left side). Four forms in particular are most com-
mon: males with a "monster-maw" headdress, males with a head-
dress bearing paired serpent or human heads facing in opposite
directions, males with a hairdo containing a circular mirror or or-
nament in the center, and a seated lord leaning to one side or the
other (referred to below as the "leaning lord" motif).
Several lines of evidence suggest that these figural jades are
also specifically related to the cult of the feathered serpent. As
mentioned, several of these jades were considered appropriate ded-
icatory offerings for the final stage of the Castillo, the principal
deity of which was undoubtedly Kukulcan (see Figure 18).14 Quite
similar jades also turn up occasionally at Epiclassic sites (Fig-
ure 20, right side). Especially interesting are collections from Monte
Alban (Caso 1965:Figures 20-30; Paddock 1966:Figures 159-
163) and Xochicalco (Nagao 1989:Figure 18; Saenz 1963). At
Xochicalco, jades with the circular hairdo ornament and the twin-
serpent headdress were discovered in axial offerings and burials
within the Temple of the Feathered Serpent. Stratigraphically, these
were actually sealed by floors of the penultimate construction stage
(Estructura 2, Saenz 1963:12-16), but the fact that the final stage
preserved the same midline as the previous substage may suggest
14
Interestingly, one of these jades also has a hieroglyphic inscription
with the Calakmul emblem glyph.
204 Ringle, Gallareta Negr6n, and Bey

Z b ^

Figure 16. Warrior-on-serpent motif: [a] Cacaxtia Structure A , south door (Nagao 1989:Figure 4 ] ; [b] Panel D, X'telhu, Yucatan
(Robertson 1986:Figure 11]; (c) jade from the Sacred Cenote, Chichen Itza (ProskouriakofF 1974: Plate 78a}; (d] Chichen Itza, Lower
Temple of the Jaguars (Tozzer 1957:2:108]; (e] Chichen Itza, Upper Temple of the Jaguars, north wall mural (Tozzer 1957:2:105);
(f] vessel from Isla Sacrificios, Veracruz (du Solier 1943:78].
Return of Quetzalcoatl
Rgure 17. El Tajin Pyramid of the Niches Panel 3 [Kampen 1972:Figure 6a).
that the previous stage also was dedicated to the Feathered Ser-
pent. The inclusion of a carved conch shell (a symbol of Quetzal-
coatl) in Offering I and the suggestion that the burials were
sacrificial, dedicatory offerings provides some additional support.
The Xochicalco jades are all frontal types, although not all are
stylistically Maya. The two small jades found in Offering 1 had
the circular hairdo ornaments and triangular bibs below the face
Calakmul EG
Rgure 18. Jades from a substaircase offering, El Castillo, Chichen Itza: a-c, e, "Monster maw headdress" figural jades; d, glyphic text
with a possible Calakmul emblem glyph [Marquina 1964:Foto 428].
205
(Saenz 1963:Lamina III). Burial 1 had two figural jades, the larger
of which (a plaque) had the twin-serpent headdress and the smaller
of which is stylistically aberrant. Nagao (1989:Figure 18) illus-
trates two further unprovenienced examples, one of which has the
monster-maw headdress and the second of which has the circular
hairdo ornament, thus representing three of the four classes (the
fourth being represented on the facade sculptures). Most of the
"Mayoid" Monte Alban jades can be similarly classified. Jades of
these types were found in caches dated to Monte Alban IIIb/IV
(Caso 1965:907-908) in conjunction with other Epiclassic traits.
A "Tula-like" jade (having the circular hairdo ornament) was also
found in Monte Alban IV, although Caso (1965:908) notes that it
may well be earlier. Finally, several such jades were also found at
Tula itself by Acosta (1957:Lamina 28), in the Burned Palace.
The linkage of the figural jades to Quetzalcoatl/Kukulcan is made
clear in the sculpture from Xochicalco (Figure 21). As many have
noted, the leaning lords along the coils of the feathered serpent
bear a strong resemblance to those of the jades, extending even to
the wearing of the "monster-maw" headdress (Figure 21a-c, e). A
frontal view of an individual in this headdress also occurs prom-
inently on Xochicalco Stela 1 (Figure 21d), which Saenz (1961)
was first to identify as Quetzalcoatl/Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli. Briefly,
although we have used the neutral term "monster," l5 this image is
the frontal view of a man in what Stone (1989) has termed the
15
Because some headdresses at Chichen seem closer to jaguars, we
retain the more general term, but the symbolism is equivalent.
206 Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey

—ft—
1—
11 I - .4

Rgure 19. jades with feathered-serpent associations from the Sacred Cenote, Chichen Itza: [a] feathered-serpent motifs on jade beads
(Proskouriakoff 1974:Plates 42.1,42.2,46.b.4, respectively]; [b] jade serpent tongues or rattles (Proskouriakoff l974:Plates 41.g.2, 50c];
(c] jades with Wind (Ik] emblems (Proskouriakoff 1974:Plates 65.6.2, 65.6.3, 50.3, and 50.1].
Return of Quetzalcoatl 207

l
a. "Topknot" Jades

6 7 10 11
b. "Monster Maw Headdress" Jades

12 13

14 15
c. "Twinned Heads/Serpent Headdress" Jades

d. "Leaning Lord" Jades

Figure 20. Figural jades from Epiclassic sites: first column is from Chichen Itza, second from Xochicaico, third from Monte Alban
Illb/ IV, and the last from Tula. Examples 1,2 , 6,7,12,13,16, and 17 from Proskouriakoff (1974:Plates 49.a.3,66.7,67.b.l, 67.b.2,49.a.6,
66.7, 73.a.l, 73.a.3]; examples 3 and 14 from Saenz (l962:Laminas 111-IV); example 4 from Acosta [1957]; examples S, 9,10, and 18
from Caso [!96S:Figures 20, 23, 29); example 8 from Nagao [1989); examples 11 and 19 from Tozzer [1957:700,702); example 15 from
Paddock [1966:Figures 162-163).

"Mosaic" headdress and Taube (1992b) the "War Serpent" head-
dress, a key component of Teotihucanoid warrior costumes of the
Classic Maya. Taube has also argued that this helmet is a precur-
sor of the Aztec xiuhcoatl. Taube's arguments can be pursued fur-
ther, to argue that the latter is but an aspect of the Venus-Tlaloc
war complex and that the monster-maw headdress is, therefore,
yet another cult insignia, at least during the Epiclassic.16 Although
16
As Taube (1992b) and Sugiyama (1989) have noted, the war ser-
pent also appears as a headdress along the body of the feathered serpent
on the Temple of the Feathered Serpent, Teotihuacan, bearing the circular
goggles of Tlaloc on its forehead. The Aztec xiuhcoatl also frequently
has a trapeze ray on its tail, like many of the cult Tlalocs, and was a
weapon of Huitzilopochtli, who we would argue was a late replacement
for Quetzalcoatl among the Mexica (similar images are found in the Mix-
tec codices in association with feathered-serpent temples). Other war
serpent/xiuhcoatl images share Quetzalcoatl features. The Acanceh xiuh-
coatl has Venus markings on its body, while several of the Aztec images
have small front feet like the Quetzalcoatl image from the Temple of the
Chacmool (Figure 6d).
the "monster-maw" headdress may be emblematic of cult war-
riors, the symbolism of the face emerging from the maw would
also seem to be related to both Quetzalcoatl's creation of humans
and perhaps also to the serpent as a means of transformation.
We therefore argue that the limited variety of costumes and pos-
tures present in the figural jades, their presence on architectural
facades and in caches at a wide variety of sites, and their associ-
ation with many clear references to feathered serpents indicate that
they symbolically refer to the cult of Quetzalcoatl, rather than be-
ing portraits of historical figures. The jades are perhaps best in-
terpreted as some sort of religious token, perhaps offered by
pilgrims, and we agree with Proskouriakoff that those from Chi-
chen come from the period of its florescence.17 That period, how-
ever, was not the Early Postclassic, but the Epiclassic. This explains
17
The limited variety of jade motifs, plus their sheer number, argues
against their being scavenged. Given their stylistic qualities, they were prob-
ably produced in workshops somewhere in the southern lowlands.
208 Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey

Figure 21. Parallels between some Xochicalco reliefs and jade images: the "leaning lord" and "monster-maw headdress" motifs: [a, b]
Xochicalco, Temple of the Plumed Serpent and detail [Seler 1991:Figures 4 , 4 a ] ; (c] Chichen ltza cenote jade [Proskouriakoff 1974:Plate
73a]; [d] Xochicalco Stela 1 [Saenz l961:Lamina 11]; (e] Xochicalco jade [Nagao 1989).

the preponderance of Late Classic types found in the cenote, as Building of the Columns at Tajin apparently depict events in the
well as their appearance at such sites as Xochicalco and Monte life of ruler 13 Rabbit (see Figure 14c). The sculpted narrative
Alban Illb/IV. Ball and Ladd (1992) and Sheets et al. (1992) spec- frieze, in fact, seems to be an Epiclassic invention, and the formal
ulate they may have entered the cenote as the result of a massive parallels between the Tajin friezes and those from Chichen are es-
termination offering. This is supported by the fact that several pecially striking. In many of these, figures are marked with num-
classes of offerings were burnt. Arguing against this hypothesis is bered "calendrical" names (e.g., 13 Rabbit). In the Maya area, at
the absence of Hocaba pottery (Brainerd 1958:44-45), which pre- least, this was in marked contrast to earlier local conventions. Here
sumably would be present during the concluding stages of Chi- we might note that the last attested ruler of Palenque, known only
chen's occupation. from an inscription on a fine-paste bowl, has the calendrical name
"6 Cimi Pacal." The inscription also has two Venus signs.
To one accustomed to viewing Classic Maya art, a striking as-
THE EPICLASSIC VISUAL SYSTEM
pect of these cities' imagery is the lack of a "cult of personality."
Another point to make about this putative network is the essential Whereas most Maya rulers employ stelae and building facades to
similarity in the ways messages were conveyed. Throughout the
history of the International style, a relatively uniform set of visual
symbols conveyed by a prestige art style formed the primary me-
dium of communication. To these were added minimal glyphic com-
mentaries of more-local form. This can be seen at Xochicalco and
Cacaxtla in the highlands, where the sculptural or mural treat-
ments were heavily influenced by Late Classic Maya canons, yet
the texts clearly were not. A similar emphasis on narrative art at
the expense of text can be seen at "New" Chichen and some of the
late buildings of El Tajin. From what little we can tell, the content
often referred to local events. Hirth (1989), for instance, has made
a strong case that the tablero frieze of the Temple of the Feathered
Serpent depicts a series of toponyms of regional sites possibly dom- figure 22. Xochicalco, Temple of the Plumed Serpent, taWero-panel detail
inated by Xochicalco (Figure 22), whereas the friezes from the [Hirth 1989:Figure 4b].
Return of Quetzalcoatl
trumpet their achievements, and monuments frequently have but a
single central figure, that does not seem to be the case at Chichen
or most other cult centers. To be sure, friezes and murals do depict
sacrifices and battles with clearly marked leaders, but the central
figures are not disproportionately scaled to the remainder of the
composition, and more often than not the emphasis seems to be on
the event itself. This lack of a standout central figure is reminis-
cent of the Teotihuacan mural tradition.
Late Postclassic shrine centers continue to follow these pat-
terns. Although stelae continued to be erected at Mayapan, the
scenes depict deities receiving homage—rather than the deeds of
local rulers. The Mixteca-Puebla-style Santa Rita murals have only
brief texts consisting of dates, names, and probably toponyms (Stu-
art and Houston 1994:79-80) in typical Maya form, whereas those
from Tulum do not have texts.
Although the study of Epiclassic texts is in its infancy (Berlo
1989; Caso 1962), it is too simple to say that texts were exclu-
sively local, for there was widespread sharing of certain important
signs. Prominent among the Epiclassic signs are several calendri-
cal glyphs that suggest either names for or dates associated with
Quetzalcoatl. Perhaps the most common of these is the so-called
Reptile Eye (RE) glyph (Figure 23), examples of which come from
Cacaxtla, Teotenango, Xochicalco, Piedra Labrada (Veracruz), Ix-
tapaluca, and the Codex Nuttall, either alone or with coefficients.
Although von Winning (1961) associates the glyph with the day
Cipactli, Caso (1962:53) notes that at Xochicalco—where there
are several instances of the glyph—there are also clear Cipactli
glyphs of the usual form. Therefore, he preferred reading it as the
local variant of the day Wind/Ehecatl.
Most instances of the RE glyph have coefficients of 7, 9, or 12,
the first two being the most common. (As earlier suggested, coef-
ficients may signify particular deity aspects.) On the Temple of
the Plumed Serpent of Xochicalco, 9 RE occurs six times envel-
oped in the undulations of each of the six feathered serpents on the
north, east, and south sides. As several commentators have noted,
a logical conclusion is that 9 RE names the serpent. The fact that
9 Wind is given as Quetzalcoatl's date of birth in several sources,
and also occurs as an alternative name for the god in the Mixtec
codices, provides powerful support for a reading of the RE glyph
as "wind" (Caso 1958-1959,1961:81-82,1979; Nicholson 1978).18
Nine RE also occurs on the north door mural of Structure A, Ca-
caxtla, in association with a jaguar warrior standing above a jaguar-
serpent composite (Figure 23b.7).
According to Caso (1961:81), the Leyenda de los soles and the
Anales de Cuauhtitldn, respectively, identify 7 Wind as the name
of the sun and the day when humans were created by Quetzalcoatl,
perhaps explaining the popularity of the 7 RE glyph (Figure 23a).
On Xochicalco Stela 1, the 7 RE glyph occurs above the head of
an individual wearing the monster-maw headdress associated above
with Quetzalcoatl (Figure 23a. 1). This same date and costume are
conjoined on a plaque figure from the Ixtapaluca/Chalco area, where
7 RE is embedded in the pectoral (Figure 23a.2; Caso 1962:53-
54). Seven RE also occurs atop Piedra Labrada (Veracruz) Stela 1
and twice at Cacaxtla, on both the north and south door jambs of
Structure A, where the association is with both eagle and jaguar
warriors. A final intriguing possibility comes from Seibal Stela 3,
one of the late (A.D. 874), stylistically aberrant monuments that
18
Possibly relevant is the prominence of 9 Ik at Palenque, most nota-
bly as the birth date of an ancestral female deity. Nine Imix, however, is
not attested at the site.
209
may mark the advent of the Quetzalcoatl cult at that site. There
are, in fact, two examples of the possible RE glyph—one with a
coefficient of 7, the other with 5.19 In addition to the 7 coefficient,
their identification as RE glyphs is supported by their association
with Tlaloc-masked figures below and by the appearance of an
identical sign on the piers and warrior columns of Tula (e.g., Toz-
zer 1957:Figure 561). Finally, although Caso (1961) has no entry
for 12 Wind/RE, 12 Wind was a founding hero of the Codex Nut-
tall, charged by the ancestors with the founding of feathered-
serpent temples and the deliverance of ritual power objects to the
Mixtecs (see Figures 2 and 3).
Quetzalcoatl's role as creator deity may be indicated by the
4 Ollin glyphs, the date of the creation of the fifth sun according
to most sources. These too are first found in Epiclassic texts (Fig-
ure 24a). On Xochicalco Stela 3, 4 Ollin surmounts a figure in
virtually identical costume to that of Stela 1; the date is associ-
ated with the serpent form of Quetzalcoatl on the Maltrata mon-
ument. This pairing of RE and ollin glyphs (without coefficients)
also can be found at the center of the left and right sun disks of
the sky band framing the Mixtec ancestors 11 Alligator and 4
Alligator on page 19 of the Codex Nuttall (see Figure 3; also
Figure 24b). The context is again creation, albeit here solely of
the Mixtecs. Both ancestors have feathered serpent bodies and
are shown presenting 12 Wind with the temple and fire stick of
the Quetzalcoatl cult.
The RE eye is scarcer in the Maya region. Parsons (1969:144)
identifies one of the most common Cotzumalhuapa signs as RE
(Figure 23d). On Cotzumalhuapa Monument 33 (Figure 23d. 12),
the Quetzalcoatl association is indicated by the serpent tongue hang-
ing below the signs, whereas on Stela 5, RE forms the headdress
of the ballplayer who directs his gaze upward to what is probably
a version of Quetzalcoatl as Venus (Habel 1878:Plate 3). RE usu-
ally occurs on monuments with clear cult themes, such as ball-
playing or human sacrifice, and although most lack coefficients,
the number is conveyed by repetitions of the sign. The stone mon-
uments typically have 6 RE signs (Parsons 1969:144). Except for
the Cotzumalhuapa-style jade from the Sacred Cenote (note 19)
and schematic "reptile heads" in sky bands, we have found no other
RE glyphs in the Maya lowlands.
Apart from the RE, glyphs typical of Epiclassic forms occur at
"New" Chichen as name glyphs. Several are nondescript animals,
but one figure of the Lower Temple of the Jaguars clearly has a
highland "house" glyph. In that same frieze, Caso (1962:60) notes
the presence of a (calendrical?) glyph he designates as "A" to-
gether with a coefficient of 6 on the Lower Temple of the Jaguars
at Chichen (Figure 24c). This glyph is found also at Xochicalco,
Chalco, in Zapotec inscriptions, and possibly in the Cotzumal-
huapa region (Figure 24d), but only at Xochicalco and Chichen
does it also occur with the coefficient 6. Finally, "ringed" dates
are found from Teotenango to Xochicalco and Maltrata on the Gulf
Coast (Figure 24e).
We suggest that the suppression of personality cults, the pres-
tige use of certain art styles, the deemphasis of text, and the use of
certain common symbols was an intentional strategy used to sus-
tain the "international" appearance of shrine centers and to facil-
19
One of the Cotzumalhuapa-style jades from the Chichen cenote also
had a coefficient of 5 (Coggins and Shane 1984:No. 39). Graham (1990:63-
64) made the argument for a date of A.D. 874 (10.2.5.3.10) for the Seibal
stela. He also notes the Tula parallels, interpreting the sign as a version of
Cipactli.
210
O G
G
O
11
itate communication with foreign pilgrims. One is therefore tempted
to see the distribution of writing styles between "Old" and "New"
Chichen as due not to ethnicity or construction phase, but to the
involvement of the former area with the traditional Maya tasks of
demonstrating legitimacy, kinship, and personal achievements,
whereas the latter area was the locus of the cult. A similar argu-
ment can be made for El Tajin, contrasting the reliefs associated
with the Pyramid of the Niches and the ballcourts with the column
friezes of Tajin Chico. Name glyphs (notably 13 Rabbit) occur only
Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey
-Vt—/•/
t«1 rTr
10
Figure 23. Epiclassic examples of the "Reptile Eye" [RE] glyph: a, 7 RE—[1)
Xochicalco, Stela I (Saenz 1961]; (2] lxtapaluca plaque (Caso 1962:Figure 5);
[3] Piedra Labrada, Veracruz stela (Caso 1962:Figure 4a]; (4] Xochicalco,
Stone of the Four Glyphs (Edmonson 1988:38]; (5] Cacaxtla Structure A
doors (Berlo 1989:Figure 7); (6] Seibal Stela 3:A1 (Graham 1996); b, 9
RE—(7] Cacaxtla Structure A doors (Berlo 1989:Figure 7); (8) Xochicalco,
Temple of the Plumed Serpent (Seler 1991a:Figure 4b]; c, 12 RE—(9] Tex-
milinchan (Caso !962:Figura 4c); (10) Teotenango tablet (Berlo 1989: Fig-
ure 22a); d, possible RE glyphs from Santa Lucia Cotzumalhuapa—(II]
Cotzumalhuapa-style RE (Thompson 1948:Figure 62k); [12] Cotzumal-
huapa Monument 33 (Thompson 1948:Figure 2h).
in the latter context, which also concern personal rites of sacrifice
and accession. The Niches sculpture, while also featuring human
sacrifice and probably some historical actors, subsumes these to
general themes of creation and warfare.
This is not to say that cult areas were not of political impor-
tance, for some of the Chichen ballcourt reliefs strongly suggest
organizational parallels with Cholula. As earlier noted, Cholula
stood as a sacred place of legitimation for peripheral elites of the
region. According to Rojas, Cholula was governed by two priests
Return of Quetzalcoatl
12 Wind
titled the aquiach and the tlalquiach, priests of Quetzalcoatl and
representatives of the eagle and jaguar warrior sodalities:
these two governed all the republic and from this religion [of
Quetzalcoatl] emerged the captains named by the (a)quiach and
tlalquiach when they declared war on their neighbors, just as
these two priests had preeminence in confirming all the gover-
nors of the states and kings of this New Spain. In this manner,
these kings, in inheriting their kingdom or region, came to the
city and made obeisance to the idol of Quetzalcoatl... the two
high priests marked them by piercing the ears, nose or lower lip
according to their rank that they had by which they were con-
firmed and they (the rulers) returned to their lands [Rojas 1927
The Mixtec hero 8 Deer undergoes this nose-piercing cer-
emony on page 52 of the Codex Nuttall (Figure 25b). The location
is marked by a "reed" place name, and it is carried out under the
211
Figure 24. Other Epiclassic glyphs: a, the date 4 Ollin—(1) Xochicalco,
Stela 1 [Saenz 1961); [2) Maltrata, Veracruz [Berlo !989:Figure 25); b, Reptile
Eye and Ollin as celestial symbols—(3) Codex Nuttall page 19 (Anders et al.
1992a); c, Caso's Glyph A—[4) Xochicalco, Temple of the Plumed Serpent
(Caso 1962:Figura 8); (5) Chichen Itza, Lower Temple of the Jaguars [Caso
1962:Figura 8); d, glyphs from Cotzumalhuapa region—(6) El Baul, M o n -
ument 6 and (7) Monument IS, Santa Lucia Cotzumalhuapa (both from
Thompson 1948:Figure 62i); e,"ringed dates"—(8) Maltrata,Veracruz (Berlo
!989:Figure 25); (9) Xochicalco, Temple of the Plumed Serpent (Seler
1991a:Figure 5); (10) Teotenango (Alvarez A . 1975:Lamina 9).
10
auspices of a foreign "Toltec" Lord 4 Jaguar, perhaps an emissary
from Cholula.
A weathered relief from the north side of the North Temple of
the Great Ballcourt of Chichen Itza also seems to represent this
ceremony (Figure 25c). In the lower register, an individual holds
what may be a nose plug in one hand while he holds or pierces his
nose with the other. This scene is between two other scenes of
ritual ablutions reminiscent of the Tajin ballcourt friezes (Fig-
ure 25a). The association of the tanks with trees or plants may also
be significant, as might be the temples sprouting similar trees at Tajin
and Xochicalco (Figure 25c-e). Although these might be simply dec-
orative, the fact that the latter two sprout directly from or within the
temple platforms suggests a toponym of real or mythic importance.
Even deeper parallels between the political organization of cult
centers is indicated by the consistently paired images of a Captain
Sun-Disk and a Captain Feathered Serpent in the ballcourt murals
(e.g., see Figure 14a), which Charles Lincoln (1990) has argued
212 Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey

Figure 25. (a] A scene showing the offering o f a liquid, possibly pulque, before a leader seated over a tank again possibly containing
pulque. Note the resemblance o f the reclining figure t o a chacmool and the QuetzalcoatI pectoral on the right-most figure. EITajin South
Ballcourt, north-central panel (Kampen 1972:Figure 25]; (b] detail from the Codex Nuttall showing legitimation by nose piercing (Anders
et al. I992a:codex page 52]; (c] detail from the north vault of the North Temple of the Great Ballcourt, Chichen Itza, possibly showing
ritual ablutions and nose piercing (drawing from [Wren !994:Figure 4 ] ] ; (d] temple with tree,Tajin Temple of the Niches Panel 1 (Kampen
1972:Figure 5a]; (e) A schematic Tajin-style temple in front of a tree, Xochicalco, Temple of the Plumed Serpent (Seler 1991a:Figure 41].

indicate dual kingship at Chichen Itza. Although he forwards an
indigenous explanation for this arrangement, we suggest that dual
leadership may ultimately be modeled upon the institutions of Cho-
lula. Captains Sun-Disk and Feathered Serpent are shown receiv-
ing the tribute and homage of warrior processions and doing battle,
precisely those roles mentioned by Rojas for the aquiach and tlal-
quiach. Chichen may, thus, have acted similarly as a place of le-
gitimation for eastern rulers adhering to the QuetzalcoatI cult.20
20
Another possibility is that these scenes took place at another cult
center, perhaps Cholula itself, although the costumes suggest a Maya setting.
Return of Quetzalcoatl
Much remains to be learned about the content of the mural and
sculptural programs of these sites, but if it is true that certain of
these buildings were cult shrines, it may be profitable to reexam-
ine these works as narratives not solely of local events, but also of
ritual or historical events connected with the international cult of
Quetzalcoatl. A broader perspective may help explain such nonlo-
cal features as the mountain and ocean scenes of the Chichen mu-
rals, the maguey plants of the Tajin friezes, and the boats of
Teotihuacan, Chichen Itza, and Xochicalco (Figure 26).
213
MECHANISMS OF CULT DIFFUSION
Consideration of the various aspects of Quetzalcoatl may also in-
dicate how the cult spread. Below, we discuss evidence for its dif-
fusion via warfare, trade, and pilgrimage, all three of which have
been important to the expansion of such historically known world
religions as Islam and Christianity. A final mechanism, favored by
ethnohistorical sources, may have been migration, either of entire
groups of cult followers who replaced local cultures along their
Figure 26. Canoe-borne warriors: [a] Xochicalco
(Seier 1991a:Figure 9]; [b]Tepantitla compound, Teo-
tihuacan (Sejoume 1966b:Figure 143]; (c) Disk
G, Sacred Cenote, Chichen Itza [Kremer 1994:
Figure 1, drawing by E. Wagner].
214
path, or of conquering elites. The former, though, was probably
less common than claimed by historical sources.
The involvement of the cult in warfare has already been de-
tailed, but several feathered-serpent images specifically suggest
the dynamic nature of its expansion. A particularly interesting
example is found on the south doorjamb of Building A, Cacaxtla,
where a Maya-like warrior bearing a double-headed-serpent bar
rides a feathered serpent (see Figure 16a). A band with aquatic
images below and behind this suggests travel across water (per-
haps referring to Ixtlilxochitl's statement that the Olmeca-Xicalanca
came from the land of Papuha and up the Atoyac River).21 The
warrior has a large bird headdress probably representing an eagle,
given the appearance of a jaguar warrior on the opposite jamb.
This extraordinary image occurs also at the opposite extreme of
the proposed shrine axis, on a jade from the Sacred Cenote of Chi-
chen (Figure 16c) and on a panel from the site of X'telhu, Yuca-
tan, not far from Chichen Itza (Figure 16b). Warriors mounted on
feathered serpents are also prominent in the Upper Temple of the
Jaguars of the Great Ballcourt, along the north wall of the inner
room (Coggins and Shane 1984:Figure 18; Miller 1977:Figure 4;
Figure 16e), on Disk I from the Sacred Cenote (Lothrop 1952),
and elsewhere (e.g., Tozzer 1957:Figures 105-115; Figure 16d).
Strikingly similar images have also found on a pot from Isla Sac-
rificios by du Solier (1943; Figure 16f) and at Tula (Sejourne
1966a:Figure 174; Tozzer 1957:Figures 115, 116, and 132).
Related images occur as the place sign for Coixtlahuaca in early
colonial Mixtec codices (Figure 27) (Smith 1973:65-66). These
serpents bear not warriors, but temples with associated founding
rulers. (The Lienzo of Ihuitldn also shows the mummy bundle of
Lord 9 Wind, a name for Quetzalcoatl, associated with the found-
ing of the town [Smith 1973:Figure 45b].) Byland and Pohl
(1994b: 144-145) note that Coixtlahuaca was ethnically distinct
from its Mixtec neighbors, claimed Toltec ancestry, and was closely
allied with cities of Tlaxcala and Puebla in the Late Postclassic, as
the codices suggest it was much earlier. On the basis of this evi-
dence, it is likely that the cult had a role in its founding. The Mal-
trata monument (see Figure 9a) is probably a similar genealogical
register, showing a founding pair associated with a pyramid and a
Venus-marked feathered serpent.
Although it is not clear whether the serpents of the north mural
of the Upper Temple of the Jaguars also ride over water (they are
on a field of blue), certainly the Temple of the Warriors Fresco
(Figure 28) shows a coastal scene with a Quetzalcoatl shrine along
its shore. Although this scene is relatively peaceful, in contrast to
the battles of the Upper Temple of the Jaguars, it is interesting to
note that the boats bear individuals with shields and the Quetzal-
coatl pouch. (Similar canoe-borne warriors are located on the fa-
cade of the Temple of Quetzalcoatl, Xochicalco, and on a mural
from Teotihuacan [Figure 26a-b].) Explicit images of canoe war-
fare may be found on golden Disk G from the Sacred Cenote (Fig-
ure 26c) and on other mural fragments from the Temple of the
Warriors (Morris et al. 1931:Figures 139 and 146).
Thus, these Quetzalcoatl "vehicles" probably refer to two basic
methods of propagating the faith, through military conquest and
through the founding of new towns and dynasties. The transpor-
tation of troops by canoe may suggest a key military strategy of
the coastal cult network and explain why its presence seems often
to have been felt most strongly along watercourses, for example at
21
This may also be a mythical water realm similar to that of the facade
of the Temple of the Feathered Serpent, Teotihuacan.
Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey
Altar de Sacrificios and Seibal along the Usumacinta-Pasion drain-
age, and sites along the Atoyac River.
The distribution of the broad-brimmed war headdress men-
tioned above (see Figure 12) suggests that the cult may also have
moved into Chiapas via the Usumacinta and the headwaters of the
Lacantun and Grijalva Rivers. A number of the hats occurs in the
area of Comitan, Chiapas, on monuments such as Chinkultic
Stela 9 and a stela from Tonala (see Figure 12h). Another figure
with a broad-brimmed hat occurs as a captive on a recently un-
covered stone from Tonina (see Figure 12f). This area is also note-
worthy in having Cycle 10 monuments and, in the case of Quen
Santo, apparently direct epigraphic references to figures from Chi-
chen Itza (Kowalski 1989). The Comitan sites may have con-
trolled one means of access to the highlands and the Pacific coast,
as well as access to salt production at San Mateo Ixtatan (Nav-
arette C. 1990).
Although warfare was one mechanism used to spread the cult, a
complementary mechanism may have been its spread by traders,
just as caravan routes were critical to the early success and later
diffusion of Islam (Kennedy 1986:22-49; Thayer 1992). Duran
(1971:128-129,133) notes that Quetzalcoatl was a particularly im-
portant god among the merchants of Cholula, evidently an ancient
pattern: "Today the natives of Cholula continue their trade and
commerce with different merchandise, traveling through the most
remote and distant parts of the land, such as Cuauhtemallan and
Xoconochco, all along those coasts and mine, with their loads of
peddlers' trinkets, just as they did in ancient times" (Duran
1971:129).
Pilgrims may well have moved along these same pathways, as
again was the case with Islam (Thayer 1992). Pilgrimage is an out-
standing aspect of historically known religious practice in Meso-
america, and was almost certainly so in earlier periods. Cholula was
the preeminent highland pilgrimage center at contact, and its ar-
chaeological record suggests that it had been so for centuries. Eth-
nohistory and archaeology likewise indicate that Chichen continued
to draw devotees and offerings long after it ceased to be a major city.
CULT CERAMICS
Although typically used to determine chronology, status, or eth-
nicity, ceramic analysis may provide a means for choosing among
these mechanisms of cult expansion. However, the patterning of
ceramics associated with a cult may present serious difficulties for
interpretation. In most cases, the initial introduction of cult ceram-
ics would be an elite phenomenon. These may then have spread to
or been imitated by a wider segment of the population as the cult
grew in popularity, obscuring ethnic and status boundaries. If cult
followers resided together, their use of cult ceramics might appear
as a later localized assemblage and occupation, although in reality
noncultists may continue to manufacture local types. (As we dis-
cuss later, the limited distribution of Sotuta ceramics at several
northern sites may be such a case, as may the distribution of fine-
paste wares along the Pasion.) With respect to pilgrimage, if pil-
grims were fed and housed locally, they may well have had a
negligible impact on ceramics.
Arguing against migration as a major agent is the fact that most
of the cult sites exhibit comparatively little evidence of foreign
pottery. At Chichen Itza, an essential argument for claiming Chi-
chen as being ethnically (northern) Maya is that the Sotuta and
Cehpech complexes stem from a common manufacturing tradi-
tion. Even at their height, certain types of these complexes are so
similar as to be difficult to sort without diagnostic vessel parts,
Return of QuetzalcoatI
such as rims. Since food preparation and consumption are some of
the most fundamental and conservative aspects of ethnic identity,
it is difficult to understand why grater bowls (molcajetes) and grid-
dles (comales) would not have been more frequent had central Mex-
ican groups actually settled at Chichen Itza. Both forms were found
in very low numbers, numbers that further decreased as the Post-
215
Rgure 27. The place glyph for Coix-
tlahuaca in three post-Conquest
documents (Caso 1979:l:Figures 1, 4,
5): (a] Coixtlahuaca, (b) Seler II,
(c) Meixueiro.
classic progressed (Brainerd 1958:80, 86; Smith 1971:70, 84).
"Mixtec" or "Mexican" ceramics (or imitations thereof) seem to
have been limited to ceremonial vessels.
Parallel patterns occur at Cacaxtla and Xochicalco, where evi-
dence of outside (Maya) influence is limited to the murals and a
restricted set of ritual objects. Ceramics and other domestic arti-
216
Figure 28. Temple of the Warriors fresco (Tozzer 19S7:Figure 62).
facts are of local manufacture and style (Hirth and Cyphers Guillen
1988; Nagao 1989:90). Likewise, there is relatively little evidence
of imported ceramics in Monte Alban Illb/IV, except for some
plumbate (Caso and Bernal 1965:892). Thus, population replace-
ment by migration seems insufficient to account for the Epiclassic
changes at any of these sites.
Although direct outside influence is limited in the assemblages
of cult centers, they are alike in being somewhat different from
their immediate neighbors. The localized distribution of Sotuta ce-
ramics within a more widespread matrix of Yucatecan Cehpech
ceramics has already been discussed. Similarly, the ceramics of
Cacaxtla are highly localized, even from surrounding Tlaxcalan
assemblages (Santana Sandoval and Delgadillo Torres 1995:366),
and the ceramics of Xochicalco are said to differ from those of its
hinterlands (Angulo Villasenor 1988:10). Compositional analyses
of El Tajin coarse wares also revealed they did not match those
produced at nearby sites (Lira Lopez 1990).
Two factors unite these assemblages: (1) the presence of fine-
paste and plumbate pottery and (2) the widespread distribution of
an incensario complex throughout the hypothesized cult region
(Figure 29). Bey suggests that there are four important forms
associated with the complex: a "frying pan" or ladle censer, open-
work censers, spiked hourglass incensarios, and Tlaloc pots. Their
consistent association suggests usage in a restricted ritual con-
text, perhaps some aspect of the Quetzalcoatl cult. The Tlaloc
pot, for instance, may reflect the importance of that deity to the
cult. Both censers and Tlaloc pots are present in the scenes from
the Codex Nuttall discussed above (see Figures 2 and 3). All four
types of vessels are found in Yucatecan contexts associated with
Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey
Chichen influence, but are scarce or absent in Cehpech assem-
blages.22 Certain of these forms also persist in Postclassic assem-
blages associated with the later cult, as for instance at Mayapan.
As elite wares and perhaps the most widely traded types of ce-
ramics, fine orange and, somewhat later, plumbate also appear to
be associated with the expansion of the cult. In Yucatan, Smith
mistook the association of fine orange and plumbate with the So-
tuta complex (and its late appearance in other sites) as evidence
that it postdated the Cehpech complex. More recent evidence shows
both fine orange and plumbate arriving in Yucatan during the Epi-
classic. As mentioned, the Uxmal Ballcourt indicates their pres-
ence by A.D. 905 while Kowalski et al.'s (1998) excavations
demonstrate a slightly later date for plumbate. At Isla Cerritos,
Silho Fine Orange appears during the Chacpel phase (A.D. 750-
900) and Tohil Plumbate early in the following Jotuto phase (A.D.
900-1200) (Andrews et al. 1988:200-201). Thus, the data from
northern Yucatan support Fahmel's (1988:87-91) contention that,
throughout southern Mesoamerica, production of both types con-
siderably antedates the traditional dating of Toltec expansion. Fine
orange probably appeared ca. A.D. 800-850; plumbate probably
postdates it slightly.
Fahmel's (1988) distribution study of fine orange and plumbate
used evidence available as of the mid-1980s. He notes (Fahmel
1988:87) that Silho "was found in the entire Maya area, on the
22
For instance, no examples of these forms were found in our collec-
tions from Ek Balam and Labna, nor are they reported from Coba (Robles
Castellanos 1990).
 Return of Quetzalcoatl 217

Vrrre.».r^^.v^^jJ.^«^t.V

f
Figure 29. The suggested ritual incensario complex: [a] Balankanche Cave, Yuatan [Andrews IV J97O:Figures II, 12,16, 19]; [b] Mata-
capan, Veracruz [Coe 1965:Figure 29]; [c] Tlaxcala (Seler 199!b:Figures 3, 23]; [d] Teotenango [Vargas R 1975:Dibujo 13]; [e] Seibal
[SablofF 197S:Figures 334-33S, 3 3 8 - 3 4 0 ] ; [ f ] Tula [Diehl 1983:Figure 25].

coast of Veracruz and in a corridor of the altiplano that runs from
Tehuacan to Cholula and Teotihuacan." This corresponds well with
our hypothesized cult network, but his maps are, perforce, based
on a mixture of chance finds and excavation data, so it is difficult
to judge the relative importance of these types regionally. Our own
work at Ek Balam and Labna, together with data from several other
recent projects, show Silho to be a generally scarce type most fre-
quent in precisely those sites and contexts that were Itza or Itza-
influenced. Tohil, if anything, is even rarer. This, however, only serves
to sharpen the association of fine orange wares, and perhaps Tohil
Plumbate, with those sites most important to the cult network.
Fahmel found little or no evidence for fine orange at either
Monte Alban or Xochicalco. Saenz (1961:43), however, found a
few sherds of Z (Balancan) Fine Orange and the handle of an
218
incensario in a pit offering. This offering, together with those
found within a small nearby room and in burials beneath the Tem-
ple of the Plumed Serpent, contained several elements that seem
to pertain to the Quetzalcoatl cult, including two Gulf Coast yokes,
an hacha, and "Mayoid" jades (Figure 20.3, 20.14). (See our ear-
lier dicussion of these artifacts.) The finding of pieces of Stelae
1-3 in the pit offering cements the association with Quetzalcoatl.
At Cacaxtla, the most common tradewares are reported to be fine
orange of Gulf Coast affiliations and fine gray (Santana Sandoval
and Delgadillo Torres 1995:366). Fine-paste ceramics were impor-
tant at El Tajin, but, unlike at most sites in the area, were made from
a unique clay source whose location has yet to be determined (Lira
L6pez 1990). With regard to Monte Alban, it is interesting that dur-
ing mb/rv, when the Mayoid jades were deposited, the ceramic com-
plex is marked by the addition of a partial Epiclassic ritual-ceramic
assemblage, including a high frequency of ladle-type incense burn-
ers (Caso and Bernal 1965 :Figura 21 i) made with local paste and lim-
ited amounts of plumbate and a locally made fine-orange imitation
(Caso and Bernal 1965:892). As we argue below, this may reflect the
adoption of the cult and its apparatus by local elites, rather than by
imposition from without. To conclude this brief overview, we may
note that, during the Late Postclassic of northern Yucatan, virtually
the only imported ware of any importance was Matillas Fine Or-
ange. This may reflect the continuing importance of the cult net-
work during that period, especially at May apan and at such East Coast
shrine centers as Cozumel and Tulum.
The distribution of certain of these types may be due to the im-
portance of ritual or elite consumption of beverages, such as ca-
cao or pulque. (Other distinctive ceramic forms, such as grater
bowls, may reflect special food production for feasts or rituals.)
Pulque drinking is probably illustrated by the Bebedores mural
from the Great Pyramid of Cholula, which depicts approximately
100 individuals in various drinking postures (McCafferty 1996a,
1996b; Marquina 1971). The vessels illustrated are probably not
one of the types discussed above, but recent analysis of the archi-
tectural context suggests that it was an Epiclassic activity (Mc-
Cafferty 1996a:Note 3). Both Garcia Payon (1973) and Wilkerson
(1984) think that pulque is also involved in several sculptural scenes
at El Tajin. Wilkerson argues that some of the narrative friezes on
both the North and South Ballcourts represent the Mountain of
Foam (Popozonaltepetl) and ritual bathing in pulque vats. Sup-
porting the identification of the beverage are maguey plants, as-
sociated with hill signs on the north-central panel, and depictions
of rabbits, an animal associated both with the moon and with pulque
in Aztec mythology, on the northwest panel. (Henequen, perhaps
cultivated, is also depicted on some of the Temple of the Warriors
murals from Chichen [Morris et al. 1931:Plates 152b and 153].)
Although drinking may simply reflect elite or cult practice, it may
have been more specifically linked to Quetzalcoatl's role as a pa-
tron of merchants, who, in later times at least, devoted vast sums
to elaborate feasts (Duran 1971:138-139).23 Alternatively, this may
have been done by pilgrims as part of their devotions.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE
FOR THE CULT'S SPREAD
As mentioned at the outset, the Epiclassic period is usually viewed
as a period of Balkanism arising after Teotihuacan's demise. Garcia
23
John Pohl (personal communication 1998) indicates this was
also the conclusion of the Mixteca-Puebla conference regarding Cholula
polychromes.
Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey
Cook (1981:269) suggests that, in southern Tlaxcala, the apparent
takeover of Cholula by the Olmeca Xicalanca, whose capital was
Cacaxtla, was a key factor in this collapse. Evidence of fortifica-
tions increases (Cacaxtla itself was heavily fortified), as do rituals
associated with warfare. Pyramidal structures decrease by one-
half, indicating the consolidation of religio-political authority, but
also perhaps due to religious change. According to Garcia Cook,
the period ca. A.D. 650-850 was one of internecine warfare among
petty chiefdoms, with consolidation of the southern Atoyac Basin
only after ca. A.D. 850:
In the last part of this phase (A.D. 850-1100) conditions stabi-
lized with the arrival of new groups, among them the Teochi-
chimecs or Toltec-Chichimecs. . . . Boundaries were laid out,
and the kingdoms or small military states agreed to remain
united, respecting each other's independence but cooperating
as small confederated states, perhaps under the leadership of
the strongest political and military group, which was located at
Tepeticpac [Garcia Cook 1981:270],
Further north along the Atoyac was a small culture he desig-
nates as the Acopinalco complex. The people associated with this
complex also experienced political upheaval prior to A.D. 750. The
strongest centers eventually prevailed because of "Tajin affilia-
tions," these sites displaying "certain characteristic traits of the
Tajin culture." In the following century, "one detects greater con-
trol over the populace by the Mixtecs or the Olmeca-Xicalanca"
(Garcia Cook 1981:270).
The emergence of the key Puebla-Tlaxcala corridor from polit-
ical chaos is instructive. The period just prior to the Epiclassic
was marked by political atomization, and regions were only able
to extricate themselves by what we would interpret as external al-
liances. Thus, the Tajin and "Toltec" influence seen in the area ca.
A.D. 750 (and the Maya influence at Cacaxtla) probably represents
less the actual movement of people than the adoption by local war-
lords of symbols of prestige from more established areas. This prob-
ably also involved the temporary use of mercenaries from these
regions, allowing the creation of relatively stable confederations
of small statelets. Such a strategy could, however, be a dangerous
one; according to Garcia Cook (1981), the central area (Texcalc
culture) was eventually taken over by Toltecs/Chichimecs.
Although Garcia Cook limits his discussion only to Cholula and
Cacaxtla, we would argue that these reactions to the eruption of
the cult can be seen elsewhere along the axis as well. Adoption of
the cult by local elites is suggested at such secondary cult centers
as Xochicalco, Uxmal, and Seibal. Xochicalco, for instance, seems
to have expanded very rapidly between A.D. 650 and 900. Most of
the public buildings, including the Temple of the Plumed Serpent
and the main ballcourt, were built during this period. Like Cacax-
tla, Xochicalco was fortified24 with ditches and walls (Hirth 1989;
Hirth and Cyphers Guillen 1988) and, like Cacaxtla, the ceramics
of Xochicalco differed from those of its hinterlands (Angulo Vi-
llasenor 1988:10). Since there is little evidence of central Mexican
influence (Hirth and Cyphers Guillenl988:45), Puebla and the Gulf
Coast seem to have been the immediate sources of influence—as
the iconography and offerings would indicate.
24
Enclosure walls are common at several cult centers, such as Xochi-
calco, Cacaxtla, Teotenango, Chichen Itza, Uxmal, and, during the Late
Postclassic, Mayapan and Tulum. Those of Chichen and Uxmal, however,
may be primarily symbolic in function. Many noncult centers also had such
walls.
Return of Quetzalcoatl
In the case of Seibal, many of the traits in the Quetzalcoatl com-
plex first occur during the Bayal phase (A.D. 830-930). The cer-
emonial focus shifts to Group A and later to Group C, which is
devoid of texts. Architecturally, three typical cult forms are first
found in this phase, although not in association. Structure C-79 is
a large round platform suggestive of the Ehecatl aspect of Que-
tzalcoatl, who is also represented on Stela 19. Structure A-3 (Fig-
ure 30) is a low, radial pyramid supporting a vaulted superstructure.
It bears a hieroglyphic date of 10.0.0.0.0 (A.D. 830), whereas the
five stelae around it are even later, exactly contemporaneous with
the dates from Chichen Itza. According to Smith (1982:231-232),
the Bayal-phase Ballcourt A-19 closely resembled Ballcourts 2D9
and 3D4 from Chichen. Common traits include defined end zones,
vertical bench faces and playing walls, and probably low struc-
tures along the top of each range.
Ceramically, the phase is marked by the appearance of fine gray
and fine orange, ladle (frying pan) censers, and modes such as carv-
ing, gadrooning, appliqued spikes, and modeling (Sabloff 1973).
Sabloff (1973:113) states that, despite these markers, it was often
difficult to differentiate earlier Tepejilote lots from Bayal because
of the persistence of local types. This recalls similar patterns at
other cult sites, where domestic pottery was largely unaffected by
the addition of an elite, specialized subcomplex, manifested most
strongly in the appearance of fine-paste wares and changes to the
incensario complex. At Seibal, the associations between ceramic
and ritual innovations are particularly clear:
It would appear that as the ceremonial locus of the site shifted
from Group D to Group A, there also was a shift in religious
practices or in the nature of the incensario ritual. In other words,
the older elaborate flanged cylinders with the sun god heads
. . . and the separate bowls for burning the incense . . . were
replaced by much simpler looking spiked and ladle incensarios.
These later censers were associated with Tenth Cycle monu-
ments and fine paste ceramics, and a few of them have forms
that resemble Postclassic censers from Tikal and northern Yu-
catan [Sabloff 1973:119].
Tourtellot (1988:400-407), likewise, had difficulty distinguish-
ing Tepejilote and Bayal occupations in the settlement survey—
because many deposits lacked diagnostics of either phase, but
diagnostic Bayal deposits seemed to cluster near the center of the
site. He was also unable to detect significant changes in Bayal-
phase residential architecture suggestive of ethnic changes. Tour-
tellot (1988:405) does consider the possibility that Bayal diagnostics
are a "sociological, high status, functional subcomplex," but re-
jects the notion because some nondiagnostic deposits were found
beneath deposits with Bayal diagnostics and because presumably
low-status, nondiagnostic loci in some cases later became "high-
status" diagnostic loci. In addition, fine-paste ceramics did not con-
sistently correlate with other indicators of status. If, however, Bayal
diagnostics were caused by ideological changes, they may well
not strictly correlate with status and may show a variable uptake
by the resident population.
With regard to the sculpture, Kowalski (1989) has demon-
strated the close relationship between the iconographic details of
Stela 1 (10.2.0.0.0) with symbols from Chichen (particularly note-
worthy is the group of twined serpents in the headdress). There
can be no doubt that these are in some way "Itza" referents, and
Kowalski suggests that this figure may in fact be ethnically "Itza."
In this respect, the placement of Stela 1 north of and apart from
Structure A-3 and facing east is suggestive (see Figure 30) (Graham
219
1996:7.13). Chichen may conceptually have been viewed as north
of Seibal and as the eastern shrine of the Quetzalcoatl axis.
Stela 1 's placement north of and apart from the quincunx of stelae
in association with Structure A-3 suggests Itza presence in a sup-
porting role, rather than a dominant one. This is augmented by the
iconography of the stelae of A-3, which employ such traditional
Maya symbols of authority as the serpent bar (Stelae 9 and 10),
the quadripartite sacrificial badge (Stela 10), and the God K-manikin
(Stelae 8 and 21), symbols not in use at Chichen Itza. Neither is
the Chichen or Puuc style of dating employed. Nevertheless, as
Ashmore (1989) reminds us, north was often associated with rul-
ership in Classic Maya sites. This is the placement of Stela 10,
which probably depicts the paramount of Seibal, and so the loca-
tion of Stela 1 farther north of A-3 may carry this resonance, as
well. In sum, the symbolism of the A-3 group seems to reflect the
adoption of the Quetzalcoatl complex by a local ruler, probably
with the aid of "Itza" mercenaries. These may well have been from
Chichen Itza, but may also have been from other nodes along the
Quetzalcoatl axis.
Incorporation into the Quetzalcoatl cult, while resulting in a Bayal-
phase boom, may have been fatal to local control, because radically
different sculpture appeared shortly afterward (Figure 31). (It is also
noteworthy that Group C, which had heavy Bayal activity, includ-
ing the round Structure 79, had no stelae.) The aberrant sculptures
are like many of the early International-style monuments and mu-
rals in having abbreviated messages that appear to be dates in car-
touches. Other cult traits include the entwined serpent belt of Stela
13, the wind-god mask and speech scroll of Stela 19, and the Tlaloc-
like mask of Stela 3, very like that of Xochicalco Stela 2.
A similar scenario can be argued for nearby Altar de Sacrifi-
cios. At Altar, the Jimba complex (A.D. 909-948) is the cognate of
Seibal's Bayal phase and is defined by the dominance of fine-
paste wares. Grater bowls (molcajetes) are common, although both
griddle and spiked hourglass censers appear somewhat earlier in
the Boca phase (Adams 1971:106, Charts 10—II).25 Overall, Ad-
ams (1971,1973) emphasizes the almost total disjunction between
the Boca complex, a locally derived Pasion tradition, and the suc-
ceeding Jimba complex, with strong Gulf Coast affinities. Adams
(1971:162-163) sees this as perhaps representing a population re-
placement by nonlocal Maya with a different ritual orientation and
a militaristic posture, as evidenced by scenes on the carved pottery.
However, he also notes that
only sites in the immediate vicinity of the Pasion-Salinas rivers
confluence show evidence of Jimba occupation.26 In fact at Al-
tar there is little evidence of Jimba occupation outside ceremo-
nial Group A. In this group Jimba ceramics, especially the utility
types, are spread like a blanket over every structure and every
available piece of ground. This indicates an intensive and closely
packed settlement and a relatively small number of people at
one time, as does the evidence of no occupation outside the
river area [Adams 1971:163].
Examination of the stratigraphic record suggests a somewhat
different interpretation. As Adams (1971:104) notes, the Boca and
25
A d a m s (1971:53) notes that Cedral Applique hourglass censers were
found only in surface deposits; thus, its dating is inferential.
26
Adams (1971:163) notes a sizable amount of fine-paste pottery at
Piedras Negras similar to the Jimba complex. (It will b e remembered that
"Mexican" imagery is prominent in the late sculptures of that site.) Sig-
nificantly, "only nonutilitarian pottery is known certainly to occur," prob-
ably attributable to the cult subcomplex.
220 Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey

Stela 1
Stela 21

Stela 10

Stela 9

Stela 11

Stela 8

Figure 30. Seibal Structure A - 3 and associated stelae. Plan is from A . L Smith [1982:Figure 17), stelae from Graham [1996).
Return of QuetzalcoatI
Figure 31. Xochicalco Stela 2 and three late stelae from Seibal: a, Seibal Stela 3; b, Xochicalco Stela 2; c, Seibal Stela 13; d , Seibal
Stela 19 [a, c, and d are from Graham [1996]; b is from Saenz [1961:Lamina 3]).
Jimba complexes could not be distinguished stratigraphically in
the site center, and it was only after the discovery of "pure" Bayal
deposits at Seibal and then Boca deposits in outlying Altar house
mounds that the two were separated. It should also be noted that
pure Jimba deposits were never encountered (Adams 1971:106).
The confinement of the Jimba complex to the site center sug-
gests a situation similar to others already discussed; that is, it was
essentially an elite subassemblage, with the outlying populace con-
tinuing to use Boca wares. (Several of the fine-orange types ap-
pear to be ritual drinking vessels.) We would agree with its intrusive
nature (ascribing it to cult usage), but would argue that the major-
ity of the population continued to be of local origin and to use
Boca ceramics. We would argue, therefore, that Jimba represents a
late facet of the Boca complex, and may not have dated as late as
Adams suggests.
This sort of interaction also helps to explain the dynamics of
northern Yucatan during the Terminal Classic/Epiclassic. Several
ethnohistorical sources suggest that Chichen Itza exercised con-
trol over the entire peninsula, a position also taken by several ar-
chaeologists. Ringle et al. (1991) have been skeptical of such claims
because of the paucity of Sotuta ceramics elsewhere, as well as the
restriction of such features as gallery-patio structures, colonnaded
halls, and serpent temples to Chichen alone. Nevertheless, at sites
such as Uxmal and Dzibilchaltun, very late contexts do have lim-
ited amounts of Sotuta ceramics, usually fine orange, plumbate,
and some Chichen Slate, often "mixed" with Cehpech slates. Al-
though their limited distribution within such sites has often been
221
attributed to severe population decline, we suggest that it is just as
likely to have resulted from their linkage to cult activities. At Dzi-
bilchaltun, for instance, a survey by Cottier and Kurjack (Kurjack
1974:Figure 6) demonstrated that Sotuta occupations occurred
largely in and around the ceremonial nuclei and along the sacbes
connecting them. We suggest that these were surrounded by a large
support population using Cehpech ceramics.
Uxmal offers a clear association between these ceramics and other
aspects of the cult complex, including a ballcourt, round structures,
and feathered-serpent imagery. As mentioned above, sherds from this
late complex were found sealed within the ballcourt, whoseringsbear
the late hieroglyphic date of A.D. 905 (see Table 2). Ruz Lhuillier's
(1958) excavation demonstrated that the upper wall of each side of
the court was covered by a pair of interlaced feathered serpents. Al-
though he suggested that these might be later adornments, Ruiz found
no evidence for substructures or other architectural modifications to
support this hypothesis, ultimately concluding that "Mexican" in-
fluence at Uxmal was ideological rather than the result of conquest.
The fine-orange bowl found cached within the east building during
Maldonado's (Kurjack et al. 1991:156) later excavations only con-
firms our view, because fine orange is associated with many cult
caches throughout the axis.
Kowalski (1987) has argued that the House of the Governors and
some of the Monjas buildings are also part of this late horizon and
date to the rule of Lord Chac, the individual depicted on Stela 14 (Fig-
ure 12d). Sinuous feathered serpents wind across the facade of the
west building of the Monjas, and several Tlaloc masks with trapeze-
222
ray year signs in their mouths occur at the corners of the east build-
ing (Maldonado 1991; otherTlalocs were found at the base of the
Adavino [see Figure 10a]). These surmount a column of typical Chac
masks, perhaps as a mark of domination. Supporting this dating is
an offering consisting of an Ehecatl-Quetzalcoatl head and that of a
dog (Xolotl?)—in association with fine orange, plumbate, and So-
tuta pottery—found in a passageway just outside the east side of the
Nunnery (Koniezna and Mayer 1976). Kowalski et al. (1996) also
recently excavated a round structure with much the same ceramic
component. We have argued that C-shaped structures found in the
center of the Nunnery and on the House of the Governor's platform
may be part of this horizon or, more probably, postdate it somewhat
(Beyetal. 1997).27
Thus, the appearance of a feathered-serpent ballcourt, round and
C-shaped buildings, feathered-serpent imagery on the House of
the Governors and the West Building of the Monjas quadrangle,
mixed Cehpech-Sotuta-Hocaba ceramics, and such costume ele-
ments as the wide-brimmed hat (see Figure 12d) strongly suggest
the arrival of the Kukulcan cult at the very end of Uxmal's flores-
cence. (The dates from the ballcourt actually postdate the major-
ity of those from Chichen Itza by a few years.) This, we would
again argue, represents not the military occupation of Uxmal by
Chichen, but a late strategy by local elites to advance their own
political ambitions. We continue to feel that the claims of empire
in Yucatan are overstated. Itza supremacy in Yucatan was an ideo-
logical supremacy, but over a world that was rapidly collapsing.
Uxmal seemingly illustrates that the political facet of this ideol-
ogy was not uncontested, because the quarrel was continued into
the Postclassic by the Xius and Cocoms.
Another probable corridor of cult expansion was along the Pa-
cific slopes of Guatemala, particularly the Cotzumalhuapa region,
although no cult center on the order of Chichen or Cholula seems
to have emerged. The appearance of cult traits in an area that pre-
viously experienced strong Teotihuacan influence suggests the ap-
propriation of preexisting political or ideological alliances by the
cult. Space does not permit full treatment of this interesting re-
gion, but clearly the same cult complex arrived during the Epi-
classic period. Ballplayers wearing Gulf Coast yokes and making
offerings to a descending god are a recurrent theme of the stelae,
as is human sacrifice (Habel 1878; Parsons 1969; Thompson 1948).
As mentioned above, ballcourt construction intensified during this
period (Parsons 1991), and Gulf Coast-style hachas and yokes
are found in both excavations and museum collections from the
area. The glyphic system of Cotzumalhuapa is likewise of the typ-
ical telegraphic, Epiclassic type. Several of the calendrical signs
are clearly central Mexican in form and, as mentioned, both the
RE and either ollin or Caso's Glyph A are prominent among these
(Parsons 1969:144). Plumbate, but not fine orange, is represented
in ceramic assemblages (Parsons 1969; Thompson 1948).
TULA AND THE CULT AXIS
During the tenth century, at the same time that the cult expanded
into the Mixteca, a more important event was taking place in
Hidalgo—where Tula emerged as a major cult and urban center.
Although recognizing the clear artistic and architectural parallels
between Tula and Chichen Itza, we wish to leave to a future pa-
27
Aside from the placement of a C-shaped structure in the middle of
the Monjas, Gallareta Negron has noted that some of the feathered-serpent
sections were reused in construction of the C-shaped frame braces.
Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey
per a full exploration of the Tula's link to the Quetzalcoatl cult,
because it postdates our focus here. Some discussion of Tula's
chronology, however, is necessary. Based on the traditional dat-
ing sequence for Tula, the mature Chichen Itza polity is best
aligned with the Corral (A.D. 800-900), Terminal Corral (A.D. 900-
950), and Early Tollan (A.D. 950-1000) phases at Tula. There-
fore, the (at most) 100-150-year overlap between Chichen Itza
and Tula connects a polity at or just past its prime (Chichen)
with a rapidly expanding urban center in the initial stages of its
hegemonic expansion, suggesting that Tula was a later partici-
pant in the cult.
This alignment is supported by both lithic and ceramic data.
The transition at Tula from a Coyotlatelco to a fully developed
Tollan ceramic complex is marked by two transitional complexes,
the Terminal Corral and the Early Tollan. The complexity of this
transitional period is too great to pursue in detail in this paper, but
Bey (1987, 1994) argues that the Early Tollan phase is character-
ized by the appearance of traditional Early Postclassic markers from
central Mexico growing out of the Coyotlatelco Red-on-brown tra-
dition. It is also marked by the rapid growth in production of types
foreign to the Basin of Mexico, but having traits that Bey believes
connect them, at least indirectly, with the Sotuta ceramic complex.
These traits are associated with common domestic serving and prep-
aration vessels and appear in the following types: Joroba Orange-
on-cream, Proa Polished Cream, Jara Polished Orange, Ira Stamped
Orange, and Rebato Polished Red. These types, Bey (1987, 1994)
argues, are dramatically different in terms of the production tech-
niques of the red-on-brown tradition. At this point in Bey's analy-
sis, however, it is far too premature to state with certainty that
these are in any way directly associated with the Sotuta ceramic
complex, although they very likely are the result of some type of
influence from the greater Mesoamerican lowlands.
Perhaps most important for the chronological placement of Tula
is the correlation of Early and Late Tollan phase pottery with dis-
tinct patterns of obsidian procurement. Bey (1987) observed that
Early and Late Tollan phase collections from the rural site of Haci-
enda de Bojay, located just north of Tula, were associated with dis-
tinct patterns of obsidian use, the Early Tollan phase material being
associated with much higher percentages of gray obsidian than the
Late Tollan phase collections. Subsequent analysis of the obsidian
in Early and Late Tollan phase deposits from the Tulane University
obsidian-workshop excavations, directed by Dan Healan, bore out
this hypothesis. Currently, Healan (1993:454) indicates that there
were three sequential procurement systems at Tula. The first, dat-
ing to the Coyotlatelco/Corral phase, consisted almost wholly of ma-
terial from Ucareo/Zinapecuaro. During the second, which belongs
to the Terminal Corral and Early Tollan phases and the earliest stage
of the excavated workshops and houses, Pachuca green obsidian came
to comprise 20-40% of the assemblage, the remainder of which con-
tinued to be dominated by Ucareo/Zinapecuaro obsidian. In the last
stage, during the Tollan phase, Pachuca obsidian is the overwhelm-
ing favorite, with 80-90% of the material coming from that source.
Analysis of obsidian at Chichen Itza by Braswell and Glascock
(1995, quoted in Cobos P. [1995]) indicates that 56% of the cen-
tral Mexican obsidian was from the Zinapecuaro/Ucareo source,
with Ucareo pieces twice as frequent as Pachuca green obsidian.
At Isla Cerritos, although the sample size is small, roughly the
same ratio held between the two sources in the Chacpel phase, but
became roughly equal during the following Jotuto phase (Cobos P.
1995). Thus, Chichen, Chacpel-phase Isla Cerritos, and Stage 2
Tula all share a predominance of Ucareo obsidian in a roughly 2:1
ratio to green obsidian.
Return of Quetzalcoatl
This does not necessarily indicate that Tula was the direct pro-
vider of that obsidian, because lithic assemblages from other Epi-
classic sites, such as Xochicalco and Azcapotzalco, are also heavily
dominated by Ucareo obsidian (Healan 1993:Table 1), but it does
suggest an Epiclassic rather than Early Postclassic date for this
procurement pattern. The fact that roughly 16% of Chichen's cen-
tral Mexican obsidian came from Paredon, Hidalgo (Braswell and
Glascock 1995, quoted in Cobos P. [1995]), a source apparently
unexploited by Tula but heavily used by Azcapotzalco and to a
lesser extent by Xochicalco (Healan 1993:Table 1, personal com-
munication 1997), further suggests that other providers were used.
What is strange is that no Gulf Coast or Puebla obsidian has yet
been identified from Chichen Itza, although the obsidian almost
certainly had to move through those areas. At Isla Cerritos, how-
ever, approximately 8% of the non-Maya, Chacpel-phase obsidian
is from the Pico de Orizaba source and, during the Jotuto phase,
approximately 6% came from Zaragoza, Puebla (Cobos P. 1995).
Unfortunately, the published data on obsidian from the Gulf Coast
is vitiated by very small samples, in the case of Tajin, and a lack of
provenience, in the case of Cholula, but the published data indi-
cate a high reliance on Zaragoza, Puebla (Hester et al. 1972; Jack
et al. 1972). This has been confirmed in the Mixtequilla survey
(Stark et al. 1992), which also demonstrated the scarcity of green
obsidian in the region during the Classic period. She believes that
a network, perhaps based at Cantona and exploiting Zaragoza,
served most of Puebla-Tlaxcala and parts of Veracruz until the Early
Postclassic.
Of great interest is the degree to which pre-Tollan phase Tula
and nearby sites were connected to the Quetzalcoatl cult. Three of
these important Coyotlatelco sites are La Mesa, Magoni, and Tula
Chico (Mastache and Cobean 1989). La Mesa and Magoni are hill-
top sites dating to the early Coyotlatelco period, the former 14 km
east of Tula and the latter just to the northwest of the urban zone.
La Mesa, partially constructed in the Toltec, small-stone tech-
nique typical of Tollan-phase Tula, has a ballcourt and has pro-
duced a number of sculpted pieces that Mastache and Crespo argue
are prototypes of sculptures at Tula (Mastache and Cobean
1995:157): "The most complete example is a panel [that] appears
to be that of a headdress similar to those on the Tlahuizcalpan-
tecuhtli figures on the exterior of Pyramid B at Tula" (Mastache
and Cobean 1989:60). In addition, they found a large obsidian knife,
whose form is exactly that of the sacrificial knives found at Tula.
For Mastache and Crespo, it is clear that some of the central ideo-
logical institutions found at Tula are first seen in these nearby Co-
yotlatelco settlements.
Tula Chico, the Coyotlatelco settlement that preceded and is
largely buried by Tollan-phase Tula, is an urban center of 5-6 km2
with buildings oriented to a uniform grid. It is centered around a
main plaza with two ballcourts, a number of pyramids, and large
elite structures. Similarities between the layout of Tula Chico's
main plaza and that of Tula Grande have long been noted and—
like La Mesa—Toltec, small-stone construction was used at Tula
Chico.
Thus, although the pre-Tollan-phase evidence is limited, it sug-
gests that the cult reached the Tula region during the Epiclassic. It
was not until the Tollan phase, however, that Tula positioned itself
as another major shrine center—perhaps as the (new) western ter-
minus of the cult axis. One step in this strategy may have been to con-
quer Cholula, as related by Ixtlilxochitl and others, appropriating the
most important highland cult center. It remains unclear why and to
what extent Tula looked to Chichen Itza as an artistic and architec-
tural model, rather than emulating shrine centers closer to home. By
223
the tenth century, the style and iconography of the cult may have be-
come more formalized, and Tula, therefore, consciously adopted
these as part of its cult ambitions. However, present work in the Ba-
sin of Mexico suggests that much, if not all, of the above sequence
may be pushed back in time, perhaps up to a century, and that what
is presently argued to be discrete phases actually represents signif-
icant periods of overlap (Parsons et al. 1996).
THE GOD QUETZALCOATL
Given the apparent polytheistic, or minimally dualistic, nature of
most Mesoamerican religions, and the persistence of local gods
until the end of the pre-Columbian world, why would the cult of
Quetzalcoatl foster such widespread social upheavals? In part, there
must have been economic and political factors still only dimly per-
ceived, but this renewed emphasis on the centrality of the feath-
ered serpent is also cause for a reexamination of the nature of deity
in Mesoamerica, only some general aspects of which can be
sketched herein.
We suggest that, during the Epiclassic, Quetzalcoatl's position
in the theogonies of certain cultures was reanalyzed to emphasize
his primordial role as a creator. One interpretation might be the
suggestion of Thompson (1970) and Lopez Austin et al. (1991)
that the alligator earth monster (cipactli) is perhaps just one as-
pect of the feathered serpent, literally a hat that he wears on the
Temple of Quetzalcoatl at Teotihuacan (Sugiyama 1989). Alterna-
tively, a number of Aztec myths, such as those from the Historia
de los Mexicanos porsus pinturas, record acts of creation by Que-
tzalcoatl in conjunction with other deities, notably Huitzilopochtli
and Tezcatlipoca. In these, Quetzalcoatl acts to separate heaven
and earth (Figure lOd), whereas others associate him with the sym-
bol ollin, the symbol for both the five world directions and the five
cosmic ages (e.g., see Figure 9a). He may also be the double-
headed serpent, or the double-headed monster {Dresden Codex 4 b -
5b), from which some of the most important gods emerge, such as
Itzam Na/God D and Kauil/God K (Figure 32). This fundamental,
generative aspect is further associated with the creation of time
and, by extension, history, because Quetzalcoatl is also credited
with the calendar in some stories.
More concretely, according to several Aztec legends Quetzal-
coatl was responsible for the creation of humans. It is perhaps this
aspect that is behind the many images of humans emerging from
the mouth of the feathered serpent, either explicitly or in the form
of the monster-maw headdress. Given this role, and his role in cre-
ating history, Quetzalcoatl was involved with dynastic descent and
political legitimacy. This is clear in the ceremonies conducted at
Cholula, mentioned above, and their probable parallels at Chi-
chen. Although the exact relation of Quetzalcoatl to lowland Maya
serpent imagery remains to be clarified, images of ancestors emerg-
ing from the maws of vision serpents, such as Yaxchilan Lintel 25,
may also reflect the serpent's role in social reproduction.28
From a social perspective, the cult may have gained popularity
during the Epiclassic because it offered a more personal message
based upon the associations of Quetzalcoatl with rebirth and spir-
itual transformation. This may have been a facet of what several
scholars have identified as a widening of the political base during
the Epiclassic, as, for instance, the ability of lesser Maya nobles to
28
Like Quetzalcoatl, the vision serpent is often bearded and associ-
ated with Tlaloc/war imagery, as well as ancestors. Freidel et al. (1993:208),
in fact, indicate its relation to the Feathered Serpent cult, although we would
disagree with their belief that the latter was a Postclassic cult.
224
Rgure 32. Roles of the serpent in Yucatecan art: [a] serpent engendering Chac, Dresden Codex, page 33b [Tozzer !957:Figure 382); [b)
feathered serpent engendering God K(?), Chichen Itza, Temple of the Owls capstone (Tozzer 19S7:Figure 384).
display inscriptions. Although difficult to prove, the evidence of
pilgrimage, the wide sharing of Quetzalcoatl emblems among war-
rior images, and the depiction of a wider range of society in sculp-
tures and paintings seems to suggest a broader social base for the
cult. It is interesting that, in discussing Quetzalcoatl, Duran
(1971:138-139) also chose to discuss the three professions by which
men were able to rise above their station (i.e., the military, the
priesthood, and mercantilism). Although explicitly linked only to
the last of these by Duran, it is clear from the above that Quetzal-
coatl was also a war god and a central Epiclassic deity. Thus, one
reason for the spread of the Epiclassic cult may have been its abil-
ity to enlist the interests of all three aforementioned estates, as
well as the nobility.
Finally, there is the aspect of Quetzalcoatl as feathered ser-
pent. The transformation of 5 Eagle into a feathered serpent in
order to converse with the sacred ancestor 3 Flint at Apoala (see
Figure 2) is of profound significance. The feathered serpent is
here a nagual (Anders et al. 1992a:124), a liminal symbol unit-
ing earth and air. More than any particular quality, however, the
feathered-serpent nagual represents the transformative, transfig-
urative aspect of cult experience. It is the vehicle whereby hu-
mans are linked to the otherworld, but it is also the path to new
worldly identities. A clear example occurs on pages 36-38 of the
Codex Borgia, in which the hero "Stripe-eye" emerges from the
sacred bundle to travel in a trance through the body of a hybrid
Ehecatl-Cipactli serpent, finally emerging to continue his or-
deals. Byland and Pohl (1994a:157-159) suggest that these ritu-
als concern accession to political office, although it may be to a
Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey
priestly office, as well. Taube (1992a) has further identified themes
of emergence with passage of the feathered serpent through a
portal or mirror, often with a feathered rim. The most famous of
these are the serpents from the facade of the Temple of Quetzal-
coatl, Teotihuacan, but a number of Epiclassic examples also ex-
ist. Taube (1992b) and Koontz (1994) have further demonstrated
that the portals of emergence are often battle standards, as well.
Such standards at Tajin often have an ollin infix, reflecting the
role of time in such transformations.
As noted, Tlaloc plays an almost equally prominent role as the
companion of Quetzalcoatl. Particularly striking are several masks
from Chichen Itza that combine aspects of both deities in a single
image (Figure lOb-c). On the one hand, both deities overlap con-
siderably in their associations: both are associated with water, fer-
tility, heavenly bodies, and war, among other things. On the other,
it could be argued that Tlaloc remained essentially a nature god,
whereas Quetzalcoatl, in his guise of culture bearer, wise man, and
city founder, represented the cultural sphere. Quetzalcoatl also
tended to be more of a sky god, or at least that liminal area be-
tween sky and land, while Tlaloc remained more earthbound. In a
typical Mesoamerican pattern, they form a fundamental, genera-
tive duality that is still poorly understood.
This pairing is strongly reminiscent of the twin temples to Tla-
loc and Huitzilopochtli that comprised the Templo Mayor. Duran
(1971:133) notes that "In the City of Mexico, since [Quetzalcoatl]
was not the patron of the city, [the people] did not pay so much
heed to his glorification as in Cholula." In contrast, Rojas (1927
[1581]: 162-163) tells us that Quetzalcoatl and Tlaloc (in the guise
Return of Quetzalcoatl
of 9 Quiahuitl or 9 Rain) were the principal "idols" of Cholula,
and that the latter was housed atop the Great Pyramid. This par-
allel between Huitzilopochtli and Quetzalcoatl is also evident in
their pairing in certain late Mexican theogonies, in which both gods
are creators. This probably represented a conscious strategy by Az-
tec theologians to replace the figure most representative of the ear-
lier cult with their own ethnic sky and war deity, which will be
dealt with in a future paper on the Postclassic changes to the cult
network.
In brief, Quetzalcoatl would appear to stand for a highly ab-
stract notion of spirit standing behind the many more specific man-
ifestations of deity and behind the phenomena of the world. In this
respect, the claims of Itza monotheism by several early colonial
informants, in the face of what appeared to be overwhelming ev-
idence to the contrary, was correct. Behind the multiplicity of gods,
men, and the things of this earth lay duality (Quetzalcoatl-Tlaloc),
but behind this duality was an even more fundamental unity. Que-
tzalcoatl was both that ultimate aspect and the vehicle by which it
was attained.
CONCLUSIONS
This paper argues for the existence of a long-lived, pan-Meso-
american axis of politico-religious interaction focused on the cult of
Quetzalcoatl. This axis begins to account for the appearance of "Mex-
ican" and "Gulf Coast" traits in the western Peten and in Yucatan.
The spread of the cult, often by force of arms, provides a specific so-
cial mechanism accounting for the distribution of shared traits. The
cult network also provides a logic for the significance and distribu-
tion of the Mixteca Puebla style during the PostcJassic period, al-
though by then this axis was already old and in some disarray. Aspects
of this model have been anticipated by several authors, in particular
Coggins(1987),29Davies(1977),Fox(1991),McVicker(1985),and
Thompson (1970), but these have been either more restricted in their
scope or have been "Tulacentric," locating these events in the Early
Postclassic. An overlap between Chichen and Tula of at most 100
years is insufficient for Tula to have achieved urban status and rep-
licated itself in Yucatan, but it is sufficient for a rising urban power
(i.e., Tula) to have emulated the architecture and imagery of the Que-
tzalcoatl cult from its eastern node.30
Our model is also different in stressing the involvement of an
emergent religious institution in the spread of Quetzalcoatl. The
enormous symbolic prestige (and probable material wealth) accru-
ing to the major nodes in this chain accounts for the intense con-
flicts waged over these centers from Late Classic times onward.
Beginning with Teotihuacan, Cholula exchanged hands several
times and seems to have been a linchpin in several imperial strat-
egies. Tula, too, was riven by discord among its various ethnic
groups, probably personified in the struggle for supremacy be-
tween Tezcatlipoca and Quetzalcoatl. The battles waged by the in-
habitants of Chichen (or the cult generally) are inscribed and painted
on dozens of structures and hundreds of columns throughout "New"
29
Clemency Coggins kindly provided us with a copy of her 1987 paper
after reviewing an initial draft of this paper. Although she too locates tolte-
cayotl during the Epiclassic, she sees Chichen as the major focal point in a
network of sites linked by adherence to a common calendrical (new fire) rit-
ual. Although this is part of the linkage, we feel the ties were both broader
and earlier than she suggests, and that the new-fire ceremony of itself is in-
sufficient to account for Chichen's rise. Furthermore, many of the images she
claims as related to new fire are open to other interpretations.
30
Given our lack of knowledge of pre-Tollan Tula, it may well have
played a limited regional role as a cult center prior to the Early Postclassic,
only later emerging as a "world shrine."
225
Chichen. Later, the conflict between the Xius of Uxmal and the
Cocoms of Chichen Itza over Mayapan was probably only super-
ficially about calendrical matters. The deeper cause was probably
Mayapan's role as the major Postclassic cult shrine in Yucatan.31
Although Mayapan was probably founded by emigre Cocoms from
Chichen Itza, both factions resided within the city and bitterly fought
for political supremacy. The Xius eventually prevailed in expel-
ling the Cocoms, but only at the expense of Mayapan's final
destruction.
The implications of this model are numerous and necessarily
leave many questions unanswered. To what extent was the Epi-
classic axis an outgrowth of Teotihuacan and its sphere of influ-
ence?32 The elements of Teotihuacan costume and iconography,
including RE glyphs, stepped fret designs, pouches, broad-brimmed
hats, and monster-maw headdresses, make it a certain prototype
for aspects of the Epiclassic cult. Evidence indicates that many of
the same corridors of influence were exploited by both Teotihua-
can and the later followers of the Feathered Serpent, especially
those on the Gulf Coast and the Pacific slopes south of Tehuantepec.
Consideration of the fate of religious institutions in situations
of social collapse may provide some insight into how the Epiclas-
sic network was engendered. The Quetzalcoatl cult may originally
have been coextensive with the Teotihuacan state, with the Tem-
ple of the Feathered Serpent as its central shrine. As the political
and economic networks foundered, the cults may have been pri-
marily affected by a disruption of pilgrimage practices, because
pilgrimage typically follows trade routes and depends upon some
guarantees of security. The cult may then have gradually reconsti-
tuted itself during the early Epiclassic by a redirection of worship
and pilgrimage to regional shrine centers, as well as by military
action.
This new order, however, also would have demanded a new
mythological charter, necessarily involving the multiplication of
the acts and events associated with patron deities. Thus, it is to
this period that we may date the elaboration of the deeds of Que-
tzalcoatl, a process that probably continued unabated as long as
new shrines waxed or waned in importance. As a consideration of
the many Christian shrines dedicated to the Virgin attest, such char-
ters may have been of only local importance, whereas other shrines
may have been of more universal recognition.
The history of the cult in the Basin of Mexico after Teotihuacan
can only be touched upon here. Interestingly, the Epiclassic shrine
axis seems to have developed without the direct inspiration of the
Basin of Mexico, because much of the Tlaxcala corridor was ap-
parently hostile to their neighbors to the northwest during the Epi-
classic. The desire of this region to remain free of central Mexican
hegemony may have been a strong reason for reaching out for al-
liances to the Gulf Coast and to the Maya area, although the find-
ing of a plaque in the Ixtapaluca/Chalco area (Figure 23a.2) may
31
The accounts of the "League of Mayapan," a union of Chichen, Ux-
mal, and Mayapan, have proved impossible to verify as a political event
because Mayapan was founded long after the demise of the other two cit-
ies. Chichen and Uxmal, however, continued to have resident populations
and almost certainly retained their prestige as sacred centers during the
Early Postclassic. Thus, the League of Mayapan may refer to an alliance
with ideological rather than political authority over the peninsula, an ar-
rangement that apparently collapsed during Mayapan's ascendancy.
32
In the very last stages of preparing this manuscript, we became aware
of Carlson's (1991) interesting treatment of several of the Teotihuacan icon-
ographic antecedents to Epiclassic imagery. Several of his conclusions com-
plement our own and provide a solid base for future investigations of cult
history.
226 Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey

indicate ties between the southern basin and the Xochicalco-Puebla-

Venus sign of Kukulcan
Tlaxcala corridor, as Jimenez Moreno (1942) suspected many years
ago.
How the centers of the southern lowlands articulated with the
Epiclassic system also remains to be understood; clearly, the ear-
liest Epiclassic sites—such as Cacaxtla and Xochicalco—were
strongly influenced by southern, rather than northern, Maya styles.
As Stone (1989) and others have pointed out, such Mexican traits
as "A-O" year signs and pouches are to be found in the Late Clas- '"V
sic southern lowlands at such sites as Piedras Negras and in the
Petexbatun, strategically located along the Usumacinta and its trib-
utaries and persisting until well after the fall of Teotihuacan. The
timing of the emergence of the feathered-serpent network and its
later reflux into the Usumacinta drainage at sites such as Seibal
suggest that the network had an important role in the collapse of
the southern Lowlands. We think that the so-called "star wars" or
Venus-Tlaloc wars at the end of the Late Classic are direct refer-
ences to the cult. Schele and Miller (1986:213-214) note the shift
of Tlaloc imagery to sacrificial and military contexts in the Late
Classic, and that during the eighth century warrior costume be-
came regularized, consistently depicting jaguars and birds, pat-
terns already noted above outside the Maya lowlands.
It has been demonstrated that many of these conflicts were tied
to stations of Venus, but in our view this represents not so much
ritualized as religious warfare. The glyph for this event, showing a
Lamat sign over a shell (T501:575; Figure 33a), has so far eluded
decipherment. To us, the Lamat sign is a direct reference to Que- trophy head
tzalcoatl in his Venus aspect. Another variant shows the Lamat or
Venus sign over an emblem glyph, indicating a war event at that
location (Seibal is one of these examples). If Kukulcan was an
ideological component of the wars of the Late Classic in the south-
ern Lowlands, it can help make sense of several images. To take a
minor example, a schist plaque was recently discovered in resi- Figure 33. Maya glyphs for war and their possible relation t o Kukulcan:
dential excavations at Copan, dating to ca. 750-850 (Figure 33b) (a] the "Star War" glyph; [b] schist plaque showing a man holding a feath-
(Sheehy 1991). This plaque depicts an individual holding a feath- ered serpent above his head, Patio Group 9M-22-A, Copan (Sheehy 1991:Fig-
ered serpent aloft, and a trophy head in his other hand. Could this ure 12].
be a reference to sectarian conflict and, if so, does this represent a
cult partisan or a brief moment of triumph over the forces that
eventually prevailed? thus refer to ethnic Maya and foreigners alike. In this it is like the
As to the enduring question of who the Itzas were, this model term "Christian" or "Muslim," which in most contexts are straight-
suggests that the ethnohistorical sources were in many ways cor- forward religious identities, but in some situations may refer to
rect. Kukulcan did come from the west, and the Itzas were respon- what are essentially ethnic groups. This was probably the situation
sible for the introduction of "idolatry," (i.e., the worship of in Yucatan, where Chichen stands out vividly from the more tra-
Quetzalcoatl). We have, however, been misled in interpreting Itza ditional communities ruled by sacred ahaus and worshiping the
as an ethnic identity. In our view, Itza is a religious identity33 re- old gods. One such traditional kingdom seems to have been Ek
ferring to the militant followers of Quetzalcoatl. The term may Balam, only 55 km northeast of Chichen Itza, which our work sug-
gests persisted in the traditional ways until ca. A.D. 900.
The equation in early sources of Toltecs and Itzas, of Kukulcan
33
Thompson (1970) favors a translation of Itza as "iguana house" and Quetzalcoatl, therefore indicates a similar solution to the knotty
because of his identification of Itzam Na with the celestial monsters, both problem of Toltec and Itza identity and to whether Quetzalcoatl
alligators and serpents. "Na" is the Maya word for house or home, while
"-am" is an agentive suffix according to the Diccionario maya cordemex
was man or deity. Quetzalcoatl was both, and "he" did found Tula,
(Barrera VSsquez et al. 1980). On one level, the word means simply "house Cholula, Tilantongo, Chichen Itza, and Mayapan, but in the form
of the Itza." This then raises the meaning of Itza. The root itz has been of an aggressively expansionistic world religion. Although it is un-
given a variety of etymologies, including "witch," "dew," and the Nahua doubtedly too simplistic to attribute events over a period of sev-
root for "obsidian blade or mirror," among others (cf. Taube 1992a: 31- eral centuries to a single dynamic, Lopez Austin et al. (1991) remind
41; Thompson 1970:209-233). However, there is a far more relevant set
of meanings if there was a play on, or degeneration between, the glottal- us that Mesoamerican religion had a strong unitary basis. We must,
ized and unglottalized /ts/-/ts7. (Stephen Houston [personal communica- therefore, identify specific social processes to account for that con-
tion 1997] has noted a possible glottalized its'a on Coba Stela 4.) The tinuity. Although there certainly was continuity, any tradition so
root "ils'/ls/" has connotations of wisdom, artistry, valor, and knowledge long-lived must have experienced changes. It is thus tempting to
(Barrera V. et al. 1980:217), in short all the cultural qualities associated
see the events of the Epiclassic as resulting in part from some sort
with Quetzalcoatl and toltecdyotl in the highlands. This supports the con-
tention made in this paper that Itza is essentially a religious, not an eth- of doctrinal shift that led to an emphasis on militaristic prose-
nic, identity. lytism and human sacrifice.
Return of Quetzalcoatl
The concept of a pan-Mesoamerican Quetzalcoatl cult focused
on several shrine cities, if correct, has significant implications for
current models of Mesoamerican political organization. Obvi-
ously, the prevailing view of the Epiclassic as a period of frag-
mentation will need revision. The alliance-corridor model suggested
by Byland and Pohl (1994a, 1994b) has much merit, but these cor-
ridors must now be seen as developing within (or in reaction to)
the much larger interregional shrine corridor. Similarly, although
segmentary states and political factionalization were surely part
of the political landscape of Epiclassic and Postclassic Mesoamer-
ica, the above analysis suggests that we must examine these in
light of broader international developments.
Finally, although a pan-Mesoamerican Quetzalcoatl cult and
temple system is perhaps suggestive of a world-systems ap-
proach, such approaches have generally disregarded the impor-
tance of religious movements in effecting interregional change.
In many ways, we see the cult axis is an emergent institution
paralleling the medieval Christian Church or the early Islamic
expansion in its ability to mobilize military might across ethnic
and political boundaries. Like these historical parallels, smaller-
scale economic and political ties were subsumed within an over-
arching religious authority. Because ritual prestige seems to have
been duplicated at the various shrines along the route, so too po-
litical, military, and economic linkages only extended over por-
tions of the network. As with other world religions, religious
authority could not always be translated into political authority
or be equated with economic systems; the Quetzalcoatl network
should not be considered a monolithic entity.
Pilgrimage, too, has received little attention in the literature.
Historically, pilgrimage has been responsible for the movement of
RESUMEN
El conti'nuo analisis de Chichen Itza sugiere que su construction esta fechada
primeramente al periodo clasico tardi'o, aproximadamente 700-1000 d.C,
en vez del postclisico temprano. Este trabajo examina las implicaciones
de esta marcacion temporal para el muy conocido problema "tolteca." Ya
que la ocupacion de Chichen fue en mayor parte anterior a la fase Tollan
de Tula, concluimos que lo que es usualmente indentificado como
iconografia tolteca en Chichen de hecho se fecha en el horizonte epi-
clasico, extendiendose desde Morelos y Puebla hasta las costas del Golfo
y Yucatan. Chichen Itza, sugerimos, fue la estacion occidental en una cadena
de templos dedicados principalmente a Quetzalcoatl/Kukulcan. Esta cadena
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
An earlier version of this paper was presented in the session "Ideological
and Socio-Economic Transformation in Postclassic Mesoamerica" at the
95th Annual Meeting of the American Anthropology Association, Novem-
ber 1995. We thank Janine Gasco and John Pohl, organizers of the session,
for the invitation to participate. We also thank Will Andrews, Tony An-
drews, Rafael Cobos, Dan Healan, Grant Jones, and Geoff McCafferty for
REFERENCES
Acosta, Jorge R.
1957 Resumen de los informes de las exploraciones arqueol6gicas en
Tula, Hgo., durante las IX y X temporadas, 1953-1954. Anales del
lnstituto National de Antropologia e Historia IX: 119-169.
Adams, Richard E.W.
1971 The Ceramics ofAltar de Sacrificios. Papers of the Peabody Mu-
seum of Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 63, No. 1, Cambridge.
227
significant numbers of people across political frontiers; indeed, in
some societies, it was the greatest such agent. As Thayer (1992)
has pointed out, elite pilgrimage was especially significant in the
transmission of ideas and the forging of far-flung political alli-
ances. Although most interpretations of pilgrimage have empha-
sized the fostering of group integration (Turner's "communitas"),
pilgrimage may also subvert local allegiances in favor of legiti-
mation from cult centers. In part, this power stems from the inher-
ent theatricality of pilgrimage shrines, where cult dramas can be
witnessed or enacted by pilgrims, and political messages inter-
woven with cosmic myths. Thus, the contested nature of many pil-
grimage centers (e.g., Jerusalem, Mayapan, and Cholula) must also
be considered.
From an economic point of view, such centers also provide at-
tractive venues for exchange, as the trade fairs of medieval Eu-
rope and Mecca demonstrate. In this sense, Malcolm Webb's (1975)
dictum "the flag follows trade" might be better rephrased as "trade
follows the temple." Membership in the cult might well lead to
enhanced trade opportunities with, and military support from, other
cult centers, and probably enormous revenues for the few "inter-
national" cult centers. We should also not underestimate the sig-
nificance of pilgrimage in the exchange systems, not only in
reinforcing ideological ties, but also as sources of income. Ironi-
cally, the hordes of tourists visiting these sites today may unwit-
tingly repeat a very ancient pattern. However, instead of the modern
experience of a disconnected series of historical reconstructions,
earlier pilgrims traveled along a network that replicated on a vast
scale the eastern and western aspects of the Venus cult and the
wanderings of the man-god Quetzalcoatl.
trasciende las fronteras polfticas e incluye sitios como Cholula, Cacaxtla,
El Tajin, Xochicalco y por ultimo, Tula. El culto de Quetzalcoatl esta man-
ifestado por un complejo especifico de rasgos y parece haberse expandido
militarmente con vigor mesi&nico. El peregrinaje fue tambien una activ-
idad importante en estos centres. El eje de este culto aparentamente con-
tinuo hasta el periodo postclasico y fue responsable para la distribuci6n
del estilo artfstico mixteca-puebla. En Yucatan, Mayapan pareceria haber
asumido la position de Chichen como la mas importante estacidn yucateca,
aunque acompanada de algunos nuevos templos a lo largo de la costa del
Caribe.
discussions and clarifications of their own work, and for providing unpub-
lished data. Clemency Coggins, Annabeth Headrick, John Poh), and an anon-
ymous third reviewer made a number of valuable comments, but should be
absolved from any lingering obtuseness on our part. We also thank Joe
Gutekanst, of the Davidson Library, for extraordinary help in locating in-
terlibrary materials.
1973 Maya Collapse: Transformation and Termination in the Ceramic
Sequence at Altar de Sacrificios. In The Classic Maya Collapse, ed-
ited by T. Patrick Culbert, pp. 133-164. School of American Research/
University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Alva Ixtlilxochitl. Fernando de
1975 Obras historicas. 2 vols. Edited by Edmundo O'Gorman. Uni-
versidad Nacional Autonoma de M6xico, Mexico.
228
Alvarez A., Carlos
1975 Petroglifos y esculturas. In Teotenango: El antiguo lugar de la
muralla, edited by Roman Pifla Chan, pp. 267-307. Direction de Tu-
rismo, Gobierno del Estado de Mexico, Mexico.
Anders, Ferdinand, Maarten Jansen, and Gabina A. Perez-Jimenez
1992a Cronica Mixteca: Libro explicativo del llamado Codice Zouche-
Nuttall. Codices Mexicanos No. 2. Akademische Druck- und Verlag-
sanstalt, Vienna, and Fondo de Cultura Economica, Mexico.
1992b Origen e historia de los reyes Mixtecos: Libro explicativo del
llamado Codice Vindobonensis. Codices Mexicanos No. 1. Akade-
mische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Vienna, and Fondo de Cultura
Econ6mica, Mexico.
Andrews, Anthony P., Tomas Gallareta N., and Rafael Cobos P.
1989 Preliminary Report of the Cupul Survey Project. Mexicon XI:91-
95.
Andrews, Anthony P., Tomas Gallareta N., Fernando Robles C , Rafael
Cobos P., and Pura Cervera R.
1988 Isla Cerritos: An Itza Trading Port on the North Coast of Yuca-
tan, Mexico. National Geographic Research 4:196-207.
Andrews, E. Wyllys IV
1970 Balankanche, Throne of the Tiger Priest. Publication No. 32.
Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University, New Or-
leans, LA.
Andrews, E.W. IV, and E.W. Andrews V
1980 Excavations at Dzibilchaltun, Yucatan, Mexico. Publication No.
48.-Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University, New Or-
leans, LA.
Andrews, E. Wyllys V
1976 The Archaeology of Quelepa, El Salvador. Publication No. 42.
Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University, New Or-
leans, LA.
Angulo Villasenor, Jorge
1988 Prefacio. In Tiempo y asentamiento en Xochicalco, by Kenneth
G. Hirth and Ann Cyphers Guillen, pp. 9-11. Universidad Nacional
Aut6noma de Mexico, Mexico.
Ashmore, Wendy
1989 Construction and Cosmology: Politics and Ideology in Lowland
Maya Settlement Patterns. In Word and Image in Maya Culture: Ex-
plorations in Language, Writing, and Representation, edited by Wil-
liam F. Hanks and Don S. Rice, pp. 272-286. University of Utah Press,
Salt Lake City.
Ball, Joseph W.
1979 The 1977 Central College Symposium on Puuc Archaeology: A
Summary View. In The Puuc: New Perspectives, edited by Lawrence
Mills, pp. 46-51. Scholarly Studies in the Liberal Arts No. 1. Central
College, Pella, IA.
Ball, Joseph W., and John M. Ladd
1992 Ceramics. In Artifacts from the Cenote of Sacrifice, Chichen Itza,
Yucatan, edited by Clemency C. Coggins, pp. 191-233. Memoirs of
the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 10, No. 3.
Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
Barrera VSsquez, Alfredo, Juan Ramon Bastarrachea Manzano, William
Brito Sansores, Refugio Vermont Salas, David Dzul Gongora, and Do-
mingo Dzul Poot
1980 Diccionario Maya Cordemex. Ediciones Cordemex, Merida,
Mexico.
Berlo, Janet C.
1989 Early Writing in Central Mexico: In Tlilli, In Tlapalli before A.D.
1000. In Mesoamerica after the Decline of Teotihuacan, A.D. 700—
900, edited by Richard A. Diehl and Janet Catherine Berlo, pp. 19-
48. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington,
DC.
Benin, Kathleen (editor)
1988 Feathered Serpents and Flowering Trees: Reconstructing the Mu-
rals of Teotihuacan. The Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, San
Francisco.
Bey, George J. Ill
1987 A Regional Analysis ofToltec Ceramics, Tula, Hidalgo, Mexico.
Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Tu-
lane University, New Orleans, LA.
1994 Changes in Domestic Pottery Production and Distribution in Tula,
Hidalgo, Mexico. Paper presented at the 93rd Annual Meeting of the
American Anthropological Association, Atlanta.
Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey
Bey, George J. Ill, Tara M. Bond, William M. Ringle, Craig A. Hanson,
Charles W. Houck, and Carlos Peraza Lope
1998 The Ceramic Chronology of Ek Balam, Yucatan, Mexico. An-
cient Mesoamerica 9:101-120.
Bey, George J. Ill, Craig A. Hanson, and William M. Ringle
1997 Classic to Postclassic at Ek Balam, Yucatan: Architectural and
Ceramic Evidence for Defining the Transition. Latin American An-
tiquity 8:237-254.
Brainerd, George W.
1958 The Archaeological Ceramics of Yucatan. Anthropological
Records, vol. 19. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Braswell, Geoffrey E., and Michael D. Glascock
1995 Los artefactos de obsidiana de Chichen Itzi. Paper presented at
the III Coloquio International de Mayistas, Chetumal, Quintana Roo,
Mexico.
Brueggemann, Juergen, and Rene Ortega Guevara
1989 El Proyecto Tajin. Arqueologia 5:153-174.
Burger, Richard L.
1992 Chavin and the Origins ofAndean Civilization. Thames and Hud-
son, New York.
Butler, Mary
1935 Piedras Negras Pottery. Piedras Negras Preliminary Papers No.
4. The University Museum, Philadelphia.
Byland, Bruce E., and John M.D. Pohl
1994a In the Realm of 8 Deer: The Archaeology of the Mixtec Codi-
ces. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.
1994b Political Factions in the Transition from Classic to Postclassic
in the Mixteca Alta. In Factional Competition and Political Develop-
ment in the New World, edited by Elizabeth M. Brumfiel and John W.
Fox, pp. 117-126. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Cabrera Castro, Ruben, Saburo Sugiyama, and George L. Cowgill
1991 The Templo de Quetzalcoatl Project at Teotihuacan. Ancient Me-
soamerica 2:77-92.
Carlson, John B.
1991 Venus-Regulated Warfare and Ritual Sacrifice in Mesoamerica:
Teotihuacan and the Cacaxtla "Star Wars " Connection. Technical Pub-
lication No. 7. Center for Archaeoastronomy, College Park, MD.
Carrasco Vargas, Ramon, and Eduardo Perez de Heredia Puente
1996 Los Ultimos Gobernantes de Kabah. In Eighth Palenque Round
Table, 1993, edited by Martha J. Macri and Jan McHargue, pp. 297-
308. Pre-Columbian Art Research Institute, San Francisco.
Caso, Alfonso
1958-1959 Glifos teotihuacanos. Revista Mexicana de Estudios
Antropologicos 15(l):51-70.
1961 Nombres calendaricos de los dioses. El Mexico Antiguo 9:77-
100.
1962 Calendario y escritura en Xochicalco. Revista Mexicana de Estu-
dios Antropologicos 18(l):49-80.
1965 Lapidary Work, Goldwork, and Copperwork from Oaxaca. In
Archaeology of Southern Mesoamerica, Pt. 2, edited by Gordon
R. Willey, pp. 896-930. Handbook of Middle American Indians,
vol. 3, Robert Wauchope, general editor. University of Texas Press,
Austin.
1979 Reyes y reinos de la mixteca. Fondo de Cultura Economica,
Mexico.
Caso, Alfonso, and Ignacio Bernal
1965 Ceramics of Oaxaca. In Archaeology of Southern Mesoamerica,
Pt. 2, edited by Gordon R. Willey, pp. 871-895. Handbook of Middle
American Indians, vol. 3, Robert Wauchope, general editor. Univer-
sity of Texas Press, Austin.
Castillo Pena, Patricia
1995 La expresion simbolica del Tajin. Serie Arqueologia. Instituto
Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Mexico.
Cobos P., Rafael
1995 Katun and Ahau: Dating the End of Chichen Itza. Manuscript on
file, Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University, New
Orleans.
Coe, Michael D.
1965 Archaeological Synthesis of Southern Veracruz and Tabasco. In
Archaeology of Southern Mesoamerica, Pt. 2, edited by Gordon R.
Willey, pp. 679-715. Handbook of Middle American Indians, vol. 3,
Robert Wauchope, general editor. University of Texas Press, Austin.
Coggins, Clemency C.
1987 New Fire at Chichen Itza. In Memorias del Primer Coloquio In-
Return of Quetzalcoatl
ternacional de Mayisias (1985), pp. 427-484. Universidad Au-
tonoma de Mexico, Mexico.
Coggins, Clemency C , and Orrin C. Shane III (editors)
1984 Cenote of Sacrifice: Maya Treasures from the Sacred Well at
Chichen ltzd. University of Texas Press, Austin.
Cohodas, Marvin
1989 The Epiclassic Problem: A Review and Alternative Model. In
Mesoamerica after the Decline of Teotihuacan, A.D. 700-900, edited
by Richard A. Diehl and Janet Catherine Berlo, pp. 219-240. Dumb-
arton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, DC.
1991 Ballgame Imagery of the Maya Lowlands: History and Iconog-
raphy. In The Mesoamerican Ballgame, edited by Vernon L. Scarbor-
ough and David R. Wilcox, pp. 251-288. University of Arizona Press,
Tucson.
Davies, Nigel
1977 The Toltecs: Until the Fall of Tula. University of Oklahoma Press,
Norman,
de Borhegyi, Stephan F.
1965 Archaeological Synthesis of the Guatemalan Highlands. In Ar-
chaeology of Southern Mesoamerica, Pt. 1, edited by Gordon R. Wil-
ley, pp. 3-58. Handbook of Middle American Indians, vol. 2, Robert
Wauchope, general editor. University of Texas Press, Austin,
de Montmollin, Olivier
1997 A Regional Study of Classic Maya Ballcourts from the Upper
Grijalva Basin, Chiapas, Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 8:23-41.
Diehl, Richard A.
1983 Tula: The Toltec Capital of Ancient Mexico. Thames and Hud-
son, New York.
Diehl, Richard A., and Janet Catherine Berlo (editors)
1989 Mesoamerica after the Decline of Teotihuacan, A.D. 700-900.
Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, DC.
du Solier, Wilfrido
1943 A Reconnaissance on Isla de Sacrifwios, Veracruz, Mexico. Notes
on Middle American Archaeology and Ethnology No. 14. Carnegie
Institution of Washington, Washington, DC.
Duran, Fray D.
1971 Book of the Gods and Rites and the Ancient Calendar, translated
and edited by Fernando Horcasitas and Doris Heyden. University of
Oklahoma Press, Norman.
Edmonson, Munro S.
1986 Heaven Born Merida and Its Destiny: The Book ofChilam Balam
of Chumayel. University of Texas Press, Austin.
Erosa Peniche, Jose A.
1939 Descubrimientos y exploracion arqueologica de la subestructura
del Castillo en Chichen Itza. Adas del la Primera Sesion del XXVII
Congreso Internacional de Americanistas 11:229-248.
Fahmel B., Bernd
1988 Mesoamerica lolteca sus cerdmicas de comercio principales. Uni-
versidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico.
Firth, Raymond
1996 Religion: A Humanist Interpretation. Routledge, London.
Florescano, Enrique
1993 El mito de Quetzalcoatl. Fondo de Cultura Economica, Mexico,
DF.
Fox, John W.
1991 The Lords of Light Versus the Lords of Dark: The Postclassic
Highland Maya Ballgame. In The Mesoamerican Ballgame, edited by
Vernon L. Scarborough and David R. Wilcox, pp. 213-238. Univer-
sity of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Freidel, David, Linda Schele, and Joy Parker
1993 Maya Cosmos: Three Thousand Years on the Shaman's Path.
William Morrow, New York.
Gallareta Negron, Tomas, Fernando Robles C , Anthony P. Andrews, Rafael
Cobos P., and Pura Cervera R.
1989 Isla Cerritos: Un puerto maya prehispanico de la costa norte de
Yucatan, Mexico. In Memorias del Segundo Coloquio Internacional
de Mayistas, pp. 311-332. Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mex-
ico, Mexico.
Garcia Cook, Angel
1981 The Historical Importance of Tlaxcala in the Cultural Develop-
ment of the Central Highlands. In Handbook of Middle American
Indians, Supplement 1: Archaeology, edited by Victoria R. Bricker
and Jeremy A. Sabloff, pp. 244-276. University of Texas Press,
Austin.
229
Garcia Payon, Jose
1951 La piramide del Tajin. Cuadernos Americanos 10(6):153-177.
1973 Los enigmas de El Tajin. Coleccion Cientifica 3. Instituto Na-
cional de Antropologfa e Historia, Mexico.
Garibay K., Angel Maria
1985 Teogonia e historia de los mexicanos: Tres opusculos del siglo
XVI. Editorial Pornia, Mexico.
Gillespie, Susan D.
1989 The Aztec Kings. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
1991 Ballgames and Boundaries. In The Mesoamerican Ballgame, ed-
ited by Vernon L. Scarborough and David R. Wilcox, pp. 317-345.
University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Gonzalez Crespo, Norberto, Silvia Garza Tarazona, Hortensia de Vega Nova,
Pablo Mayer Guala, and Giselle Canto Aguilar
1995 Archaeological Investigations at Xochicalco, Morelos: 1984 and
1986. Ancient Mesoamerica 6:223-236.
Graham, Ian
1996 Seibal. Corpus of Maya Hieroglyphic Inscriptions, vol. 7, pt. 1.
Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Cambridge, MA.
Graham, John A.
1990 Monumental Sculpture and Hieroglyphic Inscriptions. In Exca-
vations at Seibal, edited by Gordon R. Willey, pp. 1-79. Memoirs of
the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 17, No. 1.
Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
Griibe, Nikolai
1994 Hieroglyphic Sources for the History of Northwest Yucatan. In
Hidden among the Hills, edited by Hanns J. Prem, pp. 316-358. Acta
Mesoamericana 7. Verlag Von Flemming, Mbckmuhl.
Habel, S.
1878 The Sculptures of Santa Lucia Cosumalwhuapa in Guatemala.
Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge No. 269. Smithsonian In-
stitution, Washington, DC.
Healan, Dan M. (editor)
1989 Tula of the Toltecs: Excavations and Survey. University of Iowa
Press, Iowa City.
1993 Local Versus Non-Local Obsidian Exchange at Tula and Its Im-
plications for Post-Formative Mesoamerica. World Archaeology
24:449-466.
Hernandez, Francisco
1921 [1545] Of the Religious Beliefs of the Indians of Yucatan in 1545.
In Reports on the Maya Indians of Yucatan, edited by Marshall H.
Saville, pp. 209-215. Indian Notes and Monographs Vol. IX, No. 3.
Museum of the American Indian, Heye Foundation, New York.
Hester, Tomas R., Robert N. Jack, and Robert F. Heizer
1972 Trace Element Analysis of Obsidian from the Site of Cholula,
Mexico. In Contributions of the University of California Archaeolog-
ical Research Facility 16:105-110. Berkeley.
Hirth, Kenneth G.
1989 Militarism and Social Organization at Xochicalco, Morelos. In
Mesoamerica after the Decline of Teotihuacan, A.D. 700—900, edited
by Richard A. Diehl and Janet Catherine Berlo, pp. 69-82. Dumbar-
ton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, DC.
Hirth, Kenneth G., and Ann Cyphers Guill6n
1988 Tiempo y asentamiento en Xochicalco. Universidad Nacional Au-
tonoma de Mexico, Mexico.
Jack, Robert N., Tomas R. Hester, and Robert F. Heizer
1972 Geologic Sources of Archaeological Obsidian from Sites in
Northern and Central Veracruz, Mexico. In Contributions of the Uni-
versity of California Archaeological Research Facility 16:117-122.
Berkeley.
Jimenez Moreno, Wigberto
1942 El enigma de las olmecas. Cuadernos Americanos 49:5:1 I S -
1966 Mesoamerica before the Toltecs. In Ancient Oaxaca, edited by
John Paddock, pp. 1-82. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.
Kampen, Michael E.
1972 The Sculptures of El Tajin, Veracruz, Mexico. University of Flor-
ida Press, Gainesville.
Kelley, David H.
1982 Notes on Puuc Inscriptions and History. Supplement to The Puuc:
New Perspectives, edited by Lawrence Mills. Central College, Pella,
Iowa.
Kennedy, Hugh
1986 The Prophet and the Age of the Caliphates. Longman, New York.
230
Kepecs, Susan
1994 The Preliminary Regional Ceramic Sequence of Chikinchel,
Northeast Yucatan, Mexico. Paper presented at the 93rd Annual Meet-
ing of the American Anthropological Association, Atlanta.
Kepecs, Susan, Gary Feinman, and Sylviane Boucher
1994 Chichen Itza and Its Hinterland: A World-Systems Perspective.
Ancient Mesoamerica 5:141-158.
Kepecs, Susan M., and Tomas Gallareta Negron
1995 Una vision diacrdnica de Chikinchel y Cupul, noreste de Yucatan,
M6xico. In Memorias del Segundo Congreso International de May-
istas, pp. 275-293. IIF/CEM, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mex-
ico, Mexico.
Kirchhoff, Paul, Odena Guemes, and Luis Reyes Garcia
1976 Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca. Institute Nacional de Antropologfa
e Historia, Mexico.
Konieczna, Barbara, and Pablo Mayer
1976 Uxmal, Yucatan, informe de la temporada 1973-1974. In Inves-
tigaciones arqueologicas en el sureste. Cuadernos de los Centros No.
27, pp. 1-18. Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Mexico.
Koontz, Rex A.
1994 The Iconography of El Taji'n, Veracruz, Mexico. Unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Texas,
Austin.
Kowalski, Jeff K.
1987 The House of the Governor: A Maya Palace at Uxmal, Yucatan,
Mexico. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.
1989 Who Am I among the Itza?: Links between Northern Yucatan
and the Western Maya Lowlands and Highlands. In Mesoamerica af-
ter the Decline of Teotihuacan, A.D. 700—900, edited by Richard A.
Diehl and Janet Catherine Berlo, pp. 173-185. Dumbarton Oaks Re-
search Library and Collection, Washington, DC.
1990 A Preliminary Report on the 1988 Field Season at the Nunnery
Quadrangle, Uxmal, Yucatan, Mexico. Mexicon XII(2):27-33.
Kowalski, Jeff K., Alfredo Barrera Rubio, Heber Ojeda Mas, and Jose
Huchim Herrera
1996 Archaeological Excavations of a Round Temple at Uxmal: Sum-
mary Discussion and Implications for Northern Maya Culture His-
tory. In Eighth Palenque Round Table, 1993, edited by Martha J. Macri
and Jan McHargue, pp. 281-296. Pre-Columbian Art Research Insti-
tute, San Francisco.
Kremer, Jiirgen
1994 The Putun Hypothesis Reconsidered. In Hidden among the Hills,
edited by Hanns J. Prem, pp. 289-307. Acta Mesoamericana 7. Verlag
Von Flemming, Mockmiihl.
Kubler, George
1961 Chichen-Itza y Tula. Estudios de Cultura Maya 1:47-80.
Kurjack, Edward B.
1974 Prehistoric Lowland Maya Community and Social Organiza-
tion: A Case Study at Dzibilchaltun, Yucatan, Mexico. Publication No.
38. Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University, New Or-
leans, LA.
Kurjack, Edward B., Ruben Maldonado C, and Merle G. Robertson
1991 Ballcourts of the Northern Maya Lowlands. In The Mesoamer-
ican Ballgame, edited by Vernon L. Scarborough and David R. Wil-
cox, pp. 145-159. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Las Casas, Fray Bartolome de
1966 Los indios de Mexico y Nueva Espaha: Antologia, edited by Ed-
mundo O'Gorman. Editorial Porrua, Mexico.
Lincoln, Charles E.
1986 The Chronology of Chichen Itza: A Review of the Literature. In
Late Lowland Maya Civilization, edited by Jeremy A. Sabloff and E.
Wyllys Andrews V, pp. 141-198. School of American Research, Santa
Fe, and University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
1990 Ethnicity and Social Organization at Chichen Itza, Yucatan, Mex-
ico. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Har-
vard University, Cambridge, MA.
Lind, Michael D.
1994 Cholula and Mixteca Polychromes: Two Mixteca-Puebla Re-
gional Sub-Styles. In Mixteca-Puebla: Discoveries and Research in
Mesoamerican Art and Archaeology, edited by H.B. Nicholson and
Eloise Quinones Keber, pp. 79-99. Labyrinthos, Culver City, CA.
Lira Lopez, Yamile
1990 La cerdmica de El Tajin, norte de Veracruz. Betrage zur Archa-
ologie Band 3, Berlin.
Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey
Lopez Austin, Alfredo
1973 Hombre-dios: religion y politico en el mundo Ndhuatl. Univer-
sidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico.
Lopez Austin, Alfredo, Leonardo Lopez LujJin, and Saburo Sugiyama
1991 The Temple of Quetzalcoatl at Teotihuacan: Its Possible Ideo-
logical Significance. Ancient Mesoamerica 2:93-105.
Lothrop, Samuel K.
1952 Metals from the Cenote of Sacrifice, Chichen Itza, Yucatan. Mem-
oirs of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 10,
No. 2. Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
Marcus, Joyce, and Kent V. Flannery
1996 Zapotec Civilization: How Urban Society Evolved in Mexico's
Oaxaca Valley. Thames and Hudson, London.
McCafferty, Geoffrey G.
1996a The Ceramics and Chronology of Cholula, Mexico. Ancient Me-
soamerica 7:299-323.
1996b Reinterpreting the Great Pyramid of Cholula, Mexico. Ancient
Mesoamerica 7:1-17.
McVicker, Donald
1985 The "Mayanized" Mexicans. American Antiquity 50:82-101.
Maldonado C , Ruben
1991 Tlalocs at Uxmal. In Sixth Palenque Round Table, 1986, edited
by Virginia M. Fields and Merle Greene Robertson, pp. 97-101. Uni-
versity of Oklahoma Press, Norman.
Marquina, Ignacio
1964 Arquitectura prehispdnica. Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e
Historia and Secretari'a de Educaci6n Piiblica, Mexico.
1971 La pintura en Cholula. In Artes de Mexico 140. Mexico.
Mastache, Alba Guadalupe, and Robert H. Cobean
1989 The Coyotlatelco Culture and the Origins of the Toltec State. In
Mesoamerica after the Decline of Teotihuacan, A.D. 700-900, edited
by Richard A. Diehl and Janet Catherine Berlo, pp. 49-68. Dumbar-
ton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, DC.
Medelli'n Zenil, Alfonso
1962 El monolito de Maltrata, Veracruz. Palabra y Hombre 24:37-
48.
Miller, Arthur G.
1977 "Captains of the Itza": Unpublished Mural Evidence from Chichen
Itza. In Social Process in Maya Prehistory, edited by Norman Ham-
mond, pp. 197-226. Academic Press, New York.
Miller, Virginia E.
1991 The Frieze of the Palace of the Stuccoes, Acanceh, Yucatan, Mex-
ico. Studies in Pre-Columbian Art and Archaeology No. 31. Dumb-
arton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, DC.
Molina Feal, Daniel
1995 Consideraciones sobre la cronologia de Cacaxtla. In Antologia
de Cacaxtla, edited by Angel Garcia Cook, Beatriz Leonor Merino
Carrion, and Lorena Mirambell Silva, pp. 174-179. Instituto Nacio-
nal de Antropologia e Historia, Mexico.
Morley, Sylvanus G., and George W. Brainerd
1956 The Ancient Maya. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
Morris, Early H., Jean Chariot, and Ann A. Morris
1931 The Temple of the Warriors at Chichen Itza, Yucatan. 2 vols. Pub-
lication No. 406. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, DC.
Nagao, Debra
1989 Public Proclamation in the Art of Cacaxtla and Xochicalco. In
Mesoamerica after the Decline of Teotihuacan, A.D. 700-900, edited
by Richard A. Diehl and Janet Catherine Berlo, pp. 83-104. Dumb-
arton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, DC.
Navarette C , Carlos
1990 Chinkultic, un sitio-puerta intermedio entre los altos de Guate-
mala y el occidente de Chiapas. In La epoca Cldsica: Nuevos hallaz-
gos, nuevas ideas, edited by Amalia Cardos de Mendez, pp. 447-453.
Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Mexico.
Nicholson, Henry B.
1976 Ehecatl-Quetzalcoatl vs. Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl of Tollan: A Prob-
lem in Mesoamerican Religion and History. Actes du XLIIe Congres
International des Americanistes VI:35-47.
1978 The Deity 9 Wind "Ehecatl-Quetzalcoatl" in the Mixteca Picto-
rials. Journal of Latin American Lore 4:61-92.
Nicholson, Henry B., and Eloise Quinones Keber
1994 Introduction. In Mixteca-Puebla: Discoveries and Research in
Mesoamerican Art and Archaeology, edited by H.B. Nicholson and
Eloise Quinones Keber, pp. vii-xv. Labyrinthos, Culver City, CA.
Return of QuetzalcoatI
Paddock, John
1966 Oaxaca in Ancient Mesoamerica. In Ancient Oaxaca, edited by
John Paddock, pp. 83-242. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
1987 Cholula en Mesoamerica. Notas Mesoamericanas 10:21-70.
Parsons, Jeffrey R., Elizabeth Brumfiel, and Mary Hodge
1996 Developmental Implications of Earlier Dates for Early Aztec in
the Basin of Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 7:217-230.
Parsons, Lee A.
1969 Bilbao, Guatemala: An Archaeological Study of the Pacific Coast
Cotzumalhuapa Region, vol. 2. Publications in Anthropology No. 12.
Milwaukee Public Museum, Milwaukee, WI.
1991 The Ballgame in the Southern Pacific Coast Cotzumalhuapa Re-
gion and Its Impact on Kaminaljuyu during the Middle Classic. In
The Mesoamerican Ballgame, edited by Vernon L. Scarborough and
David R. Wilcox, pp. 195-212. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Peraza Lope, Carlos A.
1993 Estudio y secuencia del material cerdmico de San Gervasio, Co-
zumel. T6sis de Licenciatura, Facultad de Ciencias Antropol6gicas,
Universidad Autonoma de Yucatan, Merida.
Peterson, David
1987 The Real Cholula. Notas Mesoamericanas 10:71-118.
Pollock, H.E.D.
1962 Introduction. In Mayapan, Yucatan, Mexico, pp. 1-22. Publica-
tion No. 619. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, DC.
Proskouriakoff, Tatiana
1962a Civic and Religious Structures of Mayapan. In Mayapan, Yu-
catan, Mexico, pp. 87-164. Publication No. 619. Carnegie Institution
of Washington, Washington, DC.
1962b The Artifacts of Mayapan. In Mayapan, Yucatan, Mexico,
pp. 321-442. Publication No. 619. Carnegie Institution of Washing-
ton, Washington, DC.
1974 Jades from the Cenote of Sacrifice, Chichen Itza, Yucatan. Mem-
oirs of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 10,
No. 1. Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
Reyes V., Virgilio
1975 Arquitectura y poblamiento. In Teotenango: El antiguo lugar de
la muralla, edited by Roman Pifia Chan, pp. 117-188. Direction de
Turismo, Gobierno del Estado de Mexico, Mexico.
Ringle, William M., and George J. Bey
1992 The Center and Segmentary State Dynamics. Paper presented at
the Wenner-Gren Conference on the Segmentary State and the Clas-
sic Maya Lowlands, Cleveland State University, Cleveland, OH.
Ringle, William M, George J. Bey, and Carlos Peraza L.
1991 An Itza Empire in Northern Yucatan?: A Neighboring View. Pa-
per presented at the Symposium "Chichen Itza: The Site and Its En-
virons," 47th International Congress of Americanists, New Orleans,
LA.
Robertson, Donald
1970 The Tulum Murals: The International Style of the Late Post-
Classic. Verhandlungen des XXXVIII. Internationalen Amerikanisten-
kongresses, Band II, pp. 77-88. Kommissionsverlag Klaus Renner,
Munich, Germany.
Robertson, Merle Greene
1986 Some Observations on the X'telhu Panels at Yaxcaba, Yucatan.
In Research and Reflections in Archaeology and History: Essays in
Honor of Doris Stone, edited by E. Wyllys Andrews V, pp. 87-111.
Publication No. 57. Middle American Research Institute, Tulane Uni-
versity, New Orleans, LA.
Robles Castellanos, Fernando
1987 La sequencia ceramica preliminar de Isla Ceritos, Costa Centro-
Norte de Yucatan. In Papers from the 1985 Maya Ceramic Confer-
ence, edited by Prudence M. Rice and Robert J. Sharer, pp. 99-109.
BAR International Series 345 (i). British Archaeological Reports, Ox-
ford.
1990 La secuencia ceramica de la region de Cobd, Quintana Roo.
Coleccion cientifica del Institute Nacional de Antropologia e Histo-
ria, Mexico.
Rojas, Gabriel de
1927 [1581] Relation de Cholula. Revista Mexicana de Estudios
Historicos l:Apendice:158-169.
Ruppert, Karl, Edwin M. Shook, A.L. Smith, and Robert E. Smith
1954 Chichen Itza, Dzibiac, and Balam Canche, Yucatan. In Carnegie
Institution of Washington Yearbook No. 53, pp. 286-289. Washing-
ton, DC.
231
Ruz Lhuillier, Alberto
1952 Exploraciones en Palenque: 1951. Anales del Instituto Nacional
de Antropologia e Historia V:47-66.
1958 El juego de pelota de Uxmal. In Miscellanea Paul Rivet. XXI
Congreso Internacional de Americanistas, vol. I, pp. 635-667. Uni-
versidad Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico.
Sabloff, Jeremy A.
1973 Continuity and Disruption during Terminal Late Classic Times at
Seibal: Ceramic and Other Evidence. In The Classic Maya Collapse, ed-
ited by T. Patrick Culbert, pp. 107-132. School of American Research,
Santa Fe, and University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
1975 Excavations at Seibal. Ceramics. Memoirs of the Peabody Mu-
seum of Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 13, No. 2. Harvard Univer-
sity, Cambridge, MA.
Saenz, Cesar A.
1961 Tres estelas en Xochicalco. Revista Mexicana de Estudios
Antropologicos 17:39-66.
1963 Exploraciones en la piramide de las serpientes emplumadas, Xochi-
calco, Mor. Revista Mexicana de Estudios Antropologicos 19:7-26.
Sanders, William T.
1981 Ecological Adaptation in the Basin of Mexico: 23,000 B.C. to the
Present. In Handbook of Middle American Indians, Supplement 1: Ar-
chaeology, edited by Victoria R. Bricker and Jeremy A. Sabloff,
pp. 147-197. University of Texas Press, Austin.
Santana Sandoval, Andres, and Rosalba Delgadillo Torres
1995 Cacaxtla durante la transici6n del periodo Clfisico al Poscl£sico.
In Antologia de Cacaxtla, edited by Angel Garcia Cook, Beatriz Le-
onor Merino Carrion, and Lorena Mirambell Silva, pp. 358-368. In-
stituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Mexico. Originally
published 1990.
Schele, Linda, and David Freidel
1990 A Forest of Kings: The Untold Story of the Ancient Maya. Wil-
liam Morrow, New York.
Schele, Linda, and Mary Ellen Miller
1986 The Blood of Kings: Dynasty and Ritual in Maya Art. Kimbell
Art Museum, Fort Worth, TX.
Sejourne\ Laurette
1966a Arquitectura y pintura en Teotihuacdn. Siglo Veintiuno, Mex-
ico.
1966b El Universo de QuetzalcoatI. Fondo de Cultura Econ6mica, Mex-
ico.
Seler, Eduard
1991 a The Ruins of Xochicalco. In Collected Works in Mesoamerican
Linguistics and Archaeology, vol. II, edited by J.E.S. Thompson, Fran-
cis Richardson, and Frank E. Comparato, pp. 70-93. Labyrinthos, Cul-
ver City, CA.
1991b Archaeological Results of My First Trip to Mexico. In Col-
lected Works in Mesoamerican Linguistics and Archaeology, vol. II,
edited by J.E.S. Thompson, Francis Richardson, and Frank E. Com-
parato, pp. 155-202. Labyrinthos, Culver City, CA.
1992 Excavations at the Site of the Principal Temple in Mexico. In
Collected Works in Mesoamerican Linguistics and Archaeology, vol.
Ill, edited by J.E.S. Thompson, Francis Richardson, and Frank E. Com-
parato, pp. 114-193. Labyrinthos, Culver City, CA.
Sharp, Rosemary
1978 Architecture as Interelite Communication in Preconquest Oa-
xaca, Veracruz, and Yucatan. In Middle Classic Mesoamerica, A.D.
400-700, edited by Esther Pasztory, pp. 158-171. Columbia Univer-
sity Press, New York.
Sheehy, James J.
1991 Structure and Change in a Late Classic Maya Domestic Group at
Copan, Honduras. Ancient Mesoamerica 2:1-19.
Sheets, Payson D., John M. Ladd, and David Bathgate
1992 Chipped-Stone Artifacts. In Artifacts from the Cenote of Sacri-
fice, Chichen Itza, Yucatan, edited by Clemency C. Coggins, pp. 153—
189. Memoirs of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Vol. 10, No. 3. Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
Smith, A.L.
1982 Excavations at Seibal. Major Architecture and Caches. Mem-
oirs of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 15,
No. 1. Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
Smith, Mary Elizabeth
1973 Picture Writing from Ancient Southern Mexico. University of
Oklahoma Press, Norman.
232
Smith, Robert E.
1971 The Pottery of Mayapan. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Ar-
chaeology and Ethnology Vol. 66. Harvard University, Cambridge,
MA.
Spinden, Ellen S.
1933 The Place of Tajin in Totonac Archaeology. American Anthro-
pologist 35:225-270.
Stark, Barbara L., and L. Antonio Curet
1994 The Development of the Classic-Period Mixtequilla in South-
Central Veracruz, Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 5:267-287.
Stark, Barbara L., Lynette Heller, Michael D. Glascock, J. Michael Elam,
and Hector Neff
1992 Obsidian-Artifact Source Analysis for the Mixtequilla Region,
South-Central Veracruz, Mexico. Latin American Antiquity 3:221-
239.
Stirling, Mathew W.
1943 Stone Monuments of Southern Mexico. Bulletin No. 138. Bureau
of American Ethnology, Washington, DC.
Stone, Andrea
1989 Disconnection, Foreign Insignia, and Political Expansion: Teo-
tihuacan and the Warrior Stelae of Piedras Negras. In Mesoamerica
after the Decline of Teotihuacan, A.D. 700-900, edited by Richard A.
Diehl and Janet Catherine Berlo, pp. 153-172. Dumbarton Oaks Re-
search Library and Collection, Washington, DC.
Stuart, David, and Stephen D. Houston
1994 Classic Maya Place Names. Studies in Pre-Columbian Art & Ar-
chaeology No. 33. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collec-
tion, Washington, DC.
Stuart, George E.
1989 Introduction: The Hieroglyphic Record of Chichen Itza and Its
Neighbors. In Research Reports on Ancient Maya Writing, preface to
Nos. 23-25. Center for Maya Research, Washington, DC.
Stuiver, Minze, and Paula J. Remier
1987 CALIB Radiocarbon Calibration Program, version 1.3. Quater-
nary Isotope Laboratory, University of Washington, Seattle.
Sugiyama, Saburo
1989 Iconographic Interpretations of the Temple of Quetzalcoatl at Te-
otihuacan. Mexicon 11(4):68—74.
Taladoire, Eric, and Benoit Colsenet
1991 "Bois Ton Sang, Beaumanoir": The Political and Conflictual As-
pects of the Ballgame in the Northern Chiapas Area. In The Meso-
american Ballgame, edited by Vernon L. Scarborough and David R.
Wilcox, pp. 161-174. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Tamayo, Jorge L., and Robert C. West
1964 The Hydrography of Middle America. In Natural Environment
and Early Cultures, edited by Robert C. West, pp. 84-121. Handbook
of Middle American Indians, vol. 1, Robert Wauchope, general edi-
tor. University of Texas Press, Austin.
Taube, Karl A.
1992a The Iconography of Mirrors at Teotihuacan. In Art, Ideology,
and the City ofTeotihuacan, edited by Janet Catherine Berlo, pp. 169-
204. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington,
DC.
1992b The Temple of Quetzalcoatl and the Cult of Sacred War at Teo-
tihuacan. RES 21:53-87.
1992c The Major Gods of Ancient Yucatan. Studies in Pre-Columbian
Art and Archaeology No. 32. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and
Collection, Washington, DC.
Thayer, James S.
1992 Pilgrimage and Its Influence on West African Islam. In Sacred
Journeys: The Anthropology of Pilgrimage, edited by Alan Morinis,
pp. 169-187. Greenwood Press, Westport, CT.
Ringle, Gallareta Negron, and Bey
Thompson, J. Eric S.
1948 An Archaeological Reconnaissance in the Cotzumalhuapa Re-
gion, Escuintla, Guatemala. Contributions to American Anthropol-
ogy and History No. 44. Publication No. 574. Carnegie Institution of
Washington, Washington, DC.
1970 Maya History and Religion. University of Oklahoma Press, Nor-
man.
Tourtellot, Gair III
1988 Excavations at Seibal. Peripheral Survey and Excavation: Set-
tlement and Community Patterns. Memoirs of the Peabody Museum
of Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 16. Harvard University, Cam-
bridge, MA.
Tozzer, Alfred M. (editor and translator)
1941 Landa's Relacion de las cosas de Yucatan. Papers of the Pea-
body Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. XVIII.
Cambridge, MA.
1957 Chichen Itza and Its Cenote of Sacrifice. Memoirs of the Pea-
body Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology Vols. 11 and 12. Har-
vard University, Cambridge, MA.
Vargas P., Ernesto
1975 La ceramica. In Teotenango: el antiguo lugar de la muralla, ed-
ited by Roman Pina Chan, pp. 189-265. Direction de Turismo, Go-
bierno del Estado de Mexico, Mexico, DF.
von Winning, Hasso
1961 Teotihuacan Symbols: The Reptile's Eye Glyph. Ethnos 26:121-
166.
Wagner, Elisabeth
1995 The Dates of the High Priest Grave ("Osario") Inscription, Chi-
chen Itza, Yucatan. Mexicon XVIII(l):10-13.
Webb, Malcolm C.
1975 The Flag Follows Trade: An Essay on the Necessary Interaction
of Military and Commercial Factors in State Formation. In Ancient
Civilization and Trade, edited by Jeremy A. Sabloff and C.C. Lamberg-
Karlovsky, pp. 155-209. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquer-
que.
Werbner, Richard P.
1977 Introduction. In Regional Cults, edited by R.P. Werbner, pp. ix-
xxxvii. Monograph No. 16. Association of Social Anthropologists. Ac-
ademic Press, New York.
Wilkerson, S. Jeffrey K.
1984 In Search of the Mountain of Foam: Human Sacrifice in Eastern
Mesoamerica. In Ritual Human Sacrifice in Mesoamerica, edited by
Elizabeth H. Boone, pp. 101-132. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library
and Collection, Washington, DC.
1987 El Tajin: A Guide for Visitors. Universidad Veracruzana, Pa-
pantla, Mexico.
1991 And Then They Were Sacrificed: The Ritual Ballgame of North-
eastern Mesoamerica through Time and Space. In The Mesoamerican
Ballgame, edited by Vernon L. Scarborough and David R. Wilcox,
pp. 45-72. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Winter, Marcus C.
1989 From Classic to Post-Classic in Pre-Hispanic Oaxaca. In Meso-
america after the Decline of Teotihuacan, A.D. 700-900, edited by
Richard A. Diehl and Janet Catherine Berlo, pp. 123-130. Dumbar-
ton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, DC.
Wren, Linnea
1994 Ceremonialism in the Reliefs of the North Temple, Chichen Itza.
In Seventh Palenque Round Table, 1989, edited by Merle Greene Rob-
ertson and Virginia M. Fields, pp. 25-31. Pre-Columbian Art Re-
search Institute, San Francisco.
Yadeun, Juan
1992 Tonind: El laberinto del inframundo. Gobierno del Estado de
Chiapas/Espejo de Obsidian, Mexico.