Effigy Censers Late Postclassic ceramics at Tumben-Naranjal consist almost entirely of Navulá, Mama, and Payil Groups from the Seco Complex devised by Robles-Castellanos (1990) for Coba, and similarly defined in the ceramic chronology of Xelha by Canche (1992). Chen Mul Modeled from the Navulá group is by far the best represented ceramic type for the Late Postclassic occupation of Tumben-Naranjal, outnumbering other types nearly four to one (Figure 5). Research on these and other Maya censers is sparse and what little that does exist is predominantly descriptive and classificatory in nature (Borhegyi 1951, 1959; Smith 1971a, 1971b; Ferree 1972; Goldstein 1977; Benyo 1979). A recent re- evaluation of censers by Rice (1999) represents the most comprehensive treatment Classic-period censers from an interpretive standpoint to date, treating issues of function, meaning, origin, context, symbolism, and the differentiation of effigy and non-effigy forms. For Postclassic Yucatan, the 1957 study of Mayapan censers by Thompson is the only substantial interpretive report available. Thompson moved beyond fundamental descriptive and chronological analyses, addressing issues such as context, function, meaning, deity identification, and the application of ethnohistory to archaeological analysis. In a succinct and useful explanation of Mayapan examples (Figure 6), Thompson (1957: 599-600) describes these effigy censers as
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Effigy Censers
Late Postclassic ceramics at Tumben-Naranjal consist almost entirely of
Navulá, Mama, and Payil Groups from the Seco Complex devised by Robles-
Castellanos (1990) for Coba, and similarly defined in the ceramic chronology of
Xelha by Canche (1992). Chen Mul Modeled from the Navulá group is by far the best
represented ceramic type for the Late Postclassic occupation of Tumben-Naranjal,
outnumbering other types nearly four to one (Figure 5). Research on these and
other Maya censers is sparse and what little that does exist is predominantly
descriptive and classificatory in nature (Borhegyi 1951, 1959; Smith 1971a, 1971b;
Ferree 1972; Goldstein 1977; Benyo 1979). A recent re-evaluation of censers by
Rice (1999) represents the most comprehensive treatment Classic-period censers
from an interpretive standpoint to date, treating issues of function, meaning, origin,
context, symbolism, and the differentiation of effigy and non-effigy forms. For
Postclassic Yucatan, the 1957 study of Mayapan censers by Thompson is the only
substantial interpretive report available. Thompson moved beyond fundamental
descriptive and chronological analyses, addressing issues such as context, function,
meaning, deity identification, and the application of ethnohistory to archaeological
analysis. In a succinct and useful explanation of Mayapan examples (Figure 6),
Thompson (1957: 599-600) describes these effigy censers as
…made of coarse, unslipped pottery. The effigy is attached to the front of a thick-walled vase which stands on a high pedestal base, both slightly flaring. The headdress of the effigy usually rises 10 to 15 cm above the rim of the vessel; interiors, particularly the bases, of many are fire blackened…. In most figures the arms are bent at an angle of 90, palms up, and the hands may support offerings…. Some parts of the effigies, notably faces, hands, and feet, were commonly made in molds…. Painting was done after firing.
Effigy censers seem to have appeared in Maya history sometime in the
middle to late 14th Century. The spread was so rapid that by Spanish arrival, the
use of effigy censers had become nearly ubiquitous in the Maya lowlands
(Thompson ibid.: 603; Robles-Castellanos ibid.). Their function for burning copal
incense is documented by resin residue and smoke stains on vessel fragments.
Based on the location of vessel remains, it appears that censers were often placed
near shrine entrances and on, or adjacent to, basal altars. Following Spanish
contact, censers continue in use among the Maya, though predominantly restricted
to the unconverted or non-Catholic Maya. Post-contact examples of Maya censers
have been encountered at several Postclassic sites, reflecting the persistence of
ritual practice and pilgrimage at abandoned centers well after Spanish arrival
(Lothrop 1924: 63, Figures 29b, 31). Post-contact censers tend to be smaller,
retaining key facial characteristics and loosing elaborate appendages, dress, and
decoration, much in the same way modern Lacandon burners or “god pots” are
Apart from their use as receptacles for burning copal, historical evidence
suggests that Postclassic Maya considered effigy censers animate beings called
aluxob (Redfield and Villa Rojas 1934: 119-121; Redfield 1941: 232-239; Villa Rojas
1945: 103; Thompson ibid.: 602-603, 620, 624). Brinton (1883: 1-13) states that the
term for these beings is derived from the word h-loxkatob, which he translates as
“the strong ones of clay;” however, according to Taube (personal communication
2000) this is more accurately understood as “the fighting or fierce ones of clay.”
Villa Rojas (1941: 122) notes as well, that the Yucatec Maya perceive stone-core
stucco idols as aluxob. In modern Maya mythology, these creatures are tricksters
whom roam the bush and field harassing milperos and hunters, attempting to
coerce offerings of food. If the wishes of the aluxob are met, in return they offer
protection of the cornfield. Even more importantly, in case of a prolonged dry spell,
this mischievous spirit will capture a wandering rain god unaware and force him to
water the milpa before his release - suggesting an affiliation of aluxob and effigy
censers to rain ritual and milpa rites. In fact, aluxob in their effigy form are thought
to bathe in rainstorms, exposing themselves to the elements on top of ruined
shrines in the same manner as censers abandoned at temples during and after the
Late Postclassic (Villa Rojas ibid.). A quote by an informant from Chan Kom
reinforces this connection of aluxob to censers and rain,
They are about a foot high and look like small children, except for their beards and their crowns. These crowns go around the head; they are square in outline, and are made of clay. Inside there is a hollow, and the hollow extends through the body of the alux, so that rain enters at the top and runs out the toes. (Redfield and Villa Rojas ibid.: 120)
Effigy censers are usually found shattered as if ritually smashed (Thompson
ibid.; Chase 1988). Apparently, the Colonial Spanish and Maya took every
opportunity to destroy abandoned effigies when encountered; the Spanish because
they wanted to eradicate any indication of idolatry and the Maya, to prevent the
mischief of the aluxob (Redfield and Villa Rojas ibid.: 119-121; Tozzer ibid.: 73, 108,
110; Villa Rojas ibid.: 103). Though this practice may account for limited numbers of
shattered censers, it would not explain the near-total destruction of vessels seen at
most Late Postclassic sites. A contemporary explanation for smashed censers
among the Yucatec Maya contends that as aluxob (in ceramic effigy form) wash in
rain, chaakob or rain deities take aim and cast thunderbolts from the sky,
attempting to destroy them (Villa Rojas ibid.). On the other hand, one
archaeological interpretation attributes concentrations of smashed censers
associated with monumental architecture to “termination” rituals, supposedly
meant to spiritually deactivate animate structures before their abandonment or
modification (Schele and Friedel 1990: 459; Mock 1998). In other contexts,
ethnohistoric evidence indicates that effigy censers were regularly smashed at the
conclusion of certain agricultural rites and rain rituals to release the aluxob whom
are thought to animate these vessels. For instance, Landa (Tozzer ibid.: 161, Notes
835-841) tells us that during the ceremony of ocna, a plant renewal ritual
performed in honor of the rain deities as a demonstration of their connection to
agriculture, the “renovation” of ceramic idols, censers, and all associated ritual
paraphernalia occurred. Once these vessels had fulfilled their intended purpose and
after their practical use-life expired, censers were discarded and likely smashed to
release the souls of deities captured in effigy form. In essence, this practice served
the same purpose as “kill-holes” well-documented in other New World cultures such
as those in the American Southwest – to free spirits possessing ceramics and other
inanimate objects.
Sacred Caves and the Ritual Collection of Virgin Water
Sacred water, referred to by the Yucatec Maya as zuhuy ha, is thought of as
“virgin” water for its purity and association with holiness. As a potent liquid
substance, zuhuy ha drawn from pools of pristine cave water for use in various rites
related to rainmaking, agricultural abundance, and fertility (Thompson 1959; Pohl
and Pohl 1983; Bonor 1989; Brady et al. ibid. The Chorti and Keckchi Maya likewise
use sacred water, called uh-ha’, agua bendita, or santo ha collected from sacred
springs and rivers for use in identical agricultural rites (Thompson 1930: 52-53;
Wisdom 1974: 381-Note 23, 438-Note 9). Evidence for the association of sacred
caves with agricultural rites and rain ritual is evident at a number of caves in the
Yucatan peninsula such as Balankanche, Balam Ku, Dzab-Na, and Actun Ka’. This
connection is based on numerous water jars, rain-god incense burners, metates,
and manos in ritual cave contexts (Stromsvik 1956; Thompson ibid., 1975; Andrews
1961, 1970; Reddell 1977; Pollock 1980; Bonor ibid.). At cave Balankanche near
Chichen Itza, 95 effigy censers depicting the Central Mexican rain deity Tlalloc were
clustered in front of speleothem columns, beneath stalactites, and set inside niches
carved from living cave formations near pools of water (Andrews ibid., 1970: 9, 12,
Figure 5; Bonor ibid.: 110, Figure 28). Andrews (ibid.: 9) states that out of six areas
in Cave Balankanche where rain-god censers were grouped, it was plainly clear that
each locus was offertory in nature, stating
All are directly associated with either underground bodies of water or striking stalagmitic formations (in which the cave is rich), which were apparently correctly interpreted by the ancients as phenomena attributable to the action of water. Scattered offertory material was similarly located beside or under prominent stalactitic formations. The association of all objects of an offertory nature with water or its manifestations is obvious.
This pattern of rain-god censers associated with cave formations and standing pools
of water was found replicated in the immediate vicinity of Chichen Itza, at the
recently reported cave of Balam Ku (James Brady, personal communication 2000).
Moreover, other wet caves and cenotes feature interior shrines or platforms located
adjacent to water pools such as those at Mayapan, Tancah, and Xcaret, suggesting
the performance of certain rites related to the ritual use of cave water (Lothrop
ibid.; Smith 1953, 1954; Andrews and Andrews 1975). In caves surrounding
Tumben-Naranjal, Rissolo (ibid.) has documented similar instances of ritual cave
modification, reflected in the presence of interior stairways, platform shrines,
propitiatory altars, and ritual ceramic scatters at caves Actun Maas, Actun Pak
Chen, Actun Tacbi Ha, and Actun Toh. As Brady et al. (1997) discuss, the
archaeological context of speleothems and their use among modern Maya suggest
that these rituals were strongly associated with rain, fertility, and power.
Speleothems as Petrified Zuhuy Ha
The presence of speleothems in aboveground shrine-complexes at Tumben-
Naranjal reveals that speleothems were regularly brought from caves to shrine-
altars, presumably used in rites enhanced by these spiritually charged natural