Kate: José, do you think that monuments are forever? José: It’s difficult to think so, because many times, when we walk through our cities, we find these places of memory that are like super ancient, that not even one knows when they were founded, what the characters are… then sometimes they give that sense that they are eternal, but I think that they go changing in a, but I think that they are changing in a long duration, they are changing. Kate: Yes, they are changing in the sense that maybe, there are new uses, new decorations, new ways of interpreting the monuments, but I think that always there is a remainder, whatever it be, or its absence, or also parts of those monuments that endure across all time. And that relates to our object of today, because we are going to speak of a part of a Mayan monument that is a lintel titled “Presentation of the captives to a Mayan ruler”, the sculpted in the classic Mayan period in the year 785 A.D., and that is found in the Kimball Arts Museum in Dallas, Texas. Welcome to… José: Las cosas tienen vida. Kate: This is a podcast in which we speak of a historical object with the researcher who studies it, and this week we have the fortune of speaking with Pilar Regueiro Suárez. Pilar is a postdoctoral associate researcher in the Department of Anthropology in the Middle American Research Institute of Tulane University in the United States. She received her master’s and doctoral degrees in Mesoamerican studies from the National Autonomous University of Mexico. Her studies center on the organization and the political rituals of the Mayas, the documentation of Indigenous traditions in New Spain, the participation of women in the conquests of the 16th century, and the cultural exchanges during the colonial period. For this reason, Pilar is the perfect person to explain to us this lintel. Welcome, Pilar! José: Welcome! Pilar: Hello, how are you? Many thanks for the invitation. Kate: Many thanks for accepting our invitation. And to begin this episode, how would you describe this lintel so that our public imagined it? Pilar: To begin the lintel is this horizontal piece that is placed above the entrances or doors that is sculpted with iconography and with hieroglyphic texts. That is to say that, to see it, originally a Maya of the elite —because generally this only was seen by persons of the elite— had to enter the building and look upwards in order to be able to appreciate, let’s say, the iconography. It is a lintel of approximately one meter and 15 centimeters long, it is quite long. It would seem that it is not very big, but yes, it is big. It is made in limestone and, as I was saying, it has sculpted an image with hieroglyphic texts that is, like very typical of the Maya discourse of the classic epoch. It is a lintel of the 8th century, end of the 8th century A.D. It is fitting to highlight that this lintel forms part of the tradition of the Usumacinta, of the king Usumacinta. This area is found between Mexico, in Chiapas, and Guatemala, and Yaxchilán, precisely where of the Mexican side of the Usumacinta is found. And what is seen is basically at the left side, a ruler of Yaxchilán. This ruler is called Shield Jaguar IV, although in this lintel he is referred with his name of youth, that is to say, a name previous to when he was enthroned, that is Chelew Chan K’inich. And he is seated upon a throne with his legs crossed, like a lotus flower, and he addresses a person that we know is called Aj Chak Maax, that is a Sajal. The term Sajal is the title of a functionary that dedicated himself to distinct things, but mainly was a war captain. And this war captain is presenting him three captives, or three prisoners that he just obtained during a war, that are suffering on the floor. And we know that they are suffering because they carry, no, the positions of the hands, they are upon their foreheads. We know that they are completely naked because it is a way of humiliating them. They are prisoners, they are tied with ropes and they are also stripped of their ornaments. A way of humiliation, let’s say, in the iconographic representations that the Mayas used was to place these prisoners with paper, with things of paper. Then the earspools, that generally could be of jade or of other materials, are removed and they are replaced with paper. Then, in this image, we see how they are completely humiliated, with these insignias of paper, naked, tied upon the floor, suffering with positions or gestures of suffering. The war captain, this Sajal, presents these three personages to the ruler, and well, the hieroglyphic texts, basically is what the images are describing. This person, Aj Chak Maax, in 783 after Christ, presents him with these three people, but they are not any people. One of them, that is the most important, is a, he has a well-known title, let’s say as official, is Baah Wayaab, that we know that that title was had by functionaries linked with rituals… with the control of ritual. That is to say that they had religious attributes and that surely is a Baah Wayaab of a nearby city to that area of Usumacinta. José: Who were individuals the responsible of sculpting this lintel? Pilar: That is the most interesting part, in fact, of this lintel, because among, generally the Mayan stone monuments were intervened by various artists, but only the most experienced, because let’s say that there were hierarchies inside the artists. But only the most experienced —because let’s say that there were hierarchies inside the artists— are the ones who sign these monuments. And the signature of this monument is found in the central part, which is rare. Generally, they always appear, like in the edges, a little hidden the signatures, but in this occasion the signature of the artist appears at the center of the lintel, below the elbow of this Sajal that is presenting the captives. And here, literally, the text says this is the sculpture of Mayuy Ti, the one of K’inna’, and K’inna’ is a zone of a city, also of that region of the Usumacinta, that is called Piedras Negras, that is at the Guatemalan side of the Usumacinta. And it is the historic enemy of Yaxchilán. Then, that is why it is the most interesting, because this lintel comes from —well, we don’t know exactly from where it comes. It does not come from Yaxchilán, it comes from a site that was baptized as Laxtunich and that probably now the hypothesis is that it can be the Túnel, which is a quite small site of the Guatemalan side of Usumacinta, that belonged to the political sphere of Yaxchilán. And why do I say that it is interesting this sculptor? Because Mayuy Ti, apparently, proceeds from the enemy city of the area of influence of Yaxchilán and he is sculpting monuments for the ruler of Yaxchilán and for the elite of Yaxchilán. It is a moment of much political instability, in fact, it is the moment previous to what we denominate as the Maya collapse, that is to say, a political decline that comes in domino effect, that carries the abandonment of various cities on the part of these elites. The common people continue living in those zones, but it is interesting to note that probably these artists, in a moment already of political instability and with less centralization and political control, well, they begin to circulate through even enemy spheres, and that they are sculpting monuments of an exceptional quality that no longer being made in the capital. Then it is very interesting at political level, that is the theme that I most study, how these elites in the periphery begin to acquire power and begin to bring artists of the stature of Mayuy Ti to sculpt these works of art. Kate: Yes, that is super interesting. And I want to understand a little better because in your description you told us that the lintel is above the door inside of a building. And I would like to understand how is the context, how they see it. Why is it there? Because I imagine that it is a little complicated to see it upwards. Maybe it is painted so that it shows its iconography better, but why do they put an image above the door? Pilar: This style, let’s say discursive, is very of Usumacinta. Many of the buildings of cities of Usumacinta have these sculpted lintels. Generally, they appear in groups of three, that are the three entrances of the temples and they form part of narratives linked with the rulers, ceremonies, or rituals that they do around their enthronement and also captures or taking of prisoners. It is a little like a political propaganda around their government. But in the case of these lintels, in reality we see that, although yes the image of the ruler is preponderant, in reality, the person who carries all the narrative weight is the Sajal, is who is presenting the three prisoners to the ruler. And generally, in other discourses it is the ruler, who comes out in individual manner with the prisoners. Then in this case, well, it is a propaganda on the part of these elites in the periphery that also want to legitimate their authority at local level. Then probably these monuments or these discourses go directed to very specific sectors of the elite at local level, let’s say thinking in probably this site that the Túnel, it is surely a discourse directed to the elite of the Túnel on the part of this Sajal, and it is interesting that it forms part of narratives that have to do with the same topic, with this Sajal making rituals, but always at the side of the ruler, because the ruler, in the end, is a figure that helps to reaffirm and reinforce that political position at local level. José: We have had other objects where are included images and texts, in this case archaeological, let’s say how are connected these texts and these images in the lintel? Pilar: This is a characteristic that we have above all in this period in Maya contexts. First, because the Maya culture has a system of writing that is known quite well, that is 80% deciphered in the actuality, and we know that this characteristic, that we call intermediality, consists in combining iconography with hieroglyphic texts, that many times complement each other, that is to say, that the hieroglyphic text contributes extra information to interpret the images, but in occasions it does not complement it. In occasions they are speaking of different things and rather it is giving more information that the actual image is not giving us. They even form part of broader narratives that not only encompass a single monument, but that encompass a group of monuments. Then, this intermediality is very interesting because it leads us to interpret them in many ways. We could analyze the text in independent manner, the iconography in independent manner, but I consider that analyzing it just as the discourse was conceived originally, that is to say combining both things, well it allows us to understand a message with many more meanings. José: Was this lintel painted? They look like some traces. We would like to know if it was painted. What happened? Was it repainted? Pilar: Yes, all the Mayan monuments were painted, and above all the lintels. We know that they were painted because some conserve remains of paint, like the case of this lintel, that also makes it quite interesting. In the case of this lintel, the background is clearly blue and the skin of the invidivuals and the hieroglyphics are painted in the color red, that this also is very interesting because, in difference with the lintels of Yaxchilán, the palette of colors is inverted. Generally, the backgrounds are red and the adornments that form part of the table of the individuals are in the color blue, although the skin also is in a red tone. This also allows us to see how, inside of the palette of colors, these artists of the periphery are having like their own artistic patterns that differ with those of the capital. And it is very interesting, because not in all cases or not in all lintels, well, we conserve those traces of color, although yes we do conserve descriptions of those colors at beginnings of the 20th century, with these travelers that went through these Mayan ruins, a little in manner of explorers, and who describe the colors that in that moment, yes, they could see, but that unfortunately are not conserved in totality. In this case yes, and that also makes it better or much more interesting at level, let’s say, of materials and at an artistic level. Kate: Speaking of these explorers, in another episode about the Chacmol with Daniel Grecco, we spoke of some Frenchmen of the 19th century, when they came to Chichén Itzá, and I would like to know how they found this lintel. Pilar: The history of the lintel is very interesting because that has carried us to that first we do not know exactly its location and that it has begun to be traced through photographs and until its last localization, which is United States. This lintel appears referred to in a work of two explorers at middle of the 20th century, more or less in 1950–51. It is a couple that go through these ruins of the Usumacinta, but on the Guatemalan side, that are called Dana and Ginger Lamb, and what they do is explore a site, that we do not know its name, but they take photographs and they make, let us say, like sketches about the distribution of the place’s plaza and they refer the existence of a cenote. And in the map, they only circle a zone, and they say these lintels or these monuments proceed from this zone. But in that zone, there are very many sites that belong to the same sphere of Yaxchilán and that we do not know exactly the location of the place from where these lintels proceeded. And they themselves are the ones who baptize that site, in quotation marks, as “Laxtunich,” but we have no idea where is “Laxtunich.” Later, these monuments appear in photographs in Europe. Probably they already had been transferred there, or they were kept, let us say, like in the black market, they were extracted by looters. And finally, we know that, more or less in the 70s, it was acquired by the Kimbell Art Museum in Dallas, where it is found at present. But, well, always the same question is if we know that they are Usumacinta style, by the iconography, because they refer to personages that we have very well located historically. But where is the “Laxtunich?” And recently, archaeologists who study this zone of the Usumacinta, well, began to discard, through these sketches, looking for the cenote, looking for the photographs, following a little the route of the Lamb through this zone, they have proposed that it can be the Túnel, that is a small site that belongs to the political sphere of Yaxchilán and that shares iconographically many similarities with other sites, like La Pasadita, like Tecolote. From this lintel, since it is in this mysterious site, that probably be the Túnel, until the present, that it is found in Dallas, in the museum. José: And what value has this lintel for the actual Maya studies? Pilar: It can be explored from distinct fields. As I say to you, it can, let us say, problematize this question of the artists circulating through different political spheres. At artistic level, it can also be studied through this iconography or of this palette of colors that still it conserves. It is fitting to highlight that it is the mirror form of the iconography. Generally, the rulers appear at the right side, which is the place to highlight the political hierarchy, and in this lintel it is inverted, but also the hieroglyphics, generally are read from left to right, and the name of the ruler that appears in the throne, written in the throne, is from right to left, that is, to read it we have to begin from the right side. And this is the mirror effect that Mayuy Ti uses. That is, the artist, again, like to reaffirm or reinforce, like his own artistic stamp at local level, that that does not happen in other zones. That is interesting at artistic level, but at political level, that is a little of what most interests me, is to note how these elites in the periphery, or these secondary elites, are acquiring much more political preponderance and much more activity or participation inside of these dynamics in the periphery. That they are achieving, let’s say, to attract artists from other sites to elaborate their own discourses, to reflect themselves, let’s say, at level of political discourse, at a propagandistic level, in these monuments, thing that is not happening in the capitals. Then, for me, what interests me very much is to contrast these discourses that are produced in capitals against those that are produced in these zones of the periphery, where we note many more changes and differences with respect to the official discourse, let’s say, and it can be explored through these details, even the calligraphy of the hieroglyphic texts, to note those differences and how these individuals are mentioned here and also could participate in these dynamics and try to reconstruct a little more the political organization of that moment that besides, as I was telling you, it is a key moment because it is previous to the collapse. To understand why the collapse occurred, we have to understand how the system functioned, and this forms part of that system. Kate: And as researcher, how did you arrive to study this lintel? Pilar: I previously studied a very famous ruler of Yaxchilán who was called Bird Jaguar, that is the ruler who had the most monuments made, that most buildings made in the city, and he is one of the ones who begins to mention very much these elite individuals in the periphery. He begins to mention them in his discourse. Then, likewise, I began to arrive to these other members of the elite, that carried me to study monuments outside of the capital, in this case, the lintels of “Laxtunich,” La Pasadita, El Cayo, in the case of Piedras Negras, because they are monuments of great quality and that are being produced just before the collapse of the city. I have the hypothesis that these individuals of the secondary elite or of the foreign elite are the ones who also carry, the ones who provoke the political crisis, because they begin to acquire a great deal of power. They exercise much more competition, and the system already cannot deal with them. So, I arrived at this lintel just for this reason, by studying the political dynamics of the peripheries. José: And to all our interviewees we always ask them a trick question. If you could ask something to this lintel, and this one could answer you, what would it be? Pilar: It is difficult to ask a single thing, but I think that I would love very much to ask to Mayuy Ti, the circumstances in which he elaborated this lintel, because he is, I repeat, an artist that comes from a political enemy entity. Then, I would love to ask him how he made the lintel, in what circumstances he arrived to el Túnel and in what circumstances he related with the elite of Yaxchilán and mainly with this Sajal and with Chelew Chan K’inich, that is the ruler of Yaxchilán. Kate: And finally, for the public that wants to continue delving into this theme, can you recommend us a text? Pilar: Yes, well, I am going to recommend two, in reality. I am going to recommend this book that tells a little the trajectory of these archaeologists looking for the “Laxtunich” and where they propose that it is El Túnel, but also in which they revise other lintels at an artistic level, and also at an epigraphic level, to read the hieroglyphic texts. And the book is edited by Stephen Haust, it is called Maya Universe in Stone, it is edited by the Getty Research Institute in 2021. And I am going to recommend a recent article that came out, published last year in the journal Ancient Mesoamerica. It is Open Access, and it is called The Sajals of the Western Maya Lowlands, that, precisely, in that article is of my authorship. I speak about the dynamics of the sajales, that are these officials of the periphery of this zone of the Usumacinta and how, through their discourse, we can detect these changes and this participation in very specific political dynamics previous to the collapse. Kate: Well, thank you so much Pilar, for this interesting conversation. José: Many thanks. Pilar: Thanks to you both, thanks. And thanks for the invitation. José: Kate, what have we learned today? Kate: As always, we have learned a lot with Pilar. And I, as art historian, I would like to insist on the object. Pilar spoke to us of our artist that comes from the periphery, from the enemy, no?, but he makes this work for this family, like showing the control of the ruler, that can send an enemy to come to make his art, but also of the colors of this work that stand out, that this work is different to the works that they make in the metropolis, because, instead of having the background red and the details in blue, she told us that here we see the inversion, that the background is blue and the details red, and for that we always see this separation between periphery and the metropolis, and the power of controlling all the spaces. José: And it is super interesting because what you say also connects with the political idea of the process, not only of its process, but its political life, because it was produced by a politics, for a political discourse. Politics, because there were people in the 20th century that took the lintels out and sold them, put them in a market, even, like the actual politics of the museums, how they display them, etc. It is an object that has been moved politically and that, maybe, to us, the name of the ruler or of the zone does not resound with us, but that yes it is understood, no? Not always, it is difficult to define it, but it is like a universal figure, no? Of this sovereign over the subjects or over enslaved, no? And that is super interesting. So, well, many thanks for having listened to this episode. Kate: And for those who want to see an image of this lintel, it can be seen in our Instagram page. José: @lascosastienenvida Kate: And also in our web page. José: www.lascosastienenvida.com. Kate: You can see not only those objects, but also a transcription in Spanish and English of the episode and also a more ample bibliography and more information about Pilar, so we hope that you enjoy this new edition of our podcast. José: Always innovating for you and hopefully this new portal serves you. See you in the next episode. Kate: See you soon, bye!