Teotihuacan Home Page, Teotihuacan Notes I-7: The Imager of the V-Type Incensario Manta and its Message

Teotihuacan Notes:

Internet Journal for Teotihuacan Archaeology and Iconography

NOTES I-3: TEOTIHUACAN INCENSARIOS: THE 'V' MANTA AND ITS MESSAGE

James Langley

TEOTIHUACAN INCENSARIOS: THE 'V' MANTA AND ITS MESSAGE

The "incensario" (as the ritual censer is called in Spanish) is one of the most beautiful and intriguing artefacts produced by the Teotihuacan culture. It comes in many shapes and guises but in its most typical form (Fig 1) it consists of a coarse pottery bowl to hold incense surmounted by a similar inverted bowl from which a long hollow tube, that acts as a chimney, protrudes vertically. To this chimney are affixed several horizontal pottery plaques that act as a scaffold for the attachment of a variety of ornaments of fine pottery, called "adornos" in Spanish, among which floral, avian and butterfly images predominate. In addition there are often two irregularly shaped tablets on either side of the incensario with, below, a number of smaller rectangular plaques, commonly called "mantas", all of which bear symbolic motifs. Finally, a small human mask is placed in the recess between the tablets and above the mantas. This incensario, which can conveniently be called the recessed human mask (RHM) type, constitutes about two thirds of the ritual censers in the data sample.

The Teotihuacan incensario has been discussed in excavation reports dating back to the early years of this century and has been the subject of several commentaries (e.g. von Winning) and an extended study by Janet Berlo (1984). It is part of a widespread mesoamerican tradition, shared notably with the Zapotec and Maya cultures, each with its distinctive forms and iconographic conventions. Its closest approximation is found in the Escuintla department of Guatemala (generally considered an outpost of the Teotihuacan culture) and at Xico at the southern end of the central highland lake system, but Teotihuacan types are clearly distinguishable from even these close analogues. During excavations it has been found, often in carefully disassembled form, in caches beneath the floors of residential structures and, less often, in burials. Adornos and other detached pieces also occur in caches and, together with sherds of incensario bases, are found in domestic waste dumps and the fill of pyramidal structures.

Much of what has been written about the Teotihuacan incensario is descriptive, but a consensus has emerged on its general function and usage. As a receptacle for burning incense, its use in ritual is obvious, while the fact that it has most often been found buried beneath the floors of residential compounds or in domestic waste suggests compound rather than state ritual. Opinion is more divided on the interpretation of the incensario's imagery and what it may represent. The RHM type, which has been the most closely examined of the Teotihuacan incensarios, has for example been described as a miniature altar, temple or theater. It has also been called a deity image and has been identified with the Aztec Xochipilli, on the basis of its floral and avian iconography, and with a butterfly deity because of its conspicuous butterfly symbolism. Even more specifically, von Winning has suggested that the Butterfly God was the guardian deity of merchants and envoys and that the incensario was used in funerary ritual involving members of the military-administrative class charged with the external relations of the metropolis (1987:60).

Persuasive as they may be, none of these hypotheses has been generally accepted and it is timely to examine whether a hitherto neglected component of the RHM incensario, the manta, might elucidate this incensario's meaning and usage. The manta appears only on incensarios of the RHM type known or supposed to have been recovered from Teotihuacan and nearby highland sites such as Azcapotzalco. It is thus an exclusively metropolitan artefact but, despite the singularity of the conjunction and the high probability that mantas contribute distinctively to the symbolic connotation of the RHM incensario, they have been generally ignored, perhaps because they appeared insignificant compared to the striking likenesses of birds, flowers and butterflies among the adornos, perhaps because the intricacy and variety of their symbolic motifs rendered them confusing and inscrutable. However, a close examination of the manta suggests that they are neither insignificant nor inscrutable, most of their motifs being familiar as calendrical signs in other mesoamerican notational systems.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether they function in a similar way at Teotihuacan. In order to confine the discussion within reasonable limits, only one simple type of manta (the 'V' manta, defined below), will be examined in detail. However, a preliminary study of the subject (Langley 1986: 153-167) revealed that, despite their great diversity, all mantas were configured with horizontal bands highly suggestive of bindings around bundles. The paper therefore briefly reviews bundle symbolism in several mesoamerican cultures and proposes, after comparison of the V manta with established examples of bundled calendrical notation on several Teotihuacan sculptures, that the manta's sign cluster relates to calendrical cycles of time and probably contains a numerical component. Finally evidence is presented to establish that there is a close association between this manta and the ubiquitous Teotihuacan Storm God, an association that accords well with the conspicuous martial symbolism of the incensario.

A preliminary word of caution is necessary. Not many of the incensarios in museums and private collections come from controlled archaeological excavations. Without a known provenance, the contextual evidence of their function is lost forever and, in many cases, even their integrity as artefacts is in doubt. As an assemblage of parts the incensario is easily concocted from the myriad adornos found at Teotihuacan sites and, without the guarantees offered by a sanctioned excavation, there is always the suspicion that the artefact is a mere confection. It is thus hazardous to base conclusions on items without provenance. As an example, Berlo illustrates an incensario with manta-like adornos that depict the Storm God (1984 Part i: 40-41; Part ii: Fig 37). However, she suspects that the incensario may be a modern copy and it has therefore been excluded from the argument in this paper in favour of a Storm God association with the RHM incensario.

Mantas are usually affixed to incensarios in sets of four, though from three to six may be present. They bear a large variety of motifs although mantas in a set are always identical (except for colour) on incensarios of secure provenance. In my preliminary treatment of the subject (Langley: op. cit.) I noted that despite their great diversity, mantas could be divided into two main types based on the way in which their sign clusters were configured. One, the tabular type (Fig 2, left), is characterized by the disposition of its motifs in horizontal bands, often with a sign such as the RE glyph appended below. The sign clusters are complex and highly variable but several subtypes of this manta can be distinguished. A less common type that appears on about a quarter of the RHM incensarios in the data sample, and that I now call the V manta, is simpler and more uniform in its imagery. It has two diagonal panels in a V configuration that originate at its lower edge and a row of finger-like signs across the top (Figs 3a and 3b, middle and right), with one or two ancillary motifs between. There is never an appended glyph nor a feather fringe at the top of the manta. The minor variants of this manta, when not attributable to wear or coarse fabrication, result from the presence or absence of ancillary motifs, or their precise form. A significant variant of this imagery is found on a related artefact, the feathered V adorno, that is slightly larger than the manta (by about 25%), has a feather fringe along its top edge and V panels that extend beyond its sides. These panels are tufted and have a Quincross infix (Fig 4, right below).

THE BUNDLE AND THE NEW FIRE

Regardless of type, all mantas have certain common features, notably the prevalence of pan-mesoamerican calendrical signs in their imagery (the evidence for which is reviewed in my preliminary treatment of the subject). Motifs that are reminiscent of folded paper or cloth often enclose the manta's sign cluster and, as mentioned above, the configuration of the manta itself resembles that of a bundle. The latter is, of course, a familiar item of mesoamerican imagery and may represent a variety of physical objects, ritual paraphernalia or symbolic devices. The Aztec tribute records contain examples of the first category, notably bundles of firewood and of cloth, and bales of cotton. The most striking examples of ritual paraphernalia are found in the highland codices among the mummy bundles that depict funerary rites or signify the death of rulers, but references and illustrations of other types of ritual bundle abound in the literature, inscriptions and myths of Mesoamerica. The bundle is also used glyphically and symbolically, one notable example being the bundle of 52 reeds or wooden rods, the Aztecs symbol for the completion of the 52 year Calendar Round. Calendrical function is also attributed to the bundle signs (T 102 and T103) in the Maya hieroglyphic system.

In so far as the the bundle at Teotihuacan is concerned, its most common representation is certainly the firewood faggot of which von Winning has written in two studies (1977 and 1979). In the first of these he discusses several forms of firewood bundle depicted more or less naturalistically on pottery and mural paintings at Teotihuacan and the much more abstract Comb-and-Bar sign. He notes the latter's similarity to the Mayan fire glyph (T563), generally thought to represent a firewood bundle, and argues that it too is "a simplified firewood bundle without the knot element". He also suggests that, like the Mayan glyph, these Teotihuacan bundles are all "related to the completion of time periods" and, more specifically, that they reflect a concept and function similar to that embodied in the Aztec Xiuhmolpilli ('binding of the years'), the symbol of the expiring 52 year cycle, which might take the form of a bundle of 52 rods or of a naturalistic replica in stone. von Winning develops this theme in his second paper, concluding that the 'binding of the years' and New Fire ceremony, the ceremonial kindling of fire by which the Aztecs initiated the new Calendar Round, "had their origin in Early Classic Teotihuacan where the completed cycle was represented ideographically by compound signs of firewood bundles, twisted cords and knot elements". This conclusion and the analogy with Aztec ritual practice on which it turns, rest heavily on several stone sculptures found by Leopoldo Batres at Teotihuacan in 1905.

Describing his excavation of the rubble on the west side of the Pyramid of the Sun, Batres reported that among his most notable finds were two stone slabs, sculpted on their outer faces, and two stone blocks bearing similar motifs (Batres 1906:25). Among these motifs he noted particularly folded bands, twisted cord and flames, saying that he was inclined to think that this cluster symbolized the binding of the years and the great centennial festival of the renewal of sacred fire. Figure 5 is a recent photograph of one of the two fragmentary stone blocks, or prismatic sculptures as they have been called, recovered by Batres. It is the smaller of the two fragments and was illustrated by Batres in his paper where it is described as 'apparently representing the Xiuhmolpilli'. It has not been as often reproduced as its more complete but badly deteriorated companion piece [see, for example, Gamio (1922): Lamina 22(f)]. This sculpture is, of course, three dimensional but bears what appear to be identical bas-relief images on each of its four sides rather than representing a single three dimensional object. The motifs on its sides include a single elongated rectangle enclosed within an 'envelope' of folded paper or cloth, from which panels of similar material extend diagonally and horizontally. Below, a length of twisted cord is superimposed on a second rectangular motif. At the upper end of the sculpture there is a band of flames. On the stone slabs mentioned above, flames are also depicted on either side of a horizontal rectangle below the twisted cord.

Not only is this imagery two-dimensional, but there is no sign of a bundle of rods among the motifs on any of the Batres' sculptures. It would therefore appear that the term "Xiuhmolpilli" is, strictly speaking, misleading when applied to them. However, this is not prejudicial to the larger point that Batres wished to establish, namely that the sculptures provide evidence of the existence of the New Fire concept at Teotihuacan. As von Winning has pointed out, the Aztec ceremonies marking the passage from one Calendar Round to the next involved two rituals: the disposition of the Xiuhmolpilli by burial (attested archaeologically in excavations conducted by Batres himself) or burning (for which the evidence is more tenuous) and the kindling of the New Fire. While it is clear that the two were closely related, distinctions between the rituals and their glyphic representation abound in the texts from that period available to us. The best known are probably pages 34-36 of Codex Borbonicus, where both rituals are depicted, and the title page of the Codex Mendoza. In the first case the site of the New Fire, the mountain near Ixtapalapa known as Uixachtlan, is designated by a fire drill placed above a mountain glyph, while the Codex Mendoza identifies 2 Reed as a New Fire year by a fire-kindling glyph consisting of a fire drill, the fire block and flame signs (Fig 6, right). The same concept could be conveyed by other combinations of these elements, for example the flaming wood block of the Codex Boturini, page 13.

A very different glyphic convention for the same events has been noted by several scholars, notably Caso (1927) and Nicholson (1959), who proposed that the year of the New Fire might be identified in the Aztec glyphic system by a twisted and knotted cord. Particularly noteworthy are examples in the Codex Mendoza and the two dates on the front of the Teocalli de la Guerra Sagrada, the cartouche for one of which, the New Fire year 2 Acatl, contains such a cord (Fig 7, left). While there seems to be no decisive evidence on the matter, one may reasonably assume that this form of New Fire glyph relates conceptually and visually to the cord-bound Xiuhmolpilli. (Since the associations are quite different, there is no conflict here with the hypothesis developed in a later paper by Nicholson (1966) in which he argued that an alternative form of the generalized year-sign particularly associated with Xochicalco - the looped cord - was related conceptually to the Maya notion of the 'year bearer' and the tumpline by which this burden was transported).

Returning now to Batres' Teotihuacan sculptures (Fig 5), and assuming that continuities over time and space justify the element of analogical reasoning involved, one can construe the elongated rectangle as a firedrill (Nahuatl 'tlequauitl') within its ritual folded paper. The Xiuhmolpilli is invoked in the twisted cord here superimposed on the presumptive woodblock. With flames above and (on the slabs) to either side of the woodblock, this combined imagery relating to the two rituals is more powerful evidence for their existence at Teotihuacan than would be the Xiuhmolpilli alone. This hypothesis is rendered all the more plausible by the usage of New Fire symbolism in the inscriptions of highland sites such as Xochicalco in the immediate post-Teotihuacan period (Saenz 1967), thus partially bridging the time gap between Teotihuacan and the post-classic Aztecs.

The discovery of the sculptures in the immediate vicinity of the Pyramid of the Sun suggests a central setting for the rituals, but does not tell us whether they were well-established nor what role they may have played in Teotihuacan ceremonial practice. Ceramic evidence, for example in the form of pottery sherds from Santiago Ahuitzla that bear imagery akin to that on the Batres' sculptures (cited by von Winning 1979: Fig 2e and f), suggests that the ritual was indeed widespread. Some of this imagery is repeated on the manta which thus provides an even broader source of data in support of the hypothesis that some elements of the New Fire were part of a ritual celebrated throughout the city and at other highland sites of the Teotihuacan culture.

THE V MANTA AND CALENDRICAL NOTATION

The finger-like motifs characteristic of the V manta (Fig 3) might be thought to depict the rods of a firewood bundle but their shape and the way in which each one is clearly defined and separated from its fellows argue against this interpretation. They are, rather, reminiscent of the finger variant of the numeral 1 that may substitute for the more common dot in the writing systems of several mesoamerican cultures. A post-classic example is found in the tribute section of the Codex Mendoza where from one to eight fingers signify unitary quantities of tribute cloth, each representing one braza, "the length of the two arms of a man stretched crosswise" according to Cooper Clark (1938: 82 footnote 2). Closer in time to Teotihuacan one finds the finger as the "symbolic variant" for the numeral one in the Maya area (Thompson 1970:137. He includes illustrations of examples from inscriptions at Naranjo and Quirigua). Even earlier examples from Monte Alban (including the inscription on Stela 13 that has been dated to the middle of the first millenium BC) are cited and illustrated by Caso (1965: 933, Figs. 3 & 4).

Although the calendrical and ritual use of numerals is a conspicuous feature of precolumbian Mesoamerica, few numbers survive on the Teotihuacan artefacts that have come down to us. Those that exist, on several portable objects and one mural painting (the Tlalocan water talud of Tepantitla), are in the bar and dot system but there is no reason in principal why an alternative finger notation should not have coexisted with it. Thus the possibility that the manta's finger motif is a numeral is worthy of consideration. It appears in the data sample in multiples of six or seven, with the possibility of a very rare five. In mesoamerican calendrical practice, one might expect this to qualify a day sign but the V manta cluster contains no recognizable sign of this kind. Instead there is, below the finger motifs, a horizontal rectangle with superimposed cord-loop which is frequently enclosed within a folded paper or cloth 'envelope', although this is not clearly distinguishable in Figure 3. In addition there is, in some examples, a narrow vertical rectangle between the top of the manta and the cord-loop. Sometimes it is superimposed on the central "finger" while, on other occasions, it is placed midway between the fingers. Comparison with the Batres' sculptures suggests that this rectangle depicts the fire-drill enclosed in ritual paper and that the cord-loop is the alternative year-sign. A third sign, a short segment of twisted cord that appears to be an extension of the cord-loop, is occasionally present lower down the manta, between the two horizontal bands. Thus one finds depicted on the V manta one or more signs which in other mesoamerican cultures signify numerals, the year, the New Fire and the year of the New Fire.

We know very little about the Teotihuacan calendrical system and whether, for example, the 52 year Calendar Round or some alternative cycles were in use. The precise significance of the V manta symbolism is therefore uncertain, but widespread mesoamerican practice suggests that it records some form of association between the numerals 6 and 7 and the New Fire - possibly a kindling (without specification as to cycle length or base date) or the duration of the time period initiated by that particular New Fire. It is perhaps significant that von Winning in his 1979 study cites several examples of the association of the numeral 7 together with the firewood bundle sign and the RE glyph. Although only one of these examples comes from Teotihuacan, others are from sites close to it in time and cultural affiliation - Xochicalco and Piedra Labrada.

The most prominent feature of the V manta, the two oblique panels that originate at its lower edge, may be interpreted in several different ways. They may act as a secondary binding around the manta, supplementing the horizontal ties, or they may serve a symbolic and ritual function as do, for example, the paper streamers (Nahuatl 'amaneapalli') placed around Aztec mummy bundles. Caso discusses a similar usage recorded in the Codex Borbonicus in which the Xiuhmolpilli, as the symbol of the defunct Calendar Round, is decorated with such streamers (Caso 1967a:130). However, it is not possible, on the basis of the available evidence, to make a choice between alternative interpretations of these panels.

THE V MANTA AND THE STORM GOD

The V panels recur in several remarkable examples of manta symbolism found on effigy figurines of the Storm God. The first is a cabecita in whose headdress a form of the V manta is prominently displayed (Fig 8, left). The presumed firedrill, the loop or knot within its folded paper and the V panels are all present. The finger motif, however, is replaced by a band of small segmented rectangles that von Winning, in another context, has called "stacked firewood" (1979: 26, caption to Figure 2f). Despite this difference, it is clear that the essential concepts embodied in the V manta are reflected here. The identical sign cluster is also found on a Storm God figurine (Fig 9, right), four examples of which are in the data sample. Several probably come from the same mold and two are recorded as having been excavated at Azcapotzalco. They depict the deity wearing a breastplate bearing the main elements of the manta sign cluster. An especially noteworthy feature of the figurine is the projection at its right shoulder. Its bulbous, punctate terminal is very similar to the butts of the darts that cross behind the Teotihuacan bird and weapons emblem (Caso 1967b: Fig. 38e), suggesting that the figurine may be some form of armorial device. For the moment it will suffice to say that the association of the manta sign cluster with the Storm God in his martial incarnation (Langley 1986: 75-85) is wholly compatible with the martial symbolism of the incensario: the many dartbutt adornos, the feathered shields, the compounded water and fire signs analagous to the Aztec war metaphor 'atl-tlachinolli', and butterfly imagery.

The very rare feathered variant of V manta imagery (Fig 4) also offers significant evidence on the relationship of the Storm God to the RHM incensario. The examples in the data sample are limited to several detached and broken items from Sigvald Linné's excavations at Teotihuacan (sadly without more specific provenance), and two adornos affixed to each of two incensarios, one without provenance while the other (Fig 10, left) is said to have been excavated during the Proyecto Arqueologico Teotihuacan 1980-82. One curious aspect of these incensarios is that the adornos are placed inverted towards the top of the artefact, not below the human head mask where sets of four regular mantas of the tabular type are affixed, thus confirming that they should be classed as adornos rather than as mantas.

The most significant differences between the sign cluster on this adorno and on the V manta relate to the treatment of the V panels. These extend beyond the sides of the adorno and end in feather tufts, echoing the feather fringe along the top of the artefact. They also bear a sign, known as the Kan cross in Maya epigraphy (T281), which is a prominent constituent of the month sign Pop. In the Teotihuacan context it is perhaps better distinguished as the Quincross for the five elements in its cruciform structure. This form of V panel clearly represents a pair of streamers rather than a form of binding as may be the case with the manta. In fact, it closely resembles a common form of costume ornamentation at Teotihuacan. It is worn as a cockade in headdresses (for example, by many of the upper wall figures of porticos 1 and 3 of Atetelco's White Patio where it is associated with variants of the Trapeze and Ray (TR) sign, a year indicator in several mesoamerican cultures.) It also appears,

inverted and occasionally incorporating the TR sign, at the waist of richly attired figures (for example, the processional warriors of Techinantitla - Berrin (ed) 1988, Figs. V.5d and V.8). Of all these usages, the closest and most remarkable analogy to the manta sign cluster is found in the headdresses worn and carried by the Storm God in the murals of the Anteroom of the Gods at Techinantitla (Fig 11, right) and worn on a stuccoed and painted cylinder tripod vessel in a private collection (Fig 12, left). In both these artefacts, the headdress consists of a truncated version of the cluster: tufted V panels bearing the Quincross infix, finger motifs and feather fringe. Three fingers are visible in the headdresses worn by the Storm God while five are present in those that he carries.

Here, then, are further examples of the association of manta imagery with the Storm God. Surprising as they may be, they reflect a well-established Teotihuacan practice: the usage of calendrical symbolism in headdresses, particularly of figures identifiable as warriors by their clothing and weapons, as in the Atetelco murals mentioned above. This use of calendrical symbolism has been interpreted as an emblem of military leadership, strikingly demonstrated at Cacaxtla, a highland site that dates to the immediate post-Teotihuacan period. Its eclectic style of mural painting was strongly influenced by Teotihuacan and the two principal "Jaguar" warriors in the famous "Battle" murals of Edificio B are distinguished by the year signs in their headdresses and the Storm God emblems they display (Foncerrada de Molina 1993). The reasons why calendrical symbolism should serve this purpose are obscure but may lie in the inextricable links between the mesoamerican pantheon and calendar, and the particular identification of the Storm God with martial imagery and the annual agricultural cycle.

A further link between the feathered V adorno and the Storm God is provided by the Quincross infix of its V panels. This is a common sign throughout Mesoamerica. Paired with the interlaced bands sign it forms the Maya glyph for the month Pop and it has also been interpreted in the Maya culture as a symbol for turquoise and, by inference, as a water sign. Contextual evidence suggests that both usages may occur at Teotihuacan. It is on occasion paired with the interlaced bands sign (though it is uncertain whether this is calendrical) and it appears in sign clusters where one would expect to find a reference to water, often as part of Storm God imagery. Among many examples, it appears in Storm God insignia, in his headdress in several murals of Tepantitla's Tlalocan Patio, as an affix to his sound scrolls, and as an infix in libations.

What conclusions can be drawn from the Storm God use of items from the V manta sign cluster as costume accessories? First, they demonstrate the intimate relationship between the deity and the manta and, by extension, with the incensario on which it appears. This is interesting since there is so little in incensario imagery that relates directly to any deity. Past identifications of the RHM incensario with specific deities have been based on general iconographic considerations, not the presence of imagery uniquely associated with that deity. The present evidence is specific and direct and, while it is not of a kind to establish the RHM incensario as a symbolic substitute for the Storm God, it adds a new dimension to our understanding of the incensario and corroborates the martial affiliation implied by much of its imagery. Second, they add to the known corpus of calendrical notation in the headdresses and attire of martial figures and establish a link between the Storm God, the Teotihuacan martial deity par excellence, and the use of such notation as an emblem of military leadership.

At this stage of the enquiry many leads remain to be explored. In particular the symbolism of the many forms of the tabular manta deserve further study, as do the identity and uses of the diverse types of incensario that were developed at Teotihuacan. However, on the basis of the past work of many scholars and the symbolism of the V manta several hypotheses regarding the meaning and usage of the RHM incensario now come to mind. One is that the incensario was used in periodic ritual pertaining to warriors or martial activity that was scheduled in relation to a time cycle or coincided with the passage from one such cycle to the next. Alternatively, it may have been featured in the kind of periodic mortuary and memorial ritual described by Torquemada in Chapter XLV of Book XIII of his Monarquia Indiana according to which ceremonies were held monthly during the first 80 days following the death of a native ruler and annually thereafter for four years. Archaeological verification is very much to be desired for it is difficult, without it, to make a judgement on these or other possible hypotheses. However, the fact that incensarios are found in both mortuary and offertory contexts weighs in favour of the notion of memorial or dedicatory ritual. The human head mask, central to the RHM incensario and often painted, is also a feature of the mummy bundle or shroud described by Torquemada and generally accepted as having the same function at Teotihuacan. Finally, the adornos of birds, butterflies and flowers that decorate most incensarios are not only associated with the departed in mesoamerican mythology, but are also frequently described as among the most common of offerings to the dead. All in all the circumstantial evidence points to death, martial elite and some form of periodicity as the focus for incensario ritual.

A final caution. To use a judicial metaphor, there are no witnesses from Teotihuacan and, once one goes beyond the material facts of the ancient culture, all hypotheses rest on chains of circumstantial evidence that are notoriously prone to error. This paper is no exception to the rule and is offered as a contribution to an on-going debate.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am profoundly grateful to Dr. Garcia Moll, former Director of the Museo Nacional de Antropologia for permission to examine the Teotihuacan incensarios in the museum, to Profesor Ruben Cabrera for providing material for study from his extensive excavations in the context of the Proyecto Teotihuacan 80-82 and to the Peabody Museum for access at short notice to its extensive Teotihuacan collection. I also owe a debt of gratitude to Dr Saburo Sugiyama and Dr Stanley Loten who read and commented most helpfully on an earlier version of this paper and to Maestra Clara Diaz for her many contributions to my work. Finally, I am indebted to Dr Nancy Troike for the suggestion that the incensario might have been featured in periodic mortuary ritual.

ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig 1: Incensario. Teotihuacan. Private collection.

Fig 2: Manta, tabular type from the incensario in Fig 1.

Fig 3: (a) Manta, V type. Courtesy of the Ethnografiska Museet, Stockholm. (b) Manta, V type. Private collection.

Fig 4: Feathered V adorno. Courtesy of the Ethnografiska Museet, Stockholm.

Fig 5: Stone sculpture with symbolism of the New Fire ritual. Courtesy of the Teotihuacan Regional Museum, INAH, Mexico.

Fig 6: Codex Mendoza title page.

Fig 7: Calendrical glyphs flank the stairway of the Teocalli de la Guerra Sagrada. Courtesy of the Museo Nacional de Antropología, INAH, Mexico.

Fig 8: Cabecita.

Fig 9: Fragmentary figurine.

Fig 10: Incensario. Courtesy of the Museo Nacional de Antropología, INAH, Mexico.

Fig 11: Mural painting. Anteroom of the Gods, Techinantitla. After Sugiyama (1992): Fig 17.

Fig 12: Painted and stuccoed cylinder tripod vessel. Private collection

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Batres, Leopoldo

1906 Teotihuacán. Memoria que presenta Leopoldo Batres, Inspector General... al XV Congreso Internacional de Americanistas... Quebec... Imprenta de Fidencio S. Soria, México, D.F.

Berlo, Janet C.

1982 Artistic specialization at Teotihuacan: the ceramic incense burner. In Pre-Columbian Art History: selected readings. 2nd ed., edited by A. Cordy-Collins, pp. 83-100. Peek Publications, Palo Alto.

Caso, Alfonso

1927 El teocalli de la guerra sagrada. Monografias del Museo Nacional de Arqueologia, Historia y Etnografia. Secretaria de Educacion Publica, Mexico DF.

1965 Zapotec writing and calendar. HMAI, vol. 3, edited by Gordon R. Willey, pp. 931-947.

1967a Los calendarios prehispánicos. Serie de culture Nahuatl, monografia No. 6. Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas. UNAM, México, D.F. (Note: the studies listed above are reprinted in this volume.)

1967b Dioses y signos Teotihuacanos. In Teotihuacán: Onceava Mesa Redonda, pp. 249-279. SMA, México, D.F.

Cooper Clark, James

1938 Codex Mendoza. Waterlow & Sons, London.

Foncerrada de Molina, Marta

1993 Cacaxtla: la iconografia de los Olmeca-Xicalanca. UNAM, Mexico DF.

Gamio, Manuel (editor)

1922 La población del Valle de Teotihuacán, vol. 1: la población prehispánica. Secretaría de Agricultura y Fomento, México, D.F.

Langley, James C.

1986 Symbolic notation of Teotihuacan: elements of writing in a mesoamerican culture of the Classic period. BAR International Series 313. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford.

1992 Teotihuacan sign clusters: emblem or articulation? In Art, ideology, and the city of Teotihuacan, edited by Janet C. Berlo, pp. 247-280. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington D.C.

Nicholson, H.B.

1959 The Chapultepec cliff sculpture of Motecuhzoma Xocoyotzin. El Mexico antiguo IX : 379-423.

1966 The significance of the "looped cord" year symbol in pre-Hispanic Mexico: an hypothesis. Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl 6: 135-147.

Saenz, Cesar

1967 El fuego nuevo. Serie Historia XVIII. INAH, México, D.F.

Sugiyama, Saburo

1992 Rulership, Warfare, and Human Sacrifice at the Ciudadela: an Iconographic Study of Feathered Serpent Representations. In Art, ideology, and the city of Teotihuacan, edited by Janet C. Berlo, pp. 205-230. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington D.C.

Thompson, J. Eric S.

1971 Maya hieroglyphic writing. 3rd edition. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

von Winning, Hasso

1977 The old Fire God and his symbolism at Teotihuacan. Indiana 4: 7-61. Berlin.

1979 The "Binding of the Years" and the "New Fire" in Teotihuacan. Indiana 5: 15-32. Berlin.

1987 El simbolismo del arte funerario de Teotihuacan. In Arte funerario. Coloquio internacional de historia del arte, vol I, edited by Louise Noelle, pp 55-63. Instituto de Investigaciones Esteticas, Cuadernos de historia del arte 41-I. UNAM, Mexico, D.F.