A Maya Carved Shell Plaque From Tula, Hidalgo, Mexico

Abstract

In the early 1880s, a finely carved Maya shell picture plaque was found at the Toltec capital of Tula, central Mexico, and was subsequently acquired by The Field Museum in Chicago. The shell was probably re-carved in the Terminal Classic period and depicts a seated lord with associated Maya hieroglyphs on the front and back. Here the iconography and glyphic text of this unique artifact are examined, the species and habitat of the shell are described, and its archaeological and social context are interpreted. The Tula plaque is then compared with Maya carved jade picture plaques of similar size and design that were widely distributed throughout Mesoamerica, but were later concentrated in the sacred cenote at Chichen Itza. It is concluded that during the Late Classic period, these plaques played an important role in establishing contact between Maya lords and their counterparts representing peripheral and non-Maya domains. The picture plaques may have been elite Maya gifts establishing royal alliances with non-local polities and may have become prestige objects used in caches and termination rituals.

From Tula Chico to Chichén Itzá: Implications of the Epiclassic Sculpture of Tula for the Nature and Timing of Tula-Chichén Contact

“…Several other kinds of data support the suggestion of early contact between the two centers. A carved shell plaque showing a seated Maya ruler in Late Classic style was collected at Tula in the nineteenth century (McVicker and Palka 2001), and a Classic Maya polychrome vessel bearing another image of a seated lord was excavated at the site in the 1980s (Cobean 1990:488-493, lámina 222). Bey and Ringle (2007:378) suggest that the vase was acquired at Tula during the Tollan phase.…”

Fifty Shades of Green: Interpreting Maya Jade Production, Circulation, Consumption, and Value

“…These picture plaques, in their finished form, were almost certainly gifts between elites that served as a kind of calling card, given on royal visits, as a symbol of political alliance (McVicker and Palka 2001; see also Pillsbury et al 2012:Plate 41; Schele and Miller 1986). Most of these plaques show rulers seated on thrones, possibly indicating that these were a stand in for royal power, as a gift they would represent the personage of the king (see also Graeber 2014 for objects coming to represent humans as a substitute for human currency).…”

“…Many of these examples were burned and those that show burning (in that they were broken and discolored white or brown) were probably deposited in the Sacred Cenote of Chichen Itza, and those that remain pristine often come from caches. McVicker and Palka (2001:193) argue that if they were meant to establish and maintain peripheral relations this may be why few, if any, were found in the Usumacinta region where they were possibly carved. The fact that they were not included with interments may suggest that they were not seen as individual or personal inalienable possessions, but perhaps represented a community or larger ideal, as a lasting example of political alliances between communities (see also Kovacevich and Callaghan 2013; Mills 2004).…”

“…In order to assess if plaque blanks were circulated as standardized commodities, it may be helpful to look at a certain type of plaque that was relatively homogeneous in form and iconography, such as the “Nebaj-type objects” studied by Proskouriakoff (1974:175). These plaques were named for those first found at Nebaj in 1946 (Smith and Kidder 1951:Figures 59a and 59b) and are part of a larger category called “picture plaques” (McVicker and Palka 2001). Proskouriakoff (1974) and Smith and Kidder (1951) argue that these objects were carved on or near the lower Usumacinta drainage (possibly at a single workshop) due to the similarity in sculptural style to monumental art in the region.…”

Figurines Are Us? The Social Organization of Jaina Island, Campeche, Mexico

“…Miller's 12 men on thrones deserve additional analysis. Although they appear to be representatives of nobility, Goldstein (1979:91) notes that, “the ceramic figurines occupying the throne are like the glyphs [on the throne], repeated symbols rather than individuals.” In fact, the even more regal-appearing figures carved on conch shell sections reputedly from Jaina also fail to yield inscriptions clearly designating the depicted lord as Ajaw (McVicker and Palka 2001:181, Figure 5).…”