1Running head SHORTENED VERSION OF TITLEPAGE .docx

1
Running head: SHORTENED VERSION OF TITLE
PAGE
2
SHORTENED TITLE HERE IN ALL CAPS
Full Title of Your Paper Here
Your Name
School or Institution Name (University at Place or Town, State)
Your Full Title of Your Paper
Hit the tab key one time to begin the main body of the paper.
The paragraphs of the main document are indented. The
computer will wrap your text for you based upon the margin
settings established by this document template. It is not
necessary for you to hit the Enter or return key at the end of a
line of text. Only hit the enter key (one time) when you reach
the end of a paragraph.
Then hit the tab key to indent and then continue typing the
paper. In APA any source that you use in your paper must have
an in-text citation. In APA these citations include the author’s

last name and the year of the publication in parentheses (Name,
Year).
References
Lastname, C. (2008). Title of the source without caps except
Proper Nouns or: First word after colon. The Journal or
Publication Italicized and Capped, Vol#(Issue#), Page numbers.
Maya Decipherment
Ideas on Ancient Maya Writing and Iconography
JUNE 13, 2016
The Face of the Calendar Stone: A New
Interpretation
by David Stuart • Article • Tags: Aztec, Moteuczoma, Nahui
Ollin
by David Stuart, The University of Texas at Austin
Note: The following post, a bit off-topic from the world of
Maya hieroglyphs, is excerpted from a larger work
now in preparation, provisionally titled “The Face of the
Cosmos: Further Interpretations of the Aztec Calendar
Stone”
(https://decipherment.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/piedra-del-
sol-cropped.jpg)
Figure 1. Photograph of the sculpted face of the Aztec Calendar
Stone, or Piedra del Sol. Museo Nacional de

Antropología, Mexico City.
After over two centuries of intensive scholarly attention and
commentary there would seem little left
to say about the symbolism of the so-called Calendar Stone or
Piedra del Sol of Tenochtitlan, the single
most iconic image of Aztec culture and ancient Mexico (Figure
1). Much has been written and
debated about its imagery and iconography, yet a few basic
questions regarding its intended meaning
continue to be the subject of discussion and even fervent
disagreement. If nothing else its varied
interpretations reveal that the full significance of this
quintessential Mesoamerican object, like much
of Aztec and Maya iconography, still remains beyond our reach.
Or, as Villela, Robb and Miller
(2010:4) point out, “for all that has been written on the
Calendar Stone, we can be sure that it has not
yet full revealed its secrets.”
The truth of this statement comes across as soon as one delves
into the long-running debate over the
identity of the face at the very center of the design (Figure 2). It
seems at once integral to the larger
design of the solar disc as well as to the Olin day sign that
forms the Nahui Olin (“Four Movement”)
name of the current sun or era. Early in the twentieth century,
Eduard Seler and Hermann Beyer
were adamant that the visage at the center of the disc was that
of Tonatiuh, or “an image of the sun,
no more and no less,” as Seler (1904a:797) once put it. This
became the standard interpretation

reinforced by numerous publications over the ensuing decades.
However, Navarrete and Heyden
(1974) proposed that the face was rather that of the animate
earth, Tlalteuctli. Around the same time
Townsend (1979) made a similar interpretation in his important
study of Aztec imperial art. And in a
somewhat related vein Klein (1976) rejected the traditional
Tonatiuh interpretation in favor of seeing
it as the face of the night sun, Yohualteuctli. In this essay I
would like to add some additional
thoughts on this key question, based on epigraphic clues in the
surrounding design, suggesting that it
may also have a firm historical identity as a deified portrait of
the Mexica ruler Moteuczoma II.
Figure 2. The central Nahui Olin glyph of the Calendar Stone.
The face itself is clearly embedded within the hieroglyphic
forms around it. As Klein noted (1976:9),
(https://decipherment.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/nahui-
olin.jpg)
Figure 3. A standard presentation of the hieroglyph for Nahui
Olin (Four Movement), showing an eye (ixtli)
in the center of the Olin element. From the Codex Borbonicus.
the face’s location in the center of the Olin glyph points to it
being a graphic elaboration on the central
eye motif that appears in nearly all other (simpler) examples of
the Olin sign (Figure 3). This surely
plays off of the full range of meanings of the Nahuatl noun
ixtli, meaning “face, eye, surface”
(Kartunen 1983:121). This is an important detail to consider, for

it suggests that the central face, as a
more visually developed ixtli, is more integral to the Olin sign
than to the solar disc. In depicting a
face at the center, the Nahuatl-speaking artist(s) thus chose to
develop the Olin’s design in a way that
was linguistically and conceptually logical. Interestingly, ixtli
can have a more abstract notion of
“identity” – the diagnostic “face” of a person or thing. The last
of these definitions of ixtli is of special
note given the many varied interpretations of the central visage
proposed over the last several
decades. Here we see how language serves as an important
conceptual baseline for interpreting the
Calendar Stone’s composition and hieroglyphic design –
something that seems underappreciated in
some of what has been written on the monument and Aztec art
in general.
Before the 1970s nearly all scholars followerd Seler and Beyer
in seeing the central face as a
straightforward portrait of Tonatiuh, the sun god. Differing
interpretations have largely hinged on
two features of the central visage — the knife-tongue of that
emerges from the grimacing mouth and
the clawed appendages that flank the face, each grasping a
human heart. According to Navarrete and
Heyden (1974) and Townsend (1979) these were clear
indications that the face is that of Tlalteuctli, the
earth lord. As Navarrete and Heyden concluded:
…nos parece que el rostro esculpido en medio del Calendario
Azteca or Piedra del Sol, no es de Tonatiuh
sino de Tlaltecuhtli, que irrumpe hacia arriba mirando al cielo,
de acuerdo con la verdadera posición del
monumento, esculpido y dedicado al Quinto Sol, el Sol de
movimiento de Tierra, Nahui Ollin, o 4

Movimiento (Navarrete and Heyden 1976:374).
Townsend furthermore noted, “the idea that the central mask of
the Sun Stone represents the face of
the earth, and not the face of Tonatiuh, ‘the sun,’ is consistent
with the enclosing glyph ollin”
(Townsend 1979:69). This is because of the common translation
of olin as “earthquake” (its meaning is
actually a bit more general, hence my preference for
“movement” or “quake”), and perhaps also that
the meaning of the corresponding seventeenth day in other
Mesoamerican cultures includes “earth”
(for example, the Maya day Caban < kab, “earth”). In his view
the central visage represented “both the
sacred earth and the territory of the Mexica nation” (Townsend
1979:69). Such interpretations in
favor of Tlalteuctli, the animate earth, at the center of the
Calendar Stone seem compelling for two
reasons: the face’s formal qualities as well as the stone’s
original orientation as a flat, upward-facing
surface. Spatially this all seems to make considerable sense.
The Tlalteuctli interpretation failed to win over all specialists in
Aztec iconography, however. In a
nuanced and influential study, Cecilia Klein (1976) also called
into question the traditional Tonatiuh
identification but proposed that the central face is neither a
direct representation of the sun nor of the
earth. Rather she interpreted it as an image of Yohualteuctli,
the “Night Lord,” who Seler had
specifically identified as the nocturnal sun within the
Underworld. As Klein noted, “since
Yohualtecuhtli was a god of the earth, darkness, death and the
south a center of the world, his

appearance in a context of the world at the center of the earth in
the middle of the night is far more
logical than would be that of Tonatiuh” (Klein 1976:10). Klein
suggested that a specific aspect of a
solar being is at the center of the Calendar Stone, just not its
more obvious aspect as the warming
Tonatiuh who rises in the eastern sky.
Nicholson (1993:14) offered a strong rejoinder to all of the
many alternate interpretations that
emerged in the 1970s, preferring to adhere to Seler and Beyer’s
original and more direct
interpretation: “Despite all of the recent efforts on the part of
many serious students to refute or
significantly modify the traditional view that this image
represents Tonatiuh, the diurnal solar diety, I
believe the best evidence still supports this identification.”
Nicholson noted that the knife-tongue of
the central face was not necessarily a strong diagnostic feature
of Tlateuctli, appearing with some
frequency on images of other other deities in Aztec
iconography. Nicholson was not even sure of the
knife-tongue’s “debatable” significance.
To complicate the debate further, Felipe Solís more recently
noted that the central face of the
headdress of this Calendar Stone’s might be best interpreted as
Xiuhteuctli, the “Turquoise Lord,”
considered the god of “the center of the universe, whose image
has hybrid characteristics of the earth
and underworld” (Solís Olquín 2000:36). He based this
assertion on a consideration of the headband,
seeing its central jewel as a variant of the xiuhtototl bird,
considered a diagnostic feature of that deity
(see also Matos Moctezuma 2004:63).

Although such arguments reflect significant disagreement
regarding the identity of the central face,
they also could reveal the inherent ambiguity in identifying
some Aztec deities as singular, discrete
entities. The rigid either-or dichotomies of those earlier studies
go against the more fluid senses of
identity that Aztec artisans and theologians ascribed to such
religious imagery. Nicholson was surely
correct in pointing out that the animate knife-tongue and clawed
hands clutching hearts pertain to
different supernatural beings, but I would argue that their
meaning is fairly clear: rather than being
diagnostic features, they characterize those powerful deities that
pierce, cut, take and consume the
hearts from human sacrifice. Knives used in sacrifice were,
perhaps, metaphorical “tongues” of the
sun and of the earth. Both the earth and the sun in their varied
aspects are equally viable candidates
in this respect. Moreover, I think it also very relevant that one
of the hieroglyphs prominently
featured in relationship to the central image of the Calendar
Stone is 1 Flint (Ce Tecpatl), equally
translatable as “1 Knife” (see Figure 4, below). This day-sign
shows the same attached eyes and fangs
replicated the animated knife-tongue of the central face. As we
will see, this hieroglyph carries
specific mythological meaning as a calendar name for yet
another important Mexica deity.
Decades after the related studies by Klein, Navarrete, Heyden
and Townsend, the identify of the
central face of the Calendar Stone’s Olin glyph will no doubt
continue to be debated. Again, I suspect

that a lack of any firm consensus reflects the deliberate
intention of the stone’s original designers to
present a conflation of forms and spatial ideas. The face shows
a combination of features that at once
suggest Tonatiuh as well as the sun’s reflection on or within
earth. In other words, a number of
merged identifies may play into the overall significance of the
central face. Surely the original
orientation of the Calendar Stone as an upward-facing
monument reflects its earth-bound nature, but
it was also a reflection of the sun at zenith (Taube 2000). And
as the face of the Olin sign it presents
the animate visage of both terrestrial and celestial “movement.”
There is a good deal more to say about the identity of the
central face. What previous writers have
neglected to point out is that the designers of the Calendar
Stone may have been quite explicit in
marking its identification by means of hieroglyphic labels and
elements. As I elaborate in the
following section, certain hieroglyphic names and designation
that are embedded in the design of the
Calendar Stone gravitate to the central olin sign and seem to
make direct reference to it, serving as
labels of identity that have until now gone unrecognized or
misunderstood.
Featured within the interior of the design, adjacent to the Olin
glyph, are four smaller hieroglyphs
grouped into two pairs. Like the four “era” glyphs infixed
within the arms of the olin, these are
oriented to face one another along the central vertical axis of
the composition. At the base of the circle
are two date glyphs, 1 Rain and 7 Monkey, the significances of
which remain uncertain. Umberger
(1988) pointed out that 1 Rain was the day, according to

Sahagún, when sacrifices were made to
rejuvenate the strength of the king. She notes (ibid.) that
“Motecuhzoma, like the sun, apparently
needed sacrifices to renew him.” Of the the upper pair of
glyphs, the left-most hieroglyph shows a
royal xuihuitzolli headband with falling hair and various
adornments, opposite a calendrical reference
to 1 Flint (Figure 4, in blue). The placement of these
hieroglyphs above and in in direct association to
the central Olin hieroglyph suggests to my mind that these may
have direct bearing on the long-
standing question of the identity of the central face.
Figure 4. The two principal hieroglyphs (in blue) adjacent to the
Nahui Olin sign. To the left is the name of
Moteuczoma II, to the right is 1 Flint, the likely calendar name
of Huitzilopochtli (Drawing by E. Umberger).
The headdress or headband glyph was seen by Seler and Beyer
as a symbolic reference to the spirits
of deceased warriors and, by extension, to the eastern sky (Seler
1904). However, Umberger (1981:205,
1988), following an earlier suggestion by Peñafiel (1890), was
surely correct to see this as a
particularly elaborate version of the name hieroglyph of
Moteuczoma II, of which there are many
examples on other monuments (Umberger 1981, 1988) (Figure
5). Her groundbreaking insight
provided a key historical context for the monument , dating it to
between 1503 and 1519, an
attribution that is now widely accepted.

Figure 5. Various examples of Moteuczoma’s name glyph, (g)
being from the Calendar Stone. From Hajovsky
2015:Fig. 1.1. (Drawings by P.T. Hajovsky).
The adjacent 1 Flint glyph, opposite the personal name of the
ruler, has been variously interpreted. It
was the name of a key year in the migration history of the
Mexica, marking the departure date from
Aztlan and also the year in which the Mexica defeated the
Tepenecs early in the reign of Itzcoatl.
However, it is perhaps significant that the 1 Flint glyph here
lacks the square xihuitl cartouche that
one customarily finds with year records. Perhaps, then, it is not
to be taken as an explicit year
reference, but as something more oblique and metaphorical.
Indeed, in another important insight
Umberger (1988) suggested that it should more correctly be
seen as the calendrical name of
Huitzilopochtli, the patron deity of Tenochtitlan, an
embodiment of the sun, and in certain respects
Moteuczoma’s supernatural counterpart. This interpretation
seems intrinsically attractive given 1
Flint’s visual juxtaposition with Moteuczoma II’s name glyph,
as if these were two names associated
with and reflective of one another. And in addition to being a
probable calendar reference to
Huitzilpochtli, 1 Flint may symbolically evoke the theme of
heart sacrifice. Here I am reminded of the
evident symbolism of the day 1 Etznab (equivalent to 1 Flint)
among the Classic Maya. In the
mythological text of Temple XIX at Palenque, 1 Etznab is the
day of the axe sacrifice of the great
alligator(s) by the local dynastic patron god GI (see Stuart
2005:68-75).

Those who accept the presence of Moteuczoma II’s name on the
Calendar Stone generally consider
his hieroglyph as designating the tlahtoani (ruler) who
commissioned the sculpture in the early
sixteenth century, not as something more functional or integral
within the larger design of the
monument. However, it seems reasonable to suppose that the
careful and intentional positioning of
both the ruler’s name and the 1 Flint glyph (also a name) within
the inner circle holds important
meaning in the Calendar Stone’s overall composition and
meaning, and deserves further
consideration. Simply put, both glyphs are placed directly
above the face and its surrounding Nahui
Olin glyph, within the circular frame, and thus seem integral to
the central design. This interior
placement of the glyphs is highly significant, suggesting that
they serve as labels or names. That is to
say, they serve to identify the deity represented at the center of
the stone as both historical and
mythical aspects of the sun. After all, several examples of the
Moteuczoma II name glyph accompany
portraits of the ruler, such as on the Hackmack Box, the
Chapultepec Cliff Sculpture, and the Teocalli
of Sacred Warfare (see Figure 5, e and f). In this new
interpretation the central face of the Calendar
Stone is explicitly labelled as Moteuczoma II as well as an
embodiment of 1 Flint, the birth date of
Huitzilopochtli. Here we should recall that the 1 Flint name
glyph visually echoes an obvious feature
of the central face, its flint-knife tongue. The xiuhuitzolli
diadem that adorns the name glyph of
Moteuczoma likewise bears an animated “flint face,” perhaps
visually linking it as well to the central

face of the monument.
If we interpret these two related name glyphs as labels for the
accompanying image, we naturally
must wonder how they pertain to the long debate about the
identity of the central face as either the
visage of the sun or of the earth. I doubt the issue is so binary
and oppositional, as explained above,
and prefer to see an intention to convey multiple identifies for
the central face. But the key point here
is that the monument provides its own explicit indication of two
identities: one historical, the
emperor Moteuczoma II, and one mythological, the solar aspect
of Huitzilopochtli. The face is
directly labeled by these hieroglyphs as a portrait of the defied
ruler who embodies and exemplifies
the Mexica patron god.
As Stephanie Strauss has pointed out to me (personal
communication, 2016), one intriguing detail of
the inner circle could be taken as indirect support for such a
historical identification. If we consider
the face to be a deified portrait of the tlahtoani, it is possible
see the large pointed form above the
head, a feature of the Olin glyph — as a playful visual reference
to the ruler’s xuihuitzolli diadem.
Indeed the shape is identical to the diadems when they are seen
in frontal view (Figure 6). And as
we can see in Figure 5 above, the very same diadem (in profile
view) and the strands of hair visible
on other side of the face are the two consistent elements of the
king’s name glyphs. In those examples
the diadem stands for the word
(https://decipherment.wordpress.com/2015/01/26/the-royal-
headband-a-pan-mesoamerican-hieroglyph-for-ruler/)teuc(tli)
(https://decipherment.wordpress.com/2015/01/26/the-royal-

headband-a-pan-mesoamerican-hieroglyph-for-
ruler/), “lord,” a core term embedded within the name
Moteuczoma.
Figure 6. Comparison of the headband of the Calendar Stone’s
central face to the royal xiuhuitzolli diadem as
depicted in the Codex Borboniicus.
It seems appropriate then that the central image of the Calendar
Stone would be at once cosmological
and personalized, linking the cosmic forces of the sun to the
persona of the living ruler. The solar
identification of the tlahtoani was elegantly conveyed by the
oration of Nezahualpilli, the king of
Texcoco, at the accession ceremony of Moteuczomah II, as
described in Duran’s Historia:
O most powerful of all the kings on earth! The clouds have been
dispelled and the darkness in which we
lived has fled. The sun has appeared and the light of the day
shines upon us after the darkness that had been
brought by the death of your uncle the king. The torch that
illuminates this city has again been lighted and
today a mirror has been placed before us, into which we are to
look (Durán 1994:391)
Here the poetic parallelism is made between the inauguration of
the king, the rise of the bright sun,
and to the symbolism of New Fire ceremony. The ruler is the
diurnal sun as well as a mirror of the
community. All of these metaphors are among the many visual
messages that are encoded visually in
the design of the Calendar Stone.

To refine these concepts further, it is important to note that the
person of the tlahtoani was viewed at
times as the embodiment and personification of Huitzilopochtli,
himself a specific aspect of the sun.
In fact this equation is a basic tenet of ancient Mexica ideology.
The core myth of Huitzilopochtli’s
birth was a metaphor of solar birth and creation, famously
replicated through spatial performance at
his shrine in the huey teocalli in the main precinct of
Tenochtitlan. His main weapon, as described in
Sahagún and elsewhere, was the xiuhcoatl serpent representing
the shooting stars or the sun’s
piercing rays, and of course these are the two dominant images
at the edge of the Calendar Stone. As
Umberger (1987:425) noted, “the ruler, Huitzilopochtli and the
sun are closely related in Mexico
thought: the ruler is the human imitator of the sun god, and the
fortunes of both are compared to that
of the sun.” We see this fundamental unity of ruler and patron
god depicted in a very overt manner
on the Stone of Tizoc, where the one labelled image of that
ruler shows him as a conqueror wearing
the regal hummingbird headdress of the Mexica patron deity
(Hajovsky 2015:104) (Figure 7). I see a
similar fusion of identities encoded by the hieroglyphic labels
on the Calendar Stone, referring to the
deified central face that visually presents itself as a more
“generic” cosmic force and actor as the sun,
the earth, or as some fusion of the two. It is the hieroglyphs
that provide the specific ideological
message.
Figure 7. The ruler Tizoc (left) in the guise of Huitzilopochtli.

From the Stone of Tizoc. (Photograph by D.
Stuart).
We know that elsewhere in Mesoamerica rulers were frequently
presented as embodiments of the sun
and of calendrical cycles, and in this light the Calendar Stone
seems little different. Among the Classic
Maya are several images of historical rulers as the hieroglyphs
for Ahau, becoming the personified
essence of of period endings in the Long Count calendar. On La
Palma, Stela 5, for example, the local
king of the Lakamtuun royal line is portrayed within a
hieroglyph pronounced ajaw, “king,” in the
writing of the time period 7 Ahau (Figure 8). In a similar way
Maya kings were often shown on ritual
occasions and upon their accessions as embodiments of katuns
and of other units of time (see Stuart
1996). I wonder if similar ideas existed among the Mexica, and
if the Calendar Stone similarly
equates a specific ruler not only with the sun and with celestial
power, but also with a particular
calendrical and temporal identity, Nahui Olin. The notion that
time itself could be embodied and
personified through a living king or queen seems to have been
prelevant in Mesoamerican ideology
and theology.
Figure 8. A Maya ruler as the embodiment of the time period 7
Ahau. Detail from El Palma Stela 5.
(Preliminary drawing by D. Stuart).
In sum, my tentative identification of the Calendar Stone’s
central face as that of Moteuczoma II in

deified form remains a working hypothesis. It is not a portrait
in any conventional sense, but rather a
mythologized image of the living ruler who embodies other
beings and cosmic elements. If true, this
new interpretation would add an important new historical
dimension to the long-standing questions
surrounding the monument and its overall meaning, and of
course regarding the old debate of its
identity as Tonatiuh or Tlalteuctli, etc.. To my mind either or
both of these interpretations seem
possible. In any case, layered with these multi-faceted identities
are the labels that suggest the face is
a deified image of Moteuczoma II as the Mexica patron deity
Huitzilopochtli. Whatever other
significances the central face may have, these two names appear
to be the two specific written
identities featured by the artist who designed the Calendar
Stone. This iconic monument thus
becomes a more overt political, even personalized, statement,
featuring the reigning emperor not only
in the cosmic role as the reborn sun and/or consuming earth, but
also as the embodiment of time in
general.
Note and Acknowledgements
Some readers may be confused by the varied spellings of the
Aztec ruler’s name. I use Moteuczoma
following my former Nahuatl professor, J. Richard Andrews,
who long insisted that common
spellings such as “Motecuhzoma” or “Moctezuma” don’t
accurately reflect the underlying Nahuatl
phonology nor the semantic parsing of the name, meaning “One
Who Frowns Like a Lord.”
I thank Emily Umberger and Stephen Houston, who provided

very useful feedback. As noted, this
essay is an excerpt of a longer study of the Calendar Stone now
in preparation, much of which grew
out of from my UT-Austin course on Aztec art in the fall of
2015, and a graduate seminar on
Mesoamerican iconography in the spring of this year. I would
also like to thank a number of students
and colleagues at UT-Austin for their insights, including Tim
Beach, Elliot Lopez-Finn, Edwin Román
Ramirez, Sergio Romero, and, especially, Stephanie Strauss,
who first pointed out the possible diadem
on the Calendar Stone’s central face.
References
Durán, Fray Diego. 1994. The History of the Indies of New
Spain. University of Oklahoma Press,
Norman.
Hajovsky, Patrick Thomas. 2015. On the Lips of Others:
Moteuczoma’s Fame in Aztec Monuments and
Rituals. University of Texas Press, Austin.
Kartunnen, Francis. 1988. An Analytical Dictionary of Nahuatl.
University of Texas Press, Austin.
Klein, Cecilia. 1976. The Identity of the Central Deity on the
Aztec Calendar Stone. The Art Bulletin
58(1):1-12.
Navarrete, Carlos, and Doris Heyden. 1974. La cara central de
la piedra del sol: una hipótesis. Estudios
de Cultura Nahuatl, vol. XI, pp. 355-376.

Nicholson, Henry B. 1993. The Problem of the Identification of
the Central Image of the Aztec
Calendar Stone. In Current Topics in Aztec Studies: Essays in
Honor of Dr. H.B. Nicholson. San Diego
Museum of Man, San Diego.
Peñafiel, Antonio. 1890. Monumentos del arte mexicano
antiguo. A. Asher, Berlin.
Seler, Eduard. 1904. Die Ausgrabungen am Orte des Hauptemels
in Mexico. In Gesemmelte
Abhandlungen zur Amerikanischen Sprach- und
Alterthumskunde, vol. II, pp. 767-904. A. Asher & Co.,
Berlin.
Solis, Felipe. 2000. La Piedra del sol. Arqueología Mexicana,
vol VII, no. 41: 32-39.
Stuart, David. 2005. The Inscriptions from Temple XIX at
Palenque. Pre-Columbian Art Research
Institute, San Francisco.
Taube, Karl. 2000. The Turquoise Hearth: Fire, Self Sacrifice,
and the Central Mexican Cult of War. In
Mesoamerica’s Classic Heritage: From Teotihuacan to the
Aztecs, edited by D. Carasco, L. Jones and S.
Sessions, pp. 269-340. University Press of Colorado, Boulder.
Townsend, Richard Fraser. 1979. State and Cosmos in the Art of
Tenochtitlan. Studies in Pre-Columbian
Art and Archaeology, Number 20. Dumbarton Oaks,
Washington, D.C.
Umberger, Emily. 1981. Aztec Sculptures, Hieroglyphs and
History. Ph.D. Dissertation, Graduate School

of Arts and ciences, Columbia University.
_____________. 1987. Events Commemorated by Date Plaques
at the Templo Mayor: Further
Thoughts on the Solar Metaphor. In The Aztec Templo Mayor,
edited by E. H. Boone, pp. 411-451.
Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C.
_____________. 1988. A Reconsideration of Some Hieroglyphs
on the Mexica Calendar Stone. In Smoke
and Mist: Mesoamerican Studies in Memory of Thelma D.
Sullivan, I:345-388. B.A.R, Oxford
Villela, Kristaan D., Matthew Robb and Mary Ellen Miller.
2010. Introduction. In The Aztec Calendar
Stone, edited by Villela, Kristaan D. and Mary Ellen Miller, pp.
1-41. Getty Research Institute, Los
Angeles.
Blog at WordPress.com. | The Newsy Theme. Design by
Themify.
About these ads (https://wordpress.com/about-these-ads/)
A
(https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/wp-
content/uploads/2017/03/StoneGraphic.jpg)
Evidence suggests the sun god’s face was

unpainted or colored black, as shown in this
illustration, representing the sun darkened
during an eclipse. Florida Museum of Natural
H o m e ( h t t p s : / / w w w . flo r i d a m u s e u m . u fl. e d
u / s c i e n c e ) ∠
L i f e o n E a r t h ( h t t p s : / / w w w . flo r i d a m u s e u
m . u fl. e d u / s c i e n c e / t o p i c / l i f e - o n - e a r t h / )
∠ C u l t u r e s
( h t t p s : / / w w w . flo r i d a m u s e u m . u fl. e d u / s c i e
n c e / t o p i c / l i f e - o n - e a r t h / c u l t u r e s / )
Study finds central image of Aztec sun stone shows dying sun
god killed by
eclipse
E n e s p a ñ o l ( h t t p s : / / w w w . flo r i d a m u s e u m .
u fl. e d u / s c i e n c e / o m i n o s a -
i n t e r p r e t a c i o n - d e - l a - p i e d r a - d e l - c a l e n d
a r i o - a z t e c a / )
new study on one of the most important remaining artifacts from
the Aztec Empire, a 24-ton basalt
calendar stone, interprets the stone’s central image as the death
of the sun god Tonatiuh during an
eclipse, an event Aztecs believed would lead to a global
apocalypse accompanied by earthquakes.
Many scientists believe the heart of the stone to be the face of
Tonatiuh (pronounced toe-NAH-tee-
uh), atop which Aztecs offered human sacrifices to stave off the
end of the world. Researcher Susan Milbrath, a
Latin American art and archaeology curator at the Florida
Museum of Natural History, offers the new, ominous
interpretation of this symbol in the February print edition of the

journal Mexicon.
“They did perhaps have a more foreboding look on their future
than people in today’s societies do,” she said.
“But the Aztecs were more sophisticated in terms of astronomy
than people realize.”
Stone’s grisly past
The Aztec Empire dominated much of present-day central
Mexico from about 1325 until the 1520s, when the Spanish
colonized the region, assimilating locals to live more like their
O M I N O U S N E W I N T E R P R E T A T I O N O F A Z
T E C S U N S T O N E
M A R C H 2 7 , 2 0 1 7
Evidence suggests the sun god's face was unpainted or colored
black, like the sun darkened during an eclipse. Florida Museum
of Natural History graphic by James Young, with images from
El Commandant and Keepscases / Wikimedia Commons / CC-
BY-
SA-3.0
" #
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/wp-
content/uploads/2017/03/StoneGraphic.jpg
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/topic/life-on-earth/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/topic/life-on-
earth/cultures/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/ominosa-
interpretacion-de-la-piedra-del-calendario-azteca/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/ominous-new-

interpretation-of-aztec-sun-stone/#
History graphic by James Young, with images
from El Commandant and Keepscases /
Wikimedia Commons / CC-BY-SA-3.0
content/uploads/2017/03/Dickinson.jpg)
Curator Susan Milbrath is pictured with the
Aztec calendar stone at the Florida Museum,
one of the few replicas in the U.S. Florida
Museum of Natural History photo by Kristen
Grace
content/uploads/2016/12/DSC07720.jpg)
European conquerors. The Spanish buried the 12-foot-wide
calendar stone, also known as the Sun Stone, face down
before it was uncovered in 1790.
The stone, which was displayed in the main square of the Aztec
capital, Tenochtitlan, in present-day Mexico City,
was probably where the most treasured captives were sacrificed,
Milbrath said.

“That almost made it like a stage for public ritual,” she said.
The original stone is housed at the National Museum of
Anthropology in Mexico City, but the Florida Museum of
Natural History displays a full-size replica in the Dickinson
Hall courtyard on the University of Florida campus.
Studying the sun to predict the future
Milbrath said early cultures such as the Aztecs and Mayas
tracked the sun’s movements to predict future events,
such as weather patterns and astronomical cycles.
“It’s quite natural for people to want to predict cycles,” she
said. “Once people started tracking both the sun and the
moon and noticing the eclipses that occurred, it probably
became central to their religion.”
Like other early Mexican societies, the Aztecs relied heavily
on agriculture, growing maize, beans and squash to sustain their
population. But their dependence on the sun
for agriculture was also accompanied by a belief that they had
to feed the sun with the blood of human sacrifice
to keep it alive.
The Aztecs sacrificed a prisoner on the calendar stone on the
date 4 Olin, the day they believed the world would
end. The day repeats every 260 days in their calendar cycle.
With succession of the cycle, another prisoner was
sacrificed and the sun rose again the following day. Tonatiuh
lived on.
The priests, high in the Aztec society chain of command, were
responsible for charting astronomical
phenomena, including the eclipse that would bring impending
doom, Milbrath said.

They may have known that no eclipse would come on 4 Olin
during the height of the empire. Based on the Aztec
calendar system, a solar eclipse would not fall on that date until
the 21st century, she said.
“When they created their mythology, they made sure that 4 Olin
would never occur with an eclipse in their
world,” she said. “The possibility of purposeful manipulation
should not be ignored.”
Claws, human hearts and a darkened sun
One of the most important features of the stone, Milbrath said,
may have been washed away over time: paint.
In commonly used images, including one displayed beside the
original stone, the surface is colorful, with a
headdress- and necklace-adorned Tonatiuh depicted as a blue
and red figure framed in yellow.
content/uploads/2017/03/Dickinson.jpg
content/uploads/2016/12/DSC07720.jpg
This 8-foot replica of the sun stone is
displayed in Disney’s Epcot theme park in
Orlando. Florida Museum of Natural History
photo by Susan Milbrath
content/uploads/2017/03/AztecDisney1.jpg)
Tom Gardner and Addie Hassel, artisans with
Stelter Creative, photograph and measure the

Aztec Sun Stone replica at Dickinson Hall for
an 8-foot reproduction. The reproduction is
now in the Mexico pavilion at Disney’s Epcot
theme park in Orlando. Florida Museum of
Natural History photo by Kristen Grace
These colors are often used in Aztec paintings of Tonatiuh as
a living god, Milbrath said. But some evidence suggests the
image of Tonatiuh may have been left unpainted or colored
black, like the sun during a solar eclipse. Black was also used
in another important eclipse image of the dying sun in
another Central Mexican codex. Tonatiuh’s tongue, shown on
the Calendar Stone as a knife sticking out of his
mouth, was a common icon of death as well, she said.
Surrounding Tonatiuh are claws clutching human hearts,
alluding to an eclipse monster — the embodiment of
eclipses in other Aztec paintings and drawings — and a circle of
signs symbolizing the 260-day calendar used to
predict agricultural cycles and future events.
On the outermost ring, fire serpents — open-jawed snakes with
flames on their bodies and starry snouts —
represent a constellation closely associated with the sun in the
dry season, when the sun’s powerful rays were
most brilliant, Milbrath said.
For Aztecs, astronomy blended with religion
The Aztec obsession with astronomy was not an anomaly, she
said.
“Astronomy and religion have always been connected,” she
said. “It’s just innate, because without electric lights,
all you have to do at night is look up and see the vastness of the

stars in the sky.”
Aztec people likely tried to defy and combat the forces they
thought would destroy the sun during an eclipse, when
darkness covered the sun and harm could come to people,
Milbrath said.
“Pregnant women stayed indoors because they thought their
children would be born with horrible deformities,” she said.
“Most of the details of how the Aztecs dealt with solar
eclipses are not well-known, but they definitely did try to scare
away the monster they thought was eating the
sun.”
Milbrath said although human sacrifice was an important
practice in Aztec culture, scientists should not
overlook what they accomplished by being able to predict
eclipses.
“I hope people have an appreciation of the Aztecs not as some
bloodthirsty population,” she said. “They
probably killed a lot less people than we have in the 20th
century through collective warfare.”
“I’m afraid that warfare is endemic to our cultures. We’re
sacrificing people all the time, in different ways,” she
continued. “I’m not sure that we’re more sophisticated than they
were.”
E n e s p a ñ o l ( h t t p s : / / w w w . flo r i d a m u s e u m .
u fl. e d u / s c i e n c e / o m i n o s a -
i n t e r p r e t a c i o n - d e - l a - p i e d r a - d e l - c a l e n d
a r i o - a z t e c a / )

content/uploads/2017/03/AztecDisney1.jpg
∠
∠
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Author
By Emily Mavrakis
(https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/authors/emily-
mavrakis/) | More articles by
Emily Mavrakis
(https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/tag/Emily-
Mavrakis/)
• Learn more about the Latin American Archaeology Collection
(https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/latinarch/home/) at the
Florida Museum.
Tags
E M I L Y M A V R A K I S ( H T T P S : / / W W W . F L O
R I D A M U S E U M . U F L . E D U / S C I E N C E / T A G /
E M I L Y - M A V R A K I S / )
L A T I N A M E R I C A N A R C H A E O L O G Y ( H T T
P S : / / W W W . F L O R I D A M U S E U M . U F L . E D U /
S C I E N C E / T A G / L A T I N - A M E R I C A N -
A R C H A E O L O G Y / )
S U S A N M I L B R A T H ( H T T P S : / / W W W . F L O

R I D A M U S E U M . U F L . E D U / S C I E N C E / T A G /
S U S A N - M I L B R A T H / )
P R E V I O U S A R T I C L E ( H T T P S : / / W W W . F L
O R I D A M U S E U M . U F L . E D U / S C I E N C E / O M
I N O S A -
I N T E R P R E T A C I O N - D E - L A - P I E D R A - D E L
- C A L E N D A R I O - A Z T E C A / )
O M I N O S A I N T E R P R E T A C I Ó N D E L A P I E
D R A D E L C A L E N D A R I O A Z T E C A
( H T T P S : // W W W . F L O R I D A M U S E U M . U F L .
E D U / S C I E N C E / O M I N O S A -
I N T E R P R E T A C I O N - D E - L A - P I E D R A - D E L
- C A L E N D A R I O - A Z T E C A / )
N E X T A R T I C L E ( H T T P S : / / W W W . F L O R I D
A M U S E U M . U F L . E D U / S C I E N C E / 2 0 1 7 - N S
F - D I S S E R T A T I O N -
I M P R O V E M E N T - G R A N T S / )
2 0 1 7 N S F D I S S E R T A T I O N I M P R O V E M E N
T G R A N T S
( H T T P S : // W W W . F L O R I D A M U S E U M . U F L .
E D U / S C I E N C E / 2 0 1 7 - N S F -
D I S S E R T A T I O N - I M P R O V E M E N T - G R A N T
S / )
(https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/museum-reaches-
500000-digitized-mollusks-online/)
Museum
reaches
500,000
digitized

mollusks
online,
largest
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/tag/emily-mavrakis/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/tag/latin-american-
archaeology/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/tag/susan-milbrath/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/authors/emily-
mavrakis/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/tag/Emily-
Mavrakis/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/latinarch/home/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/2017-nsf-
dissertation-improvement-grants/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/2017-nsf-
dissertation-improvement-grants/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/museum-reaches-
500000-digitized-mollusks-online/
worldwide
(https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/museum-
reaches-
500000-
digitized-
mollusks-
online/)
(https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/new-book-reveals-

untold-history-of-pre-colonial-
caribbean-islands/)
(https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/on-the-defense/)
On the defense
(https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/on-
the-defense/)
(https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/what-lies-within/)
What lies within
(https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/what-
lies-within/)
Bringing hobbits to
Gainesville
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/new-book-reveals-
untold-history-of-pre-colonial-caribbean-islands/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/on-the-defense/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/on-the-defense/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/what-lies-within/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/what-lies-within/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/bringing-hobbits-to-
gainesville/
gainesville/
(https://www.facebook.com/FMScience/)

(https://www.instagram.com/FloridaMuseum/)
(https://www.pinterest.com/FloridaMuseum/)
(https://www.youtube.com/user/FloridaMuseum/)
About (/science/about/) | Contact (/science/contact/) | Authors
(/science/authors/) | Pressroom
(/pressroom/) | Log In (/science/wp-admin)
T H I S P A G E U S E S G O O G L E A N A L Y T I C S (
H T T P : / / W W W . G O O G L E . C O M / A N A L Y T I C
S ) • G O O G L E P R I V A C Y
P O L I C Y ( H T T P : / / W W W . G O O G L E . C O M / I
N T L / E N _ A L L / P R I V A C Y P O L I C Y . H T M L ) •
U F P R I V A C Y P O L I C Y
( H T T P : / / P R I V A C Y . U F L . E D U / P R I V A C Y S
T A T E M E N T . H T M L ) • C O N T A C T T H E W E B
M A S T E R
( H T T P S : / / W W W . F L M N H . U F L . E D U / W E B
M A S T E R / C O N T A C T / ) • © C O P Y R I G H T
( H T T P S : / / W W W . F L M N H . U F L . E D U / M U S E
U M / C O P Y R I G H T . H T M )
(https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/bringing-hobbits-
to-gainesville/)
(https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/bringing-
hobbits-to-gainesville/)
S O C I A L

S E A R C H
Search.. #
I N F O
https://www.facebook.com/FMScience/
https://twitter.com/FloridaMuseum/
https://www.instagram.com/FloridaMuseum/
https://www.pinterest.com/FloridaMuseum/
https://www.youtube.com/user/FloridaMuseum/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/about/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/contact/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/authors/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/pressroom/
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/science/wp-admin
http://www.google.com/analytics
http://www.google.com/intl/en_ALL/privacypolicy.html
http://privacy.ufl.edu/privacystatement.html
https://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/webmaster/contact/
https://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/museum/copyright.htm
gainesville/
gainesville/
HAVC 160A Critical Analysis Paper: The Sun
Stone
Due: Tuesday 11 a.m., Oct. 23, 2018; submit papers
on Canvas as a Word doc or docx

Late papers accepted with 5 pointpenalty until 5
p.m.,Oct. 25
“Critical analysis” refers to the dissection of an
argument. The objective of this
assignment is to distinguish among
unsubstantiated assertion, unpersuasive
argumentation, and a compelling thesis based on
reliable evidence. Critical analysis is
not based on writing style nor on belief, but on
reason. A critical analysis does not
necessarily find fault; it can praise as well as
criticize.
This paper requires you to critically analyze,
compare and contrast, two articles on the
most studied and best known Mexica (Aztec)
monument: the Sun Stone (aka Calendar
Stone).
Adhere closely to thesedirections:
1. Before reading the two articles that will be
the focus of your analysis, consult some
general sources on the Sun Stone to acquire a
basicbackground. Begin with your
textbook (Miller, pp. 254-55). Although consulting
online sources is risky, the
following provide fairly standard, reliable information:
https://www.ancient.eu/Sun_Stone/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=Zn03u3-U1fk
2. Read the following two recent scholarly re-
interpretations of the Sun Stone (both are
available as pdfs on Canvas > Files > Paper):
A. Stuart, David. 2016. “The Face of the Calendar
Stone: A New Interpretation.”
Online post, Maya Decipherment
<https://decipherment.wordpress.com/2016/06/13/the-face-of-
the-calendar-stone-a-new-
interpretation/>
B. Milbrath, Susan. 2017. “Eclipse Imagery on
the Aztec Calendar Stone.”
Mexicon 39(1):16-26
3. In essay format, compare and contrast the
articles by Stuart and Milbrath. What
kinds of evidence does each use (archaeological,
historical, iconographical,other)? Do
you find one argument more convincing? If so, why?
If not, why not? Be sure to state
your opinion and the reasoning behind your assessment.
Note: This assignment is not
about being right or wrong, but employing
reasoning to assess scholarly
argumentation. Before you begin writing, read the
paper requirements below.

Paper requirements. Be sure that your paper
includes the following:
§ A title page with the title of your paper, your name,
the course number (HAVC
160A), and the date
§ An introductory paragraph introducing the paper
topicand featuring your thesis
statement
§ A concise summary of both Stuart’s thesis and
that of Milbrath (a sentence or
two each; no more than a paragraph). To
demonstrate your understanding,
phrase the theses of both scholars in your own
words—do not quote! Note: Both
Stuart and Milbrath are cisgender;use masculine
pronouns when referring to
Stuart and feminine pronouns when discussing
Milbrath.
§ An identification and discussion of the kinds of
evidence used by each author
(archaeological, historical, iconographical,other)

§ A comparison of the author's conclusions with
each otherand with those of
otherscholars (Miller’s text, recommended online
sources, lecture material).
Yoursources should be cited using Chicago’s author-
date style; a brief guide to
Chicago Styleis posted on Canvas (Files >
Paper). If you use information from
lectures to develop your analysis, be sure to provide
the appropriate citation
(e.g., Dean, HAVC 160A Lecture: 10/16/2018).
§ Your reasoned evaluation of both authors’
evidence, arguments, and conclusions
§ A concluding paragraph with a concise summary
statement.Stateyour position
clearly even if it is ambivalent!
§ A bibliography, formatted according to Chicago Style,
that includes the full
publication data of all works you consulted (but
none that you didn’t actually
examine). A concise guide to Chicago style is
posted on Canvas (Files > Paper).
Papers should be at least 750 words, but no
longer than 1,500 words, and should be
typed, double-spaced, with numbered pages (except
the title page, which is never

numbered). Use at least 10-point font. Submit your
finished paper to Canvas as a Word
document (doc,docx) by the time/date required to
avoid loss of points for a late
submission.
Refer to the evaluation rubric (below), double-
checking to make sure you have
completedall required elements.
HAVC 160A
Critical Analysis Paper Evaluation
_____of 05 – Paper specifications (Is the paper
neat with numbered pages [except for
title page]?; Is the required information provided on
the title page? Is the
paper double-spaced?Is the word count adhered
to?)
_____of 15 – Grammar, spelling, & citations (Are
grammar & spelling correct? Is the
paper well-written in lucidprose? Is Chicago
Styleused properly for BOTH
in-text citations & the bibliography?)
_____of 10 – Organization (Is therean introductory
paragraph with a thesis statement?

Is the argument presented logically with smooth
transitions? Is therea
concluding paragraph with a summary statement? Is
the paper presented
in the correct order: Title page, text,
bibliography?)
_____of 10 – Summary of Stuart (Is Stuart’s
thesis correctly identified and briefly
summarized without quotation?)
_____of 10 – Summary of Milbrath (Is Milbrath’s
thesis correctly identified and briefly
summarized without quotation?)
_____of 10 – Identification & critique of Stuart’s
evidence
_____of 10 – Identification & critique of
Milbrath’s evidence
_____of 20 – Comparison of Stuart and
Milbrath (Is the discussion thorough, thoughtful,
and accurate?)
_____of 10 – Overall evaluation (Is the
evaluation well-reasoned?)
_____of 100

1Running head SHORTENED VERSION OF TITLEPAGE .docx

1Running head SHORTENED VERSION OF TITLEPAGE .docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 1Running head SHORTENED VERSION OF TITLEPAGE .docx

Similar to 1Running head SHORTENED VERSION OF TITLEPAGE .docx (15)

More from vickeryr87

More from vickeryr87 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

1Running head SHORTENED VERSION OF TITLEPAGE .docx