Presione para ir a la versión en español

Article suitable for older students

Find out more

True or false, genuine or fake?

19th Mar 2016

Mexicolore contributor Miguel Gleason

We are most grateful to Miguel Gleason for this intriguing introduction to the story of many pre-Hispanic Mesoamerican artefacts in European collections that suffered from ‘mistaken identity’. In 2002 Miguel Gleason founded the association Mexico in Europe, whose aim is to identify, catalogue and publicise Mexico’s cultural wealth abroad. This has already led to the publication of six multimedia DVDs and culminated in 2015 in his richly illustrated and extensively researched book México insólito en Europa (‘Unusual Mexico in Europe’), with a prologue written by Miguel León-Portilla.

When an artefact is found outside its original archaeological context, there remains the possibility, however small, that it could be a copy or a fake. Equally, even when we’re sure of the authenticity of a sculpture or other piece of art, commentators can make mistakes in interpreting its meaning. Quite frequently researchers, specialists and collectors find themselves treading a fine line in between truth and falsehood. Some of them end up themselves being the source of incorrect information. For example, the Codex Cospi, of Mixtec origin, which used to belong to the Marquis of Cospi of Bologna, Italy, was recorded in 1665 by its owner as being of Chinese provenance. On the manuscript’s cover you can still see (pic 1) how the Italian word Messico has been overwritten onto the word Cina. Fortunately, in this case, many years after the mistake was made, it was corrected.

A British collector, travelling in central Mexico during the 19th century, didn’t hesitate to label a small figure, found by or sold to him near the remains of Lake Texcoco, as a ‘hippo’s head’, and it has remained to this day catalogued as such in a museum in Edinburgh. We can only hope, for his good name’s sake, that he was struck by the close likeness of object and animal and not because he actually believed such creatures really existed on the American continent. What our affable friend didn’t realise is that by rotating and lifting the figure it no longer resembles a hippo but becomes the head of the rain god Tlaloc, with his characteristic goggle-shaped eyes (pic 2).

One of the principal historical sources we have is the testimonies provided by the codices. But paper wasn’t the only medium to carry written information. In several civilisations glyphs or narratives were painted on ceramic vessels or carved on stelae. The lintels of Yaxchilán in the British Museum, for example, have been key to the process of deciphering Maya glyphs and have allowed us to extend the boundaries of our understanding of the complex culture and writing system of this ancient civilisation (pic 3).

According to specialist Laura Elena Sotelo we have evidence today of the existence of around 15 pre-Hispanic codices of Maya origin. Most, however, have been found in archaeological settings where the remaining material is so fragile and badly deteriorated that nothing of their original contents is knowable. It is a sad paradox that though we may know where and when they were made and possibly even who they belonged to, we know nothing at all of these codices’ contents. On the other hand there are three Maya codices in Europe today whose contents we do know, but about which how, why and when they came to Europe and where they originally came from we have no idea at all. The contrast couldn’t be greater in terms of our (lack of) understanding of pre-Hispanic Maya codices.

One of these three Maya codices is the Dresden Codex – so named simply in reference to the German city where it now resides. And here we return to the genuine/fake dichotomy: the manuscript is authentic, without the slightest doubt, and yet the image on the final page of the codex (pic 5) gave rise to rumours and predictions concerning the end of the world on December 21st 2012, based on its reference to a devastating flood. To the left, a celestial crocodile showers torrents of water onto the earth; beneath its abdomen more torrents of rain flow from two glyphs representing eclipses; finally, the ancient goddess Chak Chel pours more water from her pitcher. Below, the dark god of the underworld receives the storm blasts. Fears arose, according to specialists, because both deities have connections with world destruction. The date on the old lady’s pitcher is precisely December 21st 2012. Yet nothing happened that day. Commentators proceeded to suggest that the reference was not to the date for the end of the world but rather simply to the end of a major Maya calendar cycle.

In ancient Mesoamerica predictions and destinies were determined on the basis of birth dates – a concept akin in other cultures to the signs of the zodiac. One section of the Codex Laud – a Mixtec document now in the Bodleian Library, Oxford – shows how the fate of a couple’s marriage could be predicted by adding the numerical values of the couple’s calendar names (pic 6).

Nobody doubts the extensive and ancient wisdom of Mesoamerican peoples: codices, for example, were made in accordion/fan/screenfold format so that they could be unfolded to form a large circle (pic 7). The teacher or shaman, alongside his pupils or audience all seated within the circle, would deliver his auguries or teachings from the centre outwards. This allowed for the whole to be viewed at one time, and for different sections to be consulted with a simple movement of the head. In a traditional European book only two pages can be viewed at one time. The future was predicted and auguries foretold, even though rational analysis may today question their validity.

Arguments over authenticity surround the only ‘pre-Hispanic’ Mexican manuscript in the major Chester Beatty collection in Dublin (pic 8). In 1931 the famous collector sent the manuscript to the British Museum to be examined. He was informed that the document was in fact post-Hispanic but only just – dating from the first half of the 16th century. Recently, however, experts have cast doubt on its authenticity, arguing that the glyphic content makes no coherent sense. The great codices specialist Juan José Batalla has confirmed that most of it is in fact a copy of the Codex Porfirio Díaz – one of the Borgia Group of codices – and a very clever fake. It may well have been made towards the end of the 19th century by Genaro López, who used not fig tree bark paper but processed coconut fibres. According to Batalla the top left section is a brazen copy of page 60 of the Codex Borgia, with a few small modifications (adapted from the same original page) to make it less obvious. The Codex Borgia is held in the Vatican Library.

The document in the Irish library is a fake, but so well made as to appear authentic. On the other hand other fakes exist which even someone with only limited knowledge of the subject matter would recognize as being of rough, poor standard of reproduction. The dishonesty of whoever sold these objects in Mexico to naïve foreign travellers as original pieces is clear for all to see. How could European collectors be duped into believing these artefacts were authentic?

In fact, the style of two of these ‘pseudo-codices’ (one in the Balearic Islands, the other in Dublin) is similar (pix 9 and 10) – visible, for instance, when comparing the depiction of a character with a red headdress – and the possibility remains that it was the same artist and even the same merchant who sold these dubious works around Europe. The inspiration for the illustrations may well have come from those found in the Codex Durán.

Finally we turn to an example that is more strange than true/false. According to anthropologist Anthony Shelton, in 1977 the owner of a Scottish farm and his gardener were at work digging and leveling a boggy stretch of land prior to constructing a road. They suddenly came upon a huge carved stone object: they had unearthed the Aztec goddess Cihuatéotl. Overcoming their initial fright they set to to put the statue to good use, as a scarecrow in the farm’s garden, where she remained for several years before a casual visitor revealed her true identity and she was eventually moved to the British Museum in London (pic 11). The authenticity of the statue is not in question, but how it came to Scotland and why it was buried there remain a mystery. What surprised the Scottish farmer most was the scary and terrifying look of the goddess, embodying as it does concepts totally foreign to Western culture. For the Aztecs Cihuatéotl was a true goddess – for Europeans she was anything but.

Picture sources:-
• All photos © Miguel Gleason, except for -
• Pix 1 & 5: © 1992 Fondo de Cultura Económica, Mexico
• Pic 4: Photo by Ian Mursell/Mexicolore
• Pic 8: © Trustees of the Chester Beatty Library
• Pic 11: © Trustees of the British Museum.

Q. What should a librarian do when trying to catalogue a fake codex?
A. A-scribe it to a fraudulent dealer.

Comments (4)

Louisa Urquia

27th Jul 2023

Geetings. I bought a terracotta statue at an auction. No one knew much about it. It is Janaab Pecaal Mayan king circa 600 A.C. I believe it is a fake. How please may I tell this. Thank you kindly.

Mexicolore

We’re educationists, not archaeologists. By all means send us a photo and we’ll gladly give you our first impressions, but more than that we can’t offer.

Diane Christina Venancio

9th Mar 2021

I am trying to locate someone to look at a small statue of God of the underworld. It was dug up about 26 years ago when my son age 4 at the time, dug it up on his grandparents ranch in Guerrero Mexico.

Mexicolore

We’d be happy to give you our first impressions if you could send us through by email a photo or two...

Roland Klein

18th Apr 2020

I am researching a Costa Rican mystery: The Chiral Missal.
At the beginning of the 20th century, as a result of a few archeological excavations on the island of Chira, a square book with hieroglyphics was found that was called el misal chorotega (the Chorotegan missal or prayer book); but it is unknown where this document was used.

The sole reference known about this find is offered by the archeologist María Fernández Le Cappellain de Tinoco, who visited the island of Chira in 1935. In her article, “Chira, olvidada cuna de aguerridas tribus precolombina” (Chira, forgotten cradle of war-hardened pre-Columbian tribes), she relates the account of Fernández Le Cappellain of an islander who said:

“Here ... I came accompanied by Father Velazco more than twenty-five years ago, when this gentleman made his expeditions to the island. In a place very near, after five months of expedition, we discovered something very important called the Choretega missal, a square book with many hieroglyphics. ”

This Father Velazco of around 1910, is actually Padre Velasco, the largest collector (Huaquero) of indigenous artifacts from 1894 until 1924.

IF, Velasco had indeed found a Codex he would have not reported it to the Costa Rican authorities, instead, I believe he would have smuggled such an unusual find it to Mexico where he probably would have sold it as a Mixtec Document.

I have been looking for a List of Documents in Latin America and Europe that suddenly appeared around 1910. And, which may have been considered Fake because of their origin far outside the normal realm of Codices.

One of these may be the Misal Chorotega. (Who by the way historically are said to have had books and writing).

I plan to go to Chira, which is nearby me after the Plague restrictions to look for more details.

The Archaeologist Fernandez Tinoco, who wrote in 1935 about the discovery, has family here as well, and I hope to be able to see those notes she used from Chira.

Also, despite being a Priest, the notorious Padre Velasco had an large family. I have located a direct descendant who says he has some of his Grandfather’s original notebooks of finds...
Thank You Very Much for Your Site

Roland Klein
Santiago de PuriscalRoland@SlothCreek.com
506-8733-4106

Mexicolore

Good luck, sounds like an interesting quest...!

Todd H. Holmes

26th Jul 2019

For any one interested, there is a very good, albeit brief essay by the famous Mayanologist Michael Coe on how to spot a fake Mayan codex. Also, he co-authored an article about the controversial Grolier Codex, both available online.

Mexicolore

Many thanks for these suggestions. You will know, of course, that the Grolier has now been ‘officially’ recognised as not only authentic but also the oldest known manuscript in the Americas. Coe was the scholar who first brought the existence of the Grolier into the public domain.

Aztecs

Maya

True or false, genuine or fake?

Comments (4)

More Aztec Artefacts