Rio Bec and the Witz

Walking up to the mouth, you can almost feel a breath. It’s moist inside but cool, and while standing in the hot summer sun, the shade is so inviting. About to step inside, you look up and around, eyes not quite adjusting to the darkness beyond the entrance, and barely make out the stalagmites and -ctites that make up the maw of the underworld creature. The water dripping off the fangs looks like drool; it’s hungry, begging to feast, and anyone who enters is its next meal.

Standing back, an indigenous guide steps forward and calls for quiet so they can call upon the deities of the Earth, the Underworld (Xibalba - in some language groups), and the cave itself as a liminal space connecting the two, for permission to enter this sacred space. Once the peace required is granted, you enter the maw, but it has become a cool, welcoming space again, where water blessings are given, beautiful flora, fauna, geology, and history can all be seen while shining a light on the damp walls of naturally carved stone. Feeling the beauty and safety you walk deeper into the cave, just don’t stray too far, or the jaws may close behind you.

Why was Rio Bec style so important in the Maya area?

WHERE/WHEN WAS IT

To have more cultural context we need to put it in it’s proper setting. The sites that fall within the Rio Bec style are found in the southeast corner of Campeche State in the southern reaches of the Yucatan Peninsula just slightly north of the Guatemala border. The Río Bec architectural style sites and other similar sites were developed from the 7th to the 12th centuries CE, in Mesoamerica this is classified as the Classic Maya period, with occupation spanning from the Middle Preclassic to the Terminal Classic (Taladoire et al., 2013). This style is characterized by distinctive residential morphologies and building sequences, reflecting the region's unique social organization and dynamics. Unlike typical Maya centers, Río Bec lacked a central core with political monuments, making chronology crucial for understanding its development (Taladoire et al., 2013).

A notable artistic feature is the prevalence of graffiti, found on residences of all social ranks (Patrois, 2013). These incised drawings, created both during occupation and post-abandonment, serve as a rare form of individual expression in Río Bec society. Occupational graffiti often depicted remarkable individuals, animals, or events, while post-abandonment graffiti featured specific themes like female imagery and mythical entities (Patrois, 2013). Given the scarcity of glyphic inscriptions in the region, these graffiti provide valuable insights into Río Bec social dynamics and artistic practices (Patrois, 2013) and provide insights into personal and collective experiences of the inhabitants.

While the Río Bec style developed locally, it's worth noting that earlier Mesoamerican civilizations, such as the Gulf Coast Olmec, played a significant role in establishing the first unified style and iconographic system in the region, shown in evidence of elemental analysis of exported ceramics (Blomster et al., 2005). The Río Bec architectural style, prevalent in the Maya lowlands, flourished during the Classic period but eventually declined. The decline of the Río Bec style may be attributed to changes in regional growth patterns. While core centers like Tikal and Calakmul exhibited mature economic development, the Río Bec and Chenes regions showed signs of growth redistribution or decline, possibly due to truncated external ties following the collapse of southern centers (Adams & Jones, 1981). Recent findings at Dzibanche suggest a connection between this dominant site and the spread of Río Bec architectural style to distant locations like Kohunlich, potentially linked to the Late Classic Kan (Snake) dynasty (Nalda & Balanzario, 2014). These factors can collectively contribute to understanding the end of the Río Bec style within the broader context of Maya civilisation dynamics and the internal conflicts between neighbouring groups.

Like its delightfully complex styled neighbors in the Chenes and Puuc regions, the Río Bec architectural style was significant for its unique settlement patterns and monumental structures. The region lacked a typical Maya political center, instead featuring dispersed residential complexes (Taladoire et al., 2013). Structure 5N2, an towered building, exemplifies the Río Bec style's evolution from a simple residence to a grand palace, combining private and public spaces (Michelet et al., 2013). The style's importance is further emphasized by its association with distinct burial practices. Plots would have been limited to a small portion of the population and focused on ancestor veneration rather than social hierarchy display. Two main patterns emerged: "transition burials" and "occupation burials," both reflecting the significance of domestic space in Río Bec society (Pereira, 2013) and showcasing its enduring influence in Mesoamerican architecture (Taladoire et al., 2013).

WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE

There are a ton of different architectural styles in the Maya area, but the three that overlap are Chenes, Puuc, and Rio Bec. They not only share borders with areas where multiple styles were popular, but they all contain elaborate stucco artistic features and incorporate motifs of serpents and the Witz monster.

Rio Bec architecture seems to evoke extreme and opposite reactions from scholars. Michael Coe, who refers to the Rio Bec towers as an 'aberrant architectural style', writes:

"Here showiness rather than function is what was apparently sought, for characteristic of this style of the Late Classic is the decoration of perfectly ordinary small 'palaces' with high towers imitating the fronts of temple-pyramids; these towers are solid, however, the steps being impossibly narrow and steep, and the 'doorway' at the summit leading to nothing.
It is as though the Rio Bec architects wished to imitate the great Tikal temples without going to any trouble... To today's 'functionalists', the fakery of the Rio Bec style is somewhat repellent, but no one could help but be awed at these mysterious sites crumbling in their jungle fastness."

Michael D. Coe, "The Maya", p.112-3

Paul Gendrop, in contrast, is more sympathetic to the simplified tune of:

‘These Río Bec buildings might seem like simple, showy structures with no real purpose—more like oversized, fancy houses. But looking closer, they stand out because of their important place in each site, their detailed and skillful construction, unique architectural style, consistent design features, and meaningful decorative symbols. It's also worth noting that these buildings were made during a time of great artistic creativity in the Maya lowlands—the same period when Tikal, after over a thousand years of architectural growth, was building its grandest temples.
In the prehispanic Mesoamerican world, showing worship outdoors in public was extremely important, so, perched atop its pyramid base, the temple became harder for regular people to reach over time. They gathered around the base, watching ceremonies from below. While the sanctuary door above sometimes was as a simple room, maybe like an echo chamber to amplify the priest's voice. Especially at Tikal, as the pyramids grew taller, the temples’ inside spaces got smaller. To hold the heavy roofcomb, the "holy of holies" shrank to tiny sizes, like in Temple V at Tikal. [As in, the pyramid was HUGE, but the temple at the top was one or two small rooms (there were gates keeping us from going inside). This shows that for some big temple-pyramids in Petén, just having the sanctuary’s presence—both physical and symbolic—was enough, even if the inside space wasn’t useful. Eventually, this useless space was fully removed, as likely happened north of Petén in Río Bec, where only the temple-pyramid’s outside, with its important symbolic parts, was kept.’

Paul Gendrop, Rio Bec, Chenes, and Puuc Styles in Maya Architecture, p. 35-36

But what does that mean?

The Rio Bec style is characterized by the elaborate designs that also appear in Chenes and Puuc styles as they overlap on style and on location. In fact, Chenes has regularly been classified as a middle ground between the Puuc and Rio Bec styles, which works out because they are all built around the same time in the Late Classic Period (roughly 600 to 900 CE) and bordering one another. But this style showcases a unique amalgamation of artistic, structural, and functional elements that distinguish it from other Maya styles, shown in the extremely thin stairs, pseudo-temples, roof combs (which are popular in other styles as well) on flanking towers, arrangements of square in geometric motifs, even though the Witz monster/Itzamná built out as a facade around the entrance to the buildings is common in multiple, it’s a story that didn’t go out of style.

At the core of the Rio Bec architectural style are the distinct pyramid structures. While most pyramid buildings typically present a series of large stepped platforms connected by the main staircase that culminate in a temple or ceremonial structure at the apex, these examples in particular have false temple towers instead. The towers still reach high into the air, creating an imposing verticality that conveys power and prestige (Michelet et al., 2004). The other most elaborate structures often showcase elaborate stucco decorations and bas-reliefs that have both aesthetic and ritualistic functions within Maya cosmology.

The integration of terraces and stairways along the back and sides of the pyramid temples connect various levels. This arrangement allows buildings to serve both ceremonial and residential purposes, highlighting a duality in function that is central to this architectural approach (Taladoire et al., 2013). These terraces often facilitate social gatherings and rituals, demonstrating the communal use of space in Maya society. The decorative facades of the vertical towers also incorporate framed panels filled with intricate carvings. These carvings, including emblem glyphs, provide insights into the political organization and governance in the region during its peak, demonstrating a complex socio-political structure (García-Gallo et al., 2019).

What's different about the Puuc region is that the lentils are generally covered with the stucco and the edges of buildings and facades in the middle have the Witz monster or the Earth monster on them with noses sticking out. These were actually the first Mayan buildings I saw when I went there in 2013 (to Kahab and Labna). On the other hand the Chenes and the Rio Béc have the full doorway monster mouth.

Figures - - -. A collection of photos taken in 2013 in the Archaeological Sites of Kabah and Labna. (Puuc styles)

Figrure -. A selfie from summer 2014 in the Mexico City Museo Nacional de Antropología.

Attributes

On an upper platform, each pseudo-temple stands on its own base, mirroring real sanctuaries but narrower, with lintels above false doorways.

“Set off by its delicate moldings, an enormous frontal mask of Itzamná stands out on the upper frieze, contrasting with plain lower walls of the façade, while the narrow end walls feature, in the center of a recessed panel, a vertical row of crosses and remains of a roofcomb at the level of the roof.”

Paul Gendrop, "Rio Bec, Chenes, and Puuc Styles in Maya Architecture," p. 56.

The Itzamná mask crowns the upper frieze of the pseudo-temple, contrasting with the plain lower walls.

A view of the center of the main Rio Bec B building, showing the remains of a central roof comb (missing its central part), the flanking towers with their fake temples, and two checkerboard design panels which are a standard feature of Rio Bec architecture.

According to the most common convention of the area, the towers of Temple B are strongly compact volumes, and the stairways, provided with ramps, though terribly steep, permit a daring person to ascend, thanks to the accentuated "nose" of its steps.
Paul Gendrop, Rio Bec, Chenes, and Puuc Styles in Maya Architecture, p. 56

"I also attached a photo of Rio Bec B which shows a view from the rear of the better-preserved tower, with its cruciform arrangements of squares, another common motif in Rio Bec. According to Diane, this represents the four cardinal directions." - John Hagenbuch, in email

Chicanna Structure I & the Rio Bec Style

*X0673: Chicanna Structure I from* (Heyworth, 2016a)

Chicanna Structure I & the Rio Bec Style

Chicanna Structure I, on the western edge of Group A, stands as the sole temple crafted in the distinctive Rio Bec style within Chicanna. This unique architectural language flourished around the Rio Bec river basin, with about 40 known sites like Becan, Rio Bec, Xpuhil, and Chicanna itself. Emerging during the Mid to Late Classic Maya Era, roughly between 700 and 800 CE, Chicanna Structure I embodies the pinnacle of both style and site significance. (Heyworth, 2016).

The temple’s finely cut stone surfaces are adorned with intricate stucco work and rest atop a low platform, framed by two unusual towers. Each of the three front-facing chambers possesses its own doorway, surrounded by fading stucco impressions of Chac, the rain and storm god, hinting at the temple’s purpose. The flanking pyramid towers, with their steep, largely non-functional staircases overlaid by striking stucco masks of Chac, heighten the importance. Above these towers sit what appear to be small temples, though these are ornamental—devoid of inner chambers, marked only by niches or false doors—reflecting typical Rio Bec motifs inspired by the towering pyramids of Tikal. Classic Maya pyramids look like sacred mountains, made of layers that get smaller as they go up, topped with a temple. When there are nine layers, they represent the soul’s journey through the underworld called Xibalba, linking the pyramid to Maya myths. These pyramids symbolized the earth itself, with temples on top representing sacred caves where the Maize God—the first human—was born. The temple wasn’t just a building but a holy gateway where priests and rulers connected with ancestors, gods, and spirits. (Heyworth, 2016).

The pyramids and their temples were designed to look like entrances to the spirit world. They stood tall above the jungle and acted as ancient observatories to track stars, the moon, and the sun. Often built in pairs, triads, or larger groups, they lined up perfectly so light and views combined during events like the winter solstice, blending nature and religion. (Heyworth, 2016).

In essence, Chicanna Structure I blends influences from Classic Era pyramids with the later Chenes and Puuc styles. While each architectural tradition symbolized the sacred cave—the revered birthplace of creation—through distinct methods, the Rio Bec style weaves these elements together into a fusion, crafting a unique visual narrative of divine space and cultural connection. (Heyworth, 2016).

*W0845: Tikal Templo I from* (Heyworth, 2016a).

*X0674: Structure II from* (Heyworth, 2016a).

The Changing Face of Mayan Architecture

The Chenes and Puuc temple styles evoke the primordial cave not by sculpting mountains but through intricate stone fretwork depicting the great cave monster, as seen in Chicanna Structure II. This motif, far from new, had decorated carved altars and stelae since the Early Classic period, evident in monuments like the Zoomorphs of Quirigua, especially Zoomorph B. While Rio Bec architecture occasionally includes monster-mouth doorways, Chicanna Structure I does not; instead, it showcases elaborate stucco portraying the Rain God Chac. All three styles—Rio Bec, Chenes, and Puuc—flourished during the Late Classic period with a pronounced emphasis on Chac, reflecting an urgent need for rainfall. Geological evidence reveals a prolonged drought preceding the 10th-century collapse of the Classic Maya civilization, straining vital resources like manpower and timber, both essential for building vast pyramids and ornate structures. This environmental pressure likely drove a shift toward smaller, multifunctional buildings that balanced grandeur, symbolism, and practicality, offering protection and paying tribute to the Rain God, all in one cohesive form.

Chicanna Structure I: An Architectural Revolution?

Chicanna Structure I and the Rio Bec style mark a shift from the grand pyramids of the Classic Era to forms like Structure I is a scaled-down twin pyramid model, featuring a proto-Chenes and Puuc temple between its towers. These pyramid towers were not just symbolic but likely served as observational markers aligned with solar events. Positioned on the west side of Group A, the setting sun would align with the towers on key days like the solstices, creating solar effects known as hierophany—a sacred visual phenomenon, common in Mayan buildings and other ancient architectures. Observers could watch these effects from various points in Group A, notably the monster-mouth doorway of Structure II and low platforms around the plaza, indicating a deeply integrated blend of architecture, astronomy, and ritual.

Whether caused by resource depletion, religious change, or a ruler’s whim, the shift to smaller Classic Era pyramid complexes remains uncertain. It’s also unclear if Rio Bec style and Chicanna Structure I evolved from Classic pyramids to Chenes and Puuc temples. Yet, cultural and stylistic shifts northward at the Classic Era’s end suggest Chicanna Structure I and Rio Bec style marked a new approach valuing form and flair over size and cost.

What stands out most, at least to me, is that the Rio Bec style differs in its use of false doors and niches on the facades. These elements carry symbolic meaning, often reflecting Maya beliefs about the passage between worlds. They frequently include sculptural depictions representing ancestral worship and divine interactions (Nondédéo & Lacadena, 2004).

The architecture of Rio Bec, characteristic of many Mesoamerican sites, features ball courts and platforms used for public performances. These architectural elements supported religious ceremonies and economic activities, highlighting the integral role architecture played in everyday life. The ball game itself served as a narrative of creation, played in various ritual contexts—sometimes involving kings, armies, or prisoners—with outcomes potentially leading to sacrifice.

Burial practices are deeply connected to the Rio Bec style, where site layouts reveal a slightly different form of social hierarchy, and monumental architecture marks socio-political organization. The integration of burial sites within settlements reflects a nuanced understanding of life, death, and community identity. Additionally, the spatial arrangement of structures in relation to agricultural fields demonstrates how architecture responded to ecological conditions, fostering sustainable land use. This connection between built environments and agriculture illustrates an adaptive and harmonious relationship with the surrounding landscape.

Understanding the Rio Bec style requires appreciating its broader cultural significance, where structures transcend mere buildings to embody community identity and environmental responses. Nalda and Balanzario (2014) highlight how architectural styles in regions like Dzibanché and Kohunlich reveal intercultural exchanges, emphasizing the interconnectedness of Maya architectural evolution. Similarly, Adams and Adams (2003) note that Rio Bec's distinctive features balance continuity with local innovation, illustrating dynamic cultural development within the Maya Lowlands.

Chicanna Structure II: The Monster Mouth Temple

Chicanna Structure II is one of the most remarkable Mayan temples discovered, dating between 750 and 770 CE during the early Chintok ceramic phase. Its standout feature is the elaborate Monster Mouth façade, showcasing the Late Classic Maya's artistic sophistication. The façade's intricate elements—teeth, fangs, spiraling plants—were individually carved on blocks, assembled like a mosaic, then covered with stucco, finely engraved, and vividly painted blood red (with some original paint still visible). Despite centuries of jungle damage, this unique construction allowed the temple's façade to be meticulously reconstructed. Today, Chicanna Structure II remains preserved as it was over a thousand years ago and is one of the few Mayan Monster Mouth Temples still fully visible. (Heyworth 2016b).

Symbolism and Meaning of the Chicanna Monster Mouth Temple

*X0674: Chicanna Structure II* (Heyworth, 2016b)

*X0674C: Chicanna Structure II Serpent Mouth Coloured* (Heyworth, 2016b)

The Structure may depict a reptilian monster with a wide-open mouth, possibly inspired by reptiles like snakes and crocodiles consuming prey whole. The Maya depicted the entrance to the underworld as a monster with a wide, gaping mouth. The face is easily identifiable by its large eyes and sharp teeth framing the doorway. Jade earrings shaped like squared hoops with pendants hang beside the eyes, while curling serpent heads emerge from the mouth's upper corners. The doorway itself forms an upside-down "T," with teeth and a curved step representing the monster's tongue. Additionally, a second set of eyes flanks the entrance, belonging to a profile-view monster whose mouth overlaps with the frontal monster’s. This dual-perspective technique is common in Mayan art. However, Chicanna’s monsters exhibit distinct differences: the profile monster has an "S"-shaped nostril, a long straight nose-flare, a different serpent style with a flopped tongue, and a prominent curling brow with flames or plant-like shapes atop its head. These features correspond with the long-lipped masks stacked beside the doorway, linking the imagery into a cohesive symbolic composition.

Hidden Details of the Chicanna Monster

Mayan art used symbols, ideograms, and icons like their hieroglyphic writing to convey messages.

X0674IK – Inverted IK Sign (Heyworth, 2016b)

One of the most notable symbols in Chicanna Structure II is the inverted “IK” sign, an upside-down capital “T” shape, created by the monster’s open mouth around the doorway. Normally, the “IK” sign—the “T” shape—symbolizes divine breath or wind, which is often used as a form for windows. Here, extending the monster’s mouth horizontally forms an inverted “T,” supposedly reversing its meaning to represent a lack of breath or life. So this doorway signified death and the underworld.

Figure -. T-shaped window at Palenque, Chiapas, Mexico (Whitehouse 2013)

Just outside the monster mouth motifs, the façade features looping jungle vine symbolism, which represents the world tree, emerging from the underworld to lift the sky and form the world. From the vines bloom four long-lipped masks symbolizing the four aspects of Chac (recognized in some regions as Bacab or Pawahtun).

X0674CM: Stacked Masks (Heyworth, 2016b)

These figures supported the sky's four corners once the tree was fully grown. The Chacs were directly related to the sun and named the Red Chac of the East (sunrise), the Black Chac of the West (sunset), the White Chac of the North (hot summer sun), and the Yellow Chac of the South (cool sun of winter). The trunk of the world tree supported the centre of the sky and the Great God, Itzamna. Chac, in a singular form, was the God of Rain and was believed to dwell in caves where he created water and thunder, so his looping lip and brow are symbols of the sacred mountain. Blood sacrifices had to be made to him in return for his gift of water. So the long flares that extend from the noses of the Chac Masks (fig. X0674CM) and the profile monster (fig. X0674) probably represent stingray spines that indicate an association with sacrifice which were used to draw blood through the tongue (for women) or the penis.

Stingray Paddler, known for wearing stingray spines, and his partner Jaguar Paddler laid the first of three hearth stones, the Jaguar Throne, founding the universe. They symbolize the sun’s daily death and rebirth, are linked to rain, and are shown riding clouds. As elders, they may represent Chac’s origins. Chac’s role in creation—cracking earth with thunder and rain to rebirth the Maize God—mirrors sowing and growing crops. This ties Chicanna Structure II’s façade to creation myths and agriculture’s origins.
Heyworth, 2016b

W0490CC: Witz Monster (Heyworth, 2016b)

The Witz’ Monster has the Kawak glyph (6-circle triangle) on its forehead, symbolizing water drops. Formerly called the Cauac Monster, it’s now named for the word "Witz" found in its eye. Divine rulers often emerge from its jaws or stand on its head, signifying their divine reincarnation as the Maize God. The Witz monster in Palenque’s Temple of the Foliated Cross shows a triple perspective design (front and side profiles) and corn plants growing from a brow cleft, symbolizing the mountain crack where the Maize God rose. The curled brows on Chicanna Structure II likely link them to maize, agriculture, and possibly the Witz monster itself.

Chicanna Structure II Serpent Symbolism

X0674SNB – Square Nosed Beastie

W0708: Pakal’s Tomb Lid

The square-nosed beast appears in the frescoes of Teotihuacan’s Tepantitla compound as part of a priest’s headdress during seed sowing rituals, symbolizing rain essential for crops. Priests would mimic this reptilian creature to invoke rainfall. This motif is shared by three major Mesoamerican cultures—the Maya, Aztec, and Teotihuacano—each linking the square-nosed beast to the sun’s movement around the four sky corners, intertwined with elements of fire, wind, and water. These elements were vital for their agricultural cycle of slash-and-burn methods timed with seasonal rains. By tracking weather patterns alongside the sun’s path—from its rebirth at the winter solstice in the southeast to its death at the winter solstice in the southwest—these cultures tied the beast to the sun’s annual journey and the environmental conditions sustaining their crops.

W2-0024: Tepantitla: Priest Sowing

X0674S: Chicanna (Heyworth, 2016b)

X0473: Chichen Itza (Heyworth, 2016b)

W2-0031: Teotihuacan (Heyworth, 2016b)

The symbolism of the serpents that emerge from the upper and lower monster mouths of Chicanna Structure II appear to be dualistic, with the upper monster mouth featuring serpents that relate to the yearly motion of the sun, while the lower monster mouth features serpents that relate to the daily passage across the sky and down into the underworld. With this in mind, likely, the monster mouth temple is also portraying a duality, with the front facing monster and profile monster(s) being different aspects of a single beastly being, spirit or god. Meanwhile, through the serpent imagery, Chicanna Structure II’s association with the annual cycles of the sun and agriculture becomes almost irrefutable.

X0675L: Structure II Left Doorway

The Chicanna Structure II Houses

The monster mouth façade of Chicanna Structure II often overshadows the modest doorways on either side, which are integral to the building’s purpose and story. The north chamber shows a carved thatched roof typical of Maya houses (fig. X0675L); the collapsed south doorway was likely the same. The Maya concept of house, Na, symbolized ancestry, strength, security, structure, and community. Both humble homes and the god Itzam-na were Na. In the Maya Creation Myth, Na is key, with three stones placed by Gods to build a celestial hearth, the spiritual heart of the house. The first cosmic hearth-stone’s site was Na-Ho-Chan, or Five-Sky House. This likely marked a measurable spot in the sky for observing Venus or the sun, serving as both a physical place and a time record. Similarly, Chicanna Structure II’s “houses” were observation points. The Classic Maya designed structures to align with light beams or star risings on key calendar days. At Chicanna Structure II, sunlight likely illuminated the temples or rose behind them from specific spots, but this is now uncertain due to the roof’s collapse.

X0675: Triple Entrances of Structure II from (Heyworth, 2016b)

Chicanna Structure II Architecture & Alignment

Chicanna Structure II was likely built for solar observation, as evidenced by both its carved façade symbolism and its architectural alignment. It features three east-facing chambers on a north-south platform, similar to the well-known E-Groups at Tikal and Uaxactun. These complexes consist of three structures on a raised platform aligned north-south, with a western structure from which the sunrise behind the three buildings could be tracked. The northern, central, and southern structures correspond to the summer solstice, equinox/zenith, and winter solstice sunrise positions, respectively. At Chicanna, a large western platform between Structures I and II may have served as a vantage point to observe celestial events involving the sunrise over Structure II and sunset behind Structure I. (Heyworth, 2016b)

Chicanna Structure II Meaning & Purpose

Chicanna Structure II was designed to highlight Chicanna's importance and the temple's purpose. The monster mouth doorway symbolized entry to the Maya underworld. Passing through it meant entering the underworld to connect with ancestors, spirits, and gods via blood-burning rituals. Therefore, exiting Chicanna Structure II symbolized rising from the underworld, a transformation reserved for the divine or reborn, suggesting rituals here culminated with rulers emerging from the monster’s mouth in a reenactment of the Maize God’s rebirth from the sacred Witz. Though direct pictorial proof is lacking, frequent depictions of rulers appearing from the Witz Monster’s mouth support the ritual’s importance. Reflecting the Maya belief that the sun—a fiery beast—embodied a cyclical life of birth, death, and rebirth, governing the growth and decay of crops as it traveled across the sky. (Heyworth, 2016b)

The ornate façade is often described as representing the great god Itzamna or “the Wizard House”; however, it is more accurately seen as an amalgamation of powerful lesser gods or aspects of Itzamna, such as Chac, the Witz Monster, the Square-Nosed Beastie, and the sky serpent. These deities governed the agricultural calendar, and Structure II was built as a ceremonial place for offerings and communication to ensure a successful harvest. Its alignment and triple-chamber design guided the people of Chicanna in planting, harvesting, and burning crops, completing the agricultural cycle. Much like a modern church, Chicanna Structure II served as a spiritual center to connect with the dead, honor the provider, protect the community, receive divine messages, and find answers. (Heyworth, 2016b)

So if the Witz monster is in a lot of difference art styles and a lot of art styles kind of intersect why are we looking at Rio Bec so specifically? Well, because it's one of the later ones, it wasn't around for as long, and they had a lot more just facades and pseudo architecture that didn't really do much of anything. You couldn't really go inside, they were for show (kind of like a McMansion, even though you can still go inside those and live in a way too big house), but my question is, why? Why did they connect something that was intrinsically real at least in their Legends and mythology and religion to something that was fake. Well, let's look at the mythology.

Mythological Context

Rather than a single, specific monster guarding all cave entrances in Mayan mythology, the concept is more nuanced, intertwining with the sacred nature of caves as portals to Xibalba. Here's a breakdown of the key elements:

Caves as entrances to Xibalba (the underworld): For the Maya, caves and cenotes (natural sinkholes) were sacred and seen as physical doorways to the underworld, a realm inhabited by death gods and other supernatural beings.
The Lords of Xibalba: Xibalba was ruled by a pantheon of gods and entities, primarily Hun-Came ("One Death") and Vucub-Came ("Seven Death"), along with ten additional lords, often regarded as demons, who inflict suffering, illness, and death upon humanity.
Architectural representations: Mayan architecture at sites like Chicanna featured elaborately carved doorways resembling gaping monster mouths, symbolizing the entrance to the underworld, according to the Penn Museum. These entrances were often adorned with monster-mask facades.
Witz Monsters: These monstrous entities, sometimes depicted with cleft brows or emitting maize plants, represented the sacred mountains and acted as entrances to the underworld and places of origin. The emergence of the maize god from a cleft mountain is a key analogy associated with the Witz monster.
Animalistic representations: The Maya frequently utilized animal imagery to represent entities linked with the underworld. For instance, the gaping mouth of a reptilian monster, reminiscent of snakes and crocodiles consuming prey, served as a metaphor for the entrance to the underworld.
Tsukán: A legend tells of Tsukán, a giant winged serpent cursed to eternally guard the water cycle and the cenotes of the Yucatán Peninsula.
Aluxes: These mischievous goblin-like beings are believed to be guardians of nature, including caves and cenotes. Locals believe it's important to respect Aluxes to avoid their wrath.

There are a few myths that incorporate the Witz monster, although it functions more as a setting than an actual character. For example, the Hero Twins and their father are part of one story. The father, a maize god, impregnates a woman either before or after he is already dead, via his head growing or just hanging like a fruit in a tree. She touched it and gets pregnant, and later gives birth to twins. After the death in Xibalba, following a journey through a cave entrance, his sons, the Hero Twins later enter Xibalba to seek revenge and/or justice on the Lords of the Night, the rulers of the Underworld. They end up killing these Lords upon winning the ballgame. From this event, the World Tree grows and splits the Earth, which is also tied to the maize god.

In another myth, the Lightning God K'awiil enters the mountain or Xibalba to either rescue or bring out the maize for the people. This maize is often depicted as a baby maize god. The origin of people comes from the third attempt at creating humanity: the first two creations, made of wood and stone, failed because they did not properly venerate the gods and were imperfect. On the third try, they descended into Xibalba, brought maize out of the cave, and made people out of maize, allowing humans to properly honor the gods. According to the myth, we now live in the third age of people.

The myth of the lightning god and the maize mountain. The hidden maize: This legend tells of a time when the precious maize was kept hidden and inaccessible, locked beneath a heavy stone, likely within a sacred mountain cave. The early humans, in need of nourishment, sought to obtain this vital food source. However, a formidable rock stood as a barrier, preventing access to the concealed maize. The chief of the deities, a powerful lightning god, was called upon for assistance. With his potent lightning, the god struck the mountain, splitting open the rock and thus releasing the maize for the benefit of humankind. This act is also credited with scorching some of the corn, giving rise to the various colors of maize (yellow, black, red) seen to this day.

Such revered contexts featured prominently in the religious architecture and iconography prevalent among Mesoamerican civilizations. For example, how "the Teotihuacan cave may mark an important stage not only in the development of Mesoamerican mythology but also that of the American Southwest" (Moyes et al. 2016; Taube 2016). This suggests that the myths stemming from cave systems shared local beliefs and align with broader cultural narratives across geographical barriers, hinting at shared mythological archetypes among different indigenous cultures. The cave's status as an emblem of origin, fundamentally linked to the narrative of coming forth from darkness into light, resonates with mythical tales of creation that are central to many cultures all around the world.

The role of cave myths and monster lore in Mesoamerica presents an intersection of cultural, spiritual, and social narratives that resonate deeply within the mythology of numerous indigenous groups. In this context, caves symbolize not merely geographical formations but are imbued with spiritual significance as sacred sites where primordial myths happened. They serve as portals to other realms, often representing the underworld or spaces of emergence where cultural heroes or human ancestors originated. Caves are often viewed as entrances to the sacred earth and are closely associated with cosmological beliefs in Mesoamerican cultures (Miller et al., 2023). This association places caves at the center of various mythologies, linking the physical structure of the earth to the metaphysical beliefs of the peoples inhabiting the region. As well as giving the living people, or more importantly, the royal leaders, a specific place to travel to and make a whole ritualistic show about praying to the gods to give them more food. Shown symbolically, in large carvings, as the maize baby being presented by the king.

In addition to their roles as sites of creation, caves in Mesoamerica were often associated with ritualistic practices that underscored their sacred environment. Moyes et al. emphasized that "caves are almost exclusively used as ritual spaces that materialize cosmology" (Brady & Veni, 1992). These spaces were actively engaged with the community's spiritual life, serving as places for rituals important to social cohesion and collective identity. The proximity of ritual mounds to caves in sites such as the Kayuko Mound Group in Belize illustrates the deliberate spatial organization employed by ancient Mesoamericans to bridge earthly rituals and the divine realm.

Anthropomorphised

But it wasn’t just what was inside or what came out of the cave that mattered, the cave itself was anthropomorphized. At least in a way. It was still a monster but it seemed to have agency in the myths, even though it basically always did exactly what the heroes needed.

The cave, or rather the Earth monster was called Witz monster, the Cauac monster. Witz means stone mountain and Cauac means lightning storm. The sky (lightning) monster and the ocean (earth) monster are the two primary agents of all creation in Maya mythology. Together they created, with their spoken words, the First Mountain, or as it is sometimes called, Stone Mountain or Sacred Mountain, where all life on earth began.

The complexity of cave rituals can also be interpreted through the lens of Mesoamerican iconography and mythology. Recent investigations have uncovered the existence of man-made and modified caves in highlands of Guatemala, linking these constructions to ritual importance and indicating their integral role in the ceremonial landscape (Puglia, 2023). Such human-altered environments suggest an intentional crafting of the natural landscape, further emphasizing how mythology and physicality intersect in Mesoamerican cultures.

Through the analytical framework of folklore and cryptid studies, we can consider the implications of cave monsters as reflections of societal anxieties and cultural narratives. Puglia discusses how "monsters have long fascinated scholars" and that they are often embodiments of community fears and frustrations (Plascencia, 2017). The legend of cave monsters can be perceived as culturally relevant constructs that manifest in Mesoamerican folklore, echoing the collective subconscious of communities concerned with their environment and the dangers that lurk within the darkness.

Moreover, the mythological contexts surrounding specific creatures can serve dual functions, symbolizing both peril and protection. The well-known tale of “La Llorona” serves as an archetypal narrative within Latin folklore, reflecting deep societal values and historical traumas (Taube, 1986). While her presence across diverse cultural landscapes illustrates how myths can evolve and adapt, her connections to pre-Hispanic traditions indicate a historical depth that resonates within community identity.

The intersection between cave practices and the narratives surrounding monsters forms a rich tapestry of cultural expression in Mesoamerica. As noted by Taube, the physical structures of caves are frequently linked to notable deities and rituals that underscore their sacredness (Musharbash, 2021). This is further corroborated by the artistic representations captured in murals and ceremonial architecture across notable Mesoamerican sites.

Astonishingly, the study of caves and monsters informs modern interpretations of cultural identity and memory. The historical legacy represented by these narratives links nostalgia and historical trauma, intertwining them with current socio-political discourses. For example, modern interpretations of monsters contextualise fears surrounding loss of cultural identity and environmental degradation, as seen in contemporary works that channel ancient mythological insecurities into current dialogues around climate and conservation.

Mesoamerican depictions of monsters potentially serve as guardians or harbingers of change, profoundly impacting social behaviors and values. The myth around monsters encapsulates the duality of fear and reverence associated with the unknown, which, in the Mesoamerican context, often relates to the liminal spaces represented by caves. Caves act not only as thresholds to the underworld but also as venues for the emergence of the sacred and profane, where societal tensions reveal deeper truths about community aspirations and existential fears.

The manifestation of monsters within caves is also examined through the anthropological lens, where the construction of these entities is both social and relational. Monsters are defined as inherently social entities that possess a unique role in the collective psyche of a culture (Morrow & Reinhard, 2016). This notion is salient in understanding how cave monsters serve as reflections of anxiety and a desire for control over forces of nature and society.

The depths of Mesoamerican caves offer rich archaeological deposits that continuously contribute to our understanding of prehistoric communities. The study of coprolites at La Cueva de los Muertos Chiquitos revealed insights into the biological and cultural interactions of ancient populations, hinting at health practices and dietary patterns. Such findings prompt a reconsideration of the broader ecological narratives interwoven with the monsters and myths that expand the knowledge ancient life.

It becomes clear that caves are not just physical structures but rather complex symbols of life, death, and transformation. They invite us to explore the narrative landscapes that shaped civilizations and echo through the ages, highlighting the enduring legacy of Mesoamerican myth-making within both historical and contemporary contexts.

This wasn’t even just in the Mayan mythology, it was a shared Pan-Mesoamerican Mythology. Emergence from a cave is a common thread found throughout ancient Mesoamerica and among groups living in the area today. Forms of this myth can be found as far north as the American Southwest among cultural groups such as the Ancestral Puebloan or Anasazi people. They and their modern descendants built sacred rooms in their communities known as kivas, where the entrance to the sipapu, the Puebloan place of origin, was marked in the center of the floor.

One famous example of a pre-Aztec emergence place is the human-made cave under the Pyramid of the Sun at Teotihuacan. This cave differs from the Aztec account of emergence because it has only four chambers.

Another constructed Chicomoztoc-like emergence shrine is found at the site of Acatzingo Viejo, in the State of Puebla, central Mexico. It more closely parallels the Aztec account due to its having seven chambers carved into the walls of a circular rock outcropping. Unfortunately, a modern road was cut directly through this feature, destroying one of the caves.

(Classical Nahuatl Tlāltēuctli the “Earth Monster”

WHY WAS IT SO VALUABLE CULTURALLY?

The Río Bec architectural style played a crucial cultural role in the Maya region for both leaders and common people, reinforcing social cohesion and expressing power and identity through multiple dimensions. Monumental structures, such as elaborately adorned pyramidal temples with expansive plazas, symbolized elite authority and technological skill, emphasising verticality, interpreted as an "embodiment of divine kingship," linking power with sacred ceremonial complexes (Nondédéo et al. 2013). Meanwhile, everyday architecture served practical social functions; residential patterns reflected communal and private needs, fostering kinship and alliance systems while co-residence models embodied the interconnectedness of individuals within the social fabric of Maya microsocieties (Arnauld et al. 2013).

The design of Río Bec structures, characterized by distinctive architectural elements such as niches and false doors, carries deep spiritual significance tied to ancestral worship and deities, aiding religious practices among commoners. These features often correspond with burial customs, integrating the living spaces with concepts of life and death, thereby fostering connection and community identity through sacred sites (Pereira 2013). Architecturally, the region reflects both private and public agricultural functions. The strategic placement and orientation of buildings demonstrate an organized resource management system and represent social hierarchies, revealing how Maya architecture in Río Bec mirrored agrarian practices and reinforced social structures (Lemonnier and Vannière 2013).

The construction techniques and styles of Río Bec architecture reflect regional interactions that played a key role in spreading cultural identities. This architectural style not only established local identity but also connected Río Bec with nearby regions like Dzibanché and Kohunlich, illustrating the fluid cultural boundaries influencing architectural and communal narratives (Nalda and Balanzario 2014). This exchange among settlements enabled the flow of ideas and resources, strengthening social cohesion among diverse Maya communities. The Río Bec style goes beyond aesthetics, serving as a cultural perspective through which the Maya understood their world, leadership, and society. Its monumental structures shaped public life by embodying socio-political dynamics that empowered elites and symbolized collective identity. Both leaders and common people found meaning and function within this shared architectural environment. Thus, the Río Bec tradition highlights the complexity of Maya civilization, demonstrating how architecture was integral to cultural identity across social levels. (Nalda & Balanzario, 2014)

WHY DID IT GO AWAY?

The transition from the Early to Late Classic periods in the Río Bec region marked a major sociopolitical rupture, characterized by the decline or abandonment of dominant groups linked to the Peten style, which influenced urban and architectural developments (Pereira 2013). This led to more disperse d settlement patterns, suggesting shifts in community dynamics and governance that affected the continued use of the traditional Río Bec architectural style. Concurrently, broader Maya societal changes prompted a reevaluation of architectural priorities, with waning centralized powers diminishing the emphasis on monumental elite constructions (Nondédéo et al., 2013). Grand structures lost both functional and symbolic importance, giving way to simpler domestic architecture suited to smaller, decentralized communities. The sociopolitical organization evolved significantly by the Late Classic, as hierarchical architectural features like niches and false doors lost significance with the decline of ruling power. This demonstrates a political shift away from divine kingship to alternative forms of governance that no longer required monumental expressions, rendering the Río Bec style, which was closely tied to elite power symbolism, less relevant (Nondédéo et al. 2013).

Environmental factors also impacted settlement patterns and architectural styles. Changing climate conditions during this period, including fluctuations in rainfall and temperatures, likely influenced agricultural productivity. Such environmental changes may have led to food shortages, altering population dynamics and prompting migration away from established centers (Patrois, 2013). This migration brought more adjustments in building practices, as it could have introduced different cultural influences or alternative building techniques that blended with the existing architectural vernacular instead of adhering to the rigid forms characteristic of Rio Bec.

Socioeconomic interactions with neighboring regions fostered evolving cultural affiliations that diluted the prominence of the Rio Bec architectural style. Long-distance interactions would often result in a syncretic blending of architectural styles and practices (Ringle et al. 2021). Increased trade and cultural connections, especially with regions influenced by different architectural traditions, encouraged local communities to incorporate new ideas rather than continue building purely Rio Bec structures. Moreover, a population decline during the Terminal Classic period weakened settlement robustness (Taladoire et al. 2013). Population shifts, caused by internal dynamics or resource scarcity, reduced the labor force available for constructing the monumental architecture characteristic of Rio Bec. Therefore, demographic decline likely corresponded with a decreased capacity to build and maintain extensive architectural works. The decline of Rio Bec architecture stemmed from a complex interplay of sociopolitical, environmental, and economic factors. As communities adapted, their need for grand architectural statements lessened, giving rise to alternative styles and construction methods in tune with the Late Classic Maya's evolving social landscape. This transition illustrates the broader themes of adaptability and resilience in ancient Maya societies confronting multifaceted challenges, highlighting the dynamic and fluid nature of their architectural and cultural evolution.

How did it hold over, how does it effect us today?

The architectural style of the Río Bec region, despite experiencing a decline towards the end of the Maya civilization, has left a lasting cultural impact that is evident in both historical contexts and contemporary understandings. Its influences can be observed in various aspects of cultural identity, community organization, and architectural heritage, fostering a continuum from the ancient past to today's society.

The decline of the Río Bec style and the shift towards alternative architectural expressions can be understood as part of a broader transformation experienced by Maya society. As sociopolitical structures evolved, there was a noticeable migration from the more complex and hierarchical architectural styles typified by the Río Bec to simpler forms that better served the needs of increasingly decentralized communities. Pereira discusses changes in settlement patterns, often resulting in more dispersed populations, which contributed to this architectural transition Pereira (2013). Notably, the Río Bec style reached its apogee during the Late-Terminal Classic period (approximately CE 550), aligning with this shift in architectural expression (Taladoire et al., 2013). Despite this transition, foundational aspects of the Río Bec style influenced subsequent architectural traditions throughout the Maya region, including smaller centers that adopted and adapted elements from earlier constructions.

In terms of contemporary implications, the legacy of Río Bec architecture is pertinent to both archaeological scholarship and cultural heritage discourse. The aesthetics and spatial organization of Río Bec structures serve as an important reference point for understanding Maya cultural identity. Taladoire et al. highlights how architectural styles provide insight into social hierarchies and community dynamics, demonstrating their continued relevance in analyses of the relationship between architecture and society (Taladoire et al., 2013).

The influence of Río Bec, Chenes, and Puuc architecture extends into the realm of cultural memory and preservation efforts within modern Maya communities. Architectural plurality resonates with contemporary concerns regarding cultural identity erosion, especially as globalization impacts building practices and local styles. While globalization poses challenges by diminishing the distinctiveness of traditional architecture, it can also bring new ideas and materials that foster innovation and diversity (Owamoyo & Tabibi, 2023). The persistence of traditional motifs and architectural forms showcases resilience, as communities strive to preserve cultural identity while embracing innovative techniques (Owamoyo & Tabibi, 2023). More so, the concept of architectural heritage, as represented by the Río Bec style, influences modern architectural discourse. Scholars exploring global architectural movements often draw comparisons with traditional forms, investigating how modern constructions can incorporate local aesthetics while promoting sustainable practices that resonate with historical precedents.

From a sociocultural perspective, the architectural elements of these cultural regions provide insights into the collective memory and identity of modern Maya descendants. The symbolic aspects of these ancient structures, particularly their ceremonial spaces that reflect communal values, continue to shape cultural practices of community gatherings. The research by Lemonnier and Vannière indicates that agricultural features integrated within these settlements highlight the connection between the social and agricultural processes, signifying a continuity of lifestyle choices that trace back to the Classic Maya period (Lemonnier & Vannière, 2013).

Therefore, the Río Bec, Chenes, and Puuc architectural styles and their emphasis of maize and its connection to the Witz monster has not only characterized an important phase of Maya civilization but continues to affect modern cultural expressions and community identities. Its influences permeate contemporary thought in various sectors, including archaeology, cultural heritage preservation, architectural innovation, and art in general from the cultural pieces to the modern. Understanding these connections enhances appreciation of how past architectural styles can inform present cultural practices while shaping future developments within the realms of architecture and community living.

The Rio Bec architectural style encapsulates the essence of Mayan civilization through its multifaceted structures that hold socio-religious importance alongside innovative design. From pyramids crowned with vertical towers to intricately detailed facades and layouts fostering social cohesion, each element narrates a story deeply entwined with the community’s culture and beliefs. These architectural remains stand as enduring reminders of a society that seamlessly wove spiritual and physical worlds, reflecting a complex historical journey. Recognizing these features is vital for appreciating the Maya’s impressive achievements, highlighting their cultural richness, resilience, and advanced understanding of architecture and social organization.

References:

Adams, R. and Adams, J. (2003). Volumetric and stylistic reassessment of classic maya sites in the peten, río bec, chenes, and puuc hills. Ancient Mesoamerica, 14(1), 139-150. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0956536103132014

Arnauld, M., Michelet, D., & Nondédéo, P. (2013). Living together in río bec houses: coresidence, rank, and alliance. Ancient Mesoamerica, 24(2), 469-493. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0956536114000029

Arnauld, M., Michelet, D., Andrieu, C., Lacadena, A., Lemonnier, É., Vannière, B., … & Patrois, J. (2014). Río bec. des grandes maisons et des récoltes. Journal De La Société Des Américanistes, 100(2), 107-144. https://doi.org/10.4000/jsa.14042

Brady, J. and Veni, G. (1992). Man‐made and pseudo‐karst caves: the implications of subsurface features within maya centers. Geoarchaeology, 7(2), 149-167. https://doi.org/10.1002/gea.3340070205

García-Gallo, A., Michelet, D., & Arnauld, M. (2019). Uno en tres: el glifo-emblema de río bec. Revista Española De Antropología Americana, 49(Especial), 97-119. https://doi.org/10.5209/reaa.64962

Heyworth, Robin. 2016a. Chicanna Structure I & the Rio Bec Style. Uncovered History. https://uncoveredhistory.com/mexico/chicanna/chicanna-structure-i/

Heyworth, Robin. 2016b. Chicanna Structure II - The meaning of the Monster Mouth Temple. Uncovered History. https://uncoveredhistory.com/mexico/chicanna/chicanna-structure-ii-monster-temple/

Lemonnier, É. and Vannière, B. (2013). Agrarian features, farmsteads, and homesteads in the río bec nuclear zone, mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica, 24(2), 397-413. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0956536113000242

Michelet, D., Latsanopoulos, N., & Patrois, J. (2004). ¿el ocaso de un estilo? nota preliminar sobre la fachada norte del edificio con torres del grupo a de río bec. Journal De La Société Des Américanistes, 90(1), 223-240. https://doi.org/10.4000/jsa.1892

Miller, M., Creel, D., & Geib, P. (2023). Chihuahuan desert shrine caves: refining chronologies of religious iconography and social histories for the jornada and mimbres mogollon regions of the north american southwest. American Antiquity, 89(1), 37-57. https://doi.org/10.1017/aaq.2023.84

Morrow, J. and Reinhard, K. (2016). cryptosporidium parvumamong coprolites from la cueva de los muertos chiquitos (600–800 ce), rio zape valley, durango, mexico. Journal of Parasitology, 102(4), 429-435. https://doi.org/10.1645/15-916

Moyes, H., Robinson, M., & Prufer, K. (2016). The kayuko mound group: a festival site in southern belize. Antiquity, 90(349), 143-156. https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2015.213

Musharbash, Y. (2021). Monsters. Cambridge Encyclopedia of Anthropology. https://doi.org/10.29164/21monsters

Nalda, E. and Balanzario, S. (2014). El estilo río bec visto desde dzibanché y kohunlich. Journal De La Société Des Américanistes, 100(2), 179-209. https://doi.org/10.4000/jsa.14072

Nondédéo, P. and Lacadena, A. (2004). Kajtún, un nuevo sitio maya con monumentos esculpidos en la región río bec. Journal De La Société Des Américanistes, 90(1), 183-201. https://doi.org/10.4000/jsa.2612

Nondédéo, P., Arnauld, M., & Michelet, D. (2013). Río bec settlement patterns and local sociopolitical organization. Ancient Mesoamerica, 24(2), 373-396. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0956536114000017

Owamoyo, L. and Tabibi, B. (2023). The impact of globalisation on traditional architecture in nigeria: a case study of lagos island. Advances in Applied Sociology, 13(09), 636-650. https://doi.org/10.4236/aasoci.2023.139040

Patrois, J. (2013). Río bec graffiti: a private form of art. Ancient Mesoamerica, 24(2), 433-447. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0956536113000278

Pereira, G. (2013). Ash, dirt, and rock: burial practices at río bec. Ancient Mesoamerica, 24(2), 449-468. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0956536113000266

Plascencia, D. (2017). The role of the internet in the endurance of “la llorona” as a liminal archetypal monster in modern latin american society. Etropic Electronic Journal of Studies in the Tropics, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.25120/etropic.16.1.2017.3567

Puglia, D. (2023). The (mostly) unseen world of cryptids: legendary monsters in north america. Humanities, 13(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/h13010001

Ringle, W., Negrón, T., Ciau, R., Seligson, K., Fernández-Diaz, J., & Zapata, D. (2021). Lidar survey of ancient maya settlement in the puuc region of yucatan, mexico. Plos One, 16(4), e0249314. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249314

Taladoire, É., Dzul, S., Nondédéo, P., & Forné, M. (2013). Chronology of the río bec settlement and architecture. Ancient Mesoamerica, 24(2), 353-372. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0956536113000254

Taube, K. (1986). The teotihuacan cave of origin: the iconography and architecture of emergence mythology in mesoamerica and the american southwest. Res Anthropology and Aesthetics, 12, 51-82. https://doi.org/10.1086/resv12n1ms20166753