VENICE *MAYA* CATALOG ERRORS =============================================== Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 10:21:42 EDT From: Lloyd Anderson Subject: MA: Venice *MAYA* catalog errors ------------------------Original message---------------------------- This is the current list of errors in the catalog from the Mayan exhibit at the Palazzo Grassi, Venice, reported as of 2 April,1999. If you know of other errors, please let me know, and I will send out an update in a few months if it is warranted. Since some sources wished to remain anonymous, I add no names, and simply specify that all of this information comes from others, I have merely compiled, verified by checking page numbers, and abbreviated some wording... Quite a number of people noticed the "Copan Ballcourt" that wasn't; it is really the Edzna grand plaza, Lloyd Anderson Image reversals: Pages 286-287 The rollout of a ballgame-vessel is mirrored left-right Page 359 The image of Tikal is mirrored left-right. (correspondent found it hard to believe this is an aerial photo) Page 380 The map has Naj Tunich misplaced between Caracol and Naranjo, though it is correctly placed South of Caracol on the map on p. 458. Page 416 The image of Sayil is mirrored left-right; however the B/W shot on p. 112 is correct. Cat. #431a and #431b on p.628: Each image is mirrored left-right. Cat. #413 on pages 182 and 623 Image is mirrored left-right, as shown by the "u-lak" at corrected B3, and by the "10 Zip" at corrected A1, and by the face orientation at corrected A3. But it was photographed upside down as shown by the lighting? Cat. #30 page 521 The image is mirrored left-right. Page 301 the Palenque sarcophagus lid Image is mirrored left-right. HOWEVER, The Xcalumk'in panel Cat. 421 on pages 333 and 625 is in correct orientation, which some have thought was reversed. It makes sense as shown if this refers to the second Tun in a 2-Ahau K'atun, late Yucatecan style dating ? Mislabeled illustrations: Page 91 The illustration is labeled as a Copan Ball Court, but it is actually the view down to the Grand Plaza at Edzna, from the Temple of the Five Stories. See pictures by Barbara McKenzie at http://www.slip.net/~bmckenz/edzna/m2_010.html Pages 108-109 This is captioned on page 107 as the "Great Plaza" of "Tikal", but it is in fact the North Acropolis adjoining the great plaza. Page 124 This shows "The Pyramid" at Coba. Which pyramid ? There is more than one. Page 464: Given the caption at the upper left, an overlay intended for the map must have been left off. Incorrect provenience: Cat. #88 page 538 is given the provenience "Guatemala", where it should be "Southern Campeche, Mexico". Missing attibution: Left off the list of "Authors of the Entries" (p. 509) was the author of the catalogue entries for the museum objects lent to the exhibit by Dumbarton Oaks. This author should be listed on p. 509 as: BJAF Billie J. A. Follensbee The initials BJAF should have followed several catalogue entries: Catalogue #88, p. 538 Catalogue #367, p. 610 Catalogue #386, p. 616 Catalogue #436, p. 629 Catalogue #445, p. 632 Editorial various: Cat. #300 page 593, the description contains some nonsense, fragments of phrases, etc. Page 671, a note between editor and author somehow got left in: (**Is something missing here??? I've never heard of Gods Ch...). One person commented that the occurrence of the term *cahal* (instead of *sahal*) as the reading for an office below Ahau, in David Stuart's paper--e.g. p 324. Another correspondent noted that the references to "cahal" are in error. In the original paper, David used "sahal", but one of the editors in charge of the catalogue decided to change all mentions of "sahal" into "cahal" without contacting the author. Apparently, the editor had found somewhere else in the catalogue, the mention of an outdated reading ("cahal") and decided that it must be the correct one. The following comments were received from one source, which will be kept anonymous like the rest: > Art people should never be given the upper hand in >designing text pages. The failure to indent or separate >paragraphs, the obscurity of chapter titles, and the like make for >tough reading. I suppose some concept of appearance, rather >than utility, prevailed. > > There are a lot of other peculiarities as well. Why, for >example, are authors identified only by name? > > I've done a lot of technical editing, so I am more distracted >by such things than most people would be. I had to keep my >hand away from my red pencils to avoid automatically spoiling >the margins. > > Nevertheless, it's a good book. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Use this Paper for free, if all data of Author and Publisher stays on. (c) 11APR99 Mesoamerican-Portal MesoPort at HTTP://WWW.OCEANFRONT.DE