In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

396 N o t e s o f M i d d l e A m e r i c a n A r c h a e o l o g y a n d E t h n o l o g y Carnegie Institution of Washington Division of Historical Research No. 97 July 28, 1950 Rim-Head Vessels and Cone-Shaped Effigy prongs of the preclassic period at Kaminaljuyu, Guatemala Stephan F. de Borhegyi 97.1a, c, d) which showed a striking facial and technical resemblance to the previously described Type A rim-heads. These fragments were made from the same coarse, unslipped, reddish brown ware, the paste of which was a warm brown and thickly sown with particles of white temper. The major difference, however, was that all the head fragments were solid instead of hollow. On closer examination it appeared that, to judge from the angle of breakage, these heads couldneverhavebeenattachedtofigurinebodiesbut must have been applied to the side of some vessel. With these fragments as a basis, similar ones were identified in the Hartwell M. Webb Collection (Fig. 97.1e, g) and collections of unknown provenience in the Guatemala Museum (Fig. 97.1f). All were solid and bore the characteristic slightly swelled cheeks, out-thrust chin, prominent nose to which pellets of clay had been added as a representation of nose buttons or nostrils, and protruding eyes made by the application of a round or elliptical button of clay set into a shallow, horizontal depression. The supposition that all came from Kaminaljuyu was strengthened when comparison was made with the same uniform type of solid heads found at Kaminaljuyu by the Carnegie Institution (Fig. 97.1b, h, j, l) and at Las Majadas, a section of Kaminaljuyu, by Lic. David Vela (Fig. 97.1i, k). The question of the type of vessel and the proper orientation of the heads on it was still unsolved until I was fortunate enough to find in the Dieseldorff Collection two pieces which I consider to represent the original appearance of the solid, human, head In July 1949 I received a grant from the Viking Fund of New York to organize the study material of the Museo Nacional de Arqueologia y Etnologia of Guatemala. While engaged in the organization of the large figurine collections, composed of material from the Dieseldorff Collection, the “desconocido” or unreliably recorded material of the Museum, and the collections donated by the Carnegie Institution of Washington, I encountered some unusual specimens deserving of special notice. On examination it appeared that much of what had formerly been considered part of the Preclassic figurine complex of the Guatemalan highlands was actually part of the “rim-head” vessel complex described by Kidder and Shook (Note 69). In that publication the authors were able to place a group of remarkably uniform, hollow, bald, human heads, from flat-bottomed tripod vessels, in the Miraflores Phase, the oldest culture then recognized at Kaminaljuyu . It was believed that these vessels served a ceremonial purpose and were undoubtedly related to ones with three similarly placed but smaller “rimheads ” found in later horizons on the south coast of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, and Mexico (Kidder Note 15). Therefore the former were designated as “rim-head” vessels but of a type peculiar to the Miraflores culture. Hereafter in the present Note this homogeneous group will be referred to as Type A. No variations of this type had been recognized by Kidder and Shook. While organizing the Dieseldorff figurines I ran across some solid, human, head fragments (Fig. Rim-Head Vessels and Cone-Shaped Effigy Prongs of the Preclassic Period at Kaminaljuyu, Guatemala 397 fragments (Fig. 97.2a, b). Both specimens bear the same relationship to tripod, flat-bottomed bowls as do the rim-heads of Type A. The most striking and significant difference, however, was that here a solid head had been applied to a large, upright, hollow bulb instead of the human features appearing on the bulb itself. They were therefore classified as Type B of the “rim-head” vessel complex. For a probable restoration of Type B in comparison with Type A (Kidder and Shook 1946, Fig. 1a) see Figure 97.3. Type A, as described in Note 69, is uniformly bald and lacking in headdress. Since then some exceptions to this type have appeared (Fig. 97.4f, g, i). These have an appliqué headband, two being rippled, with a central ornament usually consisting of a button of clay. This subtype shows a further...

Share