These two volumes are Spanish translations of The Eagle, the Jaguar and the Serpent (1954) and Indian Art of Mexico and Central America (1957), both of which Covarrubias published in the United States during the final years of his life. The first is an overview of American Indian art, with a systematic regional analysis of the native arts of Canada and the United States (including Alaska). The second continues the regional analysis for Mesoamerica. Together the two works comprise an integral and personal interpretation of the subject, the first two volumes of a trilogy that the author never completed. Covarrubias combined critical talents of a high order with a detailed archaeological and ethnographic knowledge and a sensitivity to historical processes. His approach was bold and uncluttered. He selected the most telling examples, delineated the cultures in swift strokes, and always had something fresh to say. He was a defender of the thesis of direct trans-Pacific contact between Asia and America, and he responded with open enthusiasm to the “optimistic” art of the Eskimo. Western and southwestern United States people, however, received rather pedestrian treatment at his hands, and the Plains Indians appeared almost as caricatures of the Red-Man type. His enthusiasm revived, somewhat unexpectedly, in the “rich and fascinating culture” of the eastern United States.
Covarrubias’ predominant interest, of course, lay in Mexico, and his discussion of Mexican art and archaeology is a model of clarity in expression. Arte indígena de México y Centroamérica treats the subject under the customary period headings: Preclassic, Classic, and Historic (i.e. Postclassic), the last including Toltec, “Mixtec,” and Aztec. In each period Covarrubias concentrated upon essential characteristics. Though his knowledge was greater for some areas than for others, the accuracy of his impressionism indicates again and again how clearly he could see. This same impressionism, on the other hand, gave rise to private points of view with some distortion of the evidence. Covarrubias did not respond positively to Maya styles or to the postclassic in general. His concept of “Mixtec” was overdrawn. He exaggerated Olmec culture and Olmec influence, both in the Valley of Mexico and elsewhere.
The translator and new publisher have missed an opportunity to correct a number of the factual errors of the English edition. The caption of Plate LX attributing two famous sculptured stones to Teotihuacán is the most obvious of such errors unnecessarily perpetuated in the translation.
The two works are lavishly illustrated with drawings by Covarrubias and photographs of objects from his and other collections. There is an index and a bibliography.
