A precocious young girl from Titicaca

A precocious young girl from Titicaca

Had more gold than the Dons Cuernavaca.

Indeed, her necklace cost more to make 

Than those scientists could take.

And under the terrible strain

Of such startling anomalous pain, 

They shouted inelegantly, “Wow!”

And labeled her pretty, but “vain.”

‘Twas the best, I suppose, they could offer,

But, I ask, would a gentleman offer such gain?

Yes, rather than face the mirror,

And its gift of healing pain,

Her necklace they labeled “pretty,” 

And her Self, well, quite modern, thus “vain.”

But I swear by the great skull of Vaca,

In defense of the Past, and her honor,

She had purity of soul for a locket, 

And far far less gold than their caca.

 © Jay Warren Clark   

Note: The Archeologist was a man named Aldenderfer from the University of Arizona in Tucson. I sent him a copy of the poem and to his credit he did reply. His reply however was terse, dismissive, and without humor. And it was most certainly not an invitation to a dialogue between two intellectuals. That said, in academia one of the taboos of (scientific) Anthropology is an unthinking projection of modern conceptions onto people from the distant past and who are from cultures that are vastly different from our own. Mr. Aldenderfer violated that maxim—a maxim I always thought of as appropriate since scientists (and their method which attempts to eradicate subjectivity) have done their best to assure that modern people know almost nothing of the interior life! As Ananda K. Coomaraswamy taught so many years ago, the ornamentation of ancient peoples was patterned on and pointed to celestial (heavenly) models: men used shields that pointed to power cultivated by following (submitting to) celestial models and celestial commandments, and thought of their weapons, for example, as thunderbolts, etc. This is mirrored also in our Western heraldic traditions where a warrior’s shield, often ineffective against powerful projectiles, protected the warrior less than the exhortation to a virtuous life signified by the charge (motto) inscribed in text and symbols upon that shield. This was affirmed as far back as Plato (or his mentor) who taught that “No harm can come to a good man.” It is not a man’s shield that protects him, but his virtue—which is the only thing worth protecting. This was clear to ancient peoples. The true enemy was the enemy within, corruption or sin! For them a man’s interior condition was the primary reality—the physical vehicle being, at best, a fragile and tentative thing! Thus it is modern people, devoid of any such Teaching, who are more inclined to the sin of “vanity,” and that is why Aldenderfer’s comment was both unjust, and presumptuous—as well as unscientific! Ancient people thought of themselves as living under celestial constraints. Moderns, however, who are truly “vain,” submit to nothing higher than their own exalted egos. Again, this was entirely foreign to men and women of ancient cultures for whom associations with the Gods, and submission to their heavenly constraints, provided a life that had meaning precisely because it was a conscious relationship to divine principles, and thus was in no sense arbitrary or accidental! That said, I don’t know if Aldenderfer is married, but if he is I would offer the friendly advice that he will want to be careful before suggesting that her jewelry is proof positive of her superficiality and, well, “vanity.”
 
© Jay Warren Clark -1-08, revised 11-08 and 11-18, and 4-20