LAUSR

We read with great interest the article by Deps and Charlier, and entitled “A Crouzon syndrome from the classic period of Maya civilization?” [2]. We first would like to congratulate the authors for their valuable contribution to the journal, and for this interesting presentation of a very nice work of art of a civilization little known to the public. However, this report inspired us some considerations about the medical approach of the arts. Paleodiagnostical analysis is based on the assumption that the work realistically represents an individual who has formally existed. The idea of portrait is not obvious at first sight. The fact sheet referencing the work in the Quai Branly–Jacques Chirac Museum’s collections cautiously evokes a different interpretation [6]: “The character seems to be a deity related to agriculture”. The identification of the subject as the representation of a person who really existed, with morphological traits allowing recognition of the individual, is not sure. Nevertheless, assuming that this sculpture is indeed a portrait, the work must be placed in the context of the sculpture of its time and geographical space. To what extent can the Mayan culture, and more precisely that of the Quiché people, seek at this period the realism of the subjects represented? Artistic conventions vary in time and space, for example: