There are perhaps as many interpretations of the Olmec ‘were-jaguar’ motif as there are types of this remarkable image. One traditional, and widely-held, interpretation postulates that the Olmec thought their people originated from the copulation of a warrior-king and a female jaguar (Panthera onca). It seems that this suggestion largely originates in a cave mural from Oxtotitlán (Painting 1-D), which depicts an ithyphallic man standing nearby to a rearing jaguar; it is not immediately obvious that this is a scene of copulation, and even if it was, whether this is related to an origin myth or else some kind of fertility ritual. Others believe that the motif relates to the transformation of a shaman into a jaguar, with depictions representing various stages of this mutation. This has drawn criticism from scholars like Michael Coe, who argues that the centralised and hierarchical kingdom of the Olmecs was incompatible with the egalitarian nature of shamanic ritual. Instead, he proposes that the motif relates to the kingship itself: the jaguar, mentioned in later Aztec texts as being the King of the Animals, was a popular metaphor for the monarch’s power in later Mesoamerican civilisations. Aztec Emperors, for example, donned jaguar pelts and sat on a jaguar throne. Among the more unusual interpretations are medical. A cleft which often appears in the forehead of ‘were-jaguars’ is sometimes taken to be evidence of a neural tube defect, a genetic condition, which may have run in the Olmec royal families. It is argued that babies with the defect were presented to the Olmec people as evidence that jaguar blood ran in the family line. Carolyn Tate suggests that the ‘were-jaguar’ was not a representation of a human-animal hybrid at all, but rather a depiction of pre-term foetuses, based on a survey of imagery. And indeed, some scholars do not see jaguars at all, but rather the spectacled caiman (Caiman crocodilus) as the origin of the unusual features.

Whatever the origin or significance of the figures, they are ubiquitous in Olmec art. Sometimes obvious, sometimes subtle, the same characteristics are found in each: snarling upturned lips, gaping open mouth (sometimes with fangs, sometimes toothless), round plump features, a flat nose, almond or teardrop-shaped eyes, and frequently, a V-shaped cleft in the forehead. In some representations, the cleft is shown producing vegetation, most commonly maize, in an apparent reference to a maize god (Jeralemon’s God II). The features of the ‘were-jaguar’ are found in most Olmec sculpture, to the point that it is difficult to tell where the motif ends and regular ‘portrait’ sculpture begins. The features appear on most of the Olmec’s artistic output, featuring in portable or monumental sculpture, on ceremonial celts and hachas (stone axe-heads), in cave paintings, wall reliefs, mosaics, and, especially, masks. The status of such objects was extremely high; in the case of the portable sculpture and ceremonial celts, the vast majority of examples which have come down to us were deliberately buried in votive deposits, often arranged in specific ways which suggest ritual meaning.

This spectacular jadeite sculpture is unusual in the extreme. It represents what may be considered the ‘were-jaguar baby’, a recurring motif in Olmec art. The most famous Olmec sculpture to come down to modern times is the figure of a man cradling a ‘were-jaguar’ baby which is now in the Kimbell Art Museum (AP 2023.2), while the same motif of humans caring for ‘were-jaguar’ infants is repeated on the altars (probably in fact ceremonial thrones) found at La Venta. The ‘were-jaguar baby’, if it can be distinguished at all from ‘adult were-jaguars’ is usually taken to be a plumper, fleshier version. Where depicted alongside humans, it is small, and often cradled or held by the armpits. It is possible that toothless ‘were-jaguars’ are also intended to represent infants; like human babies, jaguar cubs are not born with teeth, gaining them at around one month old. Additionally, certain postulated ‘were-jaguar babies’ are associated with seated or crawling positions. This extraordinary sculpture represents a clearly infantilised ‘were-jaguar’, with a proportionally large head, short arms and legs, plump features, and rounded buttocks with a closely-formed tail. The hands are distinctly human, but the feet bear more in common with the jaguar’s paw. The face displays perhaps the most exaggerated type of ‘were-jaguar’ features, with the upper lip and the flat nose merged into a proto-muzzle. The figure has long flaring eyebrows, akin to those on the aventurine stone celt in the British Museum (Am,St.536).

Carved from the most exquisite almost translucent pale jadeite, this figure demonstrates the Olmec’s esteem for imperfect jade, celebrating the reddish-orange fissures which contrast with the mint green. The interpretation of this piece is, however, somewhat contentious. It is balanced on two axes, either laid on its front in a crawling position, or sat upright. If presented crawling, it could be a clear representation of the infant nature of this ‘were-jaguar’, or even depict a shaman mid-transformation mimicking the posture of the jaguar itself. Alternatively, if designed to sit upright, this would be a so-called ‘stargazer’, a depiction of an individual with their head tilted towards the sky, scanning the heavens. While this may represent some kind of spiritual experience, it should be remembered that the notion that deities reside in the skies is a peculiarly Mediterranean one. For the Olmec, their gods lived in caves, in the bowels of the Earth. Instead, stargazers are probably looking upwards for rain, which was so vital for Olmec agriculture, and which may have been one of the functions of the ‘were-jaguar’.