The central parks of communities in Guanacaste keep their Indigenous heritage alive through representations that honor their ancestors. Giant metates, domes with pre-Columbian crocodiles, and paintings of Chorotega ceramics adorn many cantons and districts throughout the province.
In Nicoya’s Recaredo Briceño Park, the base of the monument to Leonidas Briceño features pieces of metates and stone-carved animal figures that are now the focus of the investigation.
The organization Contemporary Indigenous Museum reported on social media that the monument contains original ancestral pieces and called on the appropriate institutions to closely examine the bust of Leonidas Briceño. In response to this claim, the National Museum confirmed it will conduct an inspection in June to determine the origin of the archaeological pieces.
The social media post states that “Indigenous history can no longer be used as ornamentation nor covered in concrete” and calls for the conservation and respect of ancestral heritage. According to Law 6703, archaeological heritage is the property of the State and must therefore be safeguarded by the National Museum.
Details of metates and stone-carved figures incorporated into the monument of Nicoyan teacher and congressman Leonidas Briceño.Photo: César Arroyo Castro
“The intention was precisely to see how this could be resolved, without needing to find actors or point fingers at who did it or when it was done,” says Gustavo Gutiérrez, founder of the Contemporary Indigenous Museum.
The organization, Gutiérrez explains, is responsible for spreading information on topics related to Indigenous peoples.
The Voice investigated the origin of the monument, but neither the Nicoya Municipality, former officials, nor descendants of Leonidas Briceño knew any further details about its construction.
A man from Matambú standing on top of metates
Leonidas Briceño was born in the indigenous territory of Matambú in 1875. He was a teacher and congressman representing the province of Guanacaste, and the grandson of Cupertino Briceño, a signatory of the Act of Annexation of the Partido de Nicoya, who immortalized the phrase “from the homeland by our own will.”
One of the few existing records is the publication of the inauguration speech for the monument in 1945, delivered by the delegate of the Nicoya Progressive Board, Blas Melisandro Arauz, which was published in the newspaper La Tribuna in August 1945.
The article mentions that the idea of building this bust “floated in the air for some time and finally was almost forgotten,” but a board established in 1936 took on the task of building this monument “based on Chorotega culture.”
The news omits details such as who was responsible for the monument or the origin of the pieces that make up the monument.
According to archaeologist and director of the National Museum of Costa Rica, Ifigenia Quintanilla, during the June visit, they will document and conduct an assessment of the monument.
During the inspection of the monument they will observe the type of raw materials used in its construction, the characteristics of the designs, and the shapes they display to determine the region and period to which they belong.
Teacher and pastor Aníbal Montero Rojas and Eugenio Briceño next to the monument a few years after its construction.Photo: Courtesy: Danilo Chong Kan
Another important aspect to consider is that the pieces cannot be subjected to alterations that change their meaning in a way that offends the memory of Indigenous peoples.
“The important thing is to first go and do the visit. Not to jump to conclusions because, in reality, all I’ve seen so far are photos from Facebook,” Quintanilla emphasizes.
Possible solutions?
This is not the first case where the use or alteration of original Indigenous pieces in public spaces has been detected. At the lookout point in the canton of La Cruz, there is a rock with carvings on which a commemorative plaque was placed. Currently, the National Museum is working together with the local government to find a joint solution.
“In a time of trafficking of artifacts, perhaps for some people preserving or creating things that included archaeological elements didn’t seem like something violent. And now, maybe we see it with different eyes. The key is to analyze each case specifically, its historical context, and from there make decisions,” Quintanilla reflects.
It is precisely this context that makes the monument so unique, as it was built in 1945, just seven years after the first law mentioning the need to safeguard archaeological heritage.
A group of students in front of the Leonidas Briceño monument around the 1940s.Photo: Courtesy: Mario Rojas
“Every historical moment, the visions and reflections we have about things are different. This monument itself is already historic; it has its own age. It’s not something that was made recently with full knowledge of the law,” the archaeologist states.
If the investigation determines that the pieces are original, Quintanilla assures that the museum—an institution with a national scope that protects heritage defined as belonging to all citizens—must respect the community’s wishes and communicate with the local government to decide the steps to follow.
“Something very important for us is to understand the community’s perspective. We wouldn’t want to come in and cause harm. Because perhaps we could provoke a negative reaction by trying to recover archaeological objects that may have been there for a very long time,” she adds.
Finally, the archaeologist highlights that this situation can be a great opportunity to reclaim the monument and raise greater awareness about Leonidas Briceño’s role in the history of Nicoya.
“If it is decided to leave it as is, more information can be added, but that all depends on going there, seeing it, and having conversations. After all, we are talking about a diagnosis that we have not yet made,” she emphasizes.
Comments