, ▁and ▁isolated ▁details ▁are ▁often ▁shown ▁without ▁any ▁reference ▁to ▁the ▁corresponding ▁structures ▁from ▁which ▁they ▁were ▁photograph ed . ▁Most ▁confusing ▁of ▁all ▁are ▁Le ▁Pl on geon ' s ▁doctor ed ▁or ▁" col lag ed " ▁images , ▁which ▁he ▁presented ▁as ▁un ret ouch ed ▁field ▁sh ots . ▁His ▁heavily ▁red ra wn ▁photograph ▁of ▁a ▁" Que en ▁M oo " ▁relief , ▁taken ▁at ▁U x mal , ▁leaves ▁little ▁hint ▁of ▁the ▁original ▁work — while ▁his ▁recre ation ▁of ▁Ch ichen ▁It za ' s ▁Platform ▁of ▁Ven us , ▁a ▁line ▁drawing ▁sand wich ed ▁between ▁phot ographic ▁images ▁of ▁sky ▁and ▁ground , ▁is ▁entirely ▁invent ed . ▁In ▁works ▁like ▁these ... Le ▁Pl on geon ▁placed ▁these ▁dist ort ions ▁at ▁the ▁service ▁of ▁a ▁specific ▁narr ative ." ▁ ▁Le ▁Pl on geon ▁identified ▁the ▁stone ▁ch ac m ool ▁figures ▁as ▁C oh , ▁the ▁war rior ▁prince . ▁Le ▁Pl on geon ▁wrote , ▁" It ▁is ▁not ▁an ▁id ol , ▁but ▁a ▁true ▁portrait ▁of ▁a ▁man ▁who ▁has ▁lived ▁an ▁earth ly ▁life . ▁I ▁have ▁seen ▁him ▁represented ▁in ▁battle , ▁in ▁coun c ils , ▁and ▁in ▁court ▁reception s ." ▁Mary ▁Ellen ▁Miller ▁dismiss es ▁this ▁as ▁an ▁" out rage ous ▁hypothesis " ▁and ▁coun ters ▁that ▁the ▁figures ▁likely ▁represent ▁a ▁capt ive , ▁defeated ▁enemy . ▁She ▁goes ▁on ▁to ▁rec ount ▁the ▁formal ▁similar ities ▁between