| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: Studies in Central American Picture-Writing - First Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the - Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1879-80, - Government Printing Office, Washington, 1881, pages 205-245
Author: Holden, Edward S.
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Studies in Central American Picture-Writing - First Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the - Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1879-80, - Government Printing Office, Washington, 1881, pages 205-245" ***
generously made available by the Bibliothèque nationale
de France (BnF/Gallica) at http://gallica.bnf.fr)
Transcriber's Note:
This book was originally published as a part of:
Powell, J. W.
1881 _First Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the
Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1879-'80._ pp.
205-245. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
The table of contents and index included in this version of the book was
extracted from the complete volume.
A number of typographical errors found in the original text have been
maintained in this version. They are marked in the text with a [TN-#].
A description of each error is found in the complete list at the end of
the text. Original spelling has been maintained. A list of inconsistently
spelled words is found at the end of the text.
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION--BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY.
J. W. POWELL, DIRECTOR.
STUDIES
IN
CENTRAL AMERICAN PICTURE-WRITING.
BY
EDWARD S. HOLDEN,
PROFESSOR OF MATHEMATICS, U. S. NAVAL OBSERVATORY.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of illustrations 206
Introductory 207
Materials for the present investigation 210
System of nomenclature 211
In what order are the hieroglyphs read? 221
The card catalogue of hieroglyphs 223
Comparison of plates I and IV (Copan) 224
Are the hieroglyphs of Copan and Palenque identical? 227
Huitzilopochtli, Mexican god of war, etc. 229
Tlaloc, or his Maya representative 237
Cukulean or Quetzalcoatl 239
Comparison of the signs of the Maya months 243
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure 48.--The Palenquean Group of the Cross 221
49.--Statue at Copan 224
50.--Statue at Copan 225
51.--Synonymous Hieroglyphs from Copan and Palenque 227
52.--Yucatec Stone 229
53.--Huitzilopochtli (front) 232
54.--Huitzilopochtli (side) 232
55.--Huitzilopochtli (back) 232
56.--Miclantecutli 232
57.--Adoratorio 233
58.--The Maya War-God 234
59.--The Maya Rain-God 234
60.--Tablet at Palenque 234
STUDIES IN CENTRAL AMERICAN PICTURE-WRITING.
BY EDWARD S. HOLDEN.
I.
Since 1876 I have been familiar with the works of Mr. JOHN L. STEPHENS
on the antiquities of Yucatan, and from time to time I have read works
on kindred subjects with ever increasing interest and curiosity in
regard to the meaning of the hieroglyphic inscriptions on the stones and
tablets of Copan, Palenque, and other ruins of Central America. In
August, 1880, I determined to see how far the principles which are
successful when applied to ordinary cipher-writing would carry one in
the inscriptions of Yucatan. The difference between an ordinary
cipher-message and these inscriptions is not so marked as might at first
sight appear. The underlying principles of deciphering are quite the
same in the two cases.
The chief difficulty in the Yucatec inscriptions is our lack of any
definite knowledge of the nature of the records of the aborigines. The
patient researches of our archæologists have recovered but very little
of their manners and habits, and one has constantly to avoid the
tempting suggestions of an imagination which has been formed by modern
influences, and to endeavor to keep free from every suggestion not
inherent in the stones themselves. I say the stones, for I have only
used the Maya manuscripts incidentally. They do not possess, to me, the
same interest, and I think it may certainly be said that all of them are
younger than the Palenque tablets, and far younger than the inscriptions
at Copan.
I therefore determined to apply the ordinary principles of deciphering,
without any bias, to the Yucatec inscriptions, and to go as far as I
could _certainly_. Arrived at the point where demonstration ceased, it
would be my duty to stop. For, while even the conjectures of a mind
perfectly trained in archæologic research are valuable and may
subsequently prove to be quite right, my lack of familiarity with
historical works forced me to keep within narrow and safe limits.
My programme at beginning was, _first_, to see if the inscriptions at
Copan and Palenque were written in the same tongue. When I say "to see,"
I mean to definitely prove the fact, and so in other cases; _second_, to
see how the tablets were to be read. That is, in horizontal lines, are
they to be read from right to left, or the reverse? In vertical columns,
are they to be read up or down? _Third_, to see whether they were
phonetic characters, or merely ideographic, or a mixture of the
two--rebus-like, in fact.
If the characters turned out to be purely phonetic, I had determined to
stop at this point, since I had not the time to learn the Maya language,
and again because I utterly and totally distrusted the methods which, up
to this time, have been applied by BRASSEUR DE BOURBOURG and others who
start, and must start, from the misleading and unlucky alphabet handed
down by LANDA. I believe that legacy to have been a positive misfortune,
and I believe any process of the kind attempted by BRASSEUR DE BOURBOURG
(for example, in his essay on the _MS. Troano_) to be extremely
dangerous and difficult in application, and to require a degree of
scientific caution almost unique.
Dr. HARRISON ALLEN, in his paper, "The Life Form in Art," in the
_Transactions of the American Philosophical Society_, is the only
investigator who has applied this method to Central American remains
with success, so it seems to me; and even here errors have occurred.
The process I allude to is something like the following: A set of
characters, say the alphabet of LANDA, is taken as a starting point. The
_variants_ of these are formed. Then the basis of the investigation is
ready. From this, the interpretation follows by identifications of each
new character with one of the standard set or with one of its
_variants_. Theoretically, there is no objection to this procedure.
Practically, also, there is no objection if the work is done strictly in
the order named. In fact, however, the list of _variants_ is filled out
not before the work is begun, but during its progress, and in such a way
as to satisfy the necessities of the interpreter in carrying out some
preconceived idea. With a sufficient latitude in the choice of
_variants_ any MS. can receive any interpretation. For example, the _MS.
Troano_, which a casual examination leads me to think is a _ritual_, and
an account of the adventures of several Maya gods, is interpreted by
BRASSEUR DE BOURBOURG as a record of mighty geologic changes. It is next
to impossible to avoid errors of this nature at least, and in fact they
have not been avoided, so far as I know, except by Dr. ALLEN in the
paper cited.
I, personally, have chosen the stones and not the manuscripts for study
largely because _variants_ do not exist in the same liberal degree in
the stone inscriptions as they have been supposed to exist in the
manuscripts.
At any one ruin the characters for the same idea are alike, and alike to
a marvelous degree. At another ruin the type is just a little different,
but the fidelity to this type is equally great. Synonyms exist; that is,
the same idea may be given by two or more utterly different signs. But a
given sign is made in a fixed and definite way. Finally the MSS. are, I
think, later than the stones. Hence the root of the matter is the
interpretation of the stones, or not so much their full interpretation
as the discovery of a _method of interpretation_, which shall be sure.
Suppose, for example, that we know the meaning of a dozen characters
only, and the way a half dozen of these are joined together in a
sentence. The _method_ by which these were obtained will serve to add
others to the list, and progress depends in such a case only on our
knowledge of the people who wrote, and of the subjects upon which they
were writing. Such knowledge and erudition belongs to the archæologists
by profession. A step that might take me a year to accomplish might be
made in an instant by one to whom the Maya and Aztec mythology was
familiar, if he were proceeding according to a sound method. At the
present time we know nothing of the meaning of any of the Maya
hieroglyphs.
It will, therefore, be my object to go as far in the subject as I can
proceed with certainty, every step being demonstrated so that not only
the archæologist but any intelligent person can follow. As soon as the
border-land is reached in which proof disappears and opinion is the only
guide, the search must be abandoned except by those whose cultivated and
scientific opinions are based on knowledge far more profound and various
than I can pretend or hope to have.
If I do not here push my own conclusions to their farthest limit, it
must not be assumed that I do not see, at least in some cases, the
direction in which they lead. Rather, let this reticence be ascribed to
a desire to lay the foundations of a new structure firmly, to prescribe
the method of building which my experience has shown to be adequate and
necessary, and to leave to those abler than myself the erection of the
superstructure. If my methods and conclusions are correct (and I have no
doubts on this point, since each one has been reached in various ways
and tested by a multiplicity of criteria) there is a great future to
these researches. It is not to be forgotten that here we have no Rosetta
stone to act at once as key and criterion, and that instead of the
accurate descriptions of the Egyptian hieroglyphics which were handed
down by the Greek cotemporaries[TN-1] of the sculptors of these
inscriptions, we have only the crude and brutal chronicles of an
ignorant Spanish soldiery, or the bigoted accounts of an unenlightened
priesthood. To CORTEZ and his companions a memorandum that it took one
hundred men all day to throw the idols into the sea was all-sufficient.
To the Spanish priests the burning of all manuscripts was praiseworthy,
since those differing from Holy Writ were noxious and those agreeing
with it superfluous. It is only to the patient labor of the Maya
sculptor who daily carved the symbols of his belief and creed upon
enduring stone, and to the luxuriant growths of semi-tropical forests
which concealed even these from the passing Spanish adventurer, that we
owe the preservation of the memorials of past beliefs and vanished
histories.
Not the least of the pleasures of such researches as these comes from
the recollection that they vindicate the patience and skill of forgotten
men, and make their efforts not quite useless. It was no rude savage
that carved the Palenque cross; and if we can discover what his efforts
meant, his labor and his learning have not been all in vain. It will be
one more proof that human effort, even misdirected, is not lost, but
that it comes, later or earlier, "to forward the general deed of man."
II.
MATERIALS FOR THE PRESENT INVESTIGATION.
My examination of the works of Mr. J. L. STEPHENS has convinced me that
in every respect his is the most trustworthy work on the _hieroglyphs_
of Central America. The intrinsic evidence to this effect is very
strong, but when I first became familiar with the works of WALDECK I
found so many points of difference that my faith was for a time shaken,
and I came to the conclusion that while the existing representations
might suffice for the study of the general forms of statues, tablets,
and buildings, yet they were not sufficiently accurate in detail to
serve as a basis for the deciphering I had in mind. I am happy to bear
witness, however, that STEPHENS'S work is undoubtedly amply adequate to
the purpose, and this fact I have laboriously verified by a comparison
of it with various representations, as those of DESAIX and others, and
also with a few photographs. The drawings of WALDECK are very beautiful
and artistic, but either the artist himself or his lithographers have
taken singular liberties in the published designs. STEPHENS'S work is
not only accurate, but it contains sufficient material for my purpose
(over 1,500 separate hieroglyphs), and, therefore, I have based my study
exclusively upon his earliest work, "_Incidents of Travel in Central
America, Chiapas, and Yucatan_," 2 vols., 8vo. New York, 1842 (twelfth
edition). I have incidentally consulted the works on the subject
contained in the Library of Congress, particularly those of BRASSEUR DE
BOURBOURG, KINGSBOROUGH, WALDECK, and others, but, as I have said, the
two volumes above named contain all the the[TN-2] material I have been
able to utilize, and much more which is still under examination.
* * * * *
One fact which makes the examination of the Central American antiquities
easier than it otherwise would be, has not, I think, been sufficiently
dwelt upon by former writers. This is the remarkable faithfulness of the
artists and sculptors of these statues and inscriptions to a standard.
Thus, at Copan, wherever the same kind of hieroglyph is to be
represented, it will be found that the human face or other object
employed is almost identically the same in expression and character,
wherever it is found. The same characters at different parts of a tablet
do not differ more than the same letters of the alphabet in two fonts of
type.
At Palenque the _type_ (font) changes, but the adherence to this is
equally or almost equally rigid. It is to be presumed that in this
latter case, where work was done both in stone and stucco, the nature
of the material affected the portraiture more or less.
The stone statues at Copan, for example, could not all have been done by
the same artist, nor at the same time. I have elsewhere shown that two
of these statues are absolutely identical. How was this accomplished?
Was one stone taken to the foot of the other and cut by it as a pattern?
This is unlikely, especially as in the case mentioned the _scale_ of the
two statues is quite different. I think it far more likely that each was
cut from a drawing, or series of drawings, which must have been
preserved by priestly authority. The work at any one place must have
required many years, and could not have been done by a single man; nor
is it probable that it was all done in one generation. Separate
hieroglyphs must have been preserved in the same way. It is this rigid
adherence to a type, and the banishment of artistic fancy, which will
allow of progress in the deciphering of the inscriptions or the
comparison of the statues. Line after line, ornament after ornament, is
repeated with utter fidelity. The reason of this is not far to seek.
This, however, is not the place to explain it, but rather to take
advantage of the fact itself. We may fairly say that were it not so, and
with our present data, all advances would be tenfold more difficult.
III.
SYSTEM OF NOMENCLATURE.
It is impossible without a special and expensive font of type to refer
pictorially to each character, and therefore some system of nomenclature
must be adopted. The one I employ I could now slightly improve, but it
has been used and results have been obtained by it. It is sufficient for
the purpose, and I will, therefore, retain it rather than to run the
risk of errors by changing it to a more perfect system. I have numbered
the plates in STEPHENS'S _Central America_ according to the following
scheme:
ENGRAVINGS OF VOLUME I.
Page.
Stone Statue, front view, I have called Plate I _Frontispiece._
Wall of Copan, Plate II 96
Plan of Copan, Plate III 133
Death's Head, Plate III^a 135
Portrait, Plate III^b 136
Stone Idol, Plate IV 138
Portrait, Plate IV^a 139
Stone Idol, Plate V 140
Tablet of Hieroglyphics, Plate V^a 141
No. 1, Sides of Altar, Plate VI 142
No. 2, Sides of Altar, Plate VII 142
Gigantic Head, Plate VIII 143
No. 1, Stone Idol, front view, Plate IX 149
No. 2, Stone Idol, back view, Plate X 150
Idol half buried, Plate XI 151
No. 1, Idol, Plate XII 152
No. 2, Idol, Plate XIII 152
No. 1, Idol, Plate XIV 153
No. 2, Idol, Plate XV 153
Idol and Altar, Plate XVI 154
Fallen Idol, Plate XVII 155
No. 1, Idol, front view, Plate XVIII 156
No. 2, Idol, back view, Plate XIX 156
No. 3, Idol, side view, Plate XX 156
Fallen Idol, Plate XX^a 157
Circular Altar, Plate XX^b 157
No. 1, Stone Idol, front view, Plate XXI 158
No. 2, Stone Idol, back view, Plate XXII 158
No. 3, Stone Idol, side view, Plate XXIII 158
Great Square of Antigua Guatimala, Plate XXIII^a 266
Profile of Nicaragua Canal, Plate XXIII^b 412
ENGRAVINGS OF VOLUME II.
Page.
Stone Tablet, Plate XXIV _Frontispiece._
Idol at Quirigua, Plate XXV 121
Idol at Quirigua, Plate XXVI 122
Santa Cruz del Quiché, Plate XXVII 171
Place of Sacrifice, Plate XXVIII 184
Figures found at Santa Cruz del Quiché, Plate XXIX 185
Plaza of Quezaltenango, Plate XXX 204
Vases found at Gueguetenango, Plate XXXI 231
Ocosingo, Plate XXXII 259
Palace at Palenque, Plate XXXIII 309
Plan of Palace, Plate XXXIV 310
Stucco Figure on Pier, Plate XXXV 311
Front Corridor of Palace, Plate XXXVI 313
No. 1, Court-yard of Palace, Plate XXXVIII 314
No. 2, Colossal Bas-reliefs in Stone, Plate XXXIX 314
East side of Court-yard, Plate XXXVII 314
No. 1, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate XL 316
No. 2, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate XLI 316
No. 3, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate XLII 316
Oval Bas-relief in Stone, Plate XLIII 318
Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate XLIV 319
General Plan of Palenque, Plate XLV 337
Casa No. 1 in Ruins, Plate XLVI 338
Casa No. 1 restored, Plate XLVII 339
No. 1, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate XLVIII 340
No. 2, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate XLIX 340
No. 3, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate L 340
No. 4, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate LI 340
No. 1, Tablet of Hieroglyphics, Plate LII 342
No. 2, Tablet of Hieroglyphics, Plate LIII 342
Tablet on inner Wall, Plate LIV 343
Casa di Piedras, No. 2, Plate LV 344
Tablet on back Wall of Altar, Casa No. 2, Plate LVI 345
Stone Statue, Plate LVII 349
Casa No. 3, Plate LVIII 350
Front Corridor, Plate LIX 351
No. 1, Bas-reliefs in Front of Altar, Plate LX 353
No. 2, Bas-reliefs in Front of Altar, Plate LXI 353
Adoratorio or Altar, Plate LXII 354
Casa No. 4, Plate LXIII 355
House of the Dwarf, Plate LXIV 420
Casa del Gobernador, Plate LXV 428
Sculptured Front of Casa del Gobernador, Plate LXVI 443
Egyptian Hieroglyphics, Plate LXVIII 441
Top of Altar at Copan, Plate LXVIII=V^a 454
Mexican Hieroglyphical Writing, Plate LXIX 454
In each plate I have numbered the hieroglyphs, giving each one its own
number. Thus the hieroglyphs of the Copan altar (vol. i, p. 141) which I
have called plate V^a, are numbered from 1 to 36 according to this
scheme--
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30
31 32 33 34 35 36
And the right hand side of the Palenque Cross tablet, as given by RAU in
his memoir published by the Smithsonian Institution (1880), has the
numbers--
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045
2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055
* * * * * *
* * * * * *
3080 3081 3082 3083 3084 3085
These are consecutive with the numbers which I have attached to the
left-hand side, as given by STEPHENS. Whenever I have stated any results
here, I have also given the means by which any one can number a copy of
STEPHENS'S work in the way which I have adopted, and thus the means of
testing my conclusions is in the hands of every one who desires to do
so.
In cases where only a _part_ of a hieroglyphic is referred to, I have
placed its number in a parenthesis, as 1826 _see_ (122), by which I mean
that the character 1826 is to be compared with a part of the character
122. The advantages of this system are many: for example; a memorandum
can easily be taken that two hieroglyphs are alike, thus 2072=2020 and
2073=2021. Hence the _pair_ 2020--2021, read horizontally, occurs again
at the point 2072--2073, etc. _Horizontal pairs_ will be known by their
numbers being consecutive, as 2020--2021; _vertical pairs_ will usually
be known by their numbers differing by 10. Thus, 2075--2085 are one
above the other.
This method of naming the _chiffres_, then, is a quick and safe one, and
we shall see that it lends itself to the uses required of it.
I add here the scheme according to which the principal plates at
Palenque have been numbered.
PLATE XXIV (left-hand side).
v----------v
{ 37 37 38 39 94 96 98 100 102 104 106
{_See_ _See_ _See_
{ 1800 1800 1806
{
{ 40 40 41 42 95 97 99=127 101 103 105 107
43=1810 43^a=46^a 44 45 108
_See_
91
46=1810 46^a=43^a 47 48
49 50 51
In the middle of the
52 52^a=1820? 53 54 plate at the top.
v----------v
55 56=1840? 57 58 109 115
_See_
1802
59 60 61 62=58? 110 116
_See_
2020
63 64 65[+] 66 111 117
_See_
2025
67 68 69 70 112 118
_See_
1911
71 72=281 73 74 113 119
_See_
2020
75 76=67 77 78 114 120
79 80 81 82
83 84 85 86=56?
86[*] 86[*] 87 88
89 90 91 92
93
[*] Accidental error in numbering here.
[+] Possibly Muluc--a Maya day; the meaning is "reunion."
PLATE XXIV (right-hand side).
v-------------------v
121 122=86?[+] 123=87 124=88
_See_ 74, _See_ 61, 1822
86[*]
125 126[++] 127=99 128
_See_ 1940 _See_ 1940 _See_ (44), 64
129 130 131=147 132
_See_ 50, 58, 62
133 134 135 136=47?
137 138 139 140
_See_ 39, _See_ 1811
91
141 142[§] 143 144
_See_ 54 _See_ 50, 58,
62, 132
145 146 147=131 148
_See_ 71
149 150 151 152
_See_ 56,
1882
153 154 155 156
_See_ 53 _See_ 50,
58, 132
157[*] 158 159 160
_See_ 68 _See_ 38 _See_ 46^a,
49^a, 52^a
v------------------------------------------v
161=50 162 [+]163=1936 164
_See_ 58, _See_ 56, _See_ 57 _See_ 58, 62
62, 132 73, 1882
165 166 167 168
_See_ 81?
169 170 171 172
_See_ 68?
173 174 175 176
_See_ 67, 76, _See_ 57 _See_ 126
90, 1910
177 178 179 180
_See_ 43^a _See_ 50, 58, 62
181 182 183 184
_See_ 57,
163, 1936
185
[*] Possibly Ymix--a Maya day.
[+] Possibly Chuen--a Maya day; meaning "a board," "a tree."
[++] Possibly Ahau--a Maya day; meaning "king."
[§] Possibly Ezanab--a Maya day.
PLATE LII.
200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 }
}
210 211 212 214 215 216 217 218 219 } Line 1.
_See_ }
2020 }
220 221 222 223 224=2060 225 226 227 228 229 }
_See_ _See_ _See_ }
2030 2060 1811-2 }
} Line 2.
230 231 232 234 235 236 237 238 239 }
_See_ }
1822 }
240 241 242=2020 243=1951 244 245 246 247 248 249 }
}
250 251 252 254 255 256 257 258 259=1943} Line 3.
_See_ }
214 }
v-----------------v
260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 }
_See_ _See_ _See_ }
2020 2021 2022 }
} Line 4.
270 271 274=244 275 276 277 278 279 }
_See_ }
204 }
280 281=72 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 }
_See_ _See_ }
1820 385 } Line 5.
}
290 294 295 296 297 298 299 }
300 301 302 303=360 304 305 306 307 }
_See_ }
203 } Line 6.
}
310 311 314 315 316 317 318 319 }
v-----------v
320 321 322 323 324=1824 325 326 327 328 329 }
_See_ _See_ _See_ _See_ }
203 204 285 305 }
} Line 7.
330 331 332 334 335 336 337 338 339 }
_See_ }
209 }
340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 }
_See_ _See_ }
209 322 }
} Line 8.
350 351 352 354 355 356=1822 357 358 359 }
_See_ _See_ }
267, 230 }
298 }
360=303 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 }
_See_ _See_ }
351 303, } Line 9.
360 }
}
370 371 375 376 377 378 379 }
380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 }
_See_ }
286, } Line 10.
1822 }
}
390 391 392 394 395 396 397 398 399 }
400 401 402 403=360 404 405 406 407 408 409 }
_See_ 367 _See_ }
326 360 }
} Line 11.
410 411 412 414 415 416 417 418 419 }
_See_ _See_ }
326 324 }
420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 }
_See_ }
324 } Line 12.
}
430 432 434 435 436 437 438 439 }
PLATE LIII.
[The upper left-hand square is No. 500, the upper right is 519, the
lower left-hand is 720, the lower right is 739. All the squares from 500
to 508, 520 to 528, 530 to 538, etc., up to 720 to 728, are obliterated
(and their numbers omitted here) except a few.]
509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519
_See_ _See_ _See_
1967 509 510
529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539
_See_
3012
549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559
_See_
162
570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579
_See_
1823
589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599
604 605 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619
_See_
571
628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639
_See_
3054
649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659
_See_
150,
1882
669 670 671=324 672=322? 673=323? 674 675 676 677 678 679
_See_ _See_ _See_
2042 77 1802
688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699
708 709 710 711 712 713=1802 714 715 716 717 718 719
_See_
439
729 730=1845 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739
_See_
2020
PLATE LIV.
v-----------v
800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813
_See_ _See_ _See_ _See_
1882 26 1940 1941,
3011
900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907=1003 908 909 910 911 912 913
_See_ _See_
2020 1310
1000 1001 1002 1003=907 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013
_See_ _See_ _See_
2021 3054 1811-2
v------------v
1100 1101 1102=717 1103 1104 1105=2020 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110=1209 1113 1114 1115
_See_ _See_ _See_ _See_
1820 2021 1840 1841?
1200 1201 1202=1110 1203 1204=1008 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209=1110 1210 1211 1212 1213
_See_ 3054 _See_
1823
1300 1301 1302 1303=1910 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313
_See_
910
1400=1823 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413
1500 1501 1502=1010 1503 1504=717 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513
1102
v-----------------v
1600 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607 1608 1609=1304 1610=1305 1611=1010 1612 1613
1700 1701 1702=1911 1703 1704 1705 1706 1707 1708 1709 1710 1711=1702 1712=1708 1713
1911
PLATE LVI (left-hand side--Palenque Cross).
{ 1801 1802 1803 1804 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965
{ _See_
{ 163,
1800 { 175
{
{ 1805 1806 1807 1808 1966
{_See_ _See_
{ 155 138
v---------------------v
[*]1810 1811 1812 1813 1814 1815 1816 1967
_See_ _See_ _See_ _See_ _See_
150 139, (1852) 131, 126,
179 146 127,
176
1820 1821 1822 1823 1824 1825 1826 1968
_See_ _See_ _See_
161 124 122,
160
1830=1820 1831 1832 1833 1834 1835 1836 1969
_See_ 161 _See_ _See_ _See_ _See_ _See_
123, 121 163 182 123
124
1840 1841 1842 1843 1844 1845=1822 1846 1970
_See_ _See_ _See_ 124 _See_
1835 124, 179
1836
1850 1851 1852 1853 1854=1806 1855
_See_
122
1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865=2021 1866
_See_ _See_ 144 _See_
126, 136?,
127 184?
1870=1820 1871 1872=1842? 1873=1803 1874 1875 1876
_See_ 160, _See_ 182
161
1880 1881 1882 1883 1884=1834 1885
_See_ _See_ _See_ 163, _See_
150, 124 182 132,
162 144
1890 1891 1892 1893 1894=1822 1895
_See_ _See_ _See_ _See_ 124 _See_
130, 131?, 132? 144
158 147?
1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905=1803 1971
_See_ _See_ _See_
146 157, 1802
182
1910 1911 1912 1913=1834 1914 1915 1972
_See_ _See_ _See_ 1884
174 174 141
v---------------v
1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1973
_See_ _See_
123 124
1930 1931 1932=1811-2? 1933 1934 1935=1884 1975 1974
_See_ 182
v-----------------v
1940=1862 1941 1942 1943 1944=1922 1945=1923
_See_ _See_ 123 _See_ 124
126,
127
1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955
_See_
164
[*] At and after this place, in vertical columns, 1810-1-2, 1820-1-2,
1830-1-2, 1840-1-2, and 1860-1-2 may be taken as 2 or 3 symbols. I have
assumed them to be 3.
PLATE LVI (right-hand side--Palenque Cross).
1980 1981 1982 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025=123
_See_ _See_ _See_
131, 144 163
147,
150
1983 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
_See_ _See_ _See_ _See_
132 134, 1811, 124
146, 1812
149
v---------v
1984 2040 2041 2042 2043=123 2044 2045
_See_ _See_ _See_
131, 131, 132,
147 147 150
2000 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055
2001 2060 2061 2062 2063 2064 2065
_See_
182
2002=122 2070 2071 2072 2073 2074 2075
2003=2021 2080 2081 2082 2083 2084 2085
_See_ 130
2004 2090 2091 2092 2093 2094 2095
2005 3000 3001 3002 3003 3004 3005
{ 1976 1978 2006 3010 3011 3012 3013 3014 3015
{ _See_
{ 1902,
[*] { 1903
{
{ 1977 1979 2007 3020 3021 3022 3023 3024 3025
{ _See_
{ 182?
2008 3030 3031 3032 3033 3034 3035
2009 3040 3041 3042 3043 3044 3045
2010 3050 3051 3052 3053 3054 3055
_See_
184
2011 3060 3061 3062 3063 3064 3065
_See_
131,
2020
2012 3070 3071 3072 3073 3074 3075
2013 3080 3081 3082 3083 3084 3085
2014
[*] These four each side of the main stem of the cross. 1976=_Ezanab_--a
Maya day[TN-3]
[Illustration: FIG. 48.--The Palenquean Group of the Cross.]
IV.
IN WHAT ORDER ARE THE HIEROGLYPHS READ?
Before any advance can be made in the deciphering of the hieroglyphic
inscriptions, it is necessary to know in what directions, along what
lines or columns, the verbal sense proceeds.
All the inscriptions that I know of are in rectangular figures. At Copan
they are usually in squares. At Palenque the longest inscriptions are in
rectangles. At Palenque again, there are some cases where there is a
single horizontal line of hieroglyphs over a pictorial tablet. Here
clearly the only question is, do the characters proceed from left to
right, or from right to left? In other cases as in the tablet of the
cross, there are vertical columns. The question here is, shall we read
up or down?
Now, the hieroglyphs must be phonetic or pictorial, or a mixture of the
two. If they are phonetic, it will take more than one symbol to make a
word, and we shall have groups of like characters when the same word is
written in two places. If the signs are pictorial, the same thing will
follow; that is, we shall have groups recurring when the same idea
recurs. Further, we know that the subjects treated of in these tablets
must be comparatively simple, and that _names_, as of gods, kings, etc.,
must necessarily recur.
The _names_, then, will be the first words deciphered. At present no
single name is known. These considerations, together with our system of
nomenclature, will enable us to take some steps.
Take, for example, the right-hand side of the Palenque cross tablet as
given by RAU. _See_ our figure 48, which is Plate LVI of STEPHENS (vol.
ii, p. 345), with the addition of the part now in the National Museum at
Washington.
Our system of numbering is here
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
* * * * * *
* * * * * *
* * * * * *
3080 3081 3082 3083 3084 3085
Now pick out the duplicate hieroglyphs in this; that is, run through the
tablet, and wherever 2020 occurs erase the number which fills the place
and write in 2020. Do the same for 2021, 2022, etc., down to 3084. The
result will be as follows:
RIGHT-HAND SIDE OF PALENQUE CROSS TABLET (RAU).
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
^-----------^ ^-----------^
2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
^-----------^
2040 2041 2042 { 2025 2020 2021
{ ^-----------^
{
2050 2051 2034 { 2053 2054 2055
^-----------^
2053 2061 2062 2063 2064 2065
2070 2071 2020 2021 2022? 2024? }
^-----------^ } ?
}
2053 2020 2082 2083 2025 2053 }
2021 2091 2092 { 2025 2094 2095
{
3000 2023 2034 { 2053 2033 3005
^-----------^
^-----------^
3010 2083 3012 2024 3014 2091
2053 3021 2023 2020 3024 2024
{ 2024 2025 2021 3033 { 2025 2034*
? { ^-----------^ { ^----
{ {
{ 2053* 3021 3042 3043 { 2035 3045
----^
3050 2083 { 2025 2034 3054 3055
_See_ 2082 {
^-----------^ {
{
2024 2020 { 2035 3063 2024 2025
^-----------^
2021 2031 2020 2021 2035 3045
^-----------^
3080 3081 2091 2093 2020 2021
^-----------^
14 cases of horizontal pairs; 4 cases of vertical pairs; 102 characters
in all, of which 51 appear more than once, so that there are but 51
independent hieroglyphs.
Here the first two lines are unchanged. In the third line we find that
2043 is the same as 2025, 2044=2020, 2045=2021, and so on, and we write
the smallest number in each case.
After this is done, connect like pairs by braces whenever they are
consecutive, either vertical or horizontal. Take the pair 2020 and 2021
for example; 2020 occurs eight times in the tablet, viz, as 2020, 2044,
2072, 2081, 3023, 3061, 3072, 3084. In five out of the eight cases, it
is followed by 2021, viz, as 2021, 2045, 2073, 3073, 3085.
It is clear this is not the result of accident. The pair 2020 and 2021
means something, and when the two characters occur together they must be
read together. There is no point of punctuation between them. We also
learn that they are not inseparable. 2020 will make sense with 2082,
3024 and 3062. Here it looks as if the writing must be read in _lines_
horizontally. We do not know yet in which direction.
We must examine other cases. This is to be noticed: If the reading is in
horizontal lines from left to right, then the progress is from top to
bottom in columns, as the case of 3035 and 3040 shows. This occurs at
the end of a line, and the corresponding _chiffre_ required to make the
pair is at the other end of the next line. I have marked this case with
asterisks. If we must read in the lines from right to left we must
necessarily read in columns from bottom to top. Thus the _lines_ are
connected.
A similar process with all the other tablets in STEPHENS leads to the
conclusion that the reading is in lines horizontally and in columns
vertically. The cases 1835-'45, 1885-'95, 1914-'24, and 1936-'46 should,
however, be examined. We have now to decide at which end of the lines to
begin. The reasons given by Mr. BANCROFT (_Native Races_, vol. ii, p.
782) appeared to me sufficient to decide the question before I was
acquainted with his statement of them.
Therefore, the sum total of our present data, examined by a rational
method, leads to the conclusion, so far as we can know from these data,
that the verbal sense proceeded in _lines_ from left to right, in
_columns_ from top to bottom; just as the present page is written, in
fact.
For the present, the introduction of the method here indicated is the
important step. It has, as yet, been applied only to the plates of
STEPHENS' work. The definite conclusion should be made to rest on _all
possible_ data, some of which is not at my disposition at present.
Tablets exist in great numbers at other points besides Palenque, and for
the final conclusion these must also be consulted. If each one is
examined in the way I have indicated, it will yield a certain answer.
The direction of reading for that plate can be thus determined. At
Palenque the progress is in the order I have indicated.
V.
THE CARD-CATALOGUE OF HIEROGLYPHS.
It has already been explained how a system of nomenclature was gradually
formed. As I have said, this is not perfect, but it is sufficiently
simple and full for the purpose. By it, every plate in STEPHENS' work
receives a number and every hieroglyph in each plate is likewise
numbered.
This was first done in my private copy of the work. I then procured
another copy and duplicated these numbers both for plates and single
_chiffres_. The plates of this copy were then cut up into single
hieroglyphs and each single hieroglyph was mounted on a library card,
as follows:
____________________________________________
| | | |
| No. 2020. | Hieroglyph. | Plate LVI. |
| |_______________| |
|__________________________________________|
| Same as Numbers. | Similar to Numbers. |
| ---------------- | ------------------- |
| ---------------- | ------------------- |
| ---------------- | ------------------- |
| ---------------- | ------------------- |
| ---------------- | ------------------- |
|__________________________________________|
The cards were 6.5 by 4.5 inches. The _chiffre_ was pasted on, in the
center of the top space. Its number and the plate from which it came
were placed as in the cut. The numbers of hieroglyphs which resembled
the one in question could be written on the right half of the card, and
the numbers corresponding to different recurrences of this hieroglyph
occupied the left half.
All this part of the work was most faithfully and intelligently
performed for me by Miss MARY LOCKWOOD, to whom I desire to express the
full amount of my obligations. A mistake in any part would have been
fatal. But no mistakes occurred.
These cards could now be arranged in any way I saw fit. The simple
_chiffres_, for example, could be placed so as to bring like ones
together. A compound hieroglyph could be placed among simple ones
agreeing with any one of its components, and so on.
The expense of forming this card catalogue of about 1,500 single
hieroglyphs was borne by the Ethnological Bureau of the Smithsonian
Institution, and the catalogue is the property of that bureau, forming
only one of its many rich collections of American picture-writings.
VI.
COMPARISON OF PLATES I AND IV (COPAN).
In examining the various statues at Copan, as given by STEPHENS, one
naturally looks for points of striking resemblance or striking
difference. Where all is unknown, even the smallest sign is examined, in
the hope that it may prove a clue. The Plate I, Fig. 49, has a twisted
knot (the "square knot" of sailors) of cords over its head, and above
this is a _chiffre_ composed of ellipses, and above this again a sign
like a sea-shell. A natural suggestion was that these might be the signs
for the name of the personage depicted in Plate I. If this is so and we
should find the same sign elsewhere in connection with a figure, we
should expect to find this second figure like the first in every
particular. This would be a rigid test of the theory. After looking
through the Palenque series, and finding no similar figure and sign, I
examined the Copan series, and in Plate IV, our Fig. 50, I found the
same signs exactly; _i. e._, the knot and the two _chiffres_.
[Illustration: FIG. 49.--Statue at Copan.]
[Illustration: FIG. 50.--Statue at Copan.]
At first sight there is only the most general resemblance between the
personages represented in the two plates; as STEPHENS says in his
original account of them, they are "in many respects similar." If he had
known them to be the same, he would not have wasted his time in drawing
them. The scale of the two drawings and of the two statues is different;
but the two personages are the same identically. Figure for figure,
ornament for ornament, they correspond. It is unnecessary to give the
minute comparison here in words. It can be made by any one from the two
plates herewith. Take any part of Plate I, find the corresponding part
of Plate IV, and whether it is human feature or sculptured ornament the
two will be found to be the same.
Take the middle face depending from the belt in each plate. The earrings
are the same; the ornament below the chin, the knot above the head, the
complicated beadwork on each side of this face, all are the same. The
bracelets of the right arms of the main figures have each the forked
serpent tongue, and the left-arm bracelets are ornamented alike. The
crosses with beads almost inclosed in the right hands are alike; the
elliptic ornaments above each wrist, the knots and _chiffres_ over the
serpent masks which surmount the faces, all are the same. In the steel
plates given by STEPHENS there are even more coindences[TN-4] to be seen
than in the excellent wood-cuts here given, which have been copied from
them.
Here, then, is an important fact. The theory that the _chiffre_ over the
forehead is characteristic, though it is not definitively proved,
receives strong confirmation. The parts which have been lost by the
effects of time on one statue can be supplied from the other. Better
than all, we gain a test of the minuteness with which the sculptors
worked, and an idea of how close the adherence to a type was required to
be. Granting once that the two personages are the same (a fact about
which I conceive there can be no possible doubt, since the chances in
favor are literally thousands to one), we learn what license was
allowed, and what synonyms in stone might be employed. Thus, the
ornament suspended from the neck in Plate IV is clearly a tiger's skull.
That from the neck of Plate I has been shown to be the derived form of a
skull by Dr. HARRISON ALLEN,[225-*] and we now know that this common
form relates not to the human skull, as Dr. ALLEN has supposed, but to
that of the tiger. We shall find this figure often repeated, and the
identification is of importance. This is a case in regard to synonyms.
The kind of symbolism so ably treated by Dr. ALLEN is well exemplified
in the conventional sign for the _crotalus_ jaw at the mouth of the mask
over the head of each figure. This is again found on the body of the
snake in Plate LX, and in other places. Other important questions can
be settled by comparison of the two plates. For example, at Palenque we
often find a sign composed of a half ellipse, inside of which bars are
drawn. [Illustration] I shall elsewhere show that there is reason to
believe the ellipse is to represent the concave of the sky, its diameter
to be the level earth, and in some cases at least the bars to be the
descending and fertilizing rain. The bars are sometimes two, three, and
sometimes four in number. Are these variants of a single sign, or are
they synonyms? Before the discovery of the identity of the personages in
these two plates, this question could not be answered. Now we can say
that they are not synonyms, or at least that they must be considered
separately. To show this, examine the bands just above the wristlets of
the two figures. Over the left hands of the figures the bars are two in
number; over the right hands there are four. This exact similarity is
not accidental; there is a meaning in it, and we must search for its
explanation elsewhere, but we now have a valuable test of what needs to
be regarded, and of what, on the other hand, may be passed over as
accidental or unimportant.
One other case needs mentioning here, as it will be of future use. From
the waist of each figure depend nine oval solids, six being hatched over
like pine cones and the three central ones having two ovals, one within
the other, engraved on them. In Plate IV the inner ovals are all on the
right-hand side of the outer ovals. Would they mean the same if they
were on the left-hand side? Plate I enables us to say that they would,
since one of these inner ovals has been put by the artist on that side
by accident or by an allowed caprice. It is by furnishing us with tests
and criteria like these that the proof of the identity of these two
plates is immediately important. In other ways, too, the proof is
valuable and interesting, but we need not discuss them at this time.
These statues, then, are to us a dictionary of synonyms in stone--a test
of the degree of adherence to a prototype which was exacted, and a
criterion of the kind of minor differences which must be noticed in any
rigid study.
I have not insisted more on the resemblances, since the accompanying
figures present a demonstration. Let those who wish to verify these
resemblances compare minutely the ornaments above the knees of the two
figures, those about the waists, above the heads, and the square knots,
etc., etc.
VII.
ARE THE HIEROGLYPHS OF COPAN AND PALENQUE IDENTICAL?
One of the first questions to be settled is whether the same system of
writing was employed at Palenque and at Copan. Before any study of the
meanings of the separate _chiffres_ can be made, we must have our
material properly assorted, and must not include in the figures we are
examining for the detection of a clue, any which may belong to a system
possibly very different.
The opinion of STEPHENS and of later writers is confirmed by my
comparison of the Palenque and the Copan series; that is, it becomes
evident that the latter series is far the older.
In Nicaragua and Copan the statues of gods were placed at the foot of
the pyramid; farther north, as at Palenque, they were placed in temples
at the summit. Such differences show a marked change in customs, and
must have required much time for their accomplishment. In this time did
the picture-writing change, or, indeed, was it ever identical?
To settle the question whether they were written on the same system, I
give here the results of a rapid survey of the card-catalogue of
hieroglyphs. A more minute examination is not necessary, as the present
one is quite sufficient to show that the system employed at the two
places was the same in its general character and almost identical even
in details. The practical result of this conclusion is that similar
characters of the Copan and Palenque series may be used interchangeably.
A detailed study of the undoubted synonyms of the two places will afford
much light on the manner in which these characters were gradually
evolved. This is not the place for such a study, but it is interesting
to remark how, even in unmistakable synonyms, the Palenque character is
always the most conventional, the least pictorial; that is, the latest.
Examples of this are No. 7, Plate V^a, and No. 1969, Plate LVI. The
_mask_ in profile which forms the left-hand edge of No. 7 seems to have
been conventionalized into the two hooks and the ball, which have the
same place in No. 1969.
[Illustration: FIG. 51.--Synonomous[TN-5] hieroglyphs from Copan and
Palenque.]
The larger of these two was cut on stone, the smaller in stucco.
The mask has been changed into the ball and hooks; the angular nose
ornament into a single ball, easier to make and quite as significant to
the Maya priest. But to us the older (Copan) figure is infinitely more
significant. The curious rows of little balls which are often placed at
the left-hand edge of the various _chiffres_ are also conventions for
older forms. It is to be noted that these balls always occur on the left
hand of the hieroglyphs, except in one case, the _chiffre_ 1975 in the
Palenque cross tablet, on which the left-hand acolyte stands.
The conclusion that the two series are both written on the same system,
and that like _chiffres_ occurring at the two places are synonyms, will,
I think, be sufficiently evident to any one who will himself examine the
following cases. It is the _nature_ of the agreements which proves the
thesis, and not the number of cases here cited. The reader will remember
that the Copan series comprises Plates I to XXIII, inclusive; the
Palenque series, Plate XXIV and higher numbers.
The sign of the group of Mexican gods who relate to hell, _i. e._, a
circle with a central dot, and with four small segments cut out at four
equally distant points of its circumference, is found in No. 4291, Plate
XXII, and in many of the Palenque plates, as Plate LVI, Nos. 2090, 2073,
2045, 2021, etc. In both places this sign is worn by human figures just
below the ear.
The same sign occurs as an important part of No. 4271, Plate XXII, and
No. 4118, Plate XIII (Copan), and No. 2064, Plate LVI (Palenque), etc.
No. 7, Plate V^a, and No. 1969, Plate LVI, I regard as absolutely
identical. These are both human figures. No. 12, Plate V^a, and No.
637, Plate LIII, are probably the same. These probably represent or
relate to the long-nosed divinity, YACATEUCTLI, the Mexican god of
commerce, etc., or rather to his Maya representative.
The sign of TLALOC, or rather the family of TLALOCS, the gods of rain,
floods, and waters, is an eye (or sometimes a mouth), around which there
is a double line drawn. I take No. 26, Plate V^a, of the Copan series,
and Nos. 154 and 165, Plate XXIV, to be corresponding references to
members of this family. No. 4, Plate V^a, and No. 155 also correspond.
No. 4242, Plate XXII, is probably related to No. 53, Plate XXIV and its
congeners.
Nos. 14 and 34, Plate V^a, are clearly related to No. 900, Plate LIV,
Nos. 127 and 176, Plate XXIV, No. 3010, Plate LVI, and many others.
Plate III^a of Copan is evidently identically the same as the No. 75
of the Palenque Plate No. XXIV.
The right half of No. 27, Plate V^a, is the same as the right half of
Nos. 3020, 3040, and many others of Plate LVI.
No. 17, Plate V^a, is related to No. 2051, Plate LVI, and many others
like it.
The major part of No. 4105, Plate XIII, is the same as No. 124, Plate
XXIV, etc.
[Illustration: FIG. 52.--Yucatec Stone.]
It is not necessary to add a greater number of examples here. The
card-catalogue which I have mentioned enables me to at once pick out all
the cases of which the above are specimens, taken just as they fell
under my eye in rapidly turning over the cards. They therefore represent
the _average_ agreement, neither more nor less. Taken together they
show that the same signs were used at Copan and at Palenque. As the same
symbols used at both places occur in like positions in regard to the
human face, etc., I conclude that not only were the same signs used at
both places, but that these signs had the same meaning; _i. e._, were
truly synonyms. In future I shall regard this as demonstrated.
VIII.
HUITZILOPOCHTLI (MEXICAN GOD OF WAR), TEOYAOMIQUI (MEXICAN GODDESS OF
DEATH), MICLANTECUTLI (MEXICAN GOD OF HELL), AND TLALOC (MEXICAN
RAIN-GOD), CONSIDERED IN RELATION TO CENTRAL AMERICAN DIVINITIES.
In the _Congrès des Américanistes, session de Luxembourg_, vol. ii, p.
283, is a report of a memoir of Dr. LEEMANS, entitled "Description de
quelques antiquités américaines conservées dans le Musée royal
néerlandais d'antiquités à Leide." On page 299 we find--
M. G.-H.-BAND, de Arnhiem, a eu la bonté de me confier quelques
antiquités provenant des anciens habitants du Yucatan et de
l'Amérique Centrale, avec autorisation d'en faire prendre des
fac-similes pour le Musée, ce qui me permet de les faire connaître
aux membres du Congrès. Elles ont été trouvées enfouies à une
grande profondeur dans le sol, lors de la construction d'un canal,
vers la rivière Gracioza, près de San Filippo, sur la frontière du
Honduras britannique et de la république de Guatémala par M.
S.-A.-van BRAAM, ingénieur néerlandais au service de la
Guatémala-Company.
From the maps given in STIELER'S Hand-Atlas and in BANCROFT'S Native
Races of the Pacific States I find that these relics were found 308
miles from Uxmal, 207 miles from Palenque, 92 miles from Copan, and 655
miles from the city of Mexico, the distances being in a straight line
from place to place.
The one of these objects with which we are now concerned is figured in
Plate (63) of the work quoted, and is reproduced here as Fig. 52.
Dr. LEEMANS refers to a similarity between this figure and others in
Stephens' Travels in Central America, but gives no general comparison.
I wish to direct attention to some of the points of this cut. The
_chiffre_ or symbol of the principal figure is, perhaps, represented in
his belt, and is a St. Andrew's cross, with a circle at each end of it.
Inside the large circle is a smaller one. It may be said, in passing,
that the cross probably relates to the _air_ and the circle to the
_sun_.
The main figure has two hands folded against his breast. Two other arms
are extended, one in front, the other behind, which carry two birds.
Each arm has a bracelet. This second pair of hands is not described by
Dr. LEEMANS. The two birds are exact duplicates, except that the eye of
one is shut, of the other open. Just above the bill of each bird is
something which might be taken as a second bill (which probably is not,
however), and on this and on the back of each bird are five spines or
claws. The corresponding claws are curved and shaped alike in the two
sets. The birds are fastened to the neck of the person represented by
two ornaments, which are alike, and which seem to be the usual
hieroglyph of the _crotalus_ jaw. These jaws are placed similarly with
respect to each bird. In KINGSBOROUGH'S Mexican Antiquities, vol. I,
Plate X, we find the parrot as the sign of TONATIHU, the sun, and in
Plate XXV with NAOLIN, the sun. On a level with the nose of the
principal figure are two symbols, one in front and one behind, each
inclosing a St. Andrew's cross, and surmounted by what seems to be a
flaming fire. It is probably the _chiffre_ of the wind, as the cross is
of the rain. Below the rear one of these is a head with protruding
tongue (the sign of QUETZALCOATL); below the other a hieroglyph (perhaps
a bearded face). Each of these is upborne by a hand. It is to be
noticed, also, that these last arms have bracelets different from the
pair on the breast.
In passing, it may be noted that the head in rear is under a cross, and
has on its cheek the symbol U. These are the symbols of the left-hand
figure in the Palenque cross tablet.
The head hanging from the rear of the belt has an _open_ eye (like that
of the principal figure), and above it is a crotalus mask, with open
eye, and teeth, and forked fangs. The principal figure wears over his
head a mask, with open mouth, and with tusks, and above this mask is the
eagle's head. This eagle is a sign of TLALOC, at least in Yucatan. In
Mexico the eagle was part of the insignia of TETZCATLIPOCA, "the devil,"
who overthrew the good QUETZALCOATL and reintroduced human sacrifice.
The characteristics of the principal figure, 63, are then briefly as
follows:
I. His _chiffre_ is an air-cross with the sun-circle.
II. He has four hands.
III. He bears two birds as a symbol.
IV. The claws or spikes on the backs of these are significant.
V. The mask with tusks over the head.
VI. The head worn at the belt.
VII. The captive trodden under foot.
VIII. The chain from the belt attached to a kind of ornament or symbol.
IX. The twisted flames (?) or winds (?) on each side of the figure.
X. His association with QUETZALCOATL or CUCULKAN,[TN-6] as shown by the
mouth with protruding tongue, and with TLALOC or TETZCATLIPOCA, as shown
by the eagle's head.
We may note here for reference the signification of one of the
hieroglyphs in the right-hand half of Fig. 52, _i. e._, in that half
which contains only writing. The topmost _chiffre_ is undoubtedly the
name, or part of the name, of the principal figure represented in the
other half. It is in pure picture-writing; that is, it expresses the sum
of his attributes. It has the crotalus mask, with nose ornament, which
he wears over his face; then the cross, with the "five feathers" of
Mexico, and the sun symbol. These are in the middle of the _chiffre_.
Below these the oval may be, and probably is, heaven, with the rain
descending and producing from the surface of the earth (the long axis of
the ellipse), the seed, of which three grains are depicted.
We know by the occurrence of the hieroglyphs on the reverse side of the
stone that this is not of Aztec sculpture. These symbols are of the same
sort as those at Copan, Palenque, etc., and I shall show later that some
of them occur in the Palenque tablets. Hence, we know this engraving to
be Yucatec and not Aztec in its origin. If it had been sculptured on one
side only, and these hieroglyphs omitted, I am satisfied that the facts
which I shall point out in the next paragraphs would have led to the
conclusion that this stone was Mexican in its origin. Fortunately the
native artist had the time to sculpture the Yucatec hieroglyphs, which
are the proof of its true origin. It was not dropped by a traveling
Aztec; it was made by a Yucatec.
In passing, it may be said that the upper left-hand, hieroglyph of Plate
XIII most probably repeats this name.
I collect from the third volume of BANCROFT'S _Native Races_, chapter
viii, such descriptions of HUITZILOPOCHTLI as he was represented among
the Mexicans as will be of use to us in our comparisons. No display of
learning in giving the references to the original works is necessary
here, since Mr. BANCROFT has placed all these in order and culled them
for a use like the present. It will suffice once for all to refer the
critical reader to this volume, and to express the highest sense of
obligation to Mr. BANCROFT'S compilation, which renders a survey of the
characteristic features of the American divinities easy.
In Mexico, then, this god had, among other symbols, "five balls of
feathers arranged in the form of a cross." This was in reference to the
mysterious conception of his mother through the _powers of the air_. The
upper hieroglyph in Fig. 52, and one of the lower ones, contain this
sign: "In his right hand he had an azured staff cutte in fashion of a
waving snake." (See Plate LXI of STEPHENS.) "Joining to the temple of
this idol there was a piece of less work, where there was another idol
they called TLALOC. These two idolls were alwayes together, for that
they held them as companions and of equal power."
To his temple "there were foure gates," in allusion to the form of the
cross. The temple was surrounded by rows of skulls (as at Copan) and the
temple itself was upon a high pyramid. SOLIS says the war god sat "on a
throne supported by a blue globe.[TN-7] From this, supposed to represent
the heavens, projected four staves with serpents' heads. (See Plate
XXIV, STEPHENS.) "The image bore on its head a bird of wrought plumes,"
"its right hand rested upon a crooked serpent." "Upon the left arm was a
buckler bearing five white plums arranged in form of a cross." SAHAGUN
describes his device as a dragon's head, "frightful in the extreme, and
casting fire out of his mouth."
HERRARA describes HUITZILOPOCHTLI and TEZCATLIPOCA[TN-8] together, and
says they were "beset with pieces of gold wrought like birds, beasts,
and _fishes_." "For collars, they had ten hearts of men," "and in their
necks Death painted."
TORQUEMADA derives the _name_ of the war god in two ways. According to
some it is composed of two words, one signifying "a humming bird" and
the other "a sorcerer that spits fire." Others say that the last word
means "the left hand," so that the whole name would mean "the shining
feathered left hand." "This god it was that led out the Mexicans from
their own land and brought them into Anáhuac." Besides his regular
statue, set up in Mexico, "there was another renewed every year, made of
different kinds of grains and seeds, moistened with the blood of
children." This was in allusion to the nature-side of the god, as fully
explained by MÜLLER (_Americanische Urreligionen_).
No description will give a better idea of the general features of this
god than the following cuts from BANCROFT'S _Native Races_, which are
copied from LEON Y GAMA, _Las Dos Piedras_, etc. Figs. 53 and 54 are the
war god himself; Fig. 55 is the back of the former statue on a larger
scale; Fig. 56 is the god of hell, and was engraved on the bottom of the
block.
[Illustration: FIG. 53.--HUITZILOPOCHTLI (front).]
[Illustration: FIG. 54.--HUITZILOPOCHTLI (side).]
These three were a trinity well nigh inseparable. It has been doubted
whether they were not different attributes of the same personage. In the
natural course of things the primitive idea would become differentiated
into its parts, and in process of time the most important of the parts
would each receive a separate pictorial representation.
[Illustration: FIG. 55.--Huitzilopochtli (back).[TN-9]]
[Illustration: FIG. 56.--MICLANTECUTLI.]
[Illustration: FIG. 57.--Adoratorio.]
By referring back a few pages the reader will find summarized the
principal characteristics of the Central American figure represented in
Fig. 52. He will also have noticed the remarkable agreement between the
attributes of this figure and those contained in the cuts or in the
descriptions of the Mexican gods. Thus--
I. The symbol of both was the cross.
II. Fig. 52 and Fig. 55 each have four hands.[233-*]
III. Both have birds as symbols.
It is difficult to regard the bird of Fig. 52 as a humming bird, as it
more resembles the parrot, which, as is well known, was a symbol of some
of the Central American gods. Its occurrence here in connection with the
four arms fixes it, however, as the bird symbol of HUITZILOPOCHTLI. In
the _Ms. Troano_, plate xxxi (lower right-hand figure), we find this
same personage with his two parrots, along with TLALOC, the god of rain.
IV. The claws of the Mexican statue may be symbolized by the spikes on
the back of the birds in Fig. 52, but these latter appear to me to
relate rather to the fangs and teeth of the various crotalus heads of
the statues.
V. The mask, with tusks, of Fig. 52, is the same as that at the top of
Fig. 55, where we see that they represent the teeth of a serpent, and
not the tusks of an animal. This is shown by the forked tongue beneath.
The three groups of four dots each on HUITZILOPOCHTLI'S statue are
references to his relationship with TLALOC.
With these main and striking duplications, and with other minor and
corroborative resemblances, which the reader can see for himself, there
is no doubt but that the two figures, Mexican and Yucatec, relate to the
same personage. The Yucatec figure combines several of the attributes of
the various members of the Mexican trinity named above, but we should
not be surprised at this, for, as has been said, some writers consider
that this trinity was one only of attributes and not of persons.
What has been given above is sufficient to show that the personage
represented in Fig. 52 is the Yucatec equivalent of HUITZILOPOCHTLI, and
has relations to his trinity named at the head of this section, and also
to the family of TLALOC. I am not aware that the relationship of the
Yucatec and Aztec gods has been so directly shown, on evidence almost
purely pictorial, and therefore free from a certain kind of bias.
If the conclusions above stated are true, there will be many
corroborations of them, and the most prominent of these I proceed to
give, as it involves the explanation of one of the most important
tablets of Palenque, parts of which are shown in Plates XXIV, LX, LXI,
and LXII, vol. ii, of STEPHENS.
Plate LXII, Fig. 57, represents the "Adoratorio or Alta Casa, No. 3" of
Palenque. This is nothing else than the temple of the god
HUITZILOPOCHTLI and of his equal, TLALOC. The god of war is shown on a
larger scale in Plate LXI, Fig. 58, while TLALOC is given in Plate LX,
Fig. 59, and the tablet inside the temple in Plate XXIV, Fig. 60. The
resemblances of Plate XXIV and of the Palenque cross tablet and their
meanings will be considered farther on.
Returning to Plate LXII, the symbols of the roof and cornice refer to
these two divinities. The faces at the ends of the cornice, with the
double lines for eye and mouth, are unmistakable TLALOC signs. The
association of the two gods in one temple, as at Mexico, is a strong
corroboration.
Let us now take Plate LXI, Fig. 58, which represents HUITZILOPOCHTLI, or
rather, the Yucatec equivalent of this Aztec god. I shall refer to him
by the Aztec appelation, but I shall in future write it in italics; and
in general the Yucatec equivalents of Aztec personages in italics, and
the Aztec names in small capitals.
Compare Fig. 52 and the Plate LXI (Fig. 58). As the two plates are
before the reader, I need only point out the main resemblances, and,
what is more important, the differences.
The sandals, the belt, its front pendant, the bracelets, the neck
ornament, the helmet, should be examined. The four hands of Fig. 52 are
not in LXI, nor the parrots; but if we refer to KINGSBOROUGH, Vol. II,
Plates 6 and 7 of the LAUD manuscript, we shall find figures of
HUITZILOPOCHTLI with a parrot, and of TLALOC with the stork with a fish
in its mouth, as in the head-dress here. The prostrate figure of Fig. 52
is here led by a chain. At Labphak (BANCROFT, Vol. iv., p. 251), he is
held aloft in the air, and he is on what _may be_ a sacrificial yoke.
The _Tlaloc_ eagle is in the head of the staff carried in the hand. This
eagle is found in the second line from the bottom of Fig. 52, we may
remark in passing. Notice also the crescent moon in the ornament back of
the shoulders of the personage of Fig. 58. The twisted cords which form
the bottom of this ornament are in the hieroglyph No. 37, Plate XXIV
(Fig. 60).
Turning now to Plate LX (Fig. 59).
This I take to be the sorcerer _Tlaloc_. He is blowing the wind from his
mouth; he has the eagle in his head-dress, the jaw with grinders, the
peculiar eye, the four TLALOC dots over his ear and on it, the snake
between his legs, curved in the form of a yoke (this is known to be a
serpent by the conventional crotalus signs of jaw and rattles on it in
nine places), the four TLALOC dots again in his head-dress, etc. He has
a leopard skin on his back (the tiger was the earth in Mexico) and his
naked feet have peculiar anklets which should be noticed.
Although I am deferring the examination of the hieroglyphs to a later
section, the _chiffre_ 3201 should be noticed. It is the TLALOC eye
again, and 3203 is the _chiffre_ of the Mexican gods of hell.
[Illustration: FIG. 58.--Maya War God.]
[Illustration: FIG. 59.--Maya Rain God.]
In passing I may just refer the reader to p. 164, Vol. ii, of STEPHENS'
book on Yucatan, where a figure occurring at Labphax is given. This I
take to be the same as _Huitzilopochtli_ of Plate LXI. Also in the MS.
_Troano_, published by BRASSEUR DE BOURBOURG, a figure in Plate XXV and
in other plates sits on a hieroglyph like 3201, and is _Tlaloc_.
This is known by the head-dress, the teeth, the air-trumpet, the serpent
symbol, etc. In Plates XXVIII, XXXI, and XXXIII of the same work
HUITZILOPOCHTLI and TLALOC are represented together, in various
adventures.
[Illustration: FIG. 60.--Tablet at Palenque.]
In Plate LX (Fig. 59) notice also the _chiffre_ on the tassels before
and behind the main personage.
Now turn to the Plate XXIV (Fig. 60), which is the main object in the
"Adoratorio" (Fig. 57), where the human figures serve as flankers.
First examine the caryatides who support the central structure. These
are _Tlalocs_. Each has an eagle over his face, is clothed in leopard
skin, has the characteristic eye and teeth, and the wristlets of Plate
LX (Fig. 59).
A vertical line through the center of Plate XXIV (Fig. 60) would
separate the figures and ornaments into two groups. These groups are
very similar, but never identical, and this holds good down to the
minutest particulars and is not the result of accident. One side (the
right-hand) belongs to _Tlaloc_, the other to _Huitzilopochtli_.
The right-hand priest (let us call him, simply for a name and not to
commit ourselves to a theory) has the sandals of Plate LXI; the
left-hand priest the anklets of Plate LX.
The beast on which the first stands and the man who supports the other
are both marked with the tassel symbol of Plate LX. There is a certain
rude resemblance between the supplementary head of this beast and the
pendant in front of the belt of Fig. 52. Four of these beasts supply
rain to the earth with _Tlaloc_ in Plate XXVI of the MS. _Troano_. The
infant offered by the right-hand priest has the _two_ curls on his
forehead which was a necessary mark of the victims for TLALOC'S
sacrifices. The center of the whole plate is a horrid mask with an open
mouth. Behind this are two staves with _different_ ornaments crossed in
the form of the air-cross. On either hand of this the ornaments are
different though similar.
A curious resemblance may be traced between the positions, etc., of
these two staves and those of the figure on p. 563, vol. iv, of
BANCROFT'S _Native Races_, which is a Mexican stone. Again, this latter
figure has at its upper right-hand corner a crouching animal (?) very
similar to the gateway ornament given in the same volume, p. 321. This
last is at Palenque. I quote these two examples in passing simply to
reinforce the idea of similarity between the sacred sculptures of
Yucatan and Mexico.
I take it that the examination of which I have sketched the details will
have left no doubt but that the personage of Fig. 52 is truly
_Huitzilopochtli_, the Yucatec representative of HUITZILOPOCHTLI; that
Plate LXI (Fig. 58) is the same personage; that Plate LX (Fig. 59)
represents TLALOC; and that Plate XXIV (Fig. 60) is a tablet relating to
the service of these two gods.
I have previously shown that the Palenque hieroglyphs are read in order
from left to right. We should naturally expect, then, that the sign for
_Tlaloc_ or for _Huitzilopochtli_ would occupy the upper left-hand
corner of Plate XXIV. In fact it does, and I was led to this discovery
in the way I have indicated.
No. 37 is the Palenque manner of writing the top sign of Fig. 52. I
shall call the signs of Fig. 52 _a_, _b_, _c_, etc., in order downwards.
The crouching face in _a_ occupies the lower central part of No. 37.
Notice also that this face occurs below the small cross in the detached
ornament to the left of the central mask of Fig. 60. The crescent moon
of Plate LXI (Fig. 58) is on its cheek; back of this is the sun-sign;
the cross of _a_ is just above its eye; the three signs for the
celestial concave are at the top of 37, crossed with rain bands; the
three seeds (?) are below these. The feathers are in the lower
right-hand two-thirds. This is the sign or part of the sign for
_Huitzilopochtli_. If a Maya Indian had seen either of these signs a few
centuries ago, he would have had the successive ideas--a war-god, with a
feather-symbol, related to sun and moon, to fertilizing rain and
influences, to clouds and seed; that is _Huitzilopochtli_, the companion
of _Tlaloc_. Or if he had seen the upper left-hand symbol of the
Palenque cross tablet (1800), he would have had _related_ ideas, and so
on.
What I have previously said about the faithfulness with which the
Yucatec artist adhered to his prototypes in signs is perfectly true,
although apparently partly contradicted by the identification I have
just made. When a given attribute of a god (or other personage) was to
be depicted, the _chiffres_ expressing this were marvellously alike.
Witness the _chiffres_ Nos. 2090, 2073, 2021, 2045, 3085, 3073, 3070,
3032 of the Palenque cross tablet. But directly afterwards some other
attribute is to be brought out, and the _chiffre_ changes; thus the
hieroglyph 1009 of Plate LIV, or 265, Plate LII, has the same protruding
tongue as 2021, etc., and is the same personage, but the style is quite
changed. In Fig. 52, _Huitzilopochtli_ is the war-god, in Plate XXIV he
is the rain-god's companion; and while every attribute is accounted for,
prominence is given to the special ones worshipped or celebrated. Scores
of instances of this have arisen in the course of my examination.
Again, we must remember that this was no source of ambiguity to the
Yucatecs, however much it may be to us. Each one of them, and specially
each officiating priest, was entirely familiar with every attribute of
every god of the Yucatec pantheon. The sign of the attribute brought the
idea of the power of the god in that special direction; the full idea of
his divinity was the integral of all these special ideas. The limits
were heaven and earth.
This, then, is the first step. I consider that it is securely based, and
that we may safely say that in proper names, at least, a kind of picture
writing was used which was _not_ phonetic.
From this point we may go on. I must again remark that great familiarity
with the literature of the Aztecs and Yucatecs is needed--a familiarity
to which I personally cannot pertend[TN-10]--and that it is clear that
the method to reach its full success must be applied by a true scholar
in this special field.
IX.
TLALOC, OR HIS MAYA REPRESENTATIVE.
Although there is no personage of all the Maya pantheon more easy to
recognize in the form of a _statue_ than _Tlaloc_, there is great
difficulty in being certain of _all_ the hieroglyphs which relate to
him. There is every reason to believe that in Yucatan, as in Mexico,
there was a family of rain-gods, _Tlalocs_, and the distinguishing signs
of the several members are almost impossible of separation, so long as
we know so little of the special functions of each member of this
family.
In Yucatan, as in Mexico, _Tlaloc's_ main sign was a double line about
the eye or mouth, or about both; and further, some of the _Tlalocs_, at
least, were bearded.[237-*]
CUKULCAN was also bearded, but we have separated out in the next section
the _chiffres_, or certainly most of them, that relate to him. Those
that are left remain to be distributed among the family of rain-gods;
and this, as I have said, can only be done imperfectly, on account of
our slight knowledge of the character of these gods.
If we examine the plates given by STEPHENS, we shall find many pictorial
allusions to _Tlaloc_. These are often used as mere ornaments or
embellishments, as in borders, etc., and probably served only to notify,
in a general way, the fact of the relationship of the personage
represented, to this family, and probably not to convey any specific
meaning.
Thus, in Plate XXXV of STEPHENS' work the upper left-hand ornament of
the border is a head of _Tlaloc_ with double lines about eye and mouth,
and this ornament is repeated in a different form at the lower
right-hand corner of the border just back of the right hand of the
sitting figure, and also in the base of the border below the feet of the
principal figure.
Plate XLVIII (of STEPHENS') is probably CHALCHIHUITLICUE (that is, the
Yucatec equivalent of that goddess), who was the sister of _Tlaloc_. His
sign occurs in the upper left-hand corner of the border, and in Plate
XLIX the same sign occurs in a corresponding position.
Plate XXIV (our Fig. 60) is full of _Tlaloc_ signs. The bottom of the
tablet has a hieroglyph, 93 (_Huitzilopochtli_), at one end and 185
(_Tlaloc_) at the other. The leopard skin, eagle, and the crouching
tiger (?) under the feet of the priest of _Tlaloc_ (the right-hand
figure) are all given. The infant (?) offered by this priest has two
locks of curled hair at its forehead, as was prescribed for children
offered to this god.
In Plate LVI (our Fig. 48) the mask at the foot of the cross is a human
mask, and not a serpent mask, as has been ingeniously proved by Dr.
HARRISON ALLEN in his paper so often quoted. It is the mask of _Tlaloc_,
as shown by the teeth and corroborated (not proved) by the way in which
the eye is expressed. The curved hook within the eyeball here, as in
185, stands for the air--the wind--of which _Tlaloc_ was also god. The
Mexicans had a similar sign for breath, message.
The _chiffre_ 1975, on which _Huitzilopochtli's_ priest is standing, I
believe to be the synonym of 185 in Plate XXIV. Just in front of
_Tlaloc's_ priest is a sacrificial yoke (?), at the top of which is a
face, with the eye of the _Tlalocs_, and various decorations. This face
is to be found also at the lower left-hand corner of Plate XLI (of
STEPHENS'), and also (?) in the same position in Plate XLII (of
STEPHENS'). These will serve as subjects for further study.
Notice in Plate LVI (our Fig. 48) how the ornaments in corresponding
positions on either side of the central line are similar, yet never the
same. A careful study of these pairs will show how the two gods
celebrated, differed. A large part, at least, of the attributes of each
god is recorded in this way by antithesis. I have not made enough
progress in this direction to make the very few conclusions of which I
am certain worth recording. The general fact of such an antithesis is
obvious when once it is pointed out, and it is in just such paths as
this that advances must be looked for.
I have just mentioned, in this rapid survey of the plates of vol. ii of
STEPHENS' work, the principal pictorial signs relating to _Tlaloc_.
There are a number almost equally well marked in vol. i, in Plates VII,
IX, X, XIII, and XV, but they need not be described. Those who are
especially interested can find them for themselves.
The following brief account and plate of a _Tlaloc_ inscription at Kabah
will be useful for future use, and is the more interesting as it is
comparatively unknown.
_INSCRIPTION AT KABAH (Yucatan)._
This hitherto unpublished inscription on a rock at Kabah is given in
_Archives paléographiques_, vol. i, part ii, Plate 20. It deserves
attention on account of its resemblances, but still more on account of
its differences, with certain other Yucatec glyphs.
We may first compare it with the Plate LX of STEPHENS (our Fig. 59).
The head-dress in Plate 20 is quite simple, and presents no resemblance
to the elaborate gear of Plate LX, in which the ornament of a leaf (?),
or more probably feather, cross-hatched at the end and divided
symmetrically by a stem (?) or quill about which four dots are placed,
seems characteristic.
_Possibly_, and only possibly, the square in the rear of the head of
Plate 20, which has two cross-hatchings, may refer to the elaborate
cross-hatchings in Plate LX. The four dots are found twice, once in
front and once in rear of the figure. The heads of the two figures have
only one resemblance, but this is a very important one. The tusks belong
to HUITZILOPOCHTLI and to his trinity, and specially to TLALOC, his
companion.
Both Plate 20 and LX have the serpent wand or yoke clearly expressed. In
LX the serpent is decorated with crotalus heads; in 20 by images of the
sun (?), as in the FERJAVARY MS. (KINGSBOROUGH). The front apron or
ornament of Plate 20 is of snake skin, ornamented with sun-symbols.
Comparing Plate 20 with Fig. 52 (_ante_), we find quite other
resemblances. The head-dress of 20 is the same as the projecting arm of
the head-dress of Fig. 52; and the tusks are found in the helmet or mask
of Fig. 52.
These and other resemblances show the Kabah inscription to be a TLALOC.
It is interesting specially on account of its hieroglyphs, which I hope
to examine subsequently. The style of this writing appears to be late,
and may serve as a connecting link between the stones and the
manuscripts, and it is noteworthy that even the style of the drawing
itself seems to be in the manner of the Mexican MS. of LAUD, rather than
in that of the Palenque stone tablets.
From the card catalogue I select the following _chiffres_ as
appertaining to the family of the _Tlalocs_. As I have said, these must
for the present remain in a group, unseparated. Future studies will be
necessary to discriminate between the special signs which relate to
special members of the family. The _chiffres_ are Nos. 3200; 1864; 1403;
811; 1107?; 1943?; 4114??; _b_?; 1893 (bearded faces, or faces with
teeth very prominent); 166?; 4??; 807?; 62?; 155?; 26; 154?; 165?; 164?;
805; 4109; 1915?; 675??; 635?? (distinguished by the characteristic eye
of the TLALOCS).
Here, again, the writing is ideographic, and not phonetic.
X.
CUKULCAN OR QUETZALCOATL.
The character 2021 occurs many times in Plate LVI (Fig. 48), and
occasionally elsewhere. The personage represented is distinguished by
having a protruding tongue, and was therefore at once suspected to be
QUETZALCOATL. (See BANCROFT'S _Native Races_, vol. iii, p. 280.) The
protruding tongue is probably a reference to his introduction of the
sacrificial acts performed by wounding that member.
The rest of the sign I suppose to be the rebus of his name,
"Snake-plumage"; the part cross-hatched being "snake," the feather-like
ornament at the upper left-hand corner being "plumage." It is necessary,
however, to prove this before accepting the theory. To do this I had
recourse to Plates I and IV (Figs. 49, 50), my dictionary of synonyms.
This _cross-hatching_ occurs in Plate I. In the six tassels below the
waist, where the cross-hatching _might_ indicate the serpent skin,
notice the ends of the tassels; these are in a scroll-like form, and as
if rolled or coiled tip. In Plate IV they are the same, naturally. So
far there is but little light.
In Plate IV, just above each wrist, is a sign composed of ellipse and
bars; a little above each of these signs, among coils which may be
serpent coils, and on the horizontal line through the top of the
necklace pendant, are two surfaces cross-hatched all over. What do these
mean? Referring to Plate I, we find, in exactly the same relative
situation, the forked tongue and the rattles of the crotalus. These are,
then, synonyms, and the _guess_ is confirmed. The cross-hatching means
serpent-skin. Is this _always_ so? We must examine other plates to
decide.
The same ornament is found in Plates IX, XIV, XVI, XVIII, XIX, XX, XXI,
XXXV (of STEPHENS'), but its situation does not allow us to gain any
additional light.
In Plate XII (STEPHENS') none of the ornaments below the belt will help
us. At the level of the mouth are four patches of it. Take the upper
right-hand one of these. Immediately to its right is a serpent's head;
below the curve and above the frog's (?) head are the rattles. Here is
another confirmation. In Plate XVIII I refer the cross-hatching to the
jaw of the crocodile. In Plate XXII I have numbered the _chiffres_ as
follows:
4201 4202 4203 4204.
4211 4212 4213 4214.
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
4311 4312 4313 4314.
4204 has the cross-hatching at its top, and to its left in 4203 is the
serpent's head. The same is true in 4233-4. In 4264 we have the same
symbol that we are trying to interpret; it is in its perfect form here
and in No. 1865 of the Palenque series. In the caryatides of Plate XXIV
(Fig. 60) the cross-hatching is included in the spots of the leopard's
skin; in the ornaments at the base, in and near the masks which, they
are supporting, it is again serpent skin. Take the lower mask; its jaws,
forked-tongue, and teeth prove it to be a serpent-mask, as well as the
ornament just above it. In Plate LX (Fig. 59) it is to be noticed that
the leopard spots are not cross-hatched, but that this ornament is given
at the lower end of the leopard robe, which ends moreover in a crotalus
tongue marked with the sign of the jaw (near the top of this ornament)
and of the rattles (near the bottom). This again confirms the theory of
the rebus meaning of the cross-hatching. In Plate XXIV (Fig. 60) the
cross-hatching on the leopard spots probably is meant to _add_ the
serpent attribute to the leopard symbol, and not simply to denote the
latter.
Thus an examination of the _whole_ of the material available, shows that
the preceding half of the hieroglyph 2021 and its congeners is nothing
but the _rebus_ for QUETZALCOATL, or rather for CUKULCAN, the Maya name
for this god. BRASSEUR DE BOURBOURG, as quoted in BANCROFT'S _Native
Races_, vol. ii, p. 699, foot note, says CUKULCAN, comes from _kuk_ or
_kukul_, a bird, which appears to be the same as the _quetzal_, and from
_can_, serpent; so that CUKULCAN in Maya is the same as QUETZALCOATL in
Aztec. It is to be noticed how checks on the accuracy of any deciphering
of hieroglyphs occur at every point, if we will only use them.
The Maya equivalents of HUITZILOPOCHTLI and TLALOC are undoubtedly
buried in the _chiffres_ already deciphered, but we have no means of
getting their names in Maya from the rebus of the _chiffres_.
In the cases of these two gods we got the _chiffre_, and the rebus is
still to seek. In the case of _Quetzalcoatl_ or CUKULCAN, the rebus was
the means of getting the name; and if the names of this divinity had not
been equivalent in the two tongues, our results would have led us to the
(almost absurd) conclusion that a god of certain attributes was called
by his Aztec name in the Maya nations.
Thus every correct conclusion confirms every former one and is a basis
for subsequent progress. The results of this analysis are that the Maya
god CUKULCAN is named in each one of the following _chiffres_, viz: Nos.
1009, 265, 2090, 2073, 2021, 3085, 2045, 3073, 3070, 3032, 1865, 265,
268?, 4291? 73?? I give the numbers in the order in which they are
arranged in the card-catalogue. There is, of course, a reason for this
order.
BANCROFT, vol. iii, p. 268, says of QUETZALCOATL that "his symbols were
the bird, the serpent, the cross, and the flint, representing the
clouds, the lightning, the four winds, and the thunderbolt."
We shall find all of his titles except one, the bird, in what follows.
We must notice here that in the _chiffre_ 2021 and its congeners the
bird appears directly over the head of CUKULCAN. It is plainly shown in
the heliotype which accompanies Professor RAU'S work on the Palenque
cross, though not so well in our Fig. 48.
In what has gone before, we have seen that the characters 2021, 2045,
2073, 3073, 3085, 265, etc., present the portrait and the rebus of
CUKULCAN. It will not be forgotten that in the examination of the
question as to the order in which the stone inscriptions were read we
found a number of _pairs_ in Plate LVI, Fig. 48; the characters 2021,
etc., being one member of each. The other members of the pairs in the
Plate LVI were 2020, 2044, 2072, 3072, 3084, etc. 264-265 is another
example of the same pair elsewhere.
I hoped to find that the name CUKULCAN, or 2021, was associated in these
pairs with some adjective or verb, and therefore examined the other
members of the pair.
In a case like this the card-catalogue is of great assistance; for
example, I wish to examine here the _chiffres_ Nos. 2020, 2044, 2072,
3072, 3084, etc. In the catalogue their cards occur in the same
compartment, arranged so that two cards that are exactly alike are
contiguous. We can often know that two _chiffres_ are alike when one is
in a far better state of preservation than the other. Hence we may
select for study that one in which the lines and figures are best
preserved; or from several characters known to be alike, and of which no
one is entirely perfect, we may construct with accuracy the type upon
which they were founded. In this case the hieroglyph 2020 is well
preserved (see the right-hand side of Plate LVI, Fig. 48, the upper
left-hand glyph). It consists of a _human hand_, with the symbol of the
_sun_ in it; above this is a sign similar to that of the Maya day
_Ymix_; above this again, in miniature, is the rebus "snake plumage" or
_Cukulcan_; and to the left of the hieroglyph are some curved lines not
yet understood. No. 2003 of the same plate is also well preserved. It
has the hand as in 2020, the rebus also, and the sign for _Ymix_ is
slightly different, being modified with a sign like the top of a cross,
the symbol of the _four winds_. The symbol _Ymix_ may be seen, by a
reference to Plate XXVII (lower half) of the MS. _Troano_, to relate to
the _rain_. The figure of that plate is pouring rain upon the earth from
the orifices represented by _Ymix_. The cross of the _four winds_ is
still more plain in Nos. 2072, 3084, and 3072.
The part of this symbol 2020 and its synonyms which consists of curved
lines occupying the left hand one-third of the whole _chiffre_ occurs
only in this set of characters, and thus I cannot say _certainly_ what
this particular part of the hieroglyph means; but if the reader will
glance back over the last one hundred lines he will find that these
_chiffres_ contain the _rebus_ CUKULCAN, the sign of a _human hand_, of
the _sun_, of the _rain_, and of the _four winds_.
In BANCROFT'S _Native Races_, vol. iii, chapter vii, we find that the
titles of QUETZALCOATL (CUKULCAN) were the _air_, the _rattlesnake_, the
_rumbler_ (in allusion to thunder), the _strong hand_, the lord of the
_four winds_. The bird symbol exists in 2021, etc. Now in 2020 and its
congeners we have found every one of these titles, save only that
relating to the _thunder_. And we have found a meaning for every part of
the hieroglyph 2020 save only one, viz, the left-hand one-third,
consisting of concentric half ellipses or circles. It may be said to be
quite _probable_ that the unexplained part of the sign (2020)
corresponds to the unused title, "the rumbler." But it is not rigorously
proved, although very probable. The thunder would be well represented by
repeating the sign for sky or heaven. This much seems to me certain. The
sign is but another summing up of the attributes and titles of CUKULCAN.
2021 gave his portrait, his bird symbol, made allusion to his
institution of the sacrifice of wounding the tongue, and spelled out his
name in rebus characters. 2020 repeats his name as a rebus and adds the
titles of lord of the four winds, of the sun, of rain, of the strong
hand, etc. It is his biography, as it were.
In this connection, a passing reference to the characters 1810, etc.,
1820, etc., 1830, etc., 1840, etc., 1850, etc., of the left-hand side of
Plate LVI should be made. Among these, all the titles named above are to
be found. These are suitable subjects for future study.
We now see _why_ the pair 2020, 2021 occurs so many times in Plate LVI,
and again as 264, 265, etc. The right-hand half of this tablet has much
to say of CUKULCAN, and whenever his name is mentioned a brief list of
his titles accompanies it. Although it is disappointing to find _both_
members of this well-marked pair to be proper names, yet it is
gratifying to see that the theory of pairs, on which the proof of the
order in which the tablets are to be read must rest, has received such
unexpected confirmation.
To conclude the search for the hieroglyphs of CUKULCAN'S name, it will
be necessary to collect all those faces with "_round_ beards" (see
BANCROFT'S _Native Races_, vol. iii, p. 250). TLALOC was also bearded,
but all the historians refer to QUETZALCOATL as above cited. I refer
hieroglyphs Nos. 658, 651?, 650?, and 249? to this category.
Perhaps also the sign No. 153 is the sign of QUETZALCOATL, as something
very similar to it is given as his sign in the _Codex Telleriano
Remensis_, KINGSBOROUGH, vol. i, Plates I, II, and V (Plate I the best),
where he wears it at his waist.
In Plate LXIII of STEPHENS (vol. ii) is a small figure of CUKULCAN
which, he calls "Bas Relief on Tablet." WALDECK gives a much larger
drawing (incorrect, however, in many details), in which the figure, the
"Beau Relief," is seen to wear bracelets high up on the arm. This was a
distinguishing sign of QUETZALCOATL (see BANCROFT'S _Native Races_, vol.
iii, pp. 249 and 250), and this figure probably is a representation of
the Maya divinity. He is on a stool with tigers for supports. The tiger
belongs to the attributes which he had in common with TLALOC, and we see
again the intimate connection of these divinities--a connection often
pointed out by BRASSEUR DE BOURBOURG.
This is the third proper name which has been deciphered. All of them
have been pure picture-writing, except in so far as their rebus
character may make them in a sense phonetic.
XI.
COMPARISON OF THE SIGNS OF THE MAYA MONTHS (LANDA) WITH THE TABLETS.
We have a set of signs for Maya months and days handed down to us by
LANDA along with his phonetic alphabet. _A priori_ these are more likely
to represent the primitive forms as carved in stone than are the
alphabetic hieroglyphs, which may well have been invented by the
Spaniards to assist the natives to memorize religious formulæ.[243-*]
BRASSEUR DE BOURBOURG has analyzed the signs for the day and month in
his publication on the MS. _Troano_, and the strongest arguments which
can be given for their phonetic origin are given by him.
I have made a set of MS. copies of these signs and included them in my
card-catalogue, and have carefully compared them with the tablets XXIV
and LVI. My results are as follows:
PLATE XXIV (our Fig. 60).
No. 42 is the Maya month _Pop_, beginning July 16.
No. 54 is _Zip_??, beginning August 25.
No. 47 is _Tzoz_??, beginning September 14.
No. 57 is _Tzec_? beginning October 4.
No. 44-45 is _Mol_?, beginning December 3.
No. 39 is _Yax_, _Zac_, or _Ceh_, beginning January 12, February 1,
February 21, respectively.
PLATE LVI (our Fig. 48).
No. 1804 is _Uo_????
No. 1901 is _Zip_????
No. 1816 is _Tzoz_??
No. 1814 is _Tzec_?
No. 1807 is _Mol_?
No. 1855 is _Yax_, _Zac_, or _Ceh_.
No. 1844 is _Mac_?
The only sign about which there is little or no doubt is No. 42, which
seems pretty certainly to be the sign of the Maya month _Pop_, which
began July 16.
No. 39, just above it, seems also to be _one_ of the months _Yax_,
_Zac_, or _Ceh_, which began on January 12, February 1, and February 21,
respectively. Which one of these it corresponds to must be settled by
other means than a direct comparison. The signs given by LANDA for these
three months all contain the same radical as No. 39, but it is
impossible to decide with entire certainty to which it corresponds. It,
however, most nearly resembles the sign for _Zac_ (February 1); and it
is noteworthy that it was precisely in this month that the greatest
feast of TLALOC took place,[244-*] and its presence in this tablet,
which relates to _Tlaloc_, is especially interesting.
In connection with the counting of time, a reference to the bottom part
of the _chiffre_ 3000 of the Palenque cross tablet should be made. This
is a _knot_ tied up in a string or scarf; and we know this to have been
the method of expressing the expiration and completion of a cycle of
years. It occurs just above the symbol 3010, the _chiffre_ for a metal.
An examination of the original stone in the National Museum, Washington,
which is now in progress, has already convinced me that the methods
which I have described in the preceding pages promise other interesting
confirmations of the results I have reached. For the time, I must leave
the matter in its present state. I think I am justified in my confidence
that suitable methods of procedure have been laid down, and that certain
important results have already been reached.
I do not believe that the conclusions stated will be changed, but I am
confident that a rich reward will be found by any competent person who
will continue the study of these stones. The proper names now known will
serve as points of departure, and it is probable that some research will
give us the signs for verbs or adjectives connected with them.
It is an immense step to have rid ourselves of the phonetic or
alphabetic idea, and to have found the manner in which the Maya mind
represented attributes and ideas. Their method was that of all nations
at the origin of written language; that is, pure picture-writing. At
Copan this is found in its earliest state; at Palenque it was already
highly conventionalized. The step from the Palenque character to that
used in the Kabah inscription is apparently not greater than the step
from the latter to the various manuscripts. An important research would
be the application of the methods so ably applied by Dr. ALLEN to
tracing the evolution of the latter characters from their earlier forms.
In this way it will be possible to extend our present knowledge
materially.
FOOTNOTES:
[225-*] The Life Form in Art, Trans. Amer. Phil. Soc., vol. xv, 1873, p.
325.
[233-*] From KINGSBOROUGH, vol. i, plate 48, it appears that TLACLI
TONATIO may have had four hands. His name meant (?) Let there be light.
[237-*] See KINGSBOROUGH, vol. ii, Plate I, of the LAUD MS.
[243-*] Since this was written I have seen a paper by Dr. VALENTINI,
"The LANDA alphabet a Spanish fabrication" (read before the American
Antiquarian Society, April 28, 1880), and the conclusions of that paper
seem to me to be undoubtedly correct. They are the same as those just
given, but while my own were reached by a study of the stones and in the
course of a general examination, Dr. VALENTINI has addressed himself
successfully to the solution of a special problem.
[244-*] See BRASSEUR DE BOURBOURG, _Histoire du Mexique_, vol. i, p.
328.
Index
Allen, Dr Harrison 208, 225, 238, 245
Bancroft, H. H., Huitzilopochtli, description of 231
, Maya hieroglyphics, mode of reading 223
Band, G. H. 229
Braam, S. A. van 229
Brasseur de Bourbourg, C. E. 208, 210, 243, 244
Card catalogue of hieroglyphs 223
Chalchihuitlicue 237
Codex Telleriano Remensis 243
Copan, Statues of 207, 224, 227, 228, 229, 245
Cortez, H. 209
Cuculkan. (_See_ Quetzalcoatl.)
Deciphering, Principles of 207
Desaix, le Capitaine 210
Herrera 232
Hieratic art 210
Hieroglyphs 210
are read in a certain order 223
Huitzilopochtli 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 238, 239, 241
Kingsborough, Lord 210
Landa, Bishop 208, 243
Landa's hieroglyphic alphabet 208
Leemans, Dr 229
Leon y Gama 232
Lockwood, Miss Mary 224
Manuscript Troano 234
Miclantecutli 229, 232
Months, their hieroglyphs 243
MS. Troano 234
Müller, J. G., Mexican gods 232
Naolin 230
Nomenclature 211, 220
Palenque, Statues of 207, 224, 237-239, 245
Quetzalcoatl 230, 237, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243
Rau, Dr 221
Stephens, John L. 207-210
Teoyaomiqui 229
Tetzcatlipoca 230
Tlaloc 229, 230, 231, 233-239, 241, 244
Torquemada 232
Touatihu 230
Troano, Manuscript 234
Valentini 243
Variank 208
Waldeck 210, 243
Transcriber's Note
TN-1 209 cotemporaries should read contemporaries
TN-2 210 the the should read the
TN-3 220 Maya day should read Maya day.
TN-4 225 coindences should read coincidences
TN-5 227 Synonomous should read Synonymous
TN-6 230 Cuculkan should read Cukulcan
TN-7 231 blue globe. should read blue globe."
TN-8 232 Tezcatlipoca should read Tetzcatlipoca
TN-9 Fig. 55 Huitzilopochtli should read HUITZILOPOCHTLI
TN-10 237 pertend should read pretend
The following word was inconsistently spelled:
Labphak / Labphax
The following phrase had inconsistent use of italics and
capitalization:
_MS. Troano_ / _Ms. Troano_ / MS. _Troano_
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Studies in Central American Picture-Writing - First Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the - Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1879-80, - Government Printing Office, Washington, 1881, pages 205-245" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.