Chapter I: Part 1

Text size

Transcriber's Note

This paper is an extract from the following publication:

Powell, J. W.
1897 _Sixteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American
Ethnology._ pp. 199-266. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C.

The index was extracted from the complete volume index.

Inconsistencies in hyphenation and spelling have been maintained, along with two typographical errors. The typographical errors are marked with [TN-#] in the text. A complete list of inconsistencies and errors is found at the end of this paper.

The original publication used characters which are not available in the character set used in this version of the text. They have been replaced with the following codes:

[c] open o
[=h] h with stroke

DAY SYMBOLS OF THE MAYA YEAR

CYRUS THOMAS

CONTENTS

Page
Introductory 205
The first day 207
The second day 215
The third day 221
The fourth day 226
The fifth day 229
The sixth day 231
The seventh day 232
The eighth day 235
The ninth day 237
The tenth day 239
The eleventh day 241
The twelfth day 243
The thirteenth day 245
The fourteenth day 248
The fifteenth day 250
The sixteenth day 252
The seventeenth day 254
The eighteenth day 258
The nineteenth day 259
The twentieth day 262
Appendix--A list of the deities of the days of the month in the
Maori calendar 265

ILLUSTRATIONS

Page
PLATE LXIV. Copies of glyphs from the codices 208
LXV. Copies of glyphs from the codices 226
LXVI. Copies of glyphs from the codices 242
LXVII. Copies of glyphs from the codices 252
LXVIII. Copies of glyphs from the codices 260
LXIX. Shell bearing Maya glyphs 262

DAY SYMBOLS OF THE MAYA YEAR

BY CYRUS THOMAS

INTRODUCTORY

As the origin and signification of the day and month, names of the Maya calendar, and of the symbols used to represent these time periods, are now being discussed by students of Mexican and Central American paleography, I deem it advisable to present the result of my investigations in this line. The present paper, however, will be limited to the days only, as I have but little to add in regard to the month names or symbols. As the conclusion reached by Drs Seler and Brinton in regard to the order and sequence of the days of the month in the different calendars appears to be satisfactorily established, it will be accepted.

As frequent allusion is made herein to the phoneticism or phonetic value of the written characters or hieroglyphs, it is proper that the writer's position on this point should be clearly understood. He does not claim that the Maya scribes had reached that advanced stage where they could indicate each letter-sound by a glyph or symbol. On the contrary, he thinks a symbol, probably derived in most cases from an older method of picture writing, was selected because the name or word it represented had as its chief phonetic element a certain consonant sound or syllable. If this consonant element were _b_, the symbol would be used where _b_ was the prominent consonant element of the word to be indicated, no reference, however, to its original signification being necessarily retained. Thus the symbol for _cab_, "earth," might be used in writing _Caban_, a day name, or _cabil_, "honey," because _cab_ is their chief phonetic element.

In a previous work[205-1] I have expressed the opinion that the characters are to a certain extent phonetic--are not true alphabetic signs, but syllabic. And at the same time I expressed the opinion that even this definition did not hold true of all, as some were apparently ideographic, while others were simple abbreviated pictorial representations. In a subsequent paper[205-2] I expressed substantially the same opinion, and gave as my belief that one reason why attempts at decipherment have failed of success is a misconception of the peculiar character of the writing, which peculiarity is found in the fact that, as it exists in the codices and inscriptions, it is in a transition stage from the purely ideographic to the phonetic. I stated also my belief that the writing had not reached the stage when each sound was indicated by a glyph or sign.

This may further be explained by the following illustration: The conventionalized figure of a turtlehead is the symbol for a "turtle," _ak_, _ac_, or _aac_ in Maya; and a conventionalized footprint is the symbol for "step" or "road," _be_, _beil_, in Maya. These may be brought together to form the word _akyab_ or _kayab_, which may have no reference to the original signification of the combined symbols. These two glyphs are, in fact, combined to form the symbol for the month _Kayab_.

These statements will perhaps suffice to make clear my views on this question, which do not appear to have been clearly understood, possibly because of my frequent use of the words "phonetic" and "phoneticism," and perhaps rather loose reference to "letter elements."

It is proper, however, to add that I am inclined to the opinion that modification in the form and details of a glyph which belongs to the class which, for want of a better term, we may designate "phonetic," in many cases indicates a modification or change in the signification or word value. I say in "many cases," because these modifications are due often to the greater or lesser accuracy with which the glyph is drawn, the caprice of the scribe, and other causes which have no reference to sound or signification. For example, the change of a rounded or circular symbol to a face figure, as is often done, does not appear, at least in the day signs, to have any significance. On the other hand, a slight variation, if permanent, may be indicative of a difference in signification or phonetic value. This appears to be true, to some extent, whether we consider the characters ideographic or as, in some sense, phonetic.

The lists of the days in the Maya, Tzental, Quiche-Cakchiquel, Zapotec, and Nahuatl, in the order usually given, are as follows:

_Names of the days in the different calendars_

THE FIRST DAY

Maya, _imix_ (or _ymix_); Tzental, _imox_ or _mox_; Quiche-Cakchiquel, _imox_ or _moxin_; Zapotec, _chilla_ or _chiylla_; Nahuatl, _cipactli_.

The symbol of this day, which is quite uniform in the day series of the codices, is shown in plate LXIV, 1.[207-1] In this the essential features appear to be the black spot at the top, the semicircle of dots around it, and the short perpendicular lines in the lower half. The form on the right slab of the "Palenque tablet," and also in the Lorillard City inscription, copied by Charney,[TN-1] is given in plate LXIV, 2. The only particular in which this differs from the other is that the little circle at the top is crosshatched. The form shown in LXIV, 3, is found in the Tikal inscription; it shows also the crosshatching in the little circle at the top. This character, however, when combined with other glyphs, and when used otherwise than as a day symbol, sometimes varies from the types given. For example, in the symbol of the month _Mac_ it is as shown in plate LXIV, 4. In this a minute, divided oblong, takes the place of the dark spot at the top, and a double curved line accompanies the circle of dots. Another form is shown in plate LXIV, 5. The only variation in this from the usual type is the introduction of two or three minute circles in the curved line of dots and the divided oblong. Dr Seler is inclined to believe that these are essential variants from the true _imix_ symbol; nevertheless, as _m_ is the chief consonant element both in _imix_, or _mox_ and _mac_, there appears to be a relation between the form of the glyphs and their phonetic value.

Drs Seler and Schellhas believe _im_ to be the radical of _imix_ and _imox_, which are dialectal variations of the same word. Dr Brinton, however, basing his opinion on the fact that _mox_ and _moxin_ are used sometimes as equivalents, decides that the radical syllable is _m-x_. In this he is probably correct, and if so, this furnishes additional evidence of the close relation between form and sound, as in one case _m-x_ are the chief phonetic elements and in the other _m-c_. It is probable that Drs Schellhas and Seler were led to their conclusion by the fact that the symbol bears a close resemblance to the conventional form of the female breast, which in Maya is _im_. This, which was perhaps the origin of the symbol, was probably selected simply because _m_ is its only prominent element. Nevertheless, it is worthy of notice that the symbol for the day _Ix_ is frequently represented as shown in plate LXVI, 36, from Tro. 5*c. This is similar in some respects to the _Imix_ symbol, and the name contains the _i_ and _x_ of the latter. If the writing is phonetic, the points of resemblance may have some significance, otherwise they do not.

In a previous paper[208-1] I suggested that the probable signification of the character LXIV, 7, from Dres. 14c and 46b, is _maax_, "monkey, ape, imitator." Below the text in each case is seen a dark male figure (or deity), to which it undoubtedly refers, as is conceded by Drs Schellhas and Seler. The face character, which forms part of the glyph, may be only a determinative; at least I am unable to assign it any other value in this connection, and the necessity for such determinative is apparent. Brasseur, under _akab-maax_, speaks of a phantom or hobgoblin of this name, which he says signifies "the great monkey of the night." Perez gives as definitions "duende" (elf or hobgoblin) and "mico nocturno." Henderson, who writes the name _akabmax_, simply says "sprite, phantom." It would seem, therefore, that among the superstitious beliefs of the Maya was that of a night phantom or deity, which took the form of a monkey. But this black figure appears to be different from those on Tro. 34*-31*, with which Seler connects it and to which he applies the name Ekchuah.[208-2]

In the paper above referred to, I have interpreted the symbol shown in plate LXIV, 8 (from Dres. 35c) _maach_, "the crow," assuming the birdhead to be a determinative. Seler concludes that the bird which this represents is "a substitute, colleague, or symbol of the Rain god Chac," the so-called Maya Tlaloc so frequently represented in the codices. Although there is in this case no bird figure below to confirm our interpretation, yet it appears to be justified by the comparisons given and by its agreement with the phonetic value of the _imix_ symbol. It is also further confirmed by the two glyphs shown in plate LXVIII, 13, 14, which occur together in Dres. 38b. In this case the two characters, which are combined in plate LXIV, 8, are separated, yet must have the same signification. Here the bird figure (a man with a bird's head or bird mask) is seen below. In both instances rain is represented, showing that the bird is supposed to bear some relation thereto. But it is more likely that it has direct reference to the wind which accompanies the rain storm rather than to "fruitfulness," as Seler supposes. Be this, however, as it may, our rendering of the _imix_ symbol in this connection appears to be justified, and indicates that the symbol is used here for its phonetic value rather than with any reference to its primary signification.

Dr Seler also refers in this connection to the lower line of symbols on Dres. 29-30b (three of which are shown in plate LXVIII, 15, 16, 17); to those shown in plate LXVIII, 18, 19, from Tro. 14c; and those shown in plate LXVIII, 20, 21, from Tro. 11a. He remarks that "in a number of hieroglyphs the character _imix_ stands as an equivalent of a peculiar animal head which bears as a distinctive mark the element _akbal_ over the eye. Thus in the hieroglyphs enumerating those above mentioned which, standing after the hieroglyphs of the cardinal points, seem to express the deities presiding over them, indeed there appears here on the same animal head, on one hand the character _imix_, on the other the element figure 165" (our plate LXIV, 5).

Although I am unable to interpret satisfactorily the _imix_ symbols in the places above referred to, I think it can be made apparent that Dr Seler's explanation is without foundation. For instance, by referring to the plates of the Dresden and Troano codices mentioned, it will be seen that there is nothing whatever that refers to an "animal head which bears the element _akbal_ over the eye," unless we suppose it to be in plate LXVIII, 16 (from Dres. 29b) and LXVIII, 21 (from Tro. 11a). There is no figure below or connected with either series to justify this conclusion. It is also certain that plate LXVIII, 21 (Tro. 11a) is not an animal head. Possibly plate LXVIII, 16 (Dres. 29b) may be intended for an animal head, but this is not certain and, moreover, it is not repeated in the series.

Referring to Cort. 27a it will be seen that the compound glyph shown in plate LXVIII, 22 (apparently the same as that on Tro. 11a) is repeated four times in one line, each connected with a cardinal point symbol, and each standing immediately over and evidently referring to a large vessel.[209-1] It is stated that it was a custom among the Maya during certain religious ceremonies to place a vessel in their temples at each of the four cardinal points.[209-2] As _cum_ and _xamach_ are Maya words signifying vessel, we still find in these the _m_ sound. It is therefore possible that the similar glyphs on Dres. 29b and Tro. 14 and 15 also refer to vessels. The supposition seems to be strengthened by the fact that connected with the former are figures of the four classes of food animals--quadrupeds, birds, reptiles (iguana), and fishes. The latter refer to the hunter's occupation, being accompanied by figures of the deer. Landa, in his descriptions of the various festivals, repeatedly alludes to the four Chacs or Bacabs which represent the four cardinal points, and to the different classes of food animals presented where vessels were used. It is therefore more likely that the symbol is used in the places mentioned because of its phonetic value rather than as a substitute for the heads of lightning animals, for which supposed substitution Dr Seler admits he can not account.

Dr Seler refers also to the glyph on which the long nose deity is seated, Dres. 44a, shown in our plate LXVIII, 23. The prefix he interprets by "man, human being," and supposes the whole glyph refers to the attributes of the Rain god. As the deity holds a fish in his hand, and is seen in the lowest division of the same plate in the act of seining fish, is it not more likely that this symbol should be rendered by _cayom_, "a fisherman"? This is appropriate and retains the phonetic value of the _imix_ symbol.

In the compound glyph 24, plate LXVIII, from Dres. 67b, to which Seler also refers in the same connection, we see in the figure below the same deity wading in water in which a fish is swimming. The right portion of the symbol is the same as the last (plate LXVIII, 23) and presumably has the same signification--_cayom_, "a fisherman," or _cayomal_, "to fish." I am unable to interpret the first or left-hand character; possibly it may be found in one of the terms _chucay_, or _[c]aucay_, which Henderson gives as equivalents of _cayomal_. The latter--_[c]aucay_--would give to this prefix precisely the phonetic value I have hitherto assigned it.

The next character Dr Seler refers to in this connection is that shown in plate LXVIII, 25, from Dres. 40c, where the long-nose god is seen below rowing a boat on the water. The adjoining symbol in the text is a fish. It is probable therefore that substantially the same interpretation is to be given here.

The group shown in plate LXIV, 9, consisting of an _Imix_ and _Kan_ symbol, is of frequent occurrence in all the codices. The relation of the characters in this combination varies, the order being frequently the reverse of that given in the figure, and again one being placed on top of the other. They frequently follow deity symbols, especially the symbol of the so called "Corn god," and in these instances seem to refer to some attribute of the divinity indicated. However, they are by no means confined to these relations, being found quite frequently in other connections. The combination is occasionally borne upon the back of an individual, as Dres. 16a, and on Tro. 21b it is on the back of a dog. Dr Seler concludes "that it denotes the copal or the offering of incense." However, he subsequently[210-1] expresses the view that it may signify "beans and maize." In a previous work[210-2] some reasons were presented by me for believing this combination was intended to denote bread or maize bread. This belief is based on the statement by Landa in his account of the sacrifices at the beginning of the year _Muluc_, that they made "images of dogs, in baked earth, carrying bread on the back," and the fact that in plate 21 of the Codex Tro., representing the sacrifices of this year, we see the figure of a dog with this _Kan-Imix_ group on its back. This figure (plate LXIV, 10) probably represents the images of which Landa speaks, and the symbols on the back, bread or food in the general sense. Further notice of this combination will be given under the fourth day, _Kan_.

The character shown in plate LXVIII, 26, from Tro. 20*d, is erroneously given by Seler as an example of the _kan-imix_ symbol. The two glyphs on the mat figure are unquestionably _imix_ symbols, though of the two different types shown in plate LXIV, 1 and 5. He suggests that here it replaces the deity symbol, but this is contradicted by the fact that in both groups where it appears the deity symbol is present. The mat-like figure, which is probably a determinative, shows that it refers to the sack, bag, or kind of hamper which the women figured below bear on the back, filled with corn, bones, etc. As _mucuc_ signifies "portmanteau, bag, sack, etc," _mucub_ "a bag or sack made of sackcloth," and _mucubcuch_ "to carry anything in a sack or folded in a shawl," it is more than probable we have in these words the signification of the symbol. The duplication of the _imix_ symbol may be to denote the plural; or, as the words come from a root signifying "secret, hidden, covered," it may be to intensify. It is noticeable also that the latter or right-hand _Imix_ symbol is similar to that used for the mouth _Mac_.

In the right section of Dres. 41b is the glyph shown in plate LXIV, 11, which, according to the phonetic system that appears to prevail in this writing, may be translated _yulpolic_, from _yulpol_, "to smooth or plane wood," or, as given by Henderson (MS. Lexicon), "to smooth, plane, or square timber, to beat off the log." This interpretation, which is given here merely because of its relation to the symbol which follows, is based in part on the following evidence: The left character, which has _y_ as its chief phonetic element, is the same as the upper character in the symbol for the month _Yax_ (plate LXIV, 12), and also the upper character of the symbol for the month _Yaxkin_ (plate LXIV, 13). Other evidence of its use with this value will be presented farther on, and also in reference to the right character of the above-mentioned symbol (plate LXIV, 11), which has been given _p_ as its chief phonetic element. By reference to the figure below the text the appropriateness of this rendering is at once apparent, as here is represented an individual in the act of chipping off the side of a tree. This he appears to be doing by holding in his left hand an instrument resembling a frow, which he strikes with a hatchet.

The character immediately below the one above mentioned and belonging to the same series is shown in plate LXIV, 14. It may be interpreted _mamachah_, "to make flat by repeated strokes." The phonetic value of the parts is obtained in this way. The upper character with two wings is Landa's _ma_, except that the circular wings contain the lines or strokes which the bishop has omitted, and which appear to indicate the _m_ sound and are observed in the _Imix_ symbol. Colonel Mallery, comparing this with the sign of negation made by the Indians and that of the Egyptians given by Champollion (our plate LXIV, 15), concludes that it is derived from the symmetrically extended arms with the hands curved slightly downward. This will furnish an explanation of the strokes in the terminal circles. The left of the two lower characters is almost identical with the symbol for the month _Mac_ (plate LXIV, 4), omitting the _ca_ glyph. The lower right-hand character is similar to the symbol for the month _Chuen_. We thus obtain legitimately the sounds _ma ma-ch_, whether we consider the parts truly phonetic or only ikonomatic.

For further illustration of the use of this symbol and evidence of phoneticism, the reader is referred to the article in the _American Anthropologist_ above mentioned.

The fact that a symbol is used to denote a given Maya day does not prove, supposing it to be in any sense phonetic, that the Maya name gives the original equivalent. It may have been adopted to represent the older name in the Tzental, or borrowed from the Zapotec calendar and retained in the Maya calendar for the new name given in that tongue. However, the symbol for this first day, which has substantially the same name in the Maya and Tzental, appears to represent the name in these languages and to be in some degree phonetic, _m_ being the chief phonetic element represented by it. The crosshatching in the little circle at the top, seen in some of the older forms found in the inscriptions, may indicate, as will later be seen, the _x_ or _ch_ sound, thus giving precisely the radical _m-x_.

It may be said, in reference to the signification of the names of the day in different dialects, that no settled or entirely satisfactory conclusion has been reached in regard to either.

The Cakchiquel word _imox_ is translated by the grammarian Ximenes as "swordfish," thus corresponding with the usual interpretation of the Mexican _cipactli_. Dr Seler thinks, however, that the Maya names were derived, as above stated, from _im_. Nevertheless he concludes that the primitive signification of both the Maya and Mexican symbols is the earth, "who brings forth all things from her bosom and takes all living things again into it." If we may judge from its use, there is no doubt that the Mexican _cipactli_ figure is a symbol of the earth or underworld. The usual form of the day symbol in the Mexican codices is shown in plate LXIV, 16, and more elaborately in plate LXIV, 17. As proof that it indicates the earth or underworld, there is shown on plate 73 of the Borgian Codex an individual, whose heart has been torn from his breast, plunging downward through the open jaws of the monster into the shades or earth below. On plate 76 of the same codex, the extended jaws open upward, and into them a number of persons are marching in regular order. These apparently represent the thirteen months of the sacred year. One has passed on and disappeared from view, and the other twelve are following with bowed heads. It would seem from these to be not only symbolic of the earth or hades, but also to have some relation to time.

For positive proof that it is sometimes used to denote the earth, or that from which vegetation comes, it is only necessary to refer to the lower right-hand figure of plate 12, Borgian Codex. Here is Tlaloc sending down rain upon the earth, from which the enlivened plants are springing forth and expanding into leaf and blossom. The earth, on which they stand and from which they arise, is represented by the figure of the mythical _Cipactli_.

It is quite probable that the monster on plates 4 and 5 of the Dresden Codex, which appears to be of the same genus, is a time symbol, and also that on plate 74 of the same codex. It is therefore more than likely that the animal indicated by the Mexican name of the day is mythical, represented according to locality by some known animal which seems to indicate best the mythical conception. Some figures evidently refer to the alligator, and others apparently to the iguana; that on plates 4 and 5 of the Dresden Codex is purely mythical, but contains reptilian characteristics.

Dr Brinton, probably influenced to some extent by the apparent signification of the Nahuatl name and symbol, explains the other names as follows:

This leads me to identify it [the Maya name] with, the Maya _mex_
or _meex_, which is the name of a fish (the "pez arana," "un
pescado que tiene muchos brazos"), probably so called from another
meaning of _mex_, "the beard." ... This identification brings this
day name into direct relation to the Zapotec and Nahuatl names. In
the former, _chiylla_, sometimes given as _pi-chilla_, is
apparently from _bi-chilla-beo_, water lizard, and Nahuatl
_cipactli_ certainly means some fish or fish-like animal--a
swordfish, alligator, or the like, though exactly which is not
certain, and probably the reference with them was altogether
mythical.

Dr Seler, in his subsequent paper, gives the following explanation of the Zapotec name _chilla_ or _chijlla_:

For this I find in the lexicon three principal meanings: One is the
cubical bean (wurfel bohne). "Pichijlla, frisolillos o havas con
que echan las suertes los sortilegos" [beans used by the sorcerers
in casting lots or telling fortunes]; another meaning is "the
ridge" (pichijlla, lechijlla, chijllatani, loma o cordillera de
sierra); another is "the crocodile" (cocodrillo, lagarto grande de
agua); and another "swordfish" (pella-pichijlla-tao, espadarte
pescado). Finally, we have chilla-tao, "the great Chilla," given
again as one of the names of the highest being. Here it seems to me
that the signification "crocodile" is the original one, and thus
far suitable. For the manner in which the first day character is
delineated in Mexican and Zapotec picture writing [our plate LXIV,
16] shows undoubtedly the head of the crocodile with the movable
snapping upper jaw, which is so characteristic of the animal.

Attention is called to the apparently closely related word as given by Perez--_mech_, _ixmech_, "lagartija."

It will not be out of place here to refer to a superstition pervading the islands of the Pacific ocean, which seems strangely coincident with the conception of the physical symbol of this day. This is a mythological monster known in some sections by the name _Taniwha_, and in others as _moko_ or _mo'o_.

Dr Edward Tregear[214-1] speaks of it as follows:

Taniwha were water monsters generally. They mostly inhabited lakes
and streams, but sometimes the sea. Sometimes the beast was a land
animal, a lizard, etc, but the true _taniwha_ is a water kelpie.

Mr Kerry Nichols,[214-2] speaking of these monsters, says:

With the other fabulous creations of Maori mythology were the
_taniwhas_ or evil demons, mysterious monsters in the form of
gigantic lizards, who were said to inhabit subterranean caves, the
deep places of lakes and rivers, and to guard tabued districts.
They were on the alert to upset canoes and to devour men. Indeed,
these fabulous monsters not only entered largely into the religious
superstitions, but into the poetry and prose of Maori tradition.

The Hawaiian _Mo'o_ or _Moko_ appears, from the following statement by Judge Fornander, to have been applied sometimes to this mythological monster:

The _Mo'o_ or _Moko_ mentioned in tradition--reptiles and
lizards--were of several kinds--the _mo'o_ with large, sharp,
glistening teeth; the talking mo'o, _moo-olelo_; the creeping mo'o,
_moo-kolo_; the roving, wandering mo'o, _moo-pelo_; the watchful
mo'o, _moo-kaala_; the prophesying mo'o, _moo-kaula_; the deadly
mo'o, _moo-make-a-kane_. The Hawaiian legends frequently speak of
_mo'o_ of extraordinary size living in caverns, amphibious in their
nature, and being the terror of the inhabitants.[214-3]

According to the Codex Fuen-leal, at the beginning of things the gods made thirteen heavens, and beneath them the primeval water, in which they placed a fish called _cipactli_ (queses como caiman). This marine monster brought the dirt and clay from which they made the earth, which, therefore, is represented in their paintings resting on the back of a fish.

A similar conception is found both in Malay and Hindu mythology, differing somewhat in details, but always relating to some monster reptile. In the Manek Maya, one of the ancient epics of Java, Anta Boga, the deity presiding over the lowest region of the earth, is a dragon-like monster with ninety nostrils. The same conception is found also among other peoples.

In the Tonga language _moco_ is "a species of lizard;" in Hawaiian _mo'o_ or _moko_ is "the general name for lizards," and the same word signifies "lizard" in Samoan; _moko-moko_ is the New Zealand (Maori) name for a small lizard. Taylor[214-4] says that _moko-titi_ was a "lizard god."

It is therefore evident that a superstition regarding some reptilian water monster prevailed throughout the Pacific islands. It is true also that the Nahuatl _cipactli_ certainly means some amphibious or water animal--a swordfish, alligator, or something of the kind, though exactly which is not certain--or, what is more likely, the reference was altogether mythical.

It is possible, and perhaps probable, as stated above, that the Maya symbol of this day was taken originally from the conventional method of representing the female breast. Drs Seler and Schellhas appear to be of this opinion. But it does not necessarily follow from this that the character used for the name of the day has any reference to the female breast, as it is more likely used in this relation for its phonetic value alone, _m_ being the chief phonetic element indicated thereby.

If the supposition herein advanced that the combination shown in plate LXIV, 9, denotes bread or food be correct, it is possible that the symbol is also sometimes used to indicate "maize," _ixim_ or _xim_, on account of its phonetic value. As will be shown farther on, the _kan_ symbol is not only used to denote the grain of maize and maize in the general sense, but it appears to denote in some cases bread or the tortilla.

THE SECOND DAY

Maya, _ik_; Tzental, _igh_; Quiche-Cakchiquel, _ik'_; Zapotec, _gui_, _ni_, _laa_, _laala_ or _liaa_; Nahuatl, _ehecatl_.

The form of the symbol of this day presents a number of minor variations, the more important of which are shown in plate LXIV, 18-26. Symbol 18 is the form given by Landa; 19-24, those found in the codices; 25 is from the left slab of the Palenque tablet or altar plate, and 26 is from the Tikal inscription.

So far as this character can satisfactorily be interpreted, where used otherwise than as a day symbol, the signification appears to be wind, spirit, or life, whether considered phonetic or not. As illustrations of its use, the following examples are presented:

At the right side of Dres. 72c are the three characters shown in plate LXIV, 27, 28, and 29, which follow one another downward, as shown in the figure, the three forming one of the short columns of the series to which they belong. From the lowest, which is the _ik_ symbol, waving blue lines, indicating water, extend downward to the bottom of the division. If these glyphs are considered ideographic and not phonetic, it is still possible to give them a reasonable interpretation. The falling water shows that they relate to the rain storm or tempest. The uppermost character, which appears to be falling over on its side, we may assume to be the symbol of a house or building of some kind;[215-1] the dotted lines extending from its surface may well be supposed to represent rain driven from the roof. There is, however, another possible interpretation of this character which appears to be consistent with Mexican and Central American mythology. It is that it indicates a house, vessel, or region of the heavens which holds the waters of the upper world. The turning on the side would, in this case, denote the act of pouring out the water in the form of rain. This supposition (although I am inclined to adopt the former) appears to be supported by the fact that this character is used in the Dresden Codex as one of the cloud or heaven symbols, as, for example, on plates 66 and 68. According to Ramirez, the Mexican wind and rain gods occupy a large mansion in the heavens, which is divided into four apartments, with a court in the middle. In this court stand four enormous vases of water, and an infinite number of very small slaves (the rain drops) stand ready to dip out the water from one or the other of these vases and pour it on the earth in showers.[216-1] As the lowest character in the group mentioned is the _ik_ symbol, its appropriate rendering here is beyond question "wind;" therefore, as two out of the three characters, and the rain sign below, indicate the rain storm, we may take for granted that the middle character probably refers to lightning or thunder.

Additional reasons for this interpretation are given in a previous paper[216-2] and need not be repeated here, as the only object now in view in referring to them is to show that the _ik_ symbol is there used to denote wind.

In the third and fourth divisions of plate 16* Codex Troano, five persons are represented, each holding in his hand an _ik_ symbol from which arises what appear to be the sprouting leaves of a plant, probably maize (plate LXIV, 30, 31). This is interpreted by Dr Seler as the heart just taken from the sacrificed victim, the leaf-shape figures representing the vapor rising from the warm blood and flesh. It is unnecessary to give here his reasons for this belief, as the suggestion presented below, although wholly different, gives to the symbol in this place substantially the same meaning that he assigns to it, to wit, life, vitality. It is probable that the figure is intended to represent the germination of a plant--the springing forth of the blade from the seed--and that the _ik_ symbol indicates plant life, or rather the spirit which the natives believe dwells in plants and causes them to grow. Seler's suggestion that in this connection _ik_ may be compared to _kan_ is appropriate, but this comparison does not tend to the support of his theory. Take, for example, the sprouting _kan_ symbols on Tro. 29b, to which he refers. There can be no doubt that the symbol represents the grain of maize from which the sprouting leaves are rising (plate LXIV, 32). In one place a bird is pulling it up; at another place a small quadruped is attacking it; at another the Tlaloc is planting (or perhaps replanting) the seed.

In the lowest division of the same plate (Tro. 29) are four individuals, three of whom, as may be seen by studying the similar figures in the division above, are anthropomorphic symbols of corn; the other an earth or underworld deity. One of the former holds in his hands a _kan_ symbol, which is colored to signify maize; the others hold _ik_ symbols. There are two interpretations which may be given this symbolic representation--one, that the _ik_ glyphs are intended to denote plant life, that which causes plants to spring up and grow; the other, that they denote wind, which in that country was often destructive to growing corn.

Very distinct reference is made in the "Relacion de la Villa Valladolid"[217-1] to the injurious effects of winds on the maize crop. It is related in this report, which appears to have been of an official character, made in 1579, that--

From June till the middle of August it rains very hard and there
are strong winds; from the latter date the rains are not copious
and the wind blows strongly from the north, which causes much
mortality among the natives, and Spaniards as well, for they
contract catarrh and _barriga_ (dropsy?). This north wind destroys
the maize crops, which form the main sustenance of both natives and
Spaniards, for they use no other bread.

There can be no doubt that most, if not all, of the figures on this plate (Tro. 29) are intended to represent the injurious and destructive agencies to which maize and other cultivated plants were subject. Birds and quadrupeds pull up the sprouting seed and pull down and devour the ripening grain; worms gnaw the roots and winds break down the stalks, one out of four escaping injury and giving full return to the planter. The latter is therefore probably the correct interpretation, the only difficult feature being the presence of the Earth god, which agrees better with the first suggestion.

It is to be observed that the series on Tro. 29c really commences with the right-hand group on 30c. The figure here holds in his hand an _ik_ symbol. Following this, the left group on 29c shows a bird pecking the corn; the next, a small quadruped tearing it down; the next, a worm gnawing at the root of a plant; and the fourth, or right-hand group, a corn figure holding a _kan_ symbol, indicating the mature grain, the uninjured portion of the crop. It would therefore appear that the _ik_ symbol in this series denotes wind.

As additional proof that the symbol is used to indicate "wind," reference is made to Tro. 24a. Here the long-nose Rain god, or Maya Tlaloc, is seen amidst the storm, clothed in black and bearing on his arm a shield on which are two _ik_ symbols (plate LXIV, 33), doubtless indicative of the fierceness of the tempest. In front of him is the Corn god, bending beneath the pouring rain. On plate 25, same codex, lower division, the storm is again symbolized, and the _ik_ symbol is present here also.

It seems from these facts to be quite certain that the value of the symbol in the codices, so far as it can be satisfactorily determined, corresponds in signification with the Maya name.

Referring again to Dr Seler's theory that the plant-like figures on Tro. 15*, 16* indicate the freshly extracted heart and the vapor arising therefrom, the following additional items are noted: He says that in the text the scene below, or at least these sprouting-plant figures, are expressed by hieroglyphs 27-29, plate LXVIII. His comparison with the so-called heart figures from the Mexican codices can scarcely be regarded as convincing, for there is hardly any resemblance. Moreover, he omits to furnish an explanation, on his theory, of the fact that some of these rising "vapors" are crowned with blossoms or fruit (plate LXIV, 31).

I think it quite probable that Dr Seler, although not accepting the theory of phoneticism, has been influenced to some extent by the form of the right-hand character of the glyph shown in plate LXVIII, 27. This is much like Landa's _o_, and _ol_ in Maya denotes "heart, etc."

According to Brasseur, _oloh_ signifies "a germ" and "to germinate;" _hokol_ also has about the same meaning. This furnishes a consistent and appropriate explanation of the figures, and gives at the same time the phonetic value of the glyph. I have not determined the prefix satisfactorily, but presume it is some word having _ch'_ or _tz'_ as its chief phonetic element, which signifies "little," "plant," or something similar.

I have not determined the other symbols to which Seler alludes in this connection, but some of them, as may be seen by comparison with other passages, do not have special reference to the plant-like figures.

Whether the little sharp-corner square seen in the upper right-hand character of the compound symbols shown in plate LXVI, 28 and 55, and others of similar form, are to be taken as _ik_ glyphs is yet an undecided question. Dr Seler appears to have excluded them from this category in his paper, so frequently referred to, though he subsequently brings them into this relation. But in these places he gives the glyph the signification "fire" or "flame." It is possible that in some of the cases to which he refers he is correct, as, for example, in regard to the figure shown in plate LXVIII, 30, from Dres. 25, where it is in the midst of the blaze. If so, the word equivalent must be _kak_, as it is seemingly a variant of _ik_, and hence may be supposed to have the _k_ sound. This will agree with his interpretation of plate LXVI, 29, by _kinichkakmo_; but in this case we must give _ich_ as the value of the so-called _ben_ symbol. This, however, is not so very objectionable, as there are other places where the chief phonetic element of the _ben_ glyph appears to be _i_. It is also to be remembered that it is much like Landa's _i_. It is likewise true, as will hereafter be shown, that the value _ben_ does not appear to hold good where it occurs in combination with other symbols. However, until a satisfactory rendering of this little four-corner _ik_ (?) symbol in some other place than the fire is found, I am hardly prepared to give full acceptance to Dr Seler's supposition.

The Zapotec names are somewhat difficult to bring into harmony with the others. Dr Brinton's solution is as follows:

In that tongue we have _uii_, air, wind; _chiic_, breath; which we
may bring into relation with _gui_; and we find _guiiebee_,
wind-and-water cloud (nube con vient y agua). Dr Seler prefers to
derive _gui_ from _quii_, fire, flame, the notion of which is often
associated with wind.

It was probably this notion and the fact that the little four-corner _ik_ (?) symbol is sometimes seen in the flame, which caused this authority to believe the symbol denotes "fire," "flame." In the manuscript Zapotec vocabulary by E. A. Fuller, "wind" is _bii_.

Dr Brinton thinks that _ni_ is the radical of _nici_, to grow, increase, gain life. He says:

_Laa_, or _laala_, is a word of many meanings, as warmth, heat,
reason, or intelligence. The sense common to all these expressions
seems to be that of life, vitality.

The form of the Mexican symbol for the day _Ehecatl_ (wind), shown in plate LXIV, 34, and also of the mouths of the female figures on plates 26 and 28, Troano Codex, which are emblematic of the storm, appear to be taken from the bird bill. The bird, as is well known, is a wind symbol with many peoples. It has been so esteemed among several tribes of American Indians, and also by peoples of the Old World. As _nii_ or _ni_ signifies "nose, beak, point" in Maya and several cognate dialects, is it not possible that in this is to be found an explanation of the second Zapotec name? In this case, however, we must assume that the term is borrowed, as in this language _xi_ or _xie_ is the term for "nose." I notice, however, that the name for bird is given as _viguini_ and _piguiini_. If _pi_ (_vi_) is a prefix, as seems probable from the word for "hen," _guitii_, then we have some ground for believing that the first Zapotec name has the same fundamental idea as the Mexican symbol.

It therefore would seem that it is not difficult to understand the origin of the Mexican symbol. Examining plate 10, Borgian Codex, which appears to represent the home of the winds, we see that, though mostly furnished with human bodies, they have bird claws as well as bills. But the origin of the Maya symbol is more difficult to account for. Dr Seler remarks:

It is difficult to determine the original idea of this character.
Figure 210 [our plate LXIV, 24] and the forms on the reliefs--if we
have correctly interpreted these--lead us to think that the wind
cross, or the figure of the Tau resulting from it, was the origin
of the character. However, the forms of the Cod. Tro. are not
easily reconciled with this.

Dr Brinton[219-1] asserts, without heeding Dr Seler's caution, that it is the sign of the four directions or four winds--the wind cross--evidently alluding to the sharp-corner square seen in our plate LXVI, 28. But he seems to have overlooked the fact that it is never thus represented in the day symbol. Moreover, no satisfactory proof has been presented showing that this form has this signification. Seler gives it in some places, as above stated, the signification "fire," "flame;" and if his interpretation of plate LXVI, 29 by _Kinich-kakmo_ be correct, as Brinton seems to think it is, his interpretations are consistent. However, Seler's assertion that "the forms of the Cod. Tro. are not easily reconciled with this" must be admitted. In the codices this glyph, as this author remarks, "rather brings to mind the idea of hanging," often resembling a bunch of grapes.

I take for granted the symbol, when standing for the day, is not pictorial or ideographic, but is adopted for its sound value. If this supposition be correct, then it must be a conventional representation of something the Maya name of which is _ik_ or that has substantially this phonetic value. The form of the Mexican symbol, as above indicated, shows that in selecting it reference was had to the bird bill, to which possibly may have been added the idea of blowing forcibly from the mouth, a common method of indicating wind. (See for example the bird-mouth female, Tro. 25b, where the _Ik_ symbol is present.) But it seems impossible to find in the symbol any reference to the bird, bird bill, or the act of blowing, or in fact anything indicating, even by a conventionalized figure, wind, air, spirit, or breath. Hence it is reasonable to conclude that it has been selected only because of the resemblance in sound of the thing it represents to the name _Ik_. I would be inclined to believe that the most usual form is the representation of a tooth or two teeth, the name being used for its phonetic value only, but for the very troublesome fact that I can find no name for tooth in Maya to sustain this view. If we could suppose it to be a conventionalized ideogram of an insect, we would obtain the desired sound, as Perez explains _ikel_ by "bicho, insecto, polilla, gorgojo." It must, however, be confessed that none of these suggestions are satisfactory.

The following additional references to the bird as a symbol of the wind are appropriate at this point.

Not only is the day _Ehecatl_ represented in the Mexican codices by a bird's head, but we see a bird perched upon a tree at each of the cardinal points on plate 44 of the Fejervary Codex. Birds are also perched on three of the four trees representing the cardinal points on plate 65 of the Vatican Codex.

In speaking of the myths of the Muyscas, Dr Brinton[220-1] says:

In the cosmogonical myths of the Muyscas, this [alluding to a
certain name] was the home or source of light, and was a name
applied to the demiurgic force. In that mysterious dwelling, so
their account ran, light was shut up and the world lay in primeval
gloom. At a certain time the light manifested itself, and the dawn
of the first morning appeared, the light being carried to the four
quarters of the earth by great black birds, who blew the air and
winds from their beaks.

The Javanese also assigned a bird to each of the cardinal points, doubtless with substantially the same mythological concept.

Commenting on a passage of the Popol Vuh, in which the name _Voc_ is mentioned, the same author[220-2] says:

The name _Voc_ is that of a species of bird (Cakchiquel _Vaku_).
Coto describes it as having green plumage, and a very large and
curved bill, apparently a kind of parrot. Elsewhere in the myth
(page 70) it is said to be the messenger of Hurakan, resting
neither in the heaven nor in the underworld, but in a moment flying
to the sky, to Hurakan, who dwells there.

This is unquestionably the wind symbolized as a bird. The name for wind in Malay is _bayu_, and _Vayu_ is a Wind god in Hindu mythology. Garud, the Bird deity of the Hindu Pantheon, who plays such an important role in the Mahabharata, and is so frequently termed therein "the foremost ranger of the skies," is apparently the Storm god, the equivalent of the Maya _Hurukan_.

We may remark incidentally that a curious coincidence is found in the fact that there appears to be a relation between the wind and monkeys in the mythology both of the Hindu and of the natives of Central America, or at least of Mexico. Hanuman, the Monkey god, who plays such an important part in the Ramayana, was the son of Pavana, the chief Wind deity. According to Brasseur, in his introductory essay to the _Popol Vuh_, it is stated in the Codex Chimalpopoca that the men were, on a day _Ehecatl_, changed by the wind into monkeys. On what peculiar mythological conception this idea is based I am unable to state.

THE THIRD DAY

Maya, _akbal_; Tzental, _votan_; Quiche-Cakchiquel, _akbal_; Zapotec, _guela_; Nahuatl _calli_.

The form of the Maya character as given by Landa is shown in plate LXIV, 35; those usually found in the codices are presented in figures 36 and 37 of the same plate. A slight variation which sometimes occurs in the Dresden Codex is given in plate LXIV, 38. In figure 39 of this plate circular dots take the place of the teeth. In another variant, shown in figure 40, there is a row of dots immediately below the broken cross line. The forms shown in figures 41 and 42 are from the inscriptions. As will be seen by comparing figures 36 and 38 with plate LXV, 64, this glyph, in some of its forms, resembles somewhat closely the _chuen_ symbol, but is generally readily distinguished from it by the wavy line across the face and the absence of the little divided oblong at the top, which is mostly present in the _chuen_ symbol. The lower triangle is usually sharp and extends to the top in the _akbal_ symbol, while that in the _chuen_ glyph is broad or rounded and does not extend to the top.

The signification of the Maya and Cakchiquel names, and also of the Zapotec, is "night" or "darkness." The Tzental name is that of a celebrated hero, which, according to Dr Brinton, is derived from the Tzental word _uotan_, "heart" or "breast." This explanation is accepted by Seler, as Bishop Nunez de la Vega, the principal authority regarding this mythological personage, says that "in every province he was held to be the heart of the village." Dr Seler also adds that "'heart of the village' is in Mexican called _tepeyollotl_, and that is the name of the deity of the third day character, _calli_" (plate LXIV, 46).

The Mexican name _calli_ signifies house. The method by which Dr Brinton brings this and the Tzental names into harmony with the idea of darkness or night is as follows:

The house is that which is within, is dark, shuts out the light,
etc. Possibly the derivation was symbolic. Votan was called "the
heart of the nation," and at Tlazoaloyan, in Soconusco, he
constructed, by breathing or blowing, a "dark house," in which he
concealed the sacred objects of his cult. In this myth we find an
unequivocal connection of the idea of "darkness" and "house."

Comments

Day Symbols of the Maya YearChapter I: Part 1

0%36 min left in chapter