Chapter XV: Front Matter (15)

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 coincidences 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,[6.1] 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. 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 Va, 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.

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 Va, and No. 1969, Plate LVI, I regard as absolutely identical. These are both human figures. No. 12, Plate Va, 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 Va, of the Copan series, and Nos. 154 and 165, Plate XXIV, to be corresponding references to members of this family. No. 4, Plate Va, 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 Va, are clearly related to No. 900, Plate LIV, Nos. 127 and 176, Plate XXIV, No. 3010, Plate LVI, and many others.

Plate IIIa of Copan is evidently identically the same as the No. 75 of the Palenque Plate No. XXIV.

The right half of No. 27, Plate Va, is the same as the right half of Nos. 3020, 3040, and many others of Plate LVI.

No. 17, Plate Va, 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.

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 Arnheim, 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 CUKULCAN, 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.” 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 plumes 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 TETZCATLIPOCA 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.

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.

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.[6.2]

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.

In passing I may just refer the reader to p. 164, Vol. ii, of STEPHENS’ book on Yucatan, where a figure occurring at Labphak 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.

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 pretend--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.[6.3]

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.