I answer that the Maya _xiu_ is unquestionably a loan from the Nahuatl,

and my reason for the opinion is that while in Maya the root _xiu_ is

sterile and has no relations to other words (unless perhaps to _xiitil_,

to open like a flower, to brood as a bird, to augment, to grow), in

Nahuatl it is a very fertile root, and nearly thirty compounds of it can

be found in the dictionaries (See Molina, _Vocabulario de la Lengua

Mexicana_, fol. 159, verso). But the composition of the name follows the

Maya and not the Nahuatl analogy.

That in either language the name Tutulxiu can be translated "Bird-tree"

(Vogelbaum), as is argued by Dr. Carl Schultz-Sellack (_Archiv fuer

Ethnologie_, Band XI, 1879), and on which translation he bases a long

argument, is very doubtful. It certainly could not in Maya; and in

Nahuatl, _tototl_ in composition would drop both its terminal

consonants.

The remaining names, Nonoual, Zuiua, Tula-pan, clearly indicate their

Nahuatl origin. Zuiua, which was erroneously printed in Pio Perez's

version as Zuina is Zuiva; Nonoual is Nonohual; Tulapan, literally "the

standard of Tula," refers to the famous city of the Toltecs, presided

over by Quetzalcoatl. All these names are borrowed directly from the

myth of this hero-god.

_Zuiven_ was the name of the uppermost heaven, the abode of the Creator

Hometeuctli, the father of Quetzalcoatl, and the place of his first

birth as a divinity. In later days, when the Quetzalcoatl myth had

extended to the Kiches and Cakchiquels, members of the Maya family in

Guatemala, "Tulan Zuiva" was identified with the Aztec Chicomoztoc, the

famous "Seven Caves," "Seven Ravines," or "Seven Cities," from which so

many tribes of Mexico, wholly diverse in language and lineage, claimed

that their ancestors emerged in some remote past (compare the _Codex

Vaticanus_, Lam. I; _Codex Zumarraga_, chap. I, with the _Popol Vuh_,

pp. 214, 227). To this spot the ancestors of the Guatemalan tribes were

reported to have gone to receive their gods; from it issued the Aztec

god Huitzilopochtli; in it still were supposed to dwell his mother and

other mighty divinities; and Quetzalcoatl was again the youngest born of

Iztac Mixcohuatl, the mighty lord of the Seven Caves (Motolinia,

_Historia de los Indios de Nueva Espana_ p[TN-12] 10, etc.).

_Tula_, properly _Tollan_, a syncopated form of _Tonatlan_, which means

"the place of the Sun," was a name applied to a number of towns in

Mexico, all named after that magnificent city inhabited by the Tolteca

("dwellers in the place of the Sun"), servants and messengers of the

Light-God their ruler, the benign, the virgin-born Quetzalcoatl. The

common tradition ran that it was destroyed by the wiles of Tezcatlipoca,

the brother, yet the eternal enemy, of Quetzalcoatl, and that at its

destruction the Toltecs disappeared, no one knew whither, while

Quetzalcoatl, after reigning a score of years in Cholula, journeyed far

eastward to the home of the Sun, where he enjoyed everlasting life.

_Nonohual_ also had a place in this myth. It was a mountain over against

Tulan. There it was that the eldest sister of Quetzalcoatl resided. When

he was made drunken by the insidious beverage handed him as a healing

draught by Tezcatlipoca, he sent for this sister, held to her lips the

intoxicating cup, and with her passed a night of debauch, the memory of

which filled him with such shame that nevermore dared he face his

subjects. Such is the story recited at length in the Aztec chronicle

called the _Codex Chimalpopoca_.

_Nonoalco_ was also the name of a small village near the city of Mexico

which still appears on the maps. Sahagun tells us that some extreme

eastern tribes in Mexico called themselves _Nonoalca_ (_Historia de la

Nueva Espana_, Lib. X, cap,[TN-13] XXIX, p[TN-14] 12); and the licenciate

Diego Garcia de Palacio mentions "quatro lugares de Indios que llaman

los Nunualcos" as dwelling, in his time (1576), in the eastern part of

the province of San Salvador, of Aztec descent, and who had recently

come there. (_Carta al Rey de Espana_, p. 60, New York, 1860). It should

be mentioned in reference to these names and all others of similar

vocalization, that both in Maya and Nahuatl the Spanish constantly

confound the short [)o] and [)u]. As the Bachelor Don Antonio Vasquez

Gastelu observes: "usan de la _o_ algunos tan obscuramente, que tira

algo a la pronunciacion de la _u_ vocal" (_Arte de lengua Mexicana_,

fol. 1, verso, La Puebla de los Angeles, 1726).

Senor Alfredo Chavero, in his Appendix to Duran's _Historia de las

Indias de Nueva Espana_ (p. 45, Mexico, 1880), claims that _Nonoalca_

was the name given to the Maya-Kiche tribes, or rather adopted by them,

when, at an extremely remote epoch, they penetrated to the central table

land of Mexico. He thinks that subsequently they became united with the

Toltecs, and were dispersed with that people at the destruction of the

city of Tula. The grounds for this theory he claims to find in certain

unpublished manuscripts, which unfortunately he does not give in

extracts, but only in general statements. Like much that this writer

presents, these assertions lack support. All the names he quotes as of

Nonoalca, that is, Maya origin, are distinctly not of the latter tongue,

but are Nahuatl. And the introduction of the mystical city of Tula is of

itself enough to invest the story with the garb of unreality.

It is, in fact, nowhere in terrestrial geography that we need look for

the site of the Tula of Quetzalcoatl, nor at any time in human history

did the Tolteca ply their skillful hands, nor Tezcatlipoca spread his

snares to destroy them. All this is but a mythical conception of the

daily struggle of light and darkness, and those writers who seek in the

Toltecs the ancestors or instructors of any nation whatsoever, make the

once common error of mistaking myth for history, fancy for fact.

Therefore, any notion that Yucatan was civilized by the Toltecs after

their dispersion, or owes anything to them, as so many, and I might say

almost all recent writers have maintained, is to me an absurdity.

This reference to the Quetzalcoatl myth at the commencement of the Maya

chronicle needs not surprise us. We encounter it also in the Kiche

_Popol Vuh_ and the Cakchiquel _Memorial de Tecpan Atitlan_. These

members of the Maya family also grafted that myth upon their own

traditions. As history, it is valueless; but as indicative of a long and

early intercourse between the Maya and Nahuatl speaking tribes, it is of

great interest. As this question will also recur in reference to various

later passages in the Maya chronicles, I will discuss it here.

One of the earliest historians of Yucatan, the Doctor Don Pedro Sanchez

de Aguilar, states that six hundred years before the Spanish conquest

the Mayas were vassals of the Aztecs, and that they were taught or

forced by these to construct the extraordinary edifices in their

country, such as are found at Uxmal and Chichen Itza. His words are:

"Fueron tan politicos y justiciosos en Yucatan como los Mexicanos, cuyos

vasallos habian sido seis cientos anos antes de la llegada de los

Espanoles. De lo cual tan solamente hay tradicion y memoria entre ellos

por los famosos, grandes y espantosos edificios de cal y canto y

silleria y figuras y estatuas de piedra labrada que dejaron en Oxumual

[Uxmal] y en Chicheniza que hoy se veen y se pudieran habitar." _Informe

contra Idolum Cultores del Obispado de Yucatan_, fol. 87 (Madrid, 1639).

The vague tradition here referred to was made part of the testimony in a

lawsuit at Valladolid, Yucatan, in 1618. These old documents were

brought to light by the late eminent Yucatecan historian Doctor Justo

Sierra, and Dr. Berendt took a copy in manuscript of the most important

points. I think it worth while to insert and translate this testimony.

VILLA DE VALLADOLID--ANO DE 1618.

"DOCUMENTO 1º. A la primera pregunta dijo este testigo que conoce al

dicho Don Juan Kahuil y a la dicha Dona Maria Quen su legitima muger y

que todos los contenidos en la pregunta, tuvo noticia muy larga de su

padre de este testigo, porque fue en su antiguedad _ahkin_, sacerdote

entre los naturales antiguos, antes que recibiesen agua de bautismo,

como los susodichos contenidos en la pregunta vinieron del reino de

Mexico y poblaron estas provincias, y que era gente bellicosa y valerosa

y Senores, y asi poblaron a Chichenica los unos, y otros se fueron hacia

el Sur que poblaron a Bacalar, y hacia el Norte que poblaron la costa;

porque eran tres o cuatro Senores y uno que se llamo _Tumispolchicbul_

era deudo de Moctezuma, rey que fue de los reinos de Mexico, y que

_Cuhuikakcamalcacalpuc_ era deudo muy cercano de dicho Don Juan Kahuil

por parte de sus padres, y que dicha _Ixnahaucupul_ hija de _Kukumcupul_

fue muger de su abuelo de dicho D. Juan Kahuil, todos los cuales fueron

los que vinieron de Mexico a poblar estas Provincias, gente principal y

Senores, pues poblaron y se senorearon de esta tierra, porque como dicho

tiene, le oyo decir al dicho su padre que eran tenidos, obedecidos y

respetados como a Senores de esta tierra, y de uno de ellos procede el

dicho D. Juan Kahuil, y de estos hay mucha noticia y dicho su padre le

dijo muchas veces, que habia constancia entre ellos de lo sucedido por

estos Senores.

"2º. A la segunda pregunta dice este testigo, que como dicho tiene, oyo

decir a su padre y otros Indios principales que los susodichos

contenidos en la primera pregunta vinieron de los reynos de Mejico a

poblar estas provincias, los unos se quedaron en Chichinica que fueron

los que edificaron los edificios sontuosos que hay en el dicho asiento,

y otros se fueron a poblar a Bacalar, y otros fueron a poblar la costa

hacia el norte, y este que fue a poblar la costa, se llamaba _Cacalpuc_,

de donde procede el dicho D. Juan Kahuil, y estos que asi se

repartieron, fueron a poblar las provincias susodichas, y las tuvieron

sugetas y en govierno, y que le cupo a un Cocom, el poblar en

Chichinica, y le obedecian todos por Senor, y los de la isla de cuzumel

le eran sugetos; y de alli (de Chicinica) se pasaron a la provincia de

Sotuta, donde estaban, cuando los conquistadores vinieron, y siempre

fueron tenidos, obedecidos y respetados como Senores.

"3º. A la primera pregunta dijo este testigo que conoce al dicho D. Juan

Kahuil, y a la dicha Da Maria Quen, su muger, y que de todos los

contenidos en la pregunta, tuvo muy larga noticia de ellos, porque D.

Juan Camal, cacique e gobernador que fue del pueblo de Sisal, de los

primeros que lo gobernaron por comision e titulo que le dio el Oidor

Tomas Lopez, oiendo como era de los antiguos caciques del dicho pueblo

en estas provincias, lo trataba en conversacion a sus principales y este

testigo, que siempre estaba en su casa, y fue alguacil mayor ordinario

en ella, como los contenidos habian venido de Mejico a poblar esta

tierra de Yucatan, y que los unos poblaron a Chichinica y hicieron los

edificios que estan en dicho asiento muy suntuosos, y que habiendo sido

los que vinieron de Mejico, cuatro deudos o parientes con sus allegados

y gente que trajaron; el uno poblo como dicho tiene a Chichinica, y el

otro fue a poblar a Bacalar, y el otro hacia el Norte y poblo en la

costa, y el otro fue hacia Cozumel; e poblaron con gente, y fueron

Senores de estas provincias, y las gobernaron y senorearon muchos anos;

y que oyo decir que uno de ellos llamado _Tanupolchicbul_ era pariente

de Moctezuma, rey de Mejico."

(_Translation._)

CORPORATION OF VALLADOLID--YEAR 1618.

"DOCUMENT NO. 1. To the first question the witness answered that he

knows the said Don Juan Kahuil and the said Dona Maria Quen his lawful

wife, and all those referred to in the question; that this witness had

full information from his father, who formerly was _ahkin_ or priest

among the natives, before they had received the water of baptism, how

the parties above mentioned in the question came from the kingdom of

Mexico, and established towns[116-1] in these provinces, and that they

were a warlike and valiant people and lords, and thus some of them

established themselves at Chichen Itza, and others went to the south and

established towns at Bacalar, and toward the north and established towns

on the coast; because they were three or four lords, and one, who was

named _Tumispolchicbul_, was a kinsman of Montezuma, king of the kingdom

of Mexico, and that _Cuhuikakcamalcacalpuc_ was a very near kinsman of

the said Don Juan Kahuil on his father's side, and that the said

_Ixnahaucupul_, daughter of _Kukumcupul_ was wife of the grandfather of

the said Don Juan Kahuil, all of whom were those who came from Mexico to

found towns in these provinces, prominent people and lords; then they

founded towns and ruled this land, because as he said, he heard his said

father say that they were regarded, obeyed and respected as lords of

this land, and that from one of them proceeded the said Don Juan Kahuil;

and of these there is abundant information, and his said father often

said to him that there was unanimity among them as to what took place by

these lords.

"2ND. To the second question this witness answered that as he has said,

he heard his father and other leading Indians say that the parties above

mentioned in the first question came from the Kingdom of Mexico to found

towns in these provinces; some remained in Chichen Itza, who were those

who built the sumptuous edifices which are in the said locality; others

went to found towns at Bacalar, and others to found towns on the coast

to the north; and he who went to found towns on the coast was named

Cacalpuc, from whom proceeds the said Don Juan Kahuil and those who thus

made division went to found towns in the above mentioned provinces, and

held them under subjection and government; and he chose a certain Cocom

to rule in Chichen Itza, and they all obeyed him as lord, and those of

the island of Cozumel were subject to him; and from there (from Chichen

Itza) they passed to the province of Zotuta, where they were when the

conquerors came, and they were always regarded, obeyed and respected as

lords.

"3RD. To the first question this witness answered that he knew all the

parties mentioned in the question and had abundant information about

them, because Don Juan Carnal who was chief and governor of Sisal, one

of the first who governed it by commission and brief given him by the

Auditor Tomas Lopez, being one of the ancient chiefs of the said town in

these provinces, spoke of the subject in conversation with his leading

men and with this witness, who was constantly in his house and was chief

clerk in ordinary in it, saying the parties mentioned had come from

Mexico to found towns in this land of Yucatan, and that some settled at

Chichen Itza, and erected the very stately edifices which are in the

said locality, and that those who came from Mexico were four kinsmen or

relatives with their friends and the people they brought with them; one

settled as heretofore said at Chichen Itza, one went to settle at

Bacalar, one went toward the north and settled on the coast, and the

other went toward Cozumel; and they founded towns with their people, and

were lords of these provinces, and governed them and ruled them many

years; and that he had heard it said that one of them named

_Tanupolchicbul_ was a kinsman of Moctezuma, King of Mexico."

This legend is also related, with some variation, by Herrera, and as I

shall have occasion more than once to refer to his account, I shall

translate it.

"At Chichen Itza, ten leagues from Itzamal, the ancients say there

reigned three lords, brothers, who came from the west, and gathered

together many people, and reigned some years in peace and justice; and

they constructed large and very beautiful edifices. It is said that they

lived unmarried and very chastely; and it is added that in time one of

them was missing, and that his absence worked such bad results that the

other two began to be unchaste and partial; and thus the people came to

hate them, and slew them, and scattered abroad, and deserted the

edifices, especially the most stately one, which is ten leagues from the

sea.

"Those who established themselves at Chichen Itza call themselves Itzas;

among these there is a tradition that there ruled a great lord called

Cuculcan, and all agree that he came from the west; and the only

difference among them is as to whether he came before or after or with

the Itzas; but the name of the building at Chichen Itza, and what

happened after the death of the lords above mentioned, show that

Cuculcan ruled the country jointly with them. He was a man of good

disposition, was said not to have had either wife or children, and not

to have known woman; he was devoted to the interests of the people, and

for this reason was regarded as a god. In order to pacify the land he

agreed to found another city, where all business could be transacted. He

selected for this purpose a site eight leagues further inland from where

now stands the city of Merida, and fifteen leagues from the sea. There

they erected a circular wall of dry stone, about a half quarter of a

league in diameter, leaving in it only two gateways. They erected

temples, giving to the largest the name Cuculcan, and also constructed

around the wall the houses of the lords among whom Cuculcan had divided

the land, giving and assigning towns to each. To the city he gave the

name Mayapan, which means "the Standard of the Maya," as Maya is the

name of their language.

"By this means the country was quieted and they lived in peace for some

years under Cuculcan, who governed with justice, until, having arranged

for his departure, and recommending them to continue the wise rule he

had established, he left them and returned to Mexico by the same route

he had come, remaining in Champoton some time, where, in memory of his

journey, he erected a building in the sea, which remains to this

day."[120-1]

Bishop Landa and some other early writers also give versions of this

tradition, but do not add any facts to those in the above quotations.

Evidently it was a widespread legend of the origin of the great

buildings of Chichen Itza. Is it a tradition of fact or is it a myth?

I confess that to me it has a suspiciously mythical aspect. It is too

similar to what I may call the standard hero-myth of the American

Aborigines. Everywhere, both in North and South America, we find the

myth of the four brothers who divided the land between them, one of whom

is superior to the others and becomes the ruler and instructor of the

ancestors of the nation. He does not die, but disappears, or goes to

heaven, and is often expected to return. Just so in one of the Maya

myths, Cuculcan did not return to Mexico, but rose to heaven, whence

once every year he descended to his temple at Mayapan and received the

gifts which from far and wide pious pilgrims had brought to his shrine

(Landa, _Relacion_, p. 302). All these myths relate to the worship of

the four cardinal points and to the Light-God, as I have shown in a

previous work (_The Myths of the New World_, chap. III. New York, 1876).

The proper names in the legend have nothing of a Nahuatl appearance.

They are all pure Maya. The "kinsman of Moctezuma," the second reading

of whose name is the correct one, is given as _tan u pol chicbul_, "in

front of the head of the jay-bird," the _chicbul_ being what the

Spaniards call the _mingo rey_, which I believe is a jay (Beltran, _Arte

del Idioma Maya_, p. 229). The other long name is a compound of _Zuhuy

kak camal cacal puc_. The historian Cogolludo informs us that _Zuhuy

Kak_, literally "virgin fire," was the daughter of a king, afterwards

deified as goddess of female infants (_Historia de Yucatan_, Lib. IV,

cap. VIII). _Camal_ was and is a common patronymic in Yucatan;

_cacalpuc_ means "mountain land,"[121-1] and thus the whole name is

easily identified as Maya. Possibly the member of the family Camal who

bore the name was a priest of the goddess.

It will be noticed that neither the legend nor the legal testimony

speaks of these foreigners as of a different language or lineage, but

leaves us to infer the contrary. Had they been of Aztec race it would

certainly have been noticed, for the Mayas had frequent mercantile

relations with these powerful neighbors, they borrowed many words from

the Nahuatl tongue, and single chiefs in Yucatan formed alliances with

the Aztec rulers, and introduced Aztec warriors even into Mayapan, as is

shown by the Chronicles I publish in this work, and also by the fact

that a small colony of Aztecs, descendants of these mercenaries, was

living in the province of Canul, west of Merida, when the Spaniards

conquered the country (Landa, _Relacion_, p. 54). Therefore the Aztecs

were no strangers to the Mayas, and doubtless the learned members of the

priesthood and nobles in the fifteenth century were quite well aware of

the existence of the powerful empire of Anahuac.

But regarding the legend I have quoted as, in part at least, based on

actual history, we may accept the fact that there was an important

emigration from Mexico, and yet not one of either Aztecs or "Toltecs."

It must be remembered that the Huastecas, an important branch of the

Maya family, occupied from time immemorial the coast of the Mexican Gulf

north of Vera Cruz, and west to the mountains of Meztitlan, a province

inhabited by a Nahuatl speaking race, but not subject to the dynasty of

the Montezumas.

I have already referred briefly to their history, and it is possible

that after their serious reverses, about 1450, they sent migratory

bodies to their relatives in Yucatan. At any rate, there seems a

consensus of testimony that the general trend of migration of the Maya

race, was from north to south, and in Central America, from west to

east.

We have in this paragraph examples of the use of three of the "numeral

particles." _Cante bin ti katun_, literally, "it (_i. e._ time) went on

for four katuns," and a few lines later _hunpel haab_, one year,

_hunpiztun_, the first year.

The correct translation of _peten_ has been debated; it is from the root

_pet_, anything round, a circle, and usually means "island." By a later

use it signifies any locality with definite boundaries, hence a

province, or kingdom. The following is the entry in the _Diccionario de

Motul_:

"PETEN; isla, _item_ provincia, region, comarca--_uay tu petenil

Yucatan_, aqui en la provincia de Yucatan."

The name of the first leader, Holon Chan Tepeuh, does not recur in the

Annals. Its signification is: _holon_, a generic name for large bees and

flies; _chan_, sufficient, powerful, still in use in Yucatan as a

surname; _tepeuh_, ruler, from _tepeual_, to rule. This last word is

marked in the _Diccionario de Motul_ as a "vocablo antiquo." It is of

Aztec origin, as in the Nahuatl language _tepeuani_ means "conqueror."

The name we are considering should probably be rendered "Holon Chan, the

ruler." The province ruled by the Chan family at the time of the

conquest was on the eastern coast, south of that of the Cupuls.

The name _Chacnouitan_ is elsewhere, as we shall see, spelled

_Chacnovitan_ and _Chacnabiton_. I am inclined to believe the last

mentioned is nearest the correct form. By Pio Perez it was supposed to

be an ancient name of Yucatan, and he translates the phrase, _uay ti

petene Chacnouitan_, by "a esta isla de Chacnavitan (Yucatan)." Dr.

Valentini says: "the translation could as well stand for 'that distant

island,'" and that "Chacnouitan was neither the whole nor the northern

part of Yucatan, but a district situated in the southwest of the

peninsula," (_loc. cit._ p. 38).

With this I cannot agree, as the adverb _uay_ always refers to the place

(in no matter how wide an accepation) where the speaker is. Therefore I

translate it "here, (_i. e._ to this general country of Yucatan, and at

first) to the province Chacnouitan." The province referred to was, I

doubt not, somewhere around Lake Peten. The word _chac_ is often used in

local names in Yucatan, and usually means either "water" or "red," as it

is a homonym with several significations.

The Maya Chronicles Brinton's Library Of Aboriginal American Literature, Number 1 · 第 5 / 13 段