It is obvious that the two forms of culture described in the foregoing
chapters, Mexican and Maya, were at least very closely related the
one to the other; but it is equally obvious that the connection was
closer between the Maya and the pre-Aztec inhabitants of the Mexican
valley than between the former and the Aztec. Religion in both areas
ran on similar lines, and the pantheons included certain more or less
otiose high gods, and a rain and thunder agricultural-deity whose
worship was of primary importance. The importance of blood-offerings,
combined with the late introduction of human sacrifice, the existence
of a ritual and solar calendar, both similar in nature, and the habit
of constructing buildings of ceremonial importance on lofty pyramidal
mounds or terraces are features common to both. Besides this, as far
as the later Maya are concerned, we find traditions of a historical
nature which make mention of places, such as Tulan and the Seven
Caves, which occur in Mexican legends, and at Chichen Itza, where at
least one section of the population traced their origin to “Tulan,”
we have ruins corresponding exactly in style to those found at the
pre-Aztec site Tulan in the Mexican valley. Other similarities relating
to material culture are equally numerous, as well as similarities in
art and symbolism. Many of these have already received attention,
but, as a further illustration of the latter, mention may be made
of a small detail which is of comparatively frequent appearance on
sculptures throughout the Mexican and Mayan area. This consists of a
trapezoidal figure interlaced with a triangle or another trapezium,
and occurs usually as a head-ornament. A series of its manifestations
is illustrated in Fig. 86. Here the earlier monuments where it appears
are represented by Copan (_a_), Menché (_c_), Piedras Negras (_b_) (for
Naranjo see Pl. XXIII; p. 302); in Yucatan it occurs at Uxmal (_g_);
on the fringe of the Mexican valley, at Tehuacan (_d_) and Xochicalco
(_e_); in the valley itself, at Tenango (_k_), Xico (_m_), and, to the
north, at Tulan (_h_); and in the Huaxtec country, at Teayo (_f_).
The sign moreover bears a close analogy to that by which the Aztec
expressed the period of a year (_l_), and the triangular portion of
it is exactly similar to a conventional sun-ray. It is perhaps worth
noting that at Copan, Uxmal and Teayo it is associated with the head
of the rain-god. The significance of this symbol is obscure, but its
presence over so large an area can hardly be due to coincidence.
[Illustration: FIG. 86.--Details from various
monuments showing the interlaced head-ornament.
_a._ Copan, stela 6.
_b._ Piedras Negras.
_c._ Menché.
_d._ Tehuacan.
_e._ Xochicalco.
_f._ Teayo.
_g._ Uxmal.
_h._ Tulan.
_k._ Tenango.
_l._ The Mexican year-sign. (_Zouche MS._)
_m._ Island of Xico.]
I think it is obvious from what has gone before, that the Aztec may
be left out of account in any consideration of the source of such
similarities as may be traced in Mexican and Mayan culture. They were
admittedly late immigrants, from the north, into the Mexican valley,
and were, at the time of their arrival, in a very low state of culture;
moreover, as stated above, it is the pre-Aztec remains which show the
closest relation to the Mayan. The question therefore resolves itself
into an enquiry which was the earlier, the culture exemplified in
the ruins of the central Maya area, or that which gave birth to the
pre-Aztec remains at such early valley sites as Tulan, Teotihuacan and
Azcapotzalco? Any solution of this question must also fix the relation
of Oaxaca to both, and account for the Huaxtec, a Maya-speaking people
whose sculptures bear no trace of a hieroglyphic script. Included
in this question is that of the origin of the calendar. Let me say
at once that the evidence at our disposal is not sufficient to
permit these questions to be answered with certainty. Much patient
excavation, both in the Mexican valley and in the central Mayan region,
is necessary before the origin of the pre-Spanish civilization can
be traced with any degree of finality; but I think it is possible to
put forward a working theory, which must of necessity be modified
in accordance with future researches, but which may at least be of
service to critics as an invitation to concentrate their minds upon the
subject. It is solely with this idea that I have ventured to draw up a
scheme of dating (see Appendix III), and I will deal with this first,
pointing out its weaknesses with as much impartiality as possible.
[Illustration:
_PLATE XXX_
_Photo. Guerra_
MAYA
THE “HOUSE OF THE GOVERNOR,” UXMAL, YUCATAN]
First of all I should like to say that the dates are not intended to
be more than approximate; even the records of Mexican history are not
in absolute accordance, and contradictions become more frequent and
serious in proportion with the remoteness of particular events from
the date of the conquest. However, the history of the valley can be
compiled with some degree of probability when the different accounts
are studied from the point of view detailed on p. 19, though the dates
of Toltec history, before the fall of the city, are in the highest
degree problematical. The books of Chilan Balam give a chronology for
the history of the Tutul Xiu which can be related to European time,
though they do not agree exactly among themselves, and interpolations
of a whole cycle appear to occur in places. The dating which I have
adopted, which is in the main that of the book of Chilan Balam of
Mani, is a conservative interpretation of these records, and may, I
believe, be credited with reasonable probability. The dating of the
monuments, the most important question of all, is unfortunately the
most problematical, and the chain of evidence by which I seek to
assign them a place in chronology has two weak links, one considerably
weaker than the other. The first of these is the assumption that
the initial dates on stelæ refer to the erection of the monuments in
question. In considering this question I would omit Palenque, which
is obviously, from the architectural and artistic point of view, one
of the latest ruins in the central Mayan area. Further, the dates do
not occur on stelæ, but for the most part on mural tablets in temples,
and may well be “mythical,” and based upon calculations into past
time made at a period when the art of chronology, if such a phrase
be permitted, had attained a great development in the hands of a
specialist priesthood. At other sites the fact that the dates form
more or less connected series, and correspond on the whole to the
development of architecture, lends a certain probability to the theory
that they are “historical” and the theory receives some support, in a
negative way, from the extreme difficulty of assigning them any other
reasonable function. The other link, which I frankly admit is far
weaker, consists in an attempt to correlate them with the dating of the
books of Chilan Balam, and this I will now explain. I have tried to
show that the buildings at Chichen Itza may be divided into three main
classes, corresponding in a rather remarkable manner to the principal
epochs of Tutul Xiu tradition; and I have pointed out that what may
be considered the earliest group is distinguished by a date in the
“long count” characteristic of the central Mayan region. I have also
explained that there is reason to believe that Chichen was inhabited
before the arrival of the Tutul Xiu, and the presence of the early Maya
in Yucatan is supported by the “long count” date at Tulum. It seems
probable that the Tutul Xiu themselves did not use the long count, but
reckoned time, as in the books of Chilan Balam, by the “short count,”
i.e. by the initial day of the katun alone. It is an interesting fact
that in more than one of the versions we find a statement that, after
their arrival at Chichen Itza, “Pop was first counted in order,” with
the variant “Pop was set in order,” and this is, I think, capable of
explanation in one of two ways. In the first place, it may refer to
some change in the calendar, necessitated by the fact that the absence
of intercalary days had brought the commencement of the year noticeably
out of tune with the seasons. In the second, it may indicate the actual
adoption of the early Maya month-system, which they found prevailing at
Chichen. We may assume, from what evidence exists, that the month-names
were never expressed in dating in the Mexican valley, and we know that
the Tutul Xiu placed their original home within the realm of “Tulan.”
It may be remarked in passing that, whichever explanation be adopted,
this was probably the occasion when the change in the “year-bearers,”
from the early system to the later, was made, and it may further be
noted that such a change would not necessarily affect the katun count.
In any case the essential point on which I would lay stress is that the
initial date at Chichen belongs to the period before the arrival of the
Tutul Xiu. Now the katun expressed in this initial date would be termed
in the short count “katun 3. ahau,” and I think it reasonable to assume
that this corresponds with the last “katun 3. ahau” of the Tutul Xiu
chronology _before_ they arrived at Chichen Itza. It may of course
be earlier, but I think this extremely unlikely, having regard to the
similarity between such buildings as the Monjas group and those of the
central Mayan area. If this assumption be admitted, then the dates of
the monuments can be brought into line with historical chronology as
appears in the Appendix.
From this it follows that the inhabitants of the Mexican valley
received the calendar from the Maya, but, before accepting such a
proposition, it will be as well to examine the calendar itself for
contributory evidence. We have seen that the Zapotec calendar forms
a most important link between the day-signs of the Mexican and Maya
respectively, and the suggestion has been made by Seler that the Maya
obtained these day-signs from the west _via_ Oaxaca, calling
attention to the comparatively simple nature of the Zapotec signs,
which agree in this respect with those of Mexico. The Mexican valley
as the place of origin of the day-signs may be, I think, disregarded,
if only for the reason that certain of the animals serving as such do
not occur in that region, and the choice therefore would lie between
Oaxaca on the one hand and the central Mayan region on the other. Now
the difference in form between the Mexican and Zapotec signs can be
explained in many cases by the fact that the Zapotec term is equivocal.
That being so, it seems to me obvious that the Zapotec must have
borrowed from the Maya and not _vice versa_. My argument is as
follows: The Zapotec signs are simple and obvious; those of the Maya
are often highly conventionalized. It would be remarkable, therefore,
that the Maya should have translated the Zapotec name in the wrong
sense, while it would be perfectly natural for the Zapotec to have
made a mistake and to have simplified the sign in accordance with
their idea of the meaning of the term. If we add to this the fact that
the only two initial dates discovered in the western Maya area are,
together with the Chichen date, the latest known, the conclusion seems
to me inevitable that early Maya culture, enumeration, and calendar
spread together from Guatemala, through Oaxaca to the Tlalhuica
country (Xochicalco) and the Mexican valley, becoming attenuated in
the process. The question of the development of the calendar itself
is interesting. The whole system seems to show traces of several
modifications and to exemplify the efforts of a primitive people to
adapt their chronology to solar time. The presence of five nemontemi
or uayeb days over and above the period of 360 bears the stamp of an
afterthought, while the 360-day period, of eighteen months, each of
which comprises a full round of the day-signs, is complete in itself
and suggests that this was the original “year.” The number of the
day-signs, viz. twenty, is obviously based upon the vigesimal system
of counting current among these peoples, but the selection of the
thirteen numerals which accompany them has not yet been satisfactorily
explained. As remarked before, it is obvious that an agricultural
population would soon observe that the seasons gradually became out of
harmony with the year, and they must have cast about to find some check
by which the discrepancy could be corrected. This check they found in
the synodical revolutions of the planet Venus. We know that the Aztec
and Maya both calculated the reappearance of this planet (as seen in
the codex Borgia and analogous MSS., and the Dresden codex), and the
glyph which has been identified as that of the morning star appears
upon the early monuments. It is worth noting that the early Maya method
of calculating time, by means of a long count of days rather than by
years, rendered the discrepancy of comparatively small account. The
lack of harmony between the year and true solar time would, it is
true, affect the seasonal feasts, but these could be transferred from
month to month as occasion demanded. As said before, I believe the
greater proportion of the inscriptions embody calculations which had as
their object the due allocation of the feasts to the proper seasons.
I have already made the suggestion that the previous “suns” marking
world-periods may typify periodical rearrangements of the calendar to
square with solar time, and it is to be noted that both in the Aztec
and in the Quiché account the tribes await the rising of the sun while
observing the morning star. The first rising of the sun, awaited
with such impatience by Aztec, Quiché and Kakchiquel alike, means, I
believe, the adoption of the solar calendar, or rather the fixing of a
date to form a starting-point for a time-count modelled on solar time;
and in the legends of the two first peoples, the morning star is the
herald of the “dawn,” which in the Aztec myth is called the “dawn for
the administration of society.” The Kakchiquel account seems to hint
that the “dawn” was not the same for all the tribes of this people. The
translation runs as follows: “Three of our tribes had seen the dawn
appear, the Zotzil, the Kakchiquel and the Tukuchi. As for the Akahal
they were but a little distance from the place when the dawn appeared
to the three nations. At the spot called Tohohil the Quiché saw their
dawn, and those of Rabinal saw it at Zamaneb; and the Tzutuhil sought
to see their dawn at Tzala, but their labours had not been completed
by this tribe when the sun arose. They had not yet finished drawing
their lines in Tzala when it arose in the sky, precisely above the
place Geletat.” The last sentence at least suggests that some process
analogous to observation of the solstice is implied. I think that the
passages relative to the appearance of the “dawn” in the various tribal
legends are worth careful study, especially in view of the fact that
no entirely satisfactory translations of the annals of Xahila and the
Popol Vuh exist. As for the books of Chilan Balam, no mention of a
“dawn” is made, but it may be argued that the statement “Pop was first
counted in order” has the same essential meaning.[11]
The reason for the decline of the early Maya civilization is rather
obscure. A glance at the scheme of dating will show how closely the
last dates at each of the ruined sites correspond one with another.
It does not of course follow that the cessation of initial dates
implies the abandonment of the “cities,” for they may have been centres
of religious life for years later; indeed Cichen was visited as a
sacred place until Spanish times, and the Lacandons of to-day still
make offerings in the deserted temples. But the abrupt termination
of the dating system at least implies some important change, and it
may be that about the beginning of the tenth cycle the “long count”
was abandoned in favour of the “katun count” as exemplified in the
books of Chilan Balam. In any case none of the buildings show evident
signs of forcible destruction, and no traces of a military invasion of
Maya territory appear. The instability of Central American political
organizations is very marked; there was a strong tendency for a state,
composed originally of independent self-contained pueblos, to split
up into smaller elements under the slightest pressure applied from
within or without. The Maya, to judge from the monuments, had enjoyed
centuries of peace, and only in the north-east and north do we find
reliefs which give any hint of war. But these may be significant, and
no doubt the decline of the old culture was due to pressure exercised
by their northern neighbours, a pressure which had its origin in the
steady southerly drift of tribes from regions considerably further
north, and which led to the occupation of the Mexican valley by the
Nahua-speaking Toltec.
A word may now be said concerning the “Toltec” culture of the Mexican
valley. The fact that this is related to the early culture of the
Maya is, as said before, obvious. Many points of similarity exist in
religious symbolism, art (such as the interlaced trapezoidal sign
described above), glyphs surrounded by a cartouche, and the bar-form
of the numeral five. If my dating of the monuments be accepted
provisionally, and also the suggestion that the calendar had its origin
with the Maya, then it follows necessarily that the Toltec culture
was due at least to Maya inspiration. The myth of the arrival of the
god Quetzalcoatl, inventor of the calendar, symbolizes the spread
of Maya culture northwards. There are so many instances of the god
being taken as the representative of his people, and I have already
shown how the high mysterious creator-god Kukulkan seems to have lost
dignity when he became personified as a tribal leader. The myth of
the immigrant Nahua tribes awaiting the “dawn for the administration
of society” at Teotihuacan then represents their first contact with
the culture derived from the Maya. So far the matter is simple, but
a difficulty now arises. The last Maya date in the long count, at
Chacula on the Chiapas border, falls about the middle of the fourth
century A.D. The Annals of Quauhtitlan give the foundation
of the Toltec state as 752 A.D. The migration-myth last
mentioned states that the Toltec were with the other Nahua immigrants
at Teotihuacan when the “dawn” appeared. These Toltec are definitely
stated to have been Nahua-speakers, while the name of the first Toltec
ruler, Mixcoamazatzin, is distinctly Nahua. Finally, the list of Toltec
rulers, seven only in number, is far too short to account for the
thick stratum of Toltec remains at Azcapotzalco. The only explanation
possible surely must be the following: The early Maya culture had
slowly crept up into the Mexican valley, through western Chiapas,
Oaxaca and Teotitlan, becoming somewhat attenuated in the process.
There it persisted for some centuries without striking development,
and perhaps gradually deteriorating. Then began the southerly drift
of the Nahua tribes, of whom the first to arrive, the Toltec, imposed
themselves as a ruling caste upon the agricultural population, adopting
their mode of life and culture, and developing the latter in accordance
with their own particular genius, but imposing their own language upon
the tribes whom they welded into an empire. But the pressure from the
north continued, wave after wave of “Chichimec” migration broke upon
the valley. The Toltec power fell, and the incursion of the wilder
tribes gave rise to migrations, such as those of the Olmec, Quiché
and Kakchiquel, which followed for the most part an easterly route,
at any rate in their initial stages. In the valley, the history of
the Toltec was reflected in the short-lived attempts of the Chichimec
and Tepanec to establish empires, but was practically repeated by the
Aztec, who also developed, and to some extent travestied, the remnants
of the earlier culture of their predecessors. The fall of Tulan had an
important effect upon Yucatan. At this period the League of Mayapan
was in full flower, but within a century we hear of the introduction
of “Mexican” mercenaries, and of political troubles at Chichen Itza,
and at this very site we find a group of buildings in unmistakable
Toltec style, with decoration in which a personified Kukulkan appears.
This Toltec influence spread further still, to British Honduras,
where it is exemplified in the frescoes of Santa Rita, and in certain
pottery vases (Pl. IX, 10; p. 82) with relief ornament in the shape
of a descending Quetzalcoatl-Kukulkan figure, similar to the Chichen
Itza relief shown in Fig. 87. In the Mixtec country, too, traces of
immigration occur in legends, almost certainly due to the same causes,
and the Toltec influence is found in the frescoes at Mitla, which
resemble those at Santa Rita, though, be it noted, they are by no means
necessarily contemporary with the buildings on which they occur. Thus
the Maya culture completed its circle, a branch passing, as I have
indicated, from Guatemala to the Mexican valley, and then through Vera
Cruz and Tabasco to Yucatan, where it came into contact with a more
legitimate offshoot of the early Maya stock. In the west the wave of
Toltec influence appears to have reached as far south as Santa Lucia
Cozumalhuapa, and the presence of tlaxtli-courts in the Chacula and
Alta Vera Paz regions are probably to be attributed to the same agency;
for it will be remembered that a body of Toltec, after the fall of
their city, are reported to have migrated to Soconusco (p. 11).
[Illustration: FIG. 87.--Stone relief at Chichen
Itza, showing Kukulkan-Quetzalcoatl. (_After Maudslay_)]
The position of the Huaxtec now arises. In them we have a Maya-speaking
people, practising certain definitely Maya customs such as tooth-filing
and -inlay, and inhumation as opposed to cremation, yet apparently
without a script. As far as their art is concerned, the sculptures of
the Panuco valley bear a closer resemblance to those of the Maya,
especially to certain stelæ at Piedras Negras, than the Aztec. The
isolation of this definitely Maya branch would seem to imply that the
Maya in the earliest days of all must have spread from Guatemala up
the east coast of Mexico as far as Tampico, penetrating into Chiapas,
and possibly Oaxaca, and colonizing the Mexican valley, where they
found a primitive people akin to the earliest population of Michoacan.
In times subsequent to what I may call this proto-Maya movement there
took place in the southern fertile region a great cultural development,
culminating in the organization of a calendar, the invention of a
script, and the construction of the ruined “cities.” The culture
developed here spread, as I have indicated on p. 361, but slowly,
since the land was by no means overpopulated, and life was easy. For
some reason it took a westerly course, _via_ Oaxaca, and never
reached the Huaxtec, who remained confined to the coast by the eastern
cordillera and held little communication with their western neighbours.
In later times, at any rate, they were cut off from the southern Maya
by the stream of migration which passed from the valley of Mexico and
its neighbourhood eastward, and they may well have been isolated at
an earlier period by some similar movement in this direction. At any
rate an early tendency towards migration on these lines is seen in
the legends of the Tutal Xiu, who left Nonoual in the second century,
probably under pressure exercised by tribes to the west.
The chief objection to this theory of the origin and development of the
Maya culture, as far as I can see, is that in Guatemala and Honduras no
certain traces of a proto-Maya culture have as yet been discovered, but
that the civilization springs, as it were, full-blown from the earth.
The answer would be that the finest ruins have focussed all attention
up to the present, and that earlier manifestations of the culture have
not been sought, while the difficulties afforded by environment and
climate place serious obstacles in the way of systematic excavation.
Further, the art itself affords many indications that it is based upon
wood-carving, and the conditions are not favourable to the survival of
any remains save those constructed in stone.
The position which must be assigned to the Zapotec raises a question of
considerable interest. Their indebtedness to Maya culture is obvious
from the consideration of a large proportion of their architectural
remains and their art, but certain peculiar features make their
appearance. In the first place, no migration legends are recorded,
while the fact that certain localities were held to be the entrance
to the underworld rather emphasizes the “indigenous” nature of the
population. Again, though cremation makes its appearance among the
later Maya, the Zapotec, for religious reasons, held out against it,
practising, in the main, secondary burial. Finally, certain forms of
ornament applied to architecture (as at Mitla) and to pottery (as at
Cuicatlan) are unique in this part of America. Of interest is the
fact that the geometric ornament at Mitla finds an exact parallel
in the stucco decoration of some of the early ruins of the Peruvian
coast, while the designs of the Cuicatlan pottery reproduce with
equal exactness a favourite textile ornament belonging to the same
region. Certain of the Peruvian coast-dwellers preserved traditions
of immigration by sea, and these combined facts might be taken as a
vague indication of early coasting-voyages down the west coast of
America. It would be rash to put this forward as a definite theory,
but at any rate further investigations in this direction might prove
of great interest. The Zapotec at one period seem to have extended
considerably further north than in later times, and to have been
driven south by the Mixtec who at least contained an immigrant
element. The peculiar slab discovered at Placeres del Oro seems to
bear some affinity with Zapotec reliefs, but here again the “Peruvian”
character of the decoration is paramount. Affinities with Peruvian
archæology extend into Michoacan, where the practice of providing the
mummy-pack of the dead with a false head prevailed, and similarities
with Peruvian beliefs may be seen in the Mexican custom of providing
the deceased with a dog to convey his soul to the underworld, and
in ill-treating dogs during eclipses of the moon. Resemblances also
exist between the Peruvian and Maya cultures; certain stone reliefs
showing a figure seated in a niche have been found at Manabi in Ecuador
(where again traditions of immigration by sea survive), which look
very like travesties of some of the Piedras Negras stelæ; while the
famous monolith discovered at Chavin de Huantar in the Andes bears
a very distinct “Maya” stamp, though it is related also to the art
of the Nasca valley. But great caution is necessary in dealing with
similarities of this nature, which may arise from no more than a common
psychology, and may bear witness only to the “American” basis shared by
both cultures.
With the possible relations which Mexican and Maya culture may bear
to those of the outer world I do not propose to deal at all. The past
has shown the futility of speculating upon insufficient evidence, and
it is sad to note how large a proportion of the literature dealing
with American archæology serves only as a monument to wasted energy
and misplaced zeal. It is impossible to deny a certain superficial
similarity, often surprising, between the Maya ruins and those of
south-east Asia, but these disappear for the most part upon closer
analysis. Mere similarity of ornament means nothing when the ornament
in question is found to symbolize beliefs of an entirely different
character; from the constructional point of view the buildings differ
essentially; while the absolute gulf which separates the American
language, calendrical system and vegetable means of sustenance from
those of Asia provides difficulties which must be explained before any
theory suggesting contact in any form can legitimately be put forward.
The question of the ultimate origin of the American population lies
beyond the scope of this book, but it is an evident fact that the
Americans physically stand in comparatively close relation to the
Asiatics. That being so a somewhat similar psychology is natural, and
this would lead, subject to modifications produced by environment, to
the evolution of a culture and art in which certain analogies might
be expected to appear. But what I have elsewhere written of Peruvian
culture applies with equal force to that of the Mexicans and Maya. The
_onus probandi_ must necessarily be upon those who wish to prove
that contact with the external world existed, and the evidence which we
possess points rather to the undisturbed evolution of Mexican and Mayan
civilization on American soil, and that civilization may therefore be
regarded as in every sense American.
APPENDIX I
NAMES OF THE DAYS IN THE MEXICAN AND MAYA CALENDARS
MAYA MEXICAN
|
/-------------/ \--------------\
Tzental Quiché and
Yucatan (Chiapas) Kakchiquel Aztec
Imix Imox Imox Cipactli
Ik Igh Ig Eecatl
Akbal Votan Akbal Calli
Kan Ghanan Kat Quetzpalin
Chicchan Abah Can Coatl
Cimi Tox Camey Miquiztli
Manik Mozic Quieh Mazatl
Lamat Lambat Ganel Tochtli
Muluc Mulu Toh Atl
Oc Elab Tzii Itzcuintli
Chuen Batz Batz Ozomatli
Eb Enob Balam Malinalli
Ben Been Ah Acatl
Ix Hix Itz Ocelotl
Men Tziquin Tziquin Quauhtli
Cib Chabin Ahmak Cozcaquauhtli
Caban Chic Noh Olin
Eznab Chinax Tihax Tecpatl
Cauac Cahogh Caok Quiauitl
Ahau Aghual Hunahpu Xochitl
APPENDIX II
NAMES OF THE MONTHS IN THE MEXICAN AND MAYA CALENDARS
MAYA MEXICAN
|
/--------------/ \---------------\
Yucatan Kakchiquel Aztec
Pop (July 16) Tacaxepual (Feb. 1) Atlcaualco (Feb. 2)
Uo Nabey Tumuzuz Tlacaxipeualiztli
Zip Rucan Tumuzuz Tozoztontli
Zotz Zibix Uei Tozoztli
Tzec Uchum Toxcatl
Xul Nabey Mam Etzalqualiztli
Yaxkin Rucab Mam Tecuiluitontli
Mol Likinka Uei Tecuiluitl
Chen Nabey Tok Tlaxochimaco
Yax Rucab Tok Xocouetzi
Zac Nabey Pach Ochpaniztli
Ceh Rucab Pach Teotleco
Mac Tziquin Kih Tepeiluitl
Kankin Cakan Quecholli
Muan Ibota Panquetzaliztli
Pax Katik Atemoztli
Kayab Itzcal Kih Tititl
Cumhu Pariche Izcalli
_Uayeh_ _Tzapi Kih_ _Nemontemi_
INDEX
Acamapitzin, 19, 20, 101, 120
Acocolco, 14, 17, 18
Acolhua, 11, 14, 16, 17, 20, 21, 36, 104
Acolhuatzin, 16, 19
agriculture, 164, 165, 271, 298
Ahau Chamahez, 224
Ahau-Quiché, 207, 220
Ah Bolon Tzacab, 220, 221, 263, 264
Ahcanul, 206
Ahchel, 206
Ahchun Caan, 220
Ahchuykak, 224
Ahcitz, 221
Ahkak Nexoi, 221
Ahmekat Tutul Xiu, 205
Ahpua, 221
Ahpula, 204
Ahulneb, 220–224
Ah-uuk-chek-nale, 233
Ahzuitok Tutul Xiu, 205
Akahal, 363
Akanum, 221
Alta Vera Paz, 194, 276, 286, 296, 298, 302, 309, 311–317, 367
Amalcum, 221
Amapan, 166
Amazon, R., 312
Amimitl, 32, 54, 100
amusements, 165–168, 301–303
Anonymous Conqueror, 105, 112
Antilles, 203, 229
aqueduct, 160, 336
architecture, 157–160, 169–184, 303, 304, 319–354, 369
atamalqualiztli, 73
atemoztli, 72
Atitlan, 200, 202, 208, 284
Atlatonan, 46
Atlaua, 32
atlcaualco, 65
Atlixco, 194
Auitzotl, 25, 26, 81, 88, 127, 171
Avilix, 220
Axayacatl, 24, 25, 115, 120, 125, 143, 158
axe, ceremonial, 236–238, 338
Ayopechtli, 54
Azcapotzalco, 11, 12, 16, 18–21, 53, 110, 120, 126, 144, 188, 356,
365
Aztlan, 12–14, 16
Bacabs, 220, 236, 238, 247, 260, 263–267, 269
Badjok, 128
Balam-Agab, 207, 280
Balam-Quitzé, 207, 280
Balcalar, 205, 214, 297, 349
Baquahol, 212
Basongo Meno, 128
beds, 159
bee-keeping, 243, 267, 268, 299
Benque Viejo, 276, 307, 351
birth, 160, 224
blood-offerings. _See_ penitential rite
Borgia codex, 234, 257, 362
Boturini codex, 14
Breton, Miss A., 334
Brinton, Prof. D. G., 97, 281, 282
British Honduras, 179, 195, 228, 276, 277, 305, 307, 309, 311,
315–318, 320, 334, 350, 351, 366
Burgoa, 28, 101, 107, 125, 179, 228
burial, 103–108, 138, 275–278, 352, 367, 369, 370
Bushongo, 128
Cablahuh Tihax, 213
Cacamatzin, 26
calendar, 47, 52, 59–79, 86, 88, 245–259, 263–271, 355, 356,
360–363, 368
Calendar Stone, 27, 50, 66, 73
Calmecac, 47, 90, 93, 94, 122, 123, 130, 162
calpulli, 89, 115–117, 126, 282
Camaxtli, 32, 33, 45, 56, 83, 125
Camazotz, 232, 242
Campeche, 199, 200, 220, 261, 262, 297
cannibalism, 67, 82
canoes, 203, 299, 300
causeways, 159
Cavek, 207, 220, 281
caves, 277, 294, 317, 352
Cavizimah, 210
Cay Batz, 212
Cay Noh, 212
Ce Acatl, 32, 46
Cempoala, 182
censers, 186, 188, 273, 315
Centzon Mimixcoa, 32, 33, 37, 46, 51, 55
Centzon Totochtin, 42, 43, 52
Centzon Uitznaua, 32, 71, 243
Cerro Montoso, 195
Chac (god), 220, 221, 229, 238, 268, 269
Chac (priests), 260, 266–270
Chacnouitan, 205
Chacula, 302, 309, 311, 315, 317, 320, 365, 367
Chac Xib Chac, 206
Chalcatongo, 80, 107
Chalchiuhtlatonac, 54
Chalchiuhtlicue, 37, 43, 51, 54, 60, 62, 64, 65
Chalco, 11, 16, 21–24, 114
Chalmeca, 66, 92
Chama, 310
Champoton, 205, 292
Chantico, 53, 62
Chapala, Lake, 6, 189
Chapultepec, 14, 17, 18, 160
Chel, 206, 207
Chiapas, 25, 26, 88, 127, 220, 228, 252, 261, 286, 290, 304, 308,
309, 312, 365, 366, 368
chicauaztli, 69, 301
Chichen Itza, 204–207, 214, 219, 227, 234, 261, 262, 278, 289–291,
301–303, 310, 319, 320, 322, 324, 328, 331, 333, 334, 336,
346–351, 355, 359–361, 364, 366
Chichimec, 5, 7, 12, 16, 18, 19, 23, 25, 28, 29, 32, 38, 43, 44,
56, 80, 103, 116, 124, 132, 150, 151, 154, 156, 159, 163, 164,
291, 364, 366
Chicome Coatl, 38, 39, 40, 44, 49, 67, 70
Chicomoztoc, 11, 12, 14, 16, 214, 355
Chiconquauhtli, 16
Chilan Balam, Books of, 203–205, 214, 218, 233, 256, 257, 358, 359,
363, 364
children, 93, 95, 122, 160–163, 262, 270–272, 283, 284, 294
Chimalpopoca (of Mexico), 20, 81, 111
Chimalpopoca (of Tlacopan), 24, 26
chinamitl, 282, 285, 286
Chinax, 224
Chiquimula, 308
chocolate, 155, 298
Chol, 202
Cholula, 11, 23, 48, 92, 113, 115, 128, 171, 175, 179, 184, 190,
191, 193, 194, 197, 198
chronological systems, 59–65, 76–78, 245–256, 271, 339, 356–364
chronology, 12, 18–24, 80, 204, 213, 214, 253–255, 259, 339–343,
345, 347, 349, 351, 358–360, 364, 365
chultunes, 277, 352
Cinteotl, 38, 40, 54, 64, 67, 69, 70, 92, 231
Cipactonal, 10, 49, 59, 224
Citan Quatu, 212
Citbolontum, 224
Citchac Coh, 224, 269
Citlalicue, 50
Citlaltonac, 50
Ciuacoatl (goddess), 33, 48, 54.
(_See also_ Tonantzin)
Ciuacoatl (judge), 130
Ciuapipiltin, 52, 100
clans. _See_ calpulli _and_ chinamitl
Clavigero, 17
clothing, 91, 92, 105, 112, 119, 122–124, 148–150, 152–154, 189,
261, 296, 297
Coatlichan, 16, 21, 110
Coatlicue, 32, 33, 39, 43, 67
Coban, 194, 312, 314, 315
Cocomes, 205–207, 275, 279
Cogolludo, 203, 218, 219, 262, 271, 287
Colhuacan, 11, 12, 14, 16–19, 33, 43, 53, 110
Colombia, 40, 58
Columbus, 203, 288
confession, 84, 271, 273
cooking, 155, 157, 298
Copan, 227, 235, 276, 279, 287, 288, 294, 313, 316–318, 320, 322,
324, 326, 332, 336–344, 346, 352, 353, 356
copper, 134, 141, 142, 292, 304, 305
Cortés, 1, 2, 140–143, 239, 287
Cotaxtla, 23, 25, 145, 195
Cotoche, Cape, 292, 300
couriers, 155, 160
Coxcoxtli, 19, 110
Coyoacan, 26, 27, 29, 114, 120
Coyolxauhqui, 32
Cozumel, 220, 271
cranial deformation, 294, 348
creation-myths, 47, 48, 50, 51, 58, 59, 207, 220, 229, 233, 239,
243, 244, 257, 272
cremation, 103–108, 275–278, 367, 369
Cueravahperi, 37
Cuernavaca, 6, 22, 24, 88, 171, 245
Cuicatlan, 58, 189, 192, 194, 195, 369
Cuilapa, 58
Cuitlauac, 12, 14, 22, 33, 100
Curicaveri, 28, 32, 40, 45
Curinguaro, 33
currency, 129, 142, 275, 287
dancing, 74, 168, 300
“dawn,” 10, 208, 212, 363, 365
day-signs, 59–61, 245–249
death, 81, 102, 275
deluge, 51, 58, 239
Diaz, Bernal, 81, 91, 111, 112, 119, 121, 122, 125, 140, 143, 145,
158, 261, 286, 289, 290, 292, 304
Diego de Godoi, 289
divination, 63, 95–99, 160, 259, 267, 272
divorce, 163, 284–286
double-headed monster, 232–235, 246
dramatic performances, 168, 300
Dresden codex, 232, 255, 257, 261, 265, 266, 290, 343, 362
Dzahuindanda, 27
ear-ornaments, 145, 152, 153, 189, 295
eclipses, 272
Ecuador, 370
education, 93, 122, 123, 162, 260, 283, 284
Eecatl, 47, 221, 226, 246
Ekchuah, 224, 269, 286
etzalqualiztli, 68, 93
feather-work, 29, 145–147, 211
fire, new, 75, 76, 121, 267, 273
fishing, 165, 221, 267, 299, 300
Fleischmann, C., 310
floating gardens, 165
food, 129, 154–157, 298, 299, 300
Francisco de Bologna, 105
frescoes, 173, 179, 261, 304, 334, 335, 350, 354
Fuentes, 276
future life, 102, 231, 232
Gagavitz, 211, 212, 276
games. _See_ amusements
Gann, Dr. T. W., 277
gold, 129, 134, 142–145, 304, 317
Gordon, Dr. G. B., 273, 318
government, 11, 19, 22, 109–120, 205, 209, 212, 260, 278–285, 364
Grijalva, 144
Gukumatz (god), 225, 226, 229, 239, 281
Gukumatz (king), 210, 211
habitations, 112, 158, 159, 303, 304
Hacavitz, 220
hair-dress, 92, 123, 124, 151, 153, 261, 295, 296
Hawaiki, 215
Hernandez, 226
Herrera, 287
Hobnil, 220, 221, 257, 263, 264, 267, 269
Holmes, Prof. W. H., 174, 176, 178, 320, 326
Holon Chantepeuh, 205
Hozanek, 220, 257, 266
Htubhtum, 221
Huaxtec, 6, 12, 14, 22, 25, 36, 43, 44, 47, 48, 66, 81, 97, 108,
123, 125, 138, 149, 150–152, 171, 181, 182, 195–198, 202, 290,
294, 295, 303, 309, 342, 356, 367, 368
Huehuetenango, 308, 320, 335, 351, 352
Huetzin, 18
Huilocintla, 83
Humboldt, A. von, 171
Hunabku, 227, 229
Hunac Ceel, 206
Hunahau, 231
Hunahpu, (god) 239
Hunahpu (hero), 231, 239, 240, 241–243, 301, 302
Hun Batz, 241, 248
Hun Camé, 232, 241, 242
Hun Chuen, 241, 248
Hun Hunahpu, 240, 241, 243, 302
Hunpiktok, 224
hunting, 71, 165, 221, 267, 268, 299, 300
Huntoh (god), 220
Huntoh (king), 212
Hunyg, 214
Hurakan, 229, 239
idols, 36, 39, 55, 56, 71, 82, 90, 107, 263–266, 268, 271, 273,
275, 276, 301, 307, 316
Ilamatecutli, 39, 72
Ilocab, 207, 208, 209
inheritance, 111, 114, 115, 163, 278, 283, 300
installation, 114, 115, 281
intercalary days, 76, 254
intoxicants, 42, 91, 132, 155, 156, 243, 248, 267, 269, 298
Iqi-Balam, 207, 280
Ixazalvoh, 221, 224
Ixchebelyax, 221
Ixchel, 224, 267
Ixcuina, 44
Iximché, 203, 304, 337, 352
Ixkun, 290
Ixtab, 232
Ixtlilton, 54, 100
Ixtlilxochitl (historian), 10, 11, 18
Ixtlilxochitl (king), 20
Itzamal, 206, 220, 224, 228
Itzamatul, 220, 227
Itzamkab-ain, 233
Itzamna, 204, 219–221, 224, 227–229, 263–267, 279
Itzcoatl, 20–22
Itzcueye, 33
Itzpapalotl, 33, 52, 61, 62
Itztlacoliuhqui, 45, 61, 62
Itztli, 45, 62, 64, 78
izcalli, 72
Izquitecatl, 42
Iztapalapa, 24, 158, 159
Iztayul, 212, 213, 293
Jilotepec, 308
justice, 129–132, 283, 284
Kabah, 350
Kabrakan, 239, 240
Kakchiquel, 202, 203, 207, 208, 210–216, 218–221, 224, 231, 232,
244, 256, 260, 262, 271, 272, 276, 281, 282, 284–286, 291–293,
303, 304, 362, 363, 366
Kanel, 221
Kanzicnal, 220, 257, 264
Kinich-Ahau, 220, 224, 227, 228, 264, 266, 267.
(_See also_ Sun)
kinship, 163, 164, 284–286
Kukulkan, 46, 204, 205, 211, 219–221, 224–226, 267, 278, 279, 331,
335, 353, 365, 366
Labna, 333, 350, 352
Lacandons, 202, 272, 273, 285, 286, 364
La Cueva, 312
Lahun Noh, 214
land, 89, 115–117, 132, 282
Landa, 203, 204, 218, 219, 227, 236, 255, 259, 263, 266, 267, 285,
291, 294, 295, 300, 304, 307, 316, 331
La Quemada, 136, 170, 181
Leon, 276
lip-ornaments, 105, 119, 127, 145, 152, 153
Lizana, 258
Loltun, 294, 317, 352
“lords of the day,” 64
“lords of the night,” 64
Lyobaa. _See_ Mitla
Macuilxochitl, 42, 54, 221
magic, 95–101
maguey, 42, 45, 93, 94, 147, 149, 150, 155–157
maize, 3, 38, 48, 49, 67, 69, 95, 99, 119, 154, 164, 220, 231, 234,
243, 244, 272, 275, 298
Mahucutah, 207, 280
Malinalco, 12, 14
Mani, 203, 204, 206, 220, 267
market, 129
marriage, 94, 162–164, 260, 280, 284–286, 295
Matlalcue, 37, 43
Matlatzinca, 6, 12, 32, 115, 125, 155
Maudslay, Dr. A. P., 170, 320, 348, 352, 353
Maxtla, 20, 21
Mayapan, 205, 206, 219, 220, 226, 267, 278–280, 284, 291, 331, 349,
366
Mayauel, 43, 54, 60, 62
Mazatec, 6, 74
Mazateca, 74
medicine, 54, 95, 96, 99–101, 224
Menché, 228, 261, 263, 288, 295, 320, 322, 324, 328, 334, 338, 340,
341, 343, 345, 346, 356
Mendoza codex, 18, 22, 89
merchants, 54, 105, 126–128, 286, 287
metal-working, 141–145
Meztitlan, 113
Meztli, 52
Michoacans. _See_ Tarascan
Mictan Ahau, 231, 266
Mictlan, 55, 78, 102, 231
Mictlanciuatl, 50
Mictlantecutli, 42, 50, 55, 60, 61, 63, 64, 78, 98, 102, 231
migrations, 9–18, 23–25, 28, 29, 57, 203–206, 208–212, 214–217,
219, 365–368
Milnauatl, 43
Mimixcoa. _See_ Centzon Mimixcoa
Misantla, 183
Mitla, 25, 80, 92, 101, 107, 177–179, 183, 197, 320, 331, 332, 335,
338, 340, 350, 367, 369
Mitnal, 231, 232
Mixcoamazatzin, 365
Mixcoatl, 28, 32, 33, 44–46, 71, 82, 179, 209, 335
Mixe, 25, 28
Mixtec, 6, 14, 22–28, 44, 57, 58, 80, 92, 94, 95, 106, 107, 117,
125, 126, 136, 151, 161, 164, 197, 203, 294, 303, 366, 369
Moan-bird, 238
Monte Alban, 88, 174, 175, 183, 192, 320
Montecuzoma I, 22–24, 159
Montecuzoma II, 26, 27, 58, 73, 81, 89, 92, 111–113, 133, 140, 143,
152, 166, 214
month-signs, 249
Moon, 42, 43, 51, 52, 166, 227, 243, 272, 311
Moquiuix, 24, 127
Morning-star, 208, 226, 258, 362–364.
(_See also_ Tlauizcalpantecutli)
mosaic, 29, 38, 46, 125, 134, 141
Motolinia, 57, 105
music, 103, 167, 168, 293, 300, 301
Nacon, 259, 260, 262, 269, 292
Nacxit, 215
nagual, 97
names, 160, 161, 284, 285
Nanauatzin, 48, 51, 54, 61
Napatecutli, 149
Naranjo, 235, 280, 288, 306, 310, 320, 324, 338, 340, 341, 343–346,
351, 356
Nautla, R., 6, 195
Nebaj, 310, 346
nemontemi days, 63, 72, 95, 361.
(_See also_ uayeb days)
New Guinea, 292
Nezahualcoyotl, 20–22, 24, 81, 131, 158, 159
Nezahualpilli, 24, 26, 166
Nicaragua, 310
Nicatayah, 220
Nihaib, 207, 220
Nonoual, 204, 214, 216, 368
Nonoualca, 7, 211
Nonoualcat. _See_ Nonoual
Nopaltzin, 17, 18, 103
nose-ornaments, 44, 52, 115, 228, 295
numerical system, 86, 87, 174, 249, 250, 287, 365
Oappatzan, 166
Oaxaca, 25, 79, 119, 126, 129, 140, 142, 174, 177, 179, 180, 183,
184, 190–192, 197, 198, 217, 303, 317, 351, 352, 356, 361, 366,
368
ochpaniztli, 70
Ococingo, 312
octli, 42, 70, 91, 97, 132, 155–157.
(_See also_ intoxicants)
Olmec, 7, 10, 12, 14, 23, 38, 44, 48, 125, 207, 215, 303, 366
Omeciuatl, 49
omens, 65, 72, 95–99, 272
Ometecutli, 49
Ome Tochtli, 42
Opochtli, 37, 165
ordeals, 115, 241, 242, 302
orientation, 170, 172, 177, 179, 180, 337, 341, 352
Otomi, 5, 6, 11, 16, 24, 32, 53, 104, 149–152, 154, 155, 163–165,
364
Otontecutli, 53
Oxlahuh Tzii, 213
Oxomoco, 10, 49, 59, 224
painting, 150, 154, 261, 295
Palenque, 228, 229, 231, 234, 237, 238, 254, 257, 279, 287, 304,
307, 310, 320, 322, 324, 328, 331, 333, 336–338, 340, 342–346,
353, 359
panquetzaliztli, 71
Panuco R., 3, 6, 10, 22, 26, 138, 182, 342, 367
Papaloapan R., 195, 211, 214
Papantla, 6, 182
Pasion, Rio de la, 202
Patecatl, 43, 61, 62
patolli, 167
Paxil, 243
Paynal, 32, 71
Pazcuaro, L., 6, 28, 29, 37, 56, 180, 189
Peabody Museum, 352
penitential rite, 82–84, 91, 93, 128, 263, 295
period-signs, 251, 252.
(_See also_ day-signs _and_ month-signs)
Peru, 57, 58, 102, 117, 168, 180, 184, 192, 197, 226, 229, 273,
308, 331, 336, 369, 370
Peten, 298, 308
Piedras Negras, 227, 261, 288, 320, 324, 330, 334, 338, 339, 342,
343, 346, 356, 368, 370
Pilzintecutli, 42
Pipil, 202, 203
Pizlimtec, 221
Placeres del Oro, 107, 180, 369
Pochotl, 16, 19
Pokomam, 207, 315
Pokonchi, 207
Popol Vuh, 203, 209, 215, 218, 226, 232, 239, 243, 244, 262, 280,
281, 292, 301–303, 363
pottery, 119, 148, 157, 179, 184, 198, 277, 308–318, 369
Prescott, W. H., 1, 112
priests, 11, 66, 68, 90–101, 109–111, 209, 259–262, 270–272, 275,
276, 279–281
pulque. _See_ octli
punishments, 93, 130–132, 162, 260, 283, 284
Quaquapitzauac, 19, 110, 127
Quauhtlatoa, 21, 24
Quauhtitlan, 113, 126
Quauhtitlan, Annals of, 11, 12, 18, 80
quauhxicalli, 66
Quaxolotl, 53
quecholli, 71, 73
Quen Santo, 36, 276, 309
Quetzalcoatl, 11, 46–51, 56, 59, 62, 92, 93, 95, 110, 111, 141,
161, 166, 171, 204, 210, 215, 219–221, 225, 331, 365, 366
Quetzaltenango, 203
Quicab, 210, 213
Quiché, 202, 203, 207–216, 218–221, 224, 225, 229, 231, 239, 248,
260, 262, 276, 280–282, 284, 286, 287, 291–293, 304, 310, 362,
363, 366
Quiengola, 27, 36, 175, 183, 302, 352
Quilaztli, 33.
(_See also_ Ciuacoatl _and_ Tonantzin)
Quinatzin, 19, 103
Quirigua, 234, 235, 254, 270, 279, 287, 296, 306, 320, 324,
338–340, 342, 343, 346, 348, 353
Rabinal, 208, 210, 211, 220, 335, 352, 363
Ranchito de las Animas, 195
Ruatan, 288
Sacchana, 276, 351
sacrifice, 11, 37–40, 44, 51–53, 65–73, 75, 77, 78, 80, 81, 88,
102, 103, 121, 131, 132, 208–210, 212, 241–243, 259, 261–263,
265, 269, 281, 293, 355
Sacrificios I., 193, 194, 309–311, 314, 317, 318
Sahagun, 10, 18, 19, 48, 57, 62, 63, 65, 72, 76, 84, 90, 91, 97,
100, 103, 127, 145, 148, 151, 152, 156, 161, 162, 170, 179, 307
salt, 155, 282, 283, 286
Sandoval, 81
San Isidro, 183
San Salvador, 243, 308
Santa Cruz Quiché, 203
Santa Lucia Cozumalhuapa, 367
Santa Rita, 320, 334, 350, 366, 367
Santa Rosa Xlabpak, 331
Sayil, 320, 333, 338, 350
Schellhas, Dr. P., 221, 227, 228, 230, 231
sculpture, 136–140, 173–177, 306, 307, 328, 338–346, 348, 353, 354,
356.
(_See also_ stone-working)
Seibal, 320, 337, 338, 341, 343, 346, 351
Seler, Prof. E., 14, 65, 76, 113, 145, 166, 221, 238, 245, 248,
308, 351, 361
Sicuirancha, 28
“sky-bar,” 235, 236, 246, 313, 338
slaves, 132, 133, 283, 286, 293
Soconusco, 11, 24, 26, 119, 286, 367
sorcery, 97, 98, 106, 131
Sotuta, 206
souls, 51, 79, 80, 93, 96, 100, 102–106, 231, 232
Spinden, Dr. H. J., 320, 324, 352, 353
spinning, 147, 148, 186, 189
steam-bath. _See_ temazcalli
stilts, 265, 266
stone-working, 134–136, 140, 141, 178, 179, 305, 306, 331, 332,
338, 340, 343, 344.
(_See also_ sculpture)
Strebel, Dr. H., 195
Sun, 31, 44, 50–52, 66, 73, 76, 81, 85, 93, 102, 208, 228, 229,
233, 234, 240, 243.
(_See also_ Kinich Ahau _and_ Tonatiuh)
Tatan Bak, 231
Tatan Holon, 231
tatu, 151, 295
Tabai, 221
Tabasco, 7, 11, 127, 128, 139, 205, 216, 220, 228, 286, 287, 291,
299, 303, 315, 367
Tamoanchan, 10, 12
Tampico, 368
Tamub, 207, 208
Tapcu Oloman, 207, 211, 215
Taras, 28
Tarascan, 6, 10, 11, 14, 16, 28, 32, 33, 37, 39, 40, 43, 44, 45,
47, 53, 56, 79, 92, 93, 96, 98, 103, 105, 108, 111, 113, 114,
122, 124, 126, 132, 136, 141, 142, 149, 150, 151, 154, 157,
159, 161, 163, 180, 181, 188, 189, 197, 308, 318, 368, 370
Teayo, 171, 181, 346, 356
Techotlala, 19, 20
Tecociztecatl, 51, 52
Tecomastlahuaca, 58
Tecpan Guatemala, 203
tecuiluitontli, 68
Tehuacan, 3, 11, 14, 29, 78, 92, 356
Tehuantepec, 24, 25, 27, 28, 127, 145, 175, 194, 286
Telleriano-Remensis codex, 88
Telpochcalli, 45, 122, 123, 162
temazcalli, 38, 101, 160
Tenango, 356
Tenayocan, 16–18, 21, 141
teocalli, The great, 26, 88, 170
Teotihuacan, 11, 36, 51, 88, 103, 172–174, 183, 187–189, 193, 197,
198, 318, 320, 356, 365
Teotitlan, 3, 6, 11, 14, 25, 36, 58, 78, 88, 191, 193, 194, 197,
198, 228, 366
teotleco, 70, 268
Teozapotlan, 25, 27, 28
Tepanec, 11, 12, 16, 19, 20, 21, 53, 110, 366
tepeiluitl, 71, 73
Tepepul, 213, 293
Tepeuh, 212
Tepeuh Oloman. _See_ Tapcu Oloman
Tepeyollotl, 55, 60, 62, 64
Tepictoton, 37
teponaztli, 167
Tepoztecatl, 43, 171
Tepoztlan, 22, 43, 171, 176
Teteoinnan, 38, 39, 43, 44, 46, 50, 54, 70, 95, 100
Texolo, 183
Tezcatlipoca, 40, 43–45, 47, 49, 50, 54, 55, 61, 68, 70, 71, 84,
99, 114, 122, 133, 141, 166, 171
Tezcatzoncatl, 42
Tezcoco, 11, 14, 17, 19, 20, 22, 26, 81, 89, 111, 114, 120, 121,
131, 158
Tezozomoc (historian), 215
Tezozomoc (king), 19, 21
Thomas, Dr. C., 202
Thompson, E. H., 352
Ticatamé, 28
Tihax, 224
Tihoo, 220
Tikal, 234, 288, 307, 316, 320, 322, 324, 326, 328, 330, 336–343,
345, 346, 351
Tikoch, 206
Tilantongo, 25
Tiripemé, 45
tititl, 72
Tizoc, 25, 88
Tlacateotl, 20
tlacaxipeualiztli, 65, 100, 262
Tlacochcalcatl, 113, 121
Tlacolula, 175, 178, 180
Tlacopan, 21, 24, 26, 53, 114, 120, 121, 131
Tlahuicol, 81
Tlalhuica, 6, 14, 40, 119, 126, 151, 171, 176, 361
Tlaloc, 36–38, 40, 43, 48, 51, 54, 55, 60–62, 64, 65, 67, 68,
71–73, 78, 80, 90, 102, 108, 114, 141, 170, 188, 191, 220, 221,
229, 233, 332
Tlalocan, 36, 55, 78, 102, 105
Tlaloque, 36, 37, 68, 149, 165, 220
Tlaltecutli, 52
Tlaltelolco, 18–20, 24, 56, 105, 110, 120, 127, 129, 170, 171
Tlamatzincatl, 46
Tlauizcalpantecutli, 33, 54, 62, 76, 77, 78, 82, 171.
(_See also_ Morning-star)
Tlaxcala, 7, 11, 14, 21, 23, 26, 32, 37, 38, 40, 48, 57, 66, 70,
83, 95, 96, 113–115, 121, 122, 126, 138, 139, 155, 190, 191,
197, 348
tlaxochimaco, 69
tlaxtli, 42, 165, 166, 170, 241, 242, 281, 301–303, 335, 336, 367
Tlazolteotl, 38, 44, 45, 52, 61, 62, 64, 66, 84, 95
Tlotzin, 18
tobacco, 92, 112, 122, 156, 157, 300
Tohil, 208, 219, 220, 262, 281
Tolgom, 212
Toltec, 7–12, 16, 23, 25, 28, 29, 46–49, 80, 104, 109, 110, 141,
150, 172, 175, 176, 188, 197, 215, 216, 219, 226, 291, 302,
349–351, 354, 358, 365–367
Toluca, 24, 25, 97, 154, 155
Tonacaciuatl, 49
Tonacatecutli, 49, 55, 60, 62, 103, 219
Tonacatepetl, 243
tonalamatl, 62, 95, 245, 271, 272, 363, 364
Tonantzin, 33, 248.
(_See also_ Ciuacoatl)
Tonatiuh, 50, 62, 64, 73, 78, 229, 233.
(_See also_ Sun)
tooth-mutilation, 151, 195, 228, 294, 316, 367
Topiltzin, 19, 46
Torquemada, 11, 287
Totochtin. _See_ Centzon Totochtin
Totonac, 6, 14, 23, 29, 38, 82, 83, 91, 92, 108, 119, 138, 140,
144, 150–152, 181–184, 190, 191, 193–198, 202, 211, 294, 295,
307, 315, 317, 318
Totoquiuatzin I, 21, 24
Totoquiuatzin II, 26
toxcatl, 68, 151
Tozi. _See_ Teteoinnan
tozoztontli, 67
Tozzer, Dr. A. M., 322
trade, 126–130, 184, 190, 286, 287
trees of the quarters, 79, 231, 234, 257
tribute, 22, 118, 119, 124, 140, 141, 147, 190, 278–283, 293
Troano-Cortesianus codex, 218, 255, 265, 266
Tukuchi, 211, 213, 256, 363
Tulan, 8, 11, 12, 16, 18, 19, 47, 49, 96, 137, 176, 179, 180, 183,
204, 208, 209, 210, 214–216, 219, 262, 280, 291, 303, 328, 336,
348, 355, 356, 360, 366
Tulanzinco, 11, 23
Tulan Zuiva. _See_ Zuiva
Tulum, 320, 349, 351, 359
Tutul Xiu, 203–207, 214, 216, 278, 291, 349, 358–360, 368
Tuxpan, 23, 26, 171, 216
Tuxtla, 203
Tzapotlatenan, 54, 100
Tzental, 220, 224, 225, 271
Tzintzuntzan, 40, 150
Tziquinaha, 208, 281
Tzitzimimé, 52, 55, 74
Tzitzipu, 29
tzompantli, 171
Tzontecomatl, 16, 19
Tzutuhil, 202, 210–212, 284, 363
Uac Mitun Ahau, 231.
(_See also_ Mictan Ahau)
uayeb days, 249, 263, 265, 361.
(_See also_ nemontemi days)
uei tecuiluitl, 69, 152
uei tozoztli, 67
Ueuecoyotl, 60, 62
Uexotzinco, 11, 12, 21, 23, 26, 32, 48, 66, 113, 115, 123, 126
Uitziliuitl, 20
Uitzilopochtli, 12, 26, 27, 32, 33, 37, 44, 45, 48, 49, 51, 62, 65,
68–72, 81, 82, 88, 90, 113, 114, 124, 125, 147, 166, 170, 171,
220, 243
Uitznaua. _See_ Centzon Uitznaua
Uixtociuatl, 43, 46, 68
Ulil, 206
Uloa, R., 273, 276, 286, 294, 309, 310, 313, 315, 318
Urendequa Vecara, 33
Usumacinta R., 200, 202, 211, 214, 216, 287, 299, 320
Utatlan, 203, 304, 337, 352
Uxmal, 205, 272, 317, 320, 326, 349, 350, 356
Valdivia, 262
Vaticanus A codex, 62, 104
Vaticanus B., codex, 234
Venus. _See_ Morning-star
Vera Cruz, 2, 3, 6, 26, 119, 127, 128, 132, 140, 145, 182, 193,
217, 303, 307, 367.
(_See also_ Sacrificios I. _and_ Totonac)
Votan, 220
Vukubatz, 212
Vukub Camé, 232, 241, 243
Vukub Hunahpu, 240, 243, 302
Vukub Kakix, 239, 240
war, 66, 77, 90, 96, 103, 106, 109, 110, 120–127, 131, 153, 168,
224, 228, 229, 259, 260, 262, 269, 283, 287–293, 337, 364
weapons, 16, 82, 124, 125, 136, 165, 206, 211, 216, 279, 280,
287–292, 348
weaving, 147–149, 307, 308
world-directions, 78, 179, 180, 241, 256, 257
writing, 86–89, 258
Xahila, 203, 211, 212, 282
Xahila, Annals of, 210–215, 218, 281, 291, 363
Xaltocan, 14, 16, 17
Xaratanga, 40
Xbalanque, 231, 239–243, 301, 302
Xcacau, 221
Xibalba, 208, 210, 220, 231, 232, 241–243, 257, 272, 302, 303
Xicalanca, 7, 14, 23, 205
Xico, 88, 356
Xilonen, 38, 39, 46, 69
Xipe, 39, 40, 54, 61, 62, 65, 67, 100, 114, 131, 224
Xiuhtecutli, 53, 61, 64, 69, 70, 72, 78, 84
Xmukané, 224, 239, 240, 241, 243
Xochbitum, 221
Xochicalco, 88, 176, 177, 180, 183, 191, 197, 346, 356, 361
Xochimilco, 12, 14, 17, 22, 23, 33, 38, 114, 126, 141
Xochipilli, 42, 61, 69, 137, 166, 221, 249
Xochiquetzal, 40, 42, 46, 49, 54, 61, 62, 149, 166, 221
xocouetzi, 69
Xolotl (god), 48, 51, 52, 62
Xolotl (king), 16–19, 36, 103, 116
Xoxo, 151, 175, 192
Xpiyakok, 224, 239, 240, 243
Xquik, 241
Xtoh, 221
yacata, 180
Yacatecutli, 54, 70, 126, 128, 224
Yaqui, 207, 213, 262
Yaxkokahmut, 227
Yoaltecutli, 50
Yoalticitl, 50
“yokes,” 138
Yucatan, 199, 200, 202–204, 218, 219–221, 226–229, 231, 237, 244,
252, 256, 257, 259, 261, 262, 269, 270, 272, 273, 277, 278,
282, 286, 290–297, 299, 303–305, 307, 309, 314, 317, 319, 320,
324, 326, 328, 332, 333, 336–338, 346–352, 356, 359, 366, 367
Zacapu, 28
Zacatecas, 6
Zactecauh, 211, 212
Zaczini, 220, 257, 266
Zamaneb, 208, 363
Zapotec, 6, 10, 16, 24–28, 36, 39, 57, 58, 80, 88, 92, 101,
106–108, 125, 126, 142, 144, 150, 151, 173–175, 177, 178, 192,
193, 197, 203, 221, 228, 245, 246, 248, 302, 303, 314, 336,
360, 361, 369, 370
Zipakna, 239, 240, 243
Zociyoeza, 27
Zociyopi, 27
Zoque, 25
Zotziha Chimalcan, 220, 232
Zotzil, 211, 212, 282, 363
Zuiva, 204, 208, 211, 214, 215
Zuhuykak, 224
Zuhuyzip, 221
PRINTED BY WILLIAM BRENDON AND SON, LTD., PLYMOUTH
[Illustration:
Maxico and Central America]
FOOTNOTES:
[1] A word of explanation should be said concerning the Mexican
language. Like other American tongues its structure is such
that long compound words and names are built up of significant
elements, many of them being thus equivalent to a whole sentence.
The practice is not unknown in this country, for is not “Obadiah
Bind-their-kings-in-chains-and-their-nobles-in-links-of-iron”
familiar to every reader of Macaulay? At the same time it adds
considerable difficulty to the study of Mexican archæology. As regards
pronunciation, the chief points to be noted are as follows: X is always
pronounced as SH and J as H; C is always hard except before E and I; CH
is sounded as the CH in CHILD; Z as in ZEBRA.
In Maya we find a happy tendency to monosyllables. X again is
pronounced as SH; but C is always hard.
[2] Sahagun states that this prince came to the throne in 1489, but the
Codex Telleriano-Remensis assigns that year to his death.
[3] This is according to Sahagun’s statement; at the present time
in the valley of Mexico the rains commence in May-June and end in
September-October.
[4] At this point the Kakchiquel annals prove a useful check upon the
account given by the Popol Vuh. Tepepul and Iztayul, according to
the latter, preceded Quicab, and Quicab was succeeded by Tepepul and
Xtayub. It is evident that some duplication has taken place in the
Quiché legend, that Tepepul and Iztayul are the same as Tepepul and
Xtayub, and that they succeeded Quicab.
[5] The very early dates which occur at Palenque, a late site, must be
themselves artificial or mythical, and so too, I believe, are the dates
which occur on the celebrated Leiden plate and Tuxtla figure.
[6] By an error the katun number has been drawn as two bars and three
dots, instead of three bars.
[7] There is a wall-painting at Chichen Itza which seems to picture a
human sacrifice, but this is on a building which undoubtedly belongs to
a later period, when the Maya had already come in contact with Mexican
influences, as will be seen later.
[8] One of these was also found by Maudslay, near Quirigua.
[9] The corners of the Castillo at Chichen Itza also appear to have
been slightly rounded and not square, as shown in Fig. 73, _f_; p.
321.
[10] The qualification is necessary, since Tulum appears to have been
inhabited at the conquest.
[11] The use of the rising of the morning star to commence a solar
time-count would explain the peculiar fact that the commencement of the
year never coincided with that of the tonalamatl. It has been stated
(p. 77) that the initial days of the Venus-periods were cipactli,
coatl, atl, acatl, and olin; cipactli being the initial day also of the
tonalamatl. But the day acatl was not only one of the initial days of
the 365-day year, but was the initial day also of the Mexican double
cycle of 104 years, which was in addition the initial day of a complete
cycle of Venus-periods. The conclusion is tempting, that after the
invention of the tonalamatl, correlated with the observation of the
planet Venus, a change was made to solar time as near as it could be
observed. As a starting-point for the new system, the next heliacal
rising of the planet was awaited, and this occurring on an acatl day
fixed the “year-bearers” as acatl, tecpatl, calli, and tochtli. It will
be remembered that the Mexicans believed that the historical sun rose
on the day 13. acatl (p. 73). At any rate, the Venus-period seems to
form a link between the tonalamatl and the year of 365 days. The fact
that none of the gods of the hunting-tribes find a place among the
deities presiding over the tonalamatl would seem sufficient proof that
the Chichimec, Aztec, and Otomi had no hand in its invention.
Transcriber’s Notes:
1. Obvious printers’, punctuation and spelling errors have been
corrected silently.
2. Where hyphenation is in doubt, it has been retained as in the
original.
3. Some hyphenated and non-hyphenated versions of the same words have
been retained as in the original.
4. Italics are shown as _xxx_.