SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 57
AN INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF THE MAYA HIEROGLYPHS
BY
SYLVANUS GRISWOLD MORLEY
[Illustration]
WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1915
* * * * *
{iii}
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION,
BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY,
_Washington, D. C., January 7, 1914._
Sir: I have the honor to submit the accompanying manuscript of a memoir
bearing the title "An Introduction to the Study of the Maya Hieroglyphs,"
by Sylvanus Griswold Morley, and to recommend its publication as a bulletin
of the Bureau of American Ethnology.
The hieroglyphic writing developed by the Maya of Central America and
southern Mexico was probably the foremost intellectual achievement of
pre-Columbian times in the New World, and as such it deserves equal
attention with other graphic systems of antiquity.
The earliest inscriptions now extant probably date from about the beginning
of the Christian era, but such is the complexity of the glyphs and subject
matter even at this early period, that in order to estimate the age of the
system it is necessary to postulate a far greater antiquity for its origin.
Indeed all that can be accepted safely in this direction is that many
centuries must have elapsed before the Maya hieroglyphic writing could have
been developed to the highly complex stage where we first encounter it.
The first student to make any progress in deciphering the Maya inscriptions
was Prof. Ernst Förstemann, of the Royal Library at Dresden. About 1880
Professor Förstemann published a facsimile reproduction of the Dresden
codex, and for the next twenty years devoted the greater part of his time
to the elucidation of this manuscript. He it was who first discovered and
worked out the ingenious vigesimal system of numeration used by the Maya,
and who first pointed out how this system was utilized to record
astronomical and chronological facts. In short, his pioneer work made
possible all subsequent progress in deciphering Maya texts.
Curiously enough, about the same time, or a little later (in 1891), another
student of the same subject, Mr. J. T. Goodman, of Alameda, California,
working independently and without knowledge of Professor Förstemann's
researches, also succeeded in deciphering the chronological parts of the
Maya texts, and in determining the values of the head-variant numerals. Mr.
Goodman also perfected some {iv} tables, "The Archaic Chronological
Calendar" and "The Archaic Annual Calendar," which greatly facilitate the
decipherment of the calculations recorded in the texts.
It must be admitted that very little progress has been made in deciphering
the Maya glyphs except those relating to the calendar and chronology; that
is, the signs for the various time periods (days and months), the numerals,
and a few name-glyphs; however, as these known signs comprise possibly
two-fifths of all the glyphs, it is clear that the general tenor of the
Maya inscriptions is no longer concealed from us. The remaining
three-fifths probably tell the nature of the events which occurred on the
corresponding dates, and it is to these we must turn for the subject matter
of Maya history. The deciphering of this textual residuum is enormously
complicated by the character of the Maya glyphs, which for the greater part
are ideographic rather than phonetic; that is, the various symbols
represent ideas rather than sounds.
In a graphic system composed largely of ideographic elements it is
extremely difficult to determine the meanings of the different signs, since
little or no help is to be derived from varying combinations of elements as
in a phonetic system. In phonetic writing the symbols have fixed sounds,
which are unchanging throughout, and when these values have once been
determined, they may be substituted for the characters wherever they occur,
and thus words are formed.
While the Maya glyphs largely represent ideas, indubitable traces of
phoneticism and phonetic composition appear. There are perhaps half a dozen
glyphs in all which are known to be constructed on a purely phonetic basis,
and as the remaining glyphs are gradually deciphered this number will
doubtless be increased.
The progress which has been made in deciphering the Maya inscriptions may
be summarized as follows: The Maya calendar, chronology, and astronomy as
recorded in the hieroglyphic texts have been carefully worked out, and it
is unlikely that future discoveries will change our present conception of
them. There remains, however, a group of glyphs which are probably
non-calendric, non-chronologic, and non-astronomic in character. These, it
may be reasonably expected, will be found to describe the subject matter of
Maya history; that is, they probably set forth the nature of the events
which took place on the dates recorded. An analogy would be the following:
Supposing, in scanning a history of the United States, only the dates could
be read. We would find, for example, July 4, 1776, followed by unknown
characters; April 12, 1861, by others; and March 4, 1912, by others. This,
then, is the case with the Maya glyphs--we find dates followed by glyphs of
unknown meaning, which presumably set forth the nature of the corresponding
events. In a word, we know now the {v} chronologic skeleton of Maya
history; it remains to work out the more intimate details which alone can
make it a vital force.
The published writings on the subject of the Maya hieroglyphs have become
so voluminous, and are so widely scattered and inaccessible, that it is
difficult for students of Central American archeology to become familiar
with what has been accomplished in this important field of investigation.
In the present memoir Mr. Morley, who has devoted a number of years to the
study of Maya archeology, and especially to the hieroglyphs, summarizes the
results of these researches to the present time, and it is believed that
this _Introduction to the Study of the Maya Hieroglyphs_ will be the means
of enabling ready and closer acquaintance with this interesting though
intricate subject.
Very respectfully,
F. W. HODGE,
_Ethnologist-in-Charge._
Dr. CHARLES D. WALCOTT,
_Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution,_
_Washington, D. C._
* * * * *
{vii}
PREFACE
With the great expansion of interest in American archeology during the last
few years there has grown to be a corresponding need and demand for primary
textbooks, archeological primers so to speak, which will enable the general
reader, without previous knowledge of the science, to understand its
several branches. With this end in view, the author has prepared An
Introduction to the Study of the Maya Hieroglyphs.
The need for such a textbook in this particular field is suggested by two
considerations: (1) The writings of previous investigators, having been
designed to meet the needs of the specialist rather than those of the
beginner, are for the greater part too advanced and technical for general
comprehension; and (2) these writings are scattered through many
publications, periodicals as well as books, some in foreign languages, and
almost all difficult of access to the average reader.
To the second of these considerations, however, the writings of Mr. C. P.
Bowditch, of Boston, Massachusetts, offer a conspicuous exception,
particularly his final contribution to this subject, entitled "The
Numeration, Calendar Systems, and Astronomical Knowledge of the Mayas," the
publication of which in 1910 marked the dawn of a new era in the study of
the Maya hieroglyphic writing. In this work Mr. Bowditch exhaustively
summarizes all previous knowledge of the subject, and also indicates the
most promising lines for future investigation. The book is a vast
storehouse of heretofore scattered material, now gathered together for the
first time and presented to the student in a readily accessible form.
Indeed, so thorough is its treatment, the result of many years of intensive
study, that the writer would have hesitated to bring out another work,
necessarily covering much of the same ground, had it not been for his
belief that Mr. Bowditch's book is too advanced for lay comprehension. The
Maya hieroglyphic writing is exceedingly intricate; its subject matter is
complex and its forms irregular; and in order to be understood it must be
presented in a very elementary way. The writer believes that this primer
method of treatment has not been followed in the publication in question
and, furthermore, that the omission of specimen texts, which would give the
student practice in deciphering the glyphs, renders it too technical for
use by the beginner. {viii}
Acknowledgment should be made here to Mr. Bowditch for his courtesy in
permitting the reproduction of a number of drawings from his book, the
examples of the period, day and month glyphs figured being derived almost
entirely from this source; and in a larger sense for his share in the
establishment of instruction in this field of research at Harvard
University where the writer first took up these studies.
In the limited space available it would have been impossible to present a
detailed picture of the Maya civilization, nor indeed is this essential to
the purpose of the book. It has been thought advisable, however, to precede
the general discussion of the hieroglyphs with a brief review of the
habitat, history, customs, government, and religion of the ancient Maya, so
that the reader may gather a general idea of the remarkable people whose
writing and calendar he is about to study.
* * * * *
{ix}
CONTENTS
Page
CHAPTER I. The Maya 1
Habitat 1
History 2
Manners and customs 7
II. The Maya hieroglyphic writing 22
III. How the Maya reckoned time 37
The tonalamatl, or 260-day period 41
The haab, or year of 365 days 44
The Calendar Round, or 18,980-day period 51
The Long Count 60
Initial Series 63
The introducing glyph 64
The cycle glyph 68
The katun glyph 68
The tun glyph 70
The uinal glyph 70
The kin glyph 72
Secondary Series 74
Calendar-round dates 76
Period-ending dates 77
U kahlay katunob 79
IV. Maya arithmetic 87
Bar and dot numerals 87
Head-variant numerals 96
First method of numeration 105
Number of cycles in a great cycle 107
Second method of numeration 129
First step in solving Maya numbers 134
Second step in solving Maya numbers 135
Third step in solving Maya numbers 136
Fourth step in solving Maya numbers 138
Fifth step in solving Maya numbers 151
V. The inscriptions 156
Texts recording Initial Series 157
Texts recording Initial Series and Secondary Series 207
Texts recording Period Endings 222
Texts recording Initial Series, Secondary Series, and
Period Endings 233
Errors in the originals 245
VI. The codices 251
Texts recording tonalamatls 251
Texts recording Initial Series 266
Texts recording Serpent Numbers 273
Texts recording Ascending Series 276
* * * * *
{x}
List of Tables
Page
TABLE I. The twenty Maya day names 37
II. Sequence of Maya days 42
III. The divisions of the Maya year 45
IV. Positions of days at the end of a year 48
V. Relative positions of days beginning Maya years 53
VI. Positions of days in divisions of Maya year 55
VII. Positions of days in divisions of Maya year according to
Maya notation 55
VIII. The Maya time-periods 62
IX. Sequence of katuns in u kahlay katunob 80
X. Characteristics of head-variant numerals 0-19, inclusive 103
XI. Sequence of twenty consecutive dates in the month Pop 111
XII. Comparison of the two methods of numeration 133
XIII. Values of higher periods in terms of lowest, in inscriptions 135
XIV. Values of higher periods in terms of lowest, in codices 135
XV. The 365 positions in the Maya year 141
XVI. 80 Calendar Rounds expressed in Arabic and Maya notation 143
XVII. Interrelationship of dates on Stelæ E, F, and J and
Zoömorph G, Quirigua 239
{xi}
ILLUSTRATIONS
Page
PLATE 1. The Maya territory, showing locations of principal cities
(map) 1
2. Diagram showing periods of occupancy of principal southern
cities 15
3. Page 74 of the Dresden Codex, showing the end of the world
(according to Förstemann) 32
4. Diagram showing occurrence of dates recorded in Cycle 9 35
5. Tonalamatl wheel, showing sequence of the 260 differently
named days 43
6. Glyphs representing Initial Series, showing use of bar and
dot numerals and normal-form period glyphs 157
7. Glyphs representing Initial Series, showing use of bar and
dot numerals and head-variant period glyphs 167
8. Glyphs representing Initial Series, showing use of bar and
dot numerals and head-variant period glyphs 170
9. Glyphs representing Initial Series, showing use of bar and
dot numerals and head-variant period glyphs 176
10. Glyphs representing Initial Series, showing use of bar and
dot numerals and head-variant period glyphs--Stela 3, Tikal 178
11. Glyphs representing Initial Series, showing use of bar and
dot numerals and head-variant period glyphs--Stela A (east
side), Quirigua 179
12. Glyphs representing Initial Series, showing use of
head-variant numerals and period glyphs 180
13. Oldest Initial Series at Copan--Stela 15 187
14. Initial Series on Stela D, Copan, showing full-figure
numeral glyphs and period glyphs 188
15. Initial Series on Stela J, Copan 191
16. Initial Series and Secondary Series on Lintel 21, Yaxchilan 207
17. Initial Series and Secondary Series on Stela 1, Piedras
Negras 210
18. Initial Series and Secondary Series on Stela K, Quirigua 213
19. Initial Series and Secondary Series on Stela F (west side),
Quirigua 218
20. Initial Series on Stela F (east side), Quirigua 220
21. Examples of Period-ending dates in Cycle 9 223
22. Examples of Period-ending dates in cycles other than
Cycle 9 227
23. Initial Series, Secondary Series, and Period-ending dates
on Stela 3, Piedras Negras 233
24. Initial Series, Secondary Series, and Period-ending dates
on Stela E (west side), Quirigua 235
25. Calendar-round dates on Altar 5, Tikal 240
26. Initial Series on Stela N, Copan, showing error in month
coefficient 248
27. Page 12 of the Dresden Codex, showing tonalamatls in all
three divisions 254
28. Page 15 of the Dresden Codex, showing tonalamatls in all
three divisions 260
29. Middle divisions of pages 10 and 11 of the
Tro-Cortesiano, showing one tonalamatl extending across
the two pages 262
30. Page 102 of the Codex Tro-Cortesiano, showing tonalamatls
in the lower three divisions 263
{xii}
31. Page 24 of the Dresden Codex, showing Initial Series 266
32. Page 62 of the Dresden Codex, showing the Serpent Numbers 273
FIGURE 1. Itzamna, chief deity of the Maya Pantheon 16
2. Kukulcan, God of Learning 17
3. Ahpuch, God of Death 17
4. The God of War 17
5. Ek Ahau, the Black Captain, war deity 18
6. Yum Kaax, Lord of the Harvest 18
7. Xaman Ek, the North Star God 19
8. Conflict between the Gods of Life and Death (Kukulcan and
Ahpuch) 19
9. Outlines of the glyphs 22
10. Examples of glyph elision, showing elimination of all parts
except essential element 23
11. Normal-form and head-variant glyphs, showing retention of
essential element in each 24
12. Normal-form and head-variant glyphs, showing absence of
common essential element 25
13. Glyphs built up on a phonetic basis 28
14. A rebus. Aztec, and probably Maya, personal and place names
were written in a corresponding manner 29
15. Aztec place names 30
16. The day signs in the inscriptions 38
17. The day signs in the codices 39
18. Sign for the tonalamatl (according to Goodman) 44
19. The month signs in the inscriptions 49
20. The month signs in the codices 50
21. Diagram showing engagement of tonalamatl wheel of 260 days
and haab wheel of 365 positions; the combination of the two
giving the Calendar Round, or 52-year period 57
22. Signs for the Calendar Round 59
23. Diagram showing section of Calendar-round wheel 64
24. Initial-series "introducing glyph" 65
25. Signs for the cycle 68
26. Full-figure variant of cycle sign 69
27. Signs for the katun 69
28. Full-figure variant of katun sign 70
29. Signs for the tun 70
30. Full-figure variant of tun sign 70
31. Signs for the uinal 71
32. Full-figure variant of uinal sign on Zoömorph B, Quirigua 71
33. Full-figure variant of uinal sign on Stela D, Copan 71
34. Signs for the kin 72
35. Full-figure variant of kin sign 73
36. Period glyphs, from widely separated sites and of different
epochs, showing persistence of essential elements 74
37. Ending signs and elements 78
38. "Snake" or "knot" element as used with day sign Ahau,
possibly indicating presence of the u kahlay katunob
in the inscriptions 83
39. Normal forms of numerals 1 to 19, inclusive, in the codices 88
40. Normal forms of numerals 1 to 19, inclusive, in the
inscriptions 89
41. Examples of bar and dot numeral 5, showing the
ornamentation which the bar underwent without affecting
its numerical value 89
{xiii}
42. Examples showing the way in which numerals 1, 2, 6, 7,
11, 12, 16, and 17 are _not_ used with period, day, or
month signs 90
43. Examples showing the way in which numerals 1, 2, 6, 7,
11, 12, 16, and 17 _are_ used with period, day, or
month signs 90
44. Normal forms of numerals 1 to 13, inclusive, in the Books
of Chilan Balam 91
45. Sign for 20 in the codices 92
46. Sign for 0 in the codices 92
47. Sign for 0 in the inscriptions 93
48. Figure showing possible derivation of the sign for 0 in
the inscriptions 93
49. Special sign for 0 used exclusively as a month coefficient 94
50. Examples of the use of bar and dot numerals with period,
day, or month signs 95
51. Head-variant numerals 1 to 7, inclusive 97
52. Head-variant numerals 8 to 13, inclusive 98
53. Head-variant numerals 14 to 19, inclusive, and 0 99
54. A sign for 0, used also to express the idea "ending" or
"end of" in Period-ending dates 102
55. Examples of the use of head-variant numerals with period,
day, or month signs 104
56. Examples of the first method of numeration, used almost
exclusively in the inscriptions 105
57. Signs for the cycle showing coefficients above 13 110
58. Part of the inscription on Stela N, Copan, showing a number
composed of six periods 115
59. Part of the inscription in the Temple of the Inscriptions,
Palenque, showing a number composed of seven periods 115
60. Part of the inscription on Stela 10, Tikal (probably an
Initial Series), showing a number composed of eight periods 115
61. Signs for the great cycle and the great-great cycle 118
62. Glyphs showing misplacement of the kin coefficient or
elimination of a period glyph 128
63. Examples of the second method of numeration, used
exclusively in the codices 131
64. Figure showing the use of the "minus" or "backward" sign
in the codices 137
65. Sign for the "month indicator" 153
66. Diagram showing the method of designating particular
glyphs in a text 156
67. Signs representing the hotun, or 5-tun, period 166
68. Initial Series showing bar and dot numerals and
head-variant period glyphs 174
69. Initial Series showing head-variant numerals and
period glyphs 183
70. Initial Series showing head-variant numerals and
period glyphs 186
71. Initial Series on Stela H, Quirigua 193
72. The tun, uinal, and kin coefficients on Stela H, Quirigua 194
73. The Initial Series on the Tuxtla Statuette, the oldest
Initial Series known (in the early part of Cycle 8) 195
74. The introducing glyph (?) of the Initial Series on the
Tuxtla Statuette 196
75. Drawings of the Initial Series: _A_, On the Leyden Plate;
_B_, on a lintel from the Temple of the Initial Series,
Chichen Itza 197
{xiv}
76. The Cycle-10 Initial Series from Quen Santo 200
77. Initial Series which proceed from a date prior to 4 Ahau
8 Cumhu, the starting point of Maya chronology 204
78. The Initial Series on Stela J, Quirigua 215
79. The Secondary Series on Stela J, Quirigua 216
80. Glyphs which may disclose the nature of the events that
happened at Quirigua on the dates: _a_, 9. 14. 13. 4. 17
12 Caban 5 Kayab; _b_, 9. 15. 6. 14. 6 6 Cimi 4 Tzec 221
81. The Initial Series, Secondary Series, and Period-ending
date on Altar S, Copan 232
82. The Initial Series on Stela E (east side), Quirigua 236
83. Calendar-round dates 241
84. Texts showing actual errors in the originals 245
85. Example of first method of numeration in the codices
(part of page 69 of the Dresden Codex) 275
* * * * *
{xv}
BIBLIOGRAPHY
AGUILAR, SANCHEZ DE. 1639. Informe contra idolorum cultores del Obispado de
Yucatan. Madrid. (Reprint in _Anales Mus. Nac. de Mexico_, VI, pp. 17-122,
Mexico, 1900.)
BOWDITCH, CHARLES P. 1901 a. Memoranda on the Maya calendars used in the
Books of Chilan Balam. _Amer. Anthr._, n. s., III, No. 1, pp. 129-138, New
York.
---- 1906. The Temples of the Cross, of the Foliated Cross, and of the Sun
at Palenque. Cambridge, Mass.
---- 1909. Dates and numbers in the Dresden Codex. _Putnam Anniversary
Volume_, pp. 268-298, New York.
---- 1910. The numeration, calendar systems, and astronomical knowledge of
the Mayas. Cambridge, Mass.
BRASSEUR DE BOURBOURG, C. E. 1869-70. Manuscrit Troano. Études sur le
système graphique et la langue des Mayas. 2 vols. Paris.
BRINTON, DANIEL G. 1882 b. The Maya chronicles. Philadelphia. (No. 1 of
_Brinton's Library of Aboriginal American Literature_.)
---- 1894 b. A primer of Mayan hieroglyphics. _Pubs. Univ. of Pa._, Ser. in
Philol., Lit., and Archeol., III, No. 2.
BULLETIN 28 of the Bureau of American Ethnology, 1904: Mexican and Central
American antiquities, calendar systems, and history. Twenty-four papers by
Eduard Seler, E. Förstemann, Paul Schellhas, Carl Sapper, and E. P.
Dieseldorff. Translated from the German under the supervision of Charles P.
Bowditch.
COGOLLUDO, D. L. 1688. Historia de Yucathan. Madrid.
CRESSON, H. T. 1892. The antennæ and sting of Yikilcab as components in the
Maya day-signs. _Science_, XX, pp. 77-79, New York.
DIESELDORFF, E. P. See BULLETIN 28.
FÖRSTEMANN, E. 1906. Commentary on the Maya manuscript in the Royal Public
Library of Dresden. _Papers Peabody Mus._, IV, No. 2, pp. 48-266,
Cambridge. _See also_ BULLETIN 28.
GATES, W. E. 1910. Commentary upon the Maya-Tzental Perez Codex, with a
concluding note upon the linguistic problem of the Maya glyphs. _Papers
Peabody Mus._, VI, No. 1, pp. 5-64, Cambridge.
GOODMAN, J. T. 1897. The archaic Maya inscriptions. (Biologia
Centrali-Americana, Archæology, Part XVIII. London.) [_See_ Maudslay,
1889-1902.]
---- 1905. Maya dates. _Amer. Anthr._, n. s., VII, pp. 642-647, Lancaster,
Pa.
HEWETT, EDGAR L. 1911. Two seasons' work in Guatemala. _Bull. Archæol.
Inst. of America_, II, pp. 117-134, Norwood, Mass.
HOLMES, W. H. 1907. On a nephrite statuette from San Andrés Tuxtla, Vera
Cruz, Mexico. _Amer. Anthr._, n. s., IX, No. 4, pp. 691-701, Lancaster, Pa.
LANDA, DIEGO DE. 1864. Relacion de las cosas de Yucatan. Paris.
LE PLONGEON, A. 1885. The Maya alphabet. Supplement to _Scientific
American_, vol. XIX, Jan. 31, pp. 7572-73, New York.
MALER, TEOBERT. 1901. Researches in the central portion of the Usumatsintla
valley. _Memoirs Peabody Mus._, II, No. 1, pp. 9-75, Cambridge.
---- 1903. Researches in the central portion of the Usumatsintla valley.
[Continued.] Ibid., No. 2, pp. 83-208.
---- 1908 a. Explorations of the upper Usumatsintla and adjacent region.
Ibid., IV, No. 1, pp. 1-51. {xvi}
MALER, TEOBERT. 1908 b. Explorations in the Department of Peten, Guatemala,
and adjacent region. Ibid., No. 2, pp. 55-127.
---- 1910. Explorations in the Department of Peten, Guatemala, and adjacent
region. [Continued.] Ibid., No. 3, pp. 131-170.
---- 1911. Explorations in the Department of Peten, Guatemala. Tikal.
Ibid., V, No. 1, pp. 3-91, pls. 1-26.
MAUDSLAY, A. P. 1889-1902. Biologia Centrali-Americana, or contributions to
the knowledge of the flora and fauna of Mexico and Central America.
Archæology. 4 vols. of text and plates. London.
MORLEY, S. G. 1910 b. Correlation of Maya and Christian chronology. _Amer.
Journ. Archeol._, 2d ser., XIV, pp. 193-204, Norwood, Mass.
---- 1911. The historical value of the Books of Chilan Balam. Ibid., XV,
pp. 195-214.
PONCE, FRAY ALONZO. 1872. Relacion breve y verdadera de algunas cosas de
las muchas que sucedieron al Padre Fray Alonzo Ponce, Comisario General en
las provincias de Nueva España. _Colección de documentos ineditos para la
historia de España_, LVII, LVIII. Madrid.
ROSNY, LEON DE. 1876. Essai sur le déchiffrement de l'écriture hiératique
de l'Amérique Centrale. Paris.
SAPPER, CARL. _See_ BULLETIN 28.
SCHELLHAS, PAUL. _See_ BULLETIN 28.
SELER, EDUARD. 1901 c. Die alten Ansiedelungen von Chaculá im Distrikte
Nenton des Departements Huehuetenango der Republik Guatemala. Berlin.
---- 1902-1908. Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur amerikanischen Sprach- und
Alterthumskunde. 3 vols. Berlin. _See also_ BULLETIN 28.
SPINDEN, H. J. 1913. A study of Maya art, its subject-matter and historical
development. _Memoirs Peabody Mus._, VI, pp. 1-285, Cambridge.
STEPHENS, J. L. 1841. Incidents of travel in Central America, Chiapas, and
Yucatan. 2 vols. New York.
---- 1843. Incidents of travel in Yucatan. 2 vols. New York.
THOMAS, CYRUS. 1893. Are the Maya hieroglyphs phonetic? _Amer. Anthr._, VI,
No. 3, pp. 241-270, Washington.
VILLAGUTIERRE, SOTOMAYOR J. 1701. Historia de la conquista de la provinzia
de el Itza, reduccion, y progressos de la de el Lacandon y otras naciones
de el reyno de Guatimala, a las provincias de Yucatan, en la America
septentrional. Madrid.
* * * * *
[Illustration: THE MAYA TERRITORY, SHOWING LOCATIONS OF PRINCIPAL
CITIES]
* * * * * {1}
AN INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF THE MAYA HIEROGLYPHS
BY SYLVANUS GRISWOLD MORLEY
* * * * *
CHAPTER I. THE MAYA
HABITAT
Broadly speaking, the Maya were a lowland people, inhabiting the Atlantic
coast plains of southern Mexico and northern Central America. (See pl. 1.)
The southern part of this region is abundantly watered by a network of
streams, many of which have their rise in the Cordillera, while the
northern part, comprising the peninsula of Yucatan, is entirely lacking in
water courses and, were it not for natural wells (_cenotes_) here and
there, would be uninhabitable. This condition in the north is due to the
geologic formation of the peninsula, a vast plain underlaid by limestone
through which water quickly percolates to subterranean channels.
In the south the country is densely forested, though occasional savannas
break the monotony of the tropical jungles. The rolling surface is
traversed in places by ranges of hills, the most important of which are the
Cockscomb Mountains of British Honduras; these attain an elevation of 3,700
feet. In Yucatan the nature of the soil and the water-supply not being
favorable to the growth of a luxuriant vegetation, this region is covered
with a smaller forest growth and a sparser bush than the area farther
southward.
The climate of the region occupied by the Maya is tropical; there are two
seasons, the rainy and the dry. The former lasts from May or June until
January or February, there being considerable local variation not only in
the length of this season but also in the time of its beginning.
Deer, tapirs, peccaries, jaguars, and game of many other kinds abound
throughout the entire region, and doubtless formed a large part of the food
supply in ancient times, though formerly corn was the staple, as it is now.
There are at present upward of twenty tribes speaking various dialects of
the Maya language, perhaps half a million people in all. These live in the
same general region their ancestors occupied, but under greatly changed
conditions. Formerly the Maya were the van of civilization in the New
World,[1] but to-day they are a dwindling {2} race, their once remarkable
civilization is a thing of the past, and its manners and customs are
forgotten.
HISTORY
The ancient Maya, with whom this volume deals, emerged from barbarism
probably during the first or second century of the Christian Era; at least
their earliest dated monument can not be ascribed with safety to a more
remote period.[2] How long a time had been required for the development of
their complex calendar and hieroglyphic system to the point of graphic
record, it is impossible to say, and any estimate can be only conjectural.
It is certain, however, that a long interval must have elapsed from the
first crude and unrelated scratches of savagery to the elaborate and
involved hieroglyphs found on the earliest monuments, which represent not
only the work of highly skilled sculptors, but also the thought of
intensively developed minds. That this period was measured by centuries
rather than by decades seems probable; the achievement was far too great to
have been performed in a single generation or even in five or ten.
It seems safe to assume, therefore, that by the end of the second century
of the Christian Era the Maya civilization was fairly on its feet. There
then began an extraordinary development all along the line. City after city
sprang into prominence throughout the southern part of the Maya
territory,[3] each contributing its share to the general progress and art
of the time. With accomplishment came confidence and a quickening of pace.
All activities doubtless shared in the general uplift which followed,
though little more than the material evidences of architecture and
sculpture have survived the ravages of the destructive environment in which
this culture flourished; and it is chiefly from these remnants of ancient
Maya art that the record of progress has been partially reconstructed.
This period of development, which lasted upward of 400 years, or until
about the close of the sixth century, may be called {3} perhaps the "Golden
Age of the Maya"; at least it was the first great epoch in their history,
and so far as sculpture is concerned, the one best comparable to the
classic period of Greek art. While sculpture among the Maya never again
reached so high a degree of perfection, architecture steadily developed,
almost to the last. Judging from the dates inscribed upon their monuments,
all the great cities of the south flourished during this period: Palenque
and Yaxchilan in what is now southern Mexico; Piedras Negras, Seibal,
Tikal, Naranjo, and Quirigua in the present Guatemala; and Copan in the
present Honduras. All these cities rose to greatness and sank again into
insignificance, if not indeed into oblivion, before the close of this
Golden Age.
The causes which led to the decline of civilization in the south are
unknown. It has been conjectured that the Maya were driven from their
southern homes by stronger peoples pushing in from farther south and from
the west, or again, that the Maya civilization, having run its natural
course, collapsed through sheer lack of inherent power to advance. Which,
if either, of these hypotheses be true, matters little, since in any event
one all-important fact remains: Just after the close of Cycle 9 of Maya
chronology, toward the end of the sixth century, there is a sudden and
final cessation of dates in all the southern cities, apparently indicating
that they were abandoned about this time.
Still another condition doubtless hastened the general decline if indeed it
did no more. There is strong documentary evidence[4] that about the middle
or close of the fifth century the southern part of Yucatan was discovered
and colonized. In the century following, the southern cities one by one
sank into decay; at least none of their monuments bear later dates, and
coincidently Chichen Itza, the first great city of the north, was founded
and rose to prominence. In the absence of reliable contemporaneous records
it is impossible to establish the absolute accuracy of any theory relating
to times so {4} remote as those here under consideration; but it seems not
improbable that after the discovery of Yucatan and the subsequent opening
up of that vast region, the southern cities commenced to decline. As the
new country waxed the old waned, so that by the end of the sixth century
the rise of the one and the fall of the other had occurred.
The occupation and colonization of Yucatan marked the dawn of a new era for
the Maya although their Renaissance did not take place at once. Under
pressure of the new environment, at best a parched and waterless land, the
Maya civilization doubtless underwent important modification.[5] The period
of colonization, with the strenuous labor by which it was marked, was not
conducive to progress in the arts. At first the struggle for bare existence
must have absorbed in a large measure the energies of all, and not until
their foothold was secure could much time have been available for the
cultivation of the gentler pursuits. Then, too, at first there seems to
have been a feeling of unrest in the new land, a shifting of homes and a
testing of localities, all of which retarded the development of
architecture, sculpture, and other arts. Bakhalal (see pl. 1), the first
settlement in the north, was occupied for only 60 years. Chichen Itza, the
next location, although occupied for more than a century, was finally
abandoned and the search for a new home resumed. Moving westward from
Chichen Itza, Chakanputun was seized and occupied at the beginning of the
eighth century. Here the Maya are said to have lived for 260 years, until
the destruction of Chakanputun by fire about 960 A. D. again set them
wandering. By this time, however, some four centuries had elapsed since the
first colonization of the country, and they doubtless felt themselves fully
competent to cope with any problems arising from their environment. Once
more their energies had begun to find outlet in artistic expression. The
Transitional Period was at an end, and The Maya Renaissance, if the term
may be used, was fully under way.
The opening of the eleventh century witnessed important and far-reaching
political changes in Yucatan. After the destruction of Chakanputun the
horizon of Maya activity expanded. Some of the fugitives from Chakanputun
reoccupied Chichen Itza while others established themselves at a new site
called Mayapan. About this time also the city of Uxmal seems to have been
founded. In the year 1000 these three cities--Chichen Itza, Uxmal, and
Mayapan--formed a confederacy,[6] in which each was to share equally in the
government of the country. Under the peaceful conditions which {5} followed
the formation of this confederacy for the next 200 years the arts blossomed
forth anew.
This was the second and last great Maya epoch. It was their Age of
Architecture as the first period had been their Age of Sculpture. As a
separate art sculpture languished; but as an adjunct, an embellishment to
architecture, it lived again. The one had become handmaiden to the other.
Façades were treated with a sculptural decoration, which for intricacy and
elaboration has rarely been equaled by any people at any time; and yet this
result was accomplished without sacrifice of beauty or dignity. During this
period probably there arose the many cities which to-day are crumbling in
decay throughout the length and breadth of Yucatan, their very names
forgotten. When these were in their prime, the country must have been one
great beehive of activity, for only a large population could have left
remains so extensive.
This era of universal peace was abruptly terminated about 1200 A. D. by an
event which shook the body politic to its foundations and disrupted the
Triple Alliance under whose beneficent rule the land had grown so
prosperous. The ruler of Chichen Itza, Chac Xib Chac, seems to have plotted
against his colleague of Mayapan, one Hunnac Ceel, and in the disastrous
war which followed, the latter, with the aid of Nahua allies,[7] utterly
routed his opponent and drove him from his city. The conquest of Chichen
Itza seems to have been followed during the thirteenth century by attempted
reprisals on the part of the vanquished Itza, which plunged the country
into civil war; and this struggle in turn paved the way for the final
eclipse of Maya supremacy in the fifteenth century.
After the dissolution of the Triple Alliance a readjustment of power became
necessary. It was only natural that the victors in the late war should
assume the chief direction of affairs, and there is strong evidence that
Mayapan became the most important city in the land. It is not improbable
also that as a result of this war Chichen Itza was turned over to Hunnac
Ceel's Nahua allies, perhaps in recognition of their timely assistance, or
as their share in the spoils of war. It is certain that sometime during its
history Chichen Itza came under a strong Nahua influence. One group of
buildings in particular[8] shows in its architecture and bas-reliefs that
it was undoubtedly inspired by Nahua rather than by Maya ideals.
According to Spanish historians, the fourteenth century was characterized
by increasing arrogance and oppression on the part of the rulers of
Mayapan, who found it necessary to surround themselves with Nahua allies in
order to keep the rising discontent of their {6} subjects in check.[9] This
unrest finally reached its culmination about the middle of the fifteenth
century, when the Maya nobility, unable longer to endure such tyranny,
banded themselves together under the leadership of the lord of Uxmal,
sacked Mayapan, and slew its ruler.
All authorities, native as well as Spanish, agree that the destruction of
Mayapan marked the end of strongly centralized government in Yucatan.
Indeed there can be but little doubt that this event also sounded the death
knell of Maya civilization. As one of the native chronicles tersely puts
it, "The chiefs of the country lost their power." With the destruction of
Mayapan the country split into a number of warring factions, each bent on
the downfall of the others. Ancient jealousies and feuds, no longer held in
leash by the restraining hand of Mayapan, doubtless revived, and soon the
land was rent with strife. Presently to the horrors of civil war were added
those of famine and pestilence, each of which visited the peninsula in
turn, carrying off great numbers of people.
These several calamities, however, were but harbingers of worse soon to
come. In 1517 Francisco de Cordoba landed the first Spanish expedition[10]
on the shores of Yucatan. The natives were so hostile, however, that he
returned to Cuba, having accomplished little more than the discovery of the
country. In the following year Juan de Grijalva descended on the peninsula,
but he, too, met with so determined a resistance that he sailed away,
having gained little more than hard knocks for his pains. In the following
year (1519) Hernando Cortez landed on the northeast coast but reembarked in
a few days for Mexico, again leaving the courageous natives to themselves.
Seven years later, however, in 1526, Francisco Montejo, having been granted
the title of Adelantado of Yucatan, set about the conquest of the country
in earnest. Having obtained the necessary "sinews of war" through his
marriage to a wealthy widow of Seville, he sailed with 3 ships and 500 men
for Yucatan. He first landed on the island of Cozumel, off the northeast
coast, but soon proceeded to the mainland and took formal possession of the
country in the name of the King of Spain. This empty ceremony soon proved
to be {7} but the prelude to a sanguinary struggle, which broke out almost
immediately and continued with extraordinary ferocity for many years, the
Maya fighting desperately in defense of their homes. Indeed, it was not
until 14 years later, on June 11, 1541 (old style), that, the Spaniards
having defeated a coalition of Maya chieftains near the city of
Ichcanzihoo, the conquest was finally brought to a close and the
pacification of the country accomplished. With this event ends the
independent history of the Maya.
MANNERS AND CUSTOMS
According to Bishop Landa,[11] who wrote his remarkable history of Yucatan
in 1565, the Maya of that day were a tall race, active and strong. In
childhood the forehead was artificially flattened and the ears and nose
were pierced for the insertion of earrings and nose-ornaments, of which the
people were very fond. Squint-eye was considered a mark of beauty, and
mothers strove to disfigure their children in this way by suspending
pellets of wax between their eyes in order to make them squint, thus
securing the desired effect. The faces of the younger boys were scalded by
the application of hot cloths, to prevent the growth of the beard, which
was not popular. Both men and women wore their hair long. The former had a
large spot burned on the back of the head, where the hair always remained
short. With the exception of a small queue, which hung down behind, the
hair was gathered around the head in a braid. The women wore a more
beautiful coiffure divided into two braids. The faces of both sexes were
much disfigured as a result of their religious beliefs, which led to the
practice of scarification. Tattooing also was common to both sexes, and
there were persons in almost every community who were especially proficient
in this art. Both men and women painted themselves red, the former
decorating their entire bodies, and the latter all except their faces,
which modesty decreed should be left unpainted. The women also anointed
themselves very freely with fragrant gums and perfumes. They filed their
teeth to sharp points, a practice which was thought to enhance their
beauty.
The clothing of the men was simple. They wore a breechclout wrapped several
times around the loins and tied in such a way that one end fell in front
between the legs and the other in the {8} corresponding position behind.
These breechclouts were carefully embroidered by the women and decorated
with featherwork. A large square cape hung from the shoulders, and sandals
of hemp or leather completed the costume. For persons of high rank the
apparel was much more elaborate, the humble breechclout and cape of the
laboring man giving place to panaches of gorgeously colored feathers
hanging from wooden helmets, rich mantles of tiger skins, and finely
wrought ornaments of gold and jade.
The women sometimes wore a simple petticoat, and a cloth covering the
breasts and passing under the arms. More often their costume consisted of a
single loose sacklike garment called the _hipil_, which reached to the feet
and had slits for the arms. This garment, with the addition of a cloth or
scarf wrapped around the shoulders, constituted the women's clothing a
thousand years ago, just as it does to-day.
In ancient times the women were very chaste and modest. When they passed
men on the road, they stepped to one side, turning their backs and hiding
their faces. The age of marriage was about 20, although children were
frequently affianced when very young. When boys arrived at a marriageable
age their fathers consulted the professional matchmakers of the community,
to whom arrangements for marriage were ordinarily intrusted, it being
considered vulgar for parents or their sons to take an active part in
arranging these affairs. Having sought out the girl's parents, the
matchmaker arranged with them the matter of the dowry, which the young
man's father paid, his wife at the same time giving the necessary clothing
for her son and prospective daughter-in-law. On the day of the wedding the
relatives and guests assembled at the house of the young man's parents,
where a great feast had been prepared. Having satisfied himself that the
young couple had sufficiently considered the grave step they were about to
take, the priest gave the bride to her husband. The ceremony closed with a
feast in which all participated. Immediately after the wedding the young
husband went to the home of his wife's parents, where he was obliged to
work five or six years for his board. If he refused to comply with this
custom he was driven from the house, and the marriage presumably was
annulled. This step seems rarely to have been necessary, however, and the
mother-in-law on her part saw to it that her daughter fed the young husband
regularly, a practice which betokened their recognition of the marriage
rite.
Widowers and widows married without ceremony, it being considered
sufficient for a widower to call on his prospective wife and eat in her
house. Marriage between people of the same name was considered an evil
practice, possibly in deference to some former exogamic law. It was thought
improper to marry a mother-in-law or an aunt {9} by marriage, or a
sister-in-law; otherwise a man could marry whom he would, even his first
cousin.
The Maya were of a very jealous nature and divorces were frequent. These
were effected merely by the desertion of the husband or wife, as the case
might be. The parents tried to bring the couple together and effect a
reconciliation, but if their efforts proved unsuccessful both parties were
at liberty to remarry. If there were young children the mother kept them;
if the children were of age the sons followed the father, the daughters
remaining with their mother. Although divorce was of common occurrence, it
was condemned by the more respectable members of the community. It is
interesting to note that polygamy was unknown among the Maya.
Agriculture was the chief pursuit, corn and other grains being extensively
cultivated, and stored against time of need in well-appointed granaries.
Labor was largely communal; all hands joined to do one another's work.
Bands of twenty or more each, passing from field to field throughout the
community, quickly finished sowing or harvesting. This communal idea was
carried to the chase, fifty or more men frequently going out together to
hunt. At the conclusion of these expeditions the meat was roasted and then
carried back to town. First, the lord of the district was given his share,
after which the remainder was distributed among the hunters and their
friends. Communal fishing parties are also mentioned.
Another occupation in high favor was that of trade or commerce. Salt,
cloth, and slaves were the chief articles of barter; these were carried as
far as Tabasco. Cocoa, stone counters, and highly prized red shells of a
peculiar kind were the media of exchange. These were accepted in return for
all the products of the country, even including the finely worked stones,
jades possibly, with which the chiefs adorned themselves at their fetes.
Credit was asked and given, all debts were honestly paid, and no usury was
exacted.
The sense of justice among the Maya was highly developed. If a man
committed an offense against one of another village, the former's lord
caused satisfaction to be rendered, otherwise the communities would come to
blows. Troubles between men of the same village were taken to a judge, who
having heard both sides, fixed appropriate damages. If the malefactor could
not pay these, the obligation extended to his wife and relatives. Crimes
which could be satisfied by the payment of an indemnity were accidental
killings, quarrels between man and wife, and the accidental destruction of
property by fire. Malicious mischief could be atoned for only by blows and
the shedding of blood. The punishment of murder was left in the hands of
the deceased's relatives, who were at liberty to exact an indemnity or the
murderer's life as they pleased. The thief was obliged to make good
whatever he had stolen, no matter how little; in event of failure to do so
he was reduced to slavery. Adultery was punishable by {10} death. The
adulterer was led into the courtyard of the chief's house, where all had
assembled, and after being tied to a stake, was turned over to the mercies
of the outraged husband, who either pardoned him or crushed his head with a
heavy rock. As for the guilty woman, her infamy was deemed sufficient
punishment for her, though usually her husband abandoned her.
The Maya were a very hospitable people, always offering food and drink to
the stranger within their gates, and sharing with him to the last crumb.
They were much given to conviviality, particularly the lords, who
frequently entertained one another with elaborate feasts, accompanied by
music and dancing, expending at times on a single occasion the proceeds of
many days' accumulation. They usually sat down to eat by twos or fours. The
meal, which consisted of vegetable stews, roast meats, corn cakes, and
cocoa (to mention only a few of the viands) was spread upon mats laid on
the ground. After the repast was finished beautiful young girls acting as
cupbearers passed among the guests, plying them industriously with wine
until all were drunk. Before departing each guest was presented with a
handsome vase and pedestal, with a cloth cover therefor. At these orgies
drinking was frequently carried to such excess that the wives of the guests
were obliged to come for their besotted husbands and drag them home. Each
of the guests at such a banquet was required to give one in return, and not
even death could stay the payment of a debt of this kind, since the
obligation descended to the recipient's heirs. The poor entertained less
lavishly, as became their means. Guests at the humbler feasts, moreover,
were not obliged to return them in kind.
The chief amusements of the Maya were comedies and dances, in both of which
they exhibited much skill and ingenuity. There was a variety of musical
instruments--drums of several kinds, rattles, reed flutes, wooden horns,
and bone whistles. Their music is described as having been sad, owing
perhaps to the melancholy sound of the instruments which produced it.
The frequent wars which darken the final pages of Maya history doubtless
developed the military organization to a high degree of efficiency. At the
head of the army stood two generals, one hereditary and the other elective
(_nacon_), the latter serving for three years. In each village throughout
the country certain men (_holcanes_) were chosen to act as soldiers; these
constituted a kind of a standing army, thoroughly trained in the art of
war. They were supported by the community, and in times of peace caused
much disturbance, continuing the tumult of war after war had ceased. In
times of great stress when it became necessary to call on all able-bodied
men for military service, the holcanes mustered all those available in
their respective districts and trained them in the use of arms. There were
but few weapons: Wooden bows strung with hemp cords, and arrows {11} tipped
with obsidian or bone; long lances with sharp flint points; and metal
(probably copper) axes, provided with wooden handles. The defensive armor
consisted of round wicker shields strengthened with deer hide, and quilted
cotton coats, which were said to have extraordinary resisting power against
the native weapons. The highest chiefs wore wooden helmets decorated with
brilliant plumes, and cloaks of "tiger" (jaguar) skin, thrown over their
shoulders.
With a great banner at their head the troops silently stole out of the
city, and moved against the enemy, hoping thus to surprise them. When the
enemies' position had been ascertained, they fell on them suddenly with
extraordinary ferocity, uttering loud cries. Barricades of trees, brush,
and stone were used in defense, behind which archers stood, who endeavored
to repulse the attack. After a battle the victors mutilated the bodies of
the slain, cutting out the jawbones and cleaning them of flesh. These were
worn as bracelets after the flesh had been removed. At the conclusion of
their wars the spoils were offered in sacrifice. If by chance some leader
or chief had been captured, he was sacrificed as an offering particularly
acceptable to the gods. Other prisoners became the slaves of those who had
captured them.
The Maya entertained an excessive and constant fear of death, many of their
religious practices having no other end in view than that of warding off
the dread visitor. After death there followed a prolonged period of sadness
in the bereaved family, the days being given over to fasting, and the more
restrained indulgence in grief, and the nights to dolorous cries and
lamentations, most pitiful to hear. Among the common people the dead were
wrapped in shrouds; their mouths were filled with ground corn and bits of
worked stone so that they should not lack for food and money in the life to
come. The Maya buried their dead inside the houses[12] or behind them,
putting into the tomb idols, and objects indicating the profession of the
deceased--if a priest, some of his sacred books; if a seer, some of his
divinatory paraphernalia. A house was commonly abandoned after a death
therein, unless enough remained in the household to dispel the fear which
always followed such an occurrence.
In the higher walks of life the mortuary customs were more elaborate. The
bodies of chiefs and others of high estate were burned and their ashes
placed in large pottery vessels. These were buried in the ground and
temples erected over them.[13] When the deceased {12} was of very high rank
the pottery sarcophagus took the form of a human statue. A variant of the
above procedure was to burn only a part of the body, inclosing the ashes in
the hollow head of a wooden statue, and sealing them in with a piece of
skin taken from the back of the dead man's skull. The rest of the body was
buried. Such statues were jealously preserved among the figures of the
gods, being held in deep veneration.
The lords of Mayapan had still another mortuary practice. After death the
head was severed from the body and cooked in order to remove all flesh. It
was then sawed in half from side to side, care being taken to preserve the
jaw, nose, eyes, and forehead in one piece. Upon this as a form the
features of the dead man were filled in with a kind of a gum. Such was
their extraordinary skill in this peculiar work that the finished mask is
said to have appeared exactly like the countenance in life. The carefully
prepared faces, together with the statues containing the ashes of the dead,
were deposited with their idols. Every feast day meats were set before them
so they should lack for nothing in that other world whither they had gone.
Very little is known about the governmental organization of the southern
Maya, and it seems best, therefore, first to examine conditions in the
north, concerning which the early authorities, native as well as Spanish,
have much to say. The northern Maya lived in settlements, some of very
considerable extent, under the rule of hereditary chiefs called _halach
uinicil_, or "real men," who were, in fact as well as name, the actual
rulers of the country. The settlements tributary to each _halach uinic_
were doubtless connected by tribal ties, based on real or fancied blood
relationship.
During the period of the Triple Alliance (1000-1200 A. D.) there were
probably only three of these embryonic nations: Chichen Itza, Uxmal, and
Mayapan, among which the country seems to have been apportioned. After the
conquest of Chichen Itza, however, the halach uinic of Mayapan probably
attempted to establish a more autocratic form of government, arrogating to
himself still greater power. The Spanish authorities relate that the chiefs
of the country assembled at Mayapan, acknowledged the ruler of that city as
their overlord, and finally agreed to live there, each binding himself at
the same time to conduct the affairs of his own domain through a deputy.
This attempt to unite the country under one head and bring about a further
centralization of power ultimately failed, as has been seen, through the
tyranny of the Cocom family, in which the office of halach uinic of Mayapan
was vested. This tyranny led to the overthrow of the Cocoms and the
destruction of centralized government, so that when the Spaniards arrived
they found a number of petty chieftains, acknowledging no overlord, and the
country in chaos.
The powers of the halach uinic are not clearly understood. He seems to have
stood at the apex of the governmental organization, and {13} doubtless his
will prevailed just so far as he had sufficient strength to enforce it. The
_batabs_, or underchiefs, were obliged to visit him and render him their
homage. They also accompanied him in his tours about the country, which
always gave rise to feasting back and forth. Finally they advised him on
all important matters. The office would seem to have been no stronger in
any case than its incumbent, since we hear of the halach uinic of Mayapan
being obliged to surround himself with foreign troops in order to hold his
people in check.
Each batab governed the territory of which he was the hereditary ruler,
instructing his heir in the duties of the position, and counseling that he
treat the poor with benevolence and maintain peace and encourage industry,
so that all might live in plenty. He settled all lawsuits, and through
trusted lieutenants ordered and adjusted the various affairs of his domain.
When he went abroad from his city or even from his house a great crowd
accompanied him. He often visited his underchiefs, holding court in their
houses, and meeting at night in council to discuss matters touching the
common good. The batabs frequently entertained one another with dancing,
hunting, and feasting. The people as a community tilled the batab's fields,
reaped his corn, and supplied his wants in general. The underchiefs were
similarly provided for, each according to his rank and needs.
The _ahkulel_, the next highest official in each district, acted as the
batab's deputy or representative; he carried a short thick baton in token
of his office. He had charge of the localities subject to his master's rule
as well as of the officers immediately over them. He kept these assistants
informed as to what was needed in the batab's house, as birds, game, fish,
corn, honey, salt, and cloth, which they supplied when called on. The
ahkulel was, in short, a chief steward, and his house was the batab's
business office.
Another important position was that of the _nacon_, or war-chief. In times
of war this functionary was second only to the hereditary chief, or batab,
and was greatly venerated by all. His office was elective, the term being
three years, during which he was obliged to refrain from intercourse with
women, and to hold himself aloof from all.
An important civil position was that held by the _ahholpop_, in whose
keeping was the _tunkul_, or wooden drum, used in summoning people to the
dances and public meetings, or as a tocsin in case of war. He had charge
also of the "town hall" in which all public business was transacted.
The question of succession is important. Bishop Landa distinctly states in
one passage "That when the lord died, although his oldest son succeeded
him, the others were always loved and served and even regarded as lords."
This would seem to indicate definitely that descent was by primogeniture.
However, another passage suggests that the oldest son did not always
succeed his father: "The lords were the governors and confirmed their sons
in their offices if they {14} [the sons] were acceptable." This suggests
the possibility, at least, that primogeniture could sometimes be set aside,
particularly when the first-born lacked the necessary qualifications for
leadership. In a somewhat drawn-out statement the same authority discusses
the question of "princely succession" among the Maya:
If the children were too young to be intrusted with the management of
their own affairs, these were turned over to a guardian, the nearest
relation. He gave the children to their mothers to bring up, because
according to their usage the mother has no power of her own. When the
guardian was the brother of the deceased [the children's paternal
uncle] they take the children from their mother. These guardians give
what was intrusted to them to the heirs when they come of age, and not
to do so was considered a great dishonesty and was the cause of much
contention.... If when the lord died there were no sons [ready, i. e.,
of age] to rule and he had brothers, the oldest or most capable of his
brothers ruled, and they [the guardians] showed the heir the customs
and fetes of his people until he should be a man, and these brothers,
although the heir were [ready] to rule, commanded all their lives, and,
if there were no brothers the priests and principal people selected a
man suitable for the position.[14]
The foregoing would seem to imply that the rulers were succeeded by their
eldest sons if the latter were of age and otherwise generally acceptable;
and that, if they were minors when their fathers died, their paternal
uncles, if any, or otherwise some capable man selected by the priests, took
the reins of government, instructing the heir in the duties of the position
which he was to occupy some day; and finally that the regent did not lay
down his authority until death, even though the heir had previously
attained his majority. This custom is so unusual that its existence may
well be doubted, and it is not at all improbable that Bishop Landa's
statement to the contrary may have arisen from some misapprehension.
Primogeniture was not confined to the executive succession alone, since
Bishop Landa states further that the high priest _Ahau can mai_ was
succeeded in his dignity by his sons, or those next of kin.
Nepotism doubtless prevailed extensively, all the higher offices of the
priesthood as well as the executive offices being hereditary, and in all
probability filled with members of the halach uinic's family.
The priests instructed the younger sons of the ruling family as well as
their own, in the priestly duties and learning; in the computation of
years, months, and days; in unlucky times; in fetes and ceremonies; in the
administration of the sacraments; in the practices of prophecy and
divination; in treating the sick; in their ancient history; and finally in
the art of reading and writing their hieroglyphics, which was taught only
to those of high degree. Genealogies were carefully preserved, the term
meaning "of noble birth" being _ah kaba_, "he who has a name." The
elaborate attention given to the subject of lineage, and the exclusive
right of the _ah kaba_ to the benefits of education, show that in the
northern part of the Maya territory at least government rested on the
principle of hereditary succession. The accounts of native as well as of
Spanish writers leave the impression that a system not unlike a modified
form of feudalism prevailed.
[Illustration: DIAGRAM SHOWING PERIODS OF OCCUPANCY OF PRINCIPAL SOUTHERN
CITIES]
{15} In attempting to gain an approximate understanding of the form of
government which existed in the southern part of the Maya territory it is
necessary in the absence of all documentary information to interpret the
southern chronology, architecture, and sculpture--practically all that
remains of the older culture--in the light of the known conditions in the
north. The chronology of the several southern cities (see pl. 2) indicates
that many of them were contemporaneous, and that a few, namely, Tikal,
Naranjo, Palenque, and Copan were occupied approximately 200 years, a much
longer period than any of the others.[15] These four would seem to have
been centers of population for a long time, and at least three of them,
Tikal, Palenque, and Copan, attained considerable size. Indeed they may
well have been, like Chichen Itza, Uxmal, and Mayapan, at a later epoch in
the north, the seats of halach uincil, or overlords, to whom all the
surrounding chiefs were tributary. Geographically considered, the country
was well apportioned among these cities: Tikal dominating the north,
Palenque, the west, and Copan, the south.
The architecture, sculpture, and hieroglyphic writing of all the southern
centers is practically identical, even to the borrowing of unessential
details, a condition which indicates a homogeneity only to be accounted for
by long-continued and frequent intercourse. This characteristic of the
culture, together with the location and contemporaneity of its largest
centers, suggests that originally the southern territory was divided into
several extensive political divisions, all in close intercourse with one
another, and possibly united in a league similar to that which later united
the principal cities of the north. The unmistakable priestly or religious
character of the sculptures in the southern area clearly indicates the
peaceful temper of the people, and the conspicuous absence of warlike
subjects points strongly to the fact that the government was a theocracy,
the highest official in the priesthood being at the same time, by virtue of
his sacerdotal rank, the highest civil authority. Whether the principle of
hereditary succession determined or even influenced the selection of rulers
in the south is impossible to say. However, since the highest offices, both
executive and priestly, in the north were thus filled, it may be assumed
that similar conditions prevailed in the south, particularly as the
northern civilization was but an outgrowth of the {16} southern. There is
some ground for believing that the highest office in the south may have
been elective, the term being a _hotun_[16] (1,800 days), and the choice
restricted to the members of a certain family. The existence of this
restriction, which closely parallels the Aztec procedure in selecting
rulers,[17] rests on very slender evidence, however, so far as the Maya are
concerned and is mentioned here simply by way of suggestion.
[Illustration: FIG. 1. Itzamna, chief deity of the Maya Pantheon (note his
name glyphs, below).]
The religion of the ancient Maya was polytheistic, its pantheon containing
about a dozen major deities and a host of lesser ones. At its head stood
Itzamna, the father of the gods and creator of mankind, the Mayan Zeus or
Jupiter. He was the personification of the East, the rising sun, and, by
association, of light, life, and knowledge. He was the founder of the Maya
civilization, the first priest of the Maya religion, the inventor of
writing and books, and the great healer. Whether Itzamna has been
identified with any of the deities in the ancient Maya picture-writings is
uncertain, though there are strong reasons for believing that this deity is
the god represented in figure 1. His characteristics here are: The aged
face, Roman nose, and sunken toothless mouth.
[Illustration: FIG. 2. Kukulcan, God of Learning (note his name glyph,
below).]
Scarcely less important was the great god Kukulcan, or Feathered Serpent,
the personification of the West. It is related of him that he came into
Yucatan from the west and settled at Chichen Itza, where he ruled for many
years and built a great temple. During his sojourn he is said to have
founded the city of Mayapan, which later became so important. Finally,
having brought the country out of war and dissension to peace and
prosperity, he left by the same way he had entered, tarrying only at
Chakanputun on the west coast to build a splendid temple as an everlasting
memorial of his residence among the people. After his departure he was
worshipped as a god because of what he had done for the public good.
Kukulcan was the Maya counterpart of the Aztec Quetzalcoatl, the Mexican
god of light, learning, and culture. In the Maya pantheon he was regarded
as having been the great organizer, the founder of cities, the framer of
laws, and the teacher of their new calendar. Indeed, his attributes {17}
and life history are so human that it is not improbable he may have been an
actual historical character, some great lawgiver and organizer, the memory
of whose benefactions lingered long after death, and whose personality was
eventually deified. The episodes of his life suggest he may have been the
recolonizer of Chichen Itza after the destruction of Chakanputun. Kukulcan
has been identified by some as the "old god" of the picture-writings (fig.
2), whose characteristics are: Two deformed teeth, one protruding from the
front and one from the back part of his mouth, and the long tapering nose.
He is to be distinguished further by his peculiar headdress.
[Illustration: FIG. 3. Ahpuch, God of Death (note his name glyphs, below).]
The most feared and hated of all the Maya deities was Ahpuch, the Lord of
Death, God "Barebones" as an early manuscript calls him, from whom evil and
especially death were thought to come. He is frequently represented in the
picture-writings (fig. 3), usually in connection with the idea of death. He
is associated with human sacrifice, suicide by hanging, death in
childbirth, and the beheaded captive. His characteristics are typical and
unmistakable. His head is the fleshless skull, showing the truncated nose,
the grinning teeth, and fleshless lower jaw, sometimes even the cranial
sutures are portrayed. In some places the ribs and vertebrae are shown, in
others the body is spotted black as if to suggest the discoloration of
death. A very constant symbol is the stiff feather collar with small bells
attached. These bells also appear as ornaments on the head, arms, and
ankles. The to us familiar crossbones were also another Maya death symbol.
Even the hieroglyph of this god (fig. 3) suggests the dread idea for which
he stood. Note the eye closed in death.
[Illustration: FIG. 4. The God of War (note his name glyph, below).]
Closely associated with the God of Death is the God of War, who probably
stood as well for the larger idea of death by violence. He is characterized
(fig. 4) by a black line painted on his face, sometimes curving, sometimes
straight, supposed to be symbolical of war paint, or, according to others,
of his gaping wounds. He appears in the picture-writings as the Death God's
companion. He presides with him over the body of a sacrificial victim, and
again follows him applying torch and knife to the habitations of man. His
hieroglyph shows as its characteristic the line of black paint (fig. 4).
Another unpropitious deity was Ek Ahau, the Black Captain, also a war god,
being represented (fig. 5) in the picture-writings as armed {18} with a
spear or an ax. It was said of him that he was a very great and very cruel
warrior, who commanded a band of seven blackamoors like himself. He is
characterized by his black color, his drooping lower lip, and the two
curved lines at the right of his eye. His hieroglyph is a black eye (fig.
5).
[Illustration: FIG. 5. Ek Ahau, the Black Captain, war deity (note his name
glyph, below).]
Contrasted with these gods of death, violence, and destruction was the
Maize God, Yum Kaax, Lord of the Harvest Fields (fig. 6). Here we have one
of the most important figures in the whole Maya pantheon, the god of
husbandry and the fruits of the earth, of fertility and prosperity, of
growth and plenty. The Maize God was as well disposed toward mankind as
Ahpuch and his companions were unpropitious. In many of the
picture-writings Yum Kaax is represented as engaged in agricultural
pursuits. He is portrayed as having for his head-dress a sprouting ear of
corn surrounded by leaves, symbolic of growth, for which he stands. Even
the hieroglyph of this deity (fig. 6) embodies the same idea, the god's
head merging into the conventionalized ear of corn surrounded by leaves.
[Illustration: FIG. 6. Yum Kaax, Lord of the Harvest (note his name glyph,
below).]
Another important deity about whom little or nothing is known was Xaman Ek,
the North Star. He is spoken of as the "guide of the merchants," and in
keeping with that character is associated in the picture-writings with
symbols of peace and plenty. His one characteristic seems to be his curious
head, which also serves as his name hieroglyph (fig. 7).
Other Maya deities were: Ixchel, the Rainbow, consort of Itzamna and
goddess of childbirth and medicine; Ixtab, patroness of hunting and
hanging; Ixtubtun, protectress of jade cutters; Ixchebelyax, the inventress
of painting and color designing as applied to fabrics.
Although the deities above described represent only a small fraction of the
Maya pantheon, they include, beyond all doubt, its most important members,
the truly great, who held the powers of life and death, peace and war,
plenty and famine--who were, in short, the arbiters of human destiny.
The Maya conceived the earth to be a cube, which supported the celestial
vase resting on its four legs, the four cardinal points. Out of this grew
the Tree of Life, the flowers of which were the immortal principle of man,
the soul. Above hung heavy clouds, the fructifying waters upon which all
growth and life depend. The religion was dualistic in spirit, a constant
struggle between the powers of {19} light and of darkness. On one side were
arrayed the gods of plenty, peace, and life; on the other those of want,
war, and destruction; and between these two there waged an unending strife
for the control of man. This struggle between the powers of light and
darkness is graphically portrayed in the picture-writings. Where the God of
Life plants the tree, Death breaks it in twain (fig. 8); where the former
offers food, the latter raises an empty vase symbolizing famine; where one
builds, the other destroys. The contrast is complete, the conflict eternal.
[Illustration: FIG. 7. Xaman Ek, the North Star God (note his name glyph,
below).]
The Maya believed in the immortality of the soul and in a spiritual life
hereafter. As a man lived in this world so he was rewarded in the next. The
good and righteous went to a heaven of material delights, a place where
rich foods never failed and pain and sorrow were unknown. The wicked were
consigned to a hell called Mitnal, over which ruled the archdemon Hunhau
and his minions; and here in hunger, cold, and exhaustion they suffered
everlasting torment. The materialism of the Maya heaven and hell need not
surprise, nor lower our estimate of their civilization. Similar realistic
conceptions of the hereafter have been entertained by peoples much higher
in the cultural scale than the Maya.
[Illustration: FIG. 8. Conflict between the Gods of Life and Death
(Kukulcan and Ahpuch).]
Worship doubtless was the most important feature of the Maya scheme of
existence, and an endless succession of rites and ceremonies was considered
necessary to retain the sympathies of the good gods and to propitiate the
malevolent ones. Bishop Landa says that the aim and object of all Maya
ceremonies were to secure three things only: Health, life, and sustenance;
modest enough requests to ask of any faith. The first step in all Maya
religious rites was the expulsion of the evil spirits from the midst of the
worshipers. This was accomplished sometimes by prayers and benedictions,
set formulæ of proven efficacy, and sometimes by special sacrifices and
offerings.
It would take us too far afield to describe here even the more important
ceremonies of the Maya religion. Their number was literally legion, and
they answered almost every contingency within the range of human
experience. First of all were the ceremonies dedicated to special gods, as
Itzamna, Kukulcan, and Ixchel. Probably every deity in the pantheon, even
the most insignificant, had at least one rite a year addressed to it alone,
and the aggregate must have made a very considerable number. In addition
there were the annual feasts of the ritualistic year brought around by the
ever-recurring {20} seasons. Here may be mentioned the numerous ceremonies
incident to the beginning of the new year and the end of the old, as the
renewal of household utensils and the general renovation of all articles,
which took place at this tine; the feasts of the various trades and
occupations--the hunters, fishers, and apiarists, the farmers, carpenters,
and potters, the stonecutters, wood carvers, and metal workers--each guild
having its own patron deity, whose services formed another large group of
ceremonials. A third class comprised the rites of a more personal nature,
those connected with baptism, confession, marriage, setting out on
journeys, and the like. Finally, there was a fourth group of ceremonies,
held much less frequently than the others, but of far greater importance.
Herein fall the ceremonies held on extraordinary occasions, as famine,
drought, pestilence, victory, or defeat, which were probably solemnized by
rites of human sacrifice.
The direction of so elaborate a system of worship necessitated a numerous
and highly organized priesthood. At the head of the hierarchy stood the
hereditary high priest, or _ahaucan mai_, a functionary of very
considerable power. Although he had no actual share in the government, his
influence was none the less far-reaching, since the highest lords sought
his advice, and deferred to his judgment in the administration of their
affairs. They questioned him concerning the will of the gods on various
points, and he in response framed the divine replies, a duty which gave him
tremendous power and authority. In the ahuacan mai was vested also the
exclusive right to fill vacancies in the priesthood. He examined candidates
on their knowledge of the priestly services and ceremonies, and after their
appointment directed them in the discharge of their duties. He rarely
officiated at sacrifices except on occasions of the greatest importance, as
at the principal feasts or in times of general need. His office was
maintained by presents from the lords and enforced contributions from the
priesthood throughout the country.
The priesthood included within its ranks women as well as men. The duties
were highly specialized and there were many different ranks and grades in
the hierarchy. The _chilan_ was one of the most important. This priest was
carried upon the shoulders of the people when he appeared in public. He
taught their sciences, appointed the holy days, healed the sick, offered
sacrifices, and most important of all, gave the responses of the gods to
petitioners. The _ahuai chac_ was a priest who brought the rains on which
the prosperity of the country was wholly dependent. The _ah macik_ conjured
the winds; the _ahpul_ caused sickness and induced sleep; the _ahuai
xibalba_ communed with the dead. At the bottom of the ladder seems to have
stood the _nacon_, whose duty it was to open the breasts of the sacrificed
victims. An important elective office in each community was that held by
the _chac_, or priest's assistant. These officials, of which there {21}
were four, were elected from the _nucteelob_, or village wise men. They
served for a term of one year and could never be reelected. They aided the
priest in the various ceremonies of the year, officiating in minor
capacities. Their duties seem to have been not unlike those of the
sacristan in the Roman Catholic Church of to-day.
In closing this introduction nothing could be more appropriate than to call
attention once more to the supreme importance of religion in the life of
the ancient Maya. Religion was indeed the very fountain-head of their
civilization, and on its rites and observances they lavished a devotion
rarely equaled in the annals of man. To its great uplifting force was due
the conception and evolution of the hieroglyphic writing and calendar,
alike the invention and the exclusive property of the priesthood. To its
need for sanctuary may be attributed the origin of Maya architecture; to
its desire for expression, the rise of Maya sculpture. All activities
reflected its powerful influence and all were more or less dominated by its
needs and teachings. In short, religion was the foundation upon which the
structure of the Maya civilization was reared. {22}
CHAPTER II. THE MAYA HIEROGLYPHIC WRITING
The inscriptions herein described are found throughout the region formerly
occupied by the Maya people (pl. 1), though by far the greater number have
been discovered at the southern, or older, sites. This is due in part, at
least, to the minor role played by sculpture as an independent art among
the northern Maya, for in the north architecture gradually absorbed in its
decoration the sculptural activity of the people which in the south had
been applied in the making of the hieroglyphic monuments.
[Illustration: FIG. 9. Outlines of the glyphs: _a_, _b_, In the codices;
_c_, in the inscriptions.]
The materials upon which the Maya glyphs are presented are stone, wood,
stucco, bone, shell, metal, plaster, pottery, and fiber-paper; the
first-mentioned, however, occurs more frequently than all of the others
combined. Texts have been found carved on the wooden lintels of Tikal,
molded in the stucco reliefs of Palenque, scratched on shells from Copan
and Belize, etched on a bone from Wild Cane Key, British Honduras, engraved
on metal from Chichen Itza, drawn on the plaster-covered walls of Kabah,
Chichen Itza, and Uxmal, and painted in fiber-paper books. All of these,
however, with the exception of the first and the last (the inscriptions on
stone and the fiber-paper books or codices) just mentioned, occur so rarely
that they may be dismissed from present consideration.
The stones bearing inscriptions are found in a variety of shapes, the
commonest being the monolithic shafts or slabs known as _stelæ_. Some of
the shaft-stelæ attain a height of twenty-six feet (above ground); these
are not unlike roughly squared obelisks, with human figures carved on the
obverse and the reverse, and glyphs on the other faces. Slab-stelæ, on the
other hand, are shorter and most of them bear inscriptions only on the
reverse. Frequently associated with these stelæ are smaller monoliths known
as "altars," which vary greatly in size, shape, and decoration, some
bearing glyphs and others being without them.
The foregoing monuments, however, by no means exhaust the list of stone
objects that bear hieroglyphs. As an adjunct to architecture inscriptions
occur on wall-slabs at Palenque, on lintels at Yaxchilan and Piedras
Negras, on steps and stairways at Copan, and on piers and architraves at
Holactun; and these do not include the great number of smaller pieces, as
inscribed jades and the like. Most of the glyphs in the inscriptions are
square in outline except for rounded corners (fig. 9, _c_). Those in the
codices, on the other hand, approximate more nearly in form rhomboids or
even ovals (fig. 9, _a_, _b_). This difference in outline, however, is only
superficial in significance and involves no corresponding difference in
meaning between {23} otherwise identical glyphs; it is due entirely to the
mechanical dissimilarity of the two materials. Disregarding this
consideration as unessential, we may say that the glyphs in both the
inscriptions and the codices belong to one and the same system of writing,
and if it were possible to read either, the other could no longer withhold
its meaning from us.
In Maya inscriptions the glyphs are arranged in parallel columns, which are
to be read two columns at a time, beginning with the uppermost glyph in the
left-hand column, and then from left to right and top to bottom, ending
with the lowest glyph in the second column. Then the next two columns are
read in the same order, and so on. In reading glyphs in a horizontal band,
the order is from left to right in pairs. The writer knows of no text in
which the above order of reading is not followed.
A brief examination of any Maya text, from either the inscriptions or the
codices, reveals the presence of certain elements which occur repeatedly
but in varying combinations. The apparent multiplicity of these
combinations leads at first to the conclusion that a great number of signs
were employed in Maya writing, but closer study will show that, as compared
with the composite characters or glyphs proper, the simple elements are few
in number. Says Doctor Brinton (1894 b: p. 10) in this connection: "If we
positively knew the meaning ... of a hundred or so of these simple
elements, none of the inscriptions could conceal any longer from us the
general tenor of its contents." Unfortunately, it must be admitted that but
little advance has been made toward the solution of this problem, perhaps
because later students have distrusted the highly fanciful results achieved
by the earlier writers who "interpreted" these "simple elements."
[Illustration: FIG. 10. Examples of glyph elision, showing elimination of
all parts except essential element (here, the crossed bands).]
Moreover, there is encountered at the very outset in the study of these
elements a condition which renders progress slow and results uncertain. In
Egyptian texts of any given period the simple phonetic elements or signs
are unchanging under all conditions of composition. Like the letters of our
own alphabet, they never vary and may be recognized as unfailingly. On the
other hand, in Maya texts each glyph is in itself a finished picture,
dependent on no other for its meaning, and consequently the various
elements entering into it undergo very considerable modifications in order
that the resulting composite character may not only be a balanced and
harmonious {24} design, but also may exactly fill its allotted space. All
such modifications probably in no way affect the meaning of the element
thus mutilated.
[Illustration: FIG. 11. Normal-form and head-variant glyphs, showing
retention of essential element in each.]
The element shown in figure 10, _a-e_ is a case in point. In _a_ and _b_ we
have what may be called the normal or regular forms of this element. In
_c_, however, the upper arm has been omitted for the sake of symmetry in a
composite glyph, while in _d_ the lower arm has been left out for want of
space. Finally in _e_ both arms have disappeared and the element is reduced
to the sign (), which we may conclude, therefore, is the essential
characteristic of this glyph, particularly since there is no regularity in
the treatment of the arms in the normal forms. This suggests another point
of the utmost importance, namely, the determination of the essential
elements of Maya glyphs. The importance of this point lies in the fact that
great license was permitted in the treatment of accessory elements so long
as the essential element or elements of a glyph could readily be recognized
as such. In this way may be explained the use of the so-called "head"
variants, in which the outline of the glyph was represented as a human or a
grotesque head modified in some way by the essential element of the
intended form. The first step in the development of head variants is seen
in figure 11, _a_, _b_, in which the entire glyph _a_ is used as a
headdress in glyph _b_, the meaning of the two forms remaining identical.
The next step is shown in the same figure, _c_ and _d_, in which the
outline of the entire glyph _c_ has been changed to form the grotesque head
_d_, though in both glyphs the essential elements are the same. A further
development was to apply the essential element () of _e_ to the head in
_f_, giving rise to a head variant, the meaning of which suffered no
corresponding change. The element (+) in figure 11, _g_, has been reduced
in size in _h_, though the other two essential elements remain unchanged. A
final step appears in _i_ and _j_, where in _j_ the position of one of the
two essential elements of _i_ () and the form of the other (++) have been
changed. These variants {25} are puzzling enough when the essential
characteristics and meaning of a glyph have been determined, but when both
are unknown the problem is indeed knotty. For example, it would seem as a
logical deduction from the foregoing examples, that _l_ of figure 11 is a
"head" variant of _k_; and similarly _n_ might be a "head" variant of _m_,
but here we are treading on uncertain ground, as the meanings of these
forms are unknown.
Nor is this feature of Maya writing (i. e., the presence of "head
variants") the only pitfall which awaits the beginner who attempts to
classify the glyphs according to their appearance. In some cases two
entirely dissimilar forms express exactly the same idea. For example, no
two glyphs could differ more in appearance than _a_ and _b_, figure 12, yet
both of these forms have the same meaning. This is true also of the two
glyphs _c_ and _d_, and _e_ and _f_. The occurrence of forms so absolutely
unlike in appearance, yet identical in meaning, greatly complicates the
problem of glyph identification. Indeed, identity in both meaning and use
must be clearly established before we can recognize as variants of the same
glyph, forms so dissimilar as the examples above given. Hence, because
their meanings are unknown we are unable to identify _g_ and _h_, figure
12, as synonyms, notwithstanding the fact that their use seems to be
identical, _h_ occurring in two or three texts under exactly the same
conditions as does _g_ in all the others.
[Illustration: FIG. 12. Normal-form and head-variant glyphs, showing
absence of common essential element.]
A further source of error in glyph identification is the failure to
recognize variations due merely to individual peculiarities of style, which
are consequently unessential. Just as handwriting differs in each
individual, so the delineation of glyphs differed among the ancient Maya,
though doubtless to a lesser extent. In extreme cases, however, the
differences are so great that identification of variants as forms of one
and the same glyph is difficult if indeed not impossible. Here also are to
be included variations due to differences in the materials upon which the
glyphs are delineated, as well as those arising from careless drawing and
actual mistakes.
The foregoing difficulties, as well as others which await the student who
would classify the Maya glyphs according to form and appearance, have led
the author to discard this method of classification as unsuited to the
purposes of an elementary work. Though a problem of first importance, the
analysis of the simple elements is far too complex for presentation to the
beginner, particularly since the {26} greatest diversity of opinion
concerning them prevails among those who have studied the subject, scarcely
any two agreeing at any one point; and finally because up to the present
time success in reading Maya writing has not come through this channel.
The classification followed herein is based on the general meaning of the
glyphs, and therefore has the advantage of being at least self-explanatory.
It divides the glyphs into two groups: (1) Astronomical, calendary, and
numerical signs, that is, glyphs used in counting time; and (2) glyphs
accompanying the preceding, which have an explanatory function of some
sort, probably describing the nature of the occasions which the first group
of glyphs designate.
According to this classification, the great majority of the glyphs whose
meanings have been determined fall into the first group, and those whose
meanings are still unknown into the second. This is particularly true of
the inscriptions, in which the known glyphs practically all belong to the
first group. In the codices, on the other hand, some little progress has
made been in reading glyphs of the second group. The name-glyphs of the
principal gods, the signs for the cardinal points and associated colors,
and perhaps a very few others may be mentioned in this connection.[18]
Of the unknown glyphs in both the inscriptions and the codices, a part at
least have to do with numerical calculations of some kind, a fact which
relegates such glyphs to the first group. The author believes that as the
reading of the Maya glyphs progresses, more and more characters will be
assigned to the first group and fewer and fewer to the second. In the end,
however, there will be left what we may perhaps call a "textual residue,"
that is, those glyphs which explain the nature of the events that are to be
associated with the corresponding chronological parts. It is here, if
anywhere, that fragments of Maya history will be found recorded, and
precisely here is the richest field for future research, since the
successful interpretation of this "textual residue" will alone disclose the
true meaning of the Maya writings.
Three principal theories have been advanced for the interpretation of Maya
writing:
1. That the glyphs are phonetic, each representing some sound, and entirely
dissociated from the representation of any thought or idea.
2. That the glyphs are ideographic, each representing in itself some
complete thought or idea.
3. That the glyphs are both phonetic and ideographic, that is, a
combination of 1 and 2.
It is apparent at the outset that the first of these theories can not be
accepted in its entirety; for although there are undeniable traces {27} of
phoneticism among the Maya glyphs, all attempts to reduce them to a
phonetic system or alphabet, which will interpret the writing, have
signally failed. The first and most noteworthy of these so-called "Maya
alphabets," because of its genuine antiquity, is that given by Bishop Landa
in his invaluable _Relacion de las cosas de Yucatan_, frequently cited in
Chapter I. Writing in the year 1565, within 25 years of the Spanish
Conquest, Landa was able to obtain characters for 27 sounds, as follows:
Three _a's_, two _b's_, _c_, _t_, _e_, _h_, _i_, _ca_, _k_, two _l's_, _m_,
_n_, two _o's_, _pp_, _p_, _cu_, _ku_, two _x's_, two _v's_, _z_. This
alphabet, which was first published in 1864 by Abbé Brasseur de Bourbourg
(see Landa, 1864), was at once heralded by Americanists as the long-awaited
key which would unlock the secrets of the Maya writing. Unfortunately these
confident expectations have not been realized, and all attempts to read the
glyphs by means of this alphabet or of any of the numerous others[19] which
have appeared since, have completely broken down.
This failure to establish the exclusive phonetic character of the Maya
glyphs has resulted in the general acceptance of the second theory, that
the signs are ideographic. Doctor Brinton (1894b: p. 14), however, has
pointed out two facts deducible from the Landa alphabet which render
impossible not only the complete acceptance of this second theory but also
the absolute rejection of the first: (1) That a native writer was able to
give a written character for an unfamiliar sound, a sound, moreover, which
was without meaning to him, as, for example, that of a Spanish letter; and
(2) that the characters he employed for this purpose were also used in the
native writings. These facts Doctor Brinton regards as proof that some sort
of phonetic writing was not unknown, and, indeed, both the inscriptions and
the codices establish the truth of this contention. For example, the sign
in _a_, figure 13, has the phonetic value _kin_, and the sign in _b_ the
phonetic value _yax_. In the latter glyph, however, only the upper part
(reproduced in _c_) is to be regarded as the essential element. It is
strongly indicative of phoneticism therefore to find the sound _yaxkin_, a
combination of these two, expressed by the sign found in d. Similarly, the
character representing the phonetic value _kin_ is found also as an element
in the glyphs for the words _likin_ {28} and _chikin_ (see _e_ and _f_,
respectively, fig. 13), each of which has _kin_ as its last syllable.
Again, the phonetic value _tun_ is expressed by the glyph in _g_, and the
sound _ca_ (_c_ hard) by the sign _h_. The sound _katun_ is represented by
the character in _i_, a combination of these two. Sometimes the glyph for
this same sound takes the form of _j_, the fish element in _k_ replacing
the comblike element _h_. Far from destroying the phonetic character of
this composite glyph, however, this variant _k_ in reality strengthens it,
since in Maya the word for fish is _cay_ (_c_ hard) and consequently the
variant reads _caytun_, a close phonetic approximation of _katun_. The
remaining element of this glyph (_l_) has the value _cauac_, the first
syllable of which is also expressed by either _h_ or _k_, figure 13. Its
use in _i_ and _j_ probably may be regarded as but a further emphasis of
the phonetic character of the glyph.
It must be remembered, however, that all of the above glyphs have meanings
quite independent of their phonetic values, that primarily their function
was to convey ideas, and that only secondarily were they used in their
phonetic senses.
[Illustration: FIG. 13. Glyphs built up on a phonetic basis.]
If neither the phonetic nor the ideographic character of the glyphs can be
wholly admitted, what then is the true nature of the Maya writing? The
theory now most generally accepted is, that while chiefly ideographic, the
glyphs are sometimes phonetic, and that although the idea of a glyphic
alphabet must finally be abandoned, the phonetic use of syllables as
illustrated above must as surely be recognized.
This kind of writing Doctor Brinton has called _ikonomatic_, more
familiarly known to us under the name of rebus, or puzzle writing. In such
writing the characters do not indicate the ideas of the objects which they
portray, but only the sounds of their names, and are used purely in a
phonetic sense, like the letters of the alphabet. For example, the rebus in
figure 14 reads as follows: "I believe Aunt Rose can well bear all for
you." The picture of the eye recalls not the idea "eye" but the sound of
the word denoting this object, which is also the sound of the word for the
first person singular of the {29} personal pronoun I. Again, the picture of
a bee does not represent the idea of that insect, but stands for the sound
of its name, which used with a leaf indicates the sound "beeleaf," or in
other words, "believe."[20]
It has long been known that the Aztec employed ikonomatic characters in
their writing to express the names of persons and places, though this
practice does not seem to have been extended by them to the representation
of abstract words. The Aztec codices contain many glyphs which are to be
interpreted ikonomatically, that is, like our own rebus writing. For
example in figure 15, _a_, is shown the Aztec hieroglyph for the town of
Toltitlan, a name which means "near the place of the rushes." The word
_tollin_ means "place of the rushes," but only its first syllable _tol_
appears in the word Toltitlan. This syllable is represented in _a_ by
several rushes. The word _tetlan_ means "near something" and its second
syllable _tlan_ is found also in the word _tlantli_, meaning "teeth." In
_a_ therefore, the addition of the teeth to the rushes gives the word
Toltitlan. Another example of this kind of writing is given in figure 15,
_b_, where the hieroglyph for the town of Acatzinco is shown. This word
means "the little reed grass," the diminutive being represented by the
syllable _tzinco_. The reed grass (_acatl_) is shown by the pointed leaves
or spears which emerge from the lower part of a human figure. This part of
the body was called by the Aztecs _tzinco_, and as used here expresses
merely the sound _tzinco_ in the diminutive _acatzinco_, "the little reed
grass," the letter _l_ of _acatl_ being lost in composition.
[Illustration: FIG. 14. A rebus. Aztec, and probably Maya, personal and
place names were written in a corresponding manner.]
The presence of undoubted phonetic elements in these Aztec glyphs
expressing personal names and place names would seem to indicate that some
similar usage probably prevailed among the Maya. {30} While admitting this
restricted use of phonetic composition by the Maya, Professor Seler refuses
to recognize its further extension:
Certainly there existed in the Maya writing compound hieroglyphs giving
the name of a deity, person, or a locality, whose elements united on
the phonetic principle. But as yet it is not proved that they wrote
texts. And without doubt the greater part of the Maya hieroglyphics
were conventional symbols built up on the ideographic principle.
Doctor Förstemann also regards the use of phonetic elements as restricted
to little more than the above when he says, "Finally the graphic system of
the Maya ... never even achieved the expression of a phrase or even a
verb."
On the other hand, Mr. Bowditch (1910: p. 255) considers the use of
phonetic composition extended considerably beyond these limits:
As far as I am aware, the use of this kind of writing [rebus] was
confined, among the Aztecs, to the names of persons and places, while
the Mayas, if they used the rebus form at all, used it also for
expressing common nouns and possibly abstract ideas. The Mayas surely
used picture writing and the ideographic system, but I feel confident
that a large part of their hieroglyphs will be found to be made up of
rebus forms and that the true line of research will be found to lie in
this direction.
[Illustration: FIG. 15. Aztec place names: _a_, The sign for the town
Toltitlan; _b_, the sign for the town Acatzinco.]
Doctor Brinton (1894 b: p. 13) held an opinion between these two, perhaps
inclining slightly toward the former: "The intermediate position which I
have defended, is that while chiefly ideographic, they [the Maya glyphs]
are occasionally phonetic, in the same manner as are confessedly the Aztec
picture-writings."
These quotations from the most eminent authorities on the subject well
illustrate their points of agreement and divergence. All admit the
existence of phonetic elements in the glyphs, but disagree as to their
extent. And here, indeed, is the crux of the whole phonetic question. Just
how extensively do phonetic elements enter into the composition of the Maya
glyphs? Without attempting to dispose of this point definitely one way or
the other, the author may say that he believes that as the decipherment of
Maya writing progresses, more and more phonetic elements will be
identified, though the idea conveyed by a glyph will always be found to
overshadow its phonetic value.
The various theories above described have not been presented for the
reader's extended consideration, but only in order to acquaint him with the
probable nature of the Maya glyphs. Success in deciphering, as we shall
see, has not come through any of the above mentioned lines of research,
which will not be pursued further in this work. {31}
In taking up the question of the meaning of Maya writing, it must be
admitted at the outset that in so far as they have been deciphered both the
inscriptions and the codices have been found to deal primarily, if indeed
not exclusively, with the counting of time in some form or other. Doctor
Förstemann, the first successful interpreter of the codices, has shown that
these writings have for their principal theme the passage of time in its
varying relations to the Maya calendar, ritual, and astronomy. They deal in
great part with the sacred year of 260 days, known to the Aztec also under
the name of the _tonalamatl_, in connection with which various ceremonies,
offerings, sacrifices, and domestic occupations are set forth. Doctor
Förstemann believed that this 260-day period was employed by the priests in
casting horoscopes and foretelling the future of individuals, classes, and
tribes, as well as in predicting coming political events and natural
phenomena; or in other words, that in so far as the 260-day period was
concerned, the codices are nothing more nor less than books of prophecy and
divination.
The prophetic character of some of these native books at least is clearly
indicated in a passage from Bishop Landa's _Relacion_ (p. 286). In
describing a festival held in the month Uo, the Bishop relates that "the
most learned priest opened a book, in which he examined the omens of the
year, which he announced to all those who were present." Other early
Spanish writers state that these books contain the ancient prophecies and
indicate the times appointed for their fulfillment.
Doctor Thomas regarded the codices as religious calendars, or rituals for
the guidance of the priests in the celebration of feasts, ceremonies, and
other duties, seemingly a natural inference from the character of the
scenes portrayed in connection with these 260-day periods.
Another very important function of the codices is the presentation of
astronomical phenomena and calculations. The latter had for their immediate
object in each case the determination of the lowest number which would
exactly contain all the numbers of a certain group. These lowest numbers
are in fact nothing more nor less than the least common multiple of
changing combinations of numbers, each one of which represents the
revolution of some heavenly body. In addition to these calculations deities
are assigned to the several periods, and a host of mythological allusions
are introduced, the significance of most of which is now lost.
The most striking proof of the astronomical character of the codices is to
be seen in pages 46-50 of the Dresden Manuscript. Here, to begin with, a
period of 2,920 days is represented, which exactly contains five Venus
years of 584[21] days each (one on each page) as well as eight solar years
of 365 days each. Each of the Venus years is divided into four parts,
respectively, 236, 90, 250, and 8 days. The {32} first and third of these
constitute the periods when Venus was the morning and the evening star,
respectively, and the second and fourth, the periods of invisibility after
each of these manifestations. This Venus-solar period of 2,920 days was
taken as the basis from which the number 37,960 was formed. This contains
13 Venus-solar periods, 65 Venus-years, 104 solar years, and 146
_tonalamatls_, or sacred years of 260 days each. Finally, the last number
(37,960) with all the subdivisions above given was thrice repeated, so that
these five pages of the manuscript record the passage of 113,880 days, or
312 solar years.
Again, on pages 51-58 of the same manuscript, 405 revolutions of the moon
are set down; and so accurate are the calculations involved that although
they cover a period of nearly 33 years the total number of days recorded
(11,959) is only 89/100 of a day less than the true time computed by the
best modern method[22]--certainly a remarkable achievement for the
aboriginal mind. It is probable that the revolutions of the planets
Jupiter, Mars, Mercury, and Saturn are similarly recorded in the same
manuscript.
Toward the end of the Dresden Codex the numbers become greater and greater
until, in the so-called "serpent numbers," a grand total of nearly twelve
and a half million days (about thirty-four thousand years) is recorded
again and again. In these well-nigh inconceivable periods all the smaller
units may be regarded as coming at last to a more or less exact close. What
matter a few score years one way or the other in this virtual eternity?
Finally, on the last page of the manuscript, is depicted the Destruction of
the World (see pl. 3), for which these highest numbers have paved the way.
Here we see the rain serpent, stretching across the sky, belching forth
torrents of water. Great streams of water gush from the sun and moon. The
old goddess, she of the tiger claws and forbidding aspect, the malevolent
patroness of floods and cloudbursts, overturns the bowl of the heavenly
waters. The crossbones, dread emblem of death, decorate her skirt, and a
writhing snake crowns her head. Below with downward-pointed spears,
symbolic of the universal destruction, the black god stalks abroad, a
screeching bird raging on his fearsome head. Here, indeed, is portrayed
with graphic touch the final all-engulfing cataclysm.
According to the early writers, in addition to the astronomic, prophetic,
and ritualistic material above described, the codices contained records of
historical events. It is doubtful whether this is true of any of the three
codices now extant, though there are grounds for believing that the Codex
Peresianus may be in part at least of an historical nature.
[Illustration: PAGE 74 OF THE DRESDEN CODEX, SHOWING THE END OF THE
WORLD (ACCORDING TO FÖRSTEMANN)]
{33}
Much less progress has been made toward discovering the meaning of the
inscriptions. Doctor Brinton (1894 b: p.32) states:
My own conviction is that they [the inscriptions and codices] will
prove to be much more astronomical than even the latter [Doctor
Förstemann] believes; that they are primarily and essentially records
of the motions of the heavenly bodies; and that both figures and
characters are to be interpreted as referring in the first instance to
the sun and moon, the planets, and those constellations which are most
prominent in the nightly sky in the latitude of Yucatan.
Mr. Bowditch (1910: p. 199) has also brought forward very cogent points
tending to show that in part at least the inscriptions treat of the
intercalation of days necessary to bring the dated monuments, based on a
365-day year, into harmony with the true solar year of 365.2421 days.[23]
While admitting that the inscriptions may, and probably do, contain such
astronomical matter as Doctor Brinton and Mr. Bowditch have suggested, the
writer believes nevertheless that fundamentally they are historical; that
the monuments upon which they are presented were erected and inscribed on
or about the dates they severally record; and finally, that the great
majority of these dates are those of contemporaneous events, and as such
pertain to the subject-matter of history.
The reasons which have led him to this conclusion follow:
_First._ The monuments at most of the southern Maya sites show a certain
periodicity in their sequence. This is most pronounced at Quirigua, where
all of the large monuments fall into an orderly series, in which each
monument is dated exactly 1,800 days later than the one immediately
preceding it in the sequence. This is also true at Copan, where, in spite
of the fact that there are many gaps in the sequence, enough monuments
conforming to the plan remain to prove its former existence. The same may
be said also of Naranjo, Seibal, and Piedras Negras, and in fact of almost
all the other large cities which afford sufficient material for a
chronological arrangement.
This interval of 1,800 days quite obviously was not determined by the
recurrence of any natural phenomenon. It has no parallel in nature, but is,
on the contrary, a highly artificial unit. Consequently, monuments the
erection of which was regulated by the successive returns of this period
could not depend in the least for the fact of their existence on any
astronomical phenomenon other than that of the rising and setting of
eighteen hundred successive suns, an arbitrary period.
The Maya of Yucatan had a similar method of marking time, though their unit
of enumeration was 7,200 days, or four times the {34} length of the one
used for the same purpose in the older cities. The following quotations
from early Spanish chroniclers explain this practice and indicate that the
inscriptions presented on these time-markers were of an historical nature:
There were discovered in the plaza of that city [Mayapan] seven or
eight stones each ten feet in length, round at the end, and well
worked. These had some writings in the characters which they use, but
were so worn by water that they could not be read. Moreover, they think
them to be in memory of the foundation and destruction of that city.
There are other similar ones, although higher, at Zilan, one of the
coast towns. The natives when asked what these things were, replied
that they were accustomed to erect one of these stones every twenty
years, which is the number they use for counting their ages.[24]
The other is even more explicit:
Their lustras having reached five in number, which made twenty years,
which they call a katun, they place a graven stone on another of the
same kind laid in lime and sand in the walls of their temples and the
houses of the priests, as one still sees to-day in the edifices in
question, and in some ancient walls of our own convent at Merida, about
which there are some cells. In a city named Tixhualatun, which
signifies "place where one graven stone is placed upon another," they
say are their archives, where everybody had recourse for events of all
kinds, as we do to Simancas.[25]
It seems almost necessary to conclude from such a parallel that the
inscriptions of the southern cities will also be found to treat of
historical matters.
_Second._ When the monuments of the southern cities are arranged according
to their art development, that is, in stylistic sequence, they are found to
be arranged in their chronological order as well. This important discovery,
due largely to the researches of Dr. H. J. Spinden, has enabled us to
determine the relative ages of various monuments quite independent of their
respective dates. From a stylistic consideration alone it has been possible
not only to show that the monuments date from different periods, but also
to establish the sequence of these periods and that of the monuments in
them. Finally, it has demonstrated beyond all doubt that the great majority
of the dates on Maya monuments refer to the time of their erection, so that
the inscriptions which they present are historical in that they are the
contemporaneous records of different epochs.
_Third._ The dates on the monuments are such as to constitute a strong
antecedent probability of their historical character. Like the records of
most ancient peoples, the Maya monuments, judging from their dates, were at
first scattered and few. Later, as new cities were founded and the nation
waxed stronger and stronger, the number of monuments increased, until at
the flood tide of Maya prosperity they were, comparatively speaking,
common. Finally, as decline set in, fewer and fewer monuments were erected,
and eventually effort in this field ceased altogether. The increasing
number of the monuments by ten-year periods is shown in plate 4, where the
passage of time (i. e., the successive ten-year periods) is represented
from left to right, and the number of dates in each ten-year period from
bottom to top. Although other dated monuments will be found from time to
time, which will necessarily change the details given in this diagram, such
additional evidence in all probability will never controvert the following
general conclusions, embodied in what has just been stated, which are
deducible from it:
[Illustration: DIAGRAM SHOWING OCCURRENCE OF DATES RECORDED IN CYCLE 9]
{35}
1. At first there was a long period of slow growth represented by few
monuments, which, however, increased in number toward the end.
2. This was followed without interruption by a period of increased
activity, the period from which the great majority of the monuments date.
3. Finally this period came to rather an abrupt end, indicated by the
sudden cessation in the erection of dated monuments.
The consideration of these indisputable facts tends to establish the
historical rather than the astronomical character of the monuments. For had
the erection of the monuments depended on the successive recurrences of
some astronomical phenomenon, there would be corresponding intervals
between the dates of such monuments[26] the length of which would indicate
the identity of the determining phenomenon; and they would hardly have
presented the same logical increase due to the natural growth of a nation,
which the accompanying diagram clearly sets forth.
_Fourth._ Although no historical codices[27] are known to have survived,
history was undoubtedly recorded in these ancient Maya books. The
statements of the early Spanish writers are very explicit on this point, as
the following quotations from their works will show. Bishop Landa (here, as
always, one of the most reliable authorities) says: "And the sciences which
they [the priests] taught were the count of the years, months and days, the
feasts and ceremonies, the administration of their sacraments, days, and
fatal times, their methods of divination and prophecy, and foretelling
events, and the remedies for the sick, and _their antiquities_" [p. 44].
And again, "they [the priests] attended the service of the temples and to
the teaching of their sciences and _how to write them in their books_." And
again, [p. 316], "This people also used certain characters or letters with
which _they wrote in their books their ancient matters_ and sciences."
Father Lizana says (see Landa, 1864: p. 352): "The _history and authorities
we can cite_ are certain ancient characters, scarcely understood by many
and explained by some old Indians, sons of the priests {36} of their gods,
who alone knew how to read and expound them and who were believed in and
revered as much as the gods themselves."
Father Ponce (tome LVIII, p. 392) who visited Yucatan as early as 1588, is
equally clear: "The natives of Yucatan are among all the inhabitants of New
Spain especially deserving of praise for three things. First that before
the Spaniards came they made use of characters and letters with which _they
wrote out their histories_, their ceremonies, the order of sacrifices to
their idols and their calendars in books made of the bark of a certain
tree."
Doctor Aguilar, who wrote but little later (1596), gives more details as to
the kind of events which were recorded. "On these [the fiber books] they
painted in color the reckoning of their years, wars, pestilences,
hurricanes, inundations, famines and other events."
Finally, as late as 1697, some of these historical codices were in the
possession of the last great independent Maya ruler, one Canek. Says
Villagutierre (1701: lib. VI, cap. IV) in this connection: "Because their
king [Canek] had read it in his _analtehes_ [fiber-books or codices] they
had knowledge of the provinces of Yucatan, and of the fact that their
ancestors had formerly come from them; _analtehes_ or histories being one
and the same thing."
It is clear from the foregoing extracts, that the Maya of Yucatan recorded
their history up to the time of the Spanish Conquest, in their hieroglyphic
books, or codices. That fact is beyond dispute. It must be remembered also
in this connection, that the Maya of Yucatan were the direct inheritors of
that older Maya civilization in the south, which had produced the
hieroglyphic monuments. For this latter reason the writer believes that the
practice of recording history in the hieroglyphic writing had its origin,
along with many another custom, in the southern area, and consequently that
the inscriptions on the monuments of the southern cities are probably, in
part at least, of an historical nature.
Whatever may be the meaning of the undeciphered glyphs, enough has been
said in this chapter about those of known meaning to indicate the extreme
importance of the element of time in Maya writing. The very great
preponderance of astronomical, calendary, and numerical signs in both the
codices and the inscriptions has determined, so far as the beginner is
concerned, the best way to approach the study of the glyphs. First, it is
essential to understand thoroughly the Maya system of counting time, in
other words, their calendar and chronology. Second, in order to make use of
this knowledge, as did the Maya, it is necessary to familiarize ourselves
with their arithmetic and its signs and symbols. Third, and last, after
this has been accomplished, we are ready to apply ourselves to the
deciphering of the inscriptions and the codices. For this reason the next
chapter will be devoted to the discussion of the Maya system of counting
time. {37}
CHAPTER III. HOW THE MAYA RECKONED TIME
Among all peoples and in all ages the most obvious unit for the measurement
of time has been the day; and the never-failing reappearance of light after
each interval of darkness has been the most constant natural phenomenon
with which the mind of man has had to deal. From the earliest times
successive returns of the sun have regulated the whole scheme of human
existence. When it was light, man worked; when it was dark, he rested.
Conformity to the operation of this natural law has been practically
universal.
Indeed, as primitive man saw nature, day was the only division of time upon
which he could absolutely rely. The waxing and waning of the moon, with its
everchanging shape and occasional obscuration by clouds, as well as its
periodic disappearances from the heavens all combined to render that
luminary of little account in measuring the passage of time. The round of
the seasons was even more unsatisfactory. A late spring or an early winter
by hastening or retarding the return of a season caused the apparent
lengths of succeeding years to vary greatly. Even where a 365-day year had
been determined, the fractional loss, amounting to a day every four years,
soon brought about a discrepancy between the calendar and the true year.
The day, therefore, as the most obvious period in nature, as well as the
most reliable, has been used the world over as the fundamental unit for the
measurement of longer stretches of time.
TABLE I. THE TWENTY MAYA DAY NAMES
Imix
Ik
Akbal
Kan
Chicchan
Cimi
Manik
Lamat
Muluc
Oc
Chuen
Eb
Ben
Ix
Men
Cib
Caban
Eznab
Cauac
Ahau
In conformity with the universal practice just mentioned the Maya made the
day, which they called _kin_, the primary unit of their calendar. There
were twenty such units, named as in Table I; these followed each other in
the order there shown. When Ahau, the last day in the list, had been
reached, the count began anew with Imix, and thus repeated itself again and
again without interruption, throughout time. It is important that the
student should fix this {38} Maya conception of the rotation of days firmly
in his mind at the outset, since all that is to follow depends upon the
absolute continuity of this twenty-day sequence in endless repetition.
[Illustration: FIG. 16. The day signs in the inscriptions.]
[Illustration: FIG. 17. The day signs in the codices.]
The glyphs for these twenty days are shown in figures 16 and 17. The forms
in figure 16 are from the inscriptions and those in figure 17 from the
codices. In several cases variants are given to facilitate identification.
A study of the glyphs in these two figures shows on the whole a fairly
close similarity between the forms for the same {39} day in each. The sign
for the first day, Imix, is practically identical in both. Compare figure
16, _a_ and _b_, with figure 17, _a_ and b. The usual form for the day Ik
in the inscriptions (see fig. 16, _c_), however, is unlike the glyph for
the same day in the codices (fig. 17, _c_, _d_). The forms for Akbal and
Kan are practically the same in each (see fig. 16, _d_, _e_, and _f_, and
fig. 17, _e_ and _f_, respectively). The day Chicchan, figure 16, _g_,
occurs rarely in the inscriptions; when present, it takes the {40} form of
a grotesque head. In the codices the common form for this day is very
different (fig. 17, _g_). The head variant, however (fig. 17, _h_), shows a
slightly closer similarity to the form from the inscriptions. The forms in
both figure 16, _h_, _i_, and figure 17, _i_, _j_, for the day Cimi show
little resemblance to each other. Although figure 17, _i_, represents the
common form in the codices, the variant in _j_ more closely resembles the
form in figure 16, _h_, _i_. The day Manik is practically the same in both
(see figs. 16, _j_, and 17, _k_), as is also Lamat (figs. 16, _k_, _l_, and
17, _l_, _m_). The day Muluc occurs rarely in the inscriptions (fig. 16,
_m_, _n_). Of these two variants _m_ more closely resembles the form from
the codices (fig. 17, _n_). The glyph for the day Oc (fig. 16, _o_, _p_,
_q_) is not often found in the inscriptions. In the codices, on the other
hand, this day is frequently represented as shown in figure 17, _o_. This
form bears no resemblance to the forms in the inscriptions. There is,
however, a head-variant form found very rarely in the codices that bears a
slight resemblance to the forms in the inscriptions. The day Chuen occurs
but once in the inscriptions where the form is clear enough to distinguish
its characteristic (see fig. 16, _r_). This form bears a general
resemblance to the glyph for this day in the codices (fig. 17, _p_, _q_).
The forms for the day Eb in both figures 16, _s_, _t_, _u_, and 17, _r_,
are grotesque heads showing but remote resemblance to one another. The
essential element in both, however, is the same, that is, the element
occupying the position of the ear. Although the day Ben occurs but rarely
in the inscriptions, its form (fig. 16, _v_) is practically identical with
that in the codices (see fig. 17, _s_). The day Ix in the inscriptions
appears as in figure 16, _w_, _x_. The form in the codices is shown in
figure 17, _t_. The essential element in each seems to be the three
prominent dots or circles. The day Men occurs very rarely on the monuments.
The form shown in figure 16, _y_, is a grotesque head not unlike the sign
for this day in the codices (fig. 17, _u_). The signs for the day Cib in
the inscriptions and the codices (figs. 16, _z_, and 17, _v_, _w_),
respectively, are very dissimilar. Indeed, the form for Cib (fig. 17, _v_)
in the codices resembles more closely the sign for the day Caban (fig. 16,
_a'_, _b'_) than it does the form for Cib in the inscriptions (see fig. 16,
_z_). The only element common to both is the line paralleling the upper
part of the glyph () and the short vertical lines connecting it with the
outline at the top. The glyphs for the day Caban in both figures 16, _a'_,
_b'_, and 17, _x_, _y_, show a satisfactory resemblance to each other. The
forms for the day Eznab are also practically identical (see figs. 16, _c'_,
and 17, _z_, _a'_). The forms for the day Cauac, on the other hand, are
very dissimilar; compare figures 16, _d'_, and 17, _b'_. The only point of
resemblance between the two seems to be the element which appears in the
eye of the former and at the lower left-hand side of the latter. The last
of the twenty Maya days, and by {41} far the most important, since it is
found in both the codices and the inscriptions more frequently than all of
the others combined, is Ahau (see figs. 16, _e'-k'_, and 17, _c'_, _d'_).
The latter form is the only one found in the codices, and is identical with
_e'_, _f'_, figure 16, the usual sign for this day in the inscriptions. The
variants in figure 16, _g'-k_', appear on some of the monuments, and
because of the great importance of this day Ahau it is necessary to keep
all of them in mind.
These examples of the glyphs, which stand for the twenty Maya days, are in
each case as typical as possible. The student must remember, however, that
many variations occur, which often render the correct identification of a
form difficult. As explained in the preceding chapter, such variations are
due not only to individual peculiarities of style, careless drawing, and
actual error, but also to the physical dissimilarities of materials on
which they are portrayed, as the stone of the monuments and the fiber paper
of the codices; consequently, such differences may be regarded as
unessential. The ability to identify variants differing from those shown in
figures 16 and 17 will come only through experience and familiarity with
the glyphs themselves. The student should constantly bear in mind, however,
that almost every Maya glyph, the signs for the days included, has an
_essential element_ peculiar to it, and the discovery of such elements will
greatly facilitate his study of Maya writing.
Why the named days should have been limited to twenty is difficult to
understand, as this number has no parallel period in nature. Some have
conjectured that this number was chosen because it represents the number of
man's digits, the twenty fingers and toes. Mr. Bowditch has pointed out in
this connection that the Maya word for the period composed of these twenty
named days is _uinal_, while the word for 'man' is _uinik_. The parallel is
interesting and may possibly explain why the number twenty was selected as
the basis of the Maya system of numeration, which, as we shall see later,
was vigesimal, that is, increasing by twenties or multiples thereof.
THE TONALAMATL, OR 260-DAY PERIOD
Merely calling a day by one of the twenty names given in Table I, however,
did not sufficiently describe it according to the Maya notion. For
instance, there was no day in the Maya calendar called merely Imix, Ik, or
Akbal, or, in fact, by any of the other names given in Table I. Before the
name of a day was complete it was necessary to prefix to it a number
ranging from 1 to 13, inclusive, as 6 Imix or 13 Akbal. Then and only then
did a Maya day receive its complete designation and find its proper place
in the calendar.
The manner in which these thirteen numbers, 1 to 13, inclusive, were joined
to the twenty names of Table I was as follows: Selecting {42} any one of
the twenty names[28] as a starting point, Kan for example, the number 1 was
prefixed to it. See Table II, in which the names of Table I have been
repeated with the numbers prefixed to them in a manner to be explained
hereafter. The star opposite the name Kan indicates the starting point
above chosen. The name Chicchan immediately following Kan in Table II was
given the next number in order (2), namely, 2 Chicchan. The next name,
Cimi, was given the next number (3), namely, 3 Cimi, and so on as follows:
4 Manik, 5 Lamat, 6 Muluc, 7 Oc, 8 Chuen, 9 Eb, 10 Ben, 11 Ix, 12 Men, 13
Cib.
TABLE II. SEQUENCE OF MAYA DAYS
5 Imix
6 Ik
7 Akbal
*1 Kan
2 Chicchan
3 Cimi
4 Manik
5 Lamat
6 Muluc
7 Oc
8 Chuen
9 Eb
10 Ben
11 Ix
12 Men
13 Cib
1 Caban
2 Eznab
3 Cauac
4 Ahau
Instead of giving to the next name in Table II (Caban) the number 14, the
number 1 was prefixed; for, as previously stated, the numerical
coefficients of the days did not rise above the number 13. Following the
day 1 Caban, the sequence continued as before: 2 Eznab, 3 Cauac, 4 Ahau.
After the day 4 Ahau, the last in Table II, the next number in order, in
this case 5, was prefixed to the next name in order--that is, Imix, the
first name in Table II--and the count continued without interruption: 5
Imix, 6 Ik, 7 Akbal, or back to the name Kan with which it started. There
was no break in the sequence, however, even at this point (or at any other,
for that matter). The next name in Table II, Kan, selected for the starting
point, was given the number next in order, i. e., 8, and the day following
7 Akbal in Table II would be, therefore, 8 Kan, and the sequence would
continue to be formed in the same way: 8 Kan, 9 Chicchan, 10 Cimi, 11
Manik, 12 Lamat, 13 Muluc, 1 Oc, 2 Chuen, 3 Eb, and so on. So far as the
Maya conception of time was concerned, this sequence of days went on
without interruption, forever.
While somewhat unusual at first sight, this sequence is in reality
exceedingly simple, being governed by three easily remembered rules:
_Rule 1._ The sequence of the 20 day names repeats itself again and again
without interruption.
[Illustration: TONALAMATL WHEEL, SHOWING SEQUENCE OF THE 260
DIFFERENTLY NAMED DAYS]
{43}
_Rule 2._ The sequence of the numerical coefficients 1 to 13, inclusive,
repeats itself again and again without interruption, 1 following
immediately 13.
_Rule 3._ The 13 numerical coefficients are attached to the 20 names, so
that after a start has been made by prefixing any one of the 13 numbers to
any one of the 20 names, the number next in order is given to the name next
in order, and the sequence continues indefinitely in this manner.
It is a simple question of arithmetic to determine the number of days which
must elapse before a day bearing the same designation as a previous one in
the sequence can reappear. Since there are 13 numbers and 20 names, and
since each of the 13 numbers must be attached in turn to each one of the 20
names before a given number can return to a given name, we must find the
least common multiple of 13 and 20. As these two numbers, contain no common
factor, their least common multiple is their product (260), which is the
number sought. Therefore, any given day can not reappear in the sequence
until after the 259 days immediately following it shall have elapsed. Or,
in other words, the 261st day will have the same designation as the 1st,
the 262d the same as the 2d, and so on.
This is graphically shown in the wheel figured in plate 5, where the
sequence of the days, commencing with 1 Imix, which is indicated by a star,
is represented as extending around the rim of the wheel. After the name of
each day, its number in the sequence beginning with the starting point 1
Imix, is shown in parenthesis. Now, if the star opposite the day 1 Imix be
conceived to be stationary and the wheel to revolve in a sinistral circuit,
that is contra-clockwise, the days will pass the star in the order which
they occupy in the 260-day sequence. It appears from this diagram also that
the day 1 Imix can not recur until after 260 days shall have passed, and
that it always follows the day 13 Ahau. This must be true since _Ahau_ is
the name immediately preceding Imix in the sequence of the day names and 13
is the number immediately preceding 1. After the day 13 Ahau (the 260th
from the starting point) is reached, the day 1 Imix, the 261st, recurs and
the sequence, having entered into itself again, begins anew as before.
[Illustration: FIG. 18. Sign for the tonalamatl (according to Goodman).]
This round of the 260 differently named days was called by the Aztec the
_tonalamatl_, or "book of days." The Maya name for this period is
unknown[29] and students have accepted the Aztec name for it. The
tonalamatl is frequently represented in the Maya codices, there being more
than 200 examples in the Codex Tro-Cortesiano alone. It was a very useful
period for the calculations of the priests because of the different sets of
factors into which it can be resolved, {44} namely, 4×65, 5×52, 10×26,
13×20, and 2×130. Tonalamatls divided into 4, 5, and 10 equal parts of 65,
52, and 26 days, respectively, occur repeatedly throughout the codices.
It is all the more curious, therefore, that this period is rarely
represented in the inscriptions. The writer recalls but one city (Copan) in
which this period is recorded to any considerable extent. It might almost
be inferred from this fact alone that the inscriptions do not treat of
prophecy, divinations, or ritualistic and ceremonial matters, since these
subjects in the codices are always found in connection with tonalamatls. If
true this considerably restricts the field of which the inscriptions may
treat.
Mr. Goodman has identified the glyph shown in figure 18 as the sign for the
260-day period, but on wholly insufficient evidence the writer believes. On
the other hand, so important a period as the tonalamatl undoubtedly had its
own particular glyph, but up to the present time all efforts to identify
this sign have proved unsuccessful.
THE HAAB, OR YEAR OF 365 DAYS
Having explained the composition and nature of the tonalamatl, or so-called
Sacred Year, let us turn to the consideration of the Solar Year, which was
known as _haab_ in the Maya language.
The Maya used in their calendar system a 365-day year, though they
doubtless knew that the true length of the year exceeds this by 6 hours.
Indeed, Bishop Landa very explicitly states that such knowledge was current
among them. "They had," he says, "their perfect year, like ours, of 365
days and 6 hours;" and again, "The entire year had 18 of these [20-day
periods] and besides 5 days and 6 hours." In spite of Landa's statements,
however, it is equally clear that had the Maya attempted to take note of
these 6 additional hours by inserting an extra day in their calendar every
fourth year, their day sequence would have been disturbed at once. An
examination of the tonalamatl, or round of days (see pl. 5), shows also
that the interpolation of a single day at any point would have thrown into
confusion the whole Maya calendar, not only interfering with the sequence
but also destroying its power of reentering itself at the end of 260 days.
The explanation of this statement is found in the fact that the Maya
calendar had no elastic period corresponding to our month of February,
which is increased in length whenever the accumulation of fractional days
necessitates the addition of an extra day, in order to keep the calendar
year from gaining on the true year.
If the student can be made to realize that all Maya periods, from the
lowest to the highest known, are always in a continuous sequence, {45} each
returning into itself and beginning anew after completion, he will have
grasped the most fundamental principle of Maya chronology--its absolute
continuity throughout.
It may be taken for granted, therefore, in the discussion to follow that no
interpolation of intercalary days was actually made. It is equally
probable, however, that the priests, in whose hands such matters rested,
corrected the calendar by additional calculations which showed just how
many days the recorded year was ahead of the true year at any given time.
Mr. Bowditch (1910: Chap. XI) has cited several cases in which such
additional calculations exactly correct the inscriptions on the monument
upon which they appear and bring their dates into harmony with the true
solar year.
So far as the calendar is concerned, then, the year consisted of but 365
days. It was divided into 18 periods of 20 days each, designated in Maya
_uinal_, and a closing period of 5 days known as the _xma kaba kin_, or
"days without name." The sum of these (18×20+5) exactly made up the
calendar year.
TABLE III. THE DIVISIONS OP THE MAYA YEAR
Pop
Uo
Zip
Zotz
Tzec
Xul
Yaxkin
Mol
Chen
Yax
Zac
Ceh
Mac
Kankin
Muan
Pax
Kayab
Cumhu
Uayeb
The names of these 19 divisions of the year are given in Table III in the
order in which they follow one another; the twentieth day of one month was
succeeded by the first day of the next month.
The first day of the Maya year was the first day of the month Pop, which,
according to the early Spanish authorities, Bishop Landa (1864: p. 276)
included, always fell on the 16th of July.[30] Uayeb, the last division of
the year, contained only 5 days, the last day of Uayeb being at the same
time the 365th day of the year. Consequently, when this day was completed,
the next in order was the Maya New Year's Day, the first day of the month
Pop, after which the sequence repeated itself as before.
The xma kaba kin, or "days without name," were regarded as especially
unlucky and ill-omened. Says Pio Perez (see Landa, 1864: p. 384) in
speaking of these closing days of the year: "Some call them _u yail kin_ or
_u yail haab_, which may be translated, the sorrowful and laborious days or
part of the year; for they [the Maya] {46} believed that in them occurred
sudden deaths and pestilences, and that they were diseased by poisonous
animals, or devoured by wild beasts, fearing that if they went out to the
field to their labors, some tree would pierce them or some other kind of
misfortune happen to them." The Aztec held the five closing days of the
year in the same superstitious dread. Persons born in this unlucky period
were held to be destined by this fact to wretchedness and poverty for life.
These days were, moreover, prophetic in character; what occurred during
them continued to happen ever afterward. Hence, quarreling was avoided
during this period lest it should never cease.
Having learned the number, length, and names of the several periods into
which the Maya divided their year, and the sequence in which these followed
one another, the next subject which claims attention is the positions of
the several days in these periods. In order properly to present this
important subject, it is first necessary to consider briefly how we count
and number our own units of time, since through an understanding of these
practices we shall better comprehend those of the ancient Maya.
It is well known that our methods of counting time are inconsistent with
each other. For example, in describing the time of day, that is, in
counting hours, minutes, and seconds, we speak in terms of elapsed time.
When we say it is 1 o'clock, in reality the first hour after noon, that is,
the hour between 12 noon and 1 p. m., has passed and the second hour after
noon is about to commence. When we say it is 2 o'clock, in reality the
second hour after noon is finished and the third hour about to commence. In
other words, we count the time of day by referring to passed periods and
not current periods. This is the method used in reckoning astronomical
time. During the passage of the first hour after midnight the hours are
said to be zero, the time being counted by the number of minutes and
seconds elapsed. Thus, half past 12 is written: 0^{hr.} 30^{min.} 0^{sec.},
and quarter of 1, 0^{hr.} 45^{min.} 0^{sec.}. Indeed one hour can not be
written until the first hour after midnight is completed, or until it is 1
o'clock, namely, 1^{hr.} 0^{min.} 0^{sec.}.
We use an entirely different method, however, in counting our days, years,
and centuries, which are referred to as current periods of time. It is the
1st day of January immediately after midnight December 31. It was the first
year of the Eleventh Century immediately after midnight December 31, 1000
A. D. And finally, it was the Twentieth Century immediately after midnight
December 31, 1900 A. D. In this category should be included also the days
of the week and the months, since the names of these periods also refer to
present time. In other words when we speak of our days, months, years, and
centuries, we do not have in mind, and do not refer to completed periods of
time, but on the contrary to current periods. {47}
It will be seen that in the first method of counting time, in speaking of 1
o'clock, 1 hour, 30 minutes, we use only the cardinal forms of our numbers;
but in the second method we say the 1st of January, the Twentieth Century,
using the ordinal forms, though even here we permit ourselves one
inconsistency. In speaking of our years, which are reckoned by the second
method, we say "nineteen hundred and twelve," when, to be consistent, we
should say "nineteen hundred and twelfth," using the ordinal "twelfth"
instead of the cardinal "twelve."
We may then summarize our methods of counting time as follows: (1) All
periods less than the day, as hours, minutes, and seconds, are referred to
in terms of past time; and (2) the day and all greater periods are referred
to in terms of current time.
The Maya seem to have used only the former of these two methods in counting
time; that is, all the different periods recorded in the codices and the
inscriptions seemingly refer to elapsed time rather than to current time,
to a day passed, rather than to a day present. Strange as this may appear
to us, who speak of our calendar as current time, it is probably true
nevertheless that the Maya, in so far as their writing is concerned, never
designated a present day but always treated of a day gone by. The day
recorded is yesterday because to-day can not be considered an entity until,
like the hour of astronomical time, it completes itself and becomes a unit,
that is, a yesterday.
This is well illustrated by the Maya method of numbering the positions of
the days in the months, which, as we shall see, was identical with our own
method of counting astronomical time. For example, the first day of the
Maya month Pop was written Zero Pop, (0 Pop) for not until one whole day of
Pop had passed could the day 1 Pop be written; by that time, however, the
first day of the month had passed and the second day commenced. In other
words, the second day of Pop was written 1 Pop; the third day, 2 Pop; the
fourth day, 3 Pop; and so on through the 20 days of the Maya month. This
method of numbering the positions of the days in the month led to calling
the last day of a month 19 instead of 20. This appears in Table IV, in
which the last 6 days of one year and the first 22 of the next year are
referred to their corresponding positions in the divisions of the Maya
year. It must be remembered in using this Table that the closing period of
the Maya year, the xma kaba kin, or Uayeb, contained only 5 days, whereas
all the other periods (the 18 uinals) had 20 days each.
Curiously enough no glyph for the _haab_, or year, has been identified as
yet, in spite of the apparent importance of this period.[31] The {48}
glyphs which represent the 18 different uinals and the xma kaba kin,
however, are shown in figures 19 and 20. The forms in figure 19 are taken
from the inscriptions and those in figure 20 from the codices.
TABLE IV. POSITIONS OF DAYS AT THE END OF A YEAR
360th day of the year 19 Cumhu last day of the month Cumhu.
361st day of the year 0 Uayeb first day of Uayeb.
362d day of the year 1 Uayeb
363d day of the year 2 Uayeb
364th day of the year 3 Uayeb
365th day of the year 4 Uayeb last day of Uayeb and of the year.
1st day of next year 0 Pop first day of the month Pop,
and of the next year.
2d day of next year 1 Pop
3d day of next year 2 Pop
4th day of next year 3 Pop
5th day of next year 4 Pop
6th day of next year 5 Pop
7th day of next year 6 Pop
8th day of next year 7 Pop
9th day of next year 8 Pop
10th day of next year 9 Pop
11th day of next year 10 Pop
12th day of next year 11 Pop
13th day of next year 12 Pop
14th day of next year 13 Pop
15th day of next year 14 Pop
16th day of next year 15 Pop
17th day of next year 16 Pop
18th day of next year 17 Pop
19th day of next year 18 Pop
20th day of next year 19 Pop last day of the month Pop.
21st day of next year 0 Uo first day of the month Uo.
22d day of next year 1 Uo
etc. etc.
The signs for the first four months, Pop, Uo, Zip, and Zotz, show a
convincing similarity in both the inscriptions and the codices. The
essential elements of Pop (figs. 19, _a_, and 20, _a_) are the crossed
bands and the _kin_ sign. The latter is found in both the forms figured,
though only a part of the former appears in figure 20, a. Uo has two forms
in the inscriptions (see fig. 19, _b_, _c_),[32] which are, however, very
similar to each other as well as to the corresponding forms in the codices
(fig. 20, _b_, _c_). The glyphs for the month Zip are identical in both
figures 19, _d_, and 20, d. The grotesque heads for Zotz in figures 19,
_e_, _f_,[33] and 20, _e_, are also similar to each other. The essential
{49} characteristic seems to be the prominent upturned and flaring nose.
The forms for Tzec (figs. 19, _g_, _h_, and 20, _f_) show only a very
general similarity, and those for Xul, the next month, are even more
unlike. The only sign for Xul in the inscriptions (fig. 19, _i_, _j_) bears
very little resemblance to the common form for this month in the codices
(fig. 20, _g_), though it is not unlike the variant in _h_, figure 20. The
essential characteristic seems to be the familiar ear and the small mouth,
shown in the inscription as an oval and in the codices as a hook surrounded
with dots.
[Illustration: FIG. 19. The month signs in the inscriptions.]
{50}
[Illustration: FIG. 20. The month signs in the codices.]
The sign for the month Yaxkin is identical in both figures 19, _k_, _l_,
and 20, _i_, _j_. The sign for the month Mol in figures 19, _m_, _n_, and
20, _k_ exhibits the same close similarity. The forms for the month Chen in
figures 19, _o_, _p_, and 20, _l_, _m_, on the other hand, bear only a
slight resemblance to each other. The forms for the months Yax (figs. 19,
_q_, _r_, and 20, _n_), Zac (figs. 19, _s_, _t_, and 20, _o_), and Ceh
(figs. 19, _u_, _v_, and {51} 20, _p_) are again identical in each case.
The signs for the next month, Mac, however, are entirely dissimilar, the
form commonly found in the inscriptions (fig. 19, _w_) bearing absolutely
no resemblance to that shown in figure 20, _q_, _r_, the only form for this
month in the codices. The very unusual variant (fig. 19, _x_), from Stela
25 at Piedras Negras is perhaps a trifle nearer the form found in the
codices. The flattened oval in the main part of the variant is somewhat
like the upper part of the glyph in figure 20, _q_. The essential element
of the glyph for the month Mac, so far as the inscriptions are concerned,
is the element () found as the superfix in both _w_ and _x_, figure 19. The
sign for the month Kankin (figs. 19, _y_, _z_, and 20, _s_, _t_) and the
signs for the month Muan (figs. 19, _a'_, _b'_, and 20, _u_, _v_) show only
a general similarity. The signs for the last three months of the year, Pax
(figs. 19, _c'_, and 20, _w_), Kayab (figs. 19, _d'-f'_, and 20, _x_, _y_),
and Cumhu (figs. 19, _g'_, _h'_, and 20, _z_, _a'_, _b'_) in the
inscriptions and codices, respectively, are practically identical. The
closing division of the year, the five days of the xma kaba kin, called
Uayeb, is represented by essentially the same glyph in both the
inscriptions and the codices. Compare figure 19, _i'_, with figure 20,
_c'_.
It will be seen from the foregoing comparison that on the whole the glyphs
for the months in the inscriptions are similar to the corresponding forms
in the codices, and that such variations as are found may readily be
accounted for by the fact that the codices and the inscriptions probably
not only emanate from different parts of the Maya territory but also date
from different periods.
The student who wishes to decipher Maya writing is strongly urged to
memorize the signs for the days and months given in figures 16, 17, 19, and
20, since his progress will depend largely on his ability to recognize
these glyphs when he encounters them in the texts.
THE CALENDAR ROUND, OR 18980-DAY PERIOD
Before taking up the study of the Calendar Round let us briefly summarize
the principal points ascertained in the preceding pages concerning the Maya
method of counting time. In the first place we learned from the tonalamatl
(pl. 5) three things: (1) The number of differently named days; (2) the
names of these days; (3) the order in which they invariably followed one
another. And in the second place we learned in the discussion of the Maya
year, or haab, just concluded, four other things: (1) The length of the
year; (2) the number, length, and names of the several periods into which
it was divided; (3) the order in which these periods invariably followed
one another; (4) the positions of the days in these periods.
The proper combination of these two, the tonalamatl, or "round of days,"
and the haab, or year of uinals, and the xma kaba kin, formed the Calendar
Round, to which the tonalamatl contributed the names {52} of the days and
the haab the positions of these days in the divisions of the year. The
_Calendar Round_ was the most important period in Maya chronology, and a
comprehension of its nature and of the principles which governed its
composition is therefore absolutely essential to the understanding of the
Maya system of counting time.
It has been explained (see p. 41) that the complete designation or name of
any day in the tonalamatl consisted of two equally essential parts: (1) The
name glyph, and (2) the numerical coefficient. Disregarding the latter for
the present, let us first see _which_ of the twenty names in Table I, that
is, the name parts of the days, can stand at the beginning of the Maya
year.
In applying any sequence of names or numbers to another there are only
three possibilities concerning the names or numbers which can stand at the
head of the resulting sequence:
1. When the sums of the units in each of the two sequences contain no
common factor, each one of the units in turn will stand at the head of the
resulting sequence.
2. When the sum of the units in one of the two sequences is a multiple of
the sum of the units in the other, only the first unit can stand at the
head of the resulting sequence.
3. When the sums of the units in the two sequences contain a common factor
(except in those cases which fall under (2), that is, in which one is a
multiple of the other) only certain units can stand at the head of the
sequence.
Now, since our two numbers (the 20 names in Table I and the 365 days of the
year) contain a common factor, and since neither is a multiple of the
other, it is clear that only the last of the three contingencies just
mentioned concerns us here; and we may therefore dismiss the first two from
further consideration.
The Maya year, then, could begin only with certain of the days in Table I,
and the next task is to find out which of these twenty names invariably
stood at the beginnings of the years.
When there is a sequence of 20 names in endless repetition, it is evident
that the 361st will be the same as the 1st, since 360 = 20 × 18. Therefore
the 362d will be the same as the 2d, the 363d as the 3d, the 364th as the
4th, and the 365 as the 5th. But the 365th, or 5th, name is the name of the
last day of the year, consequently the 1st day of the following year (the
366th from the beginning) will have the 6th name in the sequence. Following
out this same idea, it appears that the 361st day of the _second year_ will
have the same name as that with which it began, that is, the 6th name in
the sequence, the 362d day the 7th name, the 363d the 8th, the 364th the
9th, and the 365th, or last day of the _second year_, the 10th name.
Therefore the 1st day of the _third year_ (the 731st from the beginning)
will have the 11th name in the sequence. Similarly it could be shown {53}
that the _third year_, beginning with the 11th name, would necessarily end
with the 15th name; and the _fourth year_, beginning with the 16th name
(the 1096th from the beginning) would necessarily end with the 20th, or
last name, in the sequence. It results, therefore, from the foregoing
progression that the _fifth year_ will have to begin with the 1st name (the
1461st from the beginning), or the same name with which the _first year_
also began.
This is capable of mathematical proof, since the 1st day of the _fifth
year_ has the 1461st name from the beginning of the sequence, for 1461 =
4×365+1 = 73×20+1. The _1_ in the second term of this equation indicates
that the beginning day of the _fifth year_ has been reached; and the _1_ in
the third term indicates that the name-part of this day is the 1st name in
the sequence of twenty. In other words, every fifth year began with a day,
the name part of which was the same, and consequently only four of the
names in Table I could stand at the beginnings of the Maya years.
The four names which successively occupied this, the most important
position of the year, were: Ik, Manik, Eb, and Caban (see Table V, in which
these four names are shown in their relation to the sequence of twenty).
Beginning with any one of these, Ik for example, the next in order, Manik,
is 5 days distant, the next, Eb, another five days, the next, Caban,
another 5 days, and the next, Ik, the name with which the Table started,
another 5 days.
TABLE V. RELATIVE POSITIONS OF DAYS BEGINNING MAYA YEARS
IK
Akbal
Kan
Chicchan
Cimi
MANIK
Lamat
Muluc
Oc
Chuen
EB
Ben
Ix
Men
Cib
CABAN
Eznab
Cauac
Ahau
Imix
Since one of the four names just given invariably began the Maya year, it
follows that in any given year, all of its nineteen divisions, the 18
uinals and the xma kaba kin, also began with the same name, which was the
name of the first day of the first uinal. This is necessarily true because
these 19 divisions of the year, with the exception of the last, each
contained 20 days, and consequently the name of the first day of the first
division determined the names of the first days of all the succeeding
divisions of that particular year. Furthermore, since the xma kaba kin, the
closing division of the year, contained but 5 days, the name of the first
day of the following year; as well as {54} the names of the first days of
all of its divisions, was shifted forward in the sequence another 5 days,
as shown above.
This leads directly to another important conclusion: Since the first days
of all the divisions of any given year always had the same name-part, it
follows that the second days of all the divisions of that year had the same
name, that is, the next succeeding in the sequence of twenty. The third
days in each division of that year must have had the same name, the fourth
days the same name, and so on, throughout the 20 days of the month. For
example, if a year began with the day-name Ik, all of the divisions in that
year also began with the same name, and the second days of all its
divisions had the day-name Akbal, the third days the name Kan, the fourth
days the name Chicchan, and so forth. This enables us to formulate the
following--
_Rule._ The 20 day-names always occupy the same positions in all the
divisions of any given year.
But since the year and its divisions must begin with one of four names, it
is clear that the second positions also must be filled with one of another
group of four names, and the third positions with one of another group of
four names, and so on, through all the positions of the month. This enables
us to formulate a second--
_Rule._ Only four of the twenty day-names can ever occupy any given
position in the divisions of the years.
But since, in the years when Ik is the 1st name, Manik will be the 6th, Eb
the 11th, and Caban the 16th, and in the years when Manik is the 1st, Eb
will be the 6th, Caban the 11th, and Ik the 16th, and in the years when Eb
is the 1st, Caban will be the 6th, Ik the 11th, and Manik the 16th, and in
the years when Caban is the 1st, Ik will be the 6th, Manik the 11th, and Eb
the 16th, it is clear that any one of this group which begins the year may
occupy also three other positions in the divisions of the year, these
positions being 5 days distant from each other. Consequently, it follows
that Akbal, Lamat, Ben, and Eznab in Table V, the names which occupy the
second positions in the divisions of the year, will fill the 7th, 12th, and
17th positions as well. Similarly Kan, Muluc, Ix, and Cauac will fill the
3d, 8th, 13th, and 18th positions, and so on. This enables us to formulate
a third--
_Rule._ The 20 day-names are divided into five groups of four names each,
any name in any group being five days distant from the name next preceding
it in the same group, and furthermore, the names of any one group will
occupy four different positions in the divisions of successive years, these
positions being five days apart in each case. This is expressed in Table
VI, in which these groups are shown as well as the positions in the
divisions of the years which the names of each group may occupy. A
comparison with Table V will demonstrate that this arrangement is
inevitable. {55}
TABLE VI. POSITIONS OF DAYS IN DIVISIONS OF MAYA YEAR
--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| | { 1st, | 2d, | 3d, | 4th, | 5th, |
| Positions held | { 6th, | 7th, | 8th, | 9th, | 10th, |
| by days | { 11th, | 12th, | 13th, | 14th, | 15th, |
| | { 16th | 17th | 18th | 19th | 20th |
|----------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| | { Ik | Akbal | Kan | Chicchan| Cimi |
| Names of | { Manik | Lamat | Mulac | Oc | Chuen |
| days in | { Eb | Ben | Ix | Men | Cib |
| each group | { Caban | Eznab | Cauac | Ahau | Imix |
--------------------------------------------------------------------+
But we have seen on page 47 and in Table IV that the Maya did not designate
the first days of the several divisions of the years according to our
system. It was shown there that the first day of Pop was not written 1 Pop,
but 0 Pop, and similarly the second day of Pop was written not 2 Pop, but 1
Pop, and the last day, not 20 Pop, but 19 Pop. Consequently, before we can
use the names in Table VI as the Maya used them, we must make this shift,
keeping in mind, however, that Ik, Manik, Eb, and Caban (the only four of
the twenty names which could begin the year and which were written 0 Pop, 5
Pop, 10 Pop, or 15 Pop) would be written in our notation 1st Pop, 6th Pop,
11th Pop, and 16th Pop, respectively. This difference, as has been
previously explained, results from the Maya method of counting time by
elapsed periods.
Table VII shows the positions of the days in the divisions of the year
according to the Maya conception, that is, with the shift in the month
coefficient made necessary by this practice of recording their days as
elapsed time.
The student will find Table VII very useful in deciphering the texts, since
it shows at a glance the only positions which any given day can occupy in
the divisions of the year. Therefore when the sign for a day has been
recognized in the texts, from Table VII can be ascertained the only four
positions which this day can hold in the month, thus reducing the number of
possible month coefficients for which search need be made, from twenty to
four.
TABLE VII. POSITIONS OF DAYS IN DIVISIONS OF MAYA YEAR ACCORDING TO MAYA
NOTATION
------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Positions held by | | | | | |
| days expressed in |{ 0, 5, | 1, 6, | 2, 7, | 3, 8, | 4, 9, |
| Mayan notation |{ 10, 15 | 11, 16 | 12, 17 | 13, 18 | 14, 19 |
|--------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| | { Ik | Akbal | Kan | Chicchan| Cimi |
| Names of days in | { Manik | Lamat | Mulac | Oc | Chuen |
| each group | { Eb | Ben | Ix | Men | Cib |
| | { Caban | Eznab | Cauac | Ahau | Imix |
------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Now let us summarize the points which we have successively established as
resulting from the combination of the tonalamatl and haab, remembering
always that as yet we have been dealing only with {56} _the name parts of
the days and not their complete designations_. Bearing this in mind, we may
state the following facts concerning the 20 day-names and their positions
in the divisions of the year:
1. The Maya year and its several divisions could begin only with one of
these four day-names: Ik, Manik, Eb, and Caban.
2. Consequently, any particular position in the divisions of the year could
be occupied only by one of four day-names.
3. Consequently, every fifth year any particular day-name returned to the
same position in the divisions of the year.
4. Consequently, any particular day-name could occupy only one of four
positions in the divisions of the year, each of which it held in successive
years, returning to the same position every fifth year.
5. Consequently, the twenty day-names were divided into five groups of four
day-names each, any day-name of any group being five days distant from the
day-name of the same group next preceding it.
6. Finally, in any given year any particular day-name occupied the same
relative position throughout the divisions of that year.
Up to this point, however, as above stated, we have not been dealing with
the complete designations of the Maya days, but only their _name parts_ or
name glyphs, the positions of which in the several divisions of the year we
have ascertained.
It now remains to join the tonalamatl, which gives the complete names of
the 260 Maya days, to the haab, which gives the positions of the days in
the divisions of the year, in such a way that any one of the days whose
name-part is Ik, Manik, Eb, or Caban shall occupy the first position of the
first division of the year; that is, 0 Pop, or, as we should write it, the
first day of Pop. It matters little which one of these four name parts we
choose first, since in four years each one of them in succession will have
appeared in the position 0 Pop.
Perhaps the easiest way to visualize the combination of the tonalamatl and
the haab is to conceive these two periods as two cogwheels revolving in
contact with each other. Let us imagine that the first of these, A (fig.
21), has 260 teeth, or cogs, each one of which is named after one of the
260 days of the tonalamatl and follows the sequence shown in plate 5. The
second wheel, B (fig. 21), is somewhat larger, having 365 cogs. Each of the
spaces or sockets between these represents one of the 365 positions of the
days in the divisions of the year, beginning with 0 Pop and ending with 4
Uayeb. See Table IV for the positions of the days at the end of one year
and the commencement of the next. Finally, let us imagine that these two
wheels are brought into contact with each other in such a way that the
tooth or cog named 2 Ik in A shall fit into the socket named {57} 0 Pop in
B, after which both wheels start to revolve in the directions indicated by
the arrows.
[Illustration: FIG. 21. Diagram showing engagement of tonalamatl wheel of
260 days (A), and haab wheel of 365 positions (B); the combination of the
two giving the Calendar Round, or 52-year period.]
The first day of the year whose beginning is shown at the point of contact
of the two wheels in figure 21 is 2 Ik 0 Pop, that is, the day 2 Ik which
occupies the first position in the month Pop. The next day in succession
will be 3 Akbal 1 Pop, the next 4 Kan 2 Pop, the next 5 Chicchan 3 Pop, the
next 6 Cimi 4 Pop, and so on. As the wheels revolve in the directions
indicated, the days of the tonalamatl successively fall into their
appropriate positions in the divisions of the year. Since the number of
cogs in A is smaller than the number in B, it is clear that the former will
have returned to its starting point, 2 Ik (that is, made one complete
revolution), before the latter will have made one complete revolution; and,
further, that when the latter (B) has returned to its starting point, 0
Pop, the corresponding cog in B will not be 2 Ik, but another day (3
Manik), since by that time the smaller wheel will have progressed 105 cogs,
or days, farther, to the cog 3 Manik.
The question now arises, how many revolutions will each wheel have to make
before the day 2 Ik will return to the position 0 Pop. The solution of this
problem depends on the application of one sequence to another, and the
possibilities concerning the numbers or names which stand at the head of
the resulting sequence, a subject already discussed on page 52. In the
present case the numbers in question, 260 and 365, contain a common factor,
therefore our problem falls under the third contingency there presented.
Consequently, only certain of the 260 days can occupy the position 0 Pop,
or, in other words, cog 2 Ik in A will return to the position 0 Pop in B in
fewer than 260 revolutions of A. The actual solution of the problem {58} is
a simple question of arithmetic. Since the day 2 Ik can not return to its
original position in A until after 260 days shall have passed, and since
the day 0 Pop can not return to its original position in B until after 365
days shall have passed, it is clear that the day 2 Ik 0 Pop can not recur
until after a number of days shall have passed equal to the least common
multiple of these numbers, which is (260/5)×(365/5)×5, or 52×73×5 = 18,980
days. But 18,980 days = 52×365 = 73×260; in other words the day 2 Ik 0 Pop
can not recur until after 52 revolutions of B, or 52 years of 365 days
each, and 73 revolutions of A, or 73 tonalamatls of 260 days each. The Maya
name for this 52-year period is unknown; it has been called the Calendar
Round by modern students because it was only after this interval of time
had elapsed that any given day could return to the same position in the
year. The Aztec name for this period was _xiuhmolpilli_ or
_toxiuhmolpia_.[34]
The Calendar Round was the real basis of Maya chronology, since its 18,980
dates included all the possible combinations of the 260 days with the 365
positions of the year. Although the Maya developed a much more elaborate
system of counting time, wherein any date of the Calendar Round could be
fixed with absolute certainty within a period of 374,400 years, this truly
remarkable feat was accomplished only by using a sequence of Calendar
Rounds, or 52-year periods, in endless repetition from a fixed point of
departure.
In the development of their chronological system the Aztec probably never
progressed beyond the Calendar Round. At least no greater period of time
than the round of 52 years has been found in their texts. The failure of
the Aztec to develop some device which would distinguish any given day in
one Calendar Round from a day of the same name in another has led to
hopeless confusion in regard to various events of their history. Since the
same date occurred at intervals of every 52 years, it is often difficult to
determine the particular Calendar Round to which any given date with its
corresponding event is to be referred; consequently, the true sequence of
events in Aztec history still remains uncertain.
Professor Seler says in this connection:[35]
Anyone who has ever taken the trouble to collect the dates in old
Mexican history from the various sources must speedily have discovered
that the chronology is very much awry, that it is almost hopeless to
look for an exact chronology. The date of the fall of Mexico is
definitely fixed according to both the Indian and the Christian
chronology ... but in regard to all that precedes this date, even to
events tolerably near the time of the Spanish conquest, the statements
differ widely.
{59}
Such confusion indeed is only to be expected from a system of counting time
and recording events which was so loose as to permit the occurrence of the
same date twice, or even thrice, within the span of a single life; and when
a system so inexact was used to regulate the lapse of any considerable
number of years, the possibilities for error and misunderstanding are
infinite. Thus it was with Aztec chronology.
On the other hand, by conceiving the Calendar Rounds to be in endless
repetition from a fixed point of departure, and measuring time by an
accurate system, the Maya were able to secure precision in dating their
events which is not surpassed even by our own system of counting time.
[Illustration: FIG. 22. Signs for the Calendar Round: _a_, According to
Goodman; _b_, according to Förstemann.]
The glyph which stood for the Calendar Round has not been determined with
any degree of certainty. Mr. Goodman believes the form shown in figure 22,
_a_, to be the sign for this period, while Professor Förstemann is equally
sure that the form represented by _b_ of this figure expressed the same
idea. This difference of opinion between two authorities so eminent well
illustrates the prevailing doubt as to just what glyph actually represented
the 52-year period among the Maya. The sign in figure 22, _a_, as the
writer will endeavor to show later, is in all probability the sign for the
great cycle.
As will be seen in the discussion of the Long Count, the Maya, although
they conceived time to be an endless succession of Calendar Rounds, did not
reckon its passage by the lapse of successive Calendar Rounds;
consequently, the need for a distinctive glyph which should represent this
period was not acute. The contribution of the Calendar Round to Maya
chronology was its 18,980 dates, and the glyphs which composed these are
found repeatedly in both the codices and the inscriptions (see figs. 16,
17, 19, 20). No signs have been found as yet, however, for either the haab
or the tonalamatl, probably because, like the Calendar Round, these periods
were not used as units in recording long stretches of time.
It will greatly aid the student in his comprehension of the discussion to
follow if he will constantly bear in mind the fact that one Calendar Round
followed another without interruption or the interpolation of a single day;
and further, that the Calendar Round may be likened to a large cogwheel
having 18,980 teeth, each one of which represented one of the dates of this
period, and that this wheel revolved forever, each cog passing a fixed
point once every 52 years. {60}
THE LONG COUNT
We have seen:
1. How the Maya distinguished 1 day from the 259 others in the tonalamatl;
2. How they distinguished the position of 1 day from the 364 others in the
haab, or year; and, finally,
3. How by combining (1) and (2) they distinguished 1 day from the other
18,979 of the Calendar Round.
It remains to explain how the Maya insured absolute accuracy in fixing a
day within a period of 374,400 years, as stated above, or how they
distinguished 1 day from 136,655,999 others.
The Calendar Round, as we have seen, determined the position of a given day
within a period of only 52 years. Consequently, in order to prevent
confusion of days of the same name in successive Calendar Rounds or, in
other words, to secure absolute accuracy in dating events, it was necessary
to use additional data in the description of any date.
In nearly all systems of chronology that presume to deal with really long
periods the reckoning of years proceeds from fixed starting points. Thus in
Christian chronology the starting point is the Birth of Christ, and our
years are reckoned as B. C. or A. D. according as they precede or follow
this event. The Greeks reckoned time from the earliest Olympic Festival of
which the winner's name was known, that is, the games held in 776 B. C.,
which were won by a certain Coroebus. The Romans took as their starting
point the supposed date of the foundation of Rome, 753 B. C. The
Babylonians counted time as beginning with the Era of Nabonassar, 747 B. C.
The death of Alexander the Great, in 325 B. C., ushered in the Era of
Alexander. With the occupation of Babylon in 311 B. C. by Seleucus Nicator
began the so-called Era of Seleucidæ. The conquest of Spain by Augustus
Cæsar in 38 B. C. marked the beginning of a chronology which endured for
more than fourteen centuries. The Mohammedans selected as their starting
point the flight of their prophet Mohammed from Mecca in 622 A. D., and
events in this chronology are described as having occurred so many years
after the Hegira (The Flight). The Persian Era began with the date 632
A. D., in which year Yezdegird III ascended the throne of Persia.
It will be noted that each of the above-named systems of chronology has for
its starting point some actual historic event, the occurrence, if not the
date of which, is indubitable. Some chronologies, however, commence with an
event of an altogether different character, the date of which from its very
nature must always remain hypothetical. In this class should be mentioned
such chronologies as reckon time from the Creation of the World. For
example, the Era of Constantinople, the chronological system used in the
Greek Church, {61} commences with that event, supposed to have occurred in
5509 B. C. The Jews reckoned the same event as having taken place in 3761
B. C. and begin the counting of time from this point. A more familiar
chronology, having for its starting point the Creation of the World, is
that of Archbishop Usher, in the Old Testament, which assigns this event to
the year 4004 B. C.
In common with these other civilized peoples of antiquity the ancient Maya
had realized in the development of their chronological system the need for
a fixed starting point, from which all subsequent events could be reckoned,
and for this purpose they selected one of the dates of their Calendar
Round. This was a certain date, 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu,[36] that is, a day named 4
Ahau, which occupied the 9th position in the month Cumhu, the next to last
division of the Maya year (see Table III).
While the nature of the event which took place on this date[37] is unknown,
its selection as the point from which time was subsequently reckoned alone
indicates that it must have been of exceedingly great importance to the
native mind. In attempting to approximate its real character, however, we
are not without some assistance from the codices and the inscriptions. For
instance, it is clear that all Maya dates which it is possible to regard as
contemporaneous[38] refer to a time fully 3,000 years later than the
starting point (4 Ahau 8 Cumhu) from which each is reckoned. In other
words, Maya history is a blank for more than 3,000 years after the initial
date of the Maya chronological system, during which time no events were
recorded.
This interesting condition strongly suggests that the starting point of
Maya chronology was not an actual historical event, as the founding of
Rome, the death of Alexander, the birth of Christ, or the flight of
Mohammed from Mecca, but that on the contrary it was a purely hypothetical
occurrence, as the Creation of the World or the birth of the gods; and
further, that the date 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu was not chosen as the starting point
until long after the time it designates. This, or some similar assumption,
is necessary to account satisfactorily for the observed facts:
1. That, as stated, after the starting point of Maya chronology there is a
silence of more than 3,000 years, unbroken by a single contemporaneous
record, and {62}
2. That after this long period had elapsed all the dated monuments[39] had
their origin in the comparatively short period of four centuries.
Consequently, it is safe to conclude that no matter what the Maya may have
believed took place on this date 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu, in reality when this day
was present time they had not developed their distinctive civilization or
even achieved a social organization.
It is clear from the foregoing that in addition to the Calendar Round, the
Maya made use of a fixed starting point in describing their dates. The next
question is, Did they record the lapse of more than 3,000 years simply by
using so unwieldy a unit as the 52-year period or its multiples? A
numerical system based on 52 as its primary unit immediately gives rise to
exceedingly awkward numbers for its higher terms; that is, 52, 104, 156,
208, 260, 312, etc. Indeed, the expression of really large numbers in terms
of 52 involves the use of comparatively large multipliers and hence of more
or less intricate multiplications, since the unit of progression is not
decimal or even a multiple thereof. The Maya were far too clever
mathematicians to have been satisfied with a numerical system which
employed units so inconvenient as 52 or its multiples, and which involved
processes so clumsy, and we may therefore dismiss the possibility of its
use without further consideration.
In order to keep an accurate account of the large numbers used in recording
dates more than 3,000 years distant from the starting point, a numerical
system was necessary whose terms could be easily handled, like the units,
tens, hundreds, and thousands of our own decimal system. Whether the desire
to measure accurately the passage of time actually gave rise to their
numerical system, or vice versa, is not known, but the fact remains that
the several periods of Maya chronology (except the tonalamatl, haab, and
Calendar Round, previously discussed) are the exact terms of a vigesimal
system of numeration, with but a single exception. (See Table VIII.)
TABLE VIII. THE MAYA TIME-PERIODS
1 kin = 1 day
20 kins = 1 uinal = 20 days
18 uinals = 1 tun = 360 days
20 tuns = 1 katun = 7,200 days
20 katuns = 1 cycle = 144,000 days
20[40] cycles = 1 great cycle = 2,880,000 days
Table VIII shows the several periods of Maya chronology by means of which
the passage of time was measured. All are the exact terms of a vigesimal
system of numeration, except in the 2d place (uinals), {63} in which 18
units instead of 20 make 1 unit of the 3d place, or order next higher
(tuns). The break in the regularity of the vigesimal progression in the 3d
place was due probably to the desire to bring the unit of this order (the
tun) into agreement with the solar year of 365 days, the number 360 being
much closer to 365 than 400, the third term of a constant vigesimal
progression. We have seen on page 45 that the 18 uinals of the haab were
equivalent to 360 days or kins, precisely the number contained in the third
term of the above table, the tun. The fact that the haab, or solar year,
was composed of 5 days more than the tun, thus causing a discrepancy of 5
days as compared with the third place of the chronological system, may have
given to these 5 closing days of the haab--that is, the xma kaba kin--the
unlucky character they were reputed to possess.
The periods were numbered from 0 to 19, inclusive, 20 units of any order
(except the 2d) always appearing as 1 unit of the order next higher. For
example, a number involving the use of 20 kins was written 1 uinal instead.
We are now in possession of all the different factors which the Maya
utilized in recording their dates and in counting time:
1. The names of their dates, of which there could be only 18,980 (the
number of dates in the Calendar Round).
2. The date, or starting point, 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu, from which time was
reckoned.
3. The counters, that is, the units, used in measuring the passage of time.
It remains to explain how these factors were combined to express the
various dates of Maya chronology.
INITIAL SERIES
The usual manner in which dates are written in both the codices and the
inscriptions is as follows: First, there is set down a number composed of
five periods, that is, a certain number of cycles, katuns, tuns, uinals,
and kins, which generally aggregate between 1,300,000 and 1,500,000 days;
and this number is followed by one of the 18,980 dates of the Calendar
Round. As we shall see in the next chapter, if this large number of days
expressed as above be counted forward from the fixed starting point of Maya
chronology, 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu, the date invariably[41] reached will be found
to be the date written at the end of the long number. This method of dating
has been called the _Initial Series_, because when inscribed on a monument
it invariably stands _at the head_ of the inscription.
The student will better comprehend this Initial-series method of dating if
he will imagine the Calendar Round represented by a large cogwheel A,
figure 23, having 18,980 teeth, each one of which is {64} named after one
of the dates of the calendar. Furthermore, let him suppose that the arrow B
in the same figure points to the tooth, or cog, named 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu; and
finally that from this as its original position the wheel commences to
revolve in the direction indicated by the arrow in A.
[Illustration: FIG. 23. Diagram showing section of Calendar-round wheel.]
It is clear that after one complete revolution of A, 18,980 days will have
passed the starting point B, and that after two revolutions 37,960 days
will have passed, and after three, 56,940, and so on. Indeed, it is only a
question of the number of revolutions of A until as many as 1,500,000, or
any number of days in fact, will have passed the starting point B, or, in
other words, will have elapsed since the initial date, 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu. This
is actually what happened according to the Maya conception of time.
For example, let us imagine that a certain Initial Series expresses in
terms of cycles, katuns, tuns, uinals, and kins, the number 1,461,463, and
that the date recorded by this number of days is 7 Akbal 11 Cumhu.
Referring to figure 23, it is evident that 77 revolutions of the cogwheel
A, that is, 77 Calendar Rounds, will use up 1,461,460 of the 1,461,463
days, since 77×18,980 = 1,461,460. Consequently, when 77 Calendar Rounds
shall have passed we shall still have left 3 days (1,461,463 - 1,461,460 =
3), which must be carried forward into the next Calendar Round. The
1,461,461st day will be 5 Imix 9 Cumhu, that is, the day following 4 Ahau 8
Cumhu (see fig. 23); the 1,461,462d day will be 6 Ik 10 Cumhu, and the
1,461,463d day, the last of the days in our Initial Series, 7 Akbal 11
Cumhu, the date recorded. Examples of this method of dating (by Initial
Series) will be given in Chapter V, where this subject will be considered
in greater detail.
THE INTRODUCING GLYPH
In the inscriptions an Initial Series is invariably preceded by the
so-called "introducing glyph," the Maya name for which is unknown. {65}
Several examples of this glyph are shown in figure 24. This sign is
composed of four constant elements:
1. The trinal superfix.
2. The pair of comblike lateral appendages.
3. The tun sign (see fig. 29, _a_, _b_).
4. The trinal subfix.
[Illustration: FIG. 24. Initial-series "introducing glyph."]
In addition to these four constant elements there is one variable element
which is always found between the pair of comblike lateral appendages. In
figure 24, _a_, _b_, _e_, this is a grotesque head; in _c_, a natural head;
and in _d_, one of the 20 day-signs, Ik. This element varies greatly
throughout the inscriptions, and, judging from its central position in the
"introducing glyph" (itself the most prominent character in every
inscription in which it occurs), it must have had an exceedingly important
meaning.[42] A variant of the comblike appendages is shown in figure 24,
_c_, _e_, in which these elements are replaced by a pair of fishes.
However, in such cases, all of which occur at Copan, the treatment of the
fins and tail of the fish strongly suggests the elements they replace, and
it is not improbable, therefore, that the comblike appendages of the
"introducing glyph" are nothing more nor less than conventionalized fish
fins or tails; in other words, that they are a kind of glyphic synecdoche
in which a part (the fin) stands for the whole (the fish). That the
original form of this element was the fish and not its conventionalized fin
() seems to be indicated by several facts: (1) On Stela D at Copan, where
only full-figure glyphs are presented,[43] the two comblike appendages of
the "introducing glyph" appear unmistakably as two fishes. (2) In some of
the earliest stelæ at Copan, as Stelæ 15 and P, while these elements are
not fish forms, a head (fish?) appears with the conventionalized comb
element in each case. The writer believes the interpretation of this
phenomenon to be, that at the early epoch in which {66} Stelæ 15 and P were
erected the conventionalization of the element in question had not been
entirely accomplished, and that the head was added to indicate the form
from which the element was derived. (3) If the fish was the original form
of the comblike element in the "introducing glyph," it was also the
original form of the same element in the katun glyph. (Compare the comb
elements () in figures 27, _a_, _b_, _e_, and 24, _a_, _b_, _d_ with each
other.) If this is true, a natural explanation for the use of the fish in
the katun sign lies near at hand. As previously explained on page 28, the
comblike element stands for the sound _ca_ (_c_ hard); while _kal_ in Maya
means 20. Also the element () stands for the sound _tun_. Therefore _catun_
or _katun_ means 20 tuns. But the Maya word for "fish," _cay_ (_c_ hard) is
also a close phonetic approximation of the sound _ca_ or _kal_.
Consequently, the fish sign may have been the original element in the katun
glyph, which expressed the concept 20, and which the conventionalization of
glyphic forms gradually reduced to the element () without destroying,
however, its phonetic value.
Without pressing this point further, it seems not unlikely that the
comblike elements in the katun glyph, as well as in the "introducing
glyph," may well have been derived from the fish sign.
Turning to the codices, it must be admitted that in spite of the fact that
many Initial Series are found therein, the "introducing glyph" has not as
yet been positively identified. It is possible, however, that the sign
shown in figure 24, _f_, may be a form of the "introducing glyph"; at least
it precedes an Initial Series in four places in the Dresden Codex (see pl.
32). It is composed of the trinal superfix and a conventionalized fish (?).
Mr. Goodman calls this glyph (fig. 24, _a-e_) the sign for the great cycle
or unit of the 6th place (see Table VIII). He bases this identification on
the fact that in the codices units of the 6th place stand immediately
above[44] units of the 5th place (cycles), and consequently since this
glyph stands immediately above the units of the 5th place in the
inscriptions it must stand for the units of the 6th place. While admitting
that the analogy here is close, the writer nevertheless is inclined to
reject Mr. Goodman's identification on the following grounds: (1) This
glyph _never_ occurs with a numerical coefficient, while units of all the
other orders--that is, cycles, katuns, tuns, uinals, and kins _are never_
without them. (2) Units of the 6th order in the codices invariably have a
numerical coefficient, as do all the other orders. (3) In the only three
places in the inscriptions[45] in which six periods are seemingly recorded,
though not as Initial Series, the 6th period has a numerical coefficient
just as have the other five, and, {67} moreover, the glyph in the 6th
position is unlike the forms in figure 24. (4) Five periods, not six, in
every Initial Series express the distance from the starting point, 4 Ahau 8
Cumhu, to the date recorded at the end of the long numbers.
It is probable that when the meaning of the "introducing glyph" has been
determined it will be found to be quite apart from the numerical side of
the Initial Series, at least in so far as the distance of the terminal date
from the starting point, 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu, is concerned.
While an Initial Series in the inscriptions, as has been previously
explained, is invariably preceded by an "introducing glyph," the opposite
does not always obtain. Some of the very earliest monuments at Copan,
notably Stelæ 15, 7, and P, have "introducing glyphs" inscribed on two or
three of their four sides, although but one Initial Series is recorded on
each of these monuments. Examples of this use of the "introducing glyph,"
that is, other than as standing at the head of an Initial Series, are
confined to a few of the earliest monuments at Copan, and are so rare that
the beginner will do well to disregard them altogether and to follow this
general rule: That in the inscriptions a glyph of the form shown in figure
24, _a-e_, will invariably be followed by an Initial Series.
Having reached the conclusion that the introducing glyph was not a sign for
the period of the 6th order, let us next examine the signs for the
remaining orders or periods of the chronological system (cycles, katuns,
tuns, uinals, and kins), constantly bearing in mind that these five periods
alone express the long numbers of an Initial Series.[46]
Each of the above periods has two entirely different glyphs which may
express it. These have been called (1) The normal form; (2) The head
variant. In the inscriptions examples of both these classes occur side by
side in the same Initial Series, seemingly according to no fixed rule, some
periods being expressed by their normal forms and others by their head
variants. In the codices, on the other hand, no head-variant period glyphs
have yet been identified, and although the normal forms of the period
glyphs have been found, they do not occur as units in Initial Series.
As head variants also should be classified the so-called "full-figure
glyphs," in which the periods given in Table VIII are represented by full
figures instead of by heads. In these forms, however, only the heads of the
figures are essential, since they alone present the determining
characteristics, by means of which in each case identification is possible.
Moreover, the head part of any full-figure variant is characterized by
precisely the same essential elements as the {68} corresponding head
variant for the same period, or in other words, the addition of the body
parts in full-figure glyphs in no way influences or changes their meanings.
For this reason head-variant and full-figure forms have been treated
together. These full-figure glyphs are exceedingly rare, having been found
only in five Initial Series throughout the Maya area: (1) On Stela D at
Copan; (2) on Zoömorph B at Quirigua; (3) on east side Stela D at Quirigua;
(4) on west side Stela D at Quirigua; (5) on Hieroglyphic Stairway at
Copan. A few full-figure glyphs have been found also on an oblong altar at
Copan, though not as parts of an Initial Series, and on Stela 15 as a
period glyph of an Initial Series.
THE CYCLE GLYPH
[Illustration: FIG. 25. Signs for the cycle: _a-c_, Normal forms; _d-f_,
head variants.]
[Illustration: FIG. 26. Full-figure variant of cycle sign.]
The Maya name for the period of the 5th order in Table VIII is unknown. It
has been called "the cycle," however, by Maya students, and in default of
its true designation, this name has been generally adopted. The normal form
of the cycle glyph is shown in figure 25, _a_, _b_, c. It is composed of an
element which appears twice over a knotted support. The repeated element
occurs also in the signs for the months Chen, Yax, Zac, and Ceh (see figs.
19, _o-v_, 20, _l-p_). This has been called the _Cauac_ element because it
is similar to the sign for the day Cauac in the codices (fig. 17, _b'_),
though on rather inadequate grounds the writer is inclined to believe. The
head variant of the cycle glyph is shown in figure 25, _d-f_. The essential
characteristic of this grotesque head with its long beak is the hand
element (), which forms the lower jaw, though in a _very few instances_
even this is absent. In the full-figure forms this same head is joined to
the body of a bird (see fig. 26). The bird intended is clearly a parrot,
the feet, claws, and beak being portrayed in a very realistic manner. No
glyph for the cycle has yet been found in the codices.
THE KATUN GLYPH
[Illustration: FIG. 27. Signs for the katun: _a-d_, Normal forms; _e-h_,
head variants.]
[Illustration: FIG. 28. Full-figure variant of katun sign.]
The period of the 4th place or order was called by the Maya the _katun_;
that is to say, 20 tuns, since it contained 20 units of the 3d {69} order
(see Table VIII). The normal form of the katun glyph is shown in figure 27,
_a-d_. It is composed of the normal form of the tun sign (fig. 29, _a_,
_b_) surmounted by the pair of comblike appendages, which we have elsewhere
seen meant 20, and which were probably derived from the representation of a
fish. The whole glyph thus graphically portrays the concept 20 tuns, which
according to Table VIII is equal to 1 katun. The normal form of the katun
glyph in the codices (fig. 27, _c_, _d_) is identical with the normal form
in the inscriptions (fig. 27, _a_, _b_). Several head variants are found.
The most easily recognized, though not the most common, is shown in figure
27, _e_, in which the superfix is the same as in the normal form; that is,
the element (), which probably signifies 20 in this connection. To be
logical, therefore, the head element should be the same as the head variant
of the tun glyph, but this is not the case (see fig. 29, _e-h_). When this
superfix is present, the identification of the head variant of the katun
glyph is an easy matter, but when it is absent it is difficult to fix on
any essential characteristic. The general shape of the head is like the
head variant of the cycle glyph. Perhaps the oval () in the top of the head
in figure 27, _f_-_h_, and the small curling fang (++) represented as
protruding from the back part of the mouth are as constant as any of the
other elements. The head of the full-figure variant in figure 28 presents
the same lack of essential characteristics as the head variant, though in
this form the small curling fang is also found. Again, the body attached to
this head is that of a bird which has been identified as an eagle. {70}
THE TUN GLYPH
[Illustration: FIG. 29. Signs for the tun: _a-d_, Normal forms; _e-h_, head
variants.]
[Illustration: FIG. 30. Full-figure variant of tun sign.]
The period of the 3d place or order was called by the Maya the _tun_, which
means "stone," possibly because a stone was set up every 360 days or each
tun or some multiple thereof. Compare so-called hotun or katun stones
described on page 34. The normal sign for the tun in the inscriptions (see
fig. 29, _a_, _b_) is identical with the form found in the codices (see
fig. 29, _c_). The head variant, which bears a general resemblance to the
head variant for the cycle and katun, has several forms. The one most
readily recognized, because it has the normal sign for its superfix, is
shown in figure 29, _d_, e. The determining characteristic of the head
variant of the tun glyph, however, is the fleshless lower jaw (), as shown
in figure 29 _f_, _g_, though even this is lacking in some few cases. The
form shown in figure 29, _h_, is found at Palenque, where it seems to
represent the tun period in several places. The head of the full-figure
form (fig. 30) has the same fleshless lower jaw for its essential
characteristic as the head-variant forms in figure 29. The body joined to
this head is again that of a bird the identity of which has not yet been
determined.
THE UINAL GLYPH
[Illustration: FIG. 31. Signs for the uinal: _a-c_, Normal forms; _d-f_,
head variants.]
[Illustration: FIG. 32. Full-figure variant of uinal sign on Zoömorph B,
Quirigua.]
[Illustration: FIG. 33. Full-figure variant of uinal sign on Stela D,
Copan.]
The period occupying the 2d place was called by the Maya _uinal_ or _u_.
This latter word means also "the moon" in Maya, and the fact that the moon
is visible for just about 20 days in each lunation may account for the
application of its name to the 20-day period. The normal form of the uinal
glyph in the inscriptions (see fig. 31, _a_, _b_) is practically identical
with the form in the codices (see fig. 31, _c_). {71} Sometimes the
subfixial element () is omitted in the inscriptions, as in figure 31, a.
The head variant of the uinal glyph (fig. 31, _d-f_) is the most constant
of all of the head forms for the various periods. Its determining
characteristic is the large curl emerging from the back part of the mouth.
The sharp-pointed teeth in the upper jaw are also a fairly constant
feature. In very rare cases both of these elements are wanting. In such
cases the glyph seems to be without determining characteristics. The animal
represented in the full-figure variants of the uinal is that of a frog
(fig. 32,) the head of which presents precisely the same characteristics as
the head variants of the uinal, just described. That the head variant of
the uinal-period glyph was originally derived from the representation of a
frog can hardly be denied in the face of such striking confirmatory
evidence as that afforded by the full-figure form of the uinal in figure
33. Here the spotted body, flattened head, prominent mouth, and bulging
eyes of the frog are so realistically portrayed that there is no doubt as
to the identity of the figure intended. Mr. Bowditch (1910: p. 257) has
pointed out in this connection an interesting phonetic coincidence, which
can hardly be other than intentional. The Maya word for frog is _uo_, which
is a fairly close phonetic approximation of _u_, the Maya word for "moon"
or "month." Consequently, the Maya may have selected the figure of the frog
on phonetic grounds to represent their 20-day period. If this point could
be established it would indicate an unmistakable use of the rebus form of
writing employed by the Aztec. That is, the figure of a frog in the
uinal-period glyph would not recall the object which it pictures, but the
sound of that object's name, _uo_, approximating the sound of _u_, which in
turn expressed the intended idea, namely, the 20-day period. Mr. Bowditch
has suggested also that the grotesque birds which stand for the cycle,
katun, and tun periods in these full-figure forms may also have been chosen
because of the phonetic similarity of their names to the names of these
periods.
{72}
THE KIN GLYPH
[Illustration: FIG. 34. Signs for the kin: _a_, _b_, Normal forms; _c_,
_d_, miscellaneous; _e-k_, head variants.]
The period of the 1st, or lowest, order was called by the Maya _kin_, which
meant the "sun" and by association the "day." The kin, as has been
explained, was the primary unit used by the Maya in counting time. The
normal form of this period glyph in the inscriptions is shown in figure 34,
_a_, which is practically identical with the form in the codices (fig. 34,
_b_). In addition to the normal form of the kin sign, however, there are
several other forms representing this period which can not be classified
either as head variants or full-figure variants, as in figure 34, _c_, for
example, which bears no resemblance whatever to the normal form of the kin
sign. It is difficult to understand how two characters as dissimilar as
those shown in _a_ and _c_, figure 34, could ever be used to express the
same idea, particularly since there seems to be no element common to both.
Indeed, so dissimilar are they that one is almost forced to believe that
they were derived from two entirely distinct glyphs. Still another and very
unusual sign for the kin is shown in figure 34, _d_; indeed, the writer
recalls but two places where it occurs: Stela 1 at Piedras Negras, and
Stela C (north side) at Quirigua. It is composed of the normal form of the
sign for the day Ahau (fig. 16, _e'_) inverted and a subfixial element
which varies in each of the two cases. These variants (fig. 34, _c_, _d_)
are found only in the inscriptions. The head variants of the kin period
differ from each other as much as the various normal forms above given. The
form shown in figure 34, _e_, may be readily recognized by its subfixial
element () and the element (+), {73} both of which appear in the normal
form, figure 34, a. In some cases, as in figure 34, _f-h_, this variant
also has the square irid and the crooked, snag-like teeth projecting from
the front of the mouth. Again, any one of these features, or even all, may
be lacking. Another and usually more grotesque type of head (fig. 34, _i_,
_j_) has as its essential element the banded headdress. A very unusual head
variant is that shown in figure 34, _k_, the essential characteristic of
which seems to be the crossbones in the eye. Mr. Bowditch has included also
in his list of kin signs the form shown in figure 34, _l_, from an
inscription at Tikal. While this glyph in fact does stand between two dates
which are separated by one day from each other, that is, 6 Eb 0 Pop and 7
Ben 1 Pop, the writer believes, nevertheless, that only the element ()--an
essential part of the normal form for the kin--here represents the period
one day, and that the larger characters above and below have other
meanings. In the full-figure variants of the kin sign the figure portrayed
is that of a human being (fig. 35), the head of which is similar to the one
in figure 34, _i_, _j_, having the same banded headdress.[47]
[Illustration: FIG. 35. Full-figure variant of kin sign.]
This concludes the presentation of the various forms which stand for the
several periods of Table VIII. After an exhaustive study of these as found
in Maya texts the writer has reached the following generalizations
concerning them:
1. _Prevalence._ The periods in Initial Series are expressed far more
frequently by head variants than by normal forms. The preponderance of the
former over the latter in all Initial Series known is in the proportion of
about 80 per cent of the total[48] against 12 per cent, the periods in the
remaining 8 per cent being expressed by these two forms used side by side.
In other words, four-fifths of all the Initial Series known have their
periods expressed by head-variant glyphs.
2. _Antiquity._ Head-variant period glyphs seem to have been used very much
earlier than the normal forms. Indeed, the first use of the former preceded
the first use of the latter by about 300 years, while in Initial Series
normal-form period glyphs do not occur until nearly 100 years later, or
about 400 years after the first use of head variants for the same purpose.
3. _Variation._ Throughout the range of time covered by the Initial Series
the normal forms for any given time-period differ but little from one
another, all following very closely one fixed type. Although {74} nearly
200 years apart in point of time, the early form of the tun sign in figure
36, _a_, closely resembles the late form shown in _b_ of the same figure,
as to its essentials. Or again, although 375 years apart, the early form of
the katun sign in figure 36, _c_, is practically identical with the form in
figure 36, d. Instances of this kind could be multiplied indefinitely, but
the foregoing are sufficient to demonstrate that in so far as the
normal-form period glyphs are concerned but little variation occurred from
first to last. Similarly, it may be said, the head variants for any given
period, while differing greatly in appearance at different epochs,
retained, nevertheless, the same essential characteristic throughout. For
example, although the uinal sign in figure 36, _e_, precedes the one in
figure 36, _f_, by some 800 years, the same essential element--the large
mouth curl--appears in both. Again, although 300 years separate the cycle
signs shown in _g_ and _h_, figure 36, the essential characteristic of the
early form (fig. 36, _g_), the hand, is still retained as the essential
part of the late form (_h_).
[Illustration: FIG. 36. Period glyphs, from widely separated sites and of
different epochs, showing persistence of essential elements.]
4. _Derivation._ We have seen that the full-figure glyphs probably show the
original life-forms from which the head variants were developed. And since
from (2), above, it seems probable that the head variants are older than
the so-called normal forms, we may reasonably infer that the full-figure
glyphs represent the life-forms whose names the Maya originally applied to
their periods, and further that the first signs for those periods were the
heads of these life-forms. This develops a contradiction in our
nomenclature, for if the forms which we have called head variants are the
older signs for the periods and are by far the most prevalent, they should
have been called the normal forms and not variants, and vice versa.
However, the use of the term "normal forms" is so general that it would be
unwise at this time to attempt to introduce any change in nomenclature.
SECONDARY SERIES
The Initial Series method of recording dates, although absolutely
accurate,[49] was nevertheless somewhat lengthy, since in order to express
a single date by means of it eight distinct glyphs were required, namely:
(1) The Introducing glyph; (2) the Cycle glyph; {75} (3) the Katun glyph;
(4) the Tun glyph; (5) the Uinal glyph; (6) the Kin glyph; (7) the Day
glyph; (8) the Month glyph. Moreover, its use in any inscription which
contained more than one date would have resulted in needless repetition.
For example, if all the dates on any given monument were expressed by
Initial Series, every one would show the long distance (more than 3,000
years) which separated it from the common starting point of Maya
chronology. It would be just like writing the legal holidays of the current
year in this way: February 22d, 1913, A. D., May 30th, 1913, A. D., July
4th, 1913, A. D., December 25th, 1913, A. D.; or in other words, repeating
in each case the designation of time elapsed from the starting point of
Christian chronology.
The Maya obviated this needless repetition by recording but one Initial
Series date on a monument;[50] and from this date as a new point of
departure they proceeded to reckon the number of days to the next date
recorded; from this date the numbers of days to the next; and so on
throughout that inscription. By this device the position of any date in the
Long Count (its Initial Series) could be calculated, since it could be
referred back to a date, the Initial Series of which was expressed. For
example, the terminal day of the Initial Series given on page 64 is 7 Akbal
11 Cumhu, and its position in the Long Count is fixed by the statement in
cycles, katuns, tuns, etc., that 1,461,463 days separate it from the
starting point, 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu. Now let us suppose we have the date 10 Cimi
14 Cumhu, which is recorded as being 3 days later than the day 7 Akbal 11
Cumhu,[51] the Initial Series of which is known to be 1,461,463. It is
clear that the Initial Series corresponding to the date 10 Cimi 14 Cumhu,
although not actually expressed, will also be known since it must equal
1,461,463 (Initial Series of 7 Akbal 11 Cumhu) + 3 (distance from 7 Akbal
11 Cumhu to 10 Cimi 14 Cumhu), or 1,461,466. Therefore it matters not
whether we count three days forward from 7 Akbal 11 Cumhu, or whether we
count 1,461,466 days forward from the starting point of Maya chronology, 4
Ahau 8 Cumhu since in each case the date reached will be the same, namely,
10 Cimi 14 Cumhu. The former method, however, was used more frequently than
all of the other methods of recording dates combined, since it insured all
the accuracy of an Initial Series without repeating for each date so great
a number of days.
Thus having one date on a monument the Initial Series of which was
expressed, it was possible by referring subsequent dates to it, or to other
dates which in turn had been referred to it, to fix accurately {76} the
positions of any number of dates in the Long Count without the use of their
corresponding Initial Series. Dates thus recorded are known as "secondary
dates," and the periods which express their distances from other dates of
known position in the Long Count, as "distance numbers." A secondary date
with its corresponding distance number has been designated a Secondary
Series. In the example above given the distance number 3 kins and the date
10 Cimi 14 Cumhu would constitute a Secondary Series.
Here, then, in addition to the Initial Series is a second method, the
Secondary Series, by means of which the Maya recorded their dates. The
earliest use of a Secondary Series with which the writer is familiar (that
on Stela 36 at Piedras Negras) does not occur until some 280 years after
the first Initial Series. It seems to have been a later development,
probably owing its origin to the desire to express more than one date on a
single monument. Usually Secondary Series are to be counted from the dates
next preceding them in the inscriptions in which they are found, though
occasionally they are counted from other dates which may not even be
expressed, and which can be ascertained only by counting backward the
distance number from its corresponding terminal date. The accuracy of a
Secondary series date depends entirely on the fact that it has been counted
from an Initial Series, or at least from another Secondary series date,
which in turn has been derived from an Initial Series. If either of these
contingencies applies to any Secondary series date, it is as accurate a
method of fixing a day in the Long Count as though its corresponding
Initial Series were expressed in full. If, on the other hand, a Secondary
series date can not be referred ultimately to an Initial Series or to a
date the Initial Series of which is known though it may not be expressed,
such a Secondary series date becomes only one of the 18,980 dates of the
Calendar Round, and will recur at intervals of every 52 years. In other
words, its position in the Long Count will be unknown.
CALENDAR-ROUND DATES
Dates of the character just described may be called Calendar-round dates,
since they are accurate only within the Calendar Round, or range of 52
years. While accurate enough for the purpose of distinguishing dates in the
course of a single lifetime, this method breaks down when used to express
dates covering a long period. Witness the chaotic condition of Aztec
chronology. The Maya seem to have realized the limitations of this method
of dating and did not employ it extensively. It was used chiefly at
Yaxchilan on the Usamacintla River, and for this reason the chronology of
that city is very much awry, and it is difficult to assign its various
dates to their proper positions in the Long Count. {77}
PERIOD-ENDING DATES
The Maya made use of still another method of dating, which, although not so
exact as the Initial Series or the Secondary Series, is, on the other hand,
far more accurate than Calendar round dating. In this method a date was
described as being at the end of some particular period in the Long Count;
that is, closing a certain cycle, katun, or tun.[52] It is clear also that
in this method only the name Ahau out of the 20 given in Table I can be
recorded, since it alone can stand at the end of periods higher than the
kin. This is true, since:
1. The higher periods, as the uinal, tun, katun, and cycle are exactly
divisible by 20 in every case (see Table VIII), and--
2. They are all counted from a day, Ahau, that is, 4 Ahau 8 Cumhu.
Consequently, all the periods of the Long Count, except the kin or primary
unit, end with days the name parts of which are the sign Ahau.
This method of recording dates always involves the use of at least two
factors, and usually three:
1. A particular period of the Long Count, as Cycle 9, or Katun 14, etc.
2. The date which ends the particular period recorded, as 8 Ahau 13 Ceh, or
6 Ahau 13 Muan, the closing dates respectively of Cycle 9 and Katun 14 of
Cycle 9; and
3. A glyph or element which means "ending" or "is ended," or which
indicates at least that the period to which it is attached has come to its
close.
The first two of these factors are absolutely essential to this method of
dating, while the third, the so-called "ending sign," is usually, though
not invariably, present. The order in which these factors are usually found
is first the date composed of the day glyph and month glyph, next the
"ending sign," and last the glyph of the period whose closing day has just
been recorded. Very rarely the period glyph and its ending sign precede the
date.
The ending glyph has three distinct variants: (1) the element shown as the
prefix or superfix in figure 37, _a-h_, _t_, all of which are forms of the
same variant; (2) the flattened grotesque head appearing either as the
prefix or superfix in _i_, _r_, _u_, _v_ of the same figure; and (3) the
hand, which appears as the main element in the forms shown in figure 37,
_j-q_. The two first of these never stand by themselves but always modify
some other sign. The first (fig. 37, _a-h_, _t_) is always attached to the
sign of the period whose end is recorded either as a {78} superfix (see
fig. 37, _a_, whereby the end of Cycle 10 is indicated[53]), or as a prefix
(see _t_, whereby the end of Katun 14 is recorded). The second form is seen
as a prefix in _u_, whereby the end of Katun 12 is recorded, and in _i_,
whereby the end of Katun 11 is shown. This latter sign is found also as a
superfix in _r_.
[Illustration: FIG. 37. Ending signs and elements.]
The hand-ending sign rarely appears as modifying period glyphs, although a
few examples of such use have been found (see fig. 37, _j_, _k_). This
ending sign usually appears as the main element in a separate glyph, which
precedes the sign of the period whose end is recorded (see fig. 37, _l-q_).
In these cases the subordinate elements differ somewhat, although the
element () appears as the suffix in _l_, _m_, _n_, _q_, and the element (+)
as a postfix therein, also in _o_ and _p_. In a few cases the hand is
combined with the other ending signs, sometimes with one and sometimes with
the other. {79}
The use of the hand as expressing the meaning "ending" is quite natural.
The Aztec, we have seen, called their 52-year period the _xiuhmolpilli_, or
"year bundle." This implies the concomitant idea of "tying up." As a period
closed, metaphorically speaking, it was "tied up" or "bundled up." The Maya
use of the hand to express the idea "ending" may be a graphic
representation of the member by means of which this "tying up" was
effected, the clasped hand indicating the closed period.
This method of describing a date may be called "dating by period endings."
It was far less accurate than Initial-series or Secondary-series dating,
since a date described as occurring at the end of a certain katun could
recur after an interval of about 18,000 years in round numbers, as against
374,400 years in the other 2 methods. For all practical purposes, however,
18,000 years was as accurate as 374,400 years, since it far exceeds the
range of time covered by the written records of mankind the world over.
Period-ending dates were not used much, and, as has been stated above, they
are found only in connection with the larger periods--most frequently with
the katun, next with the cycle, and but very rarely with the tun. Mr.
Bowditch (1910: pp. 176 et seq.) has reviewed fully the use of ending
signs, and students are referred to his work for further information on
this subject.
U KAHLAY KATUNOB
In addition to the foregoing methods of measuring time and recording dates,
the Maya of Yucatan used still another, which, however, was probably
derived directly from the application of Period-ending dating to the Long
Count, and consequently introduces no new elements. This has been
designated the Sequence of the Katuns, because in this method the katun, or
7,200-day period, was the unit used for measuring the passage of time. The
Maya themselves called the Sequence of the Katuns _u tzolan katun_, "the
series of the katuns"; or _u kahlay uxocen katunob_, "the record of the
count of the katuns"; or even more simply, _u kahlay katunob_, "the record
of the katuns." These names accurately describe this system, which is
simply the record of the successive katuns, comprising in the aggregate the
range of Maya chronology.
Each katun of the u kahlay katunob was named after the designation of its
ending day, a practice derived no doubt from Period-ending dating, and the
sequence of these ending days represented passed time, each ending day
standing for the katun of which it was the close. The katun, as we have
seen on page 77, always ended with some day Ahau, consequently this
day-name is the only one of the twenty which appears in the u kahlay
katunob. In this method the katuns were distinguished from one another,
_not_ by the positions {80} which they occupied in the cycle, as Katun 14,
for example, but by the different days Ahau with which they ended, as Katun
2 Ahau, Katun 13 Ahau, etc. See Table IX.
TABLE IX.--SEQUENCE OF KATUNS IN U KAHLAY KATUNOB
Katun 2 Ahau Katun 8 Ahau
Katun 13 Ahau Katun 6 Ahau
Katun 11 Ahau Katun 4 Ahau
Katun 9 Ahau Katun 2 Ahau
Katun 7 Ahau Katun 13 Ahau
Katun 5 Ahau Katun 11 Ahau
Katun 3 Ahau Katun 9 Ahau
Katun 1 Ahau Katun 7 Ahau
Katun 12 Ahau Katun 5 Ahau
Katun 10 Ahau Katun 3 Ahau, etc.
The peculiar retrograding sequence of the numerical coefficients in Table
IX, decreasing by 2 from katun to katun, as 2, 13, 11, 9, 7, 5, 3, 1, 12,
etc., results directly from the number of days which the katun contains.
Since the 13 possible numerical coefficients, 1 to 13, inclusive, succeed
each other in endless repetition, 1 following immediately after 13, it is
clear that in counting forward any given number from any given numerical
coefficient, the resulting numerical coefficient will not be affected if we
first deduct all the 13s possible from the number to be counted forward.
The mathematical demonstration of this fact follows. If we count forward 14
from any given coefficient, the same coefficient will be reached as if we
had counted forward but 1. This is true because, (1) there are only 13
numerical coefficients, and (2) these follow each other without
interruption, 1 following immediately after 13; hence, when 13 has been
reached, the next coefficient is 1, not 14; therefore 13 or any multiple
thereof may be counted forward or backward from any one of the 13 numerical
coefficients without changing its value. This truth enables us to formulate
the following rule for finding numerical coefficients: Deduct all the
multiples of 13 possible from the number to be counted forward, and then
count forward the remainder from the known coefficient, subtracting 13 if
the resulting number is above 13, since 13 is the highest possible number
which can be attached to a day sign. If we apply this rule to the sequence
of the numerical coefficients in Table IX, we shall find that it accounts
for the retrograding sequence there observed. The first katun in Table IX,
Katun 2 Ahau, is named after its ending day, 2 Ahau. Now let us see whether
the application of this rule will give us 13 Ahau as the ending day of the
next katun. The number to be counted forward from 2 Ahau is 7,200, the
number of days in one katun; therefore we must first deduct from 7,200 all
the 13s possible. 7,200 ÷ 13 = 553-11/13. In other words, after we have
deducted all the 13's possible, that is, {81} 553 of them, there is a
remainder of 11. This the rule says is to be added (or counted forward)
from the known coefficient (in this case 2) in order to reach the resulting
coefficient. 2 + 11 = 13. Since this number is not above 13, 13 is not to
be deducted from it; therefore the coefficient of the ending day of the
second katun is 13, as shown in Table IX. Similarly we can prove that the
coefficient of the ending day of the third katun in Table IX will be 11.
Again, we have 7,200 to count forward from the known coefficient, in this
case 13 (the coefficient of the ending day of the second katun). But we
have seen above that if we deduct all the 13s possible from 7,200 there
will be a remainder of 11; consequently this remainder 11 must be added to
13, the known coefficient. 13 + 11 = 24; but since this number is above 13,
we must deduct 13 from it in order to find out the resulting coefficient.
24 - 13 = 11, and 11 is the coefficient of the ending day of the third
katun in Table IX. By applying the above rule, all of the coefficients of
the ending days of the katuns could be shown to follow the sequence
indicated in Table IX. And since the ending days of the katuns determined
their names, this same sequence is also that of the katuns themselves.
The above table enables us to establish a constant by means of which we can
always find the name of the next katun. Since 7,200 is always the number of
days in any katun, after deducting all the 13s possible the remainder will
always be 11, which has to be added to the known coefficient to find the
unknown. But since 13 has to be deducted from the resulting number when it
is above 13, subtracting 2 will always give us exactly the same coefficient
as adding 11; consequently we may formulate for determining the numerical
coefficients of the ending days of katuns the following simple rule:
Subtract 2 from the coefficient of the ending day of the preceding katun in
every case. A glance at Table IX will demonstrate the truth of this rule.
In the names of the katuns given in Table IX it is noteworthy that the
positions which the ending days occupied in the divisions of the haab, or
365-day year, are not mentioned. For example, the first katun was not
called Katun 2 Ahau 8 Zac, but simply Katun 2 Ahau, the month part of the
day, that is, its position in the year, was omitted. This omission of the
month parts of the ending days of the katuns in the u kahlay katunob has
rendered this method of dating far less accurate than any of the others
previously described except Calendar-round Dating. For example, when a date
was recorded as falling within a certain katun, as Katun 2 Ahau, it might
occur anywhere within a period of 7,200 days, or nearly 20 years, and yet
fulfill the given conditions. In other words, no matter how accurately this
Katun 2 Ahau itself might be fixed in a _long_ stretch of time, there was
always the possibility of a maximum error of about 20 years in {82} such
dating, since the statement of the katun did not fix a date any closer than
as occurring somewhere within a certain 20-year period. When greater
accuracy was desired the particular tun in which the date occurred was also
given, as Tun 13 of Katun 2 Ahau. This fixed a date as falling somewhere
within a certain 360 days, which was accurately fixed in a much longer
period of time. Very rarely, in the case of an extremely important event,
the Calendar-round date was also given as 9 Imix 19 Zip of Tun 9 of Katun
13 Ahau. A date thus described satisfying all the given conditions could
not recur until after the lapse of at least 7,000 years. The great majority
of events, however, recorded by this method are described only as occurring
in some particular katun, as Katun 2 Ahau, for example, no attempt being
made to refer them to any particular division (tun) of this period. Such
accuracy doubtless was sufficient for recording the events of tribal
history, since in no case could an event be more than 20 years out of the
way.
Aside from this initial error, the accuracy of this method of dating has
been challenged on the ground that since there were only thirteen possible
numerical coefficients, any given katun, as Katun 2 Ahau, for example, in
Table IX would recur in the sequence after the lapse of thirteen katuns, or
about 256 years, thus paving the way for much confusion. While admitting
that every thirteenth katun in the sequence had the same name (see Table
IX), the writer believes, nevertheless, that when the sequence of the
katuns was carefully kept, and the record of each entered immediately after
its completion, so that there could be no chance of confusing it with an
earlier katun of the same name in the sequence, accuracy in dating could be
secured for as long a period as the sequence remained unbroken. Indeed, the
u kahlay katunob[54] from which the synopsis of Maya history given in
Chapter I was compiled, accurately fixes the date of events, ignoring the
possible initial inaccuracy of 20 years, within a period of more than 1,100
years, a remarkable feat for any primitive chronology.
How early this method of recording dates was developed is uncertain. It has
not yet been found (surely) in the inscriptions in either the south or the
north; on the other hand, it is so closely connected with the Long Count
and Period-ending dating, which occurs repeatedly throughout the
inscriptions, that it seems as though the u kahlay katunob must have been
developed while this system was still in use.
There should be noted here a possible exception to the above statement,
namely, that the u kahlay katunob has not been found in the inscriptions.
Mr. Bowditch (1910: pp. 192 et seq.) has pointed out {83} what seem to be
traces of another method of dating. This consists of some day Ahau modified
by one of the two elements shown in figure 38 (_a-d_ and _e-h_,
respectively). In such cases the month part is sometimes recorded, though
as frequently the day Ahau stands by itself. It is to be noted that in the
great majority of these cases the days Ahau thus modified are the ending
days of katuns, which are either expressed or at least indicated in
adjacent glyphs. In other words, the day Ahau thus modified is usually the
ending day of the next even katun after the last date recorded. The writer
believes that this modification of certain days Ahau by either of the two
elements shown in figure 38 may indicate that such days were the katun
ending days nearest to the time when the inscriptions presenting them were
engraved. The snake variants shown in figure 38, _a-d_, are all from
Palenque; the knot variants (_e-h_ of the same figure) are found at both
Copan and Quirigua.
[Illustration: FIG. 38. "Snake" or "knot" element as used with day sign
Ahau, possibly indicating presence of the u kahlay katunob in the
inscriptions.]
It may be objected that one katun ending day in each inscription is far
different from a sequence of katun ending days as shown in Table IX, and
that one katun ending day by itself can not be construed as an u kahlay
katunob, or sequence of katuns. The difference here, however, is apparent
rather than real, and results from the different character of the monuments
and the native chronicles. The u kahlay katunob in Table IX is but a part
of a much longer sequence of katuns, which is shown in a number of native
chronicles written shortly after the Spanish Conquest, and which record the
events of Maya history for more than 1,100 years. They are in fact
chronological synopses of Maya history, and from their very nature they
have to do with long periods. This is not true of the monuments,[55] which,
as we have seen, were probably set up to mark the passage of certain
periods, not exceeding a katun in length in any case. Consequently, each
monument would have inscribed upon it only one or two {84} katun ending
days and the events which were connected more or less closely with it. In
other words, the monuments were erected at short intervals[56] and probably
recorded events contemporaneous with their erection, while the u kahlay
katunob, on the other hand, were historical summaries reaching back to a
remote time. The former were the periodicals of current events, the latter
histories of the past. The former in the great majority of cases had no
concern with the lapse of more than one or two katuns, while the latter
measured centuries by the repetition of the same unit. The writer believes
that from the very nature of the monuments--markers of current time--no u
kahlay katunob will be found on them, but that the presence of the katun
ending days above described indicates that the u kahlay katunob had been
developed while the other system was still in use. If the foregoing be
true, the signs in figure 38, _a-h_, would have this meaning: "On this day
came to an end the katun in which fall the accompanying dates," or some
similar significance.
If we exclude the foregoing as indicating the u kahlay katunob, we have but
one aboriginal source, that is one antedating the Spanish Conquest, which
probably records a count of this kind. It has been stated (p. 33) that the
Codex Peresianus probably treats in part at least of historical matter. The
basis for this assertion is that in this particular manuscript an u kahlay
katunob is seemingly recorded; at least there is a sequence of the ending
days of katuns shown, exactly like the one in Table IX, that is, 13 Ahau,
11 Ahau, 9 Ahau, etc.
At the time of the Spanish Conquest the Long Count seems to have been
recorded entirely by the ending days of its katuns, that is, by the u
kahlay katunob, and the use of Initial-series dating seems to have been
discontinued, and perhaps even forgotten. Native as well as Spanish
authorities state that at the time of the Conquest the Maya measured time
by the passage of the katuns, and no mention is made of any system of
dating which resembles in the least the Initial Series so prevalent in the
southern and older cities. While the Spanish authorities do not mention the
u kahlay katunob as do the native writers, they state very clearly that
this was the system used in counting time. Says Bishop Landa (1864: p. 312)
in this connection: "The Indians not only had a count by years and days ...
but they had a certain method of counting time and their affairs by ages,
which they made from twenty to twenty years ... these they call katunes."
Cogolludo (1688: lib. iv, cap. v, p. 186) makes a similar statement: "They
count their eras and ages, which they put in their books from twenty to
twenty years ... [these] they call katun." Indeed, there can be but little
doubt that the u kahlay katunob had entirely replaced the Initial Series in
recording the Long Count centuries before the Spanish Conquest; and if the
latter method of dating were known {85} at all, the knowledge of it came
only from half-forgotten records the understanding of which was gradually
passing from the minds of men.
It is clear from the foregoing that an important change in recording the
passage of time took place sometime between the epoch of the great southern
cities and the much later period when the northern cities flourished. In
the former, time was reckoned and dates were recorded by Initial Series; in
the latter, in so far as we can judge from post-Conquest sources, the u
kahlay katunob and Calendar-round dating were the only systems used. As to
when this change took place, we are not entirely in the dark. It is certain
that the use of the Initial Series extended to Yucatan, since monuments
presenting this method of dating have been found at a few of the northern
cities, namely, at Chichen Itza, Holactun, and Tuluum. On the other hand,
it is equally certain that Initial Series could not have been used very
extensively in the north, since they have been discovered in only these
three cities in Yucatan up to the present time. Moreover, the latest, that
is, the most recent of these three, was probably contemporaneous with the
rise of the Triple Alliance, a fairly early event of Northern Maya history.
Taking these two points into consideration, the limited use of Initial
Series in the north and the early dates recorded in the few Initial Series
known, it seems likely that Initial-series dating did not long survive the
transplanting of the Maya civilization in Yucatan.
Why this change came about is uncertain. It could hardly have been due to
the desire for greater accuracy, since the u kahlay katunob was far less
exact than Initial-series dating; not only could dates satisfying all given
conditions recur much more frequently in the u kahlay katunob, but, as
generally used, this method fixed a date merely as occurring somewhere
within a period of about 20 years.
The writer believes the change under consideration arose from a very
different cause; that it was in fact the result of a tendency toward
greater brevity, which was present in the glyphic writing from the very
earliest times, and which is to be noted on some of the earliest monuments
that have survived the ravages of the passing centuries. At first, when but
a single date was recorded on a monument, an Initial Series was used.
Later, however, when the need or desire had arisen to inscribe more than
one date on the same monument, additional dates were _not_ expressed as
Initial Series, each of which, as we have seen, involves the use of 8
glyphs, but as a Secondary Series, which for the record of short periods
necessitated the use of fewer glyphs than were employed in Initial Series.
It would seem almost as though Secondary Series had been invented to avoid
the use of Initial Series when more than one date had to be recorded on the
same monument. But this tendency toward brevity in dating did not cease
with the invention of Secondary Series. Somewhat later, dating by
period-endings was introduced, obviating the {86} necessity for the use of
even one Initial Series on every monument, in order that one date might be
fixed in the Long Count to which the others (Secondary Series) could be
referred. For all practical purposes, as we have seen, Period-ending dating
was as accurate as Initial-series dating for fixing dates in the Long
Count, and its substitution for Initial-series dating resulted in a further
saving of glyphs and a corresponding economy of space. Still later,
probably after the Maya had colonized Yucatan, the u kahlay katunob, which
was a direct application of Period-ending dating to the Long Count, came
into general use. At this time a rich history lay behind the Maya people,
and to have recorded all of its events by their corresponding Initial
Series would have been far too cumbersome a practice. The u kahlay katunob
offered a convenient and facile method by means of which long stretches of
time could be recorded and events approximately dated; that is, within 20
years. This, together with the fact that the practice of setting up dated
period-markers seems to have languished in the north, thus eliminating the
greatest medium of all for the presentation of Initial Series, probably
gave rise to the change from the one method of recording time to the other.
This concludes the discussion of the five methods by means of which the
Maya reckoned time and recorded dates: (1) Initial-series dating; (2)
Secondary-series dating; (3) Calendar-round dating; (4) Period-ending
dating; (5) Katun-ending dating, or the u kahlay katunob. While apparently
differing considerably from one another, in reality all are expressions of
the same fundamental idea, the combination of the numbers 13 and 20 (that
is, 260) with the solar year conceived as containing 365 days, and all were
recorded by the same vigesimal system of numeration; that is:
1. All used precisely the same dates, the 18,980 dates of the Calendar
Round;
2. All may be reduced to the same fundamental unit, the day; and
3. All used the same time counters, those shown in Table VIII.
In conclusion, the student is strongly urged constantly to bear in mind two
vital characteristics of Maya chronology:
1. The absolute continuity of all sequences which had to do with the
counting of time: The 13 numerical coefficients of the day names, the 20
day names, the 260 days of the tonalamatl, the 365 positions of the haab,
the 18,980 dates of the Calendar Round, and the kins, uinals, tuns, katuns,
and cycles of the vigesimal system of numeration. When the conclusion of
any one of these sequences had been reached, the sequence began anew
without the interruption or omission of a single unit and continued
repeating itself for all time.
2. All Maya periods expressed not current time, but passed time, as in the
case of our hours, minutes, and seconds.
On these two facts rests the whole Maya conception of time. {87}