In the "Actes de la Societe Philologique," Paris, for March, 1870, Mons.
H. de Charencey gives some particulars of his attempt to decipher
"fragments" of one or two very brief inscriptions on the bas-relief of
the cross at Palenque. I know nothing of his qualifications for this
work, but he appears to have studied the characters of the Maya
alphabet preserved and explained by Landa. It is seen, however, that his
attempt to decipher the inscriptions is a complete failure. In fact, he
professes to have done no more than reproduce two or three words in
Roman characters. He gives us _Hunab-ku_, _Eznab_, and _Kukulcan_ as
words found on the cross. _Eznab_ is supposed to be the name of a month,
or of a day of the week, and the others names of divinities. He finds
that the characters of the inscriptions are not in all respects
identical with those found in Landa, and that Landa's list, especially
when tested by the inscriptions, is incomplete. There is not absolute
certainty in regard to the name Kukulcan; nevertheless, M. de Charencey
makes this speculative use of it:
"The presence of the name 'Kukulcan' on the bas-relief of the cross is
important in a historical point of view. The name of this demigod, which
signifies 'the serpent with the quetzal plumes,' is the Maya form of the
Mexican name 'Quetzalcohuatl,' which has precisely the same meaning. But
we know that the name and worship of this god were brought to the high
plateaus of Central America toward the ninth century of our era,
consequently the bas-relief in question can not be more ancient."
This assumes that the worship of Kukulcan was never heard of by the
Mayas until the Aztecs arrived in Mexico, an assumption for which there
is no warrant, and which proceeds in utter disregard of facts. It was
the Aztecs who had never heard of Kukulcan, or, at least, had not
adopted his worship, previous to this time. The Aztecs, when they
settled in Anahuac, did not impart new ideas, religion, or culture to
any body; on the contrary, they received much from the civilization of
their new neighbors, which was more advanced than their own. It is very
certain that neither the Mayas nor the Quiches borrowed any thing from
them.
We need not go back so far as the ninth century to find the time when
the Aztecs adopted, or at least organized in Mexico, the worship of
Kukulcan, whose name they transformed into Quetzalcohuatl. His worship
did not begin with them; they did not introduce it; they found it in the
country as a very ancient worship, and adopted their form of it from the
people who yielded to their sway.
If M. de Charencey will inquire with a little more care, he will
discover that Kukulcan was one of the very oldest personages in Central
American mythology, as _Con_ was one of the oldest in that of Peru.
Kukulcan, sometimes as Zamna, was associated with almost every thing in
civilization. He introduced the beginnings of civilized life, invented
the art of writing, and was to the Central Americans not wholly unlike
what Thoth was to the Egyptians, and Tautus, or Taut, to the
Phoenicians. If the bas-relief of the cross at Palenque were half as old
as his worship in Central America, it would be far more ancient than any
one has supposed.