Produced by PM for Bureau of American Ethnology, Julia
Miller, and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
generously made available by the Bibliotheque nationale
de France (BnF/Gallica) at http://gallica.bnf.fr)
Transcriber's Note
This paper is an extract from the following publication:
Powell, J. W.
1897 _Sixteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American
Ethnology._ pp. 199-266. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C.
The index was extracted from the complete volume index.
Inconsistencies in hyphenation and spelling have been maintained, along
with two typographical errors. The typographical errors are marked with
[TN-#] in the text. A complete list of inconsistencies and errors is
found at the end of this paper.
The original publication used characters which are not available in the
character set used in this version of the text. They have been replaced
with the following codes:
[c] open o
[=h] h with stroke
DAY SYMBOLS OF THE MAYA YEAR
BY
CYRUS THOMAS
CONTENTS
Page
Introductory 205
The first day 207
The second day 215
The third day 221
The fourth day 226
The fifth day 229
The sixth day 231
The seventh day 232
The eighth day 235
The ninth day 237
The tenth day 239
The eleventh day 241
The twelfth day 243
The thirteenth day 245
The fourteenth day 248
The fifteenth day 250
The sixteenth day 252
The seventeenth day 254
The eighteenth day 258
The nineteenth day 259
The twentieth day 262
Appendix--A list of the deities of the days of the month in the
Maori calendar 265
ILLUSTRATIONS
Page
PLATE LXIV. Copies of glyphs from the codices 208
LXV. Copies of glyphs from the codices 226
LXVI. Copies of glyphs from the codices 242
LXVII. Copies of glyphs from the codices 252
LXVIII. Copies of glyphs from the codices 260
LXIX. Shell bearing Maya glyphs 262
DAY SYMBOLS OF THE MAYA YEAR
BY CYRUS THOMAS
INTRODUCTORY
As the origin and signification of the day and month, names of the Maya
calendar, and of the symbols used to represent these time periods, are
now being discussed by students of Mexican and Central American
paleography, I deem it advisable to present the result of my
investigations in this line. The present paper, however, will be limited
to the days only, as I have but little to add in regard to the month
names or symbols. As the conclusion reached by Drs Seler and Brinton in
regard to the order and sequence of the days of the month in the
different calendars appears to be satisfactorily established, it will be
accepted.
As frequent allusion is made herein to the phoneticism or phonetic value
of the written characters or hieroglyphs, it is proper that the writer's
position on this point should be clearly understood. He does not claim
that the Maya scribes had reached that advanced stage where they could
indicate each letter-sound by a glyph or symbol. On the contrary, he
thinks a symbol, probably derived in most cases from an older method of
picture writing, was selected because the name or word it represented
had as its chief phonetic element a certain consonant sound or syllable.
If this consonant element were _b_, the symbol would be used where _b_
was the prominent consonant element of the word to be indicated, no
reference, however, to its original signification being necessarily
retained. Thus the symbol for _cab_, "earth," might be used in writing
_Caban_, a day name, or _cabil_, "honey," because _cab_ is their chief
phonetic element.
In a previous work[205-1] I have expressed the opinion that the
characters are to a certain extent phonetic--are not true alphabetic
signs, but syllabic. And at the same time I expressed the opinion that
even this definition did not hold true of all, as some were apparently
ideographic, while others were simple abbreviated pictorial
representations. In a subsequent paper[205-2] I expressed substantially
the same opinion, and gave as my belief that one reason why attempts at
decipherment have failed of success is a misconception of the peculiar
character of the writing, which peculiarity is found in the fact that,
as it exists in the codices and inscriptions, it is in a transition
stage from the purely ideographic to the phonetic. I stated also my
belief that the writing had not reached the stage when each sound was
indicated by a glyph or sign.
This may further be explained by the following illustration: The
conventionalized figure of a turtlehead is the symbol for a "turtle,"
_ak_, _ac_, or _aac_ in Maya; and a conventionalized footprint is the
symbol for "step" or "road," _be_, _beil_, in Maya. These may be brought
together to form the word _akyab_ or _kayab_, which may have no
reference to the original signification of the combined symbols. These
two glyphs are, in fact, combined to form the symbol for the month
_Kayab_.
These statements will perhaps suffice to make clear my views on this
question, which do not appear to have been clearly understood, possibly
because of my frequent use of the words "phonetic" and "phoneticism,"
and perhaps rather loose reference to "letter elements."
It is proper, however, to add that I am inclined to the opinion that
modification in the form and details of a glyph which belongs to the
class which, for want of a better term, we may designate "phonetic," in
many cases indicates a modification or change in the signification or
word value. I say in "many cases," because these modifications are due
often to the greater or lesser accuracy with which the glyph is drawn,
the caprice of the scribe, and other causes which have no reference to
sound or signification. For example, the change of a rounded or circular
symbol to a face figure, as is often done, does not appear, at least in
the day signs, to have any significance. On the other hand, a slight
variation, if permanent, may be indicative of a difference in
signification or phonetic value. This appears to be true, to some
extent, whether we consider the characters ideographic or as, in some
sense, phonetic.
The lists of the days in the Maya, Tzental, Quiche-Cakchiquel, Zapotec,
and Nahuatl, in the order usually given, are as follows:
_Names of the days in the different calendars_
-----------+----------+-------------------+---------------+---------------
Maya | Tzental | Quiche-Cakchiquel | Zapotec | Nahuatl
-----------+----------+-------------------+---------------+---------------
Imix. | Imox. | Imox. | Chilla. | Cipactli.
Ik. | Igh. | Ik'. | Gui, Ni, Laa. | Ehecatl.
Akbal. | Votan. | Akbal. | Guela. | Calli.
Kan. | Ghanan. | K'at. | Guache. | Cuetzpallin.
Chicchan. | Abagh. | Can. | Ci, Ziie. | Cohuatl.
Cimi. | Tox. | Camey. | Lana. | Miquiztli.
Manik. | Moxic. | Quch. | China. | Mazatl.
Lamat. | Lambat. | Canel. | Lapa. | Tochtli.
Muluc. | Molo. | Toh. | Niza. | Atl.
Oc. | Elab. | Tzi. | Tella. | Itzcuintli.
Chuen. | Batz. | Batz. | Goloo. | Ozomatli.
Eb. | Euob. | E, Ee. | Pija. | Mallinalli.
Ben, Been. | Ben. | Ah. | Quii. | Acatl.
Ix, Hix. | Hix. | Balam. | Eche. | Ocelotl.
Men. | Tziquin. | Tziquin. | Naa. | Quauhtli.
Cib. | Chabin. | Ahmak. | Loo. | Cozcaquauhtli.
Caban. | Chic. | Noh. | Xoo. | Ollin.
Edznab. | Chinax. | Tihax. | Gopaa. | Tecpatl.
Cauac. | Cahogh. | Caoc. | Appe. | Quiahuitl.
Ahau. | Aghual. | Hunahpu. | Lao. | Xochitl.
-----------+----------+-------------------+---------------+---------------
THE FIRST DAY
Maya, _imix_ (or _ymix_); Tzental, _imox_ or _mox_; Quiche-Cakchiquel,
_imox_ or _moxin_; Zapotec, _chilla_ or _chiylla_; Nahuatl, _cipactli_.
The symbol of this day, which is quite uniform in the day series of the
codices, is shown in plate LXIV, 1.[207-1] In this the essential
features appear to be the black spot at the top, the semicircle of dots
around it, and the short perpendicular lines in the lower half. The form
on the right slab of the "Palenque tablet," and also in the Lorillard
City inscription, copied by Charney,[TN-1] is given in plate LXIV, 2.
The only particular in which this differs from the other is that the
little circle at the top is crosshatched. The form shown in LXIV, 3, is
found in the Tikal inscription; it shows also the crosshatching in the
little circle at the top. This character, however, when combined with
other glyphs, and when used otherwise than as a day symbol, sometimes
varies from the types given. For example, in the symbol of the month
_Mac_ it is as shown in plate LXIV, 4. In this a minute, divided oblong,
takes the place of the dark spot at the top, and a double curved line
accompanies the circle of dots. Another form is shown in plate LXIV, 5.
The only variation in this from the usual type is the introduction of
two or three minute circles in the curved line of dots and the divided
oblong. Dr Seler is inclined to believe that these are essential
variants from the true _imix_ symbol; nevertheless, as _m_ is the chief
consonant element both in _imix_, or _mox_ and _mac_, there appears to
be a relation between the form of the glyphs and their phonetic value.
Drs Seler and Schellhas believe _im_ to be the radical of _imix_ and
_imox_, which are dialectal variations of the same word. Dr Brinton,
however, basing his opinion on the fact that _mox_ and _moxin_ are used
sometimes as equivalents, decides that the radical syllable is _m-x_. In
this he is probably correct, and if so, this furnishes additional
evidence of the close relation between form and sound, as in one case
_m-x_ are the chief phonetic elements and in the other _m-c_. It is
probable that Drs Schellhas and Seler were led to their conclusion by
the fact that the symbol bears a close resemblance to the conventional
form of the female breast, which in Maya is _im_. This, which was
perhaps the origin of the symbol, was probably selected simply because
_m_ is its only prominent element. Nevertheless, it is worthy of notice
that the symbol for the day _Ix_ is frequently represented as shown in
plate LXVI, 36, from Tro. 5*c. This is similar in some respects to the
_Imix_ symbol, and the name contains the _i_ and _x_ of the latter. If
the writing is phonetic, the points of resemblance may have some
significance, otherwise they do not.
In a previous paper[208-1] I suggested that the probable signification
of the character LXIV, 7, from Dres. 14c and 46b, is _maax_, "monkey,
ape, imitator." Below the text in each case is seen a dark male figure
(or deity), to which it undoubtedly refers, as is conceded by Drs
Schellhas and Seler. The face character, which forms part of the glyph,
may be only a determinative; at least I am unable to assign it any other
value in this connection, and the necessity for such determinative is
apparent. Brasseur, under _akab-maax_, speaks of a phantom or hobgoblin
of this name, which he says signifies "the great monkey of the night."
Perez gives as definitions "duende" (elf or hobgoblin) and "mico
nocturno." Henderson, who writes the name _akabmax_, simply says
"sprite, phantom." It would seem, therefore, that among the
superstitious beliefs of the Maya was that of a night phantom or deity,
which took the form of a monkey. But this black figure appears to be
different from those on Tro. 34*-31*, with which Seler connects it and
to which he applies the name Ekchuah.[208-2]
In the paper above referred to, I have interpreted the symbol shown in
plate LXIV, 8 (from Dres. 35c) _maach_, "the crow," assuming the
birdhead to be a determinative. Seler concludes that the bird which this
represents is "a substitute, colleague, or symbol of the Rain god Chac,"
the so-called Maya Tlaloc so frequently represented in the codices.
Although there is in this case no bird figure below to confirm our
interpretation, yet it appears to be justified by the comparisons given
and by its agreement with the phonetic value of the _imix_ symbol. It is
also further confirmed by the two glyphs shown in plate LXVIII, 13, 14,
which occur together in Dres. 38b. In this case the two characters,
which are combined in plate LXIV, 8, are separated, yet must have the
same signification. Here the bird figure (a man with a bird's head or
bird mask) is seen below. In both instances rain is represented, showing
that the bird is supposed to bear some relation thereto. But it is more
likely that it has direct reference to the wind which accompanies the
rain storm rather than to "fruitfulness," as Seler supposes. Be this,
however, as it may, our rendering of the _imix_ symbol in this
connection appears to be justified, and indicates that the symbol is
used here for its phonetic value rather than with any reference to its
primary signification.
[Illustration: PL. LXIV. COPIES OF GLYPHS FROM THE CODICES]
Dr Seler also refers in this connection to the lower line of symbols on
Dres. 29-30b (three of which are shown in plate LXVIII, 15, 16, 17); to
those shown in plate LXVIII, 18, 19, from Tro. 14c; and those shown in
plate LXVIII, 20, 21, from Tro. 11a. He remarks that "in a number of
hieroglyphs the character _imix_ stands as an equivalent of a peculiar
animal head which bears as a distinctive mark the element _akbal_ over
the eye. Thus in the hieroglyphs enumerating those above mentioned
which, standing after the hieroglyphs of the cardinal points, seem to
express the deities presiding over them, indeed there appears here on
the same animal head, on one hand the character _imix_, on the other the
element figure 165" (our plate LXIV, 5).
Although I am unable to interpret satisfactorily the _imix_ symbols in
the places above referred to, I think it can be made apparent that Dr
Seler's explanation is without foundation. For instance, by referring to
the plates of the Dresden and Troano codices mentioned, it will be seen
that there is nothing whatever that refers to an "animal head which
bears the element _akbal_ over the eye," unless we suppose it to be in
plate LXVIII, 16 (from Dres. 29b) and LXVIII, 21 (from Tro. 11a). There
is no figure below or connected with either series to justify this
conclusion. It is also certain that plate LXVIII, 21 (Tro. 11a) is not
an animal head. Possibly plate LXVIII, 16 (Dres. 29b) may be intended
for an animal head, but this is not certain and, moreover, it is not
repeated in the series.
Referring to Cort. 27a it will be seen that the compound glyph shown in
plate LXVIII, 22 (apparently the same as that on Tro. 11a) is repeated
four times in one line, each connected with a cardinal point symbol, and
each standing immediately over and evidently referring to a large
vessel.[209-1] It is stated that it was a custom among the Maya during
certain religious ceremonies to place a vessel in their temples at each
of the four cardinal points.[209-2] As _cum_ and _xamach_ are Maya words
signifying vessel, we still find in these the _m_ sound. It is therefore
possible that the similar glyphs on Dres. 29b and Tro. 14 and 15 also
refer to vessels. The supposition seems to be strengthened by the fact
that connected with the former are figures of the four classes of food
animals--quadrupeds, birds, reptiles (iguana), and fishes. The latter
refer to the hunter's occupation, being accompanied by figures of the
deer. Landa, in his descriptions of the various festivals, repeatedly
alludes to the four Chacs or Bacabs which represent the four cardinal
points, and to the different classes of food animals presented where
vessels were used. It is therefore more likely that the symbol is used
in the places mentioned because of its phonetic value rather than as a
substitute for the heads of lightning animals, for which supposed
substitution Dr Seler admits he can not account.
Dr Seler refers also to the glyph on which the long nose deity is
seated, Dres. 44a, shown in our plate LXVIII, 23. The prefix he
interprets by "man, human being," and supposes the whole glyph refers to
the attributes of the Rain god. As the deity holds a fish in his hand,
and is seen in the lowest division of the same plate in the act of
seining fish, is it not more likely that this symbol should be rendered
by _cayom_, "a fisherman"? This is appropriate and retains the phonetic
value of the _imix_ symbol.
In the compound glyph 24, plate LXVIII, from Dres. 67b, to which Seler
also refers in the same connection, we see in the figure below the same
deity wading in water in which a fish is swimming. The right portion of
the symbol is the same as the last (plate LXVIII, 23) and presumably has
the same signification--_cayom_, "a fisherman," or _cayomal_, "to fish."
I am unable to interpret the first or left-hand character; possibly it
may be found in one of the terms _chucay_, or _[c]aucay_, which Henderson
gives as equivalents of _cayomal_. The latter--_[c]aucay_--would give to
this prefix precisely the phonetic value I have hitherto assigned it.
The next character Dr Seler refers to in this connection is that shown
in plate LXVIII, 25, from Dres. 40c, where the long-nose god is seen
below rowing a boat on the water. The adjoining symbol in the text is a
fish. It is probable therefore that substantially the same
interpretation is to be given here.
The group shown in plate LXIV, 9, consisting of an _Imix_ and _Kan_
symbol, is of frequent occurrence in all the codices. The relation of
the characters in this combination varies, the order being frequently
the reverse of that given in the figure, and again one being placed on
top of the other. They frequently follow deity symbols, especially the
symbol of the so called "Corn god," and in these instances seem to refer
to some attribute of the divinity indicated. However, they are by no
means confined to these relations, being found quite frequently in other
connections. The combination is occasionally borne upon the back of an
individual, as Dres. 16a, and on Tro. 21b it is on the back of a dog. Dr
Seler concludes "that it denotes the copal or the offering of incense."
However, he subsequently[210-1] expresses the view that it may signify
"beans and maize." In a previous work[210-2] some reasons were presented
by me for believing this combination was intended to denote bread or
maize bread. This belief is based on the statement by Landa in his
account of the sacrifices at the beginning of the year _Muluc_, that
they made "images of dogs, in baked earth, carrying bread on the back,"
and the fact that in plate 21 of the Codex Tro., representing the
sacrifices of this year, we see the figure of a dog with this _Kan-Imix_
group on its back. This figure (plate LXIV, 10) probably represents the
images of which Landa speaks, and the symbols on the back, bread or food
in the general sense. Further notice of this combination will be given
under the fourth day, _Kan_.
The character shown in plate LXVIII, 26, from Tro. 20*d, is erroneously
given by Seler as an example of the _kan-imix_ symbol. The two glyphs on
the mat figure are unquestionably _imix_ symbols, though of the two
different types shown in plate LXIV, 1 and 5. He suggests that here it
replaces the deity symbol, but this is contradicted by the fact that in
both groups where it appears the deity symbol is present. The mat-like
figure, which is probably a determinative, shows that it refers to the
sack, bag, or kind of hamper which the women figured below bear on the
back, filled with corn, bones, etc. As _mucuc_ signifies "portmanteau,
bag, sack, etc," _mucub_ "a bag or sack made of sackcloth," and
_mucubcuch_ "to carry anything in a sack or folded in a shawl," it is
more than probable we have in these words the signification of the
symbol. The duplication of the _imix_ symbol may be to denote the
plural; or, as the words come from a root signifying "secret, hidden,
covered," it may be to intensify. It is noticeable also that the latter
or right-hand _Imix_ symbol is similar to that used for the mouth _Mac_.
In the right section of Dres. 41b is the glyph shown in plate LXIV, 11,
which, according to the phonetic system that appears to prevail in this
writing, may be translated _yulpolic_, from _yulpol_, "to smooth or
plane wood," or, as given by Henderson (MS. Lexicon), "to smooth, plane,
or square timber, to beat off the log." This interpretation, which is
given here merely because of its relation to the symbol which follows,
is based in part on the following evidence: The left character, which
has _y_ as its chief phonetic element, is the same as the upper
character in the symbol for the month _Yax_ (plate LXIV, 12), and also
the upper character of the symbol for the month _Yaxkin_ (plate LXIV,
13). Other evidence of its use with this value will be presented farther
on, and also in reference to the right character of the above-mentioned
symbol (plate LXIV, 11), which has been given _p_ as its chief phonetic
element. By reference to the figure below the text the appropriateness
of this rendering is at once apparent, as here is represented an
individual in the act of chipping off the side of a tree. This he
appears to be doing by holding in his left hand an instrument resembling
a frow, which he strikes with a hatchet.
The character immediately below the one above mentioned and belonging to
the same series is shown in plate LXIV, 14. It may be interpreted
_mamachah_, "to make flat by repeated strokes." The phonetic value of
the parts is obtained in this way. The upper character with two wings is
Landa's _ma_, except that the circular wings contain the lines or
strokes which the bishop has omitted, and which appear to indicate the
_m_ sound and are observed in the _Imix_ symbol. Colonel Mallery,
comparing this with the sign of negation made by the Indians and that of
the Egyptians given by Champollion (our plate LXIV, 15), concludes that
it is derived from the symmetrically extended arms with the hands curved
slightly downward. This will furnish an explanation of the strokes in
the terminal circles. The left of the two lower characters is almost
identical with the symbol for the month _Mac_ (plate LXIV, 4), omitting
the _ca_ glyph. The lower right-hand character is similar to the symbol
for the month _Chuen_. We thus obtain legitimately the sounds _ma
ma-ch_, whether we consider the parts truly phonetic or only ikonomatic.
For further illustration of the use of this symbol and evidence of
phoneticism, the reader is referred to the article in the _American
Anthropologist_ above mentioned.
The fact that a symbol is used to denote a given Maya day does not
prove, supposing it to be in any sense phonetic, that the Maya name
gives the original equivalent. It may have been adopted to represent the
older name in the Tzental, or borrowed from the Zapotec calendar and
retained in the Maya calendar for the new name given in that tongue.
However, the symbol for this first day, which has substantially the same
name in the Maya and Tzental, appears to represent the name in these
languages and to be in some degree phonetic, _m_ being the chief
phonetic element represented by it. The crosshatching in the little
circle at the top, seen in some of the older forms found in the
inscriptions, may indicate, as will later be seen, the _x_ or _ch_
sound, thus giving precisely the radical _m-x_.
It may be said, in reference to the signification of the names of the
day in different dialects, that no settled or entirely satisfactory
conclusion has been reached in regard to either.
The Cakchiquel word _imox_ is translated by the grammarian Ximenes as
"swordfish," thus corresponding with the usual interpretation of the
Mexican _cipactli_. Dr Seler thinks, however, that the Maya names were
derived, as above stated, from _im_. Nevertheless he concludes that the
primitive signification of both the Maya and Mexican symbols is the
earth, "who brings forth all things from her bosom and takes all living
things again into it." If we may judge from its use, there is no doubt
that the Mexican _cipactli_ figure is a symbol of the earth or
underworld. The usual form of the day symbol in the Mexican codices is
shown in plate LXIV, 16, and more elaborately in plate LXIV, 17. As
proof that it indicates the earth or underworld, there is shown on plate
73 of the Borgian Codex an individual, whose heart has been torn from
his breast, plunging downward through the open jaws of the monster into
the shades or earth below. On plate 76 of the same codex, the extended
jaws open upward, and into them a number of persons are marching in
regular order. These apparently represent the thirteen months of the
sacred year. One has passed on and disappeared from view, and the other
twelve are following with bowed heads. It would seem from these to be
not only symbolic of the earth or hades, but also to have some relation
to time.
For positive proof that it is sometimes used to denote the earth, or
that from which vegetation comes, it is only necessary to refer to the
lower right-hand figure of plate 12, Borgian Codex. Here is Tlaloc
sending down rain upon the earth, from which the enlivened plants are
springing forth and expanding into leaf and blossom. The earth, on which
they stand and from which they arise, is represented by the figure of
the mythical _Cipactli_.
It is quite probable that the monster on plates 4 and 5 of the Dresden
Codex, which appears to be of the same genus, is a time symbol, and also
that on plate 74 of the same codex. It is therefore more than likely
that the animal indicated by the Mexican name of the day is mythical,
represented according to locality by some known animal which seems to
indicate best the mythical conception. Some figures evidently refer to
the alligator, and others apparently to the iguana; that on plates 4 and
5 of the Dresden Codex is purely mythical, but contains reptilian
characteristics.
Dr Brinton, probably influenced to some extent by the apparent
signification of the Nahuatl name and symbol, explains the other names
as follows:
This leads me to identify it [the Maya name] with, the Maya _mex_
or _meex_, which is the name of a fish (the "pez arana," "un
pescado que tiene muchos brazos"), probably so called from another
meaning of _mex_, "the beard." ... This identification brings this
day name into direct relation to the Zapotec and Nahuatl names. In
the former, _chiylla_, sometimes given as _pi-chilla_, is
apparently from _bi-chilla-beo_, water lizard, and Nahuatl
_cipactli_ certainly means some fish or fish-like animal--a
swordfish, alligator, or the like, though exactly which is not
certain, and probably the reference with them was altogether
mythical.
Dr Seler, in his subsequent paper, gives the following explanation of
the Zapotec name _chilla_ or _chijlla_:
For this I find in the lexicon three principal meanings: One is the
cubical bean (wurfel bohne). "Pichijlla, frisolillos o havas con
que echan las suertes los sortilegos" [beans used by the sorcerers
in casting lots or telling fortunes]; another meaning is "the
ridge" (pichijlla, lechijlla, chijllatani, loma o cordillera de
sierra); another is "the crocodile" (cocodrillo, lagarto grande de
agua); and another "swordfish" (pella-pichijlla-tao, espadarte
pescado). Finally, we have chilla-tao, "the great Chilla," given
again as one of the names of the highest being. Here it seems to me
that the signification "crocodile" is the original one, and thus
far suitable. For the manner in which the first day character is
delineated in Mexican and Zapotec picture writing [our plate LXIV,
16] shows undoubtedly the head of the crocodile with the movable
snapping upper jaw, which is so characteristic of the animal.
Attention is called to the apparently closely related word as given by
Perez--_mech_, _ixmech_, "lagartija."
It will not be out of place here to refer to a superstition pervading
the islands of the Pacific ocean, which seems strangely coincident with
the conception of the physical symbol of this day. This is a
mythological monster known in some sections by the name _Taniwha_, and
in others as _moko_ or _mo'o_.
Dr Edward Tregear[214-1] speaks of it as follows:
Taniwha were water monsters generally. They mostly inhabited lakes
and streams, but sometimes the sea. Sometimes the beast was a land
animal, a lizard, etc, but the true _taniwha_ is a water kelpie.
Mr Kerry Nichols,[214-2] speaking of these monsters, says:
With the other fabulous creations of Maori mythology were the
_taniwhas_ or evil demons, mysterious monsters in the form of
gigantic lizards, who were said to inhabit subterranean caves, the
deep places of lakes and rivers, and to guard tabued districts.
They were on the alert to upset canoes and to devour men. Indeed,
these fabulous monsters not only entered largely into the religious
superstitions, but into the poetry and prose of Maori tradition.
The Hawaiian _Mo'o_ or _Moko_ appears, from the following statement by
Judge Fornander, to have been applied sometimes to this mythological
monster:
The _Mo'o_ or _Moko_ mentioned in tradition--reptiles and
lizards--were of several kinds--the _mo'o_ with large, sharp,
glistening teeth; the talking mo'o, _moo-olelo_; the creeping mo'o,
_moo-kolo_; the roving, wandering mo'o, _moo-pelo_; the watchful
mo'o, _moo-kaala_; the prophesying mo'o, _moo-kaula_; the deadly
mo'o, _moo-make-a-kane_. The Hawaiian legends frequently speak of
_mo'o_ of extraordinary size living in caverns, amphibious in their
nature, and being the terror of the inhabitants.[214-3]
According to the Codex Fuen-leal, at the beginning of things the gods
made thirteen heavens, and beneath them the primeval water, in which
they placed a fish called _cipactli_ (queses como caiman). This marine
monster brought the dirt and clay from which they made the earth, which,
therefore, is represented in their paintings resting on the back of a
fish.
A similar conception is found both in Malay and Hindu mythology,
differing somewhat in details, but always relating to some monster
reptile. In the Manek Maya, one of the ancient epics of Java, Anta Boga,
the deity presiding over the lowest region of the earth, is a
dragon-like monster with ninety nostrils. The same conception is found
also among other peoples.
In the Tonga language _moco_ is "a species of lizard;" in Hawaiian
_mo'o_ or _moko_ is "the general name for lizards," and the same word
signifies "lizard" in Samoan; _moko-moko_ is the New Zealand (Maori)
name for a small lizard. Taylor[214-4] says that _moko-titi_ was a
"lizard god."
It is therefore evident that a superstition regarding some reptilian
water monster prevailed throughout the Pacific islands. It is true also
that the Nahuatl _cipactli_ certainly means some amphibious or water
animal--a swordfish, alligator, or something of the kind, though exactly
which is not certain--or, what is more likely, the reference was
altogether mythical.
It is possible, and perhaps probable, as stated above, that the Maya
symbol of this day was taken originally from the conventional method of
representing the female breast. Drs Seler and Schellhas appear to be of
this opinion. But it does not necessarily follow from this that the
character used for the name of the day has any reference to the female
breast, as it is more likely used in this relation for its phonetic
value alone, _m_ being the chief phonetic element indicated thereby.
If the supposition herein advanced that the combination shown in plate
LXIV, 9, denotes bread or food be correct, it is possible that the
symbol is also sometimes used to indicate "maize," _ixim_ or _xim_, on
account of its phonetic value. As will be shown farther on, the _kan_
symbol is not only used to denote the grain of maize and maize in the
general sense, but it appears to denote in some cases bread or the
tortilla.
THE SECOND DAY
Maya, _ik_; Tzental, _igh_; Quiche-Cakchiquel, _ik'_; Zapotec, _gui_,
_ni_, _laa_, _laala_ or _liaa_; Nahuatl, _ehecatl_.
The form of the symbol of this day presents a number of minor
variations, the more important of which are shown in plate LXIV, 18-26.
Symbol 18 is the form given by Landa; 19-24, those found in the codices;
25 is from the left slab of the Palenque tablet or altar plate, and 26
is from the Tikal inscription.
So far as this character can satisfactorily be interpreted, where used
otherwise than as a day symbol, the signification appears to be wind,
spirit, or life, whether considered phonetic or not. As illustrations of
its use, the following examples are presented:
At the right side of Dres. 72c are the three characters shown in plate
LXIV, 27, 28, and 29, which follow one another downward, as shown in the
figure, the three forming one of the short columns of the series to
which they belong. From the lowest, which is the _ik_ symbol, waving
blue lines, indicating water, extend downward to the bottom of the
division. If these glyphs are considered ideographic and not phonetic,
it is still possible to give them a reasonable interpretation. The
falling water shows that they relate to the rain storm or tempest. The
uppermost character, which appears to be falling over on its side, we
may assume to be the symbol of a house or building of some kind;[215-1]
the dotted lines extending from its surface may well be supposed to
represent rain driven from the roof. There is, however, another possible
interpretation of this character which appears to be consistent with
Mexican and Central American mythology. It is that it indicates a house,
vessel, or region of the heavens which holds the waters of the upper
world. The turning on the side would, in this case, denote the act of
pouring out the water in the form of rain. This supposition (although I
am inclined to adopt the former) appears to be supported by the fact
that this character is used in the Dresden Codex as one of the cloud or
heaven symbols, as, for example, on plates 66 and 68. According to
Ramirez, the Mexican wind and rain gods occupy a large mansion in the
heavens, which is divided into four apartments, with a court in the
middle. In this court stand four enormous vases of water, and an
infinite number of very small slaves (the rain drops) stand ready to dip
out the water from one or the other of these vases and pour it on the
earth in showers.[216-1] As the lowest character in the group mentioned
is the _ik_ symbol, its appropriate rendering here is beyond question
"wind;" therefore, as two out of the three characters, and the rain sign
below, indicate the rain storm, we may take for granted that the middle
character probably refers to lightning or thunder.
Additional reasons for this interpretation are given in a previous
paper[216-2] and need not be repeated here, as the only object now in
view in referring to them is to show that the _ik_ symbol is there used
to denote wind.
In the third and fourth divisions of plate 16* Codex Troano, five
persons are represented, each holding in his hand an _ik_ symbol from
which arises what appear to be the sprouting leaves of a plant, probably
maize (plate LXIV, 30, 31). This is interpreted by Dr Seler as the heart
just taken from the sacrificed victim, the leaf-shape figures
representing the vapor rising from the warm blood and flesh. It is
unnecessary to give here his reasons for this belief, as the suggestion
presented below, although wholly different, gives to the symbol in this
place substantially the same meaning that he assigns to it, to wit,
life, vitality. It is probable that the figure is intended to represent
the germination of a plant--the springing forth of the blade from the
seed--and that the _ik_ symbol indicates plant life, or rather the
spirit which the natives believe dwells in plants and causes them to
grow. Seler's suggestion that in this connection _ik_ may be compared to
_kan_ is appropriate, but this comparison does not tend to the support
of his theory. Take, for example, the sprouting _kan_ symbols on Tro.
29b, to which he refers. There can be no doubt that the symbol
represents the grain of maize from which the sprouting leaves are rising
(plate LXIV, 32). In one place a bird is pulling it up; at another place
a small quadruped is attacking it; at another the Tlaloc is planting (or
perhaps replanting) the seed.
In the lowest division of the same plate (Tro. 29) are four individuals,
three of whom, as may be seen by studying the similar figures in the
division above, are anthropomorphic symbols of corn; the other an earth
or underworld deity. One of the former holds in his hands a _kan_
symbol, which is colored to signify maize; the others hold _ik_ symbols.
There are two interpretations which may be given this symbolic
representation--one, that the _ik_ glyphs are intended to denote plant
life, that which causes plants to spring up and grow; the other, that
they denote wind, which in that country was often destructive to growing
corn.
Very distinct reference is made in the "Relacion de la Villa
Valladolid"[217-1] to the injurious effects of winds on the maize crop.
It is related in this report, which appears to have been of an official
character, made in 1579, that--
From June till the middle of August it rains very hard and there
are strong winds; from the latter date the rains are not copious
and the wind blows strongly from the north, which causes much
mortality among the natives, and Spaniards as well, for they
contract catarrh and _barriga_ (dropsy?). This north wind destroys
the maize crops, which form the main sustenance of both natives and
Spaniards, for they use no other bread.
There can be no doubt that most, if not all, of the figures on this
plate (Tro. 29) are intended to represent the injurious and destructive
agencies to which maize and other cultivated plants were subject. Birds
and quadrupeds pull up the sprouting seed and pull down and devour the
ripening grain; worms gnaw the roots and winds break down the stalks,
one out of four escaping injury and giving full return to the planter.
The latter is therefore probably the correct interpretation, the only
difficult feature being the presence of the Earth god, which agrees
better with the first suggestion.
It is to be observed that the series on Tro. 29c really commences with
the right-hand group on 30c. The figure here holds in his hand an _ik_
symbol. Following this, the left group on 29c shows a bird pecking the
corn; the next, a small quadruped tearing it down; the next, a worm
gnawing at the root of a plant; and the fourth, or right-hand group, a
corn figure holding a _kan_ symbol, indicating the mature grain, the
uninjured portion of the crop. It would therefore appear that the _ik_
symbol in this series denotes wind.
As additional proof that the symbol is used to indicate "wind,"
reference is made to Tro. 24a. Here the long-nose Rain god, or Maya
Tlaloc, is seen amidst the storm, clothed in black and bearing on his
arm a shield on which are two _ik_ symbols (plate LXIV, 33), doubtless
indicative of the fierceness of the tempest. In front of him is the Corn
god, bending beneath the pouring rain. On plate 25, same codex, lower
division, the storm is again symbolized, and the _ik_ symbol is present
here also.
It seems from these facts to be quite certain that the value of the
symbol in the codices, so far as it can be satisfactorily determined,
corresponds in signification with the Maya name.
Referring again to Dr Seler's theory that the plant-like figures on Tro.
15*, 16* indicate the freshly extracted heart and the vapor arising
therefrom, the following additional items are noted: He says that in the
text the scene below, or at least these sprouting-plant figures, are
expressed by hieroglyphs 27-29, plate LXVIII. His comparison with the
so-called heart figures from the Mexican codices can scarcely be
regarded as convincing, for there is hardly any resemblance. Moreover,
he omits to furnish an explanation, on his theory, of the fact that some
of these rising "vapors" are crowned with blossoms or fruit (plate LXIV,
31).
I think it quite probable that Dr Seler, although not accepting the
theory of phoneticism, has been influenced to some extent by the form of
the right-hand character of the glyph shown in plate LXVIII, 27. This is
much like Landa's _o_, and _ol_ in Maya denotes "heart, etc."
According to Brasseur, _oloh_ signifies "a germ" and "to germinate;"
_hokol_ also has about the same meaning. This furnishes a consistent and
appropriate explanation of the figures, and gives at the same time the
phonetic value of the glyph. I have not determined the prefix
satisfactorily, but presume it is some word having _ch'_ or _tz'_ as its
chief phonetic element, which signifies "little," "plant," or something
similar.
I have not determined the other symbols to which Seler alludes in this
connection, but some of them, as may be seen by comparison with other
passages, do not have special reference to the plant-like figures.
Whether the little sharp-corner square seen in the upper right-hand
character of the compound symbols shown in plate LXVI, 28 and 55, and
others of similar form, are to be taken as _ik_ glyphs is yet an
undecided question. Dr Seler appears to have excluded them from this
category in his paper, so frequently referred to, though he subsequently
brings them into this relation. But in these places he gives the glyph
the signification "fire" or "flame." It is possible that in some of the
cases to which he refers he is correct, as, for example, in regard to
the figure shown in plate LXVIII, 30, from Dres. 25, where it is in the
midst of the blaze. If so, the word equivalent must be _kak_, as it is
seemingly a variant of _ik_, and hence may be supposed to have the _k_
sound. This will agree with his interpretation of plate LXVI, 29, by
_kinichkakmo_; but in this case we must give _ich_ as the value of the
so-called _ben_ symbol. This, however, is not so very objectionable, as
there are other places where the chief phonetic element of the _ben_
glyph appears to be _i_. It is also to be remembered that it is much
like Landa's _i_. It is likewise true, as will hereafter be shown, that
the value _ben_ does not appear to hold good where it occurs in
combination with other symbols. However, until a satisfactory rendering
of this little four-corner _ik_ (?) symbol in some other place than the
fire is found, I am hardly prepared to give full acceptance to Dr
Seler's supposition.
The Zapotec names are somewhat difficult to bring into harmony with the
others. Dr Brinton's solution is as follows:
In that tongue we have _uii_, air, wind; _chiic_, breath; which we
may bring into relation with _gui_; and we find _guiiebee_,
wind-and-water cloud (nube con vient y agua). Dr Seler prefers to
derive _gui_ from _quii_, fire, flame, the notion of which is often
associated with wind.
It was probably this notion and the fact that the little four-corner
_ik_ (?) symbol is sometimes seen in the flame, which caused this
authority to believe the symbol denotes "fire," "flame." In the
manuscript Zapotec vocabulary by E. A. Fuller, "wind" is _bii_.
Dr Brinton thinks that _ni_ is the radical of _nici_, to grow, increase,
gain life. He says:
_Laa_, or _laala_, is a word of many meanings, as warmth, heat,
reason, or intelligence. The sense common to all these expressions
seems to be that of life, vitality.
The form of the Mexican symbol for the day _Ehecatl_ (wind), shown in
plate LXIV, 34, and also of the mouths of the female figures on plates
26 and 28, Troano Codex, which are emblematic of the storm, appear to be
taken from the bird bill. The bird, as is well known, is a wind symbol
with many peoples. It has been so esteemed among several tribes of
American Indians, and also by peoples of the Old World. As _nii_ or _ni_
signifies "nose, beak, point" in Maya and several cognate dialects, is
it not possible that in this is to be found an explanation of the second
Zapotec name? In this case, however, we must assume that the term is
borrowed, as in this language _xi_ or _xie_ is the term for "nose." I
notice, however, that the name for bird is given as _viguini_ and
_piguiini_. If _pi_ (_vi_) is a prefix, as seems probable from the word
for "hen," _guitii_, then we have some ground for believing that the
first Zapotec name has the same fundamental idea as the Mexican symbol.
It therefore would seem that it is not difficult to understand the
origin of the Mexican symbol. Examining plate 10, Borgian Codex, which
appears to represent the home of the winds, we see that, though mostly
furnished with human bodies, they have bird claws as well as bills. But
the origin of the Maya symbol is more difficult to account for. Dr Seler
remarks:
It is difficult to determine the original idea of this character.
Figure 210 [our plate LXIV, 24] and the forms on the reliefs--if we
have correctly interpreted these--lead us to think that the wind
cross, or the figure of the Tau resulting from it, was the origin
of the character. However, the forms of the Cod. Tro. are not
easily reconciled with this.
Dr Brinton[219-1] asserts, without heeding Dr Seler's caution, that it
is the sign of the four directions or four winds--the wind
cross--evidently alluding to the sharp-corner square seen in our plate
LXVI, 28. But he seems to have overlooked the fact that it is never thus
represented in the day symbol. Moreover, no satisfactory proof has been
presented showing that this form has this signification. Seler gives it
in some places, as above stated, the signification "fire," "flame;" and
if his interpretation of plate LXVI, 29 by _Kinich-kakmo_ be correct, as
Brinton seems to think it is, his interpretations are consistent.
However, Seler's assertion that "the forms of the Cod. Tro. are not
easily reconciled with this" must be admitted. In the codices this
glyph, as this author remarks, "rather brings to mind the idea of
hanging," often resembling a bunch of grapes.
I take for granted the symbol, when standing for the day, is not
pictorial or ideographic, but is adopted for its sound value. If this
supposition be correct, then it must be a conventional representation of
something the Maya name of which is _ik_ or that has substantially this
phonetic value. The form of the Mexican symbol, as above indicated,
shows that in selecting it reference was had to the bird bill, to which
possibly may have been added the idea of blowing forcibly from the
mouth, a common method of indicating wind. (See for example the
bird-mouth female, Tro. 25b, where the _Ik_ symbol is present.) But it
seems impossible to find in the symbol any reference to the bird, bird
bill, or the act of blowing, or in fact anything indicating, even by a
conventionalized figure, wind, air, spirit, or breath. Hence it is
reasonable to conclude that it has been selected only because of the
resemblance in sound of the thing it represents to the name _Ik_. I
would be inclined to believe that the most usual form is the
representation of a tooth or two teeth, the name being used for its
phonetic value only, but for the very troublesome fact that I can find
no name for tooth in Maya to sustain this view. If we could suppose it
to be a conventionalized ideogram of an insect, we would obtain the
desired sound, as Perez explains _ikel_ by "bicho, insecto, polilla,
gorgojo." It must, however, be confessed that none of these suggestions
are satisfactory.
The following additional references to the bird as a symbol of the wind
are appropriate at this point.
Not only is the day _Ehecatl_ represented in the Mexican codices by a
bird's head, but we see a bird perched upon a tree at each of the
cardinal points on plate 44 of the Fejervary Codex. Birds are also
perched on three of the four trees representing the cardinal points on
plate 65 of the Vatican Codex.
In speaking of the myths of the Muyscas, Dr Brinton[220-1] says:
In the cosmogonical myths of the Muyscas, this [alluding to a
certain name] was the home or source of light, and was a name
applied to the demiurgic force. In that mysterious dwelling, so
their account ran, light was shut up and the world lay in primeval
gloom. At a certain time the light manifested itself, and the dawn
of the first morning appeared, the light being carried to the four
quarters of the earth by great black birds, who blew the air and
winds from their beaks.
The Javanese also assigned a bird to each of the cardinal points,
doubtless with substantially the same mythological concept.
Commenting on a passage of the Popol Vuh, in which the name _Voc_ is
mentioned, the same author[220-2] says: