which is connected with the idea of cloud or rain. Thus, in the
hieroglyph, figure 80, the accompanying hieroglyph of figure 46,
i. e., the bird Moan. So also the one in figure 28 (p. 107) the
accompanying hieroglyph of the name Kinchahau, which, besides
cauac, contains further the element of fire and that of the
hatchet, which may remind us of the ray [or flash] darting from the
cloud. The hieroglyph cauac is, however, used far more commonly in
the sense of "stone" or "heaviness." This is most clearly shown in
the case of the animal figures pictured in Cod. Tro. 9a and 22*a,
where the stone laid upon and weighing down the horizontal beam is
represented by the element cauac. But this explanation must be
accepted also, because we find the pyramidal foundation of the
temple covered with the element cauac. And where, in Cod. Tro.
15*a, to the Chac who is felling a tree is opposed the death god,
also felling a tree, covered by the element cauac, it is clear that
here there is substituted with the death god a rigid stone in place
of what with the Chac is a sprouting tree. The numerous cases in
which the hieroglyph cauac serves as a seat or footstool of the
gods are sometimes easily interpreted as signifying clouds, but in
the majority of cases it undoubtedly represents "stone," homologous
to the hieroglyph caban and the element _tun_, "stone," itself
(figure 85), both of which are found equally often denoting the
seat and footstool of the gods. It is equally evident that in the
hieroglyph figure 84, in which there is indicated the bearing of a
burden on the back, the element cauac is to be understood simply as
the expression of the weight, the burden. In the peculiar cases
where we see the gods holding a board provided with the elements of
the character cauac, or where a board is placed before the gods,
furnished with a plaited handle whose side bears the element cauac,
the latter seems to relate to a sounding board, for the
accompanying hieroglyphs seem to signify music. Finally, there can
be found a direct homology between the element cauac and the
element tun. This is seen in the hieroglyph of the hunting god of
figure 83, whose distinguishing mark is usually an eye or the
element tun (i. e., a precious stone), which he hears in the front
of the headdress. The hieroglyph of this god is written sometimes
as in figure 81, sometimes as figure 82. And that the element here,
which in figure 82 replaces the element cauac, is to be understood
in fact as tun or "stone, precious stone," is evident, on the one
hand from the application of the precious stone in the headdress
(tun, "piedra, piedra preciosa"), and, on the other hand, from its
use as the base of the pole on which Mam, the Uayeyab demon, is set
up during the xma kaba kin (Cod. Dres. 25c). Now, it is true that a
connection of ideas can be established with considerable certainty
between clouds, rain, and stone, for in that region every rain was
a thunderstorm. But at the same time it will be found
comprehensible that a barrier of doubt was removed when I
discovered in the course of my Zapotec studies that in Zapotec the
same word was used for "rain" and "stone," namely, _quia_, _quie_.
[Illustration: PL. LXVIII COPIES OF GLYPHS FROM THE CODICES]
According to the explanation I have given above, the chief phonetic
element of the character is the guttural sound _k_, _ks_ (or _x_), and
_ch_. As additional evidence tending to confirm this conclusion, the
following examples are given:
Symbols 61, LXV, from Tro. 22*a, and 62, from Dres. 1 (42), have already
been explained, the first as signifying _kutz_ or _cutz_, "the turkey,"
and the second _tzac_, the name of a certain fish found in the senotes.
In the first (61) the first or left-hand character is our _Cauac_ symbol
and has the _k_ sound, and the same symbol forms the right portion in
the second (62) and also has the _k_ sound. In LXVI, 47, from Dres. 18c,
the _Cauac_ symbol forms the first or upper portion. The whole compound
symbol, as above shown, may be consistently interpreted _cuchpach_, "a
porter or carrier;" literally, "one who bears on the back." Again we see
the _k_ sound given the character is consistent. The symbol for the
month _Ceh_, as found in the Dresden Codex, is shown at LXVI, 44. In
this the last or lower portion is also the _Cauac_ character, and,
according to the value assigned it, should have a harder sound than the
simple aspirate. That such is the case is rendered probable by the fact
that Henderson gives _ceh_ and _kez_ both as names of the month and as
Maya words for "deer." In the Zotzil _chigh_ is the name for "deer." It
is therefore apparent that the symbol has here the guttural sound.
The glyphs in LXVII, 50 and 51 (Cort. 21), probably signify "night" and
"evening"; the first (50), _akab_, "night," and the second (51),
_kankin_, one signification of which, according to Henderson, is
"evening." The wing-like appendage is probably a time determinative.
These last interpretations are of course given with some doubt. However,
this may be said in their favor, that wing-like appendages are usually
attached to time symbols, and that the figures below the text represent
persons, each of whom carries what appears to be a wheel, possibly like
those used in keeping time, and the main character of the preceding
symbol in both cases is the _Manik_ glyph, having _ch_ as its chief
phonetic element and _chackinil_, signifying "hours, wheel." Precisely
the same symbol as LXVII, 51, preceded by the _Manik_ glyph, and a wheel
in the hand of the person figured below the text, is seen in Troano
35d.
The character shown in LXVII, 52, from Tro. 35c, may possibly be
correctly rendered by _bakah_ (_baakal_), "to roll round about, to go
round about," alluding to the flight of the vulture figured below the
text. This supposition appears to be strengthened by the probable
interpretation of the symbol immediately below it (LXVII, 53),
_malaalahah_, "without repeated buffetings." The character given in
LXVIII, 3, from Tro. 31a, may be interpreted _pak_, "to sow seed, to
plant," and that shown in LXVIII, 4, from the second division of the
same plate, indicates the same word, as the transposition of the parts
of a symbol does not always indicate a change of signification.
Possibly, however, its equivalent may be _capak_, "to reseed or sow seed
the second time," or _kapak_, "to place in a trench or hole." As the
persons figured below the text appear to be planting seed by dibbling
them in with a stick, this would seem to be an appropriate rendering. Dr
Seler appears to have entirely misunderstood these figures, as he thinks
they represent the deities pouring out water. I have in a previous part
of this paper given some reasons for believing that these plates refer
to the planting and cultivation of corn.
These examples will suffice at this point.
It is difficult to decide as to the origin of the glyph. However, I am
inclined to believe it has grown out of a conventional symbol for wood,
possibly drawn from the little knots and marks seen on the inside
surface of split wood. This may be wide of the true explanation, but all
the indications I can find point in this direction. As "wood" (_lena_)
in Zotzil (I do not know what it is in Tzental) is _ci_--equal to _ki_
or _qi_--we obtain the guttural sound which appears to be the chief
element of the symbol. In its use it appears to shade off from the hard
to the soft sound.
The Zapotec name _ape_, which, according to Dr Brinton, may properly be
translated by "lightning," or "the lightning flash," is much like the
name for "fire" which prevails throughout Oceanica. Commencing with the
Malay _api_, we trace it through the Oceanic islands in such forms as
_api, lap, yap, nap, yaf_; to New Zealand _kapura_; Tonga and Samoan
_afi_, and Hawaiian _ahi_.
In the Zapotec words _laari-api-niza_ and _ri-api-laha_, translated
"relampage, relampaguear," we find precisely the original form of the
Oceanic word for "five."
THE TWENTIETH DAY
Maya, _ahau_; Tzental, _aghual_; Quiche-Cakchiquel, _hunahpu_; Zapotec,
_lao_ or _loo_; Nahuatl, _xochitl_.
The symbol for this day, except where evidently imperfectly drawn, is
subject to but few and slight changes, that given by Landa corresponding
to the form found in the codices.
The usual and correct form is shown in LXVIII, 5-7; slight variations
are seen in LXVIII, 8 and 9. Dr Seler figures several other varieties,
but as these are from plates of the Dresden Codex, where the symbol
is in columns, where they are evidently hastily made, without any
attempt to have more than one or two in a column complete, they are not
given here. The character represented in LXVIII, 10, is from the Tikal
inscription, and that in LXVIII, 11, from the Palenque Tablet.
[Illustration: PL. LXIX SHELL BEARING MAYA GLYPHS
This shell, on which are engraved seven Maya hieroglyphs, was found in
Belize and courteously sent to the Bureau of American Ethnology by Sir
Alfred Moloney, Governor of British Honduras. The shell is here figured
for the purpose of placing it before students of Central American
paleography[TN-3]]
The Maya and Tzental names signify "king, lord, sovereign." The
derivation of the word has been explained in various ways. Brasseur
explains it by "the lord of the collar," _ah-au_, as does Dr Brinton;
Stoll gives "lord of the cultivated lands," from the Ixil, _avuan_, "to
sow." Dr Seler, however, is disposed to derive the name from the
masculine prefix _ah_ and _uinic_ or _vinak_, "man." His method of
reaching this conclusion is as follows:
For the Tzental word _aghual_, standing parallel with the Maya
_ahau_, which doubtless corresponds to the abstract form _ahaual_
of the word _ahau_, is to be referred rather to a primitive form
_avu_, _a'ku_, _ahu_, than to _ahau_. In the Tzental Pater Noster
which Pimental gives, we find the phrase "to us come Thy kingdom
(Thy dominion)" expressed by the words _aca taluc te aguajuale_.
The primitive meaning of _ahau_ is certainly "man," "lord," and the
two roots of similar significance, _ah_ and _vu_ (see _uinic_,
_vinak_, "man") seem to concur in this word.
He explains the Quiche-Cakchiquel _hunahpu_ by _hun_, "one," and _ahpu_
"lord of the blowpipe," or "blowpipe shooter." Dr Brinton translates it
the "One Master of Power." He brings the Mexican name into harmony by
rendering it "the flower of the day"--that is, the sun; and the Zapotec
by rendering it "eye," meaning "the eye of the day"--i. e., the sun.
When we attempt to bring the symbol of the day into harmony with the
Maya name, we encounter a difficulty which can be overcome only by
following a different line from that suggested by Dr Brinton or Dr
Seler. That the character shown in LXVIII, 12, is the symbol for the
cardinal point "east," which in Maya is _likin_, is now generally
admitted, and that the lower portion is the symbol for _kin_, "day" or
"sun," is also admitted. We are therefore justified in concluding that
the upper portion, which is the _Ahau_ symbol, stands for _li_, and that
_l_ is its consonant element. If Landa's second _l_ (shown in LXVIII,
43) is turned part way round, it will be seen that it is a rough attempt
to draw the _Ahau_ symbol. If a careful study is made of his _l_'s as
given in his list, and his example of spelling _le_, and of the similar
characters in the codices, it will be seen that both his _l_ characters
are derived from the same original. For example, the character shown in
LXV, 60, from Tro. 22*a is precisely the combination which this author
translates _le_, "a snare," or "to snare." By referring to the plate it
will be seen that it is followed by the character (LXV, 61) which we
have interpreted _kutz_, "turkey," and that in the picture below the
text there is a lassoed turkey. It is apparent, therefore, that both
these forms are used sometimes for words of which _l_ is the chief
phonetic element, and that the parallelogram and two interior dots are
the essential elements. The day symbol is of less frequency in
combination than the other form, but it sometimes occurs. It must,
however, be distinguished from the closely allied _p_ symbol heretofore
alluded to.
From what has been shown in regard to the symbol it would seem, if
considered phonetic, that the original day name it was intended to
represent contained _l_ as its chief consonant element. If ikonomatic,
the name of the thing indicated had _l_ as its chief element.
I think there can be little doubt that the symbol, as has been suggested
by others, was taken from the full face, the central double line
representing the nose, the two open dots the eyes, and the circle below
the mouth. Now, according to Fuller's Zapotec Vocabulary, the name for
face is _lu_, which is the Zapotec name of the day. As has been stated,
Dr Brinton thinks the Nahuatl and Zapotec names refer to the sun, and he
is inclined also to believe that the "ruler" or "sovereign" referred to
by the names of the Maya dialects is the sun.
I think we may rest assured that the symbol of this day was derived from
the full face, and that the word (for face) it was intended to indicate
had _l_ as its chief phonetic element--possibly from _lec_, "brow,
front, forehead." If derived from the face, its use as a day symbol, and
in numerous combinations, proves beyond question that it is phonetic in
the true or in the rebus sense.
FOOTNOTES:
[205-1] Study of the Manuscript Troano, pref., p. viii.
[205-2] American Anthropologist, Washington, July, 1893.
[207-1] The plates are designated by Roman numerals, and the figures by
the Arabic numbers 1, 2, 3, etc. Hence LXIV, 1, signifies figure 1 of
plate LXIV; LXIV, 2, figure 2 of plate LXIV, etc.
[208-1] American Anthropologist, July, 1893, p. 254.
[208-2] There appears to be much confusion among writers who have referred
to this subject in regard to the "Black Deities" of the codices. Dr
Brinton's remarks on this subject in his late work, "A Primer of Mayan
Hieroglyphics," does not clear up the confusion. Apparently he has not
discovered that quite a number of these are merely black figures of
well-recognized deities not thus usually colored. It appears also, judging
by his statements, that Dr. Brinton has failed to identify the
characteristics by which the different deities of this class are to be
distinguished. Dr Schellhas, in his excellent paper "Die Gottergestallen
der Maya Handschriften," fails also to properly distinguish between these
deities. Dr Seler, whose profound studies have thrown much light on the
Maya hieroglyphs, fixes quite satisfactorily the characteristics of some
of these deities, yet he confounds others which should have been
separated.
[209-1] Dr Brinton (Primer of Mayan Hieroglyphics, p. 93) claims to have
discovered that this hitherto supposed "vessel" is, in reality, "a drum."
As the four (Cort. 27a) are without any accompaniments to indicate their
use as drums, and as each has above it one of the cardinal point signs,
there is nothing, unless it be the form, to lead to the supposition that
they are drums. In the same division of the two preceding and three
following pages we see vessels of different kinds represented. In the
lower divisions pages 29 and 30, are vessels somewhat of the same
elongate, cylindrical form, borne on the backs of individuals; and also in
the lower division of page 40 are four tall cylindrical vessels, in each
of which the arm of a deity figure is thrust. This section is copied in Dr
Brinton's work with the subscript "The beneficent gods draw from their
stores." Additional proof, if any is needed to show that these are
vessels, is found in the Tro. Codex. On plates 6* and 7* are tall
cylindrical vessels with the same inverted V marks on them; moreover, one
of them has the upper portion margined by the same tooth-like projection
as those in the Cortesian plate. That these are vessels of some kind is
apparent from the use the pictures show is made of them.
[209-2] See Brasseur's lexicon under _bacab_, also the mention below,
under the day _Ik_, of four vessels.
[210-1] Zeitschrift fuer Ethnologie, p. 115.
[210-2] A Study of the Manuscript Troano, pp. 80 and 56.
[214-1] Jour. Anthrop. Inst. G. B. and I., November, 1889, p. 121.
[214-2] Ibid., 1885, p. 199.
[214-3] Polynesian Race, vol I, pp. 75-77.
[214-4] Rev. Richard Taylor, Te-Ika-a-Maui; London, 1870.
[215-1] American Anthropologist, July, 1893, pp. 263-264.
[216-1] Historia de los Mexicanos, as quoted by Brinton.
[216-2] American Anthropologist, July, 1893.
[217-1] Cong. Inter. des Americanistes, Actes de la Cuarta Reunion,
Madrid, 1881, tom. 2, pp. 173-174.
[219-1] Primer of Mayan Hieroglyphics, p. 115.
[220-1] American Hero Myths, p. 222.
[220-2] Names of the Gods in Kiche Myths, p. 22.
[223-1] Fourth Ann. Rep. Bur. Eth. (1882-83), p. 238.
[223-2] Schoolcraft, "Indian Tribes," etc, vol. I, pl. 51, No. 10, p. 360.
[224-1] American Anthropologist, July, 1893, pp. 258-259.
[224-2] Dr Brinton (Primer, etc, p. 93) explains it as the symbol of a
drum. He remarks that "in a more highly conventionalized form we find them
in the Cod. Troano thus [giving plate LXIV, 51], which has been explained
by Pousse, Thomas, and others as making fire or as grinding paint. It is
obviously the _dzacatan_, what I have called the 'pottery decoration'
around the figures, showing that the body of the drum was earthenware."
Yet (p. 130 and fig. 75) Dr. Brinton explains this identical group or
paragraph as a representation of the process of making fire from the
friction of two pieces of wood. It seems to mo clear that this glyph
represents something in the picture, and not the personage, as there is a
special glyph for this. A comparison of the groups in the two divisions of
this plate (Tro. 19) and plates 5 and 6 b of the Dresden Codex shows that
the glyph refers to the work or action indicated by the pictures. That it
refers to something in or indicated by the pictures, and that no drum is
figured, will, I think, be admitted by most students of these codices.
[225-1] Dr Brinton (Primer, p. 117) errs in regarding the superfix to this
glyph as the _kin_ or sun symbol.
[227-1] Dr Brinton (Primer, p. 110) says the object represented by this
symbol is "a polished stone, shell pendant, or bead." This authority
considers the dot or eye in the upper part as a perforation by which it
was strung on a cord. If this be true, it is strange that we see them
nowhere in the codices strung on strings, though necklaces are frequently
represented; and that we do see them piled up in vessels, see them putting
forth shoots and leaves, and see birds and quadrupeds devouring thorn. Dr
Brinton himself (p. 123, E. No. 29) gives one of these sprouting _kan_
symbols, which he says "is a picture of the maize plant from Cod. Tro., p.
29." That it is not used ikonomatically here is evident, as _kan_ in Maya
is not a name for maize or grain of maize.
[232-1] First Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn., p. 386.
[232-2] Dr Brinton (Primer, p. 65) says: "Former students have been unable
to explain this design" and suggests that it is a maggot.
[232-3] Brinton follows Brasseur in supposing it represents the "grasping
hand," and thinks it is a rebus of _mach_, "asir, tomar con los manos."
[236-1] Page 66.
[237-1] Notwithstanding his definition given above, Dr Brinton suggests in
his late work that the symbols of the day bear a close resemblance to some
of the sun signs.
[238-1] For explanation of the inclosed comb-like characters, Landa's
_ca_, see Sixth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, page 355.
[239-1] Brinton thinks that in some of the forms it indicates "a trail" or
"footprints," which are meanings of _oc_.
[240-1] I was not aware that _oc_ had the signification "dog" in any of
the Mayan languages, nor do I find that Seler or Brinton appeal to this
fact in their efforts to explain the day name in the Maya calendar.
However, Dr Brinton remarks that Brasseur and Seler think that some forms
of the symbol "portray the ears of a dog, as in some of the Mayan dialects
the dog is called _oc_."
[240-2] Dr Brinton (Primer, p. 95) says that this is called "an article of
food, by Thomas." While this is correct in the sense that I speak of the
turkey (_kutz_ or _cuitz_) as food, it is incorrect in giving the
impression that I interpret the symbol by "article of food," as I have
always interpreted it "turkey."
[245-1] Dr Brinton says it is the face of an old woman with a peculiar
pointed earmark.
[248-1] Brinton says the _ben_ symbol looks to him "like a wooden bridge,
the two supports of which are shown and which was sometimes covered with a
straw mat." If so, it must be shown in profile, and the hanging marks
above (see LXVI, 16, 17, 19) would seem to be without signification;
moreover, in LXVI, 18, the supports hang from above, which would, on this
theory, imply a hanging bridge.
[250-1] Cong. Inter. Americanistes, 1881, tom. 2.
[250-2] Dr Brinton says the usual form suggests scattered grain husks, the
word for which is _xiix_.
[257-1] Jour. Am. Eth. and Arch., II, p. 38.
APPENDIX
A LIST OF THE DEITIES OF THE DAYS OF THE MONTH IN THE MAORI CALENDAR
(AFTER TAYLOR).
1. _Tane_ was the parent of the tui, of birds in general, and trees.
2. _Ru_, the father of lakes and rivers.
3. _Rupe_, of the pigeon.
4. _Tangaroa_, of fish.
5. _Irawaru_, of dogs.
6. _Nga rangi-hore_, of stones.
7. _Mauika_, of fire.
8. _Maui_, of the land.
9. _Mumuhanga_, of the Totara; also called Tukau moana.
10. _Paruri_, of the Tui [bird].
11. _Papa_, of the Kiwi [Apterix Australis].
12. _Owa_, of the dog; he was also the father of Irawaru.
13. _Pahiko_, of the Kaka.
14. _Punga Matua_, of the shark (tuatini), lizard, and tamuri [the
snapper-fish].
15. _Tute maona_, of the Kahikatoa [a plant so named].
16. _Hina-moki_, of the rat.
17. _Tuwairore_, of the Kahikatea [a certain tree] and Rimu [a
species of pine].
18. _Haere-awa-awa_, of the Weka [a large bird].
19. _Rongo_, of the Kumara [sweet potato]; also called Rongomatane.
20. _Tiki_, of man.
21. _Tute-nga-nahu_, of evil.
22. _Tahu_, of all good.
23. _Tawiri-matea_, of the winds.
24. _Mokoikuwaru_, of lizards.
25. _Otunai-rangi_, of the palm tree (nikau) and flax (harakeke).
26. _Haumia_, of the fern root.
27. _Tomairangi_, of dew.
28. _Haupapa_, of ice.
29. _Hauhunga_, of cold.
30. _Te-apu hau_, father of storm and tempests.
It must be understood that these are not the names of the days, but of
the deities which preside over them, and of the things which they
created or of which they had special care.
INDEX
AAPE, _see_ APE.
ABAGH day symbol discussed 229
ACATL day symbol discussed 245
--, meaning of 227
AGHUAL day symbol discussed 262
AH day symbol discussed 245
AHAU and _lamat_ symbols compared 235
-- day symbol discussed 262
AHBULUC-BALAM, a Maya deity 244
AHMAK day symbol discussed 252
AK, phonetic value of 223
AKAB, definition of 261
AKBAL symbol in Maya calendar 221
APE day symbol discussed 259
--, definition of 262
APPE, _see_ APE.
ATL day symbol discussed 237
--, meaning of 238
BAKAH, definition of 262
BAKLUM-CHAAM, a Maya deity 225
BALAM day symbol discussed 248
BALCHE, a ceremonial drink 253
BALLOO, definition of 252
BAT, how regarded by Central Americans 225
BATZ day symbol discussed 241
BEE, _see_ HONEY.
BEEN, _see_ BEN.
BEN symbol in Maya hieroglyphs 218, 245
BENEL, meaning of 245
BIRD as a wind symbol 219
-- symbols in the codices 219, 220, 225, 226, 251
BLACK DEITIES of Maya codices 208
BORGIAN CODEX, discussion of symbols in 212, 213, 219, 222, 244
--, earth symbol in 256
--, flint symbols in 228
--, sky symbol in 223
BRASSEUR DE BOURBOURG, _oc_ symbol interpreted by 239
--, on definition of _ah_ 245
--, on definition of _ahau_ 263
--, on definition of _chacyuc_ 233
--, on definition of _hok_ 241
--, on definition of _lamat_ 236
--, on definition of _toh_ 238
--, on definition of _tzac_ 241
--, on derivation of _chuen_ 243
--, on Mexican mythology 221
--, on origin of _chicchan_ symbol 231
--, on the _akab-maax_ symbol 208
--, on the _bacab_ symbol 209
--, on the germ symbol 218
--, on the _manic_ day symbol 232
--, on the _lamat_ symbol 249
BRECHII, meaning of 228