ARACHNOIDEA
The scorpion (Maya,sinaan) figures prominently in the Tro-Cortesianus, two drawings from which are shown (Pl. 4, figs. 1, 2). As here conventionalized, the jointed appendages are represented as composed of an indefinite number of round segments. The large chelate pedipalps are also prominently figured but the smaller walking legs are commonly omitted. InPl. 4, fig. 1, however, there is a pair of posterior chelate appendages which are probably added to give a moreanthropoid cast to the figure. The slight projections along the sides of the body inPl. 4, fig. 2, probably do not represent the legs. In another drawing (Tro-Cortesianus 44b) these are also present but further reduced so as not to exceed the heavy fringe of spines surrounding the body. InPl. 4, fig. 1, the fringe alone appears. The formidable nature of the scorpion is of course due to the poisonous sting at the tip of the attenuated abdomen or “tail.” In the Maya pictures this portion is usually shown as a grasping organ. Thus in fig. 1 it is similar to the chela and holds a cord by which a deer has been caught. In fig. 2 the “tail” is terminated by a hand. The same thing is seen in Tro-Cortesianus 44b where the hand seizes a cord by which a deer is snared. The scorpion is represented in the drawings with a conventionalized face that is very characteristic. The facial disc is divided into three parts by a median area of straight or irregular lateral boundaries ending anteriorly in two in-turned scrolls suggesting the alae of the nose. A circular eye is present in each of the lateral divisions of the face while from the oral region projects a forked tongue.
It is of course hazardous to attempt a specific identification of these figures but, as pointed out by Stempell (1908, p. 739), there are two large scorpions in Yucatan (Centruroides margaritatusandC. gracilis) which are probably the species pictured in the codices.
The representations of the scorpion in the Tro-Cortesianus are almost always associated with scenes of the hunt. As the deer is caught in a trap so Förstemann considers thatPl. 4, fig. 1, shows a trap with five appliances, the “tail” one alone being effective. Brinton (1895, p. 75) notes that the Mayas applied the termsinaan ek, “scorpion stars” to a certain constellation and suggests that it was derived from the Spaniards. There is certainly some association between the scorpion and water as, in Tro-Cortesianus 7a, the fore and hind legs of the animal enclose a body of water. The scorpion “tail” alone appears in Tro-Cortesianus 31a and 82a as the tail of a god. Its significance is difficult to make out. Destruction is indicated by the scorpion in the Aubin manuscript as suggested by Seler (1900-1901, p. 71).
In the Nuttall Codex there is a remarkably beautiful conventionalization of a scorpion (Pl. 4, fig. 3) in which the tripartite nature of the head is still preserved though it is so reduced as to resemble the calyx of a flower. The “tail”, as elsewhere, and the legs are present.
PISCES
Figures of fish (Mayakai) occur commonly in the Maya codices in various connections as well as in the stone carvings, but none of these seems certainly identifiable. Among the representations, however, there are clearly several species. One (Pl. 5, figs. 2, 6, 7-9;Pl. 6, fig. 9) has a single dorsal fin, powerful teeth, and a generally ferocious aspect and may represent some large predacious variety, perhaps a tunny. The distinct operculum in most of the figures would preclude their representing a shark. Other figures picture similar fish without the prominent teeth (Pl. 5, fig. 4, 5;Pl. 6, figs. 2, 6, 10, 13). In two cases the scales are diagramatically shown by straight or crescentric lines (Pl. 5, fig. 4, 8). A third species of fish is shown provided with two dorsal fins (Pl. 6, figs. 3, 11;Pl. 7, fig. 6, the last an excellent stone carving). Others (Pl. 6, figs. 7, 14-17) represent fishes without dorsal fins, one of which (fig. 7) from its length may be an eel, possiblyMuraena.
In the Nuttall Codex occurs a remarkable fish with an unmistakable wing arising just behind the head nearly at the dorsal line. While this may represent a flying fish (Exocetus), the head is so bird-like that the whole may be merely a combination figure.
Of frequent occurrence in the Dresden is a glyph, two modifications of which are here shown (Pl. 6, figs. 4, 5). Stempell suggests that the vertical lines on the posterior portion of such figures may be gill slits and that hence they may represent sharks in which these orifices are without an operculum.
As with the molluscs, so with the fish, we naturally find them usually associated with the water. This may be seen especially well in the Nuttall Codex. In Dresden 33a (Pl. 6,fig. 13) the fish is clearly associated with the operation of fishing as two figures are seated on the edge of a body of water in the act of casting a net. An eel is shown in the water under god B in Dresden 65b (Pl. 6, fig. 7) and fish are shown just below the claws of a crocodile in textfigure 1. In Dresden 44a god B holds a fish in his hands. As will be pointed out later (p. 314) this god is frequently associated with water. In Dresden 44c a fish appears between god B and an unidentifiable deity. In the Maya codices the greater number of representations of fish are in connection with sacrifice. In Dresden 27 (Pl. 6, fig. 6) the fish is pictured resting on twoKansigns, the symbol of maize or bread, and these in turn on a flat bowl. In Dresden 29b (Pl. 5, fig. 9) the fish is represented between the red and black numbers of thetonalamatl. Here again the fish is shown as an offering.
In two cases only do we find the fish used as a part of the head-dress and in each case the fish is graphically shown as held in the mouth of a heron. One of these is in the Dresden Codex 36b (Pl. 5, fig. 3) and one in the stone carving of the Temple of the Cross at Palenque (Pl. 15, fig. 5). Fish are often represented on the stone carvings as feeding upon a water plant. This is seen in the border at the bottom of the Lower Chamber of the Temple of the Tigers at Chichen Itza (Pl. 5, figs. 2, 4;Pl. 6, fig. 2). In several instances at Copan fish are shown as forming the sides of the Great Cycle glyph at the beginning of an Initial Series (Pl. 6, figs. 14-17). It has often been suggested that as the word fish in Maya iskai(usually writtencay), there may be some phonetic significance here, combining the fish,kai, with the usually drum-like sign for stone,tun, makingkai tunorkatun. This is the term usually given not to the Great Cycle but to the period composed of twentytunsand is probably derived fromkalmeaning twenty andtun, a stone.
AMPHIBIA
Frogs.Figures undoubtedly representing frogs (Mayamutšoruo) or toads are found in several places in the codicesand in the stone carvings, but it is quite impossible to refer them definitely to any of the numerous species occurring in Central America, if, indeed, the artists had any one species in mind. In the Tro-Cortesianus frogs are not uncommon. In 31a there are four (Pl. 7, fig. 1) with water coming from their mouths. They are characterized by their stout tailless bodies, flattened heads and toothless mouths. In 101d (Pl. 7, figs. 2, 3) there are two, the first painted blue with spots of darker blue and the second white and represented as broken in two in the middle. The signs of death above the latter clearly show that a dead animal is indicated.Pl. 7, fig. 6, shows the end of Altar O from Copan on which a frog and a fish are pictured, the former in dorsal view, the latter in lateral aspect. The peculiar pointed snout of this frog is similar to that of the frog shown inPl. 7, fig. 7, also in dorsal view. A somewhat similar creature (Pl. 29, fig. 6) we have included and though it may represent an opossum it has little to distinguish it from the figures of frogs.309-*
God B in Tro-Cortesianus 12b should be associated with the frog. His legs are those of a frog and he appears as if swimming in the water. Frog in Maya isUowhich is also the name of the second month of the Maya year. The first day of this month, according to Landa, corresponds to August 5 of our year and this is the height of the rainy season in the Maya region. The sign forUodoes not, however, resemble a frog in any way. The frog above one of the figures in the Lower Chamber of the Temple of the Tigers at Chichen Itza (Pl. 7, fig. 7) has clearly some relation to the name or totem of the warrior. The Nahua custom is seen here.
Toads are probably intended inPl. 7, figs. 4, 5. In these the great breadth of the head and mouth together with the short inflated body combine to produce a very toad-like appearance. It is not unlikely that they represent the huge marine toad,Bufo marinus, common from southern Mexico to Brazil and in the West Indies. There seems to be no distinction in the treatment of frogs and toads in the codices.
Tree-toad(Hyla eximia). Of great interest are the figures in Tro-Cortesianus 26a and b (Pl. 8, figs. 1, 3), showing a god with expanded finger tips and characterized further by the presence of two parallel black stripes from the hinder and lower margins of the eye respectively. The knob-like finger tips at once suggest one of the tree-toads, and the presence of the two lines seems to indicateHyla eximiaas the species represented. In this tree-toad there is a long black lateral line running posteriorly from the tympanum and above it a shorter line just as in the drawings. It appears to be a common species in the valley of Mexico though but little seems to have been written of its habits. At the beginning of the rainy season it repairs to pools of water to breed and is then very noticeable from its loud voice. No doubt its importance in the Maya economy was from its conspicuousness at the beginning of the rainy period. This fact is brought out more strongly when we consider that these gods representing the tree-toad are associated with agriculture and the sowing of grain at the beginning of the rainy season. Förstemann (1902, p. 35) identifies these figures as god F. They are quite unlike the usual representation of this god and are clearly god P as Schellhas (1904, p. 39) indicates. It is interesting to note that the two black lines behind the eye are also seen in the other gods shown in Tro-Cortesianus 26a and b although the knob-like finger tips are lacking. The glyph for this tree-toad god is recognized in the fifth place at the top of the same page (Pl. 8, fig. 2) by the same two black lines under and behind the eye.
REPTILIA
Serpent.It would be impossible in the present paper to enter into any lengthy discussion of the use of the serpent (Mayakan) in Mexico and Central America. It seems to be one of the main elements in the religion and consequently in the art of the Mayas and Mexican peoples. It is represented again and again in many forms and varied combinations. It underlies the whole general trend of Maya art. The serpent is often associated with feathers. The culture hero of the Nahuas,Quetzalcoatl(feathered serpent) corresponds to a similar god among the Mayas,Kukulcan(also meaning feathered serpent). The feathers of the quetzal are the ones commonly used in connection with the serpent.
Any attempt at identification of the species represented is beset by grave difficulties for so conventionalized have the figures often become that, except in the case of the rattlesnake with its rattles, there are no characteristic marks by which the species may be known. It is natural to suppose that the species used for artistic purposes would be those that are most noteworthy because of their size, coloring, or venomous qualities. No doubt a number of harmless species were also used in the religious ceremonies.311-*Such may be those used as hair ornaments in many of the figures (Pl. 8, figs. 7-13, 15) and in which no indication of a rattle is to be seen. The fierce eye of these reptiles is shown by means of an exaggerated overhanging brow occasionally embellished by recurved crests (Pl. 8, figs. 10, 11, 13, 15). These crests are sometimes shown as two or three stalked knobs (Pl. 10, fig. 7) that Stempell was misled into identifying as the eyes of snails. Various heads of snakes usually with fangs exposed and tongue protruding are pictured inPl. 8, figs. 4, 6;Pl. 9, figs. 2, 4-6: one snake with a spiny back is shown inPl. 8, fig. 5, but obviously it represents merely the artist’s endeavor to present as terrifying a creature as possible.
Various types of rattlesnakes are shown inPl. 9. The presence of the rattle is of course the characteristic, and this portion alone is likewise used, in one case, at least, as a glyph (Pl. 9, fig. 7). It cannot be denied, however, that some or most of the snakes in which no rattles appear, are nevertheless intended for rattlers. It may have been that the figures were so well understood that the addition of rattles in the drawings was quite unnecessary. This, however, is quite conjectural. The species of rattlesnake is probablyCrotalus basiliscusorC. terrificusof southern Mexico and adjacent regions, notC. horridusoradamanteusas supposed by Stempell since these two species are confined to the United States. Among the figures shown onPl. 9, it is noteworthy that five of the rattlesnakes show no fangs. Some are spotted, but in a wholly arbitrary manner. Three are unmarked. One is shown coiled about the base of a tree (Pl. 9, fig. 5), another coiled ready to strike though the rattle is pictured trailing on the ground instead of being held erect in the center of the coil as usually is done (Pl. 9, fig. 9). A rattlesnake is shown held in the hand of a man inPl. 9, fig. 8.
InPl. 10, fig. 1, is shown a rattle-less snake with prominent fang, coiled about the top of an altar which may represent a tree or bush. From the latter fact, it might be concluded that it was a tree or bush-inhabiting species,possibly the deadly “bush-master” (Lachesis lanceolatus). Other figures (Pl. 10, figs. 3, 7;Pl. 11, figs. 1, 2) are introduced here as examples of the curious head ornamentation frequently found in the drawings. The two first are merely serpents with the jaws extended to the utmost, and with a characteristic head decoration. The last is provided with an elaborate crest. The size and markings of the two serpents shown inPl. 11, as well as their want of rattles suggest that they may represent some species of largeBoidaeasLoxocemus bicolororBoa(sp?).
After having commented upon the various serpents occurring in the codices and in several other places, we will now take up the manner and connection in which the various figures occur. We shall pass over completely the use of the “serpent column” at Chichen Itza, the importance of the serpent motive in the development of the masked panel as worked out by Spinden, and the countless representations of the plumed serpent in the whole field of Maya design and decoration. In the single Temple of the Tigers at Chichen Itza, the feathered serpent occurs in the round as a column decoration supporting the portico, as carved on the wooden lintel at the entrance to the Painted Chamber, again and again on the frescoes of this room,313-*in the Lower Chamber as dividing the bas-relief into zones or panels, and, finally, as the center of the whole composition of this bas-relief. It will be seen, therefore, that it will be necessary in a short paper, to limit ourselves to the representations of the serpent in the Maya codices.
The serpent is most frequently associated with god B. Schellhas (1904, p. 17), Fewkes (1894), Förstemann (1906), and Thomas (1882), seem to agree that god B is to be identified asKukulcan, the most important of the deities of the Mayas and, as pointed out before, appearing in the Nahua mythology, asQuetzalcoatl, and in the Quiche myths asGucumatz. It was also noted that the name means both inMaya and in Nahuatl, the “feathered serpent” or the “bird serpent.” Other authorities consider god B asItzamna, another of the main gods of the Mayas. Seler interprets god B as the counterpart of the Nahua rain god,Tlaloc. It is certain that when god B and the serpent are associated together water and rain are usually indicated. God H, “theChicchangod,” also has some relation to the serpent. As pointed out by Schellhas (1904, pp. 28-30), this god often appears characterized by a skin-spot or a scale of the serpent on his temple of the same shape as the hieroglyph of the dayChicchan(serpent). The glyph belonging to this deity also shows theChicchansign as its distinguishing mark. Similar signs appear on the body of the serpent in many places, as in Tro-Cortesianus 30a (Pl. 11, fig. 1).
We have already noted that the serpent, god B, and water are frequently shown together, so the serpent also appears associated with water and rain, when no figure of god B is present. From this connection, it can be argued that there is some relation between the serpent and the coming of the rains. These facts would give strength to the theory that god B is to be identified as a rain god. In Dresden 33a, 35a, god B is seated on the open jaws of a serpent, while the body of the reptile encloses a blue field evidently signifying water. The number nineteen appears on this blue color. It will be noted that there are nineteen spots on the serpents inPl. 11, figs. 1, 2. In Tro-Cortesianus 3a-6a, corresponding scenes seem to be shown. The body of the serpent encloses water, and here the number eighteen appears in each case. God B occurs always in front of the serpent and his head appears as the head of the reptile in the first instance. In Dresden 35a, 36a, the head of god B is pictured as the head of the serpent in the midst of the water. In Dresden 37b (Pl. 10, fig. 8), B is holding a snake in the water.
Water appears in connection with the serpent and god B in many places in the Tro-Cortesianus. In 9, god B is pictured pouring water from a jar, a common method of showing the idea of rain in the codices. In 12b, B again is shownperhaps representing a frog, and behind him a serpent. The reptiles in 13b-18b, are all associated with the idea of rain, the turtle and frog also appearing in this section. In 30a (Pl. 11, fig. 1), god B and a female figure are both pouring water from a jar, as they stand on the body of a serpent. In 32a, the black god (L) is seen in the rain, and a serpent is near, while in 32b and 33b (Pl. 9, fig. 1), the serpent forms the belt of god L, and a female figure and water are seen in both cases. The blue color of the snake and of god B in 31b (Pl. 11, fig. 2) may also suggest water.
God B also occurs in connection with the serpent in Dresden 42a (Pl. 8, fig. 14), where the god is seated on the reptile, in Tro-Cortesianus, 10b, where the head of the same god is the head of the snake, and in Tro-Cortesianus 19a, where god B again and god A are each seated on the open jaws of a serpent.
The astronomical role of the serpent is noted in Dresden 56b, 57b (Pl. 10, fig. 3), Tro-Cortesianus 5b, 12b, 15b, and 67b, where the snake is shown in connection with a line of constellation signs, thekinor sun sign prominent in most of the drawings. In the “battle of the constellations” in Dresden 60, the serpent appears forming a sort of altar, the seat of a figure which is supported by another figure. A serpent head also appears at the foot of the latter figure.
That the serpent appears associated with the idea of time seems clear from the fact of the long number series in Dresden 61, 62 (Pl. 10, fig. 7), and 69, which are shown in the spaces made by the winding of the serpents’ bodies. In Tro-Cortesianus 13a-16a, four large reptiles appear in connection with the lines of day signs.
The study of the serpent used as a head-dress is interesting. As noted previously, quite a different kind of snake seems to be represented when used in this connection. Two other points come out in this investigation, namely, that it is only with female figures that the serpent is employed as a head-dress, and in far the greater number of cases the women are shown, either in the act of offering something, or of pouring water from a jar. The usual type of serpenthead-dress is seen in Dresden 9c (Pl. 8, fig. 11), 15b (Pl. 8, fig. 12), 18a (Pl. 8, fig. 13), 22b (Pl. 8, fig. 10), and 23b (Pl. 8, fig. 8). In the first case, the offering is a jicara or gourd of some sacred drink (baltše?), in the second and third examples, the dish is clearly shown, but the offering is unidentifiable, in the fourth case, maize (aKansign), and in the last, a fish resting on a dish. In Dresden 20a (Pl. 8, fig. 15), a woman with serpent head-dress is seen associated with the Moan-headed figure, possibly in the act of offering it as a sacrifice.
In Dresden 39b (Pl. 8, fig. 7), 43b (Pl. 8, fig. 9), and 70, a similar serpent head-dress is shown on a female figure in the act of pouring water from a jar. In Tro-Cortesianus, the serpent head-dresses differ in type only, and in two out of the four cases where they appear, water is shown flowing from the breasts (30b) of the female figure or from the mouth (32b). The woman thus represented in connection with the water is god I, the water goddess of Schellhas. She is, as he notes (1904, p. 31) usually the figure of an old woman. “Evidently, we have here the personification of water in its quality of destroyer, a goddess of floods and cloud-bursts.” We are not at all sure that we have here a distinct god as similar female figures with serpent head-dresses occur frequently in the Dresden Codex with no suggestion of water. The failure to find any distinct glyph for this goddess seems to strengthen the view of not considering her as a separate deity. Finally, in our consideration of head-dresses, the serpent is to be seen in Tro-Cortesianus 79c on the head of the first woman who is weaving. Possibly, a conventionalized serpent forms the head covering of the second figure who is represented as dead.
The serpent in Dresden 26c-28c (Pl. 10, fig. 1) coiled around the altar which rises from aTunsign is not easily explained. In 25c, the altar is replaced by god B and in the former cases, the reptiles may stand for this god with whom they are often associated.316-*The serpent seems closelyconnected with the idea of offerings as the body of a snake is shown in several instances as the support of the jar containing the various gifts in Tro-Cortesianus 34a, 34b, 35a, 35b, 36a, 36b, and possibly 52c (Pl. 9, fig. 3).
Finally the serpent is to be noted in a number of miscellaneous connections:—in Dresden 36b (Pl. 19, fig. 11), as being attacked by a black vulture,317-*in Tro-Cortesianus 40b (Pl. 9, fig. 4) a rattlesnake is biting the foot of one of the hunters, and in Tro-Cortesianus 66b, where the serpent has a human head and arm coming from its open jaws. This is a very frequent method of representing the serpent in the Maya stone carvings. In Tro-Cortesianus 60c, 100d (Pl. 9, fig. 8), twice, 106a, and 111b, the rattlesnake is shown as a sprinkler for the holy water in the hand (in the first, second and fourth examples) of god D. Landa (1864, p. 150)317-†describes in the ceremony of the baptism of children, that the leader of the rite wore on his head a kind of mitre embroidered with plumage in some manner and in his hand a small holy-water sprinkler of wood, carved skillfully, of which the filaments were the tails of serpents, similar to serpents with rattles.
In spite of the importance of the serpent in the manuscripts and stone carvings, it never seems to appear as a separate deity. With one exception, no glyph is to be found representing this reptile as is the case with many of the animals. Tro-Cortesianus 106c (Pl. 9, fig. 7) is this exception showing the rattles of a snake which are found in the line of glyphs above two of the bees. No serpent appears in the picture.
The Nahuatl day,Couatl, has the signification serpent, as suggested before, in discussing the meaning of the nameQuetzalcoatlorQuetzalcouatl. This day sign occurs throughout the Mexican manuscripts as the head of a serpent (Pl. 8, figs. 4, 6;Pl. 9, fig. 2;Pl. 10, figs. 2, 4-6).
Iguana. Of the lizards represented, the iguana (Mayahu) is the most striking, and is readily identified on account of the prominent spines along the back. As noted by Stempell, there are two or three species of large lizards in Central America commonly called iguana, and it is probable that the one here considered is theCtenosaura acanthuraof Yucatan orIguana tuberculataof South and Central America.
In the manuscripts the iguana is almost exclusively represented as an offering (Pl. 12, figs. 1-6). It is usually found on top of theKansign, meaning maize or bread,318-*and this, in turn, resting in a bowl (Pl. 12, figs. 3, 4, 6). Landa (1864, p. 230)318-†gives a pleasing confirmation of this offering of an iguana with bread. It is possible that the object shown in Tro-Cortesianus 12b (Pl. 12, fig. 13) may be the conventionalized representation of this lizard. It must be admitted that this interpretation is very doubtful. The triangular points suggest the lizard, but the pointed character of the sign as a whole in no way resembles the back of this reptile. It is found associated with threeKansigns. In Cakchiquel, a dialect of the Maya stock,K’an, according to Guzman and Brinton (1893, p. 24) is the name applied to the female of the iguana or the lizard, and this is believed to be the original sense of the Maya term. It may also be noted that the Nahua day signCuetzpalin, meaning lizard, is the one which corresponds with the Maya dayKan.Pl. 12, figs. 10, 12, 14, show representations of the day corresponding toCuetzpalinin the Aubin and Nuttall codices. These show a stout spineless species with a short thick tail and may bethe Gila monster (Heloderma horridum), a large and somewhat poisonous species having much these proportions.
Further offerings are shown inPl. 12, figs. 7, 8. These seem to be the heads and forefeet of lizards, but, from the shape of the head, perhaps not of iguanas.
In Stela D of Copan, theUinalperiod glyph seems to be represented by a spineless lizard covered with scales (Pl. 12, fig. 9). Frog-like characteristics also appear. This stone monument is remarkable from the fact that the glyphs are all more or less realistic representations of human and animal forms. It should be noted that there certainly seems to be some connection between theUinalperiod glyph and the lizard.Pl. 13, fig. 9, represents aUinalglyph from the Temple of the Foliated Cross at Palenque and the lizard form is clearly seen in the eyebrow and the upper jaw. Compare alsoPl. 13, fig. 11, andPl. 28, fig. 3. A collection of glyphs of this period shows clearly the lizard-like character of the face.
That some connection existed between the lizard and the idea of rain seems clear from a reference in theRelacion de la Ciudad de Merida(1900, p. 51).319-*Finally the lizard is shown in Dresden 3a (Pl. 12, fig. 11) directly in front of god H beside the scene of human sacrifice.
Crocodile.The text figure (1) shows a dorsal view of a crocodile (Maya,ayin) carved on the top of Altar T at Copan. The general form is considerably conventionalized with limbs elongated and provided with human hands and long toes. The protuberances of the back are roughly shown by oval markings, which are here continued on the legs. The large scales of the ventral surfaces also appear at the sides of the body, and along the posterior edges of the limbs. The tail is shortened and bifurcate. The most interesting portion, however, is the head. The snout is distinctly pinched in at the base, though broadened again distally. In the alligator the snout is broad and tapers butlittle. As in other representations of the crocodile, the lower jaw does not appear, and even in this dorsal view the artist seems to have deemed it necessary to show the row of teeth as if in side view, or as though they projected laterally from the mouth. What may represent ears or ear plugs are shown one on each side behind the eyes. There are few other examples of full drawings of the crocodile in the Maya writings. Dresden 74 shows an animal which has been considered to represent a crocodile or alligator but it seems to have more of the characteristics of a lizard.
Fig. 1. TOP OF ALTAR. T. COPAN.Fig. 1.TOP OF ALTAR. T. COPAN.
Figures of a crocodile (Crocodilus americanus) are frequent in the Nuttall Codex, where there is one large figure of the entire animal (Pl. 13, fig. 8), making its way along under water. It is shown with numerous dorsal spines, a long tail,and powerful claws. Curiously, however, it has no lower jaw and the same is true of the numerous glyphs representing the head of the animal. This is so pronounced a characteristic, that it may be doubted if the open-mouthed head and the single limb shown inPl. 13, fig. 2, really picture the same animal, though otherwise apparently referable to the crocodile. In the various glyphs showing the head of this species, the prominent, elongate eyebrow and the absence of the lower jaw are noteworthy points, while the teeth may vary in number from three to six.
The glyphs (Pl. 13, figs. 1, 3-7) represent the Nahua day signCipactlicorresponding to the Maya dayImix. In the band of constellation signs in Dresden 52b (Pl. 13, fig. 10), there occurs a single figure with a long curled eyebrow and lacking the lower jaw. In the upper jaw three teeth are indicated. A comparison of this figure with the glyphs in the Nuttall Codex seems to leave little doubt that it represents a crocodile. This is the sign which Förstemann (1906, p. 206) interprets as standing for Saturn.Pl. 13, fig. 12, is certainly the same sign as it stands in relatively the same position in the constellation band on Dresden 53a. It represents the highly conventionalized head of a crocodile. On Stela 10 from Piedras Negras (Maler, 1901-1903, Pl. 19) the same glyph is seen.
The range of the alligator in North America does not extend to Yucatan, hence the crocodile, which does occur there, is taken as the original of all these figures. There is nothing in the latter that would distinguish it from the alligator.
Turtles.Representations of the turtle (Maya,ak) are not uncommon among the Mayas. At Uxmal there is a ruined building calledCasa de las Tortugason which at intervals around the cornice there are carvings of turtles. Turtles of at least two species occur in the Tro-Cortesianus. With one exception, they seem to be limited to this codex. That shown onPl. 14, figs. 1-3, 5, is a large species with the dorsal scutes represented by large diamond-shaped pieces. There is littlethat might be considered distinctive about these turtles, although one (Pl. 14, fig. 5) has the anterior paddles much larger than the posterior, indicating a sea turtle. What is doubtless the same turtle is pictured in several places in the Nuttall Codex. In one of the figures in the latter manuscript, the shell is shown apparently in use as a shield (Pl. 14, fig. 4). This would indicate one of the large sea turtles, and there is not much doubt that either the Loggerhead turtle (Thalassochelys cephalo) or the Hawksbill (Chelone imbricata) is here intended.
Quite another species is that shown inPl. 14, fig. 6. That this is a freshwater turtle is plainly indicated by the parasitic leeches that are noted fastened by their round sucking-discs to the sides of its body. The long neck, pointed snout, and apparent limitation of the dorsal spinous scutes to the central area of the back may indicate the snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina) or possibly a species of the genusCinosternum(probablyC. leucostomum). It is hardly likely that it is one of the true soft-shelled turtles (Trionyx), as the range of that genus is not known to include Mexico. The turtle from Nuttall 43 (Pl. 14, fig. 11) may belong to the same species as its scutes seem rather few, or it may be that the view shown here is of the ventral side and that the scales indicate the small plastron of one of the sea turtles.
The turtle appears alone as one of the figures in thetonalamatlin several cases in the Tro-Cortesianus, 13a, 17a (Pl. 14, fig. 3), 72b (Pl. 14, fig. 6). It is found associated with the toad appearing in the rain in Tro-Cortesianus 17b (Pl. 14, fig. 2) and alone in the rain in 13a. In Tro-Cortesianus 81c (Pl. 14, fig. 5), it appears in front of an unidentifiable god.
Schellhas has called the turtle an animal symbolical of the lightning basing his opinion, as Brinton (1895, p. 74) tells us, on Dresden 40b where a human figure with animal head is holding two torches in his hands. This figure does not seem to us to represent a turtle, as is commonly supposed, but a parrot, as will be pointed out later (p. 343). Förstemann (1902, p. 27) identifies the turtle with the summer solstice, as has been noted before, explaining that the animal is slow of motion, and is taken to represent the time when the sun seems to stand still. He bases his theory (1904, p. 423) in part on the fact that the sign for the Maya monthKayab, which is the month in which the summer solstice occurs, shows the face of the turtle (Pl. 14, fig. 10). This undoubtedly is correct, but he seems to us wrong in classing as turtles the figure in Dresden 40b (Pl. 25, fig. 1) with its accompanying glyph (Pl. 25, fig. 6).
The turtle is found in connection with two sun (kin) signs beneath a constellation band in Tro-Cortesianus 71a. Resting upon his body are threeCauacsigns. The single representation of the turtle in the Dresden Codex is on page 49 (Pl. 14, fig. 12) where a god is pictured with a turtle’s head. The heavy sharp beak indicates that he represents one of the sea turtles previously mentioned. He is shown transfixed by a spear and corresponds to the other figures in the lower parts of pp. 46-50. These all have some connection with the Venus period which is considered in these pages.323-*
A number of glyphs representing the turtle are found throughout the codices (Pl. 14, figs. 7-10). They are all characterized by the heavy beak. It may be noted that these glyphs are virtually the same as the sign for the firstain Landa’s alphabet. As the turtle is calledakoraakin Maya, the reason is clear for the selection of this sign for anasound. These turtle glyphs often occur alone; one, however, (Pl. 14, fig. 7) is found in connection with the swimming turtle in Tro-Cortesianus 17a (Pl. 14, fig. 3). Figs. 7-9 agree in having the small scrolls at the posterior end of the eye. The head shown inPl. 14, fig. 10, has quite a different eye, though otherwise similar. Its resemblance to the glyph onPl. 25, fig. 9, is marked and suggests the parrot. Schellhas (1904, p. 44) gives in his fig. 64, a glyph for the turtle which seems clearly to be a glyph for the parrot (Pl. 25, fig. 7).
AVES
Herons(Ardea herodias;Hydranassa tricolor ruficollis). Only a few water birds are shown in the Maya works. Several are found, however, that seem to picture herons (Pl. 15, figs. 1-7). The best of these (fig. 5), a carving from the west side panel of the Temple of the Cross at Palenque shows a crested heron standing on one foot and holding in its bill a fish. A second figure (Pl. 15, fig. 1) is from the stucco ornament from the Palace, House B, at Palenque. It is less carefully executed, but seems to be a long-necked bird with a crest and outspread wings curiously conventionalized. In the Nuttall Codex there is another unmistakable heron (Pl. 15, fig. 4) with the same general characteristics, though the crest is less prominent, here represented as a series of erectile feathers separated at their tips. This elongation of the crest seems to be carried still farther in what seems to be the head and neck of a heron from Dresden 37b (Pl. 15, fig. 3) with erectile feathers at intervals along its length.
The heron is seldom employed as a head-dress. In the Lower Chamber of the Temple of the Tigers at Chichen Itza, one of the warriors wears a bird head-dress (Pl. 15, fig. 2), which from the length of the bill is probably made from a heron’s head, though the crest seems greatly exaggerated. The bas-relief on which this is found is strongly Nahua in feeling and execution. This head covering may indicate, according to the Nahua fashion, the tribe to which the warrior belongs. Again in Dresden 36a (Pl. 15, fig. 7), a man is shown wearing as a head-dress the head and neck of a heron that holds in its bill a fish. This head resembles very closely that of the heron in fig. 1. What appears to be a similar head is shown inPl. 15, fig. 6. It is interesting to note that the heron with a fish (Pl. 15, fig. 5) from Palenque also forms a part of a complicated head-dress.
It is, of course, uncertain to which of the several herons occurring in Central America these representations refer. Possibly the Great Blue heron (Ardea herodias) or the Louisiana heron (Hydranassa tricolor ruficollis) is intended. It seems not unlikely also, that one of the white egrets may be shown as their crests are fairly conspicuous.
Frigate-bird(Fregata aquila). We have included here two figures (Pl. 15, figs. 8, 9) that undoubtedly represent a single species of bird. It is characterized by a deeply forked tail and long beak, which has part way on its length, a circular object surrounded by a circle of dots. It seems still problematical what this object may be. In one figure (fig. 9), the beak is strongly hooked, in the other (fig. 8) it is straight, but as the latter is plainly a much more carelessly made drawing, we may infer that the hooked bill is more nearly correct. This would exclude the Terns (Sterna), to which Stempell has referred the figures. It seems probable that the frigate-bird (Fregata aquila) is the species intended, as this is not only a large conspicuous form on these coasts, but it has a long and strongly hooked beak and forked tail. The length of the beak would probably exclude from consideration, the swallow-tailed kite that also occurs in the region.
Both these birds are pictured, evidently as an offering or sacrifice. It is very seldom that the whole bird is represented in this connection, and still more infrequent to find anything but the turkey, which is the usual bird of sacrifice. The figure from the Dresden Codex (Pl. 15, fig. 9) rests upon the usual bowl or jar, that from the Tro-Cortesianus (Pl. 15, fig. 8) is pictured upon a grotesque animal head, threeKansigns and these upon the jar.
In the Tro-Cortesianus 20c, 21c, there occur several representations of man-like forms with very peculiar heads. The latter are each provided with a beak-like projection, on which appears the circle surrounded by dots noted above in connection with the frigate-bird. Brinton concludes that this mystic symbol is a representation of the curious knob on the bill of the male white pelican, and therefore identifies these curious figures as pelicans. Stempell follows Brinton in this, but considers that they are the brown pelican (P.fuscus), since the white pelican is rare or casual, as far south as Yucatan. Unfortunately, however, for this supposition, the brown pelican lacks the curious knob that Brinton believed to be represented by the circle of dots. Moreover, this same sign occurs on the drawings of the bills of the frigate-bird and the ocellated turkey, and is evidently not of specific significance. To our minds it is doubtful if the figures under discussion are birds at all, and we are unable to assign them a name with any degree of confidence. A peculiar glyph occurs in connection with them which may be an aid to their ultimate identification. Brinton calls the glyph the “fish and oyster sign.”
Ocellated Turkey(Agriocharis ocellata). This turkey (Mayakuopen o with dot under) is an important species in the Maya economy, and is seen frequently in the manuscripts. This is a smaller bird than the more northern true turkey (Meleagris) and is characterized by the presence of curious erect knobs on the top of the naked head. These are shown in conventionalized form in the various figures (Pl. 16), and afford a ready means of identification. On the bill of the bird shown in Tro-Cortesianus 10b (Pl. 16, fig. 2) occurs again the curious symbol, a circle surrounded by dots, previously noted under the frigate-bird and pelican. It probably has some special significance. Other figures of ocellated turkeys show but little in addition to the points just discussed. One shown inPl. 16, fig. 7, from Codex Vaticanus 3773, however, has a circular ring about the eye and the wattles are indicated as projections merely. In fig. 13, they are apparently shown as stalked knobs found elsewhere in connection with serpent head ornaments. It is only the head in this latter figure, which is considered in this interpretation.
In the Nuttall Codex, there frequently occur representations of a bird that was evidently used for sacrificial purposes. It is shown with erectile head feathers and a ring of circular marks about the eye (Pl. 26, figs. 12, 14;Pl. 27, figs. 2-3) or with concentric circles (Pl. 27, fig. 1). These figures arenot surely identifiable, but probably represent this turkey. Possibly they are the chachalaca (Ortalis vetula pallidiventris), a gallinaceous bird, commonly kept in semi-domestication in Mexico, whose bare eye ring and slightly erectile head feathers may be represented by the drawings. It is probable that this turkey is the bird represented frequently in the Maya codices as a bird of sacrifice. The head alone usually appears in this connection, among other places, in Dresden 34a (Pl. 16, fig. 10), 41c (fig. 14), 29c (fig. 16), 28c (fig. 17), and in Tro-Cortesianus 12b (Pl. 16, fig. 11), 105b (fig. 12), 107b (fig. 15). In several of these places the head is represented as resting on one or moreKansigns, again meaning bread, as well as on the vessel or jar. In Dresden 26c (Pl. 16, fig. 9), the whole turkey is pictured as an offering, as in the preceding case noted in Dresden 35a (Pl. 15, fig. 9). The whole bird as an offering may also appear in Tro-Cortesianus 4a (Pl. 16, fig. 4) corresponding to the offering of venison and iguana on the following pages. This representation of the entire bird is very rare although the fish, when used as an offering, is always represented as a whole and the iguana is in most cases when used in the same connection. Landa (1864, p. 222)327-*confirms the offering of the heads of birds with bread.
It is, however, the sacrifice of a bird, probably a turkey, by decapitating, that is especially interesting, as the operation as shown in the Dresden Codex 25c (Pl. 26, fig. 2), 26c, 27c, 28c, in the rites of the four years, is described in full by Landa. In the codex, a priest is represented as holding in his hand before an altar, a headless bird. Landa (1864, pp. 212, 218, 224, 228)327-†tells us that in theKan, theMuluc,theIx, and theCauacyears, the priests burnt incense to the idol, decapitated a “gallina” (undoubtedly a turkey), and presented it to the god.
The turkey is also used as a head-dress. Only in one case, however, Tro-Cortesianus 95c (Pl. 16, fig. 5), is the whole bird represented in this connection. This is clearly of totemic significance here, as it occurs in that part of the codex where birth and infant baptism are shown. In many other places there are curious partial representations of bird heads in the front of head-dresses which may or may not be identified as heads of turkeys. Among these are the head-dress of god H in Dresden 7c, of god E in Dresden 11e, of god C in Dresden 13b, of god A in Dresden 23c, and a female divinity in Dresden 20a (Pl. 16, fig. 13). Schellhas (1904, p. 43) identifies these birds as vultures.
That the turkey is connected with the rain seems clear. This is especially the case among the Nahuas. In the Aubin manuscript the rain god,Tlaloc, often appears in the disguise of the turkey-cock (uexolotl), and in the Vaticanus 3773, 14, the turkey (Pl. 16, fig. 7) is represented in the “House of Rain,” in contrast to the owl shown in the “House of Drought” (Seler, 1902-1903, p. 75). It might be noted also that Fewkes (1892, p. 228) shows that the turkey is emblematic of the rain among the pueblo peoples. The same idea seems to be present among the Mayas, as we note in the Tro-Cortesianus 10b (Pl. 16, fig. 2) the turkey is pictured in the rain and surrounded on three sides by bands of constellation signs.
Two methods of capturing the turkey are shown in the Tro-Cortesianus 93a and 91a (Pl. 16, figs. 1, 3). By the first, the bird is captured alive in a sort of wicker basket, which drops over it at the proper moment. The second method is by the “twich-up” or snare, which consists of anoose tied to a bent sapling and properly baited. In connection withPl. 16, fig. 1, it may be suggested that possibly this represents a cage rather than a trap, in which the bird is confined. The Lacandones at the present time often keep their totem animals in captivity (Tozzer, 1907, p. 40).
King Vulture(Sarcorhamphus papa). Numerous figures of vultures appear in the codices and elsewhere. Indeed, they are among the most common of the birds depicted. Two species only seem to occur in the writings, the king vulture and the black vulture. The former is a large black and white bird with the head and the upper part of the neck unfeathered, except for numerous short, almost bristle-like plumules. These naked portions are often colored red and there is a large more or less squarish fleshy knob at the base of the upper ramus of the beak. This conspicuous protuberance has been seized upon as a characteristic in the conventionalized figures, and serves to identify the king from the black vulture. In addition, a series of concentric circles about the eye seems to be a rather constant mark of the king vulture, though they are also sometimes found in connection with figures which, from the absence of the rostral knob, must represent black vultures (Pl. 18, figs. 18, 27;Pl. 19, figs. 7, 10, 11). In the case of the bird shown inPl. 19, fig. 1, the knob is hardly apparent, and the same is true ofPl. 19, fig. 13. Both these may represent king vultures. A remarkable figure is that shown inPl. 17, fig. 4, in which an ocellated turkey and a king vulture confront each other with necks intertwined. The short hair-like black feathers of the head are represented in this as well as inPl. 17, fig. 11, and in the glyph carved in stone (Pl. 17, fig. 10), which from the presence of the knob is probably a king vulture. The characteristic knob is shown in a variety of ways. Thus, inPl. 17, fig. 1, it is greatly developed and resembles a large horn with a falcate tip. InPl. 17, fig. 4, it is sharply angular and nearly square. Frequently, it is a circle with a centered ring surmounted by one or two additional rings or terminated by a mitre-shaped structure (Pl. 17, figs. 2, 5-7, 8-12). Avery simple form was found in the carving shown inPl. 17, fig. 13, where a long projecting knob is seen at the base of the culmen.
The king vulture seems to have a part to play as a mythological being, as it is pictured as a god with human body and bird head in the act of cohabiting with a woman in Dresden 19a, and with a dog in Dresden 13c (Pl. 17, fig. 3). Moreover, the same vulture god is represented on a blue background and under a band of constellation signs in Dresden 38b, and is also to be noted in Dresden 8a. Förstemann (1906, p. 66) shows that the thirteenth day of the Maya month is reached in thetonalamatlreckoning at this place. This day isCib, which corresponds to the Nahua dayCozcaquauhtli, which has the meaning vulture, and here, as previously noted, the vulture god is represented. In Tro-Cortesianus 22c (Pl. 17, fig. 2) and 10a,330-*the king vulture appears alone, in the first instance with a blue background, and in the second with a background representing rain. Rain is also shown in connection with the vulture god in Dresden 38b, and the black vulture in Tro-Cortesianus 18b (Pl. 19, fig. 13).
The king vulture is found employed as a head-dress twice out of the three times it appears in any connection with female figures, Tro-Cortesianus 26c (Pl. 17, fig. 12) with male figure, and 94c (Pl. 17, fig. 11) and 95c with female figures. The last two clearly have to do with the baptism and naming of infants, as previously explained.
The study of the glyph used to indicate the vulture is interesting, for we find it recurring again and again throughout the Maya codices and often when there is no other drawing of the animal, as in Dresden 39c (Pl. 17, fig. 5;Pl. 18, fig. 19). The first example (glyph 6) is clearly the head of the king vulture, whereas the second (glyph 3) is probably the head of the black vulture. The glyph in Dresden 38b (Pl. 17, fig. 7) appears in connection with the vulture god directly below it. In Dresden 11b (Pl. 18, fig. 1), it occurs alone andno figure appears in the usual place below. TheTunperiod glyph (Pl. 17, fig. 10) frequently shows vulture characteristics especially in the nostril of the face. The teeth, however, often appearing in theTunglyph would be against this theory. The blending of bird and mammal characteristics is not uncommon in the Maya drawings, however.
The Nahua day sign,Cozcaquauhtli, as previously noted, has the meaning vulture, and we naturally find this bird frequently represented in the Mexican codices. In the Nuttall Codex, the head of the king vulture occurs repeatedly as a glyph for this day. In its less modified forms (Pl. 18, figs. 2-4), the beak is merely a pair of flattened rami, surmounted proximally by the conspicuous quadrangular knob. The minute hair-like feathers on the otherwise naked head are shown as a fringe at the throat and crown, while a conventionalized ear is represented posteriorly. A series of interesting figures (Pl. 18, figs. 5-10) illustrates steps in the further reduction of this head to a small glyph in which only the beak with its large squarish knob remains (Pl. 18, fig. 10).
Black Vulture(Catharista urubu). It is difficult to assign any single characteristic to the figures representing the black vulture (Maya,ts with caron and dot belowom) other than the long raptorial beak. A number of drawings probably depict black vultures, though this cannot be certainly affirmed. Such are those shown inPl. 18, figs. 11, 12, 14, 17;Pl. 19, figs. 2-4, 13, 14. Stempell considers the vulture shown inPl. 18, fig. 13, to be a king vulture, but it has no knob on the beak, and thus is quite likely the black vulture. The fact that its head is shaped much like that of the god with the king vulture head (Pl. 17, fig. 3) would indicate merely the individuality of the artist. The coloring of the species under discussion is uniformly black in the Dresden and Tro-Cortesianus, except in certain cases where the birds are shown in outline only, as inPl. 19, fig. 12. It is not certain, however, that these two last are black vultures, though they suggest the species. The two birds shown inPl. 19, figs. 5, 6, are almost surely black vultures, and, as represented in the manuscript, are descendingupon a man. Stempell thinks they may be ravens, but this is very doubtful, for the raven probably was unknown to the Mayas, since its range is to the northward. What appears to be a crest is seen on the head of the bird inPl. 19, fig. 4. The black coloring and the shape of the bill otherwise suggest the black vulture, though perhaps the crest would indicate the harpy eagle. Similarly,Pl. 19, fig. 14, is provided with a sort of tuft or crest, but its general appearance is suggestive of the vulture. A pottery whistle (textfig. 2) from the Uloa Valley evidently represents a black vulture. The head of the bird shows the characteristic wrinkled appearance seen in the drawings, with the heavy beak. The absence of the rostral knob would preclude its being a king vulture.