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 truetaniwhais a water kelpie.
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 truetaniwhais a water kelpie.
Mr KerryNichols,214-2speaking of these monsters, says:
With the other fabulous creations of Maori mythology were thetaniwhasor 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.
With the other fabulous creations of Maori mythology were thetaniwhasor 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 HawaiianMo’oorMokoappears, from the following statement by Judge Fornander, to have been applied sometimes to this mythological monster:
TheMo’oorMokomentioned in tradition—reptiles and lizards—were of several kinds—themo’owith 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 ofmo’oof extraordinary size living in caverns, amphibious in their nature, and being the terror of theinhabitants.214-3
TheMo’oorMokomentioned in tradition—reptiles and lizards—were of several kinds—themo’owith 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 ofmo’oof extraordinary size living in caverns, amphibious in their nature, and being the terror of theinhabitants.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 calledcipactli(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 languagemocois “a species of lizard;” in Hawaiianmo’oormokois “the general name for lizards,” and the same word signifies “lizard” in Samoan;moko-mokois the New Zealand (Maori) name for a small lizard.Taylor214-4says thatmoko-titiwas 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 Nahuatlcipactlicertainly means some amphibious orwater 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,mbeing the chief phonetic element indicated thereby.
If the supposition herein advanced that the combination shown in plateLXIV, 9, denotes bread or food be correct, it is possible that the symbol is also sometimes used to indicate “maize,”iximorxim, on account of its phonetic value. As will be shown farther on, thekansymbol 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,laalaorliaa; Nahuatl,ehecatl.
The form of the symbol of this day presents a number of minor variations, the more important of which are shown in plateLXIV, 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 plateLXIV, 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 theiksymbol, 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 somekind;215-1the 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 theupper 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 inshowers.216-1As the lowest character in the group mentioned is theiksymbol, 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 previouspaper216-2and need not be repeated here, as the only object now in view in referring to them is to show that theiksymbol 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 aniksymbol from which arises what appear to be the sprouting leaves of a plant, probably maize (plateLXIV, 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 theiksymbol 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 connectionikmay be compared tokanis appropriate, but this comparison does not tend to the support of his theory. Take, for example, the sproutingkansymbols 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 (plateLXIV, 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 akansymbol, which is colored to signify maize; the others holdiksymbols. Thereare two interpretations which may be given this symbolic representation—one, that theikglyphs 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 VillaValladolid”217-1to 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 andbarriga(dropsy?). This north wind destroys the maize crops, which form the main sustenance of both natives and Spaniards, for they use no other bread.
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 andbarriga(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 aniksymbol. 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 akansymbol, indicating the mature grain, the uninjured portion of the crop. It would therefore appear that theiksymbol 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 twoiksymbols (plateLXIV, 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 theiksymbol 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, plateLXVIII. 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 (plateLXIV, 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 plateLXVIII, 27. This is much like Landa’so, andolin Maya denotes “heart, etc.”
According to Brasseur,olohsignifies “a germ” and “to germinate;”hokolalso 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 havingch’ortz’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 plateLXVI, 28 and 55, and others of similar form, are to be taken asikglyphs 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 plateLXVIII, 30, from Dres. 25, where it is in the midst of the blaze. If so, the word equivalent must bekak, as it is seemingly a variant ofik, and hence may be supposed to have theksound. This will agree with his interpretation of plateLXVI, 29, bykinichkakmo; but in this case we must giveichas the value of the so-calledbensymbol. This, however, is not so very objectionable, as there are other places where the chief phonetic element of thebenglyph appears to bei. It is also to be remembered that it is much like Landa’si. It is likewise true, as will hereafter be shown, that the valuebendoes not appear to hold good where it occurs in combination with other symbols. However, until a satisfactory rendering of this little four-cornerik(?) 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 haveuii, air, wind;chiic, breath; which we may bring into relation withgui; and we findguiiebee, wind-and-water cloud (nube con vient y agua). Dr Seler prefers to deriveguifromquii, fire, flame, the notion of which is often associated with wind.
In that tongue we haveuii, air, wind;chiic, breath; which we may bring into relation withgui; and we findguiiebee, wind-and-water cloud (nube con vient y agua). Dr Seler prefers to deriveguifromquii, fire, flame, the notion of which is often associated with wind.
It was probably this notion and the fact that the little four-cornerik(?) 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” isbii.
Dr Brinton thinks thatniis the radical ofnici, to grow, increase, gain life. He says:
Laa, orlaala, 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.
Laa, orlaala, 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 dayEhecatl(wind), shown in plateLXIV, 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. Asniiornisignifies “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 languagexiorxieis the term for “nose.” I notice, however, that the name for bird is given asviguiniandpiguiini. Ifpi(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 plateLXIV, 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.
It is difficult to determine the original idea of this character. Figure 210 [our plateLXIV, 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.
DrBrinton219-1asserts, 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 plateLXVI, 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 plateLXVI, 29 byKinich-kakmobe 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 authorremarks, “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 isikor 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 theIksymbol 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 nameIk. 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 explainsikelby “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 dayEhecatlrepresented 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, DrBrinton220-1says:
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.
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 nameVocis mentioned, the sameauthor220-2says:
The nameVocis that of a species of bird (CakchiquelVaku). Coto describes it as having green plumage, and a very large and curved bill, apparently a kind of parrot. Elsewhere in the myth (page 70) it is said to be the messenger of Hurakan, resting neither in the heaven nor in the underworld, but in a moment flying to the sky, to Hurakan, who dwells there.
The nameVocis that of a species of bird (CakchiquelVaku). Coto describes it as having green plumage, and a very large and curved bill, apparently a kind of parrot. Elsewhere in the myth (page 70) it is said to be the messenger of Hurakan, resting neither in the heaven nor in the underworld, but in a moment flying to the sky, to Hurakan, who dwells there.
This is unquestionably the wind symbolized as a bird. The name for wind in Malay isbayu, andVayuis a Wind god in Hindu mythology. Garud, the Bird deity of the Hindu Pantheon, who plays such an important rôle in the Mahabharata, and is so frequently termed therein “the foremost ranger of the skies,” is apparently the Storm god, the equivalent of the MayaHurukan.
We may remark incidentally that a curious coincidence is found in the fact that there appears to be a relation between the wind and monkeys in the mythology both of the Hindu and of the natives of Central America, or at least of Mexico. Hanuman, the Monkey god, who plays such an important part in the Ramayana, was the son of Pavana, the chief Wind deity. According to Brasseur, in his introductory essay to thePopol Vuh, it is stated in the Codex Chimalpopoca that the men were, on a dayEhecatl, changed by the wind into monkeys. On what peculiar mythological conception this idea is based I am unable to state.
THE THIRD DAY
Maya,akbal; Tzental,votan; Quiche-Cakchiquel,akbal; Zapotec,guèla; Nahuatlcalli.
The form of the Maya character as given by Landa is shown in plateLXIV, 35; those usually found in the codices are presented in figures 36 and 37 of the same plate. A slight variation which sometimes occurs in the Dresden Codex is given in plateLXIV, 38. In figure 39 of this plate circular dots take the place of the teeth. In another variant, shown in figure 40, there is a row of dots immediately below the broken cross line. The forms shown in figures 41 and 42 are from the inscriptions. As will be seen by comparing figures 36 and 38 with plateLXV, 64, this glyph, in some of its forms, resembles somewhat closely thechuensymbol, but is generally readily distinguished from it by the wavy line across the face and the absence of the little divided oblong at the top, which is mostly present in thechuensymbol. The lower triangle is usually sharp and extends to the top in theakbalsymbol, while that in thechuenglyph is broad or rounded and does not extend to the top.
The signification of the Maya and Cakchiquel names, and also of the Zapotec, is “night” or “darkness.” The Tzental name is that of a celebrated hero, which, according to Dr Brinton, is derived from the Tzental worduotan, “heart” or “breast.” This explanation is accepted by Seler, as Bishop Nuñez de la Vega, the principal authority regarding this mythological personage, says that “in every province he was held to be the heart of the village.” Dr Seler also adds that “‘heart of the village’ is in Mexican calledtepeyollotl, and that is the name of the deity of the third day character,calli” (plateLXIV, 46).
The Mexican namecallisignifies house. The method by which Dr Brinton brings this and the Tzental names into harmony with the idea of darkness or night is as follows:
The house is that which is within, is dark, shuts out the light, etc. Possibly the derivation was symbolic. Votan was called “the heart of the nation,” and atTlazoaloyan, in Soconusco, he constructed, by breathing or blowing, a “dark house,” in which he concealed the sacred objects of his cult. In this myth we find an unequivocal connection of the idea of “darkness” and “house.”
The house is that which is within, is dark, shuts out the light, etc. Possibly the derivation was symbolic. Votan was called “the heart of the nation,” and atTlazoaloyan, in Soconusco, he constructed, by breathing or blowing, a “dark house,” in which he concealed the sacred objects of his cult. In this myth we find an unequivocal connection of the idea of “darkness” and “house.”
Dr Seler’s explanation is substantially the same; he differs somewhat, however, from Dr Brinton in regard to the derivation of the wordvotan(oruotan), as he obtains it from the Mayaol,uol, “heart, soul, will, etc,” andtan, “in the midst,” also “surface, level, extent, front.” He concludes, therefore, ifuosignifies heart, thatuotandenotes “the inmost heart” or “heart of the expanse.” It is proper, however, to call attention to the fact that Dr Brinton’s derivation of the name in his “American Hero Myths” is slightly different from that given in his “Native Calendar,” above mentioned. In the former he saysuotan“is from the pure Maya root wordtan, which means primarily ‘the breast,’ or that which is in the front or in the middle of the body; with the possessive prefix it becomesutan. In Tzental this word means both ‘breast’ and ‘heart.’” It must be admitted that these explanations are apparently somewhat strained, yet it is possible they are substantially correct, as they appear to receive some support from the figures in the Mexican codices.
Plate 75 of the Borgian Codex, which is in fact the lower part of the figure on plate 76, heretofore alluded to, although having reference to the underworld, appears to be in part a delineation of night. The large black figure probably represents night, the smaller star-like figures denoting stars, and the large one the night sun, or moon. The house in the lower right-hand corner, with the black lining, is the house of darkness. The wind symbol above the roof indicates relationship with the winds. Dr Seler interprets these star-like figures as sun symbols, but the number found together on this plate forbids the supposition that they represent suns. Moreover, the association with the dark figure renders it probable that they are here used to denote stars.
There is, however, a lack in these explanations of a connecting link, which seems necessary to render them entirely satisfactory. The name appears to be intimately associated with that for serpent; or perhaps it would be more correct to say that this mythological personage appears to be intimately connected in some way with the serpent. The title of the Tzental manuscript containing the myth was, according to Cabrera, “Proof that I am a Chan,” which signifies “serpent.” His chief city wasNachan, “the house of the serpent;” his treasure house was a cavern. Simply designating him by “the heart of the nation,” “heart of the village,” does not appear to furnish a full explanation of his attributes or characteristics.
As the symbol of this day is frequently connected with cloud and rain-storm series, as in Tro. 25a, where it appears to be that from which rain is falling, its signification in these places would appear to be “cloud,” which carries with it the idea of shade, shadow, and darkness. This being true, the most likely supposition in regard to the origin of the symbol is, that it was designed to represent the cloud breaking into drops and falling as rain—in other words, the weeping cloud. Suchappears beyond question to be its signification in Tro. 25a and in other places in the same and other codices. This supposition is also consistent with the fact that some of the symbols, especially those of the inscriptions (plateLXIV, 42), have dots along the broken line, which may indicate the raindrops into which the cloud is breaking. I am therefore not inclined to accept Dr Seler’s supposition that it is intended to represent the opening to a cavern, after the conventional method adopted by the Mexican artists. It is improbable, though not impossible, that the older system may have adopted some features from the younger. Moreover, this supposition on the part of Dr Seler is in direct conflict with his statement in the immediately preceding paragraph. He says:
It is to be observed as applying chiefly to the manuscripts and the reliefs, that the two side points which project like teeth from the inner circle of the character could in no wise have signified teeth. Such an interpretation is contradicted by the occasional change of their position [plateLXIV, 47] and the fact that they also appear now and then exactly like eyes [plateLXIV, 39].
It is to be observed as applying chiefly to the manuscripts and the reliefs, that the two side points which project like teeth from the inner circle of the character could in no wise have signified teeth. Such an interpretation is contradicted by the occasional change of their position [plateLXIV, 47] and the fact that they also appear now and then exactly like eyes [plateLXIV, 39].
Now the Mexican cavern symbol, as shown in his figures and as given in Peñafiel’s “Nombres Geográficos,” appears to be the open serpent mouth with teeth and fangs. It is therefore more probable that the symbol was derived as above indicated. Among the Indian pictographs given by ColonelMallery223-1as representing clouds are those shown in plateLXIV, 43 and 44. An Ojibwa cloudsymbol223-2is shown in plateLXIV, 45, in which the circular outline denotes the sky. It seems quite likely that the Maya symbol is intended to convey precisely the same idea. On the left (bottom) of plate 70, Borgian Codex, is a curved or arch-like figure somewhat on the same order as those given. It appears to represent the sky—but darkened sky, indicating night or obscurity. On its upper surface are nine heads, which probably signify the “Nine Lords of the Night.” Below it is a black figure. On each side are two figures, the color of the four differing—one blue, another yellow, another black, and the other red. These are probably the regents of the cardinal points.
If this supposition be correct, the symbol is purely ideographic and not phonetic or ikonomatic; but this does not forbid the idea that when used in other combinations it is used phonetically to give the chief sound element of the word indicated by the ideograph. Dr Seler claims, as corroborative of his supposition, that “all symbols which are combined with the name of the third character are to be fully explained through the word ‘cavern.’” But it is far more likely that this (so far as it holds good) is due to the fact that the symbol is used because of its phonetic value or its chief phonetic element,ak, which is the same as the chief element of the Maya name for cavern—actun,actan,aktan(Henderson, MS. Lexicon).
If this supposition be correct, it may furnish a clue to the name of the deity whose symbol is shown in plateLXIV, 48. Here the left-handcharacter is theakbalsymbol (though not complete) surrounded by a circle of dots. This circle, Dr Seler contends, often indicates flames which consume the object it surrounds, or light which emanates from that object. If the whole is but a simple ideogram, it must be taken, as a whole, as indicating a particular mythological personage; otherwise it is in part phonetic, or given after the Mexican rebus method of denoting names. If not a simple ideogram, this prefix is most probably used in some sense phonetically with reference chiefly to theksound. The circle of dots is used here probably to indicate the vowel sounduoro. But in making this suggestion I do not by any means intend to suggest that the Maya scribes had reached that stage of advancement where they could indicate each sound by a character. All I wish to assert is that I find in numerous cases characters accompanied by this circle of dots where the proper interpretation appears to be a word having as its prominent vowel elementuoro. Hence the inference that there is some relation between this circle and these vowel sounds—this and nothing more.
In Dres. 16c is the symbol shown in plateLXIV, 49. This, as I have shownelsewhere,224-1represents thekukuitzor Quetzal figured below the text. Here are encircling lines of dots, and in the Maya name theusound repeated; and here also is Landa’sku. In Dres. 47c the symbol for the monthMolis given as shown in plateLXIV, 50. Here again is seen the circle of dots, and the vowel appears to hold good in other places. We see it in Landa’s firsto. It will also assist us in giving at least a consistent interpretation to the strange character shown in plateLXIV, 51, which occurs repeatedly on plate 19 of the Tro. Codex. In the pictures below are individuals apparently, and as interpreted by most authorities, engaged in grinding paint or other substance or in making fire. The right half of the glyph, including the circle of dots and crosshatching might, according to the value heretofore given these elements, be rendered byhuck, “to rub, grind, pound, pulverize;” which certainly agrees with the interpretation usually given the pictures below. Possibly the whole glyph maybe interpreted bycecelhuchah, “to triturate.” While this, so far as it relates to the left portion of the glyph, is a mere suggestion, it agrees with the fact that the ornamented or crossbarred border is found in the symbol forCib, and the three dots withLanda’se.224-2
In Tro. 11*d is the character shown in plateLXIV, 52. As the right portion is the upper part of the symbol forchikin, “west” (see plateLXIV, 53), its phonetic value may be a derivative ofkuch,kuchnahi,kuchah, “to spin, to draw out into threads.” Henderson giveschuchas an equivalent. As the subfix in plateLXIV, 48, is the character I have usually interpreted byu, this would give us some of the elements of the nameKukulcanand notItzamna, as Seler and Schellhas suppose. Possibly, however, the deity represented may beBaklum-Chaam, the god adored at Ti-ho and usually considered, though without apparent justification, as the Maya Priapus.
The somewhat similar character, plateLXIV, 55, from Tro. 18*c, which Dr Seler considers synonymous, is probably essentially distinct, as it bears a somewhat stronger resemblance to thechuenthan to theakbalsymbol. In character 54, plateLXIV, from Dres. 17b, which denotes the vulture or rapacious bird figured below the text, it probably indicates thecsound, as the most reasonable interpretation of the symbol ishchom, “the sopilote” (Perez), orhchuy, “a hawk or eagle.” If the character shown in plateLXIV, 54, is intended to indicate the bird figured below, and is neither of those mentioned, it is probably one the name of which begins withch.
The symbol of the monthZoɔ(TsozorZotz) also contains this supposedakbalglyph, but in the varied form last above mentioned, which, as we have said, bears a strong resemblance to thechuensymbol. This, as will be seen by comparing, bears a very close resemblance to glyphLXIV, 54. If phonetic, we must assume that thech(if the interpretation of the former be correct) has been hardened tozortz.225-1
The same character is also found in the symbol for the monthXul(see plateLXIV, 56, from Dres. 49c). As Dr Seler refuses to accept the theory that the characters are either phonetic or ikonomatic, he concludes, in the following words, that resemblance in the forms of the symbols indicates relationship in the subject-matter:
Xulsignifies the end, the point;xuulul, to end;xulah,xulezah, to bring to an end;xulub(that with, which anything ends), horns, or he who has horns, the devil;xulbil, jests, tricks, deviltry. We see, therefore, that this word contains doubtless a reference to something unholy, uncanny, demoniac. To the Central Americans the bat was not merely a nocturnal animal. The Popol-Vuh speaks of a Zo’tzi-ha, “bat house,” one of the five regions of the underworld. There dwells the Cama-zo’tz, “the death-bat,” the great beast that brings death to all who approach it, and also bites off the head of Hunapu.
Xulsignifies the end, the point;xuulul, to end;xulah,xulezah, to bring to an end;xulub(that with, which anything ends), horns, or he who has horns, the devil;xulbil, jests, tricks, deviltry. We see, therefore, that this word contains doubtless a reference to something unholy, uncanny, demoniac. To the Central Americans the bat was not merely a nocturnal animal. The Popol-Vuh speaks of a Zo’tzi-ha, “bat house,” one of the five regions of the underworld. There dwells the Cama-zo’tz, “the death-bat,” the great beast that brings death to all who approach it, and also bites off the head of Hunapu.
Instead of having to surmise this fancied relation, I think the explanation is to be found in the fact that similarity in the form of the glyph is indicative of a similarity in the sounds of the words represented. Here thechbecomesx(sh).
Dr Seler also calls attention in this connection to the animal figures in Dres. 36a and elsewhere, which are “represented as plunging downfrom heaven with torches in their paws, and fire also issuing from the tassel-like ends of their tails, which doubtless denote the lightning, the death-dealing servant of the Chac.” By the mention of this last word—chac—Dr Seler has shown that correct reasoning by a different line leads to precisely the same result as that which appeals to the phonetic or ikonomatic character of the symbol. Here again thechsound appears as the chief element of the character. The rain or field deities, the chacs, are usually represented in the codices as dog or panther like animals; andchuac, “the tempest,” and, according to Henderson,chacalso, signifies lightning. But the relation of figures and phonetic value includes also the animal;chacbolay, “a savage tiger, a young lion” (Perez);chacboay, “a leopard” (Henderson);chacoh, “a leopard;”chacekel, “a tiger, jaguar;”chac-ikal, “the storm, the tempest.” The similar figures in Tro. 32c probably symbolize the dry burning season which parches and withers the corn. The word is probablychoco,chocou, or some related form.
THE FOURTH DAY
Maya,kanorkanan; Tzental,ghanan; Quiche-Cakchiquel,k’at(k’ate,k’atic,gatu); Zapotec,guacheorgueche; Nahuatl,cuetzpallin.
The Maya symbol of this day is subject to but few and slight variations. The principal forms are shown in platesLXIV, 57, toLXV, 3. That given by Landa is presented in plateLXIV, 57. The forms in the codices are shown in platesLXIV, 58;LXV, 1, 2, 3, that with the eye (LXV, 3) being the usual form given in Peresianus;LXV, 4 represents it as found on the right slab of the Palenque tablet.
The significations of the Maya wordkanare various, as “yellow,” “rope,” “hamac,” etc, and, according to Dr Brinton, the Tzentalghananis the same word under a slightly different form. However, he contends that the original sense is to be found in the Cakchiquel wordk’an, as given by Guzman (in a manuscript work in his possession), who says it is the name applied to the female iguana, or tree lizard. This, it is true, brings the signification into close correspondence with that of the Nahuatl term, but it is more than probable that the Maya and Tzental terms were in use before the application mentioned by Guzman was made by the Cakchiquel. It is noticeable, however, that in the list from Taylor’s “Te-Ika-a-Maui,” presented in the appendix, “lizards” are given as symbolic of one of the New Zealand days.