PL. LXV COPIES OF GLYPHS FROM THE CODICESPL. LXV COPIES OF GLYPHS FROM THE CODICES
This interpretation, however, savors too much of an effort to bring the signification into harmony with the Mexican name. Moreover, it is difficult to explain the use of the Maya symbol on this theory, as it is undoubtedly frequently employed to denote the grain of maize. For example, it represents the seed from which a corn plant is springing, as on Tro. 29b (see plateLXIV, 32); and one figure in the same division represents a bird plucking it up, while another shows some small quadruped seizing it. It is also frequently represented in all the codicesas on a platter or vessel placed as an offering to some deity, and is often given a yellowish tint in these places. That the plant which arises from the symbol in these instances is the maize stalk is admitted by Drs Schellhas and Seler, although they do not seem to recognize the fact that the symbol represents the grain of maize which gives birth to the stalk. However, Dr Seler, in his subsequent paper above referred to, concludes that it refers to the seed, dropping his former interpretation. Both seem to recognize the whole glyph as a symbol of the stalk. Concerning this, Dr Seler says:
Indeed, we see in Cod. Mendoza the maize shoot employed to express the wordacatl, “reed.” I believe that the characterkanrepeats the Mexican idea, the maize stalk. This explains for us the reason why the characterkan, as above pointed out, always appears among the sacrifices.
Indeed, we see in Cod. Mendoza the maize shoot employed to express the wordacatl, “reed.” I believe that the characterkanrepeats the Mexican idea, the maize stalk. This explains for us the reason why the characterkan, as above pointed out, always appears among the sacrifices.
I fail to understand why this authority applies the symbol to the “stalk,” when it is the fruit, the ear, the grain, which furnishes food, and may therefore be very properly used as the symbol of food.
In plateLXV, 5, is presented a copy of one of these corn offerings as found on Tro. 9*b. As the vessel containing the offering appears to be a vase, pot, or olla, it seems improbable that the offering it contains should consist of maize stalks. It is true, however, that instances occur, as on plates 21-23, Troano, where the stalk rises from thekansymbols contained in a vessel, but these are evidently given in a figurative sense, as the vessel rests on a serpent. But even here there is evidence that the symbol denotes the grain or ear, and not the stalk, as in the lower right-hand corner of plate 21 a human figure is represented as feeding a bird with the symbol, which can not be construed in this instance as representing thestalk.227-1
Ximenes, who gives the Cakchiquel name ascat, says it refers to a net used for carrying maize, but means “lizard.” Dr Seler, referring to this statement, says he strongly suspects that “the Mexican equivalent of this character has furnished him with this interpretation.” He adds further that, in his opinion, “it has no connection with the Maya rootkan,kaan, ‘rope,’ ‘cord,’ ‘mat-cord,’ andkan—Quiche-Cakchiquel,k’an(gan)—‘yellow.’” He believes the Maya term is derived fromkaanan,kanan, which signifies “to be superfluous,” “overflow,” “to abound.”
Dr Brinton thinks that the Zapotecguache, translated by Seler “frog or toad,” is more likely a variant ofguracheorgorache, “iguana.”
It is apparent from these widely different opinions that the signification of none of the names, save that of the Mexican calendar—cuetzpallin, “lizard”—has been satisfactorily determined.
In attempting to ascertain the signification of the names of the day, exclusive of the Mexican calendar, it is best to exclude from consideration at first the signification of the latter, and allow it to have no influence in arriving at a conclusion. The attempt by Dr Brinton to force agreement with the latter appears to be unsatisfactory.
I am inclined to agree with Dr Seler that the Maya symbol for the daykanand the Mexican symbol fortecpatl, “flint,” are based on the same fundamental concept, if the flint-like symbols on plate 12 of the Borgian Codex, one of which is shown in plateLXV, 6, aretecpatlfigures; of this, however, there is considerable doubt. Seler’s opinion is based on those of this type. There can be no doubt that here this spindle-shape figure represents the shooting plant, the central stock or stem, or, what is far more likely, the seed which gives birth to the plant. Although they occupy the position of the stock or stem, yet from the form, the fact that some of them have the eye, and that from them the roots stretch downward, I am inclined to believe they are intended to denote the seed. Thekansymbol, as above stated, is also represented in the codices as that which gives birth to the plant, as that from which the sprouting plant springs. It is probable, therefore, that it was originally taken from the grain of maize, which it fairly represents.
Now it is well known that “yellow” is one of the primary meanings ofkan, and that the word is closely associated with fruit, the “yellow” referring in a large degree to the ripening fruit, especially of the maize plant. According to Henderson one signification ofkanis “ripe, as fruit, timber,” and, according to Perez,kankanilis “sazon en [que] las frutas, aunque no esten maduras por estar las mas tomando el color amarillo.” In Cakchiquelkan(gan) signifies “yellow, ripe, rich.” According to Otto Stoll,vuich(orvuach), which is almost identical with the Zapotec name of the day, is the word for “fruit” in several of the Maya dialects. According to the vocabulary of Cordova, as given by Ternaux-Compans, “yellow” in Zapotec isnagache, and in Fuller’s MS. Vocabulary it isna-gutchi, thenabeing a prefix signifying “thing.” The anonymous author, however, writes itbrechii. We also notice that “gold” in this language isyache, probably referring to the color. It is likely, therefore, that the Zapotec name of this day signifies “yellow, ripe, mature,” referring to fruits, especially maize.
When maize was introduced into New Zealand it was namedkanga, probably after the Malaytangkai, the name for an “ear of corn.” The Meztitlan name of the day isXilotl, “an ear of corn,” or “a young maize shoot.” These facts seem to show that the symbol has some reference to maize, and tend to confirm the view expressed above, that the compound symbol shown in plateLXIV, 9, denotes “maize bread.” The presence of thekancharacter in the symbol of the monthCumhuorCumkuorHumku(plateLXV, 7) is difficult to explain on the theory that it retains here the signification given it as the symbol of the dayKan, whether considered ideographic or phonetic, unless we suppose thename is incomplete and should havekanadded to it. I am somewhat disposed to believe that it is sometimes used alone to denote bread, and is then to be interpreted byuah. Take, for example, the figure in Tro. 30d. Here we see a dog seated on akansymbol, with the same symbol taking the place of the eye. Aspekis dog in Maya andpecuahthe tortilla or bread of maize, and the compound glyph in plateLXIV, 9, is in the text, this may be an instance of the true rebus method of representing a word. Another instance of a similar character will be given under the dayCaban. Possibly thekanglyph in the month symbol may have there the significationuah.
The fact must be borne in mind that this character, as before stated, is often, and perhaps most frequently, used, except where it indicates the day, merely as the symbol of corn or maize. As an example, take the compound character shown in plateLXV, 8, from Tro. 33c. In the picture under the text is the Corn god represented with the dead eye and bound with cords; above his head is a dog-like animal bearing burning torches. This representation, taken in connection with what is seen in the other divisions of the plate, appears, as heretofore stated, to denote the burning drought of summer, which is destroying the maize crop. As the right portion of the compound character is thecimisymbol, probably representing death, the whole character very likely indicates the dying corn. I have not found any combination where the rendering of the symbol bykanproves satisfactory. In fact, with the exception of thekan-imixcombination heretofore mentioned,kanis very seldom combined with other glyphs, there being only some two or three in the Tro. Cod., and three or four in the Cortesian Codex. It appears, however, a number of times in combination in the Dresden Codex, but as yet I am unable to interpret any of them satisfactorily.
THE FIFTH DAY
Maya,chicchan; Tzental,abagh; Quiche-Cakchiquel,can; Zapotec,ci,ziieorguii; Nahuatl,cohuatl.
The forms in which the symbol of this day appears are various and sometimes widely divergent. The principal ones are shown in platesLXV, 9 to 20. The form given by Landa is seen at 9; that most common in the Codex Tro. at 10. Other forms which frequently occur are shown at 11-13; those shown at 14-16 are from the Troano Codex. Some unusual forms which vary widely from the typical glyph are given at 17-20.
The change of a symbol to the face form, as seen in this instance atLXV, 15-16, does not appear to have any significance. The chief element of this character is the circular spot in the right portion, usually bordered by a double line and little square blocks, with the interior generally crosshatched. As the crosshatching is also found in the symbol for the monthPax(plateLXV, 22), it is probable, if phonetic, that this characteristic denotes thex(sh) orchsound. As a similarmarking is frequently present on the serpent figures in the codices (plateLXV, 23), it is possible that its signification ischan, “serpent,” or it may refer to some real or mythological characteristic.
The signification of the names of this day, except that of the Nahuatl calendar—cohuatl, “serpent”—appears to be uncertain. Perez says the wordchicchancan be explained only by considering it to be incorrectly written forchichan, “little.” Henderson in his lexicon writes itchichan, and gives as the meaning of the word, “new, young, aschichan u, the new moon.” Dr Seler first suggested that the first part of the name might be derived from the rootchi,chii, “mouth, to bite,” and hence that the signification might be “the biting serpent.” However, he subsequently concluded that the proper interpretation is “a sign marked or taken,” fromchich, “a sign or mark,” andch’aan, “something taken or carried away.” Dr Brinton thinks there is much less difficulty in construing it aschich, strong or great, andchan, the generic Tzental term for serpent. The generic term for serpent in the Zoztzil ischam.
Dr Seler does not attempt an explanation of the Tzental term, but Dr Brinton says that it means in that dialect and in Cakchiquel, “luck, fate, fortune.” This, he says, is identical with the Zapotecci,zii, andguii, and, as he finds evidence that the serpent is mentioned as an animal whence portents were derived by the Zapotecs, thinks this furnishes the connecting link with the signification in other calendars. This explanation is so circuitous, and in fact strained, as to render it unsatisfactory.
A study of the symbol with reference to its origin may perhaps furnish some aid in arriving at the true signification of the name. As will be seen by reference to the various forms of the symbol, the bordering of the circular inclosed space appears to be more permanent than the inner markings. This is apparent from the fact that the little squares or blocks are retained in all the types except the anomalous forms shown in plateLXV, 16-18, and even in one of these (LXV, 18) they appear. On the other hand, the markings in the inclosed space are varied, and in some instances, asLXV, 11, are omitted altogether. It would seem, therefore, from this that the bordering was considered the essential element of the glyph. From what, then, is the symbol taken? If we turn to Dresden 25c, we see in the priest’s robe, in all probability, that from which the symbol was derived. Here we have the inner crosshatching and the little dark blocks or squares around the border. The same pattern is seen also on Tro. 16*b and c, and on the female dresses, same codex, 20*c and d. On the latter, in some cases, is the waved line seen in the unusual forms of the day symbol shown in plateLXV, 17, 18, and 19. Other examples could be referred to, but attention is called only to one more, viz, the curtain-like articles exhibited on Tro. 29*b, where we see not only the inner crosshatching and bordering blocks, but on the side borders the precise marking of the day symbol shown in plateLXV, 17.
Aschi,chii, signifies not only mouth, but also “limit, border, margin, shore,” and especially the “skirt or loose edge of a garment,” the relation of the symbol to the name of the day is obvious. It is used here for its phonetic value—chi. Aschiisignifies “to bite, prick, to sting as a serpent,” andchandenotes “serpent,” the true explanation of the name of the day would seem to be “the biting or stinging serpent.” This will perhaps justify us in supposing that where the symbol is found on a serpent it must have reference to this characteristic.
I had not observed when the above was written that Brasseur had expressed substantially the same view in regard to the origin of this symbol.
THE SIXTH DAY
Maya,cimi; Tzental,tox; Quiche-Cakchiquel,camey; Zapotec,lana; Nahuatl,miquiztli.
Landa’s symbol for this day is shown in plateLXV, 24. The usual form in the Codex Tro. and Cortesian Codex is given inLXV, 25; it is varied frequently by an extension of the line from the mouth, somewhat as in symbol 28 of the same plate, which is the usual form in the Dresden Codex. A variation of this is seen at 29, which seems to have given rise to the unusual form shown in 31. A radical variation is that given at 27. The symbol of the Death god, 26 and 30, is sometimes, though rarely, substituted as the symbol of this day. The closed or dead eye and prominent teeth, as seen in the usual forms, show very clearly that the symbol is simply a conventional representation of the naked skull. The form shown at 27, however, is more difficult to account for; reference to it will be made farther on.
The Maya,Quiche Cakchiquel, and Nahuatl terms signify “death.” The Tzental nametox, however, presents a difficulty not readily overcome in order to bring its signification into harmony with that of the others. Dr Seler does not attempt an explanation in his paper on the meaning of the day names, and in his subsequent article fails to reach any settled conclusion. Dr Brinton thinks it means something (as a human head) separated, sundered, cut off; “hencetox-oghbil, the ax or hatchet;q-tox, to split, divide, cut off.” In this, he holds, it agrees precisely with the Zapoteclana, which, he says, the Zapotec vocabulary renders “a separated thing, like a single syllable, word, or letter.” Dr Seler’s interpretation of the Zapotec name is wholly different, as he says that the most natural of the various significations given is, in his opinion, “hare;”pela-pillaana, “liebre animal;”too-quixe-pillaana, orpella-pillaana, “red para liebres.” I observe, however, that in Fuller’s vocabularygu-lanais “to steal.” Other significations are “name,” “flesh,” “secretly,” etc. The proper interpretation of the Zapotec name therefore appears to be very doubtful. In Cordova’s vocabulary, as given by Ternaux-Compans, “fleche” is given as themeaning ofquii-lana. In Tzotzilgtoxsignifies “to split, break off, break open, to chop.” In Maya we havetok; which, as a substantive, Perez explains by “pedernal, la sangria;” as a verb it signifies “to bleed, let blood.” In this dialecttoxdenotes “to drain, draw off liquor, spill, shed.”
The usual form of the Mexican symbol for this day is shown in plateLXV, 32. It is also a naked skull.
Like Dr Seler, I am compelled to admit that I can give no satisfactory suggestion as to the origin of the form shown in plateLXV, 27. According to ColonelMallery,232-1one sign among the Indians for knife is to “cut past the mouth with the raised right hand,” which, if figured, would probably bear some resemblance to the marks on thissymbol.232-2
THE SEVENTH DAY
Maya,manik; Tzental,moxic; Quiche-Cakchiquel,queh; Zapotec,china; Nahuatl,mazatl.
The symbol for this day, shown in plateLXVIII, 31, is without any change worthy of notice, the only difference observable being a greater or less degree of perfection with which it has been drawn by the aboriginal artist. It is found, however, in various combinations where it is subject to variation in form, if these in truth be intended for this symbol. As Brasseur de Bourbourg has suggested, this appears to have been taken from the partially closed hand, where the points of the fingers are brought round close to the tip of the thumb. Whether intended to show the palm or back outward is uncertain, though apparently the latter. The nearest approach I find among the Indian signs figured by Colonel Mallery is that denoting “little, diminutive, small.” But the position of the hand in the symbol appears to indicate the act of grasping; either signification giveschas the chief phonetic element of the Maya wordchanandchichan, signifying “little,” andchuc,chucah, “to grasp, to seize” (“alcanzar, asir, prender,” Perez); orchuuc, “to take, grasp, catch, seize,”Henderson.232-3It would seem from this that if the symbol is phonetic in any sense, the chief element of the word indicated isch. The supposition by Drs Schellhas and Seler that this symbol sometimes contains the elements of the sign of the four winds or wind cross, appears to be without any real foundation. The partial cross-shape figure in it is merely the conventional method of drawing the opening between the fingers, and would be just as correctly given as an oval as an invertedtau.
As this interpretation of the symbol is quite different from that given by other writers, some evidence to justify it is presented here.
Attention is called first to the symbol for “west,” shown in plateLXIV, 53. The lower portion is the recognized symbol forkin, “day” or “sun,” and the upper portion is beyond question themanikcharacter. Aschikinis the Maya name for “west,” we are justified in assuming that here at least thismaniksymbol is to be interpreted bychi, and is in some sense phonetic. Aschinais the Zapotec name of the day, and signifies “deer,” andchighis the Zotzil name for “deer,” it is probable that the symbol preserves the old name, while in Maya this old name has been supplanted for some reason, or through some linguistic process, bymanik.
Dr Seler calls attention to the character shown in plateLXVIII, 32, from Dres. 13c, which is repeated in the formLXVIII, 33, on plate 21b. That this refers to the deer figured below must be admitted, as this is clearly shown by the relation of the characters in the adjoining section to the animals figured below the text. Henderson (MS. Lexicon) givesxolkeas “the male deer.” If this could be considered substantially equivalent tocholcehin sound, ourmaniksymbol would retain its value. The objection to this supposition is that the figure is probably intended for a doe instead of the male. Brasseur giveschacyucas the name applied to a small species of deer. It is true these interpretations leave out the numeral prefix; nevertheless they serve to show that it is probable the true name is a word which retains the phonetic value of themaniksymbol as we have given it. Be the word what it may, two conclusions maybe relied on: First, that it alludes to the deer, and, second, that one of its chief phonetic elements isch. The character shown in plateLXVIII, 34, from Tro. 11*b, has probably the same element in its phonetic equivalent, for the Maya verbhax(haxnahi), “to twist or turn by rolling the thing between the palms of the hand; make cord used for muslin or cloth,” etc, gives substantially this phonetic equivalent.
The character shown, in plateLXVIII, 35, from Dres. 10b, is referred to by Seler as indicating an offering to the gods. In this he is possibly correct. Astich, in Maya, signifies an “offering,” “a sacrifice,” andtich(tichah) “to offer, present,” etc, it is probable that in this instance also themaniksymbol retainsch, as its chief phonetic element. However, I am inclined to believe it refers to the collecting or gathering of the ripened fruit. In this case the prefix must be understood as a determinative indicating piling or heaping up, putting together or in a heap, or storing away. Of the Maya words indicating this operation, we note the following:Cħicħ(cħicħah),hich, andhoch, each of which haschorcħas its chief consonant element. This interpretation agrees very well with the fact that here, as elsewhere, a date is to be taken into consideration. On such a date, at such a time, the cacao is to be gathered, is to be harvested and stored away. Students of these codices, in their attempts at interpretation, appear, as a general thing, to overlook the fact that almost every paragraph or group of glyphs in the script isaccompanied by a date which must be taken into consideration in the interpretation. The symbol which follows immediately to the right, shown in plateLXVIII, 36, may be renderedcacau, the “cacao,” as the duplicated comb-like character is Landa’sca.
As the Quiche-Cakchiquel, Zapotec, and Nahuatl names all signify “deer,” the difficulty in bringing all into harmony lies in the Maya and Tzental names. Dr Seler’s explanation is substantially as follows: That the wordmanikis from the rootmanormal, which signifies “to pass quickly;”manikmay therefore mean “that which passes by,” “that which is fleeting.” Dr Brinton gives the same explanation, and concludes that the deer is referred to metaphorically. In regard to the Tzental namemoxic, Dr Seler suggests that it may be founded on the rootmax, from which is derivedmaxan, “swift.” Dr Brinton objects to this derivation, asmaxanwith the signification “swift” is fromma, “not,” andxan, “slow, tardy,” and suggests that the name is probably a corruption of the Nahuatlmazatl. However, it may be stated in favor of Seler’s explanation, that Henderson givesmoxan, “quickly, shortly, without hindrance,” which is apparently another form ofmaxan. Dr Seler, however, concludes, from a study of the relations in which the character is found in the codices, that it is the symbol of offering, of sacrifice, the deer being esteemed the animal most appropriate for this purpose. Henderson saysmaniksignifies “calm,” evidently considering it to be formed ofma, negative, andik, “wind.”
It is evident, therefore, that the authorities are at sea in regard to the signification of the Maya and Tzental names. If the symbol is used, as Seler claims, to indicate offerings or sacrifices, this may be readily explained on the supposition that it is used ikonomatically because of the phonetic value I have assigned it; but otherwise it is difficult, if not impossible, to see any relation between the symbol and the name given it. So far I have found it used in no place, in combination, where the valuemanikwill give a satisfactory interpretation.
The following additional renderings are added here as tending to confirm the phonetic value assigned themanikcharacter.
The character shown in plateLXVIII, 37, is from Tro. 20*c, where it is repeated four times. The figures below the text show women in the act of sprinkling or pouring water on children. Whether this be considered a religious ceremony or not, it is probably intended to denote purifying or cleansing, and not baptism in the modern acceptation of the term. Aschoah, according to Perez, signifies “to cleanse, purify, scour,” andchoich“to clean, scour, or wash the face,” we have therein a quite appropriate interpretation of the symbol. The presence of the cardinal-point symbols renders it probable that the scene refers to a religious ceremony of some kind. The strict regard paid to the position relative to the cardinal points by savage and semicivilized people is too well known to require any proof here.
On Tro. 34*c two individuals are engaged in some work which we might suppose to be weaving but for the fact that there is no cord orthread to be seen. Over each is the character shown in plateLXVIII, 38. This is evidently an incompletemaniksymbol. As the supposed aspirate sign is present, it is probable thathooch, “to pare off, to scrape,” orhoochci, “to pare off, or scrape the hennequin,” will furnish an appropriate rendering.
THE EIGHTH DAY.
Maya,lamat; Tzental,lambat; Quiche-Cakchiquel,canelorkanel; Zapotec,lapaorlaba; Nahuatl,tochtli.
The various forms of the symbol of this day are shown in platesLXV, 33 to 37, andLXVIII, 39-40. That given by Landa is seen inLXV, 33; it is also found very frequently in the codices asLXV, 34. The three other forms found in the codices are shown inLXV, 35, 36, 37. The form on the Palenque Tablet is given inLXVIII, 40; that of the Tikal inscription is similar to Landa’s figure, if we are correct in our determination, of which there is some doubt, as the dots are effaced.
A comparison of plateLXV, 36, with the symbol of the dayAhau, shown inLXVIII, 5, leads at once to the impression that the former was derived from the latter, and that, if in any sense phonetic, the equivalents of the two are closely related. As will be shown hereafter, theAhausymbol haslas its chief phonetic element, if it be considered in any sense phonetic. We should therefore expect to find, in the verbal equivalent of thisLamatsymbol,las a prominent element. In the form shown atLXV, 33, it would seem that we see an effort to intimate by the character itself the presence of thebelement. That the symbol shown in plateLXV, 38, hasbas its chief element is shown elsewhere. It is possible, therefore, that thisLamatsymbol had no original signification purely its own, but that it is a composite derived from theAhau, and what I have termed thebsymbol. Without anticipating the proof that theAhausymbol haslas its chief phonetic element, I call attention to the fact that it is the upper character in the symbol forlikin, “east” (plateLXVIII, 12). As the lower character is the well-known symbol forkin, “day” or “sun,” we must assume that the value of ourAhau, in this case at least, isli. As another suggestion, I would add that it may have been derived from a figure used in some game. As the figure is usually divided into apartments or cells, most of which inclose a dot, the Maya wordlem,lemah, “meter, encajar, poner dentro, introducir” (Perez), would not inappropriately express the idea. Its use as a day symbol would then be simply for its phonetic value. This is based, of course, on the derivation. I suggest below. Nevertheless it must be admitted that these are but mere guesses.
In his article so frequently referred to Dr Seler has little to say in regard to the signification of the names of this day. He remarks that “the wordkanelis given by Ximenes—with what authority I know not—with the signification ‘rabbit,’ thus corresponding to the Mexican name for this character (Tochtli).” He says he is unable to interpret the wordslambatandlamat. In his subsequent article he interpretsthe Zapotec word by “to divide, to break into pieces,” and remarks “that the concept of something divided, broken in pieces, lies at the foundation of the delineation of this day character is also proved by the Maya hieroglyph for the same [see plateLXV, 33 and 36], in which something divided or broken up is undoubtedly indicated.” He adds that “perhaps also the termslambatandlamat, used in Tzental-Zoztzil and in Maya for the day character, and which are hardly explainable from the well-known Maya, are derived from the Zapotec wordlapa.” Dr Brinton’s explanation is as follows:
The Mayalamatis evidently a shortened form of the Tzentallambat, which is composed oflam, to sink into something soft (“hundirse in cosa blanda,” like light loam), andbat, the grain, the seed, and the name refers to the planting of the crops. The Quiche-Cakchiquelkanelis the name of the Guardian of the Sown Seed, probably fromkan, yellow, referring to the yellow grains or maize. The Zapoteclapaorlabameans a drop, and a crown or garland; here probably the latter, in reference to the products of the fields. The rabbit, in Nahuatl, is the symbol of ease and intoxication.
The Mayalamatis evidently a shortened form of the Tzentallambat, which is composed oflam, to sink into something soft (“hundirse in cosa blanda,” like light loam), andbat, the grain, the seed, and the name refers to the planting of the crops. The Quiche-Cakchiquelkanelis the name of the Guardian of the Sown Seed, probably fromkan, yellow, referring to the yellow grains or maize. The Zapoteclapaorlabameans a drop, and a crown or garland; here probably the latter, in reference to the products of the fields. The rabbit, in Nahuatl, is the symbol of ease and intoxication.
Thus, while Dr Brinton explains the name by “sinking in the mud or soil,” Brasseur explains it by “sinking in the water.”
It is much more likely that the Maya name is but a modification oflemba, which, as a verb, according to Henderson, signifies “to flash, to shine, etc;” and as a noun, according to Perez, “resplendor, brillo, relampago.” I have no Tzental vocabulary at hand, but observe that in the closely allied Zoztzil, “relampagear” is given as the equivalent oflemlaghet.
It is a coincidence worthy of a passing notice that in Hawaiianlamaandpu-lamasignify “a torch;”au-lama, “to give light;”malama, “light from the sun or moon;” in Samoan,lama, “the candle-nut tree, and a torch made of the nuts;” in Tonga,mama, “light, a flambeau;” New Zealand,rama, “candle, light;” Tahaitan,rama, “a torch.”
It is somewhat singular that Dr Brinton, after his interpretation of the Maya name of the fourth day heretofore given, should in this instance derivekanel—the Quiche-Cakchiquel name of this day—from lean, “yellow,” referring to the yellow grains of maize. However, it is quite probable that the reference to the color in this explanation is correct.
The traditions of the Indians in which the rabbit is brought into relation with the sun are well known. Dr Brinton has shown in his work on “American Hero Myths” that the Rabbit or Great Hare in the Algonquian myths symbolized “light.” He remarks in “The Lenape and their Legends” that—
The familiar Algonkin myth of the “Great Hare,” which I have elsewhere shown to be distinctively a myth of Light, was also well known to the Delawares, and they applied to this animal, also, the appellation of the “Grandfather of the Indians.” Like the fire, the hare was considered their ancestor, and in both instances the Light was meant, fire being its symbol, and the word for hare being identical with that of brightness andlight.236-1
The familiar Algonkin myth of the “Great Hare,” which I have elsewhere shown to be distinctively a myth of Light, was also well known to the Delawares, and they applied to this animal, also, the appellation of the “Grandfather of the Indians.” Like the fire, the hare was considered their ancestor, and in both instances the Light was meant, fire being its symbol, and the word for hare being identical with that of brightness andlight.236-1
It is possible that the Mexicans selected the rabbit for this day as a known symbol of light, thus bringing it into correspondence with the signification of the day names of the other calendars. The method by which Drs Seler and Brinton try to bring the Maya and Zapotec names into harmony with the Mexican appears to me to be in the wrong direction.
It is therefore quite probable, from what has been shown, that the Maya, Tzental, and Quiche-Cakchiquel names refer to light, flame, or the lightning flash, and that the rabbit was selected because of some mythological relation it was supposed to bear to the sun, orlight.237-1As this character is seldom found in combination, or used otherwise than as a day symbol, it is probable that the signification is represented by some other symbol, or is not referred to in the text.
THE NINTH DAY
Maya,muluc; Tzental,moloormulu; Quiche-Cakchiquel,toh; Zapotec,nizaorqueza; Nahuatl,atl.
There are but few and slight variations in the form of the symbol of this day. That given by Landa is shown in plateLXV, 39. The usual forms in the codices are seen at 40-42 of the same plate. Symbol 43, which is an important variation, is from the Cortesian Codex.
The addition of the little circle and loop in exampleLXV, 43, from the Cortesian Codex, is important, as it possibly indicates that the simple forms given in plateLXV, 40-42, are incomplete, and may be a slight indication of phoneticism. If the latter supposition be correct, it is probable that in this additional feature we find the element’cof the word. It is one of the characteristics of themaniksymbol, which, as heretofore shown, has, in some instances at least,chas one of its phonetic elements, whether considered truly phonetic or not.
This clue, if followed up, appears to furnish an explanation of some other characters in which the little circle and loops are found. For example, the character shown in plateLXV, 44 (Dres. 2 (45)b and c), apparently refers to the act of sewing or stitching indicated by the pictures below the text. As the circle and loops form an important part of the character, it is probable thatcorchis the chief or prominent element of the word. It is possible therefore, thatchuyah, “to sew,” or some derivative thereof, would be a proper rendering. The glyph shown in plateLXV, 45, from. Tro. 11*c is a duplication ofLXV, 44. As the appendix, as shown elsewhere, probably hasah,ha, orhalas its phonetic equivalent, we have, as the elements of the word represented by the whole glyph (omitting the prefix),ch’-ch’ah. Aschoch(chochah), Perez, andchooch(choochah), Henderson, signify “to loosen, untie, disunite, detach,” this may be the true interpretation of the symbol. The presence of the eye in a symbol appears, as a rule, to have no specialsignificance, as is shown by its presence sometimes in the symbols for the dayschicchanandoc. It is worthy of note that Dr Seler introduces into his manik series the character above shown as having some relation to and being possibly a variation of that symbol. Before attempting to trace the symbol of the day in its combinations with other characters, with a view of ascertaining its original signification, reference will be made to the signification of the day names in the different calendars.
The signification of the Nahuatl wordatlis water; the Zapotec names are also words for water.Tohilwas the name of the principal Quiche deity, and appears to have been the god of thunder and rain, and, as Seler presumes, was the representative in these nations of the Maya Chac and Mexican Tlaloc. According to Brasseur,tohsignifies “a heavy or sudden shower” or “thunder shower.” Drs Seler and Brinton both derive the Maya and Tzental names from the radicalmulormol, “to join together, collect, heap up,” and suppose it refers to the gathering together of the waters (that is, the clouds) in the heavens. This brings the signification of these two names into harmony with that of the names of the other calendars, and is probably a correct interpretation.
There are but few places where the symbol of this day is found in connection with other characters that I have been able to interpret entirely satisfactorily.
The compound character shown in plateLXV, 46, is from Dres. 16c. Judging by the evident parallelism of the groups in this division, this character is the symbol of the bird figured below the text. In this picture is easily recognized the head of the parrot. Asmoois the Maya name of a species of parrot (“the macaw”), and the circular character of the glyph is like the symbol formuluc, except that the circumscribing line is of dots, we may safely accept this term as the phonetic value. The fact that the small character is double, as is theoin the word, is another indication that the rendering is correct, and probably accounts for the circle being of dots. (See above underakbal.) This interpretation appears to be further supported by the form of the symbol for the monthMolas found at Dres. 47c. (See plateLXIV, 50.)
The hint furnished by these characters may enable us to gain a correct idea of the signification of the dotted line which surrounds one of the characters in each group of Dres. 7c, one of which is shown in plateLXV, 47. As the inclosing line of dots appears in some cases (but not all, for in some instancesooruappears to form the chief phonetic element) to indicatemoormu, it is possible that this glyph may be properly interpreted bymuhul, “a gift, dower, present,” or “to present a gift or dower, to offer a present.” Hence the whole character shown in plateLXV, 47, may be interpreted “to make a gift ofcacao.”238-1
The usual form of the Mexican symbol of this day is shown in plateLXV, 48, the leaf-like portion being blue in the original to indicate water. In regard to the origin of the character, Seler remarks: “If the Maya character agrees with the Mexican (atl), we must look upon it as a water vessel.” Yet after a number of illustrations and references he declares: “I by no means affirm that thevesselis expressed by the form of this character. The form seems to me to express rather the water drop.”
It is more likely that it represents a little circular hillock, seen from above, or something of that nature surrounded by a ring, as the significations given the Maya wordmulare “hillock, heap, mound, mountain, ants’ nest, etc.” However, if Henderson is correct in giving as one of its special meanings “out of many one,” its origin may readily be seen. That it was taken from some object which could be designated by the wordmulormolmay confidently be assumed. Hence the symbol is used for its phonetic value as a day character and not with any reference to the object represented. The little circle and loops seen in plateLXV, 43, from the Cortesian Codex 30b, are probably, as heretofore stated, introduced to give thecsound. Dr Brinton suggests that it represents one thing in another of the same kind, with a reference to collecting together or heaping up.
THE TENTH DAY
Maya,oc; Tzental,elab; Quiche-Cakchiquel,tzi; Zapotec,tella; Nahuatl,itzcuintli.
The symbol of this day as given by Landa is shown in plateLXV, 49. This is substantially the usual form found in the codices as given inLXV, 50, 51, 55, the first two being usual in the Troano, Cortesian, and Peresian codices, and 55 in the Dresden. In a few instances, as Tro. 12a and 12c, it assumes the face form 52. The face form shown at 54 occurs in the Dresden Codex, as do the variations seen at 53 and 56.
Dr Seler and Brasseur contend that the forms shown in plateLXV, 52 and 54, make it evident that the broken line, which is the chief characteristic of the glyph, is intended to represent, or rather is derived from, the ear of the dog. This, Seler says, is frequently represented in the Mexican codices, and also many times in the Maya manuscripts, with the tip of the ear torn away. To illustrate this, he presents several figures of dog’s heads, one of which is shown in our plateLXV,57.239-1
There would seem to be some foundation for this supposition, yet there are difficulties in the way of its acceptance which appear unsurmountable. The first of these is that it furnishes no explanation or clue to the relation between the symbol and the Maya or Tzental name. Second, it does not appear to have been used in any instance as the symbol of the dog, which seems to be a fatal objection, if it is assumed to be merely ideographic. Third, it renders only more difficult any explanation of the character shown in plateLXV, 58, which is of suchfrequent occurrence in all the codices. If a satisfactory interpretation of this glyph could be found, it would assist greatly in deciphering the codices. I am rather inclined to think it is a sign of repetition—as “repeat thrice.” If there were some word forearwhich could be connected withocorelab, then we might suppose the symbol to be used phonetically. However, as this can not be found, some other explanation must be sought.
The Nahuatl and Quiche-Cakchiquel names are the ordinary terms in these languages for “dog,” and the Mexican symbol for the day is the head of a dog. Dr Seler does not attempt to explain the Tzental name, and merely suggests that the Maya wordoc, “foot, footprint, track,” and as a verb, “to enter, to go into,” may have been adopted by the priests as expressing a prominent characteristic of the dog. Dr Brinton is inclined to derive the nameocfrom the verbocol,oclah, “to steal, to rob,” rather than fromocol, “to enter,” supposing it to have been selected as indicative of another characteristic of the dog. This he believes also to be the signification of the Tzental termelab. This it seems to me is again reversing the order, unless we assume that the Quichetziand Mexicanitzcuintliare the olderterms.240-1
Dr Brinton says that according to Bartolomé de Pisa the Zapotec name signifies “dog,” though he does not find it with this meaning in the vocabularies. Dr Seler, however, obtains the signification “dog” for this name by supposing that it is derived fromtee-lao, “mouth downward,” referring to some myth of a dog representing the lightning, or lightning demon, as falling or plunging downward from the sky in certain figures of the codices. This, Dr Brinton says, “seems strained,” which may also be said of the explanations of the Maya name.
The symbol of the dog as found in the Dresden Codex (13c), and as admitted by Dr Seler, is shown in plateLXV, 59. The same symbol is found in the same codex, 21b. Now, I think it possible to show, with a considerable degree of certainty, what is the chief phonetic element of this symbol, at least of its first or left-hand character. In plateLXV, 60, from Tro. 22*a, is seen (omitting the prefix) substantially the symbol that Landa interpretsle, “the lasso,” and also “to lasso.” As the lower character is hise, we may take for granted that the upper portion indicates thelsound; further evidence of this, however, will be presented under the twentieth day. As this is followed by the symbol seen in plateLXV, 61, which refers to the “turkey” (kutz orcuitz),240-2and the figure below the text shows a snared turkey, the interpretation appears to be appropriate. Turning now to Dres. 44 (l)c, we notice in the picture below the text the compound glyph shown in plateLXV, 62.Immediately below it is the figure of a fish, which the two individuals represented are trying to catch in a seine. As this contains the same elements as 61 (plateLXV), reversed, the phonetic value should betz’c. Referring to Perez’ Lexicon, we find thattzacis a fish “so named;” Brasseur says, “a little fish resembling a sardine which inhabits the senotes.”
Now these givetz’as the chief phonetic element of the left character of the dog symbol (LXV, 59), which is also the consonant element of the name for “dog” (tzi) in the Tzental, Cakchiquel, and most of the Maya dialects, though not of the Maya proper. This furnishes a consistent and appropriate rendering of the left portion of the symbol. Although the symbol for the mouthKankin(LXV, 63) presents a difficulty, it is possible some other name was applied to this month of whichtzwas a leading element; Yaxkin is sometimes written with the prefixDze.
Asochis the Maya name for the “male fox,” andoquilorocquilis the name in Tzental and Tzotzil for “wolf,” it is possible the Maya name may have been derived from one of these. Moreover, it is worthy of notice that “foot” in Tzotzil is writtenoquilas well asoc.
I was at first inclined to adopt Dr Seler’s suggestion that the distinguishing feature of the symbol might have been taken from the dog’s ears as given in the codices. However, a more thorough examination leads me to doubt this suggestion. The little black clots or blocks on the bent line appear here, as in thechicchansymbol, to be the most prominent and essential elements of the symbol. As they do not appear in the ear figures, it seems impossible that the character should have been derived from these figures. It is more likely that they represent the knots on a string or cord; and this supposition appears to be sustained by the fact that the Maya wordhok, according to Brasseur, signifies “a knot, hook;” andhokal“to be knotted, formed of knots.” Perez says “hok, el lazo formado para anudar;” “hokol, lazarse para anudarse la cuerda.” If this supposition be correct, the symbol is used for the day because of its phonetic value, and without any reference to its original signification.
THE ELEVENTH DAY
Maya,chuen; Tzental,batz; Quiche-Cakchiquel,batz; Zapotec,loo; Nahuatl,ozomatli.
The symbol of this day is subject to few and slight variations. The form given by Landa, which is also quite common in most of the codices, especially Tro. and Cort., is shown in plateLXV, 64. Slight variants are shown inLXV, 65, 66, and 67. An exceptional and peculiar form from Dres. 32b is seen inLXV, 68. A form from the Perez codex in which an eye is introduced is given atLXV, 69. The character on the Palenque Tablet and some other inscriptions, which is supposed to be the symbol of this day, is shown atLXV, 70, but the proof that it is, in these cases, the day symbol is not so conclusive as that in regard toother day symbols, as no method of bringing it into relation with the other time symbols of the inscriptions has been found.
A closely corresponding form is seen in the symbol for the mouthTzecas found in the Dres. Codex (see plateLXV, 71). If the glyphs are in any sense phonetic, it is probable that in the comb-like appendage to this symbol (Landa’sca) we have the’c(’k) sound, and that the variation in the main character from the usualchuenglyph (in having the bounding line open and turned right and left at the top) is indicative of the variation in the phonetic value. The explanation of the symbol, which replaces the eye in the dog or panther like figure in Tro. 32c and 33c, and is alluded to by Dr Seler in this connection (LXVI, 1), has already been given under the discussion of the “Third Day.” There, as I have shown, it probably indicates the Maya wordchoco, “heat, warmth,” alluding to the hot, dry season which parches and shrivels up the growing corn. This explanation retains the phonetic value of the symbol, and it appears also to be entirely consistent with the figures found in connection with it.
There is another symbol closely allied in form (plateLXVI, 2) which is of frequent occurrence in the codices, usually, and, in fact, almost exclusively, in the picture spaces, and apparently bearing some relation to the offerings. It is often in groups, and is many times repeated in groups on the so-called “title pages” of the Tro. and Cort. manuscripts. It, however, frequently occurs in the form seen in the dog’s eye (LXVI, 1), grouped as the other (Dres., 25a, etc) and undoubtedly used as an equivalent, as we find numerals attached as with the other form. The only distinction, as will be observed, is the presence or absence of the little divided square at the top. As that with the divided square is more detailed, it is probably the correct form, and, if so, can not be distinguished from theChuensymbol.
On Dres. 29b, 30b, and 31b the symbol shown in plateLXVI, 3, is found in each group of characters. This bears a close resemblance to the symbol for the monthTzec, but varies in some important respects, as will be seen by comparison. The appendix, as I am inclined to believe, gives theah,ha, orhalsound, and shows that it is a verb or word indicating action. As we find in each group the figure or symbol of a food animal, the whole series may be supposed to relate to feasts, or eating, or the collection of food. This suggestion is strengthened by the fact that thekanor maize symbol is placed in connection with the animal figures. It is possible, therefore, that this character may be correctly rendered bytziclim(tziclimtah), “to distribute, share, divide among many.” As it is followed in each case by a cardinal-point symbol, and the symbol of the double tongued or toothed deity, probably Itzamna, is found in each group, it is probable that the text relates to religious festivals. This interpretation, however, is a mere suggestion or guess, which as yet I am unable to fortify by any other evidence than the resemblance of the main character to theTzecsymbol.