Part 1

Produced by Richard Tonsing, Julia Miller, and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.)

PUBLICATIONS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA

SERIES IN

Philology Literature and Archæology

VOL. III NO. 2

A PRIMER OF MAYAN HIEROGLYPHICS

BY

DANIEL G. BRINTON, A.M., M.D., LL.D., Sc.D.

PROFESSOR OF AMERICAN ARCHÆOLOGY AND LINGUISTICS IN THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA, PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE, ETC., ETC.

“Hieroglyphics old, Which sages and keen-eyed astrologers, Then living on the earth, with labouring thought, Won from the gaze of many centuries.”

—KEATS

GINN & COMPANY Agents for United States, Canada, and England 7–13 Tremont Place, Boston, U.S.A.

MAX NIEMEYER Agent for the Continent of Europe Halle, a S., Germany

PREFACE.

In the following pages I have endeavored with the greatest brevity to supply the learner with the elements necessary for a study of the native hieroglyphic writing of Central America. The material is already so ample that in many directions I have been obliged to refer to it, rather than to summarize it. This will explain various omissions which may be noted by advanced scholars; but they will not, I believe, diminish the usefulness of the work as an elementary treatise.

In conclusion I would express my thanks to the officers of the Bureau of American Ethnology, Washington, and of the Peabody Museum of Archæology, Cambridge, for various facilities they have obligingly furnished me.

CONTENTS.

_I. Introductory._ PAGE

1. GENERAL CHARACTER OF MAYAN HIEROGLYPHICS, 9

2. THE MAYAN MANUSCRIPTS OR “CODICES,” 11

3. THEORIES OF INTERPRETATION. “ALPHABETS” AND “KEYS,” 13

_II. The Mathematical Elements._

1. THE CODICES AS TIME-COUNTS, 18

2. THE MAYAN NUMERAL SYSTEM, 19

3. NUMERICAL AND ALLIED SIGNS, 19

4. THE RHETORICAL AND SYMBOLIC USE OF NUMBERS, 24

5. THE MAYAN METHODS OF COUNTING TIME, 25

6. THE CALCULATIONS IN THE CODICES, 29

7. RULES FOR TRACING THE TONALAMATL, OR RITUAL CALENDAR, 31

8. THE CODICES AS ASTRONOMICAL TREATISES, 32

9. ASTRONOMICAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE ANCIENT MAYAS, 34

_III. The Pictorial Elements._

1. THE RELIGION OF THE ANCIENT MAYAS, 37

Itzamna—Cuculcan—Kin ich—Other Gods—The Cardinal Points—The Good Gods—The Gods of Evil—The Conflict of the Gods.

2. THE COSMOGONY OF THE MAYAS, 46

3. THE COSMICAL CONCEPTIONS OF THE MAYAS, 47

4. PICTORIAL REPRESENTATIONS OF DIVINITIES, 50

Representations of Itzamna—Of Cuculcan—Of Kin ich—Of Xaman Ek, the Pole Star—Of the Planet Venus—Of Ghanan, God of Growth—Of the Serpent Goddess—of Xmucane—Of Ah puch, God of Death—Of the God of War—Of Ek-Ahau and other Black Gods.

5. THE MAYA PRIESTHOOD, 68

6. FANCIFUL ANALOGIES, 69

7. TOTAL NUMBER OF REPRESENTATIONS, 70

8. FIGURES OF QUADRUPEDS, 71

9. FIGURES OF BIRDS, 72

10. FIGURES OF REPTILES, 74

11. OCCUPATIONS AND CEREMONIES, 76

_IV. The Graphic Elements._

1. THE DIRECTION IN WHICH THE GLYPHS ARE TO BE READ, 78

2. COMPOSITION OF THE GLYPHS, 81

3. THE PROPER METHOD OF STUDYING GLYPHS, 81

4. AN ANALYSIS OF VARIOUS GRAPHIC ELEMENTS, 82

The Hand—The Eye and Similar Figures—The “Spectacles”—The Ear—Crescentic Signs—Sun and Moon Signs—Supposed Variations of the Sun Sign—The Knife Signs—The “Fish and Oyster” Sign—The Sacred Food Offerings—The _Ben ik_ and Other Signs—The Drum Signs—The Yax and Other Feather Signs—The Cross-hatched Signs—Some Linear Signs and Dots—Linear Prefixes—The “Cloud-balls” and the “Cork-screw Curl”—Signs for Union—The “Tree of Life”—The “Machete” and Similar Signs—Supposed Bird Signs—The “Crotalean Curve”—Objects Held in the Hand—The Aspersorium, the Atlatl and the Mimosa—The “Constellation Band”—The Signs for the Cardinal Points—The Directive Signs—The “Cuceb.”

5. THE HIEROGLYPHS OF THE DAYS, 109

6. THE HIEROGLYPHS OF THE MONTHS, 116

7. THE HIEROGLYPHS OF THE DEITIES, 121

_V. Specimens of Texts._

1. THE GOD OF TIME BRINGS IN THE DEAD YEAR. DRESDEN CODEX, 127

2. SACRIFICE AT THE CLOSE OF A YEAR. DRESDEN CODEX, 128

3. END OF ONE AND BEGINNING OF ANOTHER TIME PERIOD. CORTESIAN CODEX, 129

4. THE GOD OF GROWTH AND THE GOD OF DEATH. CORTESIAN CODEX, 131

5. AUGURIES FROM THE NORTH STAR. CORTESIAN CODEX, 131

6. ITZAMNA, THE SERPENT GODDESS, AND KIN ICH. DRESDEN CODEX, 132

7. THE GODS OF DEATH, OF THE SUN, AND OF WAR. DRESDEN CODEX, 132

8. CUCULCAN MAKES NEW FIRE. CODEX TROANO, 133

9. THE GODS OF DEATH, OF GROWTH, AND OF THE NORTH STAR. DRESDEN CODEX, 133

10. THE GOD OF GROWTH, OF THE SUN, AND OF THE EAST. DRESDEN CODEX, 134

11. AN INSCRIPTION FROM KABAH, 135

12. LINEAR INSCRIPTION FROM YUCATAN, 136

13. THE “INITIAL SERIES” FROM THE TABLET OF THE CROSS, PALENQUE, 137

14. INSCRIPTION ON THE “TAPIR TABLET,” CHIAPAS, 138

15. INSCRIPTION ON A TABLET FROM TONINÁ, CHIAPAS, 139

16. INSCRIPTION ON AN AMULET FROM OCOCINGO, CHIAPAS, 139

17. INSCRIPTION ON A VASE FROM A QUICHE TOMB, GUATEMALA, 140

A PRIMER OF MAYAN HIEROGLYPHICS.

I. Introductory.

The explorations among the ruined cities of Central America undertaken of late years by various individuals and institutions in the United States and Europe, and the important collections of casts, tracings and photographs from those sites now on view in many of the great museums of the world, are sure to stimulate inquiry into the meaning of the hieroglyphs which constitute so striking a feature on these monuments.

Within the last decade decided advances have been made toward an interpretation of this curious writing; but the results of such studies are widely scattered and not readily accessible to American students. For these reasons I propose, in the present essay, to sum up briefly what seem to me to be the most solid gains in this direction; and to add from my own studies additional suggestions toward the decipherment of these unique records of aboriginal American civilization.

1. _General Character of Mayan Hieroglyphs._

One and the same hieroglyphic system is found on remains from Yucatan, Tabasco, Chiapas, Guatemala, and Western Honduras; in other words, in all Central American regions occupied at the Conquest by tribes of the Mayan linguistic stock.[1] It has not been shown to prevail among the Huastecan branch of that stock, which occupied the valley of the river Panuco, north of Vera Cruz; and, on the other hand, it has not been discovered among the remains of any tribe not of Mayan affinities. The Mexican manuscripts offer, indeed, a valuable ancillary study. They present analogies and reveal the early form of many conventionalized figures; but to take them as interpreters of Mayan graphography, as many have done, is a fatal error of method. In general character and appearance the Mayan is markedly different from the Mexican writing, presenting a much more developed style and method.

Although the graphic elements preserved in the manuscripts and on the monuments vary considerably among themselves, these divergencies are not so great but that a primitive identity of elements is demonstrable in them all. The characters engraved on stone or wood, or painted on paper or pottery, differ only as we might expect from the variation in the material or the period, and in the skill or fancy of the artist.

The simple elements of the writing are not exceedingly numerous. There seems an endless variety in the glyphs or characters; but this is because they are composite in formation, made up of a number of radicals, variously arranged; as with the twenty-six letters of our alphabet we form thousands of words of diverse significations. If we positively knew the meaning or meanings (for, like words, they often have several different meanings) of a hundred or so of these simple elements, none of the inscriptions could conceal any longer from us the general tenor of its contents.[2]

It will readily be understood that the composite characters may be indefinitely numerous. Mr. Holden found that in all the monuments portrayed in Stephen’s _Travels in Central America_ there are about fifteen hundred;[3] and Mr. Maudslay has informed me that according to his estimate there are in the Dresden Codex about seven hundred.

Each separate group of characters is called a “glyph,” or, by the French writers, a “katun,” the latter a Maya word applied to objects arranged in rows, as soldiers, letters, years, cycles, etc. As the glyphs often have rounded outlines, like the cross-section of a pebble, the Mayan script has been sometimes called “calculiform writing” (Latin, _calculus_, a pebble).

2. _The Mayan Manuscripts or “Codices.”_

The hieroglyphic writing is preserved to us on two classes of remains—painted on sheets of native paper, about ten inches wide and of any desired length, which were inscribed on both sides and folded in the manner of a screen; and engraved or painted on stone, wood, pottery, or plaster.[4]

Of the former only four examples remain, none of them perfect. They have all been published with great care, some of them in several editions. They are usually spoken of as “codices” under the following names: the _Codex Troanus_ and the _Codex Cortesianus_, probably parts of the same book, the original of which is at Madrid; the _Codex Peresianus_, which is in Paris; and the _Codex Dresdensis_, in Dresden. The two former and the two latter resemble each other more closely than they do either member of the other pair. There are reasons to believe that the two first mentioned were written in central Yucatan, and the last two in or near Tabasco.[5] This district and that of Chiapas, adjacent to it on the south, was occupied at the time of the Conquest by the Tzental-Zotzil branch of the Mayan stock, who spoke a dialect very close to the pure Maya of Yucatan; they were the descendants of the builders of the imposing cities of Palenque, Ococingo, Toniná and others, and we know that their culture, mythology, and ritual were almost identical with those of the Mayas. I shall treat of them, therefore, as practically one people.

Although Lord Kingsborough had included the Dresden Codex in his huge work on “_Mexican Antiquities_,” and the _Codex Troanus_ had been published with close fidelity by the French government in 1869, it cannot be said that the serious study of the Mayan hieroglyphs dates earlier than the faithful edition of the Dresden Codex, issued in 1880 under the supervision of Dr. E. W. Förstemann, librarian-in-chief of the Royal Library of Saxony.

The most important studies of the codices have been published in Germany. Besides the excellent writings of Dr. Förstemann himself, those by Dr. P. Schellhas and Dr. E. Seler, of Berlin, are of great utility and will be frequently referred to in these pages. In France, Professor Leon de Rosny, the competent editor of the _Codex Peresianus_, the Count de Charencey, and M. A. Pousse, whose early death was a severe loss to this branch of research, deserve especial mention. In England no one has paid much attention to it but Mr. Alfred P. Maudslay, whose investigations have yielded valuable results, forerunners of others of the first importance. The earlier speculations of Bollaert are wholly fanciful. In our own country, the mathematical portions of the essays of Professor Cyrus Thomas are worthy of the highest praise; and useful suggestions can be found in Charles Rau’s article on the inscriptions of Palenque, and in Edward S. Holden’s paper on Central American picture-writing.[6]

3. _Theories of Interpretation._

The theories which have been advanced as to the method of interpreting the Mayan hieroglyphs may be divided into those which regard them as ideographic, as phonetic, or as mixed. The German writers, Förstemann, Schellhas, and Seler, have maintained that they are mainly or wholly ideographic; the French school, headed by the Abbé Brasseur, de Rosny, and de Charencey, have regarded them as largely phonetic, in which they have been followed in the United States by Professor Cyrus Thomas, Dr. Cresson, Dr. Le Plongeon, and others.

The intermediate position, which I have defended, is that while chiefly ideographic, they are occasionally phonetic, in the same manner as are confessedly the Aztec picture-writings. In these we constantly meet with delineations of objects which are not to be understood as conveying the idea of the object itself, but merely as representing the sound of its name, either in whole or in part; just as in our familiar “rebus writing,” or in the “chanting arms” of European heraldry. I have applied to this the term “ikonomatic writing,” and have explained it so fully, as it is found in the Mexican manuscripts, in my “_Essays of an Americanist_,” that I need not enter upon it further in this connection, but would refer the reader to what I have there written.[7]

The attempt to frame a real alphabet, by means of which the hieroglyphs could be read phonetically, has been made by various writers.

The first is that preserved in the work of Bishop Landa. It has failed to be of much use to modern investigators, but it has peculiar value as evidence of two facts; first, that a native scribe was able to give a written character for an unfamiliar sound, one without meaning, like that of the letters of the Spanish alphabet; and, secondly, that the characters he employed for this purpose were those used in the native manuscripts. This is proof that some sort of phonetic writing was not unknown.[8]

This alphabet was extended by the Abbé Brasseur, and especially by de Rosny, who, in 1883, defined twenty-nine letters, with numerous variants from the Codices and inscriptions.[9]

Two years later, Dr. A. Le Plongeon published an “Ancient Maya Hieratic Alphabet according to Mural Inscriptions,” containing twenty-three letters, with variants. This he applied to the translating of certain inscriptions, but added nothing to corroborate the correctness of the interpretations. Each sign, he believed, stood for a definite letter.[10]

Another student who devoted several years to an attempt to reduce the hieroglyphs to an alphabetic form was the late Dr. Hilborne T. Cresson. His theory was that the glyphs stood for the names of pictures worn down to a single phonetic element, alphabetic or syllabic. This element he conceived was consonantal, to be read with any vowel, either prefixed or suffixed; and the consonant was permutable with any of its class, as a lingual, palatal, etc. On this basis he submitted, shortly before his death in 1894, to the American Association for the Advancement of Science several translations from the Codex Troano. Previous to this, in 1892, he had announced his method in the journal “_Science_,” and claimed that he had worked it out ten years before.[11]

An alphabet of twenty-seven characters, with variants, which the author considered in every way complete, was published in 1888, by F. A. de la Rochefoucauld.[12] By means of it he offered a volume of interlinear translations from the inscriptions and codices! They are in the highest degree fanciful, and can have little interest other than as a warning against the intellectual aberrations to which students of these ancient mysteries seem peculiarly prone.

In 1892 Professor Cyrus Thomas, of the Bureau of Ethnology, announced with considerable emphasis that he had discovered the “key” to the Mayan hieroglyphs; and in July, 1893, published a detailed description and applications of it.[13] In theory, it is the same as Dr. Cresson’s, that is, that the elements of the glyphs were employed as true phonetic elements, or letters. In the article referred to he gives the characters for the following letters of the Maya alphabet: _b_, _c_, _c’_, _dz_, _ch_, _h_, _i_, _k_, _l_, _m_, _n_, _o_, _p_, _pp_, _t_, _th_, _tz_, _x_, _v_, _z_; also for a large number of syllabic sounds which he claimed to have recognized. With such an apparatus, if it had any value, one would expect to reach prompt and important results; but, aside from the doubtful character of many of his analyses, the fact that this “key” has wholly failed to add any tangible, valuable addition to our knowledge of the inscriptions is enough to show its uselessness; and the same may be said of all the attempts mentioned.

* * * * *

A slight inspection of the Maya manuscripts and of almost any of the inscriptions will satisfy the observer that they are made up of three classes of objects or elements:—

1. Arithmetical signs, numerals, and numerical computations,

2. Pictures or figures of men, animals, or fantastic beings, of ceremonies or transactions, and of objects of art or utility; and,

3. Simple or composite characters, plainly intended for graphic elements according to some system for the preservation of knowledge.

I shall refer to these as, (1) the Mathematical Elements, (2) the Pictorial Elements, and (3) the Graphic Elements of the Mayan hieroglyphic writing.

Footnote 1:

In accordance with usage in this study, I employ the adjective “Mayan” when speaking of the whole stock, and confine “Maya,” in an adjectival sense, to that branch of the stock resident in Yucatan.

Footnote 2:

This is also the opinion of Dr. Seler: “Es ist eine verhältnissmässig geringe Zahl von Bildern und Grundelementen, die in diesen Schriftzeichen wiederkehren.” _Verhand. Berliner Anthrop. Gesell._, 1887, S. 231.

Footnote 3:

“Studies in Central American Picture Writing,” in _First An. Rep. of the Bureau of Ethnology_, p. 210.

Footnote 4:

Among those who have especially merited the thanks of archæologists in collecting material for the study of the monuments are M. Désiré Charnay, Mr. A. P. Maudslay, Prof. F. W. Putnam; and I shall hope to add Dr. Le Plongeon, when he makes public his material.

Footnote 5:

The _Peresianus_ has been supposed by some to have been written in Guatemala; by others, both it and the _Dresdensis_ have been considered of Tzental origin. See Pousse, in _Arch. de la Soc. Amer._, 1885, p. 126, and Paul Perrin, “Les Annotations Européennes du Codex Peresianus,” in the same, June, 1887, p. 87 sqq. Förstemann (_Entziff._ III.) gives several cogent reasons for believing that the Dresdensis was written in or near Palenque.

Footnote 6:

The four Codices can be obtained by placing an order with one of the leading importers of foreign books in New York City. The four cost about one hundred dollars. The study of the German writers is indispensable. The contributions of Dr. Schellhas and Dr. Seler will be found in the numbers of the Berlin _Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, 1886 and later. Dr. Förstemann has likewise published in the _Zeitschrift_, 1891, and also in the _Centralblatt für Bibliothekwesen_, in which remote quarter some of his most thoughtful contributions have appeared; and in the Proceedings of the International Congress of Americanists. Four of his articles bear the general title, “Zur Entzifferung der Mayahandschriften,” I, II, III, IV. I refer to them by these numbers. The articles of Professor Thomas, Professor Rau, and Mr. Holden are contained in the annual reports of the Bureau of Ethnology, Washington, where they can be readily consulted by American students.

Footnote 7:

The essays to which I particularly refer are: “The Phonetic Elements in the Graphic Systems of the Mayas and Mexicans;” “The Ikonomatic Method of Phonetic Writing;” “The Writing and Records of the Ancient Mayas;” and “The Books of Chilan Balam.” All these are reprinted in my _Essays of an Americanist_, published by Porter & Coates, Philadelphia, 1890. As to how far this or any phonetic system is consistent with the known differences of dialects in the Mayan stock, is a question which space does not permit me to enter upon. I can only say that the signification seems to me to have been fixed in the Maya-Tzental district, and thence carried to the Chortis, Quiches, etc.

Footnote 8:

The first copy of Landa’s alphabet published in the United States was by myself in the _American Historical Magazine_, 1870. Twenty years later, 1890, in my _Essays of an Americanist_, p. 242, I reproduced a photographic fac-simile of it from the original MS. Though not without considerable value in certain directions, I do not think it worth while to dwell upon it here.

Bishop Landa’s important work, _Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatan_, written about 1570, must be carefully read by every student on this branch. It has been twice published, first by the Abbé Brasseur, at Paris, 1864, and more fully at Madrid, under the competent editorship of Juan de Dios de la Rada y Delgado, in 1884. On the relative merits of the two editions, see my “Critical Remarks on the Editions of Diego de Landa’s Writings,” in the _Proceedings_ of the American Philosophical Society, 1887.

Footnote 9:

The Abbé Brasseur’s whimsical speculations are in his introduction to the Codex Troano, published by the French government in 1869. The chief work of de Rosny on the subject is his _Essai sur le Déchiffrement de l’Ecriture Hiératique de l’Amérique Centrale_, folio, Paris, 1876. He fully recognizes, however, that there are also ideographic and pictorial characters as well as phonetic.

Footnote 10:

Dr. Le Plongeon’s “Alphabet” was published in the Supplement to the _Scientific American_, New York, for January, 1885.

Footnote 11:

At the time of his unexpected death, Dr. Cresson had left with me a full exposition of his theory. His enthusiasm was unbounded, and the sacrifices he had made in the pursuit of archæological science merit for his memory a kindly recognition among students of this subject.

Footnote 12:

_Palenqué et la Civilisation Maya_ (Paris, 1888). The “Alphabet phonétique des anciens Mayas” is on pp. 10 sqq. The author was at one time attached to the French legation in Guatemala.

Footnote 13:

In the _American Anthropologist_, Washington, D. C.

II. The Mathematical Elements.