Chapter 2

The character immediately below the one above mentioned and belonging to the same series is shown in plate LXIV, 14. It may be interpreted _mamachah_, "to make flat by repeated strokes." The phonetic value of the parts is obtained in this way. The upper character with two wings is Landa's _ma_, except that the circular wings contain the lines or strokes which the bishop has omitted, and which appear to indicate the _m_ sound and are observed in the _Imix_ symbol. Colonel Mallery, comparing this with the sign of negation made by the Indians and that of the Egyptians given by Champollion (our plate LXIV, 15), concludes that it is derived from the symmetrically extended arms with the hands curved slightly downward. This will furnish an explanation of the strokes in the terminal circles. The left of the two lower characters is almost identical with the symbol for the month _Mac_ (plate LXIV, 4), omitting the _ca_ glyph. The lower right-hand character is similar to the symbol for the month _Chuen_. We thus obtain legitimately the sounds _ma ma-ch_, whether we consider the parts truly phonetic or only ikonomatic.

For further illustration of the use of this symbol and evidence of phoneticism, the reader is referred to the article in the _American Anthropologist_ above mentioned.

The fact that a symbol is used to denote a given Maya day does not prove, supposing it to be in any sense phonetic, that the Maya name gives the original equivalent. It may have been adopted to represent the older name in the Tzental, or borrowed from the Zapotec calendar and retained in the Maya calendar for the new name given in that tongue. However, the symbol for this first day, which has substantially the same name in the Maya and Tzental, appears to represent the name in these languages and to be in some degree phonetic, _m_ being the chief phonetic element represented by it. The crosshatching in the little circle at the top, seen in some of the older forms found in the inscriptions, may indicate, as will later be seen, the _x_ or _ch_ sound, thus giving precisely the radical _m-x_.

It may be said, in reference to the signification of the names of the day in different dialects, that no settled or entirely satisfactory conclusion has been reached in regard to either.

The Cakchiquel word _imox_ is translated by the grammarian Ximenes as "swordfish," thus corresponding with the usual interpretation of the Mexican _cipactli_. Dr Seler thinks, however, that the Maya names were derived, as above stated, from _im_. Nevertheless he concludes that the primitive signification of both the Maya and Mexican symbols is the earth, "who brings forth all things from her bosom and takes all living things again into it." If we may judge from its use, there is no doubt that the Mexican _cipactli_ figure is a symbol of the earth or underworld. The usual form of the day symbol in the Mexican codices is shown in plate LXIV, 16, and more elaborately in plate LXIV, 17. As proof that it indicates the earth or underworld, there is shown on plate 73 of the Borgian Codex an individual, whose heart has been torn from his breast, plunging downward through the open jaws of the monster into the shades or earth below. On plate 76 of the same codex, the extended jaws open upward, and into them a number of persons are marching in regular order. These apparently represent the thirteen months of the sacred year. One has passed on and disappeared from view, and the other twelve are following with bowed heads. It would seem from these to be not only symbolic of the earth or hades, but also to have some relation to time.

For positive proof that it is sometimes used to denote the earth, or that from which vegetation comes, it is only necessary to refer to the lower right-hand figure of plate 12, Borgian Codex. Here is Tlaloc sending down rain upon the earth, from which the enlivened plants are springing forth and expanding into leaf and blossom. The earth, on which they stand and from which they arise, is represented by the figure of the mythical _Cipactli_.

It is quite probable that the monster on plates 4 and 5 of the Dresden Codex, which appears to be of the same genus, is a time symbol, and also that on plate 74 of the same codex. It is therefore more than likely that the animal indicated by the Mexican name of the day is mythical, represented according to locality by some known animal which seems to indicate best the mythical conception. Some figures evidently refer to the alligator, and others apparently to the iguana; that on plates 4 and 5 of the Dresden Codex is purely mythical, but contains reptilian characteristics.

Dr Brinton, probably influenced to some extent by the apparent signification of the Nahuatl name and symbol, explains the other names as follows:

This leads me to identify it [the Maya name] with, the Maya _mex_ or _meex_, which is the name of a fish (the "pez arana," "un pescado que tiene muchos brazos"), probably so called from another meaning of _mex_, "the beard." ... This identification brings this day name into direct relation to the Zapotec and Nahuatl names. In the former, _chiylla_, sometimes given as _pi-chilla_, is apparently from _bi-chilla-beo_, water lizard, and Nahuatl _cipactli_ certainly means some fish or fish-like animal--a swordfish, alligator, or the like, though exactly which is not certain, and probably the reference with them was altogether mythical.

Dr Seler, in his subsequent paper, gives the following explanation of the Zapotec name _chilla_ or _chijlla_:

For this I find in the lexicon three principal meanings: One is the cubical bean (wurfel bohne). "Pichijlla, frisolillos o havas con que echan las suertes los sortilegos" [beans used by the sorcerers in casting lots or telling fortunes]; another meaning is "the ridge" (pichijlla, lechijlla, chijllatani, loma o cordillera de sierra); another is "the crocodile" (cocodrillo, lagarto grande de agua); and another "swordfish" (pella-pichijlla-tao, espadarte pescado). Finally, we have chilla-tao, "the great Chilla," given again as one of the names of the highest being. Here it seems to me that the signification "crocodile" is the original one, and thus far suitable. For the manner in which the first day character is delineated in Mexican and Zapotec picture writing [our plate LXIV, 16] shows undoubtedly the head of the crocodile with the movable snapping upper jaw, which is so characteristic of the animal.

Attention is called to the apparently closely related word as given by Perez--_mech_, _ixmech_, "lagartija."

It will not be out of place here to refer to a superstition pervading the islands of the Pacific ocean, which seems strangely coincident with the conception of the physical symbol of this day. This is a mythological monster known in some sections by the name _Taniwha_, and in others as _moko_ or _mo'o_.

Dr Edward Tregear[214-1] speaks of it as follows:

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 true _taniwha_ is a water kelpie.

Mr Kerry Nichols,[214-2] speaking of these monsters, says:

With the other fabulous creations of Maori mythology were the _taniwhas_ or 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 Hawaiian _Mo'o_ or _Moko_ appears, from the following statement by Judge Fornander, to have been applied sometimes to this mythological monster:

The _Mo'o_ or _Moko_ mentioned in tradition--reptiles and lizards--were of several kinds--the _mo'o_ with 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 of _mo'o_ of extraordinary size living in caverns, amphibious in their nature, and being the terror of the inhabitants.[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 called _cipactli_ (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 language _moco_ is "a species of lizard;" in Hawaiian _mo'o_ or _moko_ is "the general name for lizards," and the same word signifies "lizard" in Samoan; _moko-moko_ is the New Zealand (Maori) name for a small lizard. Taylor[214-4] says that _moko-titi_ was 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 Nahuatl _cipactli_ certainly means some amphibious or water 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, _m_ being the chief phonetic element indicated thereby.

If the supposition herein advanced that the combination shown in plate LXIV, 9, denotes bread or food be correct, it is possible that the symbol is also sometimes used to indicate "maize," _ixim_ or _xim_, on account of its phonetic value. As will be shown farther on, the _kan_ symbol 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_, _laala_ or _liaa_; Nahuatl, _ehecatl_.

The form of the symbol of this day presents a number of minor variations, the more important of which are shown in plate LXIV, 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 plate LXIV, 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 the _ik_ symbol, 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 some kind;[215-1] the 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 the upper 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 in showers.[216-1] As the lowest character in the group mentioned is the _ik_ symbol, 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 previous paper[216-2] and need not be repeated here, as the only object now in view in referring to them is to show that the _ik_ symbol 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 an _ik_ symbol from which arises what appear to be the sprouting leaves of a plant, probably maize (plate LXIV, 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 the _ik_ symbol 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 connection _ik_ may be compared to _kan_ is appropriate, but this comparison does not tend to the support of his theory. Take, for example, the sprouting _kan_ symbols 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 (plate LXIV, 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 a _kan_ symbol, which is colored to signify maize; the others hold _ik_ symbols. There are two interpretations which may be given this symbolic representation--one, that the _ik_ glyphs 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 Villa Valladolid"[217-1] to 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 and _barriga_ (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 an _ik_ symbol. 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 a _kan_ symbol, indicating the mature grain, the uninjured portion of the crop. It would therefore appear that the _ik_ symbol 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 two _ik_ symbols (plate LXIV, 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 the _ik_ symbol 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, plate LXVIII. 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 (plate LXIV, 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 plate LXVIII, 27. This is much like Landa's _o_, and _ol_ in Maya denotes "heart, etc."

According to Brasseur, _oloh_ signifies "a germ" and "to germinate;" _hokol_ also 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 having _ch'_ or _tz'_ 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 plate LXVI, 28 and 55, and others of similar form, are to be taken as _ik_ glyphs 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 plate LXVIII, 30, from Dres. 25, where it is in the midst of the blaze. If so, the word equivalent must be _kak_, as it is seemingly a variant of _ik_, and hence may be supposed to have the _k_ sound. This will agree with his interpretation of plate LXVI, 29, by _kinichkakmo_; but in this case we must give _ich_ as the value of the so-called _ben_ symbol. This, however, is not so very objectionable, as there are other places where the chief phonetic element of the _ben_ glyph appears to be _i_. It is also to be remembered that it is much like Landa's _i_. It is likewise true, as will hereafter be shown, that the value _ben_ does not appear to hold good where it occurs in combination with other symbols. However, until a satisfactory rendering of this little four-corner _ik_ (?) 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 have _uii_, air, wind; _chiic_, breath; which we may bring into relation with _gui_; and we find _guiiebee_, wind-and-water cloud (nube con vient y agua). Dr Seler prefers to derive _gui_ from _quii_, fire, flame, the notion of which is often associated with wind.

It was probably this notion and the fact that the little four-corner _ik_ (?) 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" is _bii_.

Dr Brinton thinks that _ni_ is the radical of _nici_, to grow, increase, gain life. He says:

_Laa_, or _laala_, 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 day _Ehecatl_ (wind), shown in plate LXIV, 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. As _nii_ or _ni_ signifies "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 language _xi_ or _xie_ is the term for "nose." I notice, however, that the name for bird is given as _viguini_ and _piguiini_. If _pi_ (_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: