Part 4
_Torquemada_ (Fray Juan de) Monarquia Indiana, Madrid, 1613, Vol. II., Book 13, Chapter 1. “The goldsmiths did not possess the tools necessary for hammering metals, but with one stone placed above another one, they make a flat cup or a plate.” (Pero con una piedra sobre otra hacian una taza llana y un plato.) _Gomara, l. c._ “They will cast a platter in a mould with eight corners, and every corner of several metals, that is to say, the one of gold, the other of silver, without any kind of solder. They will also cast a little caldron with loose handles hanging thereto, as we used to cast a bell. They will also cast in a mould a fish with one scale of silver on its back and another of gold; they will make a parrot of metal so that his tongue shall shake and his head move and his wings flutter; they will cast an ape in a mould so that both hands and feet will stir, and holding a spindle in his hand, seeming to spin, yea, and an apple in his hand, as if he would eat it. Our Spaniards were not a little amazed at the sight of these things, for our goldsmiths are not to be compared to theirs.” _Bernal Diaz, Chapter_ 91. “I will first mention the sculptors and the gold and silversmiths, who were clever in working and smelting gold, and would have astonished the most celebrated of our Spanish goldsmiths; the number of these were very great and the most skilful lived at a place called Azcapotzalco, about four leagues from Mexico.” _Petrus Martyr, Decade VI., Chapter 6_. (A letter written to Pope Adrian VI.) “The chief noblemen’s houses (in Nicaragua) compass and inclose the King’s street on every side; in the middle site whereof one is erected, in which the goldsmiths dwell. Gold is there molten and forged (?) to be formed into divers jewels, and is formed into small plates or bars, to be stamped after the pleasure of its owners and at length is brought into the form and fashion they desire, and that neatly too.”
Footnote 15:
Lorenzana (Don Franc, Antonia de) Historia de Nueva España, page 378, Note 2.
Footnote 16:
See _Bernal Diaz_, Chap. 39.
_Petrus Martyr de Angleria_, English edition of Eden, Islands of the West Indies, page 169: “Circumference of xxviii spans (_spithamarum_ 28).”
_Torquemada Mon. Ind._, Lib. IV., Cap. 17.
Three letters, on Cortes’ landing in Yucatan, edited by _Fredric Muller_, Amsterdam, 1871. (1) Their width being seven spans, (2) larger than a wagon’s wheel, and made as if beaten out of white iron. (3) Two wheels, the one of gold and weighing 30,000 castellanos, the other of silver, weighing 50 mark. These pieces are as large as a millstone.
Footnote 17:
_Bernal Diaz, Chap. 92_: “Bronze axes, and copper and tin.” _Petrus Martyr, Dec. V., Chap. 10_: “Bronze axes and edges, cunningly tempered.” _Gomara, Chap. 210_: “They also have axes, borers and chisels of copper mixed with gold, silver or tin.” _Landa Rel. d. l., Cosas de Yucatan_, Ed. Brasseur, Paris, 1864, pag. 170, with a cut of a Yucatecan axe: “They had little axes made of a certain metal, and shaped as the illustration shows. They fastened them into the top of a wooden handle, one side serving as a weapon, the other for cutting wood. They sharpened them by hammering the edge with stones.” _Torquemada, Mon. Ind., Lib. 13, Cap. 34_: “The carpenters and carvers worked with copper instruments.” _Herrera, Dec. IV., Lib. 8, Cap. 3_: “In Honduras (1530) they cleared large mountains, for agricultural purposes, with axes made of flintstone.”
_Remesal, Hist. d. l. Prov. de Chiapas y Guatemala, 1606_: “They clear, every year, large mountains of woods, in order to prepare them for the reception of the seed corn, as is the custom in the whole province of Vera-paz; and before they got the iron axes they had to work hard because they felled the trees with copper axes and often spent an entire day in cutting one single tree, though of inferior size; and if the tree was larger three and four days, those axes being very apt to break; and having experienced the strength of iron, they appreciate all tools made of it, and thus they held our axes and machetes in great esteem.” _Cogolludo_, _Hist. d. Yucatan, Lib. IV., Cap. 3_, mentions axes as an article of trade in Yucatan: “Copper axes, brought from Mexico, which they exchanged for other merchandize.” _Documentos ineditos, Madrid, 1864, Vol. I., pag. 470_: “The Captain, Gil Gonzales de Avila, arrived here in Sto. Domingo (from Nicaragua) and sends to His Majesty 14,000 pesos de oro and 15,000 pesos, proceeding from axes which they said contained gold, and 6150 pesos de oro proceeding from bells which they also said contained gold. All this he said he was presented with during his discoveries which he was making in the Province of the South sea.” _Petrus Martyr_, _Dec. VI., Chapt. 2 and 3_, states the same fact on the authority of Gil Gonzales’ treasurer, Cereceda.
Footnote 18:
The absolute absence of mines in Yucatan is a fact that needs no further corroboration. It might, however, be of interest to hear the language used by Landa, Rel. d. las cosas de Yucatan: 1. c. § 5 “There exist many beautiful structures of masonry in Yucatan, all of them built of stone and showing the finest workmanship, the most astonishing that ever were discovered in the Indies; and we cannot wonder at it enough because there is not any class of metal in this country by which such works could be accomplished.”
Footnote 19:
_Herrera_ (_Dec. III., Lib. 4, Cap. 5_) having the original reports before his eyes, represents this scene as follows: “Multitudes of Indians flocked along the ways, astonished to see the beards and the dressing of the Spaniards. The chief person they met was Dirianjeu, the warlike cacique, who came attended by five hundred men and seventeen women, covered with gold plates, all drawn up in order, but without arms and with ten banners and trumpets, after their fashion. When they came near, the banners were displayed and the cacique touched Gonzales’ hand, as did all the five hundred, everyone giving him a turkey. Yet each of the women gave him twenty axes of gold (veinte hachas de oro) fourteen carats fine, each weighing eighteen pesos and some more.” We find in _Oviedo_ (_Gonzalo Fernandez de_), _Historia gen. y nat. de las Indias_, at the end of Vol. IV., five folio quarto pages with illustrations referring to the chapter he wrote on Nicaragua, and we learn from his text that he made the sketches himself during his sojourn in Nicaragua (1524). They represent views of the volcano of Masaya, gymnastic sports of the Indians, a plan of the town of Tecoatega, and three Indian arms, an _estorica_, a _porra_ and an _alabarda_. Each of the drawings is provided with a number which correctly corresponds to that written in the text, except those three drawings of the arms, for which we could not find the text. Upon closer examination we discovered a suggestion made (on page 81) that some ancient copyist or editor must have revised Oviedo’s original manuscript, who was supposed to have dropped the inscription to which the drawings of the three arms belong, perhaps, only on account of the illegibility of Oviedo’s handwriting. On the other hand, we cannot help expressing our doubts as to the fact that these three kinds of arms should have been in use with the Nicoyans or Nicaraguans. Notwithstanding we give the cut of the alabarda, which has the shape of a genuine mediæval battle-axe.
Footnote 20:
Sahagun (Bernardino de), Historia de la N. España, Ed. Carlos M. de Bustamante, 3 Vol., Mexico, 1830.
Footnote 21:
The following notice of three prehistoric nails is given for what it is worth. Torquemada, Lib. VI., Cap. 23: Under the reign of Nezahualpilli of Tezcuco, the statue of the God of Rain, Tlaloc, having been found to be timeworn and corroded, a new one was made and located on the mountain of Matlalcueye, the ancient site of this statue. “When this idol of Tlaloc was replaced by the new one, it happened that one of its arms broke off. They put it on again and fastened it with three gold nails. Later, when the new faith was introduced in their countries, this diabolical image was brought down from the hills, at the time of the first Bishop Zummaraga, and was broken to pieces in his presence, but not before removing the three gold nails spoken of.”
Footnote 22:
Dupaix, Antiquités Mexicaines, Paris, 1834, Vol. II., Planche 26, fig. 75, and text in Vol. I., page 21, No. 75.
Footnote 23:
With our first glance at the picture of _Tepozcolula_ we were induced to believe that we had found therein a representation of the instrument which Petrus Martyr called a “_dolabra_,” and Sahagun “_azuela_.” The translation of the one is, pick or hoe, and of the other, cooper’s adze. Both of these, therefore, would have been instruments in which the blade and its edge are at right angles to their handle, and the management of which requires both hands of the workman. This supposition is refuted by the picture of the carpenter (cut 10), who is distinctly seen to hold the piece of wood in the left and the tool in his right hand.
Footnote 24:
Dupaix, l. c., Vol. II., Planche 26, fig. 74, and text Vol. I., page 21.
Footnote 25:
Torquemada, Mon. Ind., Lib.—, Chap.—: “They also used certain copper coins, almost in the shape of a Greek Tau, Τ, its width about three or four fingers. It was a thin piece of plate of an uncertain size, and contained much gold.” Clavigero, The History of Mexico, Ed. Ch. Cullen, London, 1807, Vol. VII., Sect. 36, page 386, evidently copies the sentence when he says: “Their fourth species of money, which most resembled coined money, was made of pieces of copper, in the form of a T, and was employed in purchases of little value.”
THE KATUNES OF MAYA HISTORY.
BY PHILIPP J. J. VALENTINI, PH.D.
[_Translated from the German, by Stephen Salisbury, Jr._]
[From Proceedings of American Antiquarian Society, October 21, 1879.]
NOTE BY THE COMMITTEE OF PUBLICATION.
The Publishing Committee are glad of the opportunity to print another paper from the pen of Professor Valentini. His previous contributions have been favorably received by some of the most competent judges. He is always ingenious and suggestive, taking care to sustain his views by adequate collateral information, and leaving an impression of earnestness and thoroughness, even though the reader should not be able always to see the way through his bold inferences to the important conclusions deduced from them.
It seems apparent that new phases of opinion respecting the position in the world’s history held by the races occupying the central portions of the American Continent may be looked for in the near future. Or rather, perhaps, it may be claimed that vestiges of ancient and independent culture, of revolutions, conquests, and changing dynasties, extending back to a remote period of time, which have hitherto simply excited and bewildered travellers and explorers, bid fair to be subjected to tests and comparisons derived from wider and closer observation, for which the means are accumulating, and from which definite results are anticipated.
It is remarkable how one tidal wave of investigation after another has, at different eras, invaded and receded from these regions, carrying from them more or less of the fragments of their architectural, monumental, and pictorial records—the sources of doubtful and unsatisfactory interpretation. The Spanish chroniclers; the scientists of the period of Humboldt and his contemporaries; the French government and the learned societies of France, uniting their efforts to render effective the honest but undisciplined enthusiasm of Brasseur de Bourbourg; all have experienced a subsidence of interest arising mainly from a want of success in yielding a sufficiently plausible solution of a mysterious subject. The death of Brasseur, the fall of Maximilian, and the political distractions of the French government and people, are not alone the causes of suspended action on the part of the learned bodies of France. They deemed it prudent to discredit the judgment and correctness of their own agent. One at least of Brasseur’s Commission publicly disavowed responsibility for his opinions; and his attempt to interpret the Codex Troano by means of the alphabet of Bishop Landa was pronounced by themselves to be a failure.
How signally the explorations of Del Rio, of Dupaix, of Galindo, and of De Waldeck, failed to make a permanent impression on the public mind! How soon the illustrated narrative of Stephens became in a measure disregarded, and even his reliableness questioned! How completely the nine ponderous folios of Lord Kingsborough’s extensive collection fell dead from the press, until the great work to which he had devoted his life and his entire fortune sold in the market for less than a single useless production of Increase or Cotton Mather! We have seen the elaborate and learned essays of Gallatin upon Mexican civilization slumbering with the long sleep of the Ethnological Society; the Geographical Society cautious about travelling out of the routes of regular expeditions; even the sardonic “Nation,” assumed arbiter in literature, politics, and science, and always ready for caustic criticism, hesitating to venture far beneath the surface of these important inquiries. The ill-fated Berendt has perished in the midst of his unfinished labors; and, lastly, one of the most purely philosophical investigators of Indian habits and history reasons in a direction opposed to the antiquity and extent of aboriginal civilization.
If there is to be a renewal of interest in Mexican archæology, and a revived consciousness of something more to be gained from the relics of culture among the early races of this continent (a meaning in its mystical remains that has not been developed), our Society may claim its share in the re-kindling or fostering of the newly excited impulse. In saying this we do not overlook the preparation which recent studies of the general condition of prehistoric races has created for such investigations; but, in this particular field, it has had the fortune to draw special attention to certain regions and opportunities of research. This has been due to the earnest and liberal exertions of one of its members, who, some years since, passed a winter in Yucatan, and has kept up a correspondence with friends and acquaintances there.[26] He embodied his observations and experiences in a report on behalf of the Council rendered in 1876. He has since endeavored to promote the operations of Dr. and Mrs. Le Plongeon in the actual field, and has assisted in preparing the papers of Professor Valentini for our publications, providing illustrations in all cases when practicable. The Report of the Council in the present number of “Proceedings” is largely devoted to an account, by the writer[27] of a visit to the city of Mexico, and his observations upon the country and its history. More than twelve years ago, in January, 1868, a generous member of the Society[28] had the forethought to establish a department of the library composed of books relating to Spanish America, beginning with the gift of Lord Kingsborough’s mammoth publication, and others, for the specialty of antiquities, and accompanied by a pecuniary foundation for future growth. The importance of a provision for this particular purpose becomes daily more conspicuous as attention is directed to that portion of the continent.
It is gratifying to perceive that such movements, with the greater activity in publishing its “Anales” on the part of the Museo Naçional de México, and the issue of such publications as that of Prof. Rau by the Smithsonian Institution,[29] and the private work of Mr. Short,[30] are not without their influence.
The scheme, which, although not fully matured, we have reason to believe a real one, of sending an expedition to some of the original Mexican provinces for a thorough exploration, at the cost of a wealthy citizen of New York, the results to be printed in the North American Review, may be regarded as one of the fruits of the “_Renaissance_.”
S. F. HAVEN, _For the Committee_.
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS.
In the ensuing discussion an attempt is made to explain the so-called “Katunes of Maya history.”
The Manuscript which bears this name is written in the Maya language, and its discovery is of comparatively recent date. At its first publication in 1841 it could not fail to attract the attention of all those who were engaged in the study of ancient American history, because it unveiled a portion of the history of Yucatan, which had been till then entirely unknown and seriously missed. At that date only a scanty number of data, loosely described, and referring to an epoch removed from the Spanish conquest of the Peninsula by only a few decades, had appeared as the sole representatives of a long past, in which the builders of the ruined cities undoubtedly must have lived an eventful life, not to be counted by a few generations, but by a long and hardly calculable number of centuries. This vacuum of time the manuscript promised to fill out. Though it did not offer a history conceived in the common acceptation of the word, the brief epitome of events which it presented, began by telling us of the arrival of foreigners from distant lands, who, step by step succeeded in conquering the Maya soil and who were brought into significant connection with the name as well as the fall of cities now lying in ruins over the whole country.
As to the authenticity of the events reported, they have been received by many students with a confidence and faith rarely manifested when discoveries of such importance are brought to light. As to the form in which they were presented, the author seemed to exhibit neither the skill of a professional nor the clumsiness of an occasional forger. If on the one hand the gaps he left betrayed a defective memory, this circumstance should be held rather as an indication of his credibility. The material from which his information was derived, we might add, was extensive, and much of it was probably lost when he gave the account at a later period of his life.
The events communicated being in themselves of the highest interest, rose in importance from the fact that they were arranged in successive epochs. A chance was thereby given to calculate the long space of time that intervened between the arrival of the ancient and of the modern conquerors. This difficult task was attempted by the fortunate discoverer himself, Señor Juan Pio Perez, of Yucatan, accompanied by a learned discussion on ancient Maya chronology. His calculation furnishes the sum of 1392 years, the first initial date to be assigned to the year 144 A. D., and the last to 1536 A. D.
When, some years ago we undertook to examine the argument of Señor Perez we were not at all astonished by the great antiquity of the date he had drawn from the Maya Manuscript. For, nearly at the same time, we had reached similar results in an attempt made to utilize certain records which Ixtlilxochitl (1590), and Veytia (1760), (Kingsborough Collection, Vols. 8 and 9), have left regarding the earliest chronology of the Nahuatl tribes. By adopting a more rational method of computation than these Mexican writers had followed, we were unable to withstand the conclusion, that the Nahuatl people who were immediate territorial neighbors of the Mayas, considered the year 258 A. D. the earliest date of their arrival on and occupancy of the Mexican soil. Thus we had reached in this line of investigation very nearly the same results with the Nahuatl as Señor Perez with the Maya chronology, and the suspicion began to dawn upon us that these two neighboring people might, possibly, have stood in a still closer than a mere territorial connection.
These results, however, were only of a very problematical nature. They were derived from written reports, which, after all, could not be regarded as unquestionable authority. But they received a strong confirmation from a discovery we made later on the so-called Mexican Calendar Stone. In our discussion of this monument we believe that we have given ample proof of the fact, that its principal zone contains a sculptured record, showing a series of numerical symbols, from the computation of which the year 231 A. D. resulted as that which the Nahuatls had accepted as the first date of their national era.
Records presented in stone and compiled by the nation whose history they convey, must always be considered the most authentic evidence of historical truth. Now, were we also so fortunate as to possess some Maya monument, similar to the Mexican Calendar Stone, and were we also able to decipher it, we should thereby have the means for determining whether Maya chronology extended back to an epoch different from that of the Nahuatl, or to one identical with it. That such a monument once existed we have no doubt. That it may still exist, we have no reasonable grounds for denying the possibility. It remains, however, still to be discovered and to be interpreted. But since the fortunate discovery has not yet been made, we must rest satisfied for the present with conclusions derived from extant written records. The only manuscript of this character thus far brought to light, is that said to have been found at Mani,[31] which was translated by Señor Perez from the Maya language, and accompanied by a very valuable chronological interpretation.
Since the close revision we undertook of the latter, brought out very striking coincidences of early Maya dates with those of the Nahuatl, and especially with that indicated on the Calendar Stone, we thought it worth while to reprint the manuscript, to discuss its contents again, and to arrange them under new points of view. Regarded by itself, the manuscript, indeed, might seem of only doubtful value in settling an important chronological question. But the comparison of its earliest date with that of the Nahuatl monument will enhance the value of each of them, because they may be considered as corroborative of each other.
THE MAYA MANUSCRIPT.
_Maya._ _Translation._
Lai u tzolan Katun lukci ti cab ti This is the series of “Katunes” yotoch Nonoual cante anilo Tutul that elapsed from the time of their Xiu ti chikin Zuiua; u luumil u departure from the land and house talelob Tulapan chiconahthan. of Nonoual, in which were the four Tutul Xiu, lying to the west of Zuina, going out of the country of Tulapan.