You are here
قراءة كتاب Commentary on the Maya Manuscript in the Royal Public Library of Dresden
تنويه: تعرض هنا نبذة من اول ١٠ صفحات فقط من الكتاب الالكتروني، لقراءة الكتاب كاملا اضغط على الزر “اشتر الآن"

Commentary on the Maya Manuscript in the Royal Public Library of Dresden
PAPERS
OF THE
PEABODY MUSEUM OF AMERICAN ARCHAEOLOGY AND
ETHNOLOGY, HARVARD UNIVERSITY
VOL. IV.—No. 2
————
COMMENTARY
ON THE
MAYA MANUSCRIPT
IN THE
ROYAL PUBLIC LIBRARY OF DRESDEN
BY
DR. ERNST FÖRSTEMANN
————
TRANSLATED BY
MISS SELMA WESSELHOEFT
AND
MISS A. M. PARKER
Translation revised by the Author
————
Cambridge, Mass.
Published by the Museum
October, 1906
NOTE
——
In pursuance of the plan of publishing translations of valuable contributions to the study of the Maya hieroglyphs, the Museum Committee on Central American Research has the pleasure of offering the following translation of Dr. Ernst Förstemann's important Commentary on the Maya Manuscript in the Royal Library of Dresden, generally known as the Dresden Codex.
The translation by Miss Selma Wesselhoeft and Miss A. M. Parker was made under the direction of Mr. Charles P. Bowditch of the Museum Committee.
In the original German edition, published in 1901, Dr. Förstemann used the Arabic numerals to designate the days, but in this translation, with the consent of the author who has kindly revised the translation, Mr. Bowditch has substituted the corresponding Maya names of the days, in uniformity with the general use of students in this country. It is needless to call attention to the importance of this paper by Dr. Förstemann whose long-continued study of the intricate system of hieroglyphic writing by the ancient Mayas makes all he writes of great value to students engaged in this most interesting research.
Harvard University,
October, 1906.
PREFACE.
————
Some of those who examine this book will say, that it is too early for a commentary on the "Dresdensis," since Maya research is yet in its infancy, and this opinion is certainly justified inasmuch as a final explanation of that remarkable monument is, of course, impossible at the present time. On the other hand the accounts of the numerous investigations and discoveries which have been made thus far are so isolated and so scattered in the shape of a hundred short magazine articles, that it is certainly desirable to have what we know and what we have still to learn gathered together under one head. This book is intended, therefore, to give an idea of the state of our knowledge in this department of research at this time, when the nineteenth century is passing into the twentieth, with the definite expectation that this work will soon be far outstripped and will possess an historical value only.
The contents of the following pages are of very little value, unless the student can compare them with an edition of the manuscript. My first edition was published in 1880 at Leipsic and the second at Dresden in 1892. The edition in Lord Kingsborough's "Mexican Antiquities" (in Volume III of that work, London, 1831) is still of practical use.
And since in this work I must premise a knowledge of the elements of the subject, I would recommend, as additional aids to the comprehension of the following pages, my "Erläuterungen zur Mayahandschrift der Königlichen öffentlichen Bibliothek zu Dresden" (Dresden, 1886), and also Brinton, "A Primer of Mayan Hieroglyphics" (in the publications of the University of Pennsylvania. Series in Philology, Literature and Archaeology, Vol. III). I would also mention the very valuable work by
Paul Schellhas, "Die Göttergestalten der Mayahandschriften" (Dresden, 1897), which I follow in the designation of the various gods by letters of the alphabet.
It need hardly be pointed out, that the numerous pioneer articles by Edward Seler offer abundant instruction to the student in this field as well as in that of Aztec remains.
I wish to express heartfelt thanks to Mrs. Zelia Nuttall and Mr. Charles P. Bowditch, who have aided my work in various ways and have thus rendered possible the publication of this book.
Charlottenburg.
FIRST PART.
Pages 1-45.
Page 1.
As the first page is almost entirely effaced by abrasion, we know very little of its contents. Like the second, however, it was doubtless divided into four parts. The two pages have this also in common, that, for lack of space, their contents are not expressed in full, but abbreviated as much as possible.
The top section (a) of page 1 may have been filled with a sort of frontispiece, perhaps a face with a few signs around it.
The three lower sections (b, e, d,) with the three lower of the second page doubtless formed a whole. Each of these sections contained a normal Tonalamatl of the commonest kind, which was introduced on the left by five day-signs having a difference of 12 and was thus divided into five sections of 52 days each. In sections b and d, at least, these periods seem to be divided into equal halves of 26 days each. In d alone we recognize the initial week day, VII, of the Tonalamatl. In each of the three divisions there were two figures of gods, but we can recognize only the first of these in section d as the god D.
Page 2.
This page contains four much abbreviated Tonalamatls. In the following I will represent each Tonalamatl by setting down in a vertical line those of the twenty days with which the principal divisions of equal length of the Tonalamatl begin, in a horizontal line with Roman numerals the days of the week of thirteen days on which the separate subdivisions begin, and with the Arabic numerals the distance between these days. I will also remark that the position of the Tonalamatls in the "Dresdensis" is not connected at all, as in the Aztec, with certain places in the
year, and that no rule for this proceeding can be found. It is curious, however, that no Tonalamatl in this codex begins with the day IX or Eb, which is the more important in the last pages of the Dresden Codex.
2a.
This first Tonalamatl has the following form:—
XIII | 5 | V | 12 | IV | 11 | II | 12 | I | 12 | XIII |
Cauac | ||||||||||
Chuen | ||||||||||
Akbal | ||||||||||
Men | ||||||||||
Manik. |
The hieroglyphs and the figures show that preparations for a human sacrifice are treated of here and that the subject is, therefore, closely connected with page 3a, where the sacrifice itself is represented.
There are but two pictures of persons, which refer, therefore, only to the first or to the first two subdivisions and which, for lack of space, are