Transcriber’s Note
This book was originally published as a part of:
Powell, J. W.
1881 First Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1879-’80. pp. 205-245. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
The table of contents and index included in this version of the book was extracted from the complete volume.
A number of typographical errors have been maintained in the current version of this book. They are marked and the corrected text is shown in the popup. A list of these errors is found at the end of this book.
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION—BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY.
J. W. POWELL, DIRECTOR.
STUDIES
IN
CENTRAL AMERICAN PICTURE-WRITING.
BY
EDWARD S. HOLDEN,
PROFESSOR OF MATHEMATICS, U. S. NAVAL OBSERVATORY.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of illustrations 206 Introductory 207 Materials for the present investigation 210 System of nomenclature 211 In what order are the hieroglyphs read? 221 The card catalogue of hieroglyphs 223 Comparison of plates I and IV (Copan) 224 Are the hieroglyphs of Copan and Palenque identical? 227 Huitzilopochtli, Mexican god of war, etc. 229 Tlaloc, or his Maya representative 237 Cukulean or Quetzalcoatl 239 Comparison of the signs of the Maya months 243LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure 48.—The Palenquean Group of the Cross 221 49.—Statue at Copan 224 50.—Statue at Copan 225 51.—Synonymous Hieroglyphs from Copan and Palenque 227 52.—Yucatec Stone 229STUDIES IN CENTRAL AMERICAN PICTURE-WRITING.
By Edward S. Holden.
I.
Since 1876 I have been familiar with the works of Mr. John L. Stephens on the antiquities of Yucatan, and from time to time I have read works on kindred subjects with ever increasing interest and curiosity in regard to the meaning of the hieroglyphic inscriptions on the stones and tablets of Copan, Palenque, and other ruins of Central America. In August, 1880, I determined to see how far the principles which are successful when applied to ordinary cipher-writing would carry one in the inscriptions of Yucatan. The difference between an ordinary cipher-message and these inscriptions is not so marked as might at first sight appear. The underlying principles of deciphering are quite the same in the two cases.
The chief difficulty in the Yucatec inscriptions is our lack of any definite knowledge of the nature of the records of the aborigines. The patient researches of our archæologists have recovered but very little of their manners and habits, and one has constantly to avoid the tempting suggestions of an imagination which has been formed by modern influences, and to endeavor to keep free from every suggestion not inherent in the stones themselves. I say the stones, for I have only used the Maya manuscripts incidentally. They do not possess, to me, the same interest, and I think it may certainly be said that all of them are younger than the Palenque tablets, and far younger than the inscriptions at Copan.
I therefore determined to apply the ordinary principles of deciphering, without any bias, to the Yucatec inscriptions, and to go as far as I could certainly. Arrived at the point where demonstration ceased, it would be my duty to stop. For, while even the conjectures of a mind perfectly trained in archæologic research are valuable and may subsequently prove to be quite right, my lack of familiarity with historical works forced me to keep within narrow and safe limits.
My programme at beginning was, first, to see if the inscriptions at Copan and Palenque were written in the same tongue. When I say “to see,” I mean to definitely prove the fact, and so in other cases; second, to see how the tablets were to be read. That is, in horizontal lines, are they to be read from right to left, or the reverse? In vertical columns, are they to be read up or down? Third, to see whether they were phonetic characters, or merely ideographic, or a mixture of the two—rebus-like, in fact.
If the characters turned out to be purely phonetic, I had determined to stop at this point, since I had not the time to learn the Maya language, and again because I utterly and totally distrusted the methods which, up to this time, have been applied by Brasseur de Bourbourg and others who start, and must start, from the misleading and unlucky alphabet handed down by Landa. I believe that legacy to have been a positive misfortune, and I believe any process of the kind attempted by Brasseur de Bourbourg (for example, in his essay on the MS. Troano) to be extremely dangerous and difficult in application, and to require a degree of scientific caution almost unique.
Dr. Harrison Allen, in his paper, “The Life Form in Art,” in the Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, is the only investigator who has applied this method to Central American remains with success, so it seems to me; and even here errors have occurred.
The process I allude to is something like the following: A set of characters, say the alphabet of Landa, is taken as a starting point. The variants of these are formed. Then the basis of the investigation is ready. From this, the interpretation follows by identifications of each new character with one of the standard set or with one of its variants. Theoretically, there is no objection to this procedure. Practically, also, there is no objection if the work is done strictly in the order named. In fact, however, the list of variants is filled out not before the work is begun, but during its progress, and in such a way as to satisfy the necessities of the interpreter in carrying out some preconceived idea. With a sufficient latitude in the choice of variants any MS. can receive any interpretation. For example, the MS. Troano, which a casual examination leads me to think is a ritual, and an account of the adventures of several Maya gods, is interpreted by Brasseur de Bourbourg as a record of mighty geologic changes. It is next to impossible to avoid errors of this nature at least, and in fact they have not been avoided, so far as I know, except by Dr. Allen in the paper cited.
I, personally, have chosen the stones and not the
At any one ruin the characters for the same idea are alike, and alike to a marvelous degree. At another ruin the type is just a little different, but the fidelity to this type is equally great. Synonyms exist; that is, the same idea may be given by two or more utterly different signs. But a given sign is made in a fixed and definite way. Finally the MSS. are, I think, later than the stones. Hence the root of the matter is the interpretation of the stones, or not so much their full interpretation as the discovery of a method of interpretation, which shall be sure.
Suppose, for example, that we know the meaning of a dozen characters only, and the way a half dozen of these are joined together in a sentence. The method by which these were obtained will serve to add others to the list, and progress depends in such a case only on our knowledge of the people who wrote, and of the subjects upon which they were writing. Such knowledge and erudition belongs to the archæologists by profession. A step that might take me a year to accomplish might be made in an instant by one to whom the Maya and Aztec mythology was familiar, if he were proceeding according to a sound method. At the present time we know nothing of the meaning of any of the Maya hieroglyphs.
It will, therefore, be my object to go as far in the subject as I can proceed with certainty, every step being demonstrated so that not only the archæologist but any intelligent person can follow. As soon as the border-land is reached in which proof disappears and opinion is the only guide, the search must be abandoned except by those whose cultivated and scientific opinions are based on knowledge far more profound and various than I can pretend or hope to have.
If I do not here push my own conclusions to their farthest limit, it must not be assumed that I do not see, at least in some cases, the direction in which they lead. Rather, let this reticence be ascribed to a desire to lay the foundations of a new structure firmly, to prescribe the method of building which my experience has shown to be adequate and necessary, and to leave to those abler than myself the erection of the superstructure. If my methods and conclusions are correct (and I have no doubts on this point, since each one has been reached in various ways and tested by a multiplicity of criteria) there is a great future to these researches. It is not to be forgotten that here we have no Rosetta stone to act at once as key and criterion, and that instead of the accurate descriptions of the Egyptian hieroglyphics which were handed down by the Greek cotemporaries of the sculptors of these inscriptions, we have only the crude and brutal chronicles of an ignorant Spanish soldiery, or the bigoted accounts of an unenlightened priesthood. To Cortez and his companions a memorandum that it took one hundred men all day to throw the idols into the sea was all-sufficient. To the Spanish priests the burning of all manuscripts was praiseworthy, since those differing from Holy Writ were noxious and those agreeing with it superfluous. It is only to the patient labor of the Maya sculptor who daily carved the symbols of his belief and creed upon enduring stone, and to the luxuriant growths of semi-tropical forests which concealed even these from the passing Spanish adventurer, that we owe the preservation of the memorials of past beliefs and vanished histories.
Not the least of the pleasures of such researches as these comes from the recollection that they vindicate the patience and skill of forgotten men, and make their efforts not quite useless. It was no rude savage that carved the Palenque cross; and if we can discover what his efforts meant, his labor and his learning have not been all in vain. It will be one more proof that human effort, even misdirected, is not lost, but that it comes, later or earlier, “to forward the general deed of man.”
II.
MATERIALS FOR THE PRESENT INVESTIGATION.
My examination of the works of Mr. J. L. Stephens has convinced me that in every respect his is the most trustworthy work on the hieroglyphs of Central America. The intrinsic evidence to this effect is very strong, but when I first became familiar with the works of Waldeck I found so many points of difference that my faith was for a time shaken, and I came to the conclusion that while the existing representations might suffice for the study of the general forms of statues, tablets, and buildings, yet they were not sufficiently accurate in detail to serve as a basis for the deciphering I had in mind. I am happy to bear witness, however, that Stephens’s work is undoubtedly amply adequate to the purpose, and this fact I have laboriously verified by a comparison of it with various representations, as those of Desaix and others, and also with a few photographs. The drawings of Waldeck are very beautiful and artistic, but either the artist himself or his lithographers have taken singular liberties in the published designs. Stephens’s work is not only accurate, but it contains sufficient material for my purpose (over 1,500 separate hieroglyphs), and, therefore, I have based my study exclusively upon his earliest work, “Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan,” 2 vols., 8vo. New York, 1842 (twelfth edition). I have incidentally consulted the works on the subject contained in the Library of Congress, particularly those of Brasseur de Bourbourg, Kingsborough, Waldeck, and others, but, as I have said, the two volumes above named contain all the the material I have been able to utilize, and much more which is still under examination.
One fact which makes the examination of the Central American antiquities easier than it otherwise would be, has not, I think, been sufficiently dwelt upon by former writers. This is the remarkable faithfulness of the artists and sculptors of these statues and inscriptions to a standard. Thus, at Copan, wherever the same kind of hieroglyph is to be represented, it will be found that the human face or other object employed is almost identically the same in expression and character, wherever it is found. The same characters at different parts of a tablet do not differ more than the same letters of the alphabet in two fonts of type.
At Palenque the type (font) changes, but the adherence to this is equally or almost equally rigid. It is to be presumed that in this latter case, where work was done both in stone and stucco, the nature of the material affected the portraiture more or less.
The stone statues at Copan, for example, could not all have been done by the same artist, nor at the same time. I have elsewhere shown that two of these statues are absolutely identical. How was this accomplished? Was one stone taken to the foot of the other and cut by it as a pattern? This is unlikely, especially as in the case mentioned the scale of the two statues is quite different. I think it far more likely that each was cut from a drawing, or series of drawings, which must have been preserved by priestly authority. The work at any one place must have required many years, and could not have been done by a single man; nor is it probable that it was all done in one generation. Separate hieroglyphs must have been
III.
SYSTEM OF NOMENCLATURE.
It is impossible without a special and expensive font of type to refer pictorially to each character, and therefore some system of nomenclature must be adopted. The one I employ I could now slightly improve, but it has been used and results have been obtained by it. It is sufficient for the purpose, and I will, therefore, retain it rather than to run the risk of errors by changing it to a more perfect system. I have numbered the plates in Stephens’s Central America according to the following scheme:
ENGRAVINGS OF VOLUME I.
Page. Stone Statue, front view, I have called Plate I Frontispiece. Wall of Copan, Plate II 96 Plan of Copan, Plate III 133 Death’s Head, Plate IIIa 135 Portrait, Plate IIIb 136 Stone Idol, Plate IV 138 Portrait, Plate IVa 139 Stone Idol, Plate V 140 Tablet of Hieroglyphics, Plate Va 141 No. 1, Sides of Altar, Plate VI 142 No. 2, Sides of Altar, Plate VII 142 Gigantic Head, Plate VIII 143 No. 1, Stone Idol, front view, Plate IX 149 No. 2, Stone Idol, back view, Plate X 150 Idol half buried, Plate XI 151 No. 1, Idol, Plate XII 152 No. 2, Idol, Plate XIII 152 No. 1, Idol, Plate XIV 153 No. 2, Idol, Plate XV 153 Idol and Altar, Plate XVI 154 Fallen Idol, Plate XVII 155 No. 1, Idol, front view, Plate XVIII 156 No. 2, Idol, back view, Plate XIX 156 No. 3, Idol, side view, Plate XX 156 Fallen Idol, Plate XXa 157 Circular Altar, Plate XXb 157 No. 1, Stone Idol, front view, Plate XXI 158 No. 2, Stone Idol, back view, Plate XXII 158 No. 3, Stone Idol, side view, Plate XXIII 158 Great Square of Antigua Guatimala, Plate XXIIIa 266 Profile of Nicaragua Canal, Plate XXIIIb 412ENGRAVINGS OF VOLUME II.
Page. Stone Tablet, Plate XXIV Frontispiece. Idol at Quirigua, Plate XXV 121 Idol at Quirigua, Plate XXVI 122 Santa Cruz del Quiché, Plate XXVII 171 Place of Sacrifice, Plate XXVIII 184 Figures found at Santa Cruz del Quiché, Plate XXIX 185 Plaza of Quezaltenango, Plate XXX 204 Vases found at Gueguetenango, Plate XXXI 231 Ocosingo, Plate XXXII 259 Palace at Palenque, Plate XXXIII 309 Plan of Palace, Plate XXXIV 310 Stucco Figure on Pier, Plate XXXV 311 Front Corridor of Palace, Plate XXXVI 313 No. 1, Court-yard of Palace, Plate XXXVIII 314 No. 2, Colossal Bas-reliefs in Stone, Plate XXXIX 314 East side of Court-yard, Plate XXXVII 314 No. 1, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate XL 316 No. 2, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate XLI 316 No. 3, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate XLII 316 Oval Bas-relief in Stone, Plate XLIII 318 Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate XLIV 319 General Plan of Palenque, Plate XLV 337 Casa No. 1 in Ruins, Plate XLVI 338 Casa No. 1 restored, Plate XLVII 339 No. 1, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate XLVIII 340 No. 2, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate XLIX 340 No. 3, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate L 340 No. 4, Bas-relief in Stucco, Plate LI 340 No. 1, Tablet of Hieroglyphics, Plate LII 342 No. 2, Tablet of Hieroglyphics, Plate LIII 342 Tablet on inner Wall, Plate LIV 343 Casa di Piedras, No. 2, Plate LV 344 Tablet on back Wall of Altar, Casa No. 2, Plate LVI 345 Stone Statue, Plate LVII 349 Casa No. 3, Plate LVIII 350 Front Corridor, Plate LIX 351 No. 1, Bas-reliefs in Front of Altar, Plate LX 353 No. 2, Bas-reliefs in Front of Altar, Plate LXI 353 Adoratorio or Altar, Plate LXII 354 Casa No. 4, Plate LXIII 355 House of the Dwarf, Plate LXIV 420 Casa del Gobernador, Plate LXV 428 Sculptured Front of Casa del Gobernador, Plate LXVI 443 Egyptian Hieroglyphics, Plate LXVIII 441 Top of Altar at Copan, Plate LXVIII=Va 454 Mexican Hieroglyphical Writing, Plate LXIX 454In each plate I have numbered the hieroglyphs, giving each one its own number. Thus the hieroglyphs of the Copan altar (vol. i, p. 141) which I have called
And the right hand side of the Palenque Cross tablet, as given by Rau in his memoir published by the Smithsonian Institution (1880), has the numbers—
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055 * * * * * * * * * * * * 3080 3081 3082 3083 3084 3085These are consecutive with the numbers which I have attached to the left-hand side, as given by Stephens. Whenever I have stated any results here, I have also given the means by which any one can number a copy of Stephens’s work in the way which I have adopted, and thus the means of testing my conclusions is in the hands of every one who desires to do so.
In cases where only a part of a hieroglyphic is referred to, I have placed its number in a parenthesis, as 1826 see (122), by which I mean that the character 1826 is to be compared with a part of the character 122. The advantages of this system are many: for example; a memorandum can easily be taken that two hieroglyphs are alike, thus 2072=2020 and 2073=2021. Hence the pair 2020—2021, read horizontally, occurs again at the point 2072—2073, etc. Horizontal pairs will be known by their numbers being consecutive, as 2020—2021; vertical pairs will usually be known by their numbers differing by 10. Thus, 2075—2085 are one above the other.
This method of naming the chiffres, then, is a quick and safe one, and we shall see that it lends itself to the uses required of it.
I add here the scheme according to which the principal plates at Palenque have been numbered.
PLATE XXIV (left-hand side).
37
See 1800 37
See 1800 38
See 1806 39 94 96 98 100 102 104 106 40 40 41 42 95 97 99=127 101 103 105 107 43=1810 43a=46a 44 45 108
See 91 46=1810 46a=43a 47 48 49 50 51 52 52a=1820? 53 54 In the middle of the
plate at the top. 109 115 110 116
See 2020 111 117 112 118 113 119 114 120 55 56=1840? 57
See 1802 58 59 60 61 62=58? 63 64 65† 66
See 2025 67
See 1911 68 69 70 71
See 2020 72=281 73 74 75 76=67 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86=56? 86* 86* 87 88 89 90 91 92 93
† Possibly Muluc—a Maya day; the meaning is “reunion.”
PLATE XXIV (right-hand side).
See 74, 86* 122=86?† 123=87 124=88
See 61, 1822 125 126‡
See 1940 127=99
See 1940 128
See (44), 64 129 130 131=147 132
See 50, 58, 62 133 134 135 136=47? 137 138
See 39, 91 139
See 1811 140 141 142§
See 54 143 144
See 50, 58, 62, 132 145 146 147=131
See 71 148 149 150
See 56, 1882 151 152 153 154
See 53 155
See 50, 58, 132 156 157* 158
See 68 159
See 38 160
See 46a, 49a, 52a 161=50
See 58, 62, 132 162
See 56, 73, 1882 †163=1936
See 57 164
See 58, 62 165 166
See 81? 167 168 169
See 68? 170 171 172 173 174
See 67, 76, 90, 1910 175
See 57 176
See 126 177 178
See 43a 179 180
See 50, 58, 62 181 182
See 57, 163, 1936 183 184 185
† Possibly Chuen—a Maya day; meaning “a board,” “a tree.”
‡ Possibly Ahau—a Maya day; meaning “king.”
§ Possibly Ezanab—a Maya day.
PLATE LII.
200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209Line 1. 210 211 212 214 215 216 217 218 219
See 2020 220
See 2030 221 222
See 2060 223 224=2060 225 226 227 228 229
See 1811-2
Line 2. 230
See 1822 231 232 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242=2020 243=1951 244 245 246 247 248 249
Line 3. 250 251 252
See 214 254 255 256 257 258 259=1943 260 261 262 263 264
See 2020 265
See 2021 266
See 2022 267 268 269
Line 4. 270 271 274=244 275 276 277 278
See 204 279 280
See 1820 281=72 282 283 284 285 286
See 385 287 288
Line 5. 290 294 295 296 297 298 299 300
See 203 301 302 303=360 304 305 306 307
Line 6. 310 311 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323
See 203 324=1824
See 204 325
See 285 326
See 305 327 328 329
Line 7. 330 331 332
See 209 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342
See 209 343 344
See 322 345 346 347 348 349
Line 8. 350 351 352 354
See 267, 298 355 356=1822
See 230 357 358 359 360=303 361 362 363 364 365 366
See 351 367
See 303, 360 368 369
Line 9. 370 371 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385
See 286, 1822 386 387 388 389
Line 10. 390 391 392 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402
See 326 403= 360
367 404 405 406 407
See 360 408 409
Line 11. 410
See 326 411 412 414 415 416
See 324 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426
See 324 427
Line 12. 430 432 434 435 436 437 438 439
PLATE LIII.
[The upper left-hand square is No. 500, the upper right is 519, the lower left-hand is 720, the lower right is 739. All the squares from 500 to 508, 520 to 528, 530 to 538, etc., up to 720 to 728, are obliterated (and their numbers omitted here) except a few.]
509 510 511 512See 1967 513 514 515
See 509 516
See 510 517 518 519 529
See 3012 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556
See 162 557 558 559 570 571 572 573
See 1823 574 575 576 577 578 579 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 604 605 609 610 611
See 571 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636
See 3054 637 638 639 649 650 651 652 653 654 655
See150, 1882 656 657 658 659 669 670 671=324
See 2042 672=322? 673=323? 674
See 77 675 676 677
See 1802 678 679 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 708 709 710 711 712 713=1802 714 715 716 717
See 439 718 719 729 730=1845 731 732 733 734 735 736 737
See 2020 738 739
PLATE LIV.
800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808See 1882 809 810 811
See 26 812
See 1940 813
See 1941, 3011 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907=1003 908
See 2020 909 910
See 1310 911 912 913 1000 1001 1002 1003=907 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009
See 2021 1010
See 3054 1011
See 1811-2 1012 1013 1100 1101 1102=717 1103 1104
See 1820 1105=2020 1106
See 2021 1107
See 1840 1108
See 1841? 1109 1110=1209 1113 1114 1115 1200 1201 1202=1110
See 3054 1203 1204=1008 1205 1206 1207
See 1823 1208 1209=1110 1210 1211 1212 1213 1300 1301 1302 1303=1910 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310
See 910 1311 1312 1313 1400=1823 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1500 1501 1502=1010 1503 1504= 717
1102 1505 1506 1507 1508
1911 1712=1708 1713
PLATE LVI (left-hand side—Palenque Cross).
18001801 1802
See 163, 175 1803 1804 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1805
See 155 1806 1807
See 138 1808 1966 *1810
See 150 1811
See 139, 179 1812
See (1852) 1813
See 131, 146 1814
See 126, 127, 176 1815 1816 1967 1820
See 161 1821 1822
See 124 1823 1824 1825 1826
See 122, 160 1968 1830=1820
See 161 1831 1832
See 123, 124 1833
See 121 1834
See 163 1835
See 182 1836
See 123 1969 1840 1841 1842
See 1835 1843
See 124, 1836 1844 1845=1822
See 124 1846
See 179 1970 1850 1851 1852 1853
See 122 1854=1806 1855 1860 1861 1862
See 126, 127 1863 1864 1865=2021
See 144 1866
See 136?, 184? 1870=1820
See 160, 161 1871 1872=1842?
See 182 1873=1803 1874 1875 1876 1880 1881 1882
See 150, 162 1883
See 124 1884=1834
See 163, 182 1885
See 132, 144 1890
See 130, 158 1891
See 131?, 147? 1892
See 132? 1893 1894=1822
See 124 1895
See 144 1900
See 146 1901 1902 1903
See 157, 182 1904 1905=1803 1971
See 1802 1910
See 174 1911
See 174 1912
See 141 1913= 1834
1884 1914 1915 1972 1920 1921 1922
See 123 1923
See 124 1924 1925 1973 1930 1931 1932=1811-2? 1933 1934 1935=1884
See 182 1975 1974 1940=1862
See 126, 127 1941 1942 1943 1944=1922
See 123 1945=1923
See 124 1950
See 164 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955